Robertson Grant: Telecommunications (TSO Broadband and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Robertson Grant: Telecommunications (TSO Broadband and Other Matters) Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:673;Page:19488] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to join in this debate on Part 1A of the Telecommunications (TSO Broadband and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. The Minister in the chair the Minister for Communications and Information Technology has a reputation politically that one of his favourite phrases is “whatever it takes”. We hear that is the phrase Mr Joyce believes has marked his political career and it seems to me that in Part 1A it is whatever it takes—whatever it takes to ram through this separation of Telecom without in the opinion of members on this side of the Chamber sufficient and robust accountability mechanisms. 
I will talk in this call on Part 1A about transparency. As a member of Parliament who was not on the Finance and Expenditure Committee and as somebody who is interested in these issues and who knows about the importance of broadband to the future of the New Zealand economy and to the future ways in which New Zealanders will communicate with one another and the rest of the world I am concerned about the state this bill is in as it returns to the House. As a member of Parliament and as a concerned New Zealander looking to the importance of broadband for the future I cannot believe that this bill has returned to this House in a state that I believe the Minister should be ashamed of. I know that the select committee has done its best with this bill but a number of concerns were raised in the select committee that have not been taken up. 
In particular with regard to Part 1A I applaud my colleague Clare Curran for the amendments she is proposing and particularly I want to focus on the amendments to clause 23 she is proposing because they are about transparency. It seems to me again as somebody coming to this bill who is concerned about ensuring we have the infrastructure we need to be a proper 21st century economy that we also need to have in place rules and regulations that are fair and transparent because both of those things are important to the future of the New Zealand economy. Part 1A as it stands falls well short of the standards of transparency that New Zealanders have every right to expect from this Parliament. Sam Peseta Lotu-Iiga the previous speaker said it was obscene for us to say things like the “Minister for Miscommunication”. Well this part demonstrates why that kind of epithet actually works for this Minister because we see a situation where the Minister alone—man alone Steven Joyce—decides about the asset separation. 
Clare Curran 
: “Trust me. I know what I’m doing.”! 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: That is right. That is what the Minister is telling us. Well the problem for members on this side of the Chamber is that the track record in this area is not good. The track record in terms of transparency in telecommunications under this Minister is not good. Clause 23 as it stands fails to change my mind as a member of Parliament who is interested in this issue that this Minister has the transparent process we need. So that is why Clare Curran’s amendment will enable the New Zealand public to have some kind of say in the way the separation will happen. 
I am sorry to say this but members on this side do not feel that the Minister acting as man alone “trust me I know what I’m doing” is sufficient protection for New Zealanders to know that this deal stands up—that this separation is actually in the best interests of New Zealanders as a whole and not just one company and not just this one Minister. Clare Curran’s amendments will add a number of new paragraphs to clause 23B(3) and insert new subclause (2A) in clause 23C. That amendment provides that the Minister actually has to take into consideration section 69A of the Telecommunications Act 2001 which includes the idea of the promotion of competition for the long-term benefit of end-users— 
Clare Curran 
: The people. 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: That is New Zealanders—the end-users of this broadband. It is not just Mr Joyce it is not just Telecom; it is actually all New Zealanders. This is the equivalent of us working out the future highways of the country of asking who they are for. Are they just for the people going on holiday up on the Puhoi to Wellsford superhighway or are they for all New Zealanders? Will ultra-fast broadband—the key to unlocking economic futures for New Zealand—be available to all New Zealanders? Are we establishing a regime that is in the interests of end-users—as section 69A says “for the long-term benefit of end-users”? We are not talking about the short-term electoral cycle the slogans that Mr Joyce might come up with but whether all New Zealanders will have an opportunity to benefit from this. So that is why Clare Curran’s amendment would insert new subclause (2A) in clause 23C.