Radio New Zealand Amendment Bill

We have heard a lot of disparaging of, and, indeed, clobbering of, Radio New Zealand in this House today, so I would like to start by saying thank God we have Radio New Zealand; thank God I am able, and many others are able, to listen to a radio station that is not interrupted every few minutes with commercials; thank God we have a radio station that is not dominated by commercial interests; and thank God I can listen to Worldwatch at night when I have not found any other radio station that has international programmes consistently like Worldwatch on Radio New Zealand. Thank God we have a radio station that has a specific charter to provide comprehensive, independent, impartial, and balanced news services and current affairs, etc. Thank God we have one radio station that before the last election sat down and worked out how it should provide impartial and balanced coverage. I find it extraordinary that some persons here are even trying to suggest that Radio New Zealand might not be balanced and impartial. I think it is one of the mediums of communication in our land that actually is balanced and impartial. So thank God we have Radio New Zealand! I am not speaking just for myself, either. Its annual report states that almost half of the listeners who listen to Radio New Zealand have been listening to it for more than 20 years. We have also heard a lot of disparaging remarks about a couple of amendments in the bill. One amendment, in particular, that has generated a lot of sneering in the House is the requirement that Radio New Zealand should, amongst other things, promote programmes that contribute to the spiritual and ethical development of life in New Zealand. What is so incredibly problematic about discussing spiritual and ethical issues? Excuse me, but do we not have whole radio stations devoted to sport and endless programmes on money? Why should we not have some programmes that examine ethical and religious issues? Is there some kind of great sin in that? I am surprised that the National Party is so opposed to that provision. Maybe some members have noticed that religion seems to be a rather dominant force in the world today, and it might be helpful if we had programmes that contributed to our understanding of religious and ethical issues. To try to suggest, as the previous speaker did, that that is somehow undermining the secular state of New Zealand is utter nonsense. Hopefully, what that requirement will do is contribute to our understanding of religious and ethical issues, which are very dominant in the world today. That said, we think the charter is a wonderful document. We agree with the chief executive of Radio New Zealand who said that it provides Radio New Zealand with a clear set of guidelines that are flexible and not too prescriptive. We strongly support the charter, and the modest amendments in the bill to require Radio New Zealand to look at all age groups — in particular, children and young people — to look at religious and ethical issues, and to have regular surveys. We strongly support that, but we are concerned that there seems to be something of a parallel here with TVNZ. On the one hand, we are giving Radio New Zealand this charter with its lofty ideals, and imposing new obligations on it in this bill; on the other hand, we are not providing Radio New Zealand or, for that matter, TVNZ, with the funding they need to implement their charters. In my view, that is the main issue we should have been addressing in our review of the charter in the Commerce Committee. It is slightly ironic that we did that whole review of Radio New Zealand without getting to the heart of the problem, which is that the whole organisation is totally cash-strapped. We did not address the funding issue at all, and to me, that is a major problem. Others have spoken about the headlines we have all read, such as "Radio New Zealand blows budget for news" and "Newsroom on the verge of implosion". As others have mentioned, there is clearly a serious morale problem within Radio New Zealand. We acknowledge that, but we believe that funding issues are an underlying problem. Radio New Zealand is being expected to implement this lofty charter without sufficient funding. We suspect that deeper issues, including staffing, have also contributed to the alleged implosion. However, having identified problems of morale, etc, we should nevertheless hesitate to become involved in sorting out those issues. We must remember that Radio New Zealand is part of the fourth estate, whose independence we should be jealously guarding. We should resist the temptation to get our sticky little political fingers into that crisis and try to sort it out by deciding who should, or should not, be running Radio New Zealand — or who should not be deciding this or that. Clearly, those are issues that Radio New Zealand should sort out, and let us hope that they do, because there clearly is a serious problem. But we should also recognise and appreciate that we have independent radio in New Zealand, and an independent fourth estate. Our democracy would virtually cease to exist if we did not have radio and television channels that were truly independent, impartial, and unbiased, but instead had radio stations that were effectively the channel of corporate interests or the State. The Greens will certainly be supporting this bill. We cannot see why everyone is in such a state of consternation about the fact that Radio New Zealand should have to make a few programmes that contribute to spiritual and ethical understanding. It seems eminently sensible. We think it is extremely sensible also to ask Radio New Zealand to look at the full range of age groups, and to consider focusing more on children and young people, which is obviously one of its weak areas. It is not succeeding very well in reaching that particular audience. We think that requiring Radio New Zealand to commission surveys is extremely important. It is all very well having a charter, but how do we measure it? One of the few ways we have of doing so is through quantitative and qualitative research, and we have required that that be done. Ultimately, we are concerned that there is no point having these charters, worthy though they are, if we are not going to provide Radio New Zealand, or Television New Zealand, with the revenue they need to implement them.