Barker Rick: Television New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Barker Rick: Television New Zealand Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:673;Page:19645] 
Hon RICK BARKER (Labour) 
: 
 Firstly I thank you Mr Chairperson for acknowledging that Lianne Dalziel with other Christchurch MPs is in Christchurch and doing a fabulous job there looking after the interests of the people. I am sure the Committee would join with me in saying that we hope that on Thursday we have a very positive announcement and that the people of Christchurch can get on with their lives. I wish all the best to the Hon Lianne Dalziel as well.  
Clause 1 states the Television New Zealand Amendment Bill will be enacted as the Television New Zealand Amendment Act 2009 but as we all know it is now 2011 so I presume that the Minister in the chair the Minister of Defence will be able to tell us that this date will be updated and it will be the Television New Zealand Amendment Act 2011. I presume that is just a consequential amendment but I would like the Minister to take a call and confirm that that is the case. We are after all in 2011 and it would be a strange thing if the Act was passed in 2011 and called the Television New Zealand Amendment Act 2009. It would be very difficult for members of the public searching for this legislation. Knowing that it was passed in 2011 they would naturally go past 2009 and not see that it was on that date.  
The second aspect of this legislation—and this is very normal for these pieces of legislation—is that is comes into effect on the day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent. This is an indeterminate date because upon the start of a bill’s progress in this House when it is tabled for the first time the Minister tabling the legislation has little idea of how long the select committee will take in its deliberations. The Minister has little idea of the number of submissions that will be heard the number of hours that will be taken for the committee to consider the bill the length of the report and more important how long it will take to get the bill up to the top of the Order Paper. It would be difficult to set with any precision the date on which the bill would pass and the date on which it would gain its Royal assent. So clause 2 is perfectly acceptable. 
The legislation comes into effect on the day after the date on which the Governor-General signs it. Presumably that will be Mr Jerry Mateparae; he will make a fine Governor-General. This bill could well be one of the first bills that he signs as Governor-General. I am sure that he will take his job very seriously and will read the bill very thoroughly and be very familiar with it. No doubt when he comes to the Executive Council he will ask the Minister in charge of the bill some very probing questions as to why it should become public law. I see the Minister in the chair the Hon Dr Wayne Mapp is reading the bill very carefully as we go through the Committee stage so that when he appears before the Governor-General he will be fully briefed and able to answer any probing questions he might be asked. I commend the Minister for diligently applying himself to his homework. We would not expect any less of course.  
Clause 3 is “Principal Act amended” and states: “This Act amends the Television New Zealand Act 2003.” I presume that the 2003 Act was passed in 2003 so I presume that this amendment bill will amend the date of the legislation to 2011. So this legislation will become the Television New Zealand Amendment Act 2011 amending the principal 2003 Act.  
In the Committee stage members can traverse all that has gone on in the bill. This bill has seen quite an amount of discussion and debate but it seems that it has some fundamental flaws. The fundamental flaw in this bill is that it takes away the Television New Zealand charter. Earlier in the day the National Party members accused the Labour Party of being ideological and playing politics but if one wants to see an ideological bent and playing politics one can find them in spades in this bill.  
The National Party is opposed to public broadcasting. It believes that the market is the mechanism by which all decisions can be made but I have to say the market is not a place where one can begin to understand the culture and the nature of a society. The market can be a reflection of it but it is not the place where one would describe the culture of a particular society.  
Labour has believed always that this country deserves good quality broadcasters good quality productions and productions that reflect the nature of New Zealand. It will be more expensive to produce those types of programmes because we do not have the cost infrastructure. We have to make these programmes fresh from scratch and incur all of the costs. It is easier to go overseas and buy productions but those overseas productions reflect the culture in which they were made; they do not necessarily reflect the culture of New Zealand. Therefore Labour has always believed that we have to have a television charter. We have to direct our principal broadcaster Television New Zealand to reflect the nature of New Zealand and its particular character.  
Labour believes that National has gone backwards with this bill just like it has gone backwards with the economy and just like it is out of touch with ordinary Kiwis and is not particularly working for ordinary New Zealand families. This bill which changes the charter of Television New Zealand is a similar backwards step. Thank you.