No Māori representation on Public Media Panel

National MP Nuk Korako has criticised the lack of Māori  representation on a public broadcasting ministerial advisory group, and Associate Minister for Māori Development Willie Jackson hoped a Māori representative would be elected.

Korako has hit a raw nerve claiming Labour is paying lip service when it comes to its commitment to Māori, with Minister for Broadcasting Clare Curran saying she’s aware of criticisms.

Stuff:  National MP slams Public Media Advisory Board for lack of Māori representation

National MP Nuk Korako is slamming a public broadcasting ministerial advisory group for having no Māori representation.

The group has been established to investigate setting up a public media funding commission to advise parliament on the state of the media and resourcing needs of public media.

It’s a concern that there’s no Māori voice on the Public Media Panel, Korako says.

“Māori Television, Radio Waatea, Te Hiku Radio, all of these are actually reliant on public funds and they have not got a voice on this advisory group.”

Seems like a good point.

Minister for Broadcasting Clare Curran says she’s aware of National’s criticisms.

Curran says the panel of four has only had two meetings. Te Kāea has been told there is the possibility of another panel position.

“We’re open to adding a Māori representative on that panel,” she says.

It looks like someone has slipped up here.

Associate Minister for Māori Development Willie Jackson hoped a Māori representative would be elected.

Curran should be aware of more than National’s criticisms.

Labour met last night to discuss the future direction of the broadcasting space.

Curran says “We discussed a range of things- mainly big picture- around how we can work together, what some of the pressures are in Māori Broadcasting and right across the broadcasting sector.  We’re absolutely focused on how we can do things better. It’s still early days.”

Curran says she and Māori Broadcasting Minister Nanaia Mahuta expect to meet to discuss how they can work more closely in this space.

Including Māori input in the Public Media Panel would be a good start.

Karako’s members’ bill may do some good

Following on from the much scorned Members’ Bill from National backbencher Nuk Korako, Vernon Small rips into National’s handling of Members’ bills.

From Korako’s inconsequential lost property bill reveals dark side of Govt tactic:

Which brings us back to how the Government is manipulating the once-a-fortnight members’ day by stacking the ballot with Government backbenchers’ Bills like Korako’s lamentable deposit.

It wasn’t so long ago, with the Government able to determine its legislative programme, that the members’ ballot was seen as the route for Opposition and minor parties to put forward issues they saw as important.

When the Government had a strong majority there was little concern about what – or how many – proposed laws where wheeled up from the biscuit-tin ballot.

If the Government of the day objected, they could just knock them over like so many skittles. Next!

But with slim majorities, and especially with competing parties in the House since MMP was adopted, it is no longer so simple.

UnitedFuture’s Peter Dunne and the two Maori Party MPs are able to deliver a majority against the Government and it can no longer be sure of the numbers on slightly left of centre issues, especially at first reading.

There are plenty of examples. Last week there were two: David Parker’s move to bring contractors inside minimum wage laws and Andrew Little’s healthy homes bill. Before that were Sue Moroney’s (vetoed) extension to paid parental leave.

Hence the new tactic of stacking the ballot with as many National MPs’ measures as possible. Then the odds are lessened of an Opposition measure, with the potential to embarrass, being drawn.

Having said that, there are small but worthy measures Government members can justifiably put into the ballot. Paul Foster-Bell’s move to exempt RSAs from the need to obtain special liquor licences to serve alcohol on Anzac Day is a clear case in point. 

But others that are worthy and bring out the best in Parliament – such as the marriage equality law or ACT MP David Seymour’s proposed assisted dying bill – can potentially be displaced by National’s members’ ballot-stacking.

And even if the Government hits “flush” on Korako’s strained attempt, there are others lurking in the wings.

For example, you have to wonder in the harsh light of day if Matt Doocey still thinks his Companies (Annual Report Notice Requirements) Amendment Bill is such a good idea.

Do we really need a full members’ day debate on an amendment to remove the requirement to provide a written notice of an annual report to shareholders? 

Brownlee and his fellow ministers may not like it, but if the kind of ridicule being heaped on Korako’s nano-“bill” is the only antidote then so be it.

Opposition parties also abuse and misuse members’ bills too, but Small is justifiably blasting National here for what they do.

Prompted by Korako’s much lamented and eminently lamentable bill. Korako (and the luck of the ballot) may have done some good bringing this up.

Small joins slamming of lost property bill

The scathing of Nuk Korako’s Airport Authorities (Publicising Lost Property Sales) Amendment Bill continues, this time by Vernon Small

Korako’s inconsequential lost property bill reveals dark side of Govt tactic

None of the derision dumped on Nuk Korako’s Airport Authorities (Publicising Lost Property Sales) Amendment Bill does it full justice.

It is not just a trivial piece of legislative whimsy, it is vanishingly inconsequential.

It’s not often you get to reproduce in full the business-end of a “bill”, but here goes:

In section 9(1)(ff) replace “the insertion of suitable advertisements in a newspaper circulating in the district where the airport is situated” with “publicising the sale in what the authority considers to be a fair and reasonable manner”.

That’s it. 

So let’s bust a few developing myths about the “bill” – and both law professor Andrew Geddis and legal frequenter of social media Graeme Edgeler have made similar points elsewhere.

What it deals with is the fate of stuff people leave in airports; the odd umbrella, a bag of mints, a jacket maybe. Perhaps an iPhone.

But it doesn’t help in any meaningful way to return even those goods to their rightful owners.

What that single limpid clause does is allow airport authorities NOT to advertise in a local newspaper when they decide to auction off the lost property accumulated in their back offices. That’s all.

It doesn’t remove a rule that restricts advertisements only to newspaper, as some have suggested. They can advertise as widely as they like now.

Nor does it require them to advertise the auction in an itemised way – so you could check if your umbrella, emblazoned with elephants, is included in the sale.

In short, it does nothing for travellers, nothing to help reunite people and possessions, nothing to bulwark us against an international tsunami of lost baggage.

What it does is make it easier for airport authorities, when they decide to sell lost property and pocket the proceeds. 

In the House on Tuesday, Korako, a National list MP, gave an amusing defence of the “bill”. Given the material he had to hand, it was valiant but it was also misleading, implying many of the bogus arguments rebutted above.

If Korako doesn’t want his parliamentary career defined by this nonsense he should be banging on the National whips’ door, begging them to can it before it arrives on the floor of the House.

Nobody would want to be in the Government’s, or Korako’s, shoes when the law change lands in the House, nor suffer the the media spray that will follow.

If it has any shame – or sense of self-preservation – it will dump the “bill” altogether and slip the change into the next available Statutes Amendment Bill, where such arcane trivia belongs.

So it looks like this bill is destined for an ongoing hammering if it continues to proceed in some way through Parliament.

See also Gerry Brownlee versus Andrew Geddis.

I don’t think I have seen any defending of this bill, except for Brownlee’s attack on Geddis.

 

Lost luggage bill

For some reason there has been a lot of comment about a Government MP getting a Members’ bill drawn from the ballot.

Apparently it was a waste of a Members’ Bill slot for a trivial matter.

RNZ: MP bagged over lost luggage bill

A bill on the best way for airports to advertise lost luggage has been roundly mocked, but the MP whose name it is under insists the bill is no laughing matter.

National MP Tutehounuku (Nuk) Korako has had his member’s bill drawn out of the ballot, which means it will be debated in Parliament.

In frustration, some MPs have said their “more important” member’s bills haven’t been drawn, while Labour’s Grant Robertson and others reacted on Twitter with the hashtag #NoLuggageLeftBehind.

But many opposition Members’ Bills have no chance of success so are wastes of slots as well.

It has now been reported that it may be incorporated in a Government bill.

LostLuggageBill