Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Amendment Bill

Tēnā koe. I move, That the Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Amendment Bill be now read a second time. I would like to thank the Māori Affairs Committee for its consideration of this bill. Nō reira, e te Komiti Māori nā koutou i whakarite tēnei kōrero mō te pire nei, i tātari, ā, i whakatakoto kia wānangahia e te whakapiringa tangata o tēnei Whare, hoi anō, tēnā tātou.

[So to you the Māori Affairs Committee, which considered this discourse about this bill, deliberated it, and recommended that members of this House debate it, acknowledgments to us collectively.]

The Māori Affairs Committee has considered changes proposed in the bill and has recommended that it be passed with a small number of amendments. The amendments seek to strengthen the Crown-Māori relationship by softening the tone of some of the words in provisions relating to spectrum management and future reviews of the Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Act 2003. The committee has also expressed its concern about the status of some of the constituent groups that make up Te Pūtahi Pāoho, the Māori Television Electoral College. I will update the House on the latest changes to Te Pūtahi Pāoho later in this speech.

The Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Act 2003 established the Māori Television Service. It also specified that a review of the operation of the effectiveness of the Act be undertaken in 2008-09, with a report to Parliament and recommendations for any amendments to the foundation legislation. This bill is a result of that review. This bill does not propose major changes to the principal legislation. The changes are fine-tuning in nature, so that the Māori Television Service is well positioned for the digital switch-over and can continue its strong focus on promoting our language and our culture. Digital switch-over is scheduled for completion in December 2013.

The bill seeks to make minor changes to the function of Māori Television Service to strengthen its focus on Māori language and culture, to update arrangements for spectrum management and the contents of Māori Television Service accountability documents, to address arrangements for borrowing and investments by Māori Television Service, and to update arrangements for the timeliness of future reviews and other miscellaneous matters.

I would like to talk about comments in the Māori Affairs Committee report about the composition of Te Pūtahi Pāoho. The committee has noted its concern about the current composition of Te Pūtahi Pāoho. At the time this bill was being considered by the committee a number of the member organisations of Te Pūtahi Pāoho were either no longer active or not registered as an incorporated society. The committee rightly notes that this was an untenable situation for Te Pūtahi Pāoho and could open it to criticism.

On 26 August 2013 I was advised by Te Pūtahi Pāoho that it had accepted the withdrawal of the National Māori Congress and Kawea Te Rongo from Te Pūtahi Pāoho. Pursuant to section 14 of the Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Act, I am progressing an order in council to confirm the removal of these organisations from Te Pūtahi Pāoho. I can advise that Ngā Kaiwhakapūmau i te Reo has also been re-registered as an incorporated society. These recent actions address the concerns expressed by the committee in its report. I am advised by my officials that a letter has since been sent to the chair of the committee explaining these recent developments.

With the withdrawal of the National Māori Congress from Te Pūtahi Pāoho, I would like to give thanks to the former chair, Mr Tūwhakairiora Williams. Nō reira, e Tū, tēnā koe, i ārahi ake i te waka nei, a Te Pūtahi Pāoho. Nāhau te karanga kia hoe tahi, ā, kia haere whakamua tēnei waka.

[So congratulations to you Tū, who escorted this vessel, Te Pūtahi Pāoho, and made the call to paddle in unison so that this vessel moves forward.]

I acknowledge also the new chair, Mr Willie Jackson, who I am sure will continue the committed work of his predecessor.

I indicated in the first reading speech for the bill that I intend to undertake further work to review the composition of Te Pūtahi Pāoho, and that this work will be coordinated with relevant work streams in Vote Māori Affairs. If there are further changes to the membership of Te Pūtahi Pāoho, I will advise the House at the appropriate time. A Supplementary Order Paper for the Committee of the whole House has been prepared. It seeks to update the commencement date of this bill. This is a minor, technical, but necessary, amendment.

In conclusion, I am pleased with the progress of this bill. The select committee process has not seen the requirement for significant changes to be made to the bill. I am heartened by this, as it suggests that those with interests in this bill are satisfied with the detail of this piece of legislation. I commend this bill to the House.

Māori Television is New Zealand’s indigenous broadcaster. It provides a wide range of local and international programmes for audiences across our country and also online, and it is internationally recognised. Māori language is at the heart of Māori culture and New Zealand’s unique cultural identity, and the Māori Television Service’s vision for Māori language to be valued is that it is to be valued, embraced, and spoken by all. Māori Television was launched in 2004. It is almost 10 years old—and I think that that is a really important point, first up, to acknowledge in this House today—and in those 10 years it has largely achieved its objectives.

I want to pay particular tribute here today to my colleague the late Parekura Horomia for his courage and determination in establishing Māori Television. It could be described as a taonga, so today I put it to you that we should keep it that way. I would also like to acknowledge the contribution of Jim Mather as the outgoing Chief Executive of Māori Television, who through recent years has steered New Zealand’s only publicly funded television station to a place of great value in New Zealand’s broadcasting environment.

In contrast, though, the appointment process of a new chief executive is currently under public scrutiny—high public scrutiny—and is certainly under a cloud due to the highly questionable, and certainly botched, process under the auspices of its current chair, and former National Party MP, Georgina te Heuheu. This process, which reeks of cronyism and dodgy practice, resulted in a highly regarded and experienced board member, Ian Taylor, resigning from the board over the process used, well before questions were asked in this House. Government Ministers have subsequently ducked for cover because they know that it is a bad look. The Minister of Māori Affairs, who is the Minister in charge of this Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Amendment Bill, should recall that Māori Television is in the good place that it is in today because of the utmost care and transparency that surrounded its appointments and mandate after some mistakes were made in key appointments at its beginnings.

A publicly funded media organisation should be scrupulously independent from Government Ministers and MPs, past and present. Neither the shareholding Minister nor Māori Television will make public the detailed reasons why Ian Taylor left the board, but when that information comes to light, as it surely will, then the role played by the board chair will be exposed, and we will certainly have more to say on this matter. Her role will be exposed and her position may well be untenable.

This bill appears on the face of it to be quite straightforward, but it certainly is not. Labour is supporting this bill, but I want to explain to the House some of the complex issues surrounding it and the questions that remain. It does seek to make some minor changes to the functions of Māori Television to strengthen its focus on the language and the culture, but, importantly, it allows for the current analog spectrum that Māori Television runs on to be switched to digital, which frees up more spectrum for up to possibly eight digital services. This is important, and this is why we are debating this bill under urgency, because that has to happen by the beginning of December—by 1 December. What is the date today—what is the date today?

💬 Hon Members: The 20th.

It is 20 November. That is pretty close, so it actually has to happen. That is why we are debating this bill under urgency today, and I think we should all acknowledge that.

This bill also requires the Crown to transfer the management rights to Te Pūtahi Pāoho over that spectrum for the establishment of a digital terrestrial television network over a 20-year period. As the Minister has acknowledged, there certainly was concern raised in the Māori Affairs Committee about the membership and governance of Te Pūtahi Pāoho, and I put it to you that without those questions being asked, that situation would never have come to light and there would have been potential mismanagement by an organisation that has been revealed to contain organisations within it that do not even exist any more.

Even the commentary on this bill, which was agreed to by everyone on the committee, says: “We consider that the current situation exposes Te Pūtahi Paoho to criticism, as some of the constituent groups appear to be defunct. We recommend that this issue be addressed with some urgency,”—which the Minister has acknowledged is being undertaken, but—“… We were also assured by the relevant officials that this was being addressed. We [noted] that the relationship between the Crown, Minister, and Te Pūtahi Paoho needs to be clarified, which would be [we hoped] achieved by the amendments we recommend [in this bill].” This could be described as a dog’s breakfast of a management situation that we are putting this newly converted spectrum into, and this is something that this side of the House remains concerned about.

It raises questions around whether the Government has its house in order in passing a bill that transfers the management of valuable spectrum to an organisation that is clearly not properly constituted or properly functioning. In the Committee stage of this bill I would like the Minister to answer more questions on that matter and on what is intended to be done about it, because it also raises questions about what this spectrum may be used for down the track and who will ultimately make decisions on its use. I do have three questions that I would like to put on the record today around that, and they are: will any revenue from the potential sale or lease of surplus frequency be returned to Māori Television? If that was to occur, will any surplus—i.e., that not required by Māori Television—have to be offered back to the Crown first, or to Kordia; if so, how would its value be determined and why? And this is an important one: why does Māori Television itself not control the full frequency? I ask why this organisation, which is about to turn 10 years old, does not have control over that frequency, which it was set up to have. It does have the pride of place in our country and should be given the full value that it is accorded.

This brings into question the wider question of the spectrum for public use. Māori Television is our only publicly funded TV station. It is not a public broadcaster in the real sense of the term. It has a particular mandate. We no longer have a public television broadcaster in this country since this Government axed TVNZ 7.

Until very recently we had another problem, because we had no broadcasting spectrum that was owned by the Crown—and will not have until members on this side of the House get into Government and decide to reintroduce public television in New Zealand. But there was not any spectrum. Interestingly, just weeks ago, on 23 October, we had an announcement from Sky television that it was handing back to the Crown four multiplexes, or groups, of analog spectrum, which is the equivalent of 30 to 35 national TV channels. Sky has been sitting on this unused spectrum for years. It had to make a decision by the beginning of December to either convert it to digital or hand it back, which raises questions—raises many questions—around this.

First of all, I have just a couple of things to say and two observations. The first is to say thanks to Sky. Thanks for returning that spectrum. Secondly, those frequencies should remain with the Crown. But the questions are: when was the Government advised, formally or informally, that Sky was handing this back, and what was the relationship between this, on the face of it, magnanimous decision to hand it back with no demand for payment and the wet bus ticket decision of the Commerce Commission just 1 week before—while Sky’s contracts with the internet service providers reduced competition and probably breached the Commerce Act—that it was not going to do anything about it? Why did Sky wait until the last possible minute to hand back this spectrum? This raises many questions about the way the Government manages spectrum, what that spectrum will be used for, and whether that spectrum will be sold.

Kia ora, Mr Assistant Speaker. I was going to give a very, very lovely Tau speech. I was going to talk about Māori TV and even congratulate the Māori Affairs Committee on a job well done—on a job, in fact, where the questions that were raised by members of the Māori Affairs Committee have turned out to make some changes to what is the Māori Television Service and what is the Māori Television Electoral College.

I got a tweet this afternoon from none other than Clare Curran, saying that if it was not for her, none of the hard questions would have been asked. I mean, for goodness’ sake! It is 2013 and this—I do not use these words often—Pākehā lady from Dunedin comes to our select committee. She is not a member of our select committee, but she comes to our select committee. She does not think any of the natives on that select committee or the other Pākehā people on that committee can ask any hard questions. What she is out there saying and tweeting is: “They couldn’t do their job. I’m Clare Curran. I’ve come in on my white horse”—I do not know whether it was a white horse or not; actually, I just made that part up—“and I’m the one who’s asking the correct questions.” But she fails to realise that questions were actually asked by the late Parekura Horomia way before she even came to our select committee, questions were asked by Shane Jones, and questions were asked by all of the committee members, including the Green Party and including—well, I was going to say New Zealand First but he is not a member of New Zealand First any more, and I am not talking about myself. Questions were asked by those members of the committee. And I tell you what. It was through those questions that were asked by all of the committee—

💬 Clare Curran: Well, how about talking about the issues?

Oh, be quiet. Be quiet. You had your turn. You had your turn. The questions that were asked were asked by all of the committee, and, in fact, it was through those questions that Mr Tūwhakairiora Williams actually stood down from being the chair of Te Pūtahi Pāoho. It was because of those questions that we asked that we have Willie Jackson, who is the chair now of the new organisation.

💬 Tracey Martin: For now.

Oh, for now—well, for whenever. It does not matter. The fact of the matter is that we did our job. We knew what we were doing. And it was not Ms Clare Curran riding into our select committee trying to help us. You want to read the tweet. You want to read the tweet. I tell you, it smacks of that old colonial European thing that the old natives cannot do the job by themselves. And I tell you what. Guess what? We have done the job. I commend this bill, the Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Amendment Bill, to the House.

Taloha ni and tēnā koe to you, Mr Assistant Speaker. It is a pleasure to speak to the second reading of the Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Amendment Bill. I follow the chair of the Māori Affairs Committee, Tau Henare, who is obviously feeling a bit needy today. He wants to make sure that his select committee and the work that was done on this bill during the select committee process was good and thorough and that it asked the right questions. I say to that member, well done to the Māori Affairs Committee for making sure that this piece of legislation has gone through. But, as you asked questions, we are entitled to ask questions as well.

There are a number of questions that my colleague Clare Curran has raised about the analog spectrum that is about to become digital spectrum, about the ownership and where that lies, and about what profit and what moneys will come of that. They are very pertinent questions because, basically, that spectrum is being taken off Māori Television and being put in another entity, and to what end? As Clare Curran says, that one analog spectrum can create up to eight or 10 digital television channels. The ability for Māori Television to hold on to those and use those in the future could have allowed for huge revenue-gathering by the Māori Television Service. To sell those off or to lease those off to create more revenue, to make sure that its goal of making sure that the Reo, their language, and their culture are enhanced through the Māori Television Service, could have been enhanced by having the rights to lease that spectrum. But in this case it is being put into another entity at arm’s length from the Māori Television Service, and we are not quite sure what that means for it. So I think they are absolutely valid questions that Clare Curran has put forward, which were obviously criticised by Tau Henare. He can do that; that is his entitlement. But they are still absolutely valid questions being put by this side of the House.

I would like to come back to this notion of questions, because we have asked some questions around the appropriateness of the process around the appointment of a new chief executive at Māori Television. Just like the media have freedom to ask questions, we too have the freedom to ask questions in this House, and we have serious concerns about the process and the fairness in the process around the appointment of a new chief executive. There has been some criticism from the Māori Party and some others in New Zealand about the right of this party to ask questions. I would say to those people who criticise us for asking those questions: bad luck. We are the Opposition and it is absolutely our right. If we think there is an issue to bring to this House, then we will ask questions. There is $36 million of taxpayer funding appropriated to Māori Television, and we have to be absolutely clear that the person who is running that organisation is above board, not just because of the money but because of the importance—and I think Clare Curran used the word “taonga”—the absolute importance, of this Māori Television Service to the indigenous culture of New Zealand. We will absolutely ask those questions to make sure that that person is the right person for the job.

Clare Curran also set the scene of the importance of Māori Television not just for Māori but also for non-Māori. I understand the vision of Māori Television. It is to make sure that the Māori language and culture is strong and that they have a voice and a face for the culture here in New Zealand so that they can influence, celebrate, educate, and communicate with their people to expand the use of their language and to make sure that things that are very important to that culture are viewed around the country. I think many people would argue at the moment that Māori Television has become the default State broadcaster in New Zealand, and I would have to agree with them to quite a large extent, because if you have a look at some of the programming that it is running, especially on special occasions—I can think of its huge Anzac Day coverage that it runs now—and, of course, a lot of sports that it is covering now, it is certainly the default State broadcaster here in New Zealand.

Māori Television has also come under fire for what I would call some hard-hitting journalism recently. There was some criticism in this House about that type of journalism. But I would ask that this House and those parties actually think about what they are saying, because hard-hitting journalism—the likes of what we have seen on Native Affairs recently—absolutely can respect the tikanga of the Māori culture but also hold the values of journalism and good journalism about the way that they do things. I certainly think that what we have seen from Native Affairs and the news department of the Māori Television Service is absolutely top standard, and it is asking the right questions that need to be asked. If we do not like the way that the media are operating, we can take some action against that. We have the right to complain, but as a rule it is their job to hold us to account and to hold public office-holders to account. I think that they have done that very, very well in the last month or two. We certainly know that the journalists from Māori Television are no soft touch. It may not suit everyone in this House, but that is the reality that we have of living in a free democracy.

So I think that Māori Television certainly ticks most of the boxes for what you can expect from a State-funded broadcaster. In fact, in its statement of intent, which the Minister of Māori Affairs, who took the first call, has mentioned today, it says that one of the major outcomes that it wants over the next 3 years is to develop an independent Māori Television broadcaster that is relevant, effective, and widely accessible. I certainly think that it is doing that.

The questions of who runs it and who the chief executive is are very important because that person needs to be fiercely independent and, very importantly, I think, beyond political interference. I think that the situation we have got here at the moment—and it is yet to be fully proved, but I think it will be in time—is that it seems that the process in appointing a chief executive at Māori Television and its independence and being beyond political interference is certainly under threat.

There are some serious responsibilities under this bill that the Māori Television Service has to achieve. If I can just take this opportunity to read new section 8, “Functions of service”—because section 8 is being replaced—in clause 7 of this bill: “The principal function of the Service is to contribute to the protection and promotion of te reo Māori me ōna tikanga through the provision, in te reo Māori and English, of a high-quality, cost-effective television service that informs, educates, and entertains viewers, and enriches New Zealand’s society, culture, and heritage.” All of those things—

💬 Andrew Little: Different from TVNZ.

That is right. All of these things are very, very important. So we have to have someone in that role who ticks a hell of a lot of boxes because they have to have a unique set of skills. They have to understand all things Māori, whether it be the Reo, whether it be the culture, or whether it be the changing nature of the Māori population in New Zealand, to make sure that the coverage that they put in their programming suits that audience. Obviously they also have to understand broadcasting, have an eye on fast-changing technology, they have got to grow the use of the language, and, importantly, they have to be in charge of, as I have mentioned, roughly $36 million of taxpayer funding all up that is given to them each year. So all of those boxes have to be ticked very well, and to not do that, I think, is doing a great injustice to the Māori Television Service.

So we do have concerns about one of the people who was shortlisted for the chief executive job. The sources whom we have spoken to question the ability of that person to tick all those boxes I mentioned, and particularly around two of those boxes, which are independence and the ability of them to—I guess when you are looking at new section 8—cost-effectively run a television service. So they have to have very good financial skills and be cost-effective—so they have to have very good financial skills. So we do have some concerns around Paora Maxwell because we understand that he is a very close personal friend of the chair of the Māori Television Service, who is the former National Minister Georgina te Heuheu.

In the time line that the Māori Television Service gave in an Official Information Act request to the press gallery about the appointment process, I think it said—and I am just going to try and hunt this down—that on 16 July, Georgina te Heuheu put her hand up and said: “I have got a conflict of interest because someone on this list I know very well and is a good personal friend of mine.” Nowhere in any of the documents can I find anything to stack that up. So when on 16 July was that done? Maybe the Minister of Māori Affairs can help us there. I can find something from about 6 weeks later. But according to the Māori Television Service, on 16 July, Georgina te Heuheu said: “I have a personal relationship with this person. I am putting my hand up.” At least she did it.

But we have also got problems with the previous employment of Mr Maxwell at Television New Zealand (TVNZ). Mr Maxwell can clear that up if he just says why he left. This can be easily concluded. Either TVNZ or Mr Maxwell can clear up why he left TVNZ.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Tēnā koutou e te Whare. I do not think I am going to take all the time that I have available for this call. We are very supportive of this legislation, the Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Amendment Bill. We are very pleased that the review has been completed and that the legislation came before the Māori Affairs Committee.

The Green Party, of course, was one of only two parties that voted in favour of the Māori Television legislation in 2003 that led to Māori Television being established. It was a very proud moment for us and for me. I was a brand new MP. I had been in Parliament for less than a year, and I remember negotiating—I cannot say I was particularly good at it—with Parekura Horomia, who was the Minister of Māori Affairs at the time, over how the service would be expanded and shared, particularly amongst marae. There were a great deal of issues. It was momentous that the bill did pass, but I would just note that only two political parties voted for it: us and Labour.

💬 Hon Annette King: So the National Party didn’t support it?

The National Party did not support the legislation at the time.

The legislation is now a little bit over 10 years old. It is, as has been said previously, unusual in that it is a creature of statute. The legislative provisions that established Māori Television will need to be reviewed on a regular basis and changes will need to be made according to changing times and technology, and that is what has happened here. So it is quite reasonable for this legislation to have come before us and for the issues to be discussed.

I was pleased to be a member of the select committee that considered it. I appreciate everybody’s contributions. Clare Curran made a good contribution and other members of the select committee made a great contribution. But I do understand where Tau Henare was coming from with his contribution this afternoon.

One of the issues that have been raised around Māori Television and in the context of this bill is the one that was just raised by Kris Faafoi. I appreciate his very clear discussion and description of those issues, but let us not think that this current issue with the appointment of the chief executive, which is making a little bit of news, is the first time that there have been any issues with the Māori Television Service. In 10 years there have been some teething problems and there have been issues raised in the public realm. Some of them have been more contentious than others, under the Labour Government and under the National Government.

This is an organisation that is comparatively young, but has no doubt made an enormous contribution to New Zealand’s broadcasting scene.

💬 Hon Trevor Mallard: Much better than ATN.

Thank you, Mr Mallard. It is widely regarded as the best State television broadcaster in the country. I firmly believe that that is the case, as do the Greens, because it is 100 percent focused on the community that it serves. And having such a strong kaupapa for the people that it serves and the broad community that it serves, it is able to deliver the kind of broadcasting that we would expect as a well-educated citizenry who are looking for stories and programmes that are focused on ourselves, on our people, on our culture, on the interconnection between Pākehā and Māori culture, and on news and current affairs, of course, which most politicians are mostly interested in.

Actually, Māori Television does a lot more than just news and current affairs. Māori Television provides a huge range of programmes that reflect Māori lives—real Māori lives—being played out. It is the kind of stuff you never see on any other television station in this country. It is all the good stories that you never see anywhere on television in this country, and all of the self-made programmes where whānau are out there talking about themselves, showing our whānau, our kids, our kuia and kaumātua, and all of our nannies and our koros—showing us the way that Māori really live. It is just whānau—positive, constructive, doing amazing things, and taking great care of ourselves, our families, and our communities. Again, they are stories that you simply do not see on mainstream television.

So to that extent I want to say to the Māori Television Service that you have provided a fantastic and incredibly valuable service to our country by the work that you do. Despite any legislative change we might need to make, or regulatory change we might need to make—any of the issues that we bring as politicians to the debate—we have an obligation to make sure that this service is strengthened and at every turn is able to better meet the needs of the Māori community, and communicate to the whole of the New Zealand community about its health and wellness, and all the amazing contributions that the Māori community makes to our country.

I would note that, as in the example of news and current affairs, a large bulk of the viewership of Māori Television is Pākehā because Pākehā are wanting to hear and see the stories by Māori of Māori, as well. This is not just directed at Māori; this is about—

💬 Tracey Martin: Better programming.

—yes—genuine programmes about our own communities where Pākehā are wanting to understand more. They are wanting to understand the Reo and all the different layers and levels of Reo that are provided. They are wanting to see their own whānau. I do not think we probably have a single Pākehā whānau in this country that does not have a Māori grandchild or a Māori grandparent. We are very integrated, but that is not often reflected on any television anywhere, except for the Māori Television Service. It is a service that provides excellent communication to Māori and Pākehā alike, and that it why it has such strong support.

So for all that there may be some changes needed—and I appreciate that the Minister has given the House an update on Te Pūtahi Pāoho and its membership; I think that is great. Issues were raised at the select committee, and we have now had some changes as a result. There are still some ongoing controversial issues. They will, no doubt, be resolved in time. None of that should implicate or affect or in any way undervalue the fantastic service that Māori Television is providing to our country, helping to bind Māori and Pākehā communities together and showing the true health and wellness of Māori communities and Pākehā communities working together in Aotearoa New Zealand. Thank you very much.

Kia ora, te Kaihautū. I rise to support the Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Amendment Bill. This bill is all about changing the functions of the Māori Television Service to better protect Māori language and to allow the service to establish a free-to-air digital terrestrial TV network. These changes will support Māori Television to become a world-class indigenous broadcaster, and it is well on the way.

The awareness and the use of Māori language, Te Reo, by New Zealanders has increased dramatically over the last 25 years—the last 25 years since Te Reo became an official language with the Maori Language Act in 1987. We can be proud of Māori media for supporting and growing our appreciation of Te Reo. Coincidentally, it is 25 years since the establishment of Māori radio and broadcasting—25 years of presenting Te Reo on air for all New Zealanders. We now have 27 iwi radio stations broadcasting on 68 radio frequencies, promoting Māori language and culture. Now all New Zealanders have the opportunity to listen and to watch regularly, to enjoy, and to learn.

We can all see the effects of regular Te Reo broadcasts. New Zealanders in all walks of life, of all ethnic backgrounds, now know more about Māori culture and now use many Māori words on an everyday basis. These days they mostly pronounce them correctly, and they have an appetite to learn more. I really look forward to hearing Māori spoken on a more regular basis in every location across the country and by people in all walks of life.

This morning something special happened, and this indicates that this could be very possible. The Māori Affairs Committee sat this morning between 8 a.m. and 9 a.m. Just as we were starting, somebody came into the room by mistake. I love the fact that everyone in the room acknowledged that person, everyone in the room acknowledged them cheerfully, and everyone in the room acknowledged them in Māori. It was a chorus of various Māori greetings from all of us, regardless of ethnicity, and it was very special, it was very satisfying, and it was very appropriate.

So I commend this bill to the House. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.

Tēnā koe, Mr Assistant Speaker. Tēnā koutou e te Whare. I am pleased to take a call in this second reading of the Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Amendment Bill. I support this bill. Can I, at the outset, acknowledge our matua, our late chief, the Hon Parekura Horomia, who championed the establishment of Māori Television when he was Minister of Māori Affairs. Māori Television definitely is a lasting legacy that he has left.

I know that all of us, and all of Aotearoa, in fact, are very proud of Māori Television. It is, by default, our New Zealand State broadcaster. You know, when we watch shows like Native Affairs, Te Kāea, Code, Tōku Reo, and Hōmai Te Pakipaki, those shows have been added to the lexicon of—

💬 Hon Tau Henare: Kai Time on the Road.

Kai Time on the Road. There are so many great shows that this humble, small Māori Television station produces. You know, talk about what it can produce relative to the relatively meagre resources it has to work with, compared with its very large commercial counterparts. I think it does an exceptional job. Along with acknowledging Parekura, I do acknowledge the current and previous management and staff of Māori Television for the exceptional job that they did and they do, and also in terms of the programming they create and that we get to enjoy when they broadcast over the network.

I support this bill. I am very proud to be a member of the Māori Affairs Committee, and I do acknowledge the member Nicky Wagner from Christchurch Central, my colleague over there on the other side of the House, because we are like a whānau. There was another special moment—two moments, actually—that occurred this morning in our committee in terms of the opening. I will not share them—oh, I might share it with the House, actually, because, believe it or not, we open with a karakia, which is great. That is our custom. That is our tikanga. So we do open with a karakia, and we usually share the job around. This time our dear tuahine over there volunteered to open for us. We are multi-denominational, multiparty, Māori, Pākehā—you name it. That is us. We are all there for the kaupapa of the Māori Affairs Committee. We held hands when we had our karakia this morning to start and to conclude.

💬 Hon Tau Henare: What?

Absolutely—Nanaia Mahuta was linked with Tau Henare. We had that circle, we had that bond—the band of brothers and sisters—as we kicked off our Māori Affairs Committee and the important mahi that we do. In all seriousness, it is special and important mahi that we do. I am pleased with the work we did at the committee level, with the contribution from my colleague Clare Curran but also with the contributions from everybody, because this is an important piece of legislation. It has been a long time in the making.

The independent review that was programmed into the 2003 Act was started 5 years ago. We are nearly at the 10th anniversary of Māori Television, and we are just now implementing in legislation the recommendations of that review. So it definitely has taken a while, but we are nearly there. We have to get there. We are under urgency at the moment, and we need to get this legislation passed because of the digital switch-over that is happening in about a week’s time. So we have got to get all the ducks in a row for Māori Television.

Not all of the recommendations of the independent review were picked up in the bill itself, but a fair amount of them have been. I specifically refer to the amendments in the substituted section 8, in clause 7, which further refine the language of the function of the Māori Television Service. The main amendments in the bill are concerned with the management rights to the spectrum, which are now vested in Te Pūtahi Pāoho. That is a very interesting development, because I would have thought that those management rights could just be conferred on the Māori Television Service. I think that Television New Zealand can manage all of its part of the spectrum and make all of its decisions. I do not know; maybe they think they are giving too much power to the Māoris by giving those rights to Māori Television. Instead, the responsibility for the management of the digital spectrum—4G, the new, flash, high-definition, multi-platform digital channels, and other things that are yet to be developed—rests with Te Pūtahi Pāoho.

It is true that we have raised concerns around the composition of that body. I think that too often we get pieces of legislation where we like to prescribe a hell of a—excuse me—where we prescribe—

💬 Iain Lees-Galloway: An awful lot.

—an awful lot of rules and processes, particularly when it comes to Māori bodies and Māori entities. This bill is a classic example, because schedule 1 of the Act lists the organisations that make up Te Pūtahi Pāoho, and, through our inquiries as a select committee, it was clear that some of those organisations were not operating. They were defunct. Some were deregistered from the incorporated societies register. So it needed to be cleaned up because there is statutory recognition of those organisations, they have huge responsibility to appoint members, and those members of the Te Pūtahi Pāoho body have very important statutory roles to play. They are the partners to the Crown in terms of Māori broadcasting and the relationship around Māori Television. So it was, I think, worthwhile that we made those inquiries. I guess, initially, the concern was that that is not part of the bill, but Te Pūtahi Pāoho is a fundamental part of the Act and the bill, so I think we really had to make those inquiries to make sure that we got to the bottom of the composition and that it was tidied up.

To conclude, we do support this bill. We are looking forward to going through the remaining stages. It has been a long time in the making, in the running, but I guess we are all looking forward to this new phase for Māori Television.

Before I conclude, I would just like to make some remarks about the chief executive, or lack of, for Māori Television. All I would say is that we like to talk about a waka, but you cannot have a waka without a kaihautū. You have got to have that chief standing up against the wind, directing his paddlers which way to go. This is an important new chapter for Māori Television, and it is really important that it has its kaihautū in place to navigate it through these waters at this time. That is all I would say. I hope we can get the chief executive in place as soon as possible. I am looking forward to celebrating 10 years of Māori Television next year, and many more to come thereafter. I support this bill. Kia ora tātou.

I just want to pick up one major point that quite a few of my colleagues have been making, which is around the minor amendments to the Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Amendment Bill. One of the amendments is quite major. It reads “the protection and promotion of te reo Māori me ōna tikanga” where previously it was about the protection and promotion of Te Reo me te tikanga. This amendment addresses the vulnerability of the integrity of Te Reo by changing that principal function, the Māori language and its accepted and customary usage, and that is really important for providers of programmes to the Māori Television Service.

What it means is that it has implemented a measurable outcome for the service to achieve in terms of Te Reo and tikanga. That means, then, that programmes like Mister Ed dubbed over in Te Reo Māori are no longer acceptable. Programmes like “The Happy and Hapless Home Videos Replayed” with a Te Reo - speaking presenter are now no longer acceptable under this classification of Te Reo Māori me ōna tikanga. This bill is about protection of the context in which the Reo is placed, and how it is used and maintained. The context must enhance the mana and integrity of the Reo. I commend this bill to the House.

Tēnā koutou katoa. A little bit of whakapapa—kinship—which eclipses political affiliation, caused me to be over there on the other side of the House for a mercifully short period of time. I stand to provide a little bit of background and history in respect of this bill, the Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Amendment Bill.

It is important that we think right back to the efforts at Waiwhetū Marae, where in the 1980s the original kohanga reo was established. Then there was a push to achieve recognition in the time of the Hon Koro Wētere for Te Reo Māori. That led to—

💬 Hon Clayton Cosgrove: A great man.

Well, unlike the current Minister of Māori Affairs, he was a great man. Then that led to Te Reo being regarded as a taonga, as a manatunga. That led to the Māori Language Commission being formed, and a host of other bodies. Māori Television has had a rather chequered history, but we stand quite staunch in promoting it as an institution that plays a key role in the revival and dissemination of our language usages and customs that are often regarded as following in the wake of language development. It relies now on modern technology that the current Minister in his dealings with the Minister for Communications and Information Technology—i.e., I am talking about the spectrum, which is now the new highway—and the current activists and future users of the language should look to. It is a shame that the Minister has failed miserably. Never have we seen a worse outcome for language activists.

Indeed, on Māori Television only tonight, Piripi Walker, one of the key members of Ngā Kaiwhakapūmau i te Reo—i.e., those who seek to provide permanent status of the language—was very diplomatic, a little bit like myself. He did not quite say in candid terms that the Minister has been asleep, not at the wheel but at the helm, at the prow, in the puku, and climbing up the sail of this waka. Minister, I say to you that this is a piffling contribution. On the day this is going through, he has been told to keep quiet and accept this modest improvement whilst spectrum rights have been denied to the Treaty partner.

A Government is entitled to treat an iwi how it likes, but the Māori Party is not entitled to diminish, to destroy, or to betray the dreams of the Māori people, and that is what has happened today. That is why, although we stand and we see some modest improvements associated with this bill, it is a very bleak day.

It comes down to the quality of advocacy. I have had my differences with earlier Ministers of Māori Affairs. I had my differences at one stage when a former Minister, Tau Henare, decided to appoint Joe Williams, who had been a lawyer and a judge of the Māori Land Court as a consequence of his intervention—a very bright guy, but we were often at odds with each other about the iwi thesis. But that was a Minister who showed courage and boldness. This has been around for so long that members of the Māori media community and iwi have lost sight of where these improvements actually came from. But they are emblematic of the very lacklustre, tired, and largely irrelevant contributions that the Minister has made. It is like keeping a rugby player who has faded to a point where he is better to be on the bench permanently.

I had my misgivings about the Māori Television Electoral College. We had discussions on our side of the House, and the sense was to allow the college to refine its processes and improve its own set of accountabilities. But a number of the organisations I have referred to as waka kihau, which is the Māori way of saying, in English, ghost ships. We need to be absolutely sure, because of the value of taonga and the capacity being transmitted, that they do not decide to follow some whim of the Māori Party and promise to 72 iwis that they can all have their own radio station—an absurd idea—or their own TV station. This requires bulking up the resource, bulking up the talent, not atomising effort. I think it is very, very sad on this particular day that Māori Television is covering on Te Karere evidence of the abject failure of the current Minister and his colleagues to have an inch of influence with the dowager of Te Wai Pounamu, otherwise known as the Minister of Broadcasting. If there was ever evidence where the power imbalance lies here, Māoridom have had it shown to them today.

Unfortunately, I do not have time to digress into the inordinately large consultancy fees associated with the Te Puni Kōkiri report. Some is related to the bill, because it says “strategic advice”. But rest assured that scores of Official Information Act questions are being composed as we speak, to seek justification as to why the Minister has been unable to attract enough talent into that particular organisation. Has that caused a delay in this bill being at the point it is? There were earlier reports lying behind this bill. One was by a panel called Te Kāhui o Māhutonga. It includes the Māori word for the Southern Cross, Te Māhutonga. I think that Te Māhutonga, the Southern Cross, a key feature of navigation, needed to be imprinted in the Minister’s mind so that he had a sense of how to navigate progress—not go round in circles, not give in so easily, and not be forced to back down whilst talking tough to the hapū and the iwi. These might sound rather jarring remarks, but this is a robust House. It is the highest court in the land, and we are drawing to an end. It is important that our people, as they watch an improved version of Māori Television over the Christmas holidays, contemplate the need—and the importance—for the Minister to receive a very sharp reminder of his total irrelevance to the behaviour and the conduct of where the power is, which is not with the Māori Party.

I need to come back and talk a wee bit more about dramas around the chief executive officer. At the end of the day the board appoints its own chief executive officer, and I hope that it reaches a decision with alacrity. It has been very disturbing to learn that the former Minister, the Hon Georgina te Heuheu, put herself in a position that was very, very awkward, supporting a candidate who apparently—I have no evidence of this—left under a cloud from Television One. But all of it only goes to damage the perception initiated, I must confess, by the very idle approach shown by the Minister towards Māori broadcasting. When Koro Wētere and Parekura Horomia were around, they had dramatic support from the highest levels of Government. Indeed, I would say, even in the time of Winston Peters and Tau Henare—they had their differences. That is cool. I occasionally have my own differences with some of my colleagues. That is part of being Māori in Parliament. It is exaggerated by the media. It occasionally happens with the Greens, and I wear that often as a badge of honour, but that is another matter.

I would say that this bill, although it collects our support, shows that too little has been done. If you want Māori communities to improve the quality of language and the frequency of language, and to broaden the language out so we overcome the cringe factor with regard to our Pākehā cousins in Aotearoa and other ethnic groups, it needs leadership. Unfortunately, the Minister of Māori Affairs, for the last 5 to 6 years—intolerably long—has provided hopeless leadership. It is one thing to be a good, hail-fellow-well-met sort of character, but when you are dealing with powerful personalities, as is the case in the National Cabinet, there is no place for the old figure—i.e. of the 1950s—“Pai kare, it’ll be right.” That belongs in the past. The quality of advocacy that has caused the collapse of Māori aspirations today in relation to spectrum rights—there are spectrum rights. There most certainly are. Indeed, Labour went some way to recognising an entitlement there, and made a grant to shunt forward Māori participation in the new, emerging information and communications technology sector.

It is important that we not overlook that the value of the language eclipses the efforts of politicians. Fortunately, the language will live on, in spite of the miserable efforts of the current Minister. That is cool, that is politics, etc., and that will change next year. But Māori Television has a bright future. Its future, however, depends on its board of governors choosing the right chief executive officer and Te Pūtahi Pāoho, the waka kihau—the ghost ship—ensuring that this capacity and taonga is used to achieve the ends of the legislation, which is to popularise the language throughout New Zealand as an ongoing feature of our indigenous identity and a contribution to multicultural New Zealand. Kia ora tātou katoa.

I want to take a short call on this bill, the Māori Television Service (Te Aratuku Whakaata Irirangi Māori) Amendment Bill. I joined the Māori Affairs Committee towards the end of its consideration and can recount some of the discussion that may be useful in this part of its progress. There was a lot of discussion, which members have pointed to, around Te Pūtahi Pāoho and its role as an electoral college, and concerns that some of its constituent organisations were not fully representative of the supposed interests that they are there to promote. We had quite an in-depth discussion about what more could happen, but in the end we noted, for all the reasons that my colleague Shane Jones has outlined in his discussion, that it should not impede the progress of the bill.

With regard to the digital switch-over, the pragmatism of the select committee was that we wanted to ensure that Māori Television could continue to do what it does really well, and let us face it: it is the public broadcaster of New Zealand. It does promote the identity of New Zealand in ways that we would not see on Television One or TV3. What it does is provide an access point for many New Zealanders to see our New Zealand through a different lens. We have a platform that promotes indigenous broadcasting. We have a platform that promotes Te Reo Māori through a number of mediums—through Hōmai Te Pakipaki, through game shows, through documentaries, through sitcoms and the like, and through Māori language learning programmes.

One of the impacts of the review that will be a positive gain, I think, for the development of Te Reo Māori is to ensure that the language becomes more accessible in contemporary broadcasting terms. So, as a mother of young kids, I am absolutely delighted that Māori Television will be promoting Dora the Explorer in Te Reo Māori. My son watches—

💬 Iain Lees-Galloway: And SpongeBob.

That is right—and SpongeBob Square Pants. I have to say that that is probably more for an older audience—probably for us in here. The point of it is that our children, wherever they are, live in a very diverse world. Whether it is Dora the Explorer, whether it is Māui, whether it is Diego, or whether it is something about dragons or something about taniwha, the fact is that our children today are not limited to the world of Te Ao Māori and they want to have accessible access to what is on offer in their global community. That is the world that I am bringing my child up in, and I am absolutely delighted that Māori Television has taken the step to ensure that there are programmes that are accessible in Te Reo Māori for a new, emerging generation, who see the world as their oyster, who want access to the global indigenous community and to the global community, and who will see that through Māori Television. So I am certainly supportive of the aspects of this bill that will open up that prospect.

The other part of the conversation that is important to this bill is, I guess, the future relationship of the Ministers responsible for Māori Television and how that relationship will continue with Te Pūtahi Pāoho, especially in the future review of Māori Television. We ensured in the select committee, and we took on board advice, that there would be a good amount of negotiation and agreement around the terms of reference for the review of Māori Television. The benefit of doing that is to ensure, as was initially envisaged when Māori Television commenced, that the partnership approach to the governance and the setting of direction for Māori Television was one that would be done by agreement. With the hindsight of 20-odd years, looking at how things have happened and could happen better, I think this is a progressive step and a step in the right direction.

Members before me have spoken about the governance issue. I really do not want to add too much more to what has been said, except to agree with the comments of my colleagues, certainly on the Labour benches, that the governance of Māori Television is absolutely critical. It should not have a level of perceived interference by political appointments, which recently became a part of the focus. The reason why I say this is that there will be some of us in this House who would remember that back in the days of Aotearoa Television, it was not so easy to get over the threshold of having such an innovative approach to Māori language and Māori broadcasting through a Māori television station. So there is a spotlight, whether people want to acknowledge it or not, on everything that happens in this space. At the governance level, it is, I guess, an area where we will have to assure ourselves that there is a robust and transparent way of appointing those who lead Māori Television.

I have seen the growth of the people in the Māori Television space. Jim Mather has since left and gone to Te Wānanga o Aotearoa. He has certainly provided enough sunlight for talented potential to grow in Māori Television. It has been good to see the people who initially started at the lower levels, or on the lower rungs, if you like, in the broadcasting space now assuming roles at the management level in the programming parts of Māori Television, and can I make this comment. In an organisation such as Māori Television, which I believe is making a huge contribution to the development of Te Reo Māori, to see the growth of talent through that organisation being reflected in all parts of its operation is absolutely exciting. Whether those people are in front of the camera or behind it, or negotiating the various programmes and the way in which Māori Television is marketed externally, talent has been growing through this particular medium alone, and I am really positive about the way in which Māori Television can go into the future.

When I first used to visit schools and ask the kids: “Well, what do you want to do?”, initially the answer was: “Oh, you know, I think I want to be a teacher.”, or it would be that they wanted to do law, or commerce, or things like that. Now it might be: “I want to get into tourism, into hospitality, into broadcasting—hopefully I am going to be making my own programmes on Māori Television.”, and this is certainly what is reflected back from Māori young people within the school system. So that is the extent to which Māori Television has had a positive impact on another generation coming through.

There are some aspects of the bill that I will be only too happy to allude to in the Committee stage in order to contribute to this debate, but for this small part can I say again that, notwithstanding the concerns around Te Pūtahi Pāoho, the Māori Affairs Committee did not feel that those concerns were significant enough to impede the progress of the bill. But we still want to ensure that the Minister of Māori Affairs’ attention around ensuring the robustness of that particular body and the fulfilling of its obligations is something that he may consider a watching brief. Nō reira, i tēnei wā, ka tuku te mihi atu ki a koutou katoa. Kia ora.

Bill read a second time.

Instruction to Committee