🧪 EXPERIMENTAL / ALPHA — this is an independent prototype, not an official record. Data may be incomplete or wrong - always check the linked Hansard source before relying on it.
Hot Air

Wednesday, 15 September 2004

Electricity and Gas Industries Bill

Part 3 Amendments to Commerce Act 1986
HansardID: dc5796b6-ed00-4a87-ac77-8886ea735fab
Back to debates
🗣️ Speech Roger Sowry (New Zealand National Party — List Member)
Time unknown

Part 3 is a relatively narrow part, which amends the Commerce Act. I want to bring attention to what I think is a very serious issue. I will do it quickly now; I know that we will have to deal with this part again when the Committee resumes sometime next sitting day.

Subsection (3) of new section 57CA, inserted by clause 30B, refers to the Commerce Commission and states: “The Commerce Commission must, if asked by the Energy Commission to do so, reconsider an existing authorisation or undertaking and, to the extent that the Commission considers it necessary or desirable to do so,”. What we have is the Commerce Commission having to dance to the Energy Commission’s tune.

If we look at an earlier part of the bill, we see that that commission is able to be directed by the Minister. So let us go through the food chain. The Minister can direct the commission about something to do with lines company charging, or the regulatory environment, or the environment those companies function under. The commission then toddles off to the Commerce Commission, and the Commerce Commission is required to have a look at it. We have in this country an independent Commerce Commission—or we have had, until this bill is passed. Now we are to have a Commerce Commission that is being brought into political question by its dancing to somebody else’s tune.

Not only that but the Minister is further muddying the waters by proposing to have some commissioners who are joint commerce commissioners and energy commissioners. So they will be answering to the Minister one moment, then sitting on a case, supposedly independently, the next. Imagine if, in the Air New Zealand - Qantas debacle that went through the Commerce Commission, the Minister could have gone to the transport authority and said he wanted it to do A, B, and C, and to make sure the Commerce Commission looked at A, B, and C, and the transport authority could then have toddled off to the Commerce Commission and said it wanted it to have a look at this and this, and the Commerce Commission was obliged to look at this and this because the Minister had directed it to do so, and there was cross-accreditation of commissioners.

Progress reported.

The House adjourned at 9.56 p.m.

🗣️ Spoke in this debate (1)

  • Roger Sowry (New Zealand National Party — List Member)