"\u003C!DOCTYPE html\u003E\u003Chtml xmlns:xlink=\u0022http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\u0022 xmlns:xsi=\u0022http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance\u0022 xmlns:mml=\u0022http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\u0022\u003E\n  \u003Chead\u003E\n    \u003CMETA http-equiv=\u0022Content-Type\u0022 content=\u0022text/html; charset=utf-16\u0022\u003E\n    \u003Cmeta name=\u0022viewport\u0022 content=\u0022width=device-width, initial-scale=1\u0022\u003E\n  \u003C/head\u003E\n  \u003Cbody style=\u0022font-family:sans-serif; font-size:100%;\u0022\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000001\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a8a6bcbf38394410ad5684ed92951686\u0022\u003ETuesday, 4 December 2007\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000003\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00221f6a00154c8a4d02ba7fb33dacde6900\u0022\u003ETuesday, 4 December 2007\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000002\u0022\u003EMadam Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000004\u0022\u003EPrayers.\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000005\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002227a08689d6ee49a2bd986ff572b3f376\u0022\u003EObituaries\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000006\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u002226f2925153704c878aac7adde55fa963\u0022\u003EJohn Belgrave DCNZM\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022 data-id=\u00226ea2e661decb40f39ba265de8c50dd43\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000007\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226ea2e661decb40f39ba265de8c50dd43\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I regret to inform the House of the death on 3 December 2007 of Maurice John Belgrave DCNZM, who was appointed Chief Ombudsman on 1 July 2003. I desire, on behalf of this House, to express our sense of the loss we have sustained and to extend our sympathy to his family. I now ask members to stand with me and observe a period of silence as a mark of respect for his memory.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000008\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003EHonourable members stood as a mark of respect.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000009\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022d3d98b6291be42a4bfa297dec3b99c11\u0022\u003EPoints of Order\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000010\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00227834227b6df2415c99470acf2d46bac1\u0022\u003EState Services,Minister\u2014Lodging Questions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000011\u0022\u003E\u003Cbr\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00224fe1015855834dc4a3118cd0faf086e7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000012\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224fe1015855834dc4a3118cd0faf086e7\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (National\u2014Ilam):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I want to raise with you a very serious point of order, from National\u2019s perspective.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000013\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThis morning we attempted to lodge an oral question to the Minister of State Services, David Parker. That question asked whether he stood by all the statements and responses given on his behalf by the Hon Trevor Mallard to oral question No. 6 last week, and if he did not, why he did not. The Clerk\u2019s Office advised us that the Prime Minister had determined that all matters relating to Erin Leigh and Clare Curran were to be referred to the Minister of Justice, the Hon Annette King, for a response. The Clerk\u2019s Office further suggested that the question was unacceptable unless it was reworded, and suggested that it should be reworded to say: \u201CDoes she stand by all responses given on behalf of the Minister of State Services, the Hon Trevor Mallard, to oral question No. 6 on 22 November 2007; if not, why not?\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000014\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe suggestion that Annette King might be able to answer a question about whether Mr Parker accepts that answers given to the House by Mr Mallard were, in fact, statements that she or he could stand by makes quite a nonsense of the question process. Although we accept that the Government can choose to have anybody answer a particular question, this question is unique to the Minister of State Services and to circumstances that relate specifically to his involvement in that ministry and the issue that is at hand. We are really concerned, in that while we would say there was a case to be made that the Hon David Parker should not be involved in receiving the report on the investigation into whether he was properly acting when he made a suggestion to the ministry that Clare Curran should be employed, Ministers surely have to be accountable to this House not only for their actions but also for their responses and statements in this House to this House. In this case, all we were asking was for that particular Minister to confirm remarks that had been made on his behalf. If we are not able to ask a simple question like that, then that, I think, seriously attacks the concept of Ministers being accountable to this House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000015\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EMadam Speaker, I would like you to consider the appropriateness of the action of the Office of the Clerk in accepting a direction from the Prime Minister that this question to Mr Parker was somehow unacceptable.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u00228bd0b343a0f94e8b81f8bd601eeaecdf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000016\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228bd0b343a0f94e8b81f8bd601eeaecdf\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E The member raises a very important point in this context. I think that what needs to be clearly put on record is that the Prime Minister has delegated to the Hon Annette King responsibility for those matters within the state services portfolio. Of course, where a matter is delegated to another Minister, a question on that matter must be addressed to that Minister. The reason for that is obvious, and I think the member himself alluded to it near the end of his statement\u2014that is, that the matters clearly involve actions that occurred during the time that the Hon David Parker was the Minister for the Environment; now that he is the Minister of State Services, it is not appropriate that he have ministerial responsibility in relation to those matters. It must be delegated to another Minister, to avoid any implication at all that, wearing one hat, he is judging his actions when he was wearing a previous hat.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00226ef338cdfec34375b07fee0b5c349c53\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000017\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226ef338cdfec34375b07fee0b5c349c53\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (National\u2014Ilam):\u003C/span\u003E That sounds all very high and mighty and very fine, but the reality is that, on behalf of David Parker, the Hon Trevor Mallard stood in this House and, speaking as the Minister of State Services, seriously besmirched the character of a contractor to the Ministry for the Environment. Madam Speaker, we were not asking for the Minister to judge himself; we were not asking for the Minister to make any comments about the facts of the particular circumstance that led to this inquiry; we were simply asking the Minister whether he stood by the statements that were made on his behalf, and I think that is the fine point that needs to be considered by yourself.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u002229dc20fa4e3a427bb22864a65ce45ed4\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000018\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002229dc20fa4e3a427bb22864a65ce45ed4\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House):\u003C/span\u003E Of course, at the time that that question was asked of the Minister of State Services, with Trevor Mallard answering on his behalf, the delegation had not occurred. That delegation has now occurred, and the question on this matter can quite properly be put down to the Hon Annette King.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000019\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f9263e7061ea44d28f72a86da960c307\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank members for their contribution. I will take into consideration the comments that have been made, and rule tomorrow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000020\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00220ff653bae3cb478aa81752951e5bc3bb\u0022\u003EQuestions for Oral Answer\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000021\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00225e894f1be3af4ac5a4c13bb1c16e41e5\u0022\u003EQuestions to Ministers\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00229caff3d4bff64d429b9abe941b87921e\u0022\u003EFonterra\u2014New Zealand Majority Ownership\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000023\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223a2b1aea92f44b3c955b31cdcbadb479\u0022\u003E1. R DOUG WOOLERTON (NZ First)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Agriculture: Does he stand by the statement made on his behalf, with respect to the future capital structure of Fonterra, that the Government\u2019s primary concern includes ensuring that New Zealand retains majority ownership?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022 data-id=\u0022793a2d79385a49e2ae17274d3d5a391a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000024\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022793a2d79385a49e2ae17274d3d5a391a\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON (Minister of Agriculture):\u003C/span\u003E Yes, I do. The Government has been engaging with Fonterra to ensure that New Zealand\u2019s national interests were considered as part of the capital structure proposal. The proposal that Fonterra has put to its shareholders places a significant focus on continuing New Zealand in farmer ownership of Fonterra. If the shareholders decide to accept the proposal, the Government will facilitate the development of the necessary legislation to ensure Fonterra can grow internationally as a New Zealand company.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000025\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002295b75be261ac4fc2b1f4d2826a454ff7\u0022\u003ER Doug Woolerton\u003C/span\u003E: Is he aware of the experience of Ireland\u2019s Kerry Group co-op, which undertook a capital restructure almost identical to that proposed by Fonterra, where a maximum limit of outside ownership was agreed, yet 20 years later the shareholding in Kerry Group held by farmers has reduced from 90 percent to less than 30 percent, and does the Irish situation threaten the Government\u2019s primary concern?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000026\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e280f8fa29ae42ab9264bdf4546bf2af\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I am aware of that, and that example has been studied carefully. It is interesting to note, however, that the contribution the Kerry Group has made to the Irish economy is very, very significant, and it is tens of times more significant than it was before the capital restructuring that took place.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000027\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002212f01718-dc1f-4307-b0b3-451098ab73df\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff286ed56b03421aa5a2ff4d7ed274e4\u0022\u003EDr Ashraf Choudhary\u003C/span\u003E: What opportunities does the Minister see for the New Zealand economy from this proposal?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000028\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4e330abbf9846c598ae78b977d1c895\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: I see an innovative and internationally competitive dairy sector that will support New Zealand\u2019s goal of economic transformation. The proposed capital structure would enable Fonterra to continue to pursue its strategy of growing internationally as a highly successful New Zealand company. Fonterra believes there are significant opportunities in the international dairy industry and believes the company is uniquely placed to take advantage of these, and members of the House will have seen that in a number of countries around the world where Fonterra is investing as we speak. There are obviously significant and ongoing economic benefits for New Zealand in having large companies with global scale and reach based here in New Zealand. The Government is excited about international opportunities for the New Zealand dairy industry, but, of course, this is a matter for the Fonterra shareholders, who are the dairy farmers of New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000029\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022171a9969589a4bf6b4f326343222905d\u0022\u003ER Doug Woolerton\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Government\u2019s concern for New Zealand ownership extend to New Zealand Dairies Ltd, which has been virtually taken over by the Russian company Nutritek, which was able to step around foreign ownership rules, despite more than 75 percent of dairy farmers supplying milk to New Zealand Dairies objecting to Russian control of the company; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000030\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a17dd2b1199640c588c02095d5e8e8b8\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: There will be, of course, in the case of Fonterra, a range of mechanisms to ensure that Fonterra monitors the New Zealand shareholding and can act to keep New Zealand ownership above 50.1 percent. The absolute guarantee of a 35 percent co-op ownership means that only 15.1 percent of further New Zealand ownership would be required to ensure majority New Zealand ownership. I expect that New Zealand farmers will be the first ones themselves to take up that 15.1 percent - plus, and therefore I am confident that Fonterra will be retained in New Zealand hands.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000031\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022721442cf54534d618f955d8a90157cc4\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister think that one shareholder with 49 percent does not have every chance of defeating a multitude of shareholders at 51 percent, which was the reason why New Zealand always had the 24.9 percent rule, and things started to fall apart in terms of our country\u2019s domestic ownership being owned by New Zealanders when we changed that rule?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000032\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228415e962-886d-47b9-9356-3fdce746891f\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214f08f167f114fc8a35ba2b52cf8bffb\u0022\u003EHon JIM ANDERTON\u003C/span\u003E: The point I have to make to the House is, in the first instance, the shareholders of Fonterra\u2014the dairy farmers themselves\u2014will make this decision. It will be consulted widely, as I understand, in a series of meetings of shareholders. The shareholders will make the decision, and then Parliament itself will decide whether it will facilitate the passage of legislation to allow for that decision to take effect, because the legislation will need a change by this House. So we have the shareholders themselves carefully considering the proposition, and we then have the New Zealand Parliament considering their proposition to this House. So I think there is a fair amount of consultation and deliberation to take effect on this matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000033\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022435cf6610ac14fb5b21549b6136ede66\u0022\u003EElectoral Finance Bill\u2014Cabinet Processes\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000034\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E2. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022860b86dca12e445586369deb03a142f1\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY (Leader of the Opposition)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by her statement that the Electoral Finance Bill went through \u201Cfull Cabinet processes\u201D; if so, why?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022 data-id=\u0022c49d7b57479148faa0846c1c593c46d8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000035\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022c49d7b57479148faa0846c1c593c46d8\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E Yes; because I believe it did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000036\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c859ec0041ef4fb8bf61289f735741c4\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Why did Cabinet sign off on legislation that was so full of holes and so Draconian that, even after having some clauses knocked out by the select committee, the Law Society, most political commentators, and every major newspaper in the country are still saying it should be thrown in the bin?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000037\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222abf933e4a764762a325452921676bd5\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I could quip, just like the DVDs. [Interruption] Well, no one over here is being accused of piracy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000038\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255a49297571c40a2ada2278e9be7264b\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: If we can just have the Prime Minister address the question, please.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000039\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f388136c9a545fcbff9b62ef4074836\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: My understanding is that many organisations came to the select committee fully supporting the objectives of the bill. They had issues with the wording. The bill has been amended. There is a Government Supplementary Order Paper today. I understand there is also a Supplementary Order Paper from the Opposition, and I am happy to say that at first glance a couple of its suggestions already appear useful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000040\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b18940f3cba48a59d5aead9f6bfdd70\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Prime Minister explain why Cabinet agreed that the electoral period should begin on 1 January of each election year, thereby giving us the longest election period in the democratic world relative to the length of our electoral cycle?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000041\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b5bdf63e31f548128965c9e933e6db94\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I understand the United Kingdom period begins at the beginning of the year. If the member thinks that this is a long electoral period, he obviously cannot be watching the American election campaign.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000042\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229af7b63bc0564c82b59e8de511f0a925\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: How is a piece of legislation that is so complicated that the Electoral Commission admits it will have to tell people with questions to seek their own legal advice, and that its chief executive fears could lead to an Americanisation of New Zealand politics through endless court battles, going to enhance freedom of speech and democracy in New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000043\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d96de953a62645d1a104295bc26b25c9\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: The Americanisation came with the work of the \u201Chollow men\u201D. The member was one of the key bagmen who went around collecting the money, briefing the Exclusive Brethren, and knowing they were funding the campaign.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000044\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224919eeb0f21f48f4ba7ae0cc3f00b37d\u0022\u003EJeanette Fitzsimons\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister agree that the Electoral Finance Bill is designed to stem the flood of secret money into political parties\u2014for example, the practices revealed by Nicky Hager\u2019s book The Hollow Men, whereby the National Party in 2005 received secret millions of dollars from members of the Business Roundtable, including David Richwhite, Alan Gibbs, Doug Myers, and Peter Shirtcliffe?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000045\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022033349509101410fa8314592c7d58568\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I would ask you to consider whether that question meets all the requirements of the Standing Orders regarding the asking of questions. It does carry a range of allegations, suppositions, and epithets, and those are not allowed in questions. I believe it should be ruled out. The reality is that the member quotes from a work of fiction\u2014[Interruption] No, this is fact. We do have Standing Orders in this House, and that question does not meet those Standing Orders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000046\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb8b944e86c9465db229d1599a5549a0\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: I thought the member did something extraordinarily useful. She not only referred to certain data but provided authentication for that data in the middle of her question\u2014a policy I recommend to many members who ask questions in the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000047\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264e9a494913845ffb6c3cf36161b5d59\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I did not see anything particularly wrong with that, but I think the member, in raising the point of order, does remind us that imputations in questions and answers are contrary to the Standing Orders, so I will of course in the future take a harder line on that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000048\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229524f3258c75427eb64954b7e46c1be8\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s question reminded us of just how much big money was sloshing around for the National Party in the last election campaign. [Interruption] I know that the National Party does not like the \u201Chollow men\u201D to be exposed. They were exposed, and the reason for this new bill is so that they do not get a chance to do that again.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000049\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220563f367bc734f0d8a9c8c064dd59d0e\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: If the Prime Minister is really concerned about the use of big money, why does she not move to address the really big money in our electoral system\u2014that is, the use of millions of dollars of taxpayers\u2019 money for parties to spend on election material like the pledge card, and the use of tens of millions of dollars of taxpayers\u2019 money for soft advertising from Government departments, which we know this Government now treats as part of its own political party?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000050\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226ea35c793fd644a08708e87d17577865\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: That is typical of the hyperbole that has come from the Opposition across the whole bill. I refer back to The Hollow Men and Mr Goldsmith\u2019s email to Don Brash, which talked about Mr Key\u2019s schedule being one of \u201Cmeeting with loads of big donors\u201D. That was his role in the last campaign\u2014to thwart electoral law through the Exclusive Brethren and through big donors. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000051\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f07b40ffa2c64df0b2df81455477466e\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: In the interests of public harmony, is the Prime Minister prepared to switch her concern about the electoral legislation to a concern about commercial law\u2014because, after all, anyone who is paying that sort of money is paying it for a product fit for the purpose: hopefully, that those invested in will one day be in Government and will therefore be able to implement the policies for which the money was supplied; and that being the case, surely it is to do with the Sale of Goods Act and someone should ask those business people to demand their money back, because clearly their investment in politics was wasted?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000052\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022425b535b688f4504967e146e6947668e\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I am not sure that the Prime Minister has ministerial responsibility for that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000053\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4b1825a34154a8f8cef225f83787631\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. The Prime Minister can say she is in charge of any portfolio if a question is put to her, and I am putting to her a very rational, sane question about the ethics of business investment. If one is to invest in a political party for a result, one wants there to be a result, and not for there to be someone with his or her nose pressed against the window of power for the next 12 years\u2014which is sad but true.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000054\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f5072d452cab4d18bd2fd910273ebd98\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No. I have understood the member\u2019s question, and I have ruled on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000055\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209278070-a54a-41e9-8a27-45166301277e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a592dea8bad14104be643cdac7ad70c3\u0022\u003EJeanette Fitzsimons\u003C/span\u003E: In view of the millions of dollars in secret donations that, according to the evidence I just produced, the Business Roundtable has made to political parties of its choice, is the Prime Minister surprised, then, that the marches against the Electoral Finance Bill are being organised by John Boscowen, a member of the Business Roundtable?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000056\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226363913deb4c496e91627c1780ec509c\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: No, I am not surprised. I understand that he has also been the ACT party\u2019s fundraiser. I would have thought that in terms of the return on the capital investment, spending $120,000 on automated calling to try to get the good people of Ponsonby out to a march, and getting 5,000 people there, was a pretty poor investment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000057\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278a98da8560045559987bc6fd6ceb13c\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Is it not a sign of abject failure on the part of the Government that the Minister in charge of this bill, and the Minister before her, cannot explain it except to say that people will have to rely on common sense; and how does the Prime Minister expect well-intentioned, honest, ordinary New Zealanders to understand a bill that her Government cannot even understand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000058\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022874b3be04f364dadafb624fd7d23bee3\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: One expects people to read it carefully and to consult lawyers\u2014as political parties always have done.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a27022347e8340a4b209721800fbf6da\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: When is the Prime Minister going to admit that the reason she is forcing this legislation through is not that it is good legislation, not that it meets with the form of protocol and the processes of electoral law, and not that it is good for New Zealand, but that she is so paranoid that without it she thinks she has no hope of winning an election?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000060\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221d10a22938424451a29fe950477417a2\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I would like our little democracy to be as free from big money, from Mr Key\u2019s mates, as other little democracies are.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000061\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221cd6171909d64cf8ab00ee6d831267bc\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Prime Minister aware that not too far from this country are smaller democracies\u2014well, hopefully, growing democracies\u2014where the character and shape of those democracies have been seriously perverted by the insertion of outside money for a particular purpose; and is that not what this country\u2019s sovereignty is all about\u2014which the National Party used to believe in when it knew what the word \u201Cnational\u201D meant?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000062\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd564526b6e048969df4dc1ad7b651b0\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I believe it is indeed true that in small neighbouring countries big money from outside has had a considerable impact\u2014and, I submit, an adverse impact\u2014and I think it is time our country kept up with international standards of best practice in electoral law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000063\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a4c07950b89542b8828c9cdfea543810\u0022\u003EMetiria Turei\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister then agree and share the concerns of John Cain, a former Premier of Victoria, that in Australia a $10,000 party donation will buy one an audience with the Prime Minister, and does she agree that the Electoral Finance Bill is an attempt to stop that cancer of corruption and bribery from spreading from Australia to New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000064\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223ca2a5b9a81c40ddbdec957edf64d230\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: Most certainly I agree that the bill is a strong attempt to get rid of covert funding of the kind the National Party has always encouraged in politics.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000065\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022bed92c57910a46ccbbce172501416227\u0022\u003EFiscal Policy\u2014Reports\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000066\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E3. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232424605af7d47df91ece93ce4a18c77\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Finance: Has he received any recent reports on the Government\u2019s fiscal policy stance?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u0022766aa80744724686868b8fd9e773a69f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000067\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022766aa80744724686868b8fd9e773a69f\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance):\u003C/span\u003E Yes. I have received Fitch Ratings\u2019 New Zealand sovereign rating report, which notes that this Government has run \u201Ca broadly neutral fiscal policy stance\u201D. The report also notes that since the early 1990s general Government debt has declined from close to 60 percent of GDP to 25 percent of GDP. Despite this positive review of the Government\u2019s fiscal policy stance, we will remain conscious of inflationary pressures when we announce next year our personal tax reductions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000068\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002260ca70c2e17d4b46978d53563d99f1fa\u0022\u003ECharles Chauvel\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister received any reports on the revenue side of fiscal policy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000069\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022eee9b6a922b64f9494741a373e7ca930\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: Yes indeed. Just today, according to the PricewaterhouseCoopers and World Bank joint study Paying Taxes 2008: The global picture, which offers data on total tax rates, payment frequency, and the time needed to comply with tax regulations, New Zealand is ranked second best in the OECD, after Ireland, and ninth best in the world out of 178 economies. The report goes on to note that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000070\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cbb0a3855f9a41e1a8c0a4fa2abcd695\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: Why is everyone leaving, then?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000071\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229bf771ca86c9473bbad52c9b0c86e567\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014unfortunately, that member has not\u2014outside of all rich countries and the Maldives, the top performers whose business tax systems may be successfully emulated by other countries are Singapore, Hong Kong, Ireland, and New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000072\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be6fbb0781554fda9f61421d4eea7a0b\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister believe that people on $39,000 who are paying 33c in the dollar in tax are grateful to him for the way he has accumulated all the money that he needed and that he thought they did not need?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000073\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d71221cca6654a3ea6eb9ddd05e29d79\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: What endless public opinion surveys show is that people do not believe that we should borrow for tax cuts, unlike that member; people do not believe that we should cut social services to pay for tax cuts, which that member did in 1999; people do not believe that the entire benefit of tax cuts\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000074\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba1ca1b2836c4c0ab292458d45a48369\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s not true.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000075\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286d447be1d584b20b39b816c34d52cc5\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: That member in 1999 cut New Zealand superannuation and cut taxes. He is far too young to be suffering from that kind of premature amnesia, and I will continue to remind him and bring him up to date.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000076\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022e67b3ed9bc48497b88fe600d45fdc1ce\u0022\u003EMinisters\u2014Confidence\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000077\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E4. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c9e678240e5c4f4fb1f24fe1a457dbfa\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY (Leader of the Opposition)\u003C/span\u003E to the Prime Minister: Does she have confidence in all her Ministers?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022 data-id=\u00222ede8a4907264455862b359f1ea9431c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000078\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222ede8a4907264455862b359f1ea9431c\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister):\u003C/span\u003E Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000079\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272aa3747655040388ec42912c6c293cc\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Does she condone or approve of Trevor Mallard\u2019s savage attack, using parliamentary privilege, on Erin Leigh when she blew the whistle on political interference at the Ministry for the Environment?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000080\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022db70b280ce46424b9b23a0e3fb3e48f0\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: My understanding is that the Minister spoke on advice. Having read the Hansard, I consider it rather mild by his standards.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000081\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c1597e480c714d6788fb1c6aca94c954\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Has she sought an assurance, then, from Trevor Mallard that he has the evidence to back up his career-wrecking statements about Erin Leigh; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000082\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232974dc732a54f67842904c00f4edc28\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I understand that when the Minister gave the reply he had advice.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000083\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e8300e0054d24ef3b6def3ebfb5f5544\u0022\u003EJudy Turner\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister anticipate a drop in confidence in her Minister of Health if he does nothing to reverse the current widespread policy to bring pressure to bear on mothers of newborn babies so that they leave hospital within hours of giving birth; and does the Prime Minister share United Future\u2019s concern that this cost-saving policy is, in fact, a false economy and is putting at risk mothers and babies?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000084\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f1bb13ba531b49d79cff89e0a81971f5\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister and, indeed, the entire Government deplore the way the Capital and Coast District Health Board has behaved. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000085\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022def90d572d1d423eb18dbaf1ce401d4e\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: If the Prime Minister thinks that Mr Mallard\u2019s comments were mild by his normal standards and if she is confident that he was acting on advice, will she, therefore, encourage Mr Mallard to repeat his comments outside the House, or will she repeat them on behalf of Mr Mallard outside the House?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000086\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b21315620fda4f7ebd1a26d86efd75d5\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I would encourage Ministers, and, indeed, the member opposite, to sit quietly while the State Services Commission reports. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a204042960014cd98a8f0046584394af\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister think that it is appropriate behaviour for a senior Minister of her Government, when he himself is having some problems, to look down the barrel of a camera and beg for sympathy from the people of New Zealand but then, on the very first opportunity he gets, to come into this House and rip some woman apart on evidence he does not have, and to do it in such a cowardly way that he will not repeat it outside the House?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000088\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225e17d422549a44909771078539ef71c3\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I do not think any sensible person\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000089\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227875ecce73844793a4e33b9512bdff0a\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. We have parliamentary privilege for a very sound reason. We have had it since the Bill of Rights 1688. The leader of the National Party may not understand that, but it is not because of taking preferential treatment against\u2014[Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000090\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222e51a80f4add4826b058aa14bd33db0b\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: The member will be heard. There is to be no comment during points of order. I need to hear the whole comment. Please make it succinctly, Mr Peters. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000091\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222a3f7188ce7540e08b6a5e150f2f6d74\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I am doing it as briefly as I can. Just because they cannot understand it, is not a reason why I should not outline the principle of parliamentary privilege. The fact is a member may say something inside this House because he or she can speak honestly without the threat of legal intimidation outside of it. So to accuse someone of being a coward in the circumstances, which is what Mr Key did, is simply unparliamentary, and he should be asked to apologise. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000092\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bae675af17fa458592774433ca201e2e\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No. I understand the member\u2019s point but it is not a point of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000093\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022543c8ed36c9b46999fcb65e2d73032e6\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. So is it OK with you for someone to be accused of being a coward inside this House? That is the first time I have ever heard that ruling. Is it OK with you for someone\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000094\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224f3035f784544d159a2ea0e13e938a35\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I did not hear the word. Would the member please be seated.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000095\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228b062bc65ecf47f98ba20c68a5cc3aff\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I did.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000096\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022162d0f20a85d4befb40b3d1388f6cbf3\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Would the member please be seated, or he will be outside this House. I have ruled that the point the member made was not a point of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000097\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022acd061561b9a459eb83405d2feb975bb\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000098\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002253711726815d44c6a7bb34aacb5e28f0\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have ruled on that point.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000099\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022152b450b17394f5a9b190ec91eb1b9df\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: It is a new point of order, Madam Speaker. I seek clarification from you. Is it OK in this House, from that ruling, for someone to call another person a coward?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000100\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228ee8a912a10e41858d5ccfb6280726be\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I did not hear those words used.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000101\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022011b87006132488c9a5a94481b6addb4\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I certainly heard those words being used.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000102\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b30133b5178648cfa02292ec658e6b34\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Well, that is very helpful.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000103\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229b2b888d3fcf4a89b0ac1e7582c6e897\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. If you look at the Hansard or hear the tape, you will know that two members have just told you what happened. The word \u201Ccoward\u201D was used. Just because you did not hear it, is of no great matter. We did, and that is why we are raising the point of order. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000104\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d68228b11ca347acab91bafd607e049e\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Unfortunately, it is of some matter. I did not hear it because of the level of noise that goes on in this House. It is almost impossible from this position to hear anything. I am quite happy to look at the record, but I ask the right honourable Prime Minister to please address the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000105\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b351c7455b774bd69a96629cf70b7666\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I have no doubt that Mr Key accused Mr Mallard of cowardice. That is clearly ridiculous, particularly when Mr Key himself could be accused of being a copyright pirate. [Interruption] \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000106\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002296cda08a94164a0d9a800da6f58525de\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Please be seated. I would ask members please to respect the Standing Orders and to stop these personal references to each other in the asking and the answering of questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000107\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227cdb3646a02b41949c29b48918bb0a4e\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. In many instances in this House where one member has alleged that another member has said something unparliamentary, you have taken it upon yourself to ask the member who is alleged to have made the comment whether he or she did make the comment, and, if so, whether that member would care to withdraw and apologise. In this instance\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000108\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a6f7ffa12e3d46adb21c03707b84a25a\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have ruled on this matter, Mr Mark.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000109\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c86d2d593c014a4488203cafe6330405\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Prime Minister think that it is a good idea that one of her senior Ministers comes into this House and uses parliamentary privilege to defame a member of the public, and if she does think that is the appropriate standard, is she surprised that he will not go outside the House and repeat those statements, as we would expect him to do if he has the information to back them up; and what message does she think that that behaviour from her senior Minister sends to the rest of the people who work in the State Service in New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000110\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee3307d1c80d40f8a53dfa96d46c9d80\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: I have no evidence that anyone is being defamed except the regular defamation that occurs from Opposition members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000111\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228f636793ceb94d5a9c0f7bdd4216a1cb\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Prime Minister aware that the last time a State Services Commission report on similar matters was presented, Mr Gerry Brownlee in this House described Don Hunn as a liar, described Dr Mark Prebble as a liar\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000112\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c7a4a2d6a9544680ab0593c63cc9064c\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: No, I didn\u2019t.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000113\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cd3700b3c9b447cf81432c6d58fe59d2\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014this is in the Hansard\u2014if so, is she aware of whether any action was taken against the third-ranked member of the National Party by the leader of that party?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000114\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002273a2ddf6691c42db9a074e758e5fde7c\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. That is a deliberate misleading of the House by Dr Cullen. I made no such comments about Mr Hunn.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000115\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226310671cb6004d4384ddb1093cb8bd5a\u0022\u003EHon Dr Michael Cullen\u003C/span\u003E: Speaking to the point of order, I suggest that the member might care to look at his Hansard more closely, because I know exactly what he said. But he has just now confirmed that he did call Dr Mark Prebble, the head of the State Services Commission, a liar. He received no rebuke from his leader\u2014no action at all\u2014and why should we put up with Mr Key\u2019s questions on these matters when, in fact, clearly he takes no action on these matters when they occur in his own caucus?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000116\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bb4caf64ecae440697ad9cc527cf5555\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I would just remind members that we get into these situations by the language we use when we are asking our questions and giving our answers. I would ask the right honourable Prime Minister to address the question.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000117\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022594ba46a5c7d4b5f9dbf467a9601ff9d\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: My understanding is that not only was no action taken against Mr Brownlee on that matter but none was taken previously when he lost a civil case for assault, and none was taken against Nick Smith when a judge advised him that he simply did not believe the evidence that member had given under oath in court.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000118\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228351c87d549b4610887bbb82e1bf0a3a\u0022\u003EJohn Key\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Prime Minister send a message to the State servants of New Zealand today that they should feel confident that if they have a genuine case where they have seen political interference, they should be able to speak up, or will they know that they will be subject to the sort of callous behaviour that Trevor Mallard meted out; and can she explain whether the reason Trevor Mallard will not repeat his comments outside the House is that one appearance in the dock in a week is one too many and she does not want to make it two?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000119\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022727d5e0598124278a8c459d2591284c3\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: My advice to public servants is to follow the whistleblowers legislation. With regard to appearing in docks, the member is lucky he did not do that himself on his electoral enrolment.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000120\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00228a30ffcc54fc4b90a41e29caecdbc39f\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000121\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227beaffaadec44b92b7d0c3e745bca31a\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I ask the member whether this is a supplementary question or a point of order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000122\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dcf068ef6b7b4ee7867e1d0197434d7d\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: It is a supplementary question. I have given up on the points of order\u2014[Interruption]\u2014just temporarily. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000123\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223160e428218a4835bda50d6792d77737\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: Get Ronnie to do the same.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000124\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227afe1244f35e460a98407e591babbac2\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Is the member still alive? Why does the Prime Minister not take the standards set by the leader of the National Party, which is to be the beneficiary of an occurrence, which was that of Mr Connell rising in the caucus and telling the truth, thereupon getting totally expelled from the caucus and not reinstated, and he now being in the position has demonstrated that that succeeds in New Zealand politics\u2014why does she not follow that standard?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000125\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d052c3b26e6a4fef928e7910b41fb503\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry, but there is no ministerial responsibility for other standards in other caucuses, so that question is not in order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000126\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00228ff55f5e-9237-45e2-8e15-24228a10320e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dcbe79630b224a03b7d0ea1d0369a771\u0022\u003ERt Hon HELEN CLARK\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000127\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002230e30754960d467280cb084432557a53\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: No, it is not in order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000128\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022794d1ea6225541978ceae7572a3797e2\u0022\u003ERugby World Cup 2011\u2014Eden Park\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000129\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E5. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022191832336b084387a07099f7907b0d42\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for the Rugby World Cup: How much is the upgrade of Eden Park expected to cost taxpayers, and how many seats does he expect to be available for New Zealanders for the 2011 World Cup final?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u0022007bd56ad4614fd185854217dee68600\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000130\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022007bd56ad4614fd185854217dee68600\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) \u003C/span\u003Eon behalf of the Minister for the Rugby World Cup: The Government has agreed to underwrite the redevelopment of Eden Park up to $190 million. This will meet the commitments made to the International Rugby Board for a 60,000-seat stadium of a quality befitting a Rugby World Cup final. Ticket allocations for the 2011 Rugby World Cup are still to be finalised, and will be determined by Rugby New Zealand 2011 Ltd in conjunction with the International Rugby Board.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000131\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ce515e9599b343d1a39b4e61d5cd02dd\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Government made commitments towards the $270 million \u201Clegacy option\u201D for Eden Park; can the Minister explain how the cost has escalated more than 150 percent in the last 10 months, and how much further is it expected to rise, particularly with the Government commitment, before the stadium is completed?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000132\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c52a5559e06942a698a04ddb3a307be3\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: No; the estimate of $270 million made by, I think, Mayor John Banks includes peripheral costs as well, such as stormwater and roading upgrades and other infrastructure development.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000133\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223edbe3948c1f49f4927f72f9d9fd1c94\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I am sorry, but I just could not hear any of that answer. Could the Minister please repeat it? There was some disturbance to my left.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000134\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222b33b8c8ee1d43858cbdaecd86517671\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: The answer to the first part of the question was \u201CNo\u201D. The answer to the second part was that, as I understand, some of the estimates of apparent increases include peripheral costs\u2014infrastructure such as stormwater, roading upgrades, and so on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000135\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bbd006c55c974a1ab16eaee0e9e30b41\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister consider that paying $19,000 a seat for a one-off event is good value for taxpayer money, and has the Government considered what benefits this funding could provide for other sporting codes that are desperately short of any money?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000136\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b56701c9e5b4b0291b67ab6fd25803f\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: This is not just a matter of paying for a stadium for a one-off game; this is part of the Rugby World Cup. We expect to attract a significant number of overseas visitors, which would generate significant increased revenue for New Zealand\u2014including increased taxation revenue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000137\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002207dc4112-8a19-4dd6-a57c-878b47f8a9b6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f934b047a4614e64a34460f2135485be\u0022\u003ERon Mark\u003C/span\u003E: Does the Minister not realise that no matter how much money is poured into Eden Park we will still end up with a dog of a stadium in a dog of a location; why does the Government not simply cut from Auckland and put the money into completing the AMI Stadium in Christchurch, where the next All Black coach will come from?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000138\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226b0c2241daf445bab96d30f5a58eb1b\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: I think the member is prematurely anticipating what may be the outcome of the Rugby Union\u2019s deliberations, which, according to my latest information\u2014newspapers, which, of course, are to be relied upon in these matters\u2014is far from settled in that respect. It is appropriate that the final of the Rugby World Cup is held in New Zealand\u2019s premier rugby location, in New Zealand\u2019s largest city. I am advised by the Prime Minister that that is Auckland.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000139\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022a3cb88ba9c9b4503904fe7a5bec6892f\u0022\u003EElectoral Finance Bill\u2014Capacity as a member of Parliament\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000140\u0022\u003E\u201C\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E6. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022683470cebf604adfa03c81aa5c37bb71\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader\u2014National)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Justice: Does she stand by her statement that in her view the term \u201Ccapacity as a member of Parliament\u201D in the Electoral Finance Bill \u201Cexcludes statements of policy made outside the House that are intended to be enacted by a future Parliament.\u201D; if so, why?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022 data-id=\u002293b70a66623644e18a9a1b0b06d4104d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000142\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002293b70a66623644e18a9a1b0b06d4104d\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON (Minister for Economic Development)\u003C/span\u003E on behalf of the Minister of Justice: Yes, that is what she said. However, she will be having further discussions with other parties who have identified possible concerns. If the member has identified possible concerns, she would be happy to have further discussions with him.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000143\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ebce409572948f7aba8f50e6c7a5dc4\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister aware that the definition she has given Parliament means that a member of Parliament who said outside Parliament: \u201COur policy is to cut personal taxes.\u201D would be publishing an election advertisement, and would have to meet the statutory criteria for publication of an election advertisement?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000144\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cbbeaf51f86c44439d17693e1d9f1bff\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: The Minister is yet to have any discussions with that member or other members about their concerns, but I can imagine, for example, a situation where a Government signals that legislation will be introduced after an election, and that might somehow cause members some concern in terms of their ability to take a public position free of any encumbrance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000145\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d9dbb7b5e4914c4bb90c66332ee3a9a3\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: Given that the Minister of Justice has had 2 years to think about what the term means, can she explain further her interpretation of the bill, in that if I as a member of Parliament say next year that National\u2019s policy is to cut personal taxes, then whenever I write that down, including in letters to constituents, I will have to get the written authorisation of the financial agent of the National Party, and preface whatever I say with a statement of my name and address; why does she think that is a good idea?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000146\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220df9bf0c07c14dd18380f2da30ea19c3\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: I think the Minister might say that in a House of 121 MPs it is not only her view that is important; rather, it is the view of Parliament. I understand that the Electoral Commission has invited all parties to discuss this matter, and that\u2014I could be wrong\u2014all parties except the National Party are prepared to do so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000147\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e72fded14f34417283e07dbbc8d1e2e2\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister now telling us that statements the Minister of Justice made just 2 weeks ago, precisely for the purpose of recording in Hansard her policy intent so that the courts could refer to that Hansard, now do not count, and that he will have some kind of mini-summit with other political parties in the next couple of hours to sort it out?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000148\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022de933b8422a9450eb3312c8dd31fb2ac\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: Maybe it would help the member if I were to remind him that the law he refers to has been on our statute book for a little while. I have here the Electoral Act 1993. It is not new. The member voted for this legislation\u2014as did I\u201414 years ago. The member ought to try to get over himself. This Act has been a New Zealand statute all this while.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000149\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022345239d0507c44fa82a09e44b9c848aa\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister advised the minor parties that are supporting this bill of the consequence of her interpretation as stated in Hansard for the purpose of aiding the courts when they inevitably pick up this issue, and has he told the Greens that if they put out a pamphlet that states that their policy is to introduce mandatory country-of-origin labelling for food, it will be counted as an election advertisement, even if it is put out by an MP; it will have to be authorised by the financial agent of the party; the cost of the publicity will have to be included as an expense in the Greens\u2019 election return; and it will count against the Greens\u2019 election spending cap?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000150\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022430367650d464f9dab4b5a17f0ddf7d5\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: One could be excused for being a little confused about the position of the National Party on this issue. The National Party now appears to be holding the view that somehow this Government is taking a line on parliamentary expenditure that is too harsh. I am advised that discussions with the affected parties\u2014including the National Party, if it wishes to be involved\u2014will take place in due course. As to whether they have started, I am afraid I do not yet know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000151\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a93200a4ab6c4a17a115fbaaef8c255b\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: Would the Minister be surprised if other political parties were suspicious of her definition, because it has the effect that Government members will be allowed to talk about what the Government is doing, but Opposition members will not be allowed to talk about what they would do if they became the Government\u2014and how ridiculous is that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000152\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b0363903d80d444486e6eb6ebb27911e\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: I say again that the position in respect of the Minister of Justice is that she will hold discussions with other parties that wish to hold discussions with her\u2014including the National Party, if it is interested. Concerns have been raised of the order of those that the member raises\u2014although a little less dramatically. The Minister of Justice is very happy to have discussions with those members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000153\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002282b00f289cc5457ea3b06ade43e79d98\u0022\u003EHon Bill English\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister of Justice aware that this provision will be debated today, or if not today then tomorrow; is she also aware that she put her comments on record 2 weeks ago in this House in order to clarify the matter, and now this Minister has stood up today\u2014the day we will be debating the bill\u2014and said that it will be resolved by her having talks some time in the future, when by the end of this week it could possibly be the law and no one will know what it means?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000154\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00229c0eba1d-17a6-44e2-a9b3-2e2535339570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8c6ec1153b74c1f8901acc69c6d34d6\u0022\u003EHon PETE HODGSON\u003C/span\u003E: What the member has to decide is whether he wants to be part of these discussions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000155\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022af8443f57ff44984b703af9473fe44fd\u0022\u003EDisability Issues Policy\u2014International Response\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000156\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E7. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264cf852318c14ce9a8a93e8702e87648\u0022\u003EJILL PETTIS (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for Disability Issues: What has been the international response to the Government\u2019s disability issues policy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022 data-id=\u00221ba362be85e94e20bc49684cf2a74a0a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000157\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221ba362be85e94e20bc49684cf2a74a0a\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON (Minister for Disability Issues):\u003C/span\u003E I am delighted to inform the House that yesterday I announced that New Zealand has won the Franklin D. Roosevelt International Disability Award for 2007. The Roosevelt award recognises a nation that makes noteworthy progress towards the goal of full participation of disabled citizens. The award recognises the \u201Cextraordinary leadership that New Zealand has shown in this area\u201D. It includes our Government\u2019s work nationally in developing and implementing the New Zealand Disability Strategy, and internationally in taking a lead role in negotiating the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000158\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227766a935b0c845c089c352b0b879750d\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister please advise what progress has been made on implementation of the New Zealand Disability Strategy?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000159\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002275a05f96-2474-4c90-a6ea-cf7b5798e03e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e781def83a8b4e738dfa86f5f3d78cdf\u0022\u003EHon RUTH DYSON\u003C/span\u003E: I certainly can, but first of all I advise the House that the Roosevelt award trustees paid tribute to the fact that New Zealand is just one of a few countries in the world to have a disability strategy. The strategy requires the Government to develop and implement a comprehensive approach to disability inclusion. Our Government is continuing to deliver on that requirement. Highlights from the last couple of years include the enactment of the New Zealand Sign Language Act; work relating to the Building Act that will make a real difference in how disabled people can enter and use buildings; repeal of the Disabled Persons Employment Promotion Act; changes to the way we provide services to people who are receiving a sickness or an invalids benefit to focus on what a person can do rather than what they cannot do; and the closure, in New Zealand, of our last residential institution. We will continue to work towards achieving a society in which disabled people can lead the lives that the rest of us take for granted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000160\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022bd0355f966734f15b7509f20f247ebf1\u0022\u003EQuestion No. 8 to Minister\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u002282516276e98d42fc8d9d0aa645e30517\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000161\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002282516276e98d42fc8d9d0aa645e30517\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (National\u2014Ilam):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave for this question to be held over until the Minister\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000162\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0b364fec726404e985f6eaff426ab94\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? Yes, there is objection.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000163\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022eb854b866268431cb17a24d774406dc9\u0022\u003EState Services Commission\u2014Recent Initiatives\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000164\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E8. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022496cf1e296334bba87a97b33db23e1e3\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (National\u2014Ilam)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of State Services: What new initiatives have been undertaken by the State Services Commission since he became Minister?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022 data-id=\u0022187fd9ff6f87461bb53e938de6bac2dd\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000165\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022187fd9ff6f87461bb53e938de6bac2dd\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House)\u003C/span\u003E on behalf of the Minister of State Services: The Minister has been involved in a range of initiatives. [Interruption] I confess I was very closely going through Mr Finlayson\u2019s Supplementary Order Paper with some interest. The Minister of State Services has been the Minister for only a short period; however, in that time the Minister is pleased to have launched a report transforming the State services. This is the second annual report on the development goals programme, which is designed to transform the State services in a way that is in line with Government priorities and delivers better results for all New Zealanders. A new initiative in 2007 has been the inclusion of a value-for-money State services goal as one of the six goals.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000166\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227183ed5beef54d2cbdafc8650940cc26\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Under what initiative or protocol was the Acting Minister provided with the information that Erin Leigh had \u201Crepeated competence issues\u201D; and who provided that information?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000167\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022abbd63e366e940f28a6f0d9c21d8e71b\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: All matters in relation to that have now been delegated to the Minister of Justice, who will reply to any questions in relation to those matters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000168\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022980ea27f15814ff58693f2e3d7c0abba\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. You can see now, in relation to the point of order I raised at the start of question time today, what a difficulty we have got into. We have had a Minister standing up in the House and making a statement about Erin Leigh\u2019s competence well after the investigation into those matters had begun by the State Services Commission, and now, some days later, realising that there is a problem around this, the Government has decided to use this particular provision of our Standing Orders in order to shield the Minister from having to make statements about the veracity of the claims made to this House. That is not the action of Ministers who are being accountable; it is the action of Ministers who are trying to avoid the sorts of questions they should answer in the public interest.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000169\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222bb219d61e004adeb8ab188ff9f296a8\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: First of all, I could have raised a point of order about the relevance of the supplementary question to the principal question, which was about new initiatives undertaken by the State Services Commission. Secondly, the member was informed at the time he submitted this question about the fact that a delegation had occurred. He could therefore have put down the question to the appropriate Minister in this respect. The Government is perfectly happy to answer questions on this matter that are addressed to the appropriate Minister. [Interruption]\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000170\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d50340ceb14c4b65baf1c17c01f8c9ab\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have not ruled on your point of order\u2014unless you would like me not to rule on it. I was going to say that I understood the member\u2019s point. The member himself said that the Government\u2019s actions were consistent with the Standing Orders and Speakers\u2019 rulings, but I have undertaken to look at the issue, given that the member does consider it to be a serious issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000171\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002292eb5c6fb1154882881199f496da668f\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. My point is simply this: here we have the Deputy Prime Minister, acting today for the Minister of State Services, saying that he cannot answer a question about a matter that relates to a particular issue occurring within the State services, and that, rather than being addressed to him, that question should have been directed to the Minister Annette King, who has been given the responsibility for dealing with it. It is clear to the whole House that Annette King is not present in the House today, either. That raises the question of who might have answered on her behalf, and the recent history of the Government suggests that it would in fact have been the Deputy Prime Minister.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000172\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022101410cd506d44768bff148febab9bce\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member, but he is going over ground that has already been gone over. As was pointed out, he was given notice of this delegation, and if we had all had a little more notice of it, maybe we could have ruled on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000173\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ddfc8a9a967f4b229c28c4319fc9c014\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Can he advise the House whether the person who provided the Acting Minister with the information was employed by the Ministry for the Environment, or was it someone employed in the Beehive?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000174\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d275b02519c1404ab31f74de23dbeba9\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: As I said, a delegation has occurred in relation to all those matters. The Minister with that delegation will be happy to respond to any further questions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000175\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e65f0d8f8fee415993dfe9b1e4a9810a\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Can he, or any other Minister, provide the House with the information upon which Mr Mallard made his allegations last week?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000176\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227f8c14fb-b919-46ef-866b-8db68cfa4cf0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002268b7accbb5fb46e6a37213dada2703fa\u0022\u003EHon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN\u003C/span\u003E: That question should be put down to the Minister with the delegated responsibility for this matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000177\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022508a44ea4d064219942a7826cc29934c\u0022\u003EWildlife\u2014Protection\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000178\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c45684c6-7137-45b3-b30c-46206236e88b\u0022\u003E9. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a44f5b3481064dacb3b4bc73b4b2e03c\u0022\u003ELESLEY SOPER (Labour)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Conservation: What reports, if any, has she received about the Government\u2019s work to protect New Zealand\u2019s wildlife?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022 data-id=\u00226961d54599594bbe9f268b46d07ad65e\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000179\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226961d54599594bbe9f268b46d07ad65e\u0022\u003EHon STEVE CHADWICK (Minister of Conservation):\u003C/span\u003E In the past week I officially opened the new yellow-eyed penguin reserve on the Catlins coast in Otago on land bought jointly by the Department of Conservation and the Yellow-eyed Penguin Trust. Securing this habitat is a major victory for conservation. It highlights this Labour-led Government\u2019s commitment to protecting New Zealand\u2019s unique species.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000180\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c45684c6-7137-45b3-b30c-46206236e88b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ad074e8a8a494eb0a0667d6b0af70385\u0022\u003ELesley Soper\u003C/span\u003E: What other work is the Government doing to protect endangered species?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000181\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224c1fb05e3f4347da97415972ccb70ff9\u0022\u003EHon STEVE CHADWICK\u003C/span\u003E: The Department of Conservation is actively working to protect 239 endangered species at the moment, with projects including an intensive recovery programme for k\u0101k\u0101p\u014D, increased kiwi populations in the wild and in sanctuaries, boosting the survival of the whio, or blue duck, and captive breeding and supporting of wild takah\u0113. So far this season, eight chicks have been incubated and two have already hatched.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000182\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002205a76ff6e7264565b9dd7225eaff3e86\u0022\u003EMetiria Turei\u003C/span\u003E: Do any of the reports on the Government\u2019s work to protect New Zealand\u2019s unique species estimate how many fatalities of the M\u0101ui\u2019s dolphin we might expect over this coming summer with increased risk from fishing, from set-netting, from pollution in the waterways, and from boat strike, given the Government\u2019s procrastination about doing anything to protect this uniquely endangered New Zealand wild species?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000183\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221fb8d8db-3e96-49c7-ab1c-b7916a50e30e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c52bfdd04ca64b80a4dd9d50f2eca3b9\u0022\u003EHon STEVE CHADWICK\u003C/span\u003E: The member is absolutely correct about this beautiful species of about 111 M\u0101ui\u2019s dolphins, the rarest in the world. Yes, we have had an overwhelming response of nearly 2,500 submissions on the discussion document. Because they are so complex we do need to give them due time and due consideration, and we will be reporting on this around March next year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000184\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022f482d69627db40608f1aea2fcdd6bafc\u0022\u003EEnvironment, Ministry\u2014Employment and Contracting Guidelines\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000185\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E10. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002243d2b3145cde42c1b7898e64a40fe95b\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (National\u2014Ilam)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister for the Environment: Can he assure the House that all employment and contracting decisions made by the Ministry for the Environment have been made according to ministry guidelines; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022 data-id=\u0022a404e2225e35422e8004a43c8ec0e41c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000186\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a404e2225e35422e8004a43c8ec0e41c\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister for the Environment):\u003C/span\u003E No; my reasons have not changed since the last time I answered this question in the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000187\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214f32ce2a9014974966c3c7dfdd07c76\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: What is his response to comments made last night by former communications manager Keith Lyons, who stated that David Parker had imposed Clare Curran on the ministry and \u201CHe also wanted to boost his own profile. It sounded like, for him, that the appointment was not negotiable. The Minister wanted to ensure his own interests were promoted.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000188\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002266b86811aa174a28bab940d05d630daa\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: My response is that this is a matter that is being considered by the State Services Commissioner, and that is the way it should be dealt with.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000189\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e3da286a72e4b44b1afa36d06b43fff\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Why was Erin Leigh required to forward her work to the Prime Minister\u2019s chief of staff for approval and comment, and was it the case that Heather Simpson ordered Erin Leigh to make changes that were to benefit the Labour Party\u2019s political view?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000190\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e60504ea7d234db3b355a8a15b74ff8b\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: This is a matter that is being dealt with by the State Services Commissioner, but I can assure the House that comments on that work came from much wider than the Department of Internal Affairs.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000191\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c507e2f530e54965abace4f5c7aa4fca\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Ministry for the Environment party to the Partnership for Quality arrangements with the New Zealand Public Service Association (PSA)?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000192\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a0829f60dfce45ba957583c847d16d25\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: I would have to consult with the Minister of State Services to give a definitive answer, but from my memory, going back as a former Minister, the answer is \u201Cyes\u201D\u2014of course that applies to public servants.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ff98ec7ab3434c07a5859a3b38813c77\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister confirm that the amount of Ministry for the Environment funding that has flowed through the Partnership for Quality programme to pay for PSA union delegates to undertake union activities has topped some $400,000 in recent times?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000194\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b72db6a8735f4f5187b547e7f79efe9a\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000195\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232a4a7adcad144c28412779251819b76\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Is the Minister denying that the Ministry for the Environment has been funding from its vote time and salary for union delegates?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000196\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227b4c87badb9843b29b73a3fdbaf61710\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000197\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226859303abf6348ab8336036cd0300606\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Can the Minister tell the House how much the Ministry for the Environment has used of its vote to pay for the activities of union delegates?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000198\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002208bb310a2ef444369a61a862a32b9469\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: No.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000199\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002229e65503083e4df4980f1d214a4dba47\u0022\u003EGerry Brownlee\u003C/span\u003E: Is there anything this Minister knows about things going on in his ministry?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000200\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002279db8b64-1f9b-4416-9b81-a12963db9cbf\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba06912901b5404c83dccff60ad0b16b\u0022\u003EHon TREVOR MALLARD\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, and I know quite a lot about hot air. I have learnt more, though, from that member than from the ministry.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000201\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ae00f9609a7c477b84e56e546fd48c02\u0022\u003EEmissions\u2014Impact on Health\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000202\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E11. RUSSELL FAIRBROTHER (Labour) on behalf of \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a3e234359a5b483a9ccc229588f0e853\u0022\u003EHon MARK GOSCHE (Labour\u2014Maungakiekie)\u003C/span\u003E  to the Associate Minister of Transport: What steps is the Government taking to reduce the impact to New Zealanders\u2019 health caused by harmful emissions?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022 data-id=\u00226d880351782b4afbaa78c1dbce7a3dd3\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000203\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226d880351782b4afbaa78c1dbce7a3dd3\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH TIZARD (Associate Minister of Transport):\u003C/span\u003E The Government has taken a number of steps to reduce emissions from the New Zealand vehicle fleet. It has improved the quality of fuel, especially diesel fuel, lowering harmful emissions and enabling us to import vehicles to better international standards. The Government has introduced the visible smoke check at warrant of fitness to target the worst emitting vehicles on our roads, and last week it implemented the 2007 vehicle exhaust emissions rule, which sets minimum emission standards for vehicles entering our fleet, ensuring that vehicle emissions will continue to improve over time. The Government is now looking at in-service emission testing for the current fleet, and I expect this work will initially focus on diesel vehicles, which are the most damaging for health and air quality.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000204\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a705910-5320-43bf-aa82-027a761519f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254f342b7f05d44609fe3120df69d09d1\u0022\u003ERussell Fairbrother\u003C/span\u003E: What else is the Government doing to reduce vehicle emissions and improve air quality?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000205\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a001a41687c4370b79fe1594567faee\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH TIZARD\u003C/span\u003E: The new rule for imported used cars is part of a package of Government measures to improve air quality. Further improvements in fuel quality will allow new technologies to enter the fleet. Other work programmes will see reduced traffic congestion, promoting public transport, and introducing biofuels. The Ministry of Transport recently completed a very successful trial vehicle scrappage scheme where 250 used vehicles were scrapped in exchange for 2-month public transport passes. The ministry is finalising its study on this scheme and I hope it can be continued and expanded in the future. The National Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy set a target for a 10 percent reduction in single occupancy trips, which will impact positively on emissions. Policies in the climate change area will reduce the use of vehicles and improve transport efficiency, especially for freight, and are likely to have benefits for harmful emissions as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000206\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221a705910-5320-43bf-aa82-027a761519f6\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022609a1de6b5e64b7cb34d833445e75fb0\u0022\u003ERussell Fairbrother\u003C/span\u003E: What impact will this rule have on the importation of vehicles into New Zealand?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000207\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5238b762529462d926adc85bbbbb187\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH TIZARD\u003C/span\u003E: The rule will prevent the importation of used diesel vehicles made to older Japanese standards, and equivalent standards under other jurisdictions. In some cases vehicles that have been imported into New Zealand have been banned from the roads in Tokyo. These vehicles were actually making our fleet worse when they arrived; why should we allow the importation of used Japanese vehicles that the Japanese will not allow on their own roads? I believe this rule will result in a major improvement in the New Zealand fleet over time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000208\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d33675aafc4f4467994c65be37fe3e64\u0022\u003EPeter Brown\u003C/span\u003E: Noting those answers, is the Minister aware of the assertion that these new diesel vehicles are a fairly rare species in Japan, and that they cost two or three times as much as an older one, and as a result many diesel operators will hang on to their vehicles for much longer; if she is aware of that, does she not accept that this will do little or no good at all to improving New Zealanders\u2019 health?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000209\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223b1b5881-3b86-4894-ac77-72905f786141\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022921d8a216f6444f9a1c5ed869a47bcd7\u0022\u003EHon JUDITH TIZARD\u003C/span\u003E: If the member is talking about new diesel vehicles, then as long as they are manufactured to current Japanese standards they will improve the fleet. If he is talking about used Japanese vehicles coming into the New Zealand fleet, then the Japanese Government is continuing to improve their standards. We still have to keep a good eye on the fact that some diesel vehicles are a real problem. However, the vehicle standard is only one of the issues around better vehicle emissions. There is also the issue of better fuel standards, and the use and maintenance of vehicles. So, no, I do not accept the member\u2019s assertion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000210\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022701c9390ee6e431291db82b1586b932c\u0022\u003EHealth Services\u2014Safety of Mothers and Children\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000211\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E12. \u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002265c84939130f47ea95c65648af44e948\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (National\u2014Bay of Plenty)\u003C/span\u003E to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his reported comments, regarding the $100 \u201Cbribe\u201D for Wellington mothers to leave hospital within hours of giving birth, that this was \u201Cone organisation\u2019s response to a staff shortage and was not Government policy.\u201D; if so, is he confident that the safety of mothers and children is a priority throughout the New Zealand public health system?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022 data-id=\u00226495716e424e4c3788e3eb2738a5e292\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000212\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226495716e424e4c3788e3eb2738a5e292\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Minister of Health):\u003C/span\u003E Yes; and yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000213\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f5283e01f5e64d75bf131dd1ef53ad93\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: What immediate action will he take to prevent a repeat of the tragic death of the baby reported here in Wellington today\u2014and all members of the House will have great sympathy for the parents\u2014and does he now understand the consequences of hospitals bullying midwives and mothers to get out and go home within hours of giving birth?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000214\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc04e621d597485caaf5263bc34b8b9b\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: May I first say that I share the member\u2019s deep sense of sorrow at this recent tragedy. There is no sufficient answer for any parent who has lost a child, and I think all members\u2019 hearts go out to this family and any others who have been in a similar circumstance. The Government takes this situation and any like it very, very seriously. We expect district health boards around the country to take it similarly seriously. By saying that the previous policy of Capital and Coast District Health Board was not Government policy, I think we have made very clear the Government\u2019s expectations and that it was not appropriate. Having said that, this case did not reflect that policy, for several reasons. Firstly, this mother would not have been covered because she was a first-time mother and that policy applied only to second and subsequent births. Secondly, there was no bed shortage in the case of this birth, and there is no evidence that I have seen that, to quote the member, the mother was \u201Cbullied\u201D out of hospital.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000215\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220037349a7fea456d8b2feb03aab42738\u0022\u003EHon Marian Hobbs\u003C/span\u003E: What indications are there of the Government\u2019s concern with the safety of mothers and children?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000216\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215e36afc781b47ea8277a3661a698bee\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: Perhaps the most telling indicator of the Government\u2019s concern and effective action on it is that the infant mortality rate has declined from 7.1 deaths per 1,000 births in 1997 to 4.8 deaths per 1,000 in 2006. That is a 33 percent reduction. Additionally, of course, the Government has undertaken the MeNZB mass immunisation campaign, which has lowered the number of cases of new meningococcal B meningitis by 57 percent. However, I repeat that any infant death is a tragedy, and despite this progress we will relentlessly pursue further improvements. Our heart goes out to any family who suffers this kind of loss.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000217\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220daaf9fb-1a1f-4d31-848a-fd13cb1a2c5a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002215e6ea6c449d4b24898817d11ba0c224\u0022\u003EBarbara Stewart\u003C/span\u003E: Will he be approaching the country\u2019s 3,000 general practitioners to find out how many of them would be willing to resume providing maternity services in order to alleviate the ongoing midwife shortage and provide a safer service; if not, why not?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000218\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002276e1685e158a4a319e2473a86a4a372a\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: I have received a copy of some reporting on the nationwide workforce priority accorded to the midwifery sector. I am certainly willing to work constructively with the member and others to look at all options to address the shortfalls, and I encourage district health boards to do the same.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000219\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249d354185273465fbc6a16af56e14e14\u0022\u003ETe Ururoa Flavell\u003C/span\u003E: T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Madam Speaker. Kia ora t\u0101tou. Is the Minister aware that last weekend a woman went into the Capital and Coast District Health Board delivery suite to have her sixth child and was told that she had to go home even though she did not want to, and what action will he be taking with that district health board to address its deliberate refusal to comply with his statement last week that \u201Cno woman who needs to be in hospital after giving birth will be sent home.\u201D?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000220\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ff05b4b940c431cb664f61461b6d7cb\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: In the first case, if a member wishes to discuss an individual case or to seek information on it, it is always helpful either to get the name in advance or for it to be done in a primary question. Notwithstanding that, I understand that the district health board has had conversations with the Ministry of Health that would underline the point that no mother who is in need of care in hospital should be discharged and that no baby who is in need of care should be so discharged. I understand that the chief executive reaffirmed that position in recent days. Notwithstanding that, I remain very concerned and increasingly concerned at the situation at Capital and Coast District Health Board. I have recently issued a statement clarifying that I am seeking urgent advice on the options available to me, and a further announcement will be made shortly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000221\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f239da6904bb428f992d734b5f3b4603\u0022\u003ETe Ururoa Flavell\u003C/span\u003E: What will he introduce to respond to the fact that the number of annual practising certificates issued to midwives has decreased significantly, from 4,914 in 2002-03 to 2,857 in 2005-06, and what does he believe has caused such a severe decrease in midwives?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000222\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225dbaaffdcba04de1b9d33572c3b56638\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: It would not be appropriate for me to try to diagnose the problems of the midwifery sector. I do note that the District Health Boards New Zealand organisation has listed that sector as one of its top two workforce priorities, and that it is receiving the full support of the Ministry of Health in addressing a strategy for ensuring we have sufficient midwifery care around New Zealand.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000223\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e5ffde7d8644daa95ca95c9e647a096\u0022\u003ETe Ururoa Flavell\u003C/span\u003E: What will this Government be doing to address the training and retention of midwives in the sector?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000224\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229f5fb140f784412090be439116084862\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: As I have just said, the Government will be working closely with District Health Boards New Zealand around a strategy for ensuring that shortages are filled. It is very important that mothers and children around New Zealand get the care they deserve.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000225\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f7cc5165d19c425d96c40ea299960769\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: Has the Minister seen reports that the Maternity Service Consumer Council says that district health board managers up and down the country are bullying\u2014its word\u2014midwives to get new mothers out of hospital quicker and quicker; and should not New Zealand mothers be entitled to more?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000226\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227c92373f0c794630a33b64e7986ce38d\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: It is always ironic when a member from a party that has long championed unaffordable tax cuts becomes the champion of more social services, because it is exactly those kinds of trade-offs that this Government, since it became elected in 1999, has stood to address. That is why there are 33 percent fewer dead babies under this Government than when that member\u2019s party was in Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000227\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002264c96dd956df4585ba513fcfd04fbd72\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: Will the Minister meet with the Maternity Service Consumer Council, which has said that this sort of thing is happening up and down the country as we speak and that other hospitals are sitting on time bombs like this; and will he meet to discuss with the Maternity Service Consumer Council the fact that the council says that midwives around this country are being bullied to discharge mothers home earlier and earlier, and that that is not safe for New Zealand mothers?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000228\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e0192ed9-5715-4f6c-bd52-8db4f3466087\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a78ab5f14fa24726a74e04a49ce1ba78\u0022\u003EHon DAVID CUNLIFFE\u003C/span\u003E: I fully respect the member\u2019s efforts to stand up for vulnerable mothers, and I share his concern for those mothers. But the fact is that under this Government our infant mortality rate is one-third less than it was when that member\u2019s party was in power. Of course, discussions will continue with District Health Boards New Zealand to ensure that Government policy is given effect to, and we will relentlessly pursue opportunities for improvement in this sector.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022 data-id=\u00223a9c1837fdc64002a1602afc587e368c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000229\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223a9c1837fdc64002a1602afc587e368c\u0022\u003ETE URUROA FLAVELL (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Waiariki):\u003C/span\u003E I seek leave to table data from the Nursing Council of New Zealand and the Midwifery Council of New Zealand from the year 2000 to the year 2006.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000230\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ec266512-9fe8-47da-883e-48f046ee5059\u0022\u003EDocument, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000231\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00220e2315e2d2594a75ae330768160ff003\u0022\u003EUrgent Debates Declined\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000232\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022bfabe74b99ae47c9be15b7457fcdab8f\u0022\u003ECapital and Coast District Health Board\u2014Maternity Services\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022 data-id=\u0022d81a09f4869246e89aa98380a1d977af\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000233\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d81a09f4869246e89aa98380a1d977af\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I have received a letter from Judy Turner seeking to debate under Standing Order 380 the death of a newborn baby whose mother was discharged from Wellington Hospital 5 hours after birth. This is a case of recent occurrence involving ministerial responsibility, but I do not think that I would be justified in giving priority to this particular issue over other business in the House today. There are other opportunities to consider the performance of district health boards. The financial review of the Capital and Coast District Health Board is currently before the Health Committee, and there is, of course, the general debate tomorrow. The application is therefore declined. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000234\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u0022ebfa1b99f14e47db87c569d48b1f20da\u0022\u003ETaxation (Annual Rates, Business Taxation, KiwiSaver, and Remedial Matters) Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000235\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022c863d0e4d6c24298a5c504c217678319\u0022\u003ESecond Reading\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000236\u0022\u003EDebate resumed from 22 November.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022 data-id=\u0022629e5c42ebe34c94b814ceee18abe94d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000237\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022629e5c42ebe34c94b814ceee18abe94d\u0022\u003ER DOUG WOOLERTON (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E When I finished speaking for 2 minutes, about a week and a half ago now, I was saying that New Zealand First, unlike the National Party, supports tax cuts wherever they may occur. Again, New Zealand First, unlike the National Party, supports superannuation savings wherever they may occur, be they small or great, or of a design we completely agree with. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000238\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EIn this case, the Taxation (Annual Rates, Business Taxation, KiwiSaver, and Remedial Matters) Bill in its content includes KiwiSaver, which, by and large, financial commentators around the country are starting to become enthusiastic about. In the first instances they rubbished it completely, and in some cases said there was no need for the Government to introduce such a scheme. New Zealand First is pleased to see that KiwiSaver is encompassed within this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000239\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EAlong with that, we are pleased to see tax credits for research, but we understand that that is something that has pitfalls in it. It is an area that has been open to rorting in overseas countries. We are very, very pleased that our taxation people have spent a lot of time studying the Australian example, because in this country if we are to be competitive in the areas we wish to excel in\u2014namely, biotech and high technology areas of all sorts\u2014we no longer want to aim our workforce at unskilled jobs and be the source of cheap exports. We want excellence in this country, and to have that we simply must have research and development of the highest order. If the Government wants that to happen, it must say so, and it must say so in the only sensible manner that business understands\u2014which is to give business a tax credit. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000240\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EThere have been some issues from our State-owned enterprises. They have had concerns that, where they have been in partnership with private entities, they are not eligible for tax breaks. New Zealand First says that they should be, because they are funded by the Government. In those cases their partners, in being private enterprises, will have tax breaks available to them, and we think that that is right. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000241\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EWe implore businesses to play the game; we implore them to do what is right in this area. It would be a pity if our renewed experiences in taxation credits and in research and development were ones where we had businesses trying to rort the system. I have enough faith in our businesses to think that that will not happen, but we will just have to trust and see. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000242\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EThis bill also addresses the area of research and development in software. Overseas\u2014again, in Australia\u2014there has been a little bit of a problem whereby banks in particular have developed new software and attempted to gain a tax advantage on that by saying that it was research and development expenditure, when in fact it was just the redevelopment, or even a new development, of internal software. That is not what this bill aims to have happen, so those things will be looked at very closely if anybody has ideas of getting involved in that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000243\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EI think everybody understands that along with this bill there has been a rewriting of our tax law. Attempts have been made to line us up with Australia, which, members may be surprised to know, New Zealand First is very much in favour of. Wherever we can assist our businesses to line up with other countries with which we compete, New Zealand First is right in there voting for that on their behalf. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000244\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EWe are also very happy to see that the area of charitable organisations is taken account of. We in political parties all know\u2014at least, I hope we all know\u2014the huge efforts of people who work for no recompense other than the satisfaction of helping their communities. We are pleased to see that people who give money to, and help, charitable organisations in this country are at long last recognised and can get a tax break. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000245\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EI think that is about all I wish to say on this bill. New Zealand First is wholeheartedly in support of it. Unlike the National Party, we support those areas that attend to savings, and in the past we have supported those parts that go towards tax reduction and, indeed, tax credits for research.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022 data-id=\u0022b3f5dc6be3364524bb44c323ff447a8c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000246\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022b3f5dc6be3364524bb44c323ff447a8c\u0022\u003EHONE HARAWIRA (M\u0101ori Party\u2014Te Tai Tokerau):\u003C/span\u003E Kia ora, Madam Assistant Speaker. Kia ora t\u0101tou e te Whare. Whenever Governments propose legislation they must also consider the views of those they purport to represent, and polls are sometimes a good indicator of those views. So it was a very important revelation when, a couple of weeks ago, the results of the Marae DigiPoll were released. It was all bad news for Labour\u2019s M\u0101ori MPs, with 55 percent of M\u0101ori choosing M\u0101ori Party candidates and only 33 percent opting for Labour\u2019s M\u0101ori MPs, and with the M\u0101ori Party candidates winning hands-down in six of the M\u0101ori seats and deadlocking in a seventh, for which we did not even have a candidate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000247\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EIt was also a very clear indicator of M\u0101ori opinion that when pollsters were asked who their preferred Prime Minister was they chose three M\u0101ori\u2014two from the M\u0101ori Party, and nobody from Labour.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000248\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223110c23a224c48f5a7331839ff34c797\u0022\u003EHon Paul Swain\u003C/span\u003E: Point of order\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000249\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f5b8612ecd1c49fc936eda7e54ab7078\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I will just deal with it. The member needs to come back to the bill, please. I have been a bit tolerant. Please come back to the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000250\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d792f340bfa4f31a715b87c9e4a9947\u0022\u003EHONE HARAWIRA\u003C/span\u003E: I am talking about the importance of public opinion, because in respect of the Taxation (Annual Rates, Business Taxation, KiwiSaver, and Remedial Matters) Bill and its reference to KiwiSaver, that same Marae DigiPoll said a lot about how disconnected Labour was in terms of its view on KiwiSaver. We find, when it comes to this flagship savings policy\u2014KiwiSaver, which is referred to in this bill\u2014which was promoted with hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer-funded advertising, that 84 percent of M\u0101ori said they had not even joined. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000251\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EOf course, when challenged about the shattering findings of the Marae DigiPoll, the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs came up with his standard blub, blub, blub that the only poll that matters is on election day. It is all well and good introducing amendments about employer contributions and tax credits, but what is the point of all the pontificating when M\u0101ori are not even bothering with it anyway? And why are they not bothering? The reason is that a lot of M\u0101ori, Pasifika, and P\u0101keh\u0101, as well, for that matter, simply cannot afford to get into KiwiSaver. That is the reason. Eighty-four percent of M\u0101ori surveyed have not even joined KiwiSaver, and one of the main reasons they give is that they simply cannot afford to get into it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000252\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EWe regularly get reports coming into this House highlighting the reality of food banks being swamped by people in need, and of families who cannot even afford basic housing, heating, food, and health care. These facts are highlighted by the national homelessness forum held to highlight the sheer scale of homelessness not just in American movies but right here in good old Aotearoa. We know how poverty limits a child\u2019s options, and we know only too well how many low-waged workers are teetering on the brink of survival. Hence the importance of reference to KiwiSaver. When a family is struggling to make the zero line, the possibility of saving 4 percent a week is just beyond their horizons. Jarrod Rendle from the New Zealand Federation of Family Budgeting Services Inc. says that for many of his clients $15 a week going to savings means $15 less being spent on essentials such as food. For too many families, even $10 is $10 too much. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000253\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EWe support the recommendations of the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions, the National Distribution Union, and the New Zealand Nurses Organisation about reducing the worker\u2019s contribution to 2 percent in order to encourage workers to join. We support too the submission from Ng\u0101i Tahu about amending the withdrawal criteria to make it more flexible and more accessible for people in need, such as that already agreed upon to help second-chance homebuyers. We support, too, changes in the tax structure to help working people to save. We would also like to see real incentives to encourage poor people to save, as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000254\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003ETaxation is an important issue for M\u0101ori, as evidenced in the Marae DigiPoll, which showed that M\u0101ori-roll voters ranked tax cuts as the most significant issue for them right now, for the first time ever. Unfortunately, this bill will not deliver the necessary changes, and we would recommend further changes in order to enable that to happen. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000255\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EIn fact, the focus of this bill is more about enhancements and amendments flowing on from Budget decisions announced some time ago, which we are generally happy to support, such as voluntary tax compliance, tax exemptions for Pasifika trust funds, tax credits for Aotearoa-based research and development, and tax relief for charitable donations. We liked also the provision to remove the M\u0101ori authority net deduction limit of 5 percent of net income, which will mean that M\u0101ori authorities with a charitable trust or purpose will now be encouraged to put more money into organisations with a charitable purpose and get a tax benefit from investing in things like education grants and community support projects. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000256\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EWe noted with concern, though, an issue raised by both the National Distribution Union and the New Zealand Nurses Organisation that young workers above the compulsory school leaving age, or with an early release from school, should be eligible to participate in KiwiSaver and that to deny them would be discriminatory. We note that the Finance and Expenditure Committee did not support the proposal, which, I guess, is consistent with this Government\u2019s decision to discriminate against youth workers generally by paying them at only 80 percent of the average wage. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000257\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EWe note also an opinion confirmed by M\u0101ori voters who were asked who most effectively represented their views in Parliament. At the top of the list of 21 M\u0101ori MPs was the M\u0101ori Party\u2019s Dr Pita Sharples, and three of the top four MPs were from the M\u0101ori Party. Again, nobody from Labour appeared. In fact, the Minister of M\u0101ori Affairs\u2014Labour\u2019s most high-profile M\u0101ori MP\u2014could barely scrape up 5 percent of the vote. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000258\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00227883c85e-a5bb-4a12-9962-80df55af0ecd\u0022\u003EWe will support the second reading of this bill but will continue to raise issues of equity for young workers and support for those most in need in this country, as part of our wider commitment to a fair and just society. Thank you, Madam Assistant Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022 data-id=\u0022d59bd82536734dcabe26e4ff4c1e05c1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000259\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d59bd82536734dcabe26e4ff4c1e05c1\u0022\u003EDr the Hon LOCKWOOD SMITH (National\u2014Rodney):\u003C/span\u003E In speaking to the second reading of this Taxation (Annual Rates, Business Taxation, KiwiSaver, and Remedial Matters) Bill, I want to make it clear, and to remind the House, that National is opposing this bill. We are opposing this bill because it resets income tax rates to exactly where they are today and to where they have been all year. If Labour believed in lower taxes, and if Labour believed in reducing income taxes, it could do that right now. In the next 2 weeks Labour could introduce a Supplementary Order Paper to this bill to bring down the taxes that New Zealanders pay. We know that Labour believes in tax cuts only in election years, and this year is not an election year. So Labour says: \u201CTo hell with ordinary New Zealanders this year.\u201D Labour says that people can continue to pay the taxes that have enabled it to collect $22 billion extra every year in tax revenue compared with when it came to office.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000260\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EIt is no wonder that New Zealanders are getting really sick of this, when an average full-time income earner is now paying the top tax rate that used to exist before Labour came to office, and when three-quarters of our secondary teachers are now paying the 39c top tax rate that Labour brought in when it came to office. It is little wonder that ordinary New Zealanders are saying they have had enough of all of this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000261\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EWhen families are considered so poor that they receive Working for Families payments, yet they are on the top tax rate, that really is a stupid policy. They are considered so poor that they have to get tax credits from the Government when they have dependent families, yet they are considered so rich that they should pay the top tax rate. That is a really dumb policy, and that is why National is opposing this bill. If Labour genuinely believed in reducing income taxes, it could do it next week during the Committee stage of this bill; it could introduce a Supplementary Order Paper to bring down people\u2019s income tax rates.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000262\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThere are some bits of this bill that we do support. We support the lower corporate tax rate of 30 percent. We support the reduction in taxation on donations to charities\u2014National\u2019s policy, which Labour pinched. We support the changes to the unacceptable tax position penalties in respect of GST and withholding tax. That makes good sense, but I should point out that when this issue was last addressed when section 141KB was introduced into our law, we thought we would be dealing with these issues\u2014and we did not. I suspect that this change will not deal with the issue adequately, either. The relief from unacceptable tax position penalties should really cover voluntary disclosure where people make simple mistakes, but this bill does not do that. If someone pays the correct amount of tax but files the wrong tax returns to pay it, that kind of mistake will still, after this bill is passed, incur the big tax penalties. That is just dumb. Why do we not encourage voluntary disclosure? This bill seeks to do it but does not go far enough. That is an issue that I think should be looked at during the Committee stage. Labour has not listened adequately on that particular issue.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000263\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThere are a couple of big issues covered in this bill that I want to make some further comments on today in this second reading debate. The first issue is that of research and development tax credits. On 25 July this year the Inland Revenue Department briefed the Finance and Expenditure Committee on the policy of these tax credits, and we were told that the policy was essentially based on Australian tax credit policy for research and development. I will tell members what the Hon Shane Jones said. He is now a Minister; I cannot remember which portfolio he holds, but I congratulate him on his elevation to Cabinet. I wrote down in my book what he said to the Inland Revenue Department officials when we were briefed on 25 July. He said: \u201CLet\u2019s cut to the chase.\u201D\u2014we know how Shane talks; he is pretty much a straight shooter\u2014\u201CHas there been any demonstrable benefit in Australia in terms of economic growth from research and development tax credits?\u201D. Well, the officials just stared back at him blankly. One would have thought that he had farted loudly, because the officials just stared back at him blankly. They did not expect the Labour chair of the select committee to ask them that. This is Government policy! Here he was asking them whether there was any evidence that this policy worked.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000264\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EJust a few minutes later Shane Jones\u2014chair of the Finance and Expenditure Committee at the time\u2014asked again whether there was any evidence of any benefit from those research and development tax credits in Australia. The officials had to say that they simply did not know.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000265\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EIn theory, research and development tax credits kind of make sense. We want to encourage investment in research and development, because we believe it is a good thing to be doing. But members should remember that research and development expenditure is already 100 percent deductible for tax purposes. The research and development tax credit here is essentially a 15 percent tax rebate, on top of that 100 percent deductibility. Across the country right now we are seeing accountancy firms putting huge effort into advising businesses on how they can get so much of their current expenditure to comply with these new tax credits in order to get the extra 15 percent tax rebate on top of the 100 percent tax deductibility. That is the problem with this kind of fiddling with the tax system. So many submitters to the select committee pointed this out. They said that it would be better to lower tax rates than to try to pick winners.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000266\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003ELet me give members one example where I have a deep concern about this. Our Crown research institutes and our universities, which do most of the research in this country, are excluded from those tax credits. We can understand why; they are essentially Government-funded institutions, and the Government is saying that they should not get these tax rebates on top of their Government funding. But some of the most valuable research that is done in this country is done by joint investment between the private sector and those major research organisations\u2014between private business and the universities, and between private business and the Crown research institutes. Yet where partnerships are set up to invest in research together, and where we get real synergy out of that investment, this legislation bars those private investors from getting the tax credits.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000267\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EIn other words, this legislation is against that kind of joint investment in research that produces some of the greatest synergy to get great ideas out there into the private sector. In some circumstances the private sector will be able to get tax credits, where it still controls companies and where there is joint investment, but the legislation is not as clear as it could be in this area, and, certainly, for much joint investment the private sector will not get the tax credits. I think this is an issue that the Government should be looking at before this bill completes its Committee stage. It should be looked at again, because that joint investment is just so important for New Zealand\u2019s future development.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000268\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EFinally, I will make some comments about the KiwiSaver provisions. This legislation essentially sets up the framework for the employer contributions; the post-Budget legislation set up the framework for the employee contributions. The submissions were fascinating. Representatives from Business New Zealand came along to the Finance and Expenditure Committee. This is not the Business Roundtable; these are the ones who are supposed to be friendly with the Government. They came along and said, bluntly, that the Government had ambushed employers with this legislation. Those were their words\u2014the Government had \u201Cambushed employers\u201D. That was what they actually said to the select committee. We can understand why, because this legislation will be \u201Congoing industrial sandpaper\u201D, to use Business New Zealand\u2019s own words again. That was what it said to the select committee\u2014ongoing industrial sandpaper.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000269\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EDo members know why that is so clear? The reason is that where one employee does not have, say, a dependent family, he or she can afford to make the 4 percent contribution that goes into this scheme, but another employee cannot afford to go into the scheme, because he or she might have a dependent family or home mortgage. As Hone Harawira said, many M\u0101ori families will not be able to go into this scheme. If the employer says that this person will go into the scheme and will get employer contributions on top of his or her wages or salary but this other person will not, then the remuneration package of the person who is not going into the scheme will be less. So what does the employer do? Does it say it will pay that person a bit more cash to make up for it? We can see the ongoing tensions between employees who go into the scheme and employees who do not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000270\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThere were issues that were not properly resolved. The Council of Trade Unions wanted flexible arrangements for lower-income workers who go into the scheme, where they could make a 2 percent contribution and work with employers on how to get the total contribution, and for 16 and 17-year-old workers to be able to join the scheme. Why does Labour hate young people so much? Why have those members banned 16 and 17-year-old workers from joining the scheme? Why do those members hate 16 and 17-year-old workers? Why do they hate older workers? If people are over 65 and are still working, then they cannot join the scheme. Why do Labour members hate people over 65? This is the stupidity that this kind of legislation throws up. If one is a working person in New Zealand, then one should be able to join this scheme, if the scheme is any damned good. Why has this Government locked out young people\u201416 and 17-year-olds\u2014and why has it locked out old people?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000271\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003EThere are real, ongoing issues with this bill. I must say that the one positive thing is that the Minister said these provisions would be reviewed after 3 years, although we must be clear that the excessive taxation, regulation, and compliance costs of this legislation will simply add to the problems of the collapse in our economic productivity growth in this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022 data-id=\u002211a601b968264553b0d5a04f0434b681\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000272\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002211a601b968264553b0d5a04f0434b681\u0022\u003EJUDY TURNER (Deputy Leader\u2014United Future):\u003C/span\u003E I do not normally take a call for my party on tax law, as it is not something I pretend to be an expert on, but this legislation represents for me personally our finest hour in my involvement with United Future with regard to the rebates on charitable donations. That is the sector I came out of prior to coming to this House, and this is something that has been dear to our hearts since 2002. To finally see this legislation before the House today is a very exciting thing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000273\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EWhat does this legislation do? First of all, let us clarify that on estimate, 1.3 million people in this country take part in voluntary activities. Donations to charities and to other non-profit organisations amount to about $356 million, and that is just from people who claim tax rebates for their donations. So for many, many New Zealanders this provision in this Taxation (Annual Rates, Business Taxation, KiwiSaver, and Remedial Matters) Bill represents something that they have been looking forward to for a long time. Certainly, in meetings the Hon Peter Dunne and I have had with people from the charitable and voluntary sector, they tell us they are absolutely thrilled. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000274\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EI would challenge the National member who took a call previously and who tried to take some credit for this policy. I have National\u2019s brochure sitting on my desk right now. It has a photo of Paula Bennett and John Key espousing and supporting the policies that this tax bill now delivers. Obviously this policy has been National\u2019s policy only since John Key became the leader, but United Future negotiated and secured this deal straight after the 2005 election. Who was leader of the National Party then? It certainly was not John Key. For National members to start to claim that this is somehow their policy and that the Labour Government has stolen it from them is a very shallow claim. The evidence is made very clear by those members\u2019 own brochure, with their new leader and new spokesperson for the charitable and voluntary sector. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000275\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002213579cbb6422407381d7ea34f1d92475\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: So it\u2019s not true.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000276\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002247accf4097174e338d81e093b16f305f\u0022\u003EJUDY TURNER\u003C/span\u003E: It is not true, at all, I say to Mr Peters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000277\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c3fa38c158ab4af2b3e7fa38067a6764\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: So it\u2019s a lie, then?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000278\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f03ed87dbcf341448b02ff2e49e8ad96\u0022\u003EJUDY TURNER\u003C/span\u003E: I would not want to use that word, but let us say that those members were careless with their use of the truth. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000279\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EUnited Future is hugely thrilled to see this bill going through. What does this mean for the average voter? Let us just imagine somebody who gives $3,000 a year to various charities and non-profit organisations and who is on, say, an income of $35,000 a year. Under the current rules, that person would be entitled to a rebate of $630. Under the new rules, after this law is implemented, the rebate would be $1,000\u201433.3 percent of the $3,000\u2014and that would be a gain for that voter of $370 of tax rebate. The news is also good for those who are in companies and for M\u0101ori authorities. The 5 percent deduction limit on donations is removed and companies are given a much freer hand. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EOne of the things that I am particularly excited about is the number of New Zealand businesses that really do demonstrate social responsibility. They are regular givers, and they have a charitable wing to their business where they very thoughtfully and constructively give to the voluntary and charitable sector. They welcome this opportunity to be able to give much more generously to causes they believe in. They understand, as many New Zealanders and many Kiwi mums and dads understand, that giving back to the community is a good thing to do and that the health of the community that they rely on does not exist in some sort of vacuum. It exists because people get off their proverbial backsides and commit their time and money to the good of their community. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000281\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EThis bill stops at a certain point\u2014it stops at fixing up the rebates on charitable donations\u2014and United Future is acutely aware that there are some other things that need to be fixed for the voluntary and charitable sector. We have continued to do that work. I will mention particularly the work the Hon Peter Dunne has done with Inland Revenue Department staff and the charitable and voluntary sector, because there are some other things that need to be looked into. For instance, there is the need for a provision, as is the case in overseas jurisdictions, where people are able to give as part of their payroll provisions, and we are certainly looking into that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000282\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220d9640b0-d861-43d8-b321-e7ba56dbe362\u0022\u003EWe also need to look at streamlining the tax treatment of volunteers for their reimbursement payments and honoraria, and, again, United Future and the Hon Peter Dunne are taking progressive steps. Peter Dunne has just released a discussion document for New Zealanders to comment on with regard to how these may be implemented. Several models are available for the Government to look at. United Future, along with the Government, is looking for feedback from New Zealanders as to which of those payroll-giving options would best suit them, because we certainly believe that this sector, which we could almost describe as the glue that holds New Zealand society together, deserves this break. United Future has been very proud to be part of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022 data-id=\u0022648155fccbf54dff9173a93b279d71fb\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000283\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022648155fccbf54dff9173a93b279d71fb\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E As the newly elected chair of the Finance and Expenditure Committee\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000284\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217ce86b2b8564cfa8877df633e3f491b\u0022\u003EHon Paul Swain\u003C/span\u003E: It starts too early.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000285\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225b58b68c21594669917d94b791bdeafc\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014apart from starting too early, as Mr Swain says; we try to run a tight ship, that is right, it will be a 10 a.m. start tomorrow\u2014I am very proud and pleased to take a call on the second reading of this Taxation (Annual Rates, Business Taxation, KiwiSaver, and Remedial Matters) Bill. Mention was made of my predecessor as chair, the Hon Shane Jones, and I would just like, in passing at least, to pay a short tribute to his chairmanship of the committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000286\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220ba201ddf7774fc19efe7e0a92fc551f\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: Do you remember him asking whether there was any evidence that the tax credits worked in Australia?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000287\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223441e154b5734a289a868d1e36a2d082\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL\u003C/span\u003E: We will come to the tax credit matters that Dr Smith spoke of earlier.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000288\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EI do think that the legislation is better legislation for its passage through the committee. We have recommended several changes to the bill, and I would just like to run through some of them. As far as KiwiSaver is concerned, obviously it has been a resounding success to date. Over 260,000 New Zealanders joining the scheme is testament to that. But the aims of the scheme will be enhanced by the changes recommended to new section 101B of the legislation, which will appear in the substantive Act. The changes will clarify, as far as employment agreements entered into before the enactment date are concerned, that if employment agreements seek to effectively move the burden of compulsory employer contributions to the employee, then they will be of no effect. Employer contributions will be in addition to current remuneration. After the date of the Royal assent of the bill, compulsory employer contributions under KiwiSaver can be reduced against pay movements where there is mutual agreement between employer and employee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000289\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EIn my view, that gives the lie to the submission from Business New Zealand that was mentioned earlier. I think the quote was that it would provide \u201Cindustrial sandpaper\u201D. Certainly, that was what was said at the committee. I must say, as a former industrial relations lawyer, that I cannot see any merit in that submission. The legislation, as I have explained, permits the parties to the agreement to structure their affairs in an appropriate and sensible manner, given the objects of the scheme.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000290\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EIt is also notable that the definition of \u201Csalary and wages\u201D has been reviewed. We have recommended that redundancy payments, accommodation benefits, and living costs overseas ought to be excluded from the definition. That is obviously a common-sense move. On the other hand, Accident Compensation Corporation weekly payments and paid parental leave payments should qualify.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000291\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EWe have also looked at the minimum employee payments, and we have basically suggested that the ability to split the 4 percent\u20142 percent plus 2 percent\u2014contribution between employer and employee should remain on offer to all employees until 1 April 2010. This will enhance the attractiveness of the scheme further, particularly to low-paid workers, and it is thus to be commended, in my view.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000292\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EAnother important addition is the recommendation that we extend the second-chance homebuyer eligibility to those who have received a determination by Housing New Zealand Corporation that they are effectively in the same financial position as first-home buyers. For example, somebody who has been through a matrimonial or relationship break-up, and who has had his or her equity in the property or his or her financial position drastically reduced, ought to be able to withdraw funds from the scheme and be eligible for the first-home buyers\u2019 assistance if there is a true case of hardship, even if he or she has had that assistance in the past. I think, again, that that will make the scheme more attractive and fairer to people who really need its assistance.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000293\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EI turn now to the research and development tax credit. In order to increase onshore research and development in the private sector, a research and development tax credit will be introduced for eligible businesses. The submissions we heard, I must say, showed overwhelming support for the introduction of the regime. Keeping in mind the purpose of the tax credit, we have recommended that residents should not be required to have a fixed establishment in order to be eligible for it. Also, a person starting a business within an income tax year should not have to wait until the end of the year for eligibility; he or she should be able to accrue it, subject to other eligibility requirements, during the course of that year.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000294\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EWe have also looked at the rules relating to partnerships and collaborations in order to clarify how to treat combinations of ineligible and eligible partners and joint ventures. The definition of research and development activity should, in our view, be amended to refer to activities that \u201Cseek to achieve an advance in science or technology by resolving scientific or technological uncertainty\u201D. We have suggested that the term \u201Cappreciable element of novelty\u201D should be clarified according to the Inland Revenue Department\u2019s guidelines. Also, we should make it clear that only core activities are actually eligible.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000295\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EDr Smith mentioned the exclusion for Crown research institutes, tertiary education institutes, district health boards, and associates of those entities. Well, of course we have excluded those entities; their core business is research. What this tax credit aims to do is to try to stimulate research and development where it is not happening at the moment\u2014that is, in the private sector. We want to stimulate research and development in the core private sector, not in areas where it is already the core business of the entity. It does not make sense to rob Peter to pay Paul within already funded entities. We want to stimulate research and development in the private sector, and that is where we hope to see it as a result of this initiative.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000296\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EI was astounded to hear Dr Smith allege that the Labour Government cuts taxes only in an election year. That is a most extraordinary claim. The research and development tax credit, along with the company tax rate cuts\u2014which I am about to speak to\u2014amount to a $3.4 billion tax cut, which this Government has delivered this year. The company tax rate change is a major enhancement to our international competitiveness. We have reduced the company tax rate to 30 percent\u2014the consequential amendments are in the bill. We think the current transitional period ending on 31 March 2010 allows for an appropriate balance between the requirements of certainty and equity.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000297\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EI will speak briefly about the portfolio investment equity regime. In the select committee we looked at the exemptions, the fair dividend rate methods, and the cost method. We certainly found some of the submissions on these points very helpful, and we have asked the Inland Revenue Department to consider them in some detail. We have looked at the criteria in section 91AAO(2) of the Tax Administration Act, and we consider that it should be replaced by the new criteria that are contained in clause 165 of the bill. We have also looked at the ability of the commissioner to delegate the power to issue determinations under section 91AAO(2), and we have suggested that this should be delegated only to very senior staff, and that the power to issue determinations should be carefully monitored from now on.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000298\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EIn conclusion, the legislation clearly enhances the savings capacity of New Zealanders through the enhancements to KiwiSaver that I have mentioned, and also through the portfolio investment entity regime. The legislation introduces a major corporate tax cut and a research and development tax credit, and this will contribute in a significant way to enhancing our international competitiveness. This is excellent legislation; I commend it to the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022 data-id=\u0022bb897f04c02f4e23bceb1fc088033f8d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000299\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022bb897f04c02f4e23bceb1fc088033f8d\u0022\u003ECRAIG FOSS (National\u2014Tukituki):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to speak on the second reading of the Taxation (Annual Rates, Business Taxation, KiwiSaver, and Remedial Matters) Bill. I am speaking on a day that is actually a sad and tragic day. This day is when the Prime Minister with her arrogance and her arrogant Government will soon be jumping on her bulldozer to try to push through the most Draconian, anti-democratic, and disgraceful bill that New Zealand has ever seen.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000300\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c504a349f194bd9bdb77ae1fca4c5db\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Rubbish!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000301\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022222af74a8d474b57abd68feccc49dda1\u0022\u003ECRAIG FOSS\u003C/span\u003E: My colleague over there might have another one. It is an absolute disgrace that on this day, when I am speaking about this taxation bill, we will also see the Electoral Finance Bill being bulldozed through. To make my point\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000302\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002233b4ef166887476db13f55d0cc857c7c\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I know this gentleman has not been here long, but he knows full well that when you give a speech on the second reading you are required to at least try to focus on it, and not to focus on what might be coming up later on the Order Paper. Now, that is as old a rule in the book as there has been democracy itself, which is one of the great things being upheld today. So I am asking the member to get back to his speech, for which, for some reason beyond my knowledge or understanding, his party put him on his feet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000303\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002275f370d61bd544d281cd613f9819ed5c\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I just ask the member to keep to the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000304\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225ff3d765598a46c2add3948a2f73edc7\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I have been a member of this House for some years, and the Standing Orders of this House always provide for members to make passing reference to other matters. They cannot continue to speak about a matter not covered in the bill, but in all the 23 years that I have been in Parliament\u2014and the Rt Hon Winston Peters knows this full well\u2014passing reference can be made to other matters, which is all the member was doing.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000305\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002272c81fba326b46e5a8fb3d757be73452\u0022\u003EThe ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I just say to the member that what I have ruled is absolutely clear. I am just bringing the member back to the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000306\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022afbe391e52fc4a8d979929a9f3161206\u0022\u003ECRAIG FOSS\u003C/span\u003E: I was just about to finish that sentence before I was interrupted by the other member. To make the point here, this taxation bill was introduced not too long after the 2007 Budget. The Finance and Expenditure Committee has been working on it for 6 or so months now. I use that as a comparison against the major, constitution-changing bill that will be debated in the Chamber later today, which has had 2 weeks before a select committee. I want to make the point that there has been a lot of consultation around this bill, and a lot of submissions on it. Submissions have been listened to, the bill has been adjusted and debated, and the common-sense test was applied along the way\u2014unlike the most disgraceful bill that will be debated later on tonight.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000307\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003EYes, this is a complex bill. Many, many different activities and issues are addressed in the bill\u2014matters ranging from research and development, to charities, income tax rates, company tax rates, and the foreign investment changes recently announced. It is well worth a read\u2014at least, the first 23 pages are. I suggest that members, for interest, read through the commentary. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000308\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003EI take a moment to thank the members of the Finance and Expenditure Committee, which generally works quite constructively and tries to work towards better law and better legislation. I think history was made when some of the submitters appeared before us. Members will note in some of the transcripts that there was actually a joint submission along the way from the Council of Trade Unions and Business New Zealand. I thought that was very interesting. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000309\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003EThe most pertinent and revealing part of the commentary is on page 23, which states the minority view that the National Party has put into this bill: \u201CThe National Party recognises that the company tax rates will be dropping to 30 percent, but we believe that personal income tax rates should also be lowered.\u201D That sums up exactly why National is voting against this bill. This bill does not address, go near, or touch on income tax rates, other than to cement the current rates and schedules that are in place as we speak. That is why National is voting against this bill. Also, as I alluded to earlier, we are voting against this bill because its origins come from Budget 2007, which was a confidence and supply issue. Obviously, National does not have much confidence in this current Government\u2014nor does probably 60 percent of New Zealand now\u2014which is why National continues to vote against any and all activities relating to Budget 2007. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000310\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003EIn fact, that same Budget forecasts surpluses upon surpluses after 7 years of surpluses. In that same Budget forecast there is about $56 billion of tax revenue, which is why National members argue that there is plenty of room in there for tax cuts. That same Budget also points out the borrowings that the Government, under the watch of Dr Cullen, will be undertaking this year. Those borrowings will be channelled into the governmental black hole and they may well be used to fund tax cuts. Those same monies raised from those borrowings\u2014of which most are actually offshore\u2014could also be used to fund contributions to the Superannuation Fund of $2 billion a year. So when Dr Cullen gets up and accuses all and sundry of borrowing for tax cuts, quite frankly, he is obviously doing it himself. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000311\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003EAs I said, this bill touches on tax rates for the next financial year. During the committee we heard from the Inland Revenue Department. In the House recently the Prime Minister spoke about the billions of dollars\u2014in fact, the previous speaker alluded to it\u2014of personal tax cuts that the Labour Government has brought in over the last few years. I was scratching my head at that moment, because I could not think of $1 of personal tax cuts over the last few years\u2014not $1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000312\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d4bee97c575949b4b36f14787861957e\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: Working for Families.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000313\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d67ed79d23ca457592e3a787d4f6c91c\u0022\u003ECRAIG FOSS\u003C/span\u003E: That is not a tax cut. Labour members need to understand the difference between a tax cut and a tax credit. I asked the Inland Revenue Department officials, who administer tax cuts, income tax, and credit schedules\u2014one would think they would know\u2014whether they could name one lowering of any personal income tax rate or changing of any thresholds, at all, over the last 7 years. They could not name one\u2014not one. In fact, as we started to speak, the only change that everyone could recall was when the Labour Government put up income tax rates in 1999. It took the top rate from 33c to 39c. At the same time it promised that only 5 percent of New Zealanders would be paying that rate. Now about 13 or 14 percent of New Zealanders are paying that tax rate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000314\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003EWe acknowledge the lowering of the company tax rate from 33c to 30c, and we have applauded that in this Chamber and in public. But, again, it actually almost raises more problems than it looks to solve, because by having a 30 percent company tax rate, a 33 percent personal tax rate, a 39 percent higher personal tax rate, and a 33 percent charity rebate, the complexity in and around our tax system is getting worse by the day under this current Government. As I look on the table I see about six volumes of the income tax rewrite bill, which would be an awful lot simpler if the top rates were aligned and there were no need for volumes and volumes of paper to try to stop arbitrage between the company tax rates and the personal income tax rates. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000315\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003ETax rates have actually increased over the last 5 or so years under the current Government because of fiscal drag. With this current Government pumping up inflation and pumping up interest rates, yes, wages and salaries have gone up\u2014some may be matched with inflation, some may be under inflation\u2014but people have been dragged up, so the notional tax take is a lot higher. It is $20 billion more this year than it was in 2000. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000316\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003EI will talk about one of the measures in the bill: the research and development initiatives. Again, the committee worked constructively and we like the direction this bill is taking with research and development initiatives. I think it is maybe too little, too late, but there is no time like the present to start. At least it may help to stop the plummeting of New Zealand researchers and developments and scientific researchers overseas. Minister Dunne noted the 3-year review around this policy. That should be commended and applauded. I would be quite keen to see that provision being applied to other legislation coming through this House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000317\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003EI would like to touch on the finance leases. Supplementary Order Paper 119 originally touched on finance leases in the bill. It raised a concern. I acknowledge that that issue has been pulled from this bill and will be looked at later by Treasury and the Inland Revenue Department. I am concerned that legislation was going to be used for a journey of discovery to discover how these leases were being used and who was using them. It was the threat of litigation and the threat of litigation against retrospective legislation that I think scared off the Minister and Treasury. I suggest that that issue probably should not have been in the bill at the start. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000318\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003ETo wrap up, I say that there has been a lot of discussion around KiwiSaver. The committee spent a long time talking about the contribution rates, both within the committee and with our submitters. In the bill there is a transitional period\u2014the one percent plus one percent, two percent plus two percent, etc.\u2014but after 2011 every single contribution rate will be 4 percent from the individual and 4 percent from the employer. What is so special about that date? Why can there not be a transition period after that date for those people who are new to the workforce? That concerns me. I wonder what Dr Cullen has up his sleeve in and around that date for his upcoming Budget. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000319\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022659f6556-09a1-4ead-bc52-05cbdb4eaab8\u0022\u003EAs I noted at the start, National is voting against this bill because it is a confidence and supply issue for this Government. National has no confidence whatsoever in this current Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022 data-id=\u0022ed397b5589cc4ffd82d454e1d44fd903\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000320\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ed397b5589cc4ffd82d454e1d44fd903\u0022\u003EHon PAUL SWAIN (Labour\u2014Rimutaka):\u003C/span\u003E We live in curious times when National, when presented with a bill that introduces a research and development tax credit, which for as long as I have been here National members have either been talking about in Government or promoting in Opposition, votes against it. The bill cuts the company tax rate from 33c to 30c, which National members talked about in Government but never did\u2014I remember that in 1990-99\u2014yet National is voting against it. National members always talk about the fact that company tax rates are too high, but when they had the chance in 1990-99 to change them they never did. Here National members are now, presented with legislation that allows that to happen, and they will vote against it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000321\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003EThis legislation increases the tax incentives for people in companies to make charitable donations, which is something that National members have also talked about. They get presented with the legislation and they vote against it. When legislation appears that liberalises tax penalties so as to encourage voluntary compliance with the tax regime\u2014which is something that National has campaigned for alongside Rodney Hide from ACT over many, many years\u2014they vote against it. It is unbelievable that National can vote against research and development tax credits\u2014for which the business community has been calling for, for a very, very long time\u2014and vote against a corporate business tax rate cut from 33 percent to 30 percent.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000322\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003EI think the business community needs to understand that on this kind of thing the National Party is all hat and no horse. Its members talk about tax reform, but when they get the opportunity to vote on it they oppose it. It is an absolute, unbelievable outrage that National can go around and parade itself as, somehow, the business-friendly party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000323\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003EThere are just a couple of quick comments I want to make. Firstly, I want to make one on the KiwiSaver regime because a number of people have talked about that. Then I want to talk a little bit about the research and development tax credit and address the issue that Lockwood Smith raised, which I thought was quite a fair point. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000324\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003EThe first point is on the KiwiSaver scheme. Everyone recognises that compared with other countries overseas New Zealand\u2019s savings rate is low and we have to do something about it. When we look at the countries that have sustained better economic growth than New Zealand\u2014even though we have had pretty good economic growth over the last 5 or 6 years\u2014we see that all those countries that do better than us have a much better savings regime. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000325\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003EThis savings regime that we are promoting\u2014\u201CKiwiSaver I\u201D introduced it and \u201CKiwiSaver II\u201D introduced the employer contribution\u2014does a number of things; it allows a number of things to happen. First of all, it promotes security in retirement. I was amazed to hear the M\u0101ori Party oppose this legislation on the basis, somehow, that M\u0101ori should not be secure in retirement. I simply just cannot believe that the M\u0101ori Party, which is supposed to be talking about the future, is harking back to the past all the time. Its members are always whingeing, always grizzling, and always moaning. Here is an opportunity for M\u0101ori in particular to actually get decent security in retirement and the M\u0101ori Party members are thumbing their noses at it. I think it is ridiculous. Security in retirement is a critical thing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000326\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003EThe other critical thing KiwiSaver does is reduce consumption. It takes pressure off inflation, and therefore takes pressure off interest rates, which is a good thing for those people who are looking to try, for example, to own their own homes. So that is a good thing, as well. Of course, the final thing KiwiSaver does is that it starts to create and generate a pool of local investment capital that business can use instead of constantly going offshore and thereby picking up the problems of the exchange and interest-rate risks that are associated with that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000327\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003ENo one disagrees with the idea that we need better savings; I have not heard anyone say that. But everyone says: \u201CYou should not do it that way; you should do it some other way.\u201D Well, here is the way that the majority of us on the Finance and Expenditure Committee thought was the best way and I think it has huge support across New Zealand\u2014as the chair of our select committee went on to say during his speech. The M\u0101ori Party asks why we did not just phase something in and says that 4 percent is too high. Of course, the select committee did come up with some changes. We said that, in the end, the minimum contribution from the employee up until 1 April 2010 should be 2 percent and so should the employer minimum contribution. It is a phase-in period where the total contribution will be 4 percent. That is up to 2010. By the next year, it will be three plus three\u20143 percent from the employer and 3 percent from the employee\u2014making the contribution 6 percent, and phasing in the total contribution after 2011 to four plus four, or 8 percent. So we did listen to a lot of the submissions and brought in some transition periods, and that is a good thing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000328\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003EJust finally, I return once again to the tax credit for research and development. The Hon Dr Lockwood Smith says that this tax credit does not apply to Crown research institutes that enter into partnerships or joint ventures with private companies. That is not actually true; it appears that way on the surface. Dr Smith acknowledges that tax credits could not be applied automatically to Crown research institutes because they have already been Government-funded. People came to the committee and said we could not allow Crown research institutes to double-dip. We could not put a whole pile of tax money into them on the one hand and then give them round the back door a tax credit. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000329\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003ESo the argument settled on what happens if a Crown research institute enters into a joint venture with a private company. That is a fair issue. The point is that most of those joint ventures are fifty-fifty arrangements. If they are fifty-fifty arrangements, then the tax credit does not apply to that joint venture. But if the joint venture is restructured so that the private sector has 51 percent ownership, then it can get the tax credit. So the Crown research institute has to work out that if it wants the tax credit, it has to lose some of the control\u2014it is as simple as that. Crown research institutes can get the tax credit if they are prepared to restructure themselves in the interest of the joint venture. That was ultimately the point that was made at the select committee and I do not think it is right for Dr Smith to say that somehow this will kill off these joint venture arrangements. It will only kill them off if the joint venture or the partnership cannot restructure\u2014which is what my recommendation to those joint ventures would be, if they want to take advantage of that tax credit. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000330\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003EIn conclusion, this is thoroughly good legislation. It is classic, good Labour-led legislation that promotes savings, promotes investment in research and development, and also promotes business confidence by reducing the company tax rate. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000331\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003EI end where I began. Here is an opportunity for National to vote for tax reductions for business and it decides that it will vote against them. The National Party members will vote against a cut in the company tax rate from 33 percent to 30 percent. People may ask why National members would do that. I say to people in business that they need to be able to talk to their local National member of Parliament and ask him or her: \u201CHere was the opportunity to vote for a cut in company tax, which you have been talking about for years, and you voted against it. Why was that?\u201D I can tell members that I was on the select committee and I am still at a loss as to understanding that. It is one of the great National mysteries of all time, like the mysteries associated with such things as climate change and other matters that National seems to be flip-flopping on. The second issue is that National members are voting against the research and development tax credit, when they, and the private sector, have been talking about it for years. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000332\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003EThe final thing I say is that when it comes to the election next year, voters need to look at National\u2019s approach to KiwiSaver, because its members have been very, very vague on that. The book called The Hollow Men states: \u201CBe vague going into the election\u201D. I say to the New Zealand public, who have overwhelmingly endorsed KiwiSaver, that if they vote National, that KiwiSaver programme is in peril. It is in peril because National will fiddle with it and will ultimately get rid of it. It says in that book that National will say one thing during the election campaign and do something different afterwards. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000333\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ba6fde7e-93f4-4636-9ce2-02c07007973a\u0022\u003EI think this is great legislation and it is unbelievable that National is voting against it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223f670c71-9be5-4a7e-a197-0590da759280\u0022 data-id=\u00224588a5e5a5e84a67a9ca66355384b732\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000334\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223f670c71-9be5-4a7e-a197-0590da759280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224588a5e5a5e84a67a9ca66355384b732\u0022\u003ETIM GROSER (National):\u003C/span\u003E The member who has just spoken, the Hon Mr Swain, is, of course, far too experienced a parliamentarian to believe a word of what he has just said. If that had come from certain other members of the Government, whom I will not mention, we might accuse them of naivety, but we will not accuse Mr Swain of that. Mr Swain has been around here long enough to know that what he said is completely and totally implausible. It would be hard to write up a bill of these dimensions that did not contain individual bits that every single party in this House would support\u2014and this bill is no exception to that. But we are talking about the centrepiece of this Government\u2019s economic strategy\u2014the single most important aspect of being in Government, and the single most important responsibility of being on the Treasury benches. The National Party is looking for some policy coherence in the last three terms of this Government; this bill does not give that policy coherence. That is why the National Party opposes this bill. Mr Swain knows that perfectly well. Amidst the barrage of adjectives from him about being outraged, amazed, and whatever you will, he knows that that is the central reality. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000335\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223f670c71-9be5-4a7e-a197-0590da759280\u0022\u003EWhen I got hold of this massive bill, the old saying \u201CBrevity is the soul of wit.\u201D came to my mind. Members who remember the Shakespearean origins of that saying, which is from Hamlet, will know that the word \u201Cwit\u201D in Old English means wisdom. If it was translated into modern English, that well-known saying would be \u201CBrevity is the essence of wisdom.\u201D I will confine my comments to one small passage in this entire bill that I think personifies the very saying \u201CBrevity is the soul of wit.\u201D, and it is the minority view of the National Party. It is only 26 words long, and I will quote the minority view of the National Party: \u201CThe National Party recognises that the company tax rates will be dropping to 30 percent,\u201D\u2014exactly the point I made before, I say to Mr Swain\u2014\u201Cbut we believe that personal income tax rates should also be lowered.\u201D I do not think, in the 2 years that I have been here, that I have ever seen a minority report that does these two things: first, express itself in the briefest possible form, and, second, nail the essence of the reason why the National Party is opposing a taxation bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000336\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223f670c71-9be5-4a7e-a197-0590da759280\u0022\u003EWe know perfectly well, as we have been told this by the Prime Minister, that next year, after the Government has built up the kitty, there will be some political manipulation of the very issue addressed by the National Party in its minority report. My best bet is that the Government will make some adjustment to the brackets in order to take some account of bracket creep, after having failed to recognise the essence of the problem for 7 or 8 years to this date. But that will not represent a road to Damascus conversion on the part of Dr Cullen. Dr Cullen, the great surplus denier, has had no conversion on this particular road. Dr Cullen has recognised the need to manipulate the taxation regime of this country, which is central to the functioning of a market economy, for political ends. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000337\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223f670c71-9be5-4a7e-a197-0590da759280\u0022\u003EI imagine that few New Zealanders will be interested in listening to a parliamentary debate on this taxation bill, but I suspect many New Zealanders are probably now starting to turn up their dials in order to listen to the debate on the next bill that will follow this one, which is on a bill of vital constitutional importance to this country. To those New Zealanders who are starting to tune in, let me just make this point: in a sense, the two bills are linked. After 8 years of failed economic stewardship of this country, the next move by this Labour-led Government is to shift the goalposts politically, and to cover up the failure of its economic stewardship. We know that the chickens are finally coming home to roost. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000338\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223f670c71-9be5-4a7e-a197-0590da759280\u0022\u003EThere was so much wind in the sails of the New Zealand economy when this Government took over in the year 2000. In the previous calendar year the growth rate had been 4.3 percent. The growth rate in labour productivity in the 3 years prior to the Government coming into office averaged 3.5 percent\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000339\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270dd644d-8bcf-40dc-998a-887d62d24a76\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba9882e0300a44aab5ac223aaa3f3bf5\u0022\u003EMoana Mackey\u003C/span\u003E: You had 21 percent unemployment!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000340\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223f670c71-9be5-4a7e-a197-0590da759280\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002236a40ca89c7142a3beb02bfd711817fb\u0022\u003ETIM GROSER\u003C/span\u003E: I am very glad that the member over there mentions unemployment, because unemployment fell from 11.6 percent in 1991 to 6 percent in 1999. That rate, powered by the productivity growth, has continued to fall in the subsequent years. M\u0101ori unemployment had fallen from 23 percent in 1991 to around 10 percent by the time this Government took office. So strong was the wind in the sails of the New Zealand economy that the death by a thousand cuts took, essentially, 5 years to show up. That is what the next bill is intended to address. In that sense, these two bills are linked. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000341\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223f670c71-9be5-4a7e-a197-0590da759280\u0022\u003EWhat has happened since then is that the growth rate has slumped and productivity has tanked, from a high of 3.5 percent. That growth rate was stellar, by the way; it was slightly higher than Australia\u2019s labour productivity, which is powering a 5 percent underlying growth rate in Australia, as we have gone down to 2 percent. It is no wonder that Paul Krugman has said \u201CProductivity growth isn\u2019t everything, but in the long run it\u2019s almost everything.\u201D That is the whole key to the economic failure of this Government, and its failure to put in place a coherent taxation policy is absolutely central to those chickens coming home to roost. It is no wonder David Skilling said nearly 3 years ago: \u201CNew Zealand is not facing a crisis in the literal sense. Failure to act is unlikely to lead to terrible outcomes in the short term, but New Zealand\u2019s economic platform is gradually subsiding.\u201D How right he was, even though at the time of his saying that, nearly 3 years ago, the evidence was not really there. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000342\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223f670c71-9be5-4a7e-a197-0590da759280\u0022\u003EWe have seen a massive, massive explosion in the tax take. In the first 5 to 6 years of this Government we have seen a $20 billion increase in total tax. This morning I downloaded OECD statistics from October 2007 that counted all taxes\u2014that is, State, provincial, and local taxes. In Australia the figure was 30.9 percent of GDP in 2005, and in New Zealand the figure was 37.8 percent. This bill does nothing to address the lack of a coherent strategy that is behind that problem\u2014that crisis\u2014facing this country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000343\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223f670c71-9be5-4a7e-a197-0590da759280\u0022\u003EUnfortunately for New Zealand, there is worse to come. The people of Australia have just elected Kevin Rudd as their Prime Minister. We know that the Australian Labor Party, in contrast with today\u2019s New Zealand Labour Party, is a much more politically mature outfit. When we look at the first statements of Prime Minister Rudd and contrast them with the first statements of Prime Minister Clark, we see a remarkable difference in tone, in rhetoric, and in intent. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has in the last few days talked extensively about continuing the process of microeconomic reform. Has he dumped on his predecessors by referring to their policies\u2014the Keating/Hawke policies\u2014as failed policies of the past, as Prime Minister Clark did with regard to her predecessors in 2000? Oh no; quite contrary to that, he has absolutely endorsed those policies. Three or 4 days ago, on the ABC programme AM, one of the prime current affairs programmes in Australia, Prime Minister Rudd said: \u201CI think there\u2019s a lot of enthusiasm there for us embracing a reform agenda because if you cease reforming this economy, you start to strangle long-term productivity growth.\u201D That is a very interesting statement. First of all, politically, he is not talking about the failed policies of the past; he is accepting economic reality. He describes himself as an economic conservative. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000344\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223f670c71-9be5-4a7e-a197-0590da759280\u0022\u003EI say to Mr Swain that if we had had some more mature leadership from this Government over the last 6 years, then perhaps today we would indeed see a bill that we could support.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222537bf02a51e45bc90d8e3700a2c46cf\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments recommended by the Finance and Expenditure Committee by majority be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; M\u0101ori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 50\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbstentions 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EQuestion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022d97179ade8a7474b89164b06ad8221d9\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the Taxation (Annual Rates, Business Taxation, KiwiSaver, and Remedial Matters) Bill be now read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; M\u0101ori Party 4; United Future 2; Progressive 1; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 50\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 2.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAbstentions 6\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EGreen Party 6.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EBill read a second time.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n    \u003Cdiv class=\u0022HpsHansard\u0022\u003E\n      \u003Cp\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsProceedingHeading\u0022\u003EBills\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000345\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubjectHeading\u0022 id=\u00221b893a1f90ea42b89b88906e17c10fb8\u0022\u003EElectoral Finance Bill\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000346\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002247629fa951a34a4c8a0f774d3112d0da\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000347\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002281fce6010bec4db08aaabc652c00c3fc\u0022\u003EPart 1  Preliminary provisions\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u002258a4c2a8795c49e3864777b1f860a1b8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000348\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002258a4c2a8795c49e3864777b1f860a1b8\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E The Government welcomes the Committee of the whole House debate on the Electoral Finance Bill, and makes the observation that there has been a lengthy period of consultation and discussion on it. There have been many changes, and the bill has been worked through very thoroughly. The Justice and Electoral Committee received 575 submissions. It heard 101 submissions, and it heard many of those submissions over a period of 6 weeks. On the basis of that, the committee has made some significant changes, and this legislation will be all the better for it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000349\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe second comment I would like to make as a preliminary to this debate, which I think will be quite extensive, is that I welcomed the comments made by the Hon Bill English this morning on radio that the National Party would not be looking to filibuster in this debate, and would be looking to move constructive amendments. The Government side of the Chamber has taken the amendments proposed by Chris Finlayson and worked thoroughly through them. We will go through each of those amendments constructively, and we will consider them. Where we feel there is merit for them we will support them, and where we feel there is no merit for them we will not support them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000350\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe third point I would like to make about this bill\u2014and let us not forget the issue here\u2014is that the genesis of this bill is in the 2005 general election. To make just one point about it, I say that, interestingly, someone in the Hastings area whom I know quite well collects pamphlets from elections. He has collected pamphlets from 1972 all the way through to 2005. He observed to me that he had a pile of pamphlets from the 2005 election that was twice as high as it was for every other election cumulatively. All the pamphlets that went into his letterbox from the 1972, 1975, 1978, 1981, 1984, 1987, 1990, 1993, 1996, 1999, and 2002 elections were half the size of the number of pamphlets that came into his letterbox in 2005. He wondered why that was. The reason for that became very clear with the publication of The Hollow Men. That book made it very clear what was going on: the Exclusive Brethren was funding the National Party\u2019s campaign, and it was doing so covertly.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000351\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe essence of this bill is to identify those weaknesses in our electoral law that have been exploited. Even John Key admits that the law is deficient. The Electoral Act does not have any restrictions in the actions of third parties. As a candidate I was restricted to a certain amount of money that I could spend. My party was restricted to spending a certain amount of money, but third parties had none of those restrictions. The National Party knew that and exploited that loophole. It secretively\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000352\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022bd89e7bb8f9846fda793048087c49f33\u0022\u003EChristopher Finlayson\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. The Minister really does need to show how this immature diatribe is related to Part 1, which deals with preliminary provisions. I know he is not the smartest person in the Chamber, but he needs to be told that we are dealing with preliminary provisions that deal with definitions, appointments, and the listing of third parties, not Nicky Hager\u2019s book.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000353\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229712e2285f4e40b9ba77499a807f48ba\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I rule on that point, I remind members that there will be silence during points of order. The Minister is speaking to Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000354\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022312e3d796de84935ba291874ddacd119\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER\u003C/span\u003E: I want to make the point quite clear, and I thought the connection would have been made for the National Party, that this is about publishing. If members look at clause 4, they will find that it talks about publishing and broadcasting, and so on. I was trying to make the point very clearly that the National Party\u2019s opposition to this legislation stems from the 2005 election, when it colluded with the Exclusive Brethren to have substantial amounts of third-party literature put out.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000355\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe Hollow Men makes it very clear that the Exclusive Brethren went to the Chief Electoral Officer, David Henry, and said it was planning to spend $1.2 million on an election programme with the goal of getting votes for National. That information comes from an email that is quoted on page 26 of the book\u2014it is very, very clear. The National Party knew about that, and Richard Long, who writes\u2014supposedly independently\u2014for the Dominion Post was colluding in this process with the Exclusive Brethren. When Richard Long wrote to Mr Brash and Mr Brownlee, he told them, in answer to questions about \u201Cwhether they consulted us\u201D\u2014they being the Exclusive Brethren\u2014that they had agreed to say that \u201Cthey have advised all political parties.\u201D This was a conspiracy; of that there is no doubt.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000356\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThis bill does two things. First, it reflects the desire by all New Zealanders to see that the election campaign is fair. If people are going to give money to a political party, they want to know who the party is and how much it got\u2014not through the Waitemata Trust, and so on. So if the National Party opposes this bill, it is saying that it wants to continue the secret slush fund of money into its coffers. That is what it is saying.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000357\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe second thing about this bill is that it says that people who want to get involved in politics can do so, but they have to say who they are and what they are going to do. A very good example of that can be found in respect of the campaign for MMP. Peter Shirtcliffe said he opposed MMP. He raised lots of money and said: \u201CThis is me, I\u2019ve got my friends around here, and we\u2019re going to campaign against it.\u201D New Zealanders understood that and accepted it. The last election in 2005 was the first time that we did not see that, and this bill represents a change in our electoral law that is necessary to ensure that elections are fair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000358\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe Government has put down two Supplementary Order Papers. Supplementary Order Paper 162 contains some substantive amendments and Supplementary Order Paper 163 contains some technical amendments. I will turn, firstly, to Supplementary Order Paper 162. Members will find that in Part 1 we are changing the definition of \u201Cbroadcast\u201D in order to narrow that definition. We are proposing to delete clause 4(1)(i) relating to the definition of \u201Cpublish\u201D. That will make quite a significant difference, because that was the catch-all provision that was to bring to the notice of the public any other matter. There has been severe criticism of that provision. We have recognised that, and we are making the change so that the definition will be tighter. We are proposing to roll back the select committee\u2019s definition, which would have broadened the reach of this bill more than it should have been.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000359\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe second significant amendment in this part is to omit in clause 17(a)(i) the term \u201Cwrit day\u201D and substitute the words \u201Cthe 21st day before polling day\u201D. There was criticism of this particular date from the Electoral Commission and the Human Rights Commission, and for good reason: it was far too far out. We have now rolled it back to 21 days before polling day, which is 3 weeks before election day. If anybody wants to get involved in the political process, he or she has to register 3 weeks before the election day, say who he or she is, and say what he or she is going to do, so as to be open and honest. [Interruption] Tony Ryall is opposed to transparency, obviously, because he was the beneficiary of that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000360\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe purpose of this bill, to come back to it, is to ensure that New Zealanders have free and fair elections. As a candidate for an election, there is a cap on my spending. My party\u2019s spending for the election has a cap on it, as well. It is unrealistic to expect that third parties can run campaigns with limitless amounts of money, and to go and campaign for political parties as they did in the last election. There is no doubt about that, at all. I saw the pamphlets from the Exclusive Brethren, and I saw that they were in collusion with the National Party. Members should look at those pamphlets: \u201CChange the Government\u201D, they said. It was all done in collusion with the National Party. It was done to increase the National Party vote, and they were going to spend limitless amounts of money\u2014a minimum of $1.2 million\u2014to change the Government, without actually having to put anything on the National Party\u2019s vote.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000361\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe unions have advertised in the elections. There is no question about that. But the unions have always put their name on their pamphlets, and said who they were and what their purpose was. The National Party\u2019s friends did not do that at all, and they attempted to steal the last election by stealth and deception. This bill is going to say that that is not going to be the case. This bill is going to say: \u201CIf you\u2019re going to give money to any political party, you\u2019re going to have to say who you are, over a certain amount, so the public can identify who is giving the money and for what purpose.\u201D This bill is going to say: \u201CIf you\u2019re going to advertise in this election campaign, you\u2019re going to have to say who you are and identify yourself.\u201D New Zealanders feel that that is entirely fair and as it should be. This bill protects New Zealanders\u2019 rights to free and fair elections. This bill is going to regulate advertising, not speech, and it is going to control donations. Who can argue with that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000362\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EFreedom of speech is not necessarily the freedom to buy as much advertising as one can. I do not think there is any argument for putting a cap on candidates\u2019 spending, putting a cap on party spending, and leaving third parties completely unregulated when they behave as badly as they did in the last election. There were secret donations, secret addresses, and secret agendas, and it was all done in collusion with the National Party. That is the truth of it, and this Parliament will determine what will be fair rules for New Zealand at the next election.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022 data-id=\u0022905ed078c9a34785a5486019d7d92f2a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000363\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022905ed078c9a34785a5486019d7d92f2a\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY (Leader of the Opposition):\u003C/span\u003E I am going to do something that the Hon Rick Barker did not do, and that is address Part 1 of the Electoral Finance Bill. But before I do that, all I can say is that if Rick Barker is the standard of what it takes to be a Cabinet Minister in a Labour Government, it is no wonder its members need to change the Electoral Finance Bill to stop people competing with them. Rick Barker told us that this is a Government that is going to steamroller over 100 years of democracy in this country, on the back of a two-bit book written by Nicky Hager. This is the same Government that, when Nicky Hager wrote Seeds of Mistrust, nothing changed; absolutely nothing changed. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000364\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThis is what we know about the Electoral Finance Bill. It is a shambles. The Minister does not understand it. Labour MPs do not understand it. The Electoral Commission cannot understand it. Nobody understands this legislation. It is such a mess that the Labour Minister responsible for it has had to drop 150 adjustments in the Supplementary Order Paper before we even talk about the debate\u2014150 amendments have had to be tabled. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000365\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003ELet us talk about Part 1, which addresses the purpose of the bill. Any New Zealander who picks up the legislation will understand in a heartbeat that the purpose of the bill is what Rick Barker said before\u2014all of the partisan stuff we heard. The purpose of the bill is not to do what is written down. The purpose of the bill is as simple as this. It is to pass self-serving legislation that is designed to keep Labour in office. That is what the bill is about. It is not about democracy, freedom, and New Zealanders; it is about passing self-serving legislation to keep Labour in place. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000366\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThe second thing the bill is about is to funnel the largest amount of taxpayer money possible into the coffers of the Labour Party so its members can spend taxpayers\u2019 funds trying to buy an election. This is from people who come down to the Chamber and have the audacity to lecture the National Party about elections, when in election 2005 they spent $1.5 million in the last week, when their secretary wrote to the Electoral Commission and said they would include the spending of the pledge card in their electoral cap, even though they knew it was way over their cap. Not only did they steal the money from the taxpayers, but they broke the law, and now they are coming down here trying to lecture the National Party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000367\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EWhat they are doing today is setting up a gigantic slush fund of taxpayers\u2019 money so that they can use their accompanying legislation that they passed last week to make the equivalent of the pledge card a legal activity. What they will be doing in election 2008 is spending taxpayers\u2019 money, at the same time that they are telling taxpayers they cannot spend their own money. They wonder why they are so far down in the polls. Well, they have given up on ordinary New Zealanders, and ordinary New Zealanders know about it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000368\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThe third purpose of the bill is to use the gigantic spending budget of Government departments somehow to try to curry favour with New Zealanders. They know that, and that is why there is such politicisation of the public sector. Labour needs its stooges in the communications departments of those ministries so they can sign off on political advertising.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000369\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002218e5057a54dd4a0b97be4bb540154faf\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. The speaker did say that he was going to talk about Part 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000370\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d009c8cc63e74efe92387c8cf88ee1d8\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: I have given one warning, and I will give another one. When points of order are being heard, they will be heard in silence. Secondly, when the Committee Chair is trying to deal with points of order, they will be heard in silence, too. It just makes for proper order.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000371\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002278aae90203cf46c1953ee73a886841c3\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: It is no wonder it is a shambles. We are talking about the purpose of the bill, which is in Part 1, and the chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee does not even know what we are talking about. It is no wonder this legislation is a shambles. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000372\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EThe third purpose of the bill is to screw the scrum in favour of the Labour Party, because those members know that they lost 10 electorate seats in the last election. Rick Barker likes this legislation because it hurts him that Craig Foss cleaned his clock last time, in 2005, and he knows that his mate Russell Fairbrother might have won the selection in Napier for a seat he lost for the first time in 50 years and he might know that Nash had the signatory of Michael Cullen on his selection, but he is laughing because he is sitting over there, getting another opportunity to get dealt to in election 2008. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000373\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EI will give members a very interesting twist on that. This is what some people do not know. In 2002 the person who put up Russell Fairbrother was none other than Michael Cullen\u2019s wife, Anne Collins. In 2002 Anne Collins, Mrs Cullen, wanted him in office and in 2008 the Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand, Michael Cullen, wants him out of office. That is what that is all about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000374\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b2567d3e-a09c-47b4-bd50-2f5bb4049762\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225b0f189741c742c1bf660508cb6f6da8\u0022\u003ESue Moroney\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Madam Chairperson. The member said he was going to speak to Part 1. The content that he was just talking about had absolutely nothing to do with Part 1. I ask for relevance to this part of the bill.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000375\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fae7af0d-c48d-4dd4-88f3-928ccaa3a984\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d3a760b00ad6460eb94c2d0e0a57413f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley)\u003C/span\u003E: The member needs to come back to Part 1. The member is correct. I will give a third warning.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000376\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022422f60b089624425996f5c2eb7659666\u0022\u003EJOHN KEY\u003C/span\u003E: The purpose of this bill is quite clear; it is to suppress ordinary New Zealanders\u2019 freedom in democracy and in our elections. But that is the bit that cuts the Labour Party to the quick, because its members know that we are right. They know that the campaign the New Zealand Herald has been running is right. You see, even in the bill they refer to third parties, as if somehow they do not belong in elections in New Zealand. That is what this is about. The purpose of this bill is to attack democracy\u2014a democracy that has survived for over 100 years in New Zealand. We know that after this legislation New Zealanders will no longer be free. They are used to operating in a democracy in New Zealand where they are free to express themselves on political issues, they are free to criticise the Government, they are free to criticise the Opposition, they are free to promote policies they like and to protest against policies they do not like, and they are free to be part of a country whose core foundation is backed up by an open and transparent democracy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000377\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EOur healthy democracy does not just tolerate that sort of behaviour; it requires it. But under Labour that is all changing. The rights of ordinary New Zealanders no longer count. The rights of hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders who want to participate no longer count. Well, I have a message for the very out-of-touch Prime Minister of New Zealand: this bill cost her Minister his job. That is what happened; he is no longer here. And I will tell members this for nothing: this legislation will cost the Prime Minister of New Zealand her job in 2008. You see, she has gone\u2014she has gone. She lacks so much confidence now about winning this election on a fair and even basis that she does not care about toughing out, day after day, the front pages of the New Zealand Herald and every editorial around the country. The Labour caucus lacks so much confidence that Labour will win, without screwing the scrum, that it is closing its eyes and doing it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000378\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EIf any\u2014any\u2014part of the Labour Party thinks that this is going away in 2008, I tell them that it is not. New Zealanders are sick of being told what to do, they are sick of having Labour control every part of their lives, and they are sick of being told whether they can participate in an election. I say to Labour members that they should pick up the New Zealand Herald, read the editorial, and for once in their lives recognise that they are not bigger than the people of New Zealand. Those members have a chance to vote this legislation down; they have a chance to preserve their reputations, albeit they are badly tarnished and badly in tatters. But I will make the prediction that they will not do that, because they lack the confidence to win an election when it is run under the old basis and when electoral law was debated evenly across Parliament. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000379\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220083bcaa-f44d-4b70-97de-d091a209b88c\u0022\u003EI make this promise to New Zealanders: when Labour is gone at the end of 2008, the first thing National will do is repeal this legislation. It is gone\u2014it is gone. And we will not indulge ourselves in the kind of behaviour we have seen from the Labour Party where we write self-serving legislation. We will consult, we will actually act in the best interests of New Zealand, and we will not use Nicky Hager and his second-rate book as some sort of compass for the way in which New Zealand\u2019s democracy should be run. That is a disgrace, and we all know it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022 data-id=\u00224622a9e09efb4d89923cc09d7d4adfa5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000380\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224622a9e09efb4d89923cc09d7d4adfa5\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E Nicky Hager did not write any book; he compiled a list of emails and correspondence, all handwritten by the National Party, and then he assembled it in a book\u2014and none of those members can deny that. I understand the National Party\u2019s position. It is that there is no more democracy in New Zealand, no more freedom in New Zealand\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000381\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255ed57b1f35c4657a56e15d487834747\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry to interrupt the member, but I remind the members on my left that they may like to look at Speakers\u2019 ruling 57/3. Interjections are to be \u201Crare and reasonable\u201D, \u201Crelevant\u201D and restrained. If members wish to make a contribution to the debate, they can do so with a 5-minute speech. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000382\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225d1cf93bdc934e588bc108a757ff1039\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS\u003C/span\u003E: According to the National Party there is no more freedom in New Zealand, and no more democracy. People cannot exercise their right to speak, and they cannot vote. That is what National has argued, alongside the New Zealand Herald, that brilliant bastion of democracy and freedom, that tremendous watchdog of the people, which every now and again, every two decades, finds an issue and surfaces. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000383\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EThe truth is that National claims that the bill prevents free speech, except that those members cannot tell us which person in New Zealand is not free to speak now. I ask them please to tell me which New Zealander is denied free speech right now. Of course, they cannot tell us that, because no New Zealander has been denied free speech by this legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000384\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EThe second thing is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000385\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ac169d29-4849-42c2-a4a7-f344fd416503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c2441f905de74c138e48a78871b73085\u0022\u003EDr the Hon Lockwood Smith\u003C/span\u003E: The bill\u2019s not through yet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000386\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227807ca0f62aa454584ba203257b15786\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS\u003C/span\u003E: OK, OK! Let us imagine it is 1 January and the bill is through\u2014because it will be through\u2014so can members tell me now which New Zealander on that date will be denied free speech? You see, they cannot name one person, yet they talk about the New Zealand Herald\u2019s coverage of the bill and about a campaign when 5,000 people marched up Queen Street. For goodness\u2019 sake! I have had more people in one of my audiences than that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000387\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002286e7f629d14e4e1eb247bb92136dc74d\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: When was that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000388\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226701b628e3584e5e9867cb233083df63\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014and I did not get carried away as a result of that. But there are 5,000 people, and all of a sudden we have the difference between the free world and the Iron Curtain. It is extraordinary! Tau wants to know when that audience was. It was when we took him, hopeless though he was, and put him in Parliament. It was when he was hopeless and we put him in Parliament. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000389\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EYou know, which New Zealander, on 1 January 2008\u2014[Interruption]; no, members should answer the question\u2014or in this coming election, will not be able to have his or her say? I ask members to name one. Well, they cannot.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000390\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022296558e1bdc748cfa23568c56d93f38a\u0022\u003EJohn Carter\u003C/span\u003E: Garth McVicar.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000391\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225a78515ec5bb4c50b8bdb6b34ebfd117\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS\u003C/span\u003E: Garth McVicar can campaign, and we will campaign alongside him, unlike the \u201Csoft on law and order\u201D boys and unlike the convenient \u201Cwe\u2019re your friend tomorrow\u201D boys. Ron Mark of New Zealand First and Winston Peters will be campaigning with Garth McVicar, because what we say, we mean. And will Garth be able to vote? Of course he will. Will he be able to advertise? Of course he will. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000392\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EThe next question is this\u2014[Interruption] With that member it is \u201CSir\u201D, OK? It is not \u201CWinston\u201D to him; it is \u201CSir\u201D\u2014OK? He has been here only 5 minutes, so he should learn some respect. You see, this bill ensures that we will know who is campaigning and participating at the next election\u2014not some shadowy figures like the Exclusive Brethren, and not some group that does not want anyone to know about its registered office, its place of domicile, its name, or, above all, what it paid over to the National Party and why it did so. No one pays a million dollars to a political party without asking for something. Members should ask Michael Fay about that. He paid the National Party a million dollars, did he not? And this was the deal: \u201CYou bail me out from the BNZ and you get me into State asset sales, and I will get a return of three to one. I will put on that million dollars for you, and I will get, by the freedom of policies, $300 for every dollar I put down.\u201D That is National; that is its record. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000393\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EThose ignoramuses can scream and shout, but I know about that. I was there, and I saw what was done. I saw how National was prepared to compromise some hard-working lady down in Gore or some poor guy in Kait\u0101ia, who were making cakes, organising hoedowns, and picking up membership for the National Party. But National was prepared to put all those people aside for the sake of the few or the very few\u2014or, as Roosevelt put it, those over-mighty subjects. That is why the National Party\u2014no, no, Mr Chairman; I am speaking to clause 3(d) of this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000394\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c200176566f844028d428f1eccd00adc\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Chairman\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000395\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022dc46cc7f2a594e6abb6ab54d5a828cff\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS\u003C/span\u003E: I gave him 10 minutes\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000396\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223d07e68e1c2349e58bba820fcadec9ee\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The member\u2019s time has expired.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022 data-id=\u002240aa4c121ca84d56b6cfbaf3488b78f2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000397\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002240aa4c121ca84d56b6cfbaf3488b78f2\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. With regard to Mr Hide, I gave the National Party guy 10 minutes. Surely he could have the courtesy to give me the same? That is what fairness looks like in my book. Otherwise, if he does it there, that is fine; it will never happen again for those guys. They will never extend that\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000398\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022575a190de7254be49e1cc859bcbeab5d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Will the member please be seated. I have not called anybody yet. Mr Peters, are you seeking another call?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000399\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225313f6c63ab24e68bd3bb71c6b7e0cb5\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS\u003C/span\u003E: Yes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000400\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225b760767aa2c4936ac4fc5de18baf94e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I then call the Rt Hon Winston Peters.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000401\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b6c01e7c00844ec0a37dace5b55d1ad7\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS\u003C/span\u003E: Do members see what happened there? Even though we gave the National Party guy a fair go, his cohort was not prepared to give us one. How do members like that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000402\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002212a0fe8ab11c435a9847bc2f1a14a14e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I am sorry to interrupt the Minister, but a number of members are out of their regular seats. Members cannot move in order to facilitate interjection. I have noted that several members who are interjecting are out of their regular seats, and I have nodded to them.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000403\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224e77d0a31cad4b07b4c5e074d2d103fa\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS\u003C/span\u003E: They are delicate little flowers. They are delicate little flowers when the truth comes out. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EBut how many people are actually being affected by this legislation? Let me tell members that 56 individuals or trusts, according to the 2005 election figures, will be affected by this legislation\u2014not millions or thousands. Going on the 2005 figures, 56 individuals or trusts will be affected by this legislation. And the National members want us to read the New Zealand Herald editorial\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000405\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002251dfea20-2244-4fc7-bd7d-ebf7a98580e1\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022aa4a1f8a724f4b87b7ddcc0cb27236a0\u0022\u003EHon Tau Henare\u003C/span\u003E: Pay it back, mate!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000406\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d5e24aad003740cbbdab7319dd9cd9ba\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS\u003C/span\u003E: The member should not worry; it is organised. What about the GST? Is that paid back? Is the GST firmly paid back? Is the GST offence acknowledged? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000407\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EThe New Zealand Herald wants us to follow its view of a fair go in democracy. Do members recall the election campaign in 1993, when one political party was shut out from advertising on radio or television on pain of paying $100,000 on each and every occasion that it did so? Who organised that? The National Government did that. Did the New Zealand Herald run a campaign about that? Did it write one word about it? No! That is the kind of hypocrite it is, because it is foreign-owned. And it had better get one thing straight: its foreign ownership will not run the 2008 campaign.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000408\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002216a2510681e440b781ed32348e38bd7a\u0022\u003ERodney Hide\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. This is a robust debate, but I do not think it is acceptable that a member accuse another party first of all of being a hypocrite, but then more particularly of being foreign-owned.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000409\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022571deb51df6d477ea57c95c4c2da22c2\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I did not take it as being that. I understood that Mr Peters was referring to the New Zealand Herald when he made that remark.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000410\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a11e5f210fb1474d9cadc3b4cb4c4882\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS\u003C/span\u003E: Nothing could be more apt. It is true. Back in 1993 the New Zealand Herald would not waste a muscle or raise a finger; it said nothing about it. But that is all OK, because, you see, the New Zealand Herald\u2014a foreign-owned media company\u2014thinks it is going to organise the 2008 election from abroad. It thought so in 2005. The reason it was so mad post-election night was that it had just blown it, again. The people who sit in the boardroom of the New Zealand Herald office think that because they are from a newspaper, they will run the 2008 election. Well, I have news for them. It is all bad, and it is also based on the past. Members should look at clause 3(d) of the bill, which is about transparency. They do not need to show me the bill; I know what I am talking about. The point here is about the number of New Zealanders who are affected by this legislation. Only 56 trusts or private individuals are affected by it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000411\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EI have the National Party gifting list here. It is total deceit, of course; it is not true. The National Party\u2019s problem is that it finds it very hard\u2014as every kid in primary school will tell us\u2014to fit $10 million into $2.4 million. It finds it very hard to fit $10 million into $2.4 million, which is the campaign cap. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000412\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EThe New Zealand Herald did not tell the public this, but in the 2005 election campaign the National Party had spent all its money before the 3-month period. National Party members are screaming now, because apparently they cannot run an 11-month campaign. I do not know about Mr Key\u2019s predecessors, but if he wants to lead a political party he has to have stamina. He cannot go out like a show pony for 1, 2, or 3 months; he has to go out for the whole 2008 period. On 1 January the campaign starts. Mr Key is either up to it or he is not. Either he has the energy, the drive, and the stamina or he does not, but he should not ask the rest of us to stay home for 9 months and then turn up. The campaign period we are asked to have is no different from that in the UK. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000413\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EThose members\u2019 arguments are humbug arguments, and I ask them please not to tell me again that people died for what they are talking about. Men and women died in the wars. Men and women from New Zealand died in the world wars so that their country would not be run from outside, so that it would not be governed from outside, and so that elections would not be organised from outside. That is why they died, so let us not hear the hypocrisy from the National Party members one more time that somehow calling on the sacrifice of the dead gives some colour of right to their spurious arguments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000414\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EEvery New Zealander who wants to vote in 2008 can vote. Every New Zealander who wants to campaign in 2008 can campaign. Every New Zealander who wants to take out advertising in 2008 can do so, except that there will be some rules against those people who think\u2014and this has been demonstrated abroad\u2014that money can buy elections. There used to be a party once that believed in that. Sadly, it no longer does. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000415\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003EI raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Surely the kind of barrage that came from Mr Henare, who yelled out things like \u201CSit down!\u201D\u2014which, although it has no point to the argument, is probably the most intellectual thing he has said all day\u2014is not really the standard of intervention that we should have in this Chamber. If members want to interject, their interjections should be rare and reasonable. But a barrage about paying the money back, when, frankly, I actually spent more money on the National Party than all of its members put together\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000416\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022be2a7b3ea5a14beaad4b2c659e6974ce\u0022\u003EHon Members\u003C/span\u003E: Aw!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000417\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022528151f354364c639eab2eb45869e5f6\u0022\u003ERt Hon WINSTON PETERS\u003C/span\u003E: Oh, yes, I did. Those members are just takers. Doug and I were givers. I am saying that if that is the best they can do, then they should be asked to leave the Chamber, because the debate should be conducted in such a way that people can actually hear it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000418\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a69363a821944737ade1af9726473212\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I just say that sometimes directing a series of questions across the Chamber actually invites interjection, as well.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022 data-id=\u0022593719419b054951add55f77c3ad4452\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000419\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022593719419b054951add55f77c3ad4452\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE (Leader\u2014ACT):\u003C/span\u003E Mr Peters and Mr Barker have shown us, very clearly, what is wrong with this bill and what is wrong with the process by which we are passing it. First of all, elections, and the rules that govern our democracy, are not something that we in Parliament own. They do not belong to us; nor should they be something that we control and direct. Sadly, this is what is happening with this Electoral Finance Bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000420\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003ESecond, to the extent that we are to have these rules, we would expect not only that the public of New Zealand would be involved in their formation, with an independent body of wise people, away from the hurly-burly of politics, giving us advice, but also that there would be multiparty involvement and concurrence with the broad structure of the way the rules of an election should be run. Mr Barker and Mr Peters showed us that the genesis of this bill, the process by which it has been developed, and now the process by which it is to be passed, are mired deeply in partisan politics. What we heard from Mr Barker, the Minister in the chair, was just a long diatribe against the National Party, which leads everyone to the conclusion\u2014which is obvious from the bill\u2014that this bill is not about a fair election but about an attack by one political party on another. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000421\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EWhy would the Minister in the chair not stand up and defend this bill on its merits, rather than attack a particular party? It is the people of New Zealand who will judge the political parties; it should not be the Minister in the chair passing an Electoral Finance Bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000422\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EAll Mr Peters could do was to reinforce that view. It was not about how to conduct a fair and proper election in a modern democracy; it was all about how bad the National Party is, and that this bill is somehow designed to put down the National Party. That is not the point of what we should be doing in this House with an Electoral Finance Bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000423\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EWe have also seen from Mr Barker what else is wrong with this bill. We are in the last 2 weeks of this sitting of Parliament, before an election year, debating a bill that has been hastily cobbled together, a bill that the public do not want and on which they have not had a say. This bill has been radically changed from the bill as it first appeared, because it was such a dog. It is still a dog, and now the Minister is bringing in a raft of further amendments. Is that any way to run a democracy in an open and free society? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000424\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EI say to the Minister, to the Prime Minister with respect, to Mr Peters, and to the Green Party, that that cannot be the case. I say to the Minister and to the Prime Minister that if they will not listen to the ACT party or particularly the National Party, then they should listen to what the people are saying about this bill. I know that Mr Peters thinks that all the news media of New Zealand are somehow part of a foreign-owned conspiracy against himself, and that all around the world they sit conspiring to stop Mr Peters, and that somehow Audrey Young is a puppet of the corporate boardrooms around the world. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000425\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EWe should listen to what the media are saying. We have had not just the New Zealand Herald stating that this bill is a dog. We have had every newspaper in the country say that the bill is a dog. We have had the Dominion Post state: \u201CIt fails to promote participation in parliamentary democracy \u2026 it is so defective and incoherent as to be irredeemable and should be withdrawn.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000426\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232de75f3fa8a44a2a695d5b6734e633c\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: Who owns them?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000427\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002202e7d8aa6b3f454c90c4811efd54b403\u0022\u003ERODNEY HIDE\u003C/span\u003E: Mr Peters has had his chance. We know that everything and everyone who disagrees with him is a conspiracy against the world. He can have that view, and I am happy that he is entitled to it, but that sort of paranoia is more fitting to a psychiatrist\u2019s couch than this Chamber in debating an important bill like this. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000428\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EWe had the Christchurch Press stating that the bill \u201Cremains a botched and misconceived proposal that should be scrapped and started again.\u201D We had the Sunday Star-Times stating that Labour must \u201Cscrap the bill\u201D. We had the Hawkes Bay Today stating that it is \u201Ca Byzantine contraption to kneecap political opponents.\u201D We had the Otago Daily Times stating that \u201Ca cobbled-together, self-serving compilation giving Big Brother control of all private political funding in an election year is not the means to achieve fairness.\u201D Then we had the Waikato Times stating that it is \u201Ca flawed bill steeped in controversy. Preferably, they should scrap it and start again.\u201D I say \u201Camen\u201D to that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000429\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EIf we look at the purpose clause, not one of the purposes is advanced by this bill. Demonstrably this bill puts us further away from achieving each and every one of these purposes. I would have thought that every one of us in this Parliament, as New Zealanders and as elected parliamentarians, would have an interest in elections that are fair and democratic, but, more particularly, that give all Zealanders a right to have their say, even when we disagree with them. Is that not the point? We do not have to agree with the Brethren, but do we not defend their right to have their say? Do we not in this Parliament defend their right to spend their own money to have their say? Is it any wonder, in the climate of fear that is developing in New Zealand, that private citizens who do want to have a say think twice before putting their name out there when they express their political view, for fear of attack and reprisal? Can one not do that in a free society? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000430\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EI say to Mr Peters that all citizens who want to spend some of their hard-earned money expressing their political view, one year in three, will be affected by this bill, then every New Zealander is affected. He asked who was affected, and that is the answer. All citizens who want to have a political say and spend some of their hard-earned money to have that say will be affected by this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000431\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EThat is why the ACT party opposes this bill. I have to say we were very pleased to hear John Key say that one of the first things a National Government would do on assuming office would be to repeal this legislation, because it is a dog. I say that also to Mr Peters. This bill has to be defeated, it has to go, and I am afraid to say that Prime Minister Helen Clark, who has been a Prime Minister who has been in touch with New Zealanders on many, many issues and has been a Prime Minister able to turn the ship of State around when she gets offside with public opinion, is out of touch with what people are saying on this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000432\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bc1e9f65-e08b-4939-867c-22ef093e2a4e\u0022\u003EI say to Mr Peters: \u201CStand up for some principles that New Zealand First said that it was founded on.\u201D I say to the Greens: \u201CPlease support the right of all New Zealanders to express their political views and to spend their resources expressing those views.\u201D How can the great Green Party be opposed to that? Do we not live in a democracy where we rejoice that people differ on the political issues of the day, and that we do have disagreements? Why cannot people express that view, or will we all have to register with the Government and declare what we are doing, when we might not agree with the Government or support it? How ironic it is that we will be taxed to pay for Government propaganda but cannot spend the pittance that we are left with to express our own political views. This bill is a dog, it should go, and it will go; if it is passed by this Parliament, I am with John Key when he said he would repeal this bill, on taking office.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022 data-id=\u00224c2f42a6335f4990ad4586bd2bd8fb2c\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000433\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00224c2f42a6335f4990ad4586bd2bd8fb2c\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS (National\u2014Clevedon):\u003C/span\u003E When we look at the purpose of the Electoral Finance Bill we need to look no further than at young 16-year-old Simeon Brown of Manurewa, who took the time to email Chris Carter, Minister for Ethnic Affairs, to say that he thought the bill would stop people having their democratic say. And what did Chris Carter do? He emailed back: \u201CAre you an Exclusive Brethren?\u201D. Simeon Brown is not an Exclusive Brethren; the Exclusive Brethren apparently do not use email. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000434\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWhat would have happened if, in fact, Chris Carter had emailed back: \u201CAre you a Muslim?\u201D, \u201CAre you a member of al-Qaeda?\u201D, \u201CAre you a member of the Buddhist religion?\u201D, or \u201CAre you a member of New Zealand First?\u201D If he had said anything like that\u2014[Interruption] I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. The Minister in the chair, the Hon Rick Barker, should know that he should not be interrupting me from the chair. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000435\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ee5e739d9c004626b857e4af72e38601\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I might say that I reminded him of that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000436\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002266bff76b555945b9b85b1c3d2da70bab\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: Simeon Brown, aged 16, wrote back a very detailed email to Chris Carter. He came to my electorate office yesterday and gave me a copy of it. That email explained why he thought this bill was very bad, and he asked Mr Carter to explain his behaviour. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000437\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EMr Carter, the Minister for Ethnic Affairs, who would be the first to jump down anyone\u2019s throat for saying anything about any group that he might wish to associate himself with, said: \u201CWell, that is what I always say.\u201D, or words to that effect. He always asks whether someone is a member of the Exclusive Brethren. Now we have a Labour Minister of the Crown vilifying people because of their religion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000438\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002244db170eb84441338e68eca26a0fbd4b\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s not a religion; it\u2019s a cult.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000439\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002211529e9898cd421db7fe6ed5e38ef245\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: It has become an issue only because those people want there to be a change of Government. The previous member for Whanganui, Jill Pettis, says the Exclusive Brethren are not a religion; they are a cult. Let us just ask ourselves whether, if we used the words \u201CJew\u201D or \u201CMuslim\u201D, there would be a problem. Yes, there would. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000440\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWhen we look at the purpose clause, we find we need to look no further than that to see this bill is about closing down dissent that does not agree with the Labour Party and its poodles. That is what the bill is all about.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000441\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EI was one of the 5,000 members of the public who marched in Auckland on Saturday. I can tell the Labour members, who dismiss such marches, that it was not a march full of National Party people; they were people from completely across the board. It was not the \u201Crent a mob\u201D that the Labour Party normally turns up with for anything. They were good people who wanted to express their view. About 70 percent of them said that they had never marched for anything before.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00227d624fcb6faf47a19660a54c92e63990\u0022\u003ER Doug Woolerton\u003C/span\u003E: Grow up, for God\u2019s sake!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000443\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002217c4b597a78841b08e43252853718192\u0022\u003EJUDITH COLLINS\u003C/span\u003E: We hear from the member Doug Woolerton. He used to be a National Party member. He would once have thought that democracy was important\u2014and he has still not paid his bill, by the way\u2014and we would once have heard from him that that is actually what this issue is all about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000444\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWe need to look no further than the bill itself and particularly Part 1 of it, because that part is so riddled with errors that the Minister has lodged Supplementary Order Paper 163 with about 150 changes in it. One of the changes that my colleague Chris Finlayson is promoting is to clause 14. Clause 14(2) states\u2014and I read this directly from the bill\u2014\u201CThe following are ineligible to be a third party: (a) a party other than a non-contesting party: \u2026\u201D. What does that mean\u2014a party is not to be a third party other than a non-contesting party? It is absolute drivel! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000445\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EThen I thought that perhaps the Minister\u2019s Supplementary Order Paper 163 might have some clarification of that. Supplementary Order Paper 163, which the Minister has put forward, states with regard to clause 14: \u201CTo omit \u2018non-contesting party\u2019 \u2026 and substitute\u201D\u2014members guessed it\u2014\u201C\u00A0\u2018non-contesting party\u2019.\u201D So now we are to omit the words \u201Cnon-contesting party\u201D and substitute the words \u201Cnon-contesting party\u201D? I ask the members of the Committee who can read well to look at that amendment. They will see it states that the words \u201Cnon-contesting party\u201D are to be substituted for the words \u201Cnon-contesting party\u201D. I would ask what the Minister of Justice is supposed to be saying there. That is the same Minister who said we do not need to worry about what is in the law, because we can just use some common sense and, apparently, that will rule. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000446\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWell, I support the submission of my colleague Chris Finlayson that we should omit the words \u201Cother than a non-contesting party\u201D, because quite clearly a third party will not be a political party that is involved in the whole process, and we should not have to say that it is a non-contesting party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000447\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003EWe can go further on into the bill, and we would suggest that we omit clause 14(3), because that is all about non-contesting parties that are listed as third parties. Either they are political parties or they are not.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022 data-id=\u00229cf8342888014d97905b41b17db04f8d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000448\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229cf8342888014d97905b41b17db04f8d\u0022\u003ECHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E The main criticism of this part of the Electoral Finance Bill has clearly been that the definition of \u201Celection advertisement\u201D could have been interpreted to include issues-based advocacy, and would thus have regulated and effectively limited public participation in political life, which is the opposite of the goal of this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000449\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EI remind members that this Labour Government is the heir to the party in Government that enacted the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, and that the party of members opposite voted against that legislation. We are the party that upholds and values freedom of expression and this legislation gives real effect to that value, not just effect in form but also effect in substance. Accordingly, the Justice and Electoral Committee has recommended that the definition of \u201Celection advertisement\u201D be amended. It has been reviewed carefully in the committee, and the majority of the select committee\u2014that majority comprising Labour, Green, New Zealand First, and United Future members\u2014has recommended that it be changed. So clause 5(1)(a)(iii) is to be omitted, as was suggested by the Human Rights Commission amongst other bodies, including many non-governmental organisations that came before the committee. It is now abundantly clear that taking a stand on the issues will not fall under the definition of \u201Celection advertisement\u201D for the purpose of the legislation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000450\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003ELet us make this point perfectly clear: the bill does not limit anyone\u2019s right to comment on the issues. It is only where people seek to advocate for a vote for or against a candidate or a party or a combination that the law will intervene, and when it does so, it does so lightly. The requirements are simply that those who seek to participate in that way should do so openly rather than covertly, they should do so transparently, and they should do so subject to the very high expenditure cap of $120,000. That is an important point to have cleared up right from the start. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000451\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EThe original clause 10 has also been omitted. This related to the need for a candidate to appoint an auditor. This was seen to be a burden with no practical value. So here again we have proof of the select committee process working as it should. The submissions were heard on this point and the majority of the select committee agreed that there ought to be a recommendation to omit that provision. Accountability and transparency are still ensured for candidates, because they are required\u2014as they are now\u2014to file a return as to election expenses. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000452\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EAnother point that I draw the attention of the Committee of the whole House to is the eligibility criteria for membership of third parties. These have been revised. As long as a majority of the members are registered electors in respect of an unincorporated society, then third party registration is open, and no minimum age limit will apply. So any person who wishes to be involved in a third party and satisfies those eligibility criteria, which essentially include that there should be a majority of people onshore, can participate freely in the affairs of a third party. Any person involved in the administration of the affairs of a party or a candidate may not be listed as a third party. Again, this excludes the possibility of covert, undeclared conflicting interests or collusion between primary and third parties. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000453\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EAnother significant change that appears in this part is that the Electoral Commission will administer third party listing under clause 15 of the bill, and under clause 16 it will be empowered to prescribe an application form for the registration of third parties. I am very confident that this change will require all the necessary information for that process to be provided transparently so that people can know the true identity of third parties seeking to involve themselves directly in advocacy for political parties, candidates, or a combination of these. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000454\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002259e9efe2-6dea-4eeb-869a-ef5b3e48a5b5\u0022\u003EThis part of the bill is greatly improved as a result of the select committee process. Once again, freedom of expression is protected and preserved, as is the principle of one person, one vote, rather than one dollar, one vote.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022 data-id=\u002257f34e74cf1148458cf197fb071c5552\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000455\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002257f34e74cf1148458cf197fb071c5552\u0022\u003EMETIRIA TUREI (Green):\u003C/span\u003E T\u0113n\u0101 koe, Mr Chairman. So much hysteria about this bill has been propagated by National and the ACT party, and it is unfortunate because it is misleading members of the community. It is driving up the level of fear and concern amongst them unnecessarily, and it is propagating the view that somehow the right to spend money is the most important and crucial human right in our democracy. That is false, that is not the principle on which this country has been built, and it is a disgrace that those political parties are undertaking that kind of action. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000456\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EIt is quite interesting to note that the hysteria is being propagated by political parties with powerful financial backers, particularly ACT and National. You know, National benefited enormously from the loopholes in the law, as was evidenced at the last election. National ruthlessly and purposefully exploited those loopholes. One example, of course, was its active assistance with the Exclusive Brethren\u2019s campaign. It is neither here nor there that it was the Exclusive Brethren, as opposed to somebody else, but the National Party\u2019s campaign people talked to this other group and said: \u201CUse these kinds of words in your campaign and so will we, and we will then be able to run these two parallel campaigns together, but yours will not be caught under our spending cap. Ours will be, and we will be able to double the bang for our buck. We can double the use of our money by running this dodgy system with another group outside the political realm.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000457\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EThat was the loophole that was exposed, and that was the loophole that National exploited. Now it is being closed and we are hearing the hysteria from National members\u2014the hysteria\u2014as they say that they do not want that loophole closed. I am concerned about ACT\u2019s involvement in this, but I guess it comes from that side of the House. John Boscawen\u2014I think that is how one says his name; I am not quite sure\u2014is an ACT member and a member of the Business Roundtable. Clearly he is also an organiser of the marches in Auckland. Clearly, what is really important here is that he is using money as a campaign tool because that is the only way to try to drive up the fear in the community in order to get support. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000458\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EThis is not a community campaign; this is a money campaign, which this member of the Business Roundtable is using to try to get support to oppose this bill. There have been vast and very expensive ads in the newspaper. It is a classic example of the problems that we are trying to deal with here\u2014the fact that money can be used to mislead and frighten the community and drive it into a fury, when really what is needed is accurate information and a clear understanding of what the legislation does and what it is designed to protect. Frankly, this legislation is designed to protect our electoral system\u2014to protect it from the use of big money, to protect it from the cancer of corruption that is infecting our electoral system and can continue to infect our electoral system if we do not do something about it. It is a manipulation by National and by ACT of the communities and their very real concerns about human rights. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000459\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EIt is fantastic that our community is so concerned about human rights. We want them to be concerned about human rights; it is very, very important. But human rights are not to be relegated to the right to buy; that is not a fundamental human right. A fundamental human right is the right to express ourselves, to have the freedom of association; to be able to do the things we need to do to make good lives for ourselves, our families, and our communities. It is not a human right to buy. This is the whole focus of the National Party and the ACT party campaigns against this bill, and what John and all his work outside with the marchers is designed to do. It is using money to try to manipulate the community members\u2019 views and feelings so that they begin to see and attach the idea that one can use money, and that money and the right to buy is a fundamental human right. It is a pro-money campaign designed, in the end, to enable the buying of votes\u2014because that is what would happen if we end up not being able to get this bill through. They will then be able to use their vast resources to buy votes. This is what it comes down to. We must protect our electoral system from their doing that. It is part of the cancer of that corruption around buying votes that the right to spend money to gain influence is seen as somehow being honourable. That is what their campaign is doing, and what John Boscawen\u2019s campaign is doing\u2014it is saying to the public that the right to spend money to gain influence is an honourable thing to do. It is not honourable; it is a disgrace. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000460\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EOur whole democracy is built on the principle that people have the right to have a say, that they have the right to bring issues forward. It is part of the basic inheritance of our future generations and of the people who are here today that we are able to bring forward issues in our elections; democratically vote for representatives in this House based on the programme, the policies, and the principles that they bring here; and that this House is a representative place based on the needs of the community. It is not a place where influence should be bought. Those are not the principles for which all of those people have fought in past wars. All of those people are concerned about protecting their rights to freedom of speech and to be free New Zealanders. But that is not the same thing as saying that it is right to be able to buy influence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000461\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EThe National Party campaign, the ACT party campaign, and the marches are all exact examples of the purchase of influence, and they are examples of why we need to control advertising, in particular. We have to remember that this bill deals only with the purchase of advertising; it does not deal with what one says or what one does. This bill deals with the purchase of advertising, and we see from the campaign against the bill how easy it is to use advertising to purchase influence over the community, and how easy it is to mislead and to frighten. We saw that at the last election actually. If we look at the \u201CIwi/Kiwi\u201D billboards, we see that they were a direct attempt to frighten P\u0101keh\u0101 New Zealanders into thinking that M\u0101ori would steal their beaches. The National Party put out those billboards at 90 sites across the country. It cost over $1 million to run that billboard campaign, which was all designed to frighten people. National used money to do it, because it had the money to buy those billboards and to pay for the sites, and therefore it could influence people into thinking that M\u0101ori was somehow a threat to P\u0101keh\u0101 society. It was a direct, manipulative attack, and National used money to do it. That is what we are trying to stop. We are trying to make sure that when people go to the ballot, they go there because they have real information about the real policies that the political parties and the candidates are putting forward, and they know the truth around the issues. That truth will be disrupted and misled if we allow unfettered money to be the determinant of what those issues are, and if other people\u2019s voices are lost in the process. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000462\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EHere we go with the National Party and the ACT party wanting to be able to use unlimited money in the campaign. But what about those small groups like Plunket? What about the small community groups? What about all of those little community organisations that have real issues that they want to bring to the table? They just do not have the money to compete with a million-dollar campaign, which is being proposed by National members or by friends of National members\u2014like we have seen with the Business Roundtable, the Sensible Sentencing Trust, or some of these other organisations, which have hundreds of thousands of dollars to spend. What about those smaller groups? What about the ordinary New Zealanders who are trying to get their voices heard? They will be lost in the noise and the fury of the misleading, manipulative, and deceptive campaigns that are run because National has enough money to run them. That is the disgraceful situation that we are trying to stop here\u2014and we will stop it, despite all of the money that has been thrown against this bill, and despite the hysteria from the National members, who can see their loopholes fading before their eyes. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000463\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EI can understand their worry. I can understand why they are upset about it; they will have to fight the rest of the election on a level playing field. They will not have a special advantage just because they have very big financial backers\u2014for example, from the Business Roundtable. I can see that it is a worry for National members. But it will be good for them, because every election should be fought on a level playing field, every election should be fought transparently, and every election should be fought on the basis of real policies and real principles that candidates and parties put forward to the electorate, so the electorate knows exactly what will happen with their vote. That is an absolutely crucial part of our democracy, which National is trying to fight against. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000464\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fc8ab326-1806-41d3-8c41-cd58c95dcb45\u0022\u003EI feel sorry for National members\u2014I think it is because their backers come from the old, neo-liberal, big-money kind of environment. I would like to see National go back to its traditional, conservative roots, where the people who had those kinds of values understand the importance of democracy, understand the importance of a level playing field, and understand the importance of equality and equity, because that is what this country was built on. Those are the values held by those people, and they have been deserted by the National Party. Those people have been deserted by National, and instead the big-money backers have come in and taken over.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u002282a76ee352f745a4a09ef2eaddbc37b1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000465\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002282a76ee352f745a4a09ef2eaddbc37b1\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (National\u2014Bay of Plenty):\u003C/span\u003E That was a most interesting speech from the Greens\u2019 expert on electoral law, who says that this bill is only about the purchase of advertising. Well, that is such a load of rubbish. Let me just tell the Committee about that Green Party member. This is the woman who sat in the select committee and said that if a German tourist attends a meeting, or walks past a Green Party collector shaking a bucket and puts $20 in there, then that Green Party collector should ring the Green Party headquarters in Wellington to check whether the tourist is on the electoral roll. If he or she is not on the electoral roll, then the $20 should be given back or returned to the Electoral Commission. That is exactly what the member said\u2014that the Green Party would ring up and check whether anyone giving 20 bucks was on the electoral roll. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000466\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003ESo, frankly, she is a member who has no understanding of democracy. If she did have any understanding she would have told us what the English organisation JMG Foundation got from the Greens for the $15,000 that it gave them at the last election. The member says that money buys influence. Well, what did Mr and Mrs Goldsmith from England get for the $25,000 they gave to the Green Party in 2002? What did the Greens offer the JMG Foundation for the $15,000 that it paid in 2005? The member\u2019s argument is nonsense. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000467\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003ENational is strongly opposed to this bill. How ridiculous it is that the Labour Party dumped 150 amendments to this bill less than 90 minutes before this debate started. Less than 90 minutes before this debate started, Labour dumped 150 amendments to this bill. Does anyone recall a time when such important legislation\u2014legislation that is part of the constitutional and electoral framework of this country\u2014was subject to 150 amendments that were dumped only moments before the debate began? Absolutely never. Never in the history of this country has someone sought to table 150 amendments only moments before the debate on a bill began. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000468\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003ELet us look at the purpose of this bill and see whether the jackboot approach of this Government towards electoral law matches the purpose of the bill. Its first purpose is to \u201Cmaintain public and political confidence in the administration of elections;\u201D. Does anyone think that the public believe that this Labour Party will run the electoral system of this country with any fairness or repute? Not at all. The legislation has failed its basic first purpose, which is to maintain public confidence. Public confidence in this country is best summed up by the headline \u201CDemocracy under attack\u201D. New Zealanders say that democracy is under attack from this legislation. It is full of anti-democratic values. It is an attack on our democratic values. There is no way that it meets even the first purpose that the Government is proposing, which is to maintain public confidence in the administration of elections. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000469\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003ELet us look at the second purpose of the bill, which is to \u201Cpromote participation by the public in parliamentary democracy;\u201D. How does the bill promote public participation when ordinary people are referred to sneeringly as \u201Cthird parties\u201D? I have news for the Labour Party: we, the people of New Zealand, are not third parties to our electoral system. We, the people of New Zealand, are the core of the electoral system. We are not third parties. So this bill fails even its second purpose, which is to promote the participation of the public in parliamentary democracy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000470\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003ELet us look at the next purpose, which is to \u201Cprevent the undue influence of wealth on electoral outcomes;\u201D. Let me tell members about that. Not only is there preservation in this legislation of money from big unions, which can spend as much as they like, but the bill was specifically amended to allow Owen Glenn to give another half a million dollars to the Labour Party. I will tell the Committee what happened. The members opposite proposed an amendment that stated that anybody who was not on the New Zealand electoral roll and who lived overseas could not make a donation. They said that would be illegal. It was the party opposite that brought an amendment to the select committee and said that no one who lives overseas and is not on the electoral roll should be allowed to vote. Then we asked about Owen Glenn.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000471\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00223d49aeac-8adf-497b-9400-ab7bb077bb8d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225411d77f5819459681aa836293678fed\u0022\u003ERt Hon Winston Peters\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I sought your intervention, in the case of John Key, on the question of the principle of allowing someone to speak for 10 minutes. I was talking about someone who is a party leader; I was not talking about fly-by-nighters who turn up and decide they will indulge themselves and get 10 minutes, as well. The member can have a go later on, but not two calls in a row.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000472\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d8cd4268013a40e2b231c80112d300b1\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The decision is that of the Chair.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000473\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022519160a85f144b8d95db7e6b3d3a7e21\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: I am here today representing more people in Tauranga than that member ever will. More people in Tauranga voted for me than for that member. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000474\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EBut let us get back to the third subclause, which is to \u201Cprevent the undue influence of wealth on electoral outcomes;\u201D. The Labour Party brought forward an amendment to state that someone could not donate money if he or she was overseas and not on the electoral roll. We made a comment about Owen Glenn. A very hasty coffee break was organised and within about 15 minutes down came Lynne Pillay, who said that they wanted to change the rules so that someone can donate from overseas if he or she is a New Zealand citizen. That is the Owen Glenn subclause. Owen Glenn can now give another half a million dollars to the Labour Party. So much for preventing the undue influence of wealth on electoral outcomes! \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000475\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EWhat about the bit that states that the purpose of the bill is to \u201Censure that the controls on the conduct of the election campaigns\u2014(i) are effective; and (ii) are clear; and (iii) can be efficiently administered, \u2026\u201D? Does anyone think that a bill that is now subject to 150 amendments could be described as being effective, clear, and efficient? No way! This bill fails every single purpose before the Committee. This bill does not maintain public confidence in the electoral system; it does not promote public participation\u2014in fact, it sneeringly refers to us, the people of New Zealand, as \u201Cthird parties\u201D\u2014it does nothing about wealth and the electoral system; it does nothing about transparency or accountability; and it does nothing about the effective, clear enforcement legislation that one would expect. One hundred and fifty amendments were tabled only moments before the bill was debated. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000476\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EFrankly, I have to say to the Committee that although this Government thinks New Zealanders will forget about this legislation over the next year, I have news for the Government. Right now, up and down the country, New Zealanders know that this bill is all about Helen Clark\u2019s paranoia. Helen Clark knows that she is in the dying days of her Government. The Government is lurching from crisis to crisis. Time after time we have seen what a dying Government looks like. It is skewing the playing field in favour of itself. It is making it harder and harder for ordinary New Zealanders to have a say, and easier and easier for big Government money, big union money, and big-spending Government department advertising to influence the election of this country. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000477\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003ENew Zealanders are appalled by what this Government is proposing. We strongly oppose this legislation. New Zealanders will not forget what this Government is doing, because it is an affront to the democratic values of this country.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022 data-id=\u0022a76f0278a62b4b27ae439b283c269271\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000478\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a76f0278a62b4b27ae439b283c269271\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY (Labour\u2014Waitakere):\u003C/span\u003E What a story! What a good story Tony Ryall tells. If anyone takes the time to read National\u2019s minority view in the select committee report they will see again what a story the National Party tells. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000479\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThe Electoral Finance Bill is not an attack on free speech; it is an attack\u2014and quite unashamedly\u2014on big-buck speech. We want to see\u2014as I heard my good friend Charles Chauvel saying before\u2014the principle of one person, one vote. That is what the Labour Party\u2014and in fact the majority of people in this Parliament\u2014wants to see. I saw the huge advertisement in the New Zealand Herald\u2014which was paid for by an ACT member\u2014and I saw Rodney Hide, who had popped a bit of sticky tape across his mouth to prove a point, which is probably the only way we would see Rodney not being able to talk\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000480\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226e1233dbbe45411e9a24fd81dc2ce2be\u0022\u003EHon Member\u003C/span\u003E: That\u2019s the best part about that ad. I liked it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000481\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022756f2dbc720b47259d6d747852fa5aea\u0022\u003ELYNNE PILLAY\u003C/span\u003E: That is right. The New Zealand Herald states that free speech is going to be stifled. We know that is not the case. The illusion that it is creating in its paid advertisement with its cronies is that ordinary people will not be able to speak freely. It talks about people not being able to speak with megaphones, and all that sort of thing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000482\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EPeople do not even have to be listed as a third party unless they spend more than $12,000. I know that to the National Party, whose mates spent $1.2 million on its parallel campaigns, $12,000 seems like chicken feed. But to the majority of New Zealanders, $12,000 is a lot of money. The majority of New Zealanders\u2014and the majority of people who came to the select committee in support of the bill\u2014want to see transparency and accountability. What is wrong with that? I am pleased the select committee listened very, very carefully to what submitters said. Again, the illusion is that no one supports the bill. That is absolute rubbish. The whole non-governmental sector supports the bill. It had concerns, which we fixed, that it would be caught by the definition of advertising. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000483\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EI want to stop there just for a moment. Do members remember the huge fuss Opposition members made about the fact that non-governmental organisations, which receive Government money for the good work that they do, were advocating about things like smoke-free legislation? One would ask \u201CWhy?\u201D, because where does the National Party get its big money from? Where were the National Party members then, talking about freedom of speech? Where were they then, talking about advocacy? No, they did not want to hear it, not when those things interfered with their fund-raising, and with their money. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000484\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003EThere is no question that the National Party\u2019s opposition to this bill is absolute naked self-interest, and it is appalling. It is absolutely appalling. We heard from members of the Human Rights Commission who came to the select committee and talked about the third party cap. I had to congratulate Rodney Hide, who had a good idea. He said: \u201CLet\u2019s consult the Human Rights Commission about the proposed changes.\u201D So we got the Human Rights Commission members to come back. They said\u2014and this is what we do not see in the advertisements\u2014that they absolutely supported the purpose to provide for transparency and accountability in the democratic process and to prevent the undue influence of wealth, and to promote participation in the parliamentary democracy. I quote from its report back to the select committee on 31 October, which members will never see in the New Zealand Herald or anywhere else: \u201CThe commission strongly supports the following recommended changes which it believes better enhance freedom of expression and the right to participate in electoral processes.\u201D Why do we not see that, Mr Chairman?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022 data-id=\u0022d3c0f50eef0549a782270e39e6566382\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000485\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d3c0f50eef0549a782270e39e6566382\u0022\u003ER DOUG WOOLERTON (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I do not like to say this with my leader in the Chamber, but I talked to John Boscawen\u2014Rodney\u2019s mate\u2014this morning. We were talking about this bill. He called me to ask whether there was any chance New Zealand First would change its stance on it. He has never called me before. He has never talked to me, right through the last 5 months, but he called me this morning. National Party members are busy saying that people are doing things at the last minute. I asked him what the problem was and he said to me that he did not like the way this bill was being done behind closed doors. I said: \u201CExcuse me?\u201D. He said: \u201CYou\u2019re doing this thing behind closed doors.\u201D I said: \u201CHow so? There were 600 submissions to a public select committee, and over 100 were heard verbally at a public select committee meeting.\u201D They say there were 5,000 people\u2014and I do not believe that\u2014in Auckland, at a meeting\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000486\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b006350f10fe4a06a9c9eddd9edd7066\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: The police said that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000487\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002284507c9c1d45436582acb491685e1234\u0022\u003ER DOUG WOOLERTON\u003C/span\u003E: The police said that, did they? I do not believe that figure but the police said it, so there you go.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000488\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d29df424db05441cbebd48e70ce6d66b\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: You weren\u2019t there!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000489\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022558a33aa3a25494a96ed1a81579aba3f\u0022\u003ER DOUG WOOLERTON\u003C/span\u003E: No, I was not there. I do not march in the street; I come to this place and speak my mind here. I do not march up the street like those other guys do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000490\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EJohn Boscawen was telling me that this legislation was being done behind closed doors. I said to him: \u201CMate, they would be the biggest closed doors I have ever seen in my life.\u201D This legislation is not being done behind closed doors. There has never been a bill that I have seen before this House that has come under so much public scrutiny, and so much scrutiny within this Parliament, as this one. So it is absolutely rubbish to say it is being done behind closed doors. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000491\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EDo members know what he then said to me? He said: \u201COh, but there are some amendments coming up today that I do not know about.\u201D Well, one could have said to him: \u201CWell, excuse me, who the hell are you?\u201D. But I did not do that.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000492\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022df788c48-b9be-42fd-b8f2-76629a5572b8\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f07ab3889b7f49d7b88f1f15e8c2c5dc\u0022\u003EDr Wayne Mapp\u003C/span\u003E: Arrogance from New Zealand First!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000493\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220427a1a9917745fe95117139d38d5b30\u0022\u003ER DOUG WOOLERTON\u003C/span\u003E: No, there is no arrogance involved in this\u2014no arrogance whatsoever. If that member talked to me he would soon find that out, but because he does not know me he would not have a clue. But the fact is\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000494\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022edee1da674e54b42bbb3c5ca650c4631\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Order!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000495\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226f7745dd2c224e42b1b4925feb724479\u0022\u003ER DOUG WOOLERTON\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, I am coming back to Part 1, Mr Chairman. I asked him what was behind closed doors and he said: \u201CThe changes, the SOPs coming up today.\u201D I said that that always happens. There is a dotting of i\u2019s and crossing of t\u2019s, and the changing of mistakes. This guy does not know about parliamentary democracy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000496\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022c437bda8-4741-4ac5-89ab-b0818e1ab9fa\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00221ed24a86b5764ae493adda9e4892f7a9\u0022\u003EHon Darren Hughes\u003C/span\u003E: What\u2019s his name?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000497\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002240caf0eb7acd45899e1409e76bf196bd\u0022\u003ER DOUG WOOLERTON\u003C/span\u003E: It is John Boscawen. He does not know about politics, and he does not know about parliamentary democracy. He has been put up to the job by people on the opposite side of the Chamber\u2014that is what the deal is. He spent half of that conversation telling me how he made his money. I said: \u201CGood luck to you. I hope you go on and make a hell of a lot more.\u201D The other thing I said was that this legislation does not disbar the Brethren from involving themselves in election campaigns. It does not disbar them at all, but at least it makes sure that we know who is doing the job out there. Nor does it stop private citizens, at all, from involving themselves in elections, but members would never know that from reading the New Zealand Herald. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000498\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EIf the New Zealand Herald was going to do things straight, would it not say that it is time for these third parties, which are lobby groups\u2014not individuals\u2014called third parties when they spend second only to the two big parties in election time, to come under the Electoral Act and the electoral law of this country? We on this side of the Chamber say \u201CYes, it is.\u201D It is time we had some law surrounding the election process in this country that is actually meaningful and does not let a party run two campaigns\u2014one by another third party or lobby group, and the other by the proper party itself, which is called the National Party. Those days are over. That method did not elect them, it did not work at the last election, and it is not going to work in the future because it had to stop. The people who made that happen, who brought this bill about, were the people who made the mistakes in the National Party. By and large the public should know this\u2014[Interruption] No, no, the public should know this. They were not people like David Bennett, who is a backbencher; it was the people at headquarters who did this.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022 data-id=\u0022af0bca37547b4fe8a5a92f383a86cc2d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000499\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022af0bca37547b4fe8a5a92f383a86cc2d\u0022\u003EGORDON COPELAND (Independent):\u003C/span\u003E I want to speak to the purpose of the Electoral Finance Bill, and particularly to clause 3(b), which states that the purpose of the bill is to \u201Cpromote participation by the public in parliamentary democracy;\u201D. This bill does not achieve that purpose; rather, it introduces new and\u2014in my view\u2014totally unnecessary restrictions and roadblocks that inhibit New Zealanders from maintaining even their present ability to participate in our democracy.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000500\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EIt is a deeply flawed and dishonest bill. I say \u201Cdishonest\u201D because the only need for such a bill, which the Government has consistently appealed to as a justification for this Draconian, complex, bureaucratic, interventionist bill coming into a perfectly satisfactory electoral finance situation, comes from the involvement of the businessmen who spent, from their own pockets, money in the last election and who happened to be members of the Exclusive Brethren. As Doug Woolerton has just informed the Committee, their involvement did not work. It did not actually have much effect on the final outcome of the last election, so this whole bill is based on a foundation that is shaky and that does not stand up to any analysis whatever. I know for sure that people actually turned off voting for National when it became clear who was behind the leaflets that came through letterboxes telling people to bring the Labour Government\u2019s reign to an end. In fact, Labour was re-elected, and therefore the argument is surely self-fulfilling.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000501\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EThere was no problem, and there was no mischief that needed to be fixed. This whole bill is really predicated on ensuring that in the future any advantage that parties other than National might have enjoyed in terms of financial support is actually removed. I think that this is the action of a Government that is desperate to stay in office.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000502\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003ESitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000503\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022e00e4ec12b46423c9d51102c8ebb73f3\u0022\u003EGORDON COPELAND\u003C/span\u003E: In the 1990s Bob Jones spent a considerable sum of money in Nelson trying to unseat Nick Smith, but, in fact, Nick Smith was re-elected with an increased majority. I think that just goes to show that once New Zealanders know who is behind leaflets and other material, they are quite capable of making up their own minds, and they do not need to be treated like children.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000504\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EThis bill is badly drafted. The Minister in charge of the bill, Annette King, tries to reassure the nation that that does not matter, because the law of common sense will apply. In the 2002 election the Hon Peter Dunne gained quite some traction around the notion of common sense, but I would say that Annette King has single-handedly given common sense a bad name. If we want to promote public participation in a parliamentary democracy, common sense says that we should make it easier, not harder, for that to happen. Common sense means that we write a bill that is comprehensible, clear, and user-friendly if we genuinely want to promote greater participation in democracy and not write gobbledegook. Common sense would mean that we give third party trusts a ceiling above $120,000 for advertising, when it costs much more than that simply to make a single national letterbox drop.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000505\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003EThe whole way in which this bill has been put together is nothing but a complete breach of common sense. Common sense would conclude that an extension of the 3-month electoral period right back to 1 January in election year restricts rather than promotes participation in New Zealand\u2019s democracy. That is completely obvious. Would not common sense conclude that this bill should be ditched? It is unnecessary and, more important, it has a negative impact on the likely participation of New Zealanders in our democracy, which is the best democracy, and the oldest, I would say, in the world. Our democracy has been robust. It is tested and it is tried. There is no justification or necessity for this bill. It is a solution seeking a problem that does not actually exist in the real world\u2014a world, sadly, that this Government has become more and more out of touch with as the years have gone by.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000506\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00225cee6a89-68e3-40fd-b2d8-d8adb0ba5da0\u0022\u003ELet me say that it is time to bin this bill. It is time to assign it permanently to the rubbish bin. I will be voting against this bill, and I urge other members of the House to do likewise.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022 data-id=\u0022fdf935e0e3eb4f3f83be17b5ba2dbe3a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000507\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fdf935e0e3eb4f3f83be17b5ba2dbe3a\u0022\u003ECHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (National):\u003C/span\u003E I want to focus tonight on a number of key terms in clause 4, which is the interpretation clause. Clause 4 is a very important clause, and over the past couple of weeks my deputy leader, Mr English, has been asking various Ministers of Justice a couple of questions in the House focusing on the particular words. I have done the same, and for our efforts the Prime Minister last week called us nitpickers\u2014a phrase that is reminiscent of Sir Robert Muldoon and Simon Walker. Then, today she said there was a slight change and that what we need to do\u2014that is, members of the public and members of Parliament\u2014is read the provisions carefully and consult lawyers. Then, later this afternoon we heard a press release from the Prime Minister saying that in fact the Government was willing to talk to the National Party about various provisions we have proposed in our Supplementary Order Papers, because they seemed to make a lot of sense. Well, that is kind, but more about that later. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000508\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003ELet us focus for a moment on the word \u201Cpublish\u201D in clause 4. Even though the Minister has proposed a number of amendments, the situation with that word is still hopeless. We can deal with paragraph (i) of the definition very briefly. This paragraph was inserted by majority. It states that one is publishing an advertisement if one brings it to the notice of the public in any other manner. That phrase was clearly an extravagant phrase. It was clearly hopeless, and, indeed, the National Party members on the select committee pointed that out to the Labour members time and time again. But it was inserted by the hopeless majority, because they would not listen. Mr Benson-Pope was too busy trying to save his career from the Claire Curran challenge, and Mr Chauvel was too busy writing press releases announcing his appointment as Dr Cullen\u2019s private secretary. Of course, as we have seen\u2014and it has been very well exemplified by her performance tonight\u2014the chair was incompetent. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000509\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003ESo paragraph (i) of the definition of \u201Cpublish\u201D is going, and, of course, it should go, because it is absolutely and utterly nonsensical. The other amendments that the Minister has included in Supplementary Order Paper 162 are unsatisfactory and National cannot support them. Paragraphs (b), (e), and (g) are amended, but those amendments are minor and trifling and do not deal with the essential concerns of the National Party. I ask the Labour members to take these hypothetical situations: if a person is carrying a placard at a demonstration, for example, and that placard praises a particular party or candidate, or, conversely, criticises them, then that will be deemed to be the publication of an advertisement. I refer, in clause 4 to paragraph (b) of the definition of \u201Cpublish\u201D, which refers to someone displaying an advertisement. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000510\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002241146229-4d11-415b-a4ac-f4e2b923e95d\u0022\u003EAnother example I ask members to reflect on is the situation whereby someone sends an email to anyone saying that he or she thinks Labour is hopeless or the National Party is fantastic. Apart from that being a self-evident statement of the truth, it would also be publication of an advertisement in accordance with paragraph (c) of that definition. So this definition of publishing is far too broad. It is an unsatisfactory clause. It should be amended, as the National Party has proposed. We have suggested in the first of my Supplementary Order Papers that we amend the definition of \u201Cpublish\u201D so that it is consistent with section 214B of the Electoral Act 1993. In other words, the activity comprises advertising in any way: broadcasting on radio or television; publishing, issuing, distributing or displaying addresses, notices, or posters; and so on. It is consistent with the Electoral Act 1993, and it is not expressed in the very broad terms that the Electoral Finance Bill has.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u00221a8db61d66ac48e4b4785fe4ed9f2184\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000511\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00221a8db61d66ac48e4b4785fe4ed9f2184\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E I say from the outset that I really want to concentrate on only one very specific clause in Part 1, and that is clause 5(2)(g). I say that because I want to alert members of this Committee to what technology will do in this area. I see that this bill is concerned with something that is \u201Ccommonly known as a blog\u201D, and that it tries to include that in the area of \u201CMeaning of election advertisement\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000512\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EI want to say to this Committee tonight very clearly that I have worked in Eastern Europe. I worked with LOT airlines in Poland and I worked with Aeroflot in Moscow in the early 1980s, and I found that the most frightening thing about those societies was that their citizens could get no information about the outside world other than what their Governments would let them have. That statement has nothing to do with National, Labour, or anything else. Let me tell members that in the Eastern European regimes of the early 1980s we had Ceausescu running Romania and Egon Krenz running the Eastern Germany operation, and when I was in Moscow in 1981 Brezhnev was running the place. Those citizens could not get advice from anywhere else in the world.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000513\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EA decade later something happened that took my breath away: the Berlin Wall came crashing down. I got in touch with some of my colleagues and friends from Aeroflot and from other airlines and asked: \u201CHow did that happen? That came out of left field. I cannot believe it happened.\u201D Members should listen to what they said; I thought it was amazing. I was told that the thing that brought down the Berlin Wall more than anything else was the fax machine. I said: \u201CYou\u2019ve got to be dreaming! What are you talking about?\u201D. They said that up until about 1986 the fax machine was illegal in Eastern Europe. Do members hear that clearly? The fax machine was illegal. If one was caught with a fax machine in one of those Eastern European bloc countries one could be jailed, but companies and businesses, in order to try to be internationally competitive, had to communicate with the outside world.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000514\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EMembers should listen to this, because I thought this was a cracker. In 1987\u2014the year that John Carter and I got elected to this place\u2014the Soviet Government licensed the fax machine. People were allowed to have a fax machine, but they had to report to the Government each year on what they had done with it. They had to show a copy of every incoming and every outgoing fax. What happened in Eastern Europe was that within the next 3 years the Government lost total and absolute control, because the people just rode roughshod over such rules. Finally, faxes between people and the New York Times or the Washington Post were flying in and out of Eastern Europe. By 1990 down came the Berlin Wall and with it the entire oppression of a nation and regimes that had stopped their citizens from hearing the facts.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000515\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EI will repeat to members again: the fax machine brought down the Berlin Wall, and the fall of the Berlin Wall is probably the greatest change that has occurred in the history of this planet. If members think that the fax machine was stunning, I tell them that I simply do not even use one any more. The Internet has about 10,000 times the power of the fax machine. The Internet will democratise information. One will not be able to stop people from having their say. One will not be able to stop groups from saying what they believe. The \u201CNazi Party of New Zealand\u201D, even if it has the most disgraceful and outrageous beliefs, may be able to have its own website.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022 data-id=\u00229d3a77f048f244a3a5c1326fb315a4b1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000516\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00229d3a77f048f244a3a5c1326fb315a4b1\u0022\u003EANNE TOLLEY (National\u2014East Coast):\u003C/span\u003E I would like to speak to a particular clause here tonight, too. I would like to talk about clause 17, which is the clause that prohibits third parties from being registered in the lead-up to an election. The original bill that came before this House proposed 42 days\u2014that is, from writ day the listing of third parties would be prohibited. I want to refer to the information that was provided during the Justice and Electoral Committee hearing, because submissions from a whole range of people, including Associate Professor Andrew Geddis, Family First New Zealand, Libertarianz, the Employers and Manufacturers Association, the Human Rights Commission, David Farrar, the New Zealand Law Society, Mr Graeme Edgeler, and about 13 other submissions, focused on this clause. Of course, their concern was that the effect of this was particularly unfair if an issue arose late in an election campaign\u2014that is, in the 6 weeks leading up to an election, when the election campaign proper is going. If a third party, or an interest group, had not formally registered it could not take part, even if it was forming part of an intense electoral debate. Let us say that a party came out with a proposition in that 6 weeks, in the election campaign proper\u2014for instance, someone said they were going to ban the SPCA. If the SPCA had not registered as a third party prior to that, it would not be able to take part in the debate and it could have its future debated amongst political parties and candidates without it being able to put its side of the case. A large number of organisations made representations to the select committee. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000517\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003EI have to say that the New Zealand Labour Party supported the provision that was in the bill originally\u2014that is, banning unregistered people from taking part in that last 6 weeks of an election campaign\u2014because apparently it wanted to ensure that there were no surprises late in a campaign. Well, actually, nobody has told political parties about the \u201Cno surprises\u201D clause because that is when political parties spring their surprises, and that is the very time when organisations and individuals out in the community should be able to get involved in an election campaign. That is, in fact, the very time that the public are listening to an election campaign. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000518\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003ESo this Labour-led Government wants to ban unregistered people from taking part in that 6-week lead-up, and we heard that in the select committee from the members opposite. Interestingly enough, of course, groups like the Human Rights Commission said, and I quote from its original submission: \u201CIt is difficult to conceive of a greater limitation on freedom of speech than this, and it cannot be imagined that the degree of restriction was intended. The effect of the bill is to muzzle a person or group which finds itself in this situation.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000519\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022413ea93c46c84341ada27e5ccf11a56c\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: Quote from the second one!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000520\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002249b8d2c1a9c547718474d36ddcfea373\u0022\u003EANNE TOLLEY\u003C/span\u003E: I hear some raucous talk from across the way, saying \u201CRead the second one.\u201D Well, I will, actually, because the commission, having had a look at the changes to the bill\u2014and let us remember that in the bill that has come back we still have the words \u201Con writ day\u201D\u2014said in its follow-up after the bill was reported back to the House: \u201CThe commission requests further consideration of clause 17.\u201D In its original submission it proposed its deletion. In fact, the Human Rights Commission said that that clause should be deleted, and, in fact, it is continuing to say that it should be deleted. It accepts that there may well be legitimate administrative reasons for a close-off date, but it should be as close as administratively practical to polling day. So the commission is rejecting this proposal from the Labour Government and its lackeys. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000521\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003EThe other organisation that commented on this clause was of course the Electoral Commission. It said, in its comments to the select committee, that it also recommended removing this clause. The commission said that that would effectively prevent individuals and groups from making a contribution to debate during the critical campaign period if they had not listed as a third party. So did anyone listen either to the Human Rights Commission or to the Electoral Commission? Only National listened.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022 data-id=\u00228c73cca3a540467694543974cae3fb5d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000522\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228c73cca3a540467694543974cae3fb5d\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER (Associate Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E I will take just a brief call to reassure the member Anne Tolley that if she looks at Supplementary Order Paper 162, at the proposed amendment to clause 17(a)(i) of the Electoral Finance Bill, she will see that the words there state: \u201CTo omit \u2018writ day\u2019 and substitute \u2018the 21st day before polling day\u2019.\u201D\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000523\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229fa6748c9fba45eca8a2c9fdcccaafb4\u0022\u003EAnne Tolley\u003C/span\u003E: It\u2019s 3 weeks.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000524\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b787ca337418426fbc5fdcf6c8117ddb\u0022\u003EHon RICK BARKER\u003C/span\u003E: It is 3 weeks\u2014a significant improvement and a significant advancement\u2014and it meets the requirements of the Electoral Commission and the Human Rights Commission to be as close as administrably possible to polling day. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000525\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EI am pleased to be able to advise the member that both the Human Rights Commission and the Electoral Commission say they endorse the amendment. That is my advice. They have said the amendment is fine. I just want the member to get up to date. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000526\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe next point I want to bring up is the point raised by the member Chris Finlayson, who talked about a placard. I am pleased to be able to advise the member that the placard is currently provided for under the current Electoral Act. If people are carrying a placard then it should be authorised by the party they are promoting. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000527\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe next point I want to raise was raised by Judith Collins, who noted that a substantial number of amendments to this bill had been raised. I say to that member\u2014and this is her point of criticism\u2014that if we had not raised a substantial number of amendments she would have criticised that too. Some of the amendments here are very important, and some are drafting amendments. The one she highlighted is in Supplementary Order Paper 163. The proposed amendment to clause 14(3) states, in ordinary type, \u201CTo omit \u2018non-contesting party\u2019 and substitute\u201D, then in bold type, \u201C\u00A0\u2018non-contesting party\u2019\u00A0\u201D. She said it is a ridiculous amendment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000528\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe point about this amendment is that the convention is to put things in bold type to highlight to people reading the legislation that there is a definition somewhere else in the bill. This is a drafting error. It should have been done at the time. There are many other drafting technical errors that should be corrected. I am pleased to see the National Party is echoing support for making sure the bill is well drafted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000529\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe last point I make to members is simply that in all of the discussions they have had so far, they have not identified the main point. I come back to what Rodney Hide said. This is not an issue about the National Party or about the Labour Party; this is an issue about all parties. The issue for all parties here, I say to Mr Hide, is to make sure that the public has an assurance that when people give money to a political party they know where it comes from. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000530\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe threshold in New Zealand is reasonably high. In other countries there are lower thresholds. The public have a right to know who is putting money into which political parties and what are the consequential changes in policy. I think it is a fundamental right of transparency for the general public. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000531\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThe second very sensible thing about the bill is that if we put a cap on candidates\u2014like we have currently\u2014and a cap on political parties, then we need to have a cap on third parties. As we saw at the last election, some people, because the rules are slack, are prepared to play the rules to the nth degree and have other people campaigning on their behalf so that it does not touch their budgets at all. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000532\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002203bc0052-6dd8-4807-998a-4768a4732e0b\u0022\u003EThis bill is about fairness to everybody. It is about transparency, openness, and making sure that all people in the electoral system are treated the same. Candidates are capped, parties are capped, and third parties are capped. That is it. When the money moves, people need to know who is paying it and where it is going to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022 data-id=\u002292981f31334241a5abf29b0e550751de\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000533\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002292981f31334241a5abf29b0e550751de\u0022\u003ENICKY WAGNER (National):\u003C/span\u003E We have already heard from my colleagues that National considers election time to be the time of people power, not political control. It is the one time in the election cycle when politicians can be held to account by the people. At election time politicians should be listening to the people. It should not be the people being dictated to by the politicians. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000534\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003EBut here, in clause 18 of the Electoral Finance Bill, is a set of rules that determine when the listing of a third party must be refused. These third parties must be refused by the Electoral Commission, the very commission whose chief executive officer has already expressed concerns that it will not be able to understand the Electoral Finance Bill\u2019s rules and that it may have to refer cases to the courts for judgment. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000535\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003EThe whole principle, that this Government is creating legislation that must refuse to allow individuals or organisations to be involved in political debate, is repugnant. Labour constantly pays lip-service to encouraging public participation and consultation in political discussion, but shuts down debate when it really matters\u2014in election year. This bill and its regulations make a mockery of democracy, showing up this Government\u2019s arrogance and its refusal to accept any sort of accountability during election year. That is almost a third of the election cycle. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000536\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003ENational is not the only organisation to believe these provisions are unacceptable to the public. The Law Society has made it very clear that the third party regime unduly restricts participation in elections. Clause 18 states that unless individuals or organisations are prepared to fill forms, make statutory declarations, and appoint financial agents who must sign consent forms, they must be refused the opportunity to have their say. Clause 18(1)(c) focuses on the names of third parties. Unlike Shakespeare\u2019s declaration, \u201CWhat\u2019s in a name? That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet.\u201D, it seems that for this Government it is all in the name. The right of free speech is prohibited if the Electoral Commission finds the name offensive, if it could lead to confusion, or if it could mislead members of the public. I see plenty of problems here. What say the third party was called \u201CThe Tax is Too High Party\u201D? Would that be offensive to Labour? Probably it would. Could it be challenged by the Labour Party, for instance, with the argument that tax is not too high? Possibly it could. Could Labour declare it misleading to the public by even considering such a thing? Well, maybe. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000537\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003EThis all goes to highlight the concerns of Helena Catt, the chief executive officer of the Electoral Commission, who fears having to interpret the law. She says that everywhere that we have areas where interpretation is not clear, parties will start using that as part of their attack on each other, and that will not do anything to encourage public interest in politics or trust in the electoral programme. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000538\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003EI am concerned about an existing lobby group in my city, Noise Off. They are passionate about changing the legislation around noisy vehicles. They are angry with Labour, because Harry Duynhoven promised at the last election to fix the noise laws within 6 months, but has done nothing since to solve the problem. No doubt this group will want to campaign in 2008, but will its name Noise Off be considered offensive? Could it be refused the opportunity, because of its name, to tell this Government just how unsatisfactory it has been? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000539\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002292824476-4e66-4052-8435-b049833d8b83\u0022\u003EShakespeare figured that a name mattered little. Not this Government! Someone might be refused the right to have his or her say if the Electoral Commission does not like that person\u2019s name. Could it be that this rose has the sweet smell of incumbency arrogance, or the sickly scent of nanny knows best\u2014political interference?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022 data-id=\u00226b951014eeb54a70ad1c2b79a9f00fc7\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000540\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226b951014eeb54a70ad1c2b79a9f00fc7\u0022\u003EJOHN CARTER (National\u2014Northland):\u003C/span\u003E First, I have to give one little bit of advice. The best thing the Minister can do, if he wants to make a contribution, is not make one. That is the best contribution, because I am certain that if all of us around here took a bet as to what he said, none of us would know. I am certain there are people outside who are listening who would not know, either. I will concentrate on clause 5(2)(da) of the Electoral Finance Bill, which is about editorial material. I will read out part of a very fine editorial that appeared in the Northland Age written by the very good editor, one Peter Jackson who\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000541\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f3aca538b793465eae02b1d0bfdbd04e\u0022\u003EHon Maurice Williamson\u003C/span\u003E: I\u2019ve seen his movies.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000542\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00222ccdbe1dbc1a4068ab4129300d0175b0\u0022\u003EJOHN CARTER\u003C/span\u003E: Yes, exactly. He is a very talented guy. Peter writes this: \u201CWhatever becomes of the government\u2019s attempt to re-write this country\u2019s electoral laws, it has demonstrated that it is interested only in its self-preservation. There is nothing, apart from moves to limit the ability of political parties to accept anonymous contributions to their election spending, that offers any benefit to anyone in New Zealand apart from those parties that are currently in power, and those that will assume power in the future. That is the most alarming aspect of all, that Helen Clark\u2019s government and its allies,\u201D\u2014that is, the Greens and New Zealand First\u2014\u201Ccare nothing for the future of the people they supposedly serve, or indeed the future of their own parties. Whatever else she might be, Helen Clark is not stupid. She knows, obviously, that proposals to severely limit the extent to which third parties, and even opposition parties already in Parliament, can campaign will give the incumbent administration a massive advantage. She knows, too that one day, perhaps as soon as next year, Labour will lose a general election, and that the rules she now seeks to put in place will favour the party that replaces it. And she doesn\u2019t care. The entire thrust of what is now proposed is aimed at perpetuating her prime ministership, end of story. There can simply be no other interpretation.\u201D Mr Jackson goes on: \u201CThe minor parties that support this legislation have attempted to defend their position by decrying the past funding of \u2018right wing\u2019 parties by big business, much of it covert, but miss the point, deliberately, one suspects. They are present in Parliament courtesy of MMP, an electoral system which was foisted upon this country on the basis that it represented a more democratic process than that which it replaced. And now those minor parties are using their electoral success to shut the gate on those who might aspire to follow them into Parliament. It hasn\u2019t taken long for the often disproportionate power that has fallen into their hands via a ridiculous electoral system to corrupt them, and to persuade them that their continued presence is more important than any genuine expression of the people\u2019s will.\u201D So writes the editor of the Northland Age.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000543\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EPeter Jackson also makes a number of other points. I raise that\u2014and Mr Jackson can continue, under this law, writing that\u2014because who else will be able to make those sorts of comments once this bill becomes law on 1 January? No one else will be able to make those comments. People will not even be able to write a letter to the editor on behalf of someone who may be standing, or on behalf of some political party. They will not be entitled to do that. They will be breaking the law and it will be interpreted as somebody out there deliberately supporting a political party, which means that these people here tonight listening should be afraid. If they want to express a view in their local paper, they will be breaking the law.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000544\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00226984d661-9f65-4ed6-b29c-3285b598582d\u0022\u003EI want to let the people of this country know how serious this bill is. This is an absolute restriction on the freedom of speech in this country, and if people ever thought that one day we would have to be here defending the democratic right of people in this country to express their views, well, I say to them that we have got to that stage. The problem is that the Labour Government, and its allies in New Zealand First and the Green Party, has got to the stage where it thinks it does not matter. But it is just a start; we should be afraid.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022 data-id=\u0022e6cd59d19c2046179a585d86dbd51374\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000545\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e6cd59d19c2046179a585d86dbd51374\u0022\u003EPETER BROWN (Deputy Leader\u2014NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I say to the member who has just resumed his seat that either he is being deliberately mischievous or he clearly does not understand the bill. I will give him the benefit of the doubt. He clearly has not read the bill and does not know why we need it. The question that should be answered is, why do we need this bill? Why do we need this purpose clause, as we are dealing with Part 1? The answer is in the New Zealand Herald that National members displayed some time ago. It was in that paper. Let me read from the article in the New Zealand Herald\u2014oh, they will love this. It is written by Audrey Young, and she is talking about the email sent to the former Chief Electoral Officer, David Henry, by the Exclusive Brethren. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000546\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EIn case members over on the Opposition benches have not read this article, or heard of it, let me read the email: \u201CWe represent a group of Christian businessmen concerned as to the course and direction of the current Labour-led Government. Accordingly, we have put together an election programme with a budget of $1.2 million, with the goal of getting party votes for National as this is the only way that change will come about.\u201D It goes on to say: \u201COur programme involves extensive publications throughout the country, with a theme showing and demonstrating mistrust in the current Government and building trust in a Brash-led National Government. We write, seeking clarification and direction re the election funding issue, specifically that anything we do does not compromise National\u2019s funding position.\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000547\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EThen typically it asks a few questions. Firstly: \u201CDoes it compromise National\u2019s position if we communicate to MPs and candidates our strategy?\u201D. Secondly: \u201CDoes it compromise National\u2019s position if we show them draft publications before they are published?\u201D. Thirdly: \u201CIs there any legality prohibiting us from printing \u2018vote National, vote Brash\u2019 and including a photo of Dr Brash on the advertising? Can this be done without compromising National\u2019s funding position?\u201D. Fourthly: \u201CTo what extent can we legally advise, direct, assist, communicate, or other, with National MPs and candidates?\u201D. That is why we need this bill. But what did the New Zealand Herald say? It did not pull this email apart. Can members imagine what it would have said if New Zealand First had sent that email? What would that paper have said then if Winston Peters had been the author? We can imagine it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000548\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EI ask those members over there whether they honestly believe that this is an honourable tactic. National had $1.8 million in donations from sums over $10,000, plus funds raised from membership and fund-raising activities, plus the $1.2 million it was getting from the Exclusive Brethren. That made over $3 million or $4 million. National was trying to buy the election; I have no doubt about it. What did the royal commission state? It is in the report of the select committee, in the commentary on the bill: \u201CAs the Royal Commission on the Electoral System wrote: \u2018It is illogical to limit spending by parties if other interests are not also controlled. Supporters or opponents of a party or candidate should not be able to promote their views without restriction merely by forming campaign organisations \u201Cunaffiliated\u201D to any party \u2026 Nor should powerful or wealthy interest groups be able to spend without restriction during an election campaign while [the parties] are restricted\u2019.\u201D That is what the royal commission stated. This is why we need this bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000549\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e3dc3d88-a571-4ed7-a4b4-b66dedd6134b\u0022\u003EThe National Party had one attempt at the last election to buy itself into power. I guess its members thought they could get away with it. Bill English and John Key knew all about this\u2014I have no doubts about it. [Interruption] Those people on the backbenches did not have a clue. I know that they did not have a clue, but Dr Brash and John Key knew all about it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022 data-id=\u0022348cc0fa279b4cfe9a3d73dc98bbf4be\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000550\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022348cc0fa279b4cfe9a3d73dc98bbf4be\u0022\u003EHon MARIAN HOBBS (Labour\u2014Wellington Central):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000551\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022856b0f9ea8b94dfc80b1c3dfac9879bd\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I am going to call the honourable member Chris Auchinvole, because he was on the Justice and Electoral Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022 data-id=\u00220a34ac0175414866af8062162acb5361\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000552\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220a34ac0175414866af8062162acb5361\u0022\u003ECHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National):\u003C/span\u003E Expressing a view on a critical opinion is not immoral, any more than it is a crime to have created and earned wealth. Yet this Government treats both as obnoxious. It does not want views, and although it fleeces the wealth generators for tax, it holds them in disdain. It is frustrated by the reality that private enterprise is a more positive force for progress than is big Government bureaucracy, so it despises private enterprise as a consequence. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000553\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003ENew Zealand is a liberal, centrist community, best arrived at by mature observation of real life and human nature. This bill reflects a completely immature lack of observation, maturity, and real-life consideration, and embodies the worst aspects of human nature. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000554\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EI am speaking in the Committee stage of Part 1, with particular reference to the interpretation of \u201Cthird party\u201D in clause 4. Few clauses emphasise more the Labour Party\u2019s apprehension, fear, and phobia that others might exercise an influence on the public beyond its own. I reflect on the comments of the first true speaker during the Committee stage\u2014those of the leader of the National Party, John Key\u2014who emphasised that the whole purpose of this legislation is to screw the scrum to set favourable conditions on a partisan basis, and to hang with the view of the general public and to hang with democracy. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000555\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EWhat is it that gives Labour and the cling-on parties such a strong sense of apprehension? I think I know what it is. I think Rick Barker got it right\u2014it is the only thing he got right\u2014when he introduced the Committee stage and inadvertently said it all. He said that the genesis of this bill\u2014and I think he was actually quoting from Mr Benson-Pope\u2014was the 2005 election. I recall during my maiden speech, when I became a member in September 2005, saying that I was at a loss to understand why Labour members looked so miserable\u2014and they still do look miserable. They had won the election and they had formed a Government, of sorts. They should have been magnanimous in victory. Were they? No, they were defiant. National on the other hand was magnanimous, because in many ways, when we consider how close it got to being the elected Government, it had had a tremendous victory. It had had a tremendous reversal of previous misfortune. This was in spite of Labour having a very favourable economic circumstance to campaign in. The sweet scent of National\u2019s success quickly became a stench in Labour\u2019s nostrils. The sweet scent of others success becomes a stench in Labour\u2019s nostrils. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000556\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EAnd so we look at this particular definition of \u201Cthird party\u201D. What do third parties say about it? What does the New Zealand Law Society\u2014a relatively prestigious body, I would have thought\u2014feel about it? It considers that the bill fails in almost every respect. It states that \u201Caccountability rules are so complex that volunteers in political parties face a discouraging degree of complexity and prospects of prosecution\u201D in terms of trying to promote participation by the public in democracy. The third party registration limits the public role, and some cannot even register. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000557\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EClearly, the Government thinks that members of the public are only observers to a process where candidates and political parties are the principal parties. Indeed, they are treated like interlopers who must be controlled. The public interest is in transparency, not in shutting down the free range of ideas that may be the effect of a third party regime as it has been written. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000558\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003ELet us look at the chiller effect of this bill. I have heard the present Minister of Justice say that it will be just a matter of common sense. I think she said that in response to one of Mr English\u2019s questions, when he asked how people would feel free to discuss politics with this sort of legislation and penalty hanging over them. The response from the Minister of Justice, the Hon Annette King, was that it was perfectly easy to follow. All they had to do was to read the Act from one end to the other. This is a whole new scenario that is totally foreign to New Zealand politics. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000559\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220bfa5b74-8933-458a-99d4-bbd75d9898d0\u0022\u003EAs the Law Society says, the third party regime unduly restricts participation in elections. If participation of those not directly standing for election is to be regulated, it should be done carefully and to the least degree practicable to achieve the desired outcomes. Let us reflect on that: the third party regime unduly restricts participation in elections.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022 data-id=\u002240da6e4707c048429eb21873b180b04d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000560\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002240da6e4707c048429eb21873b180b04d\u0022\u003EJILL PETTIS (Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000561\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022a8fe05aec35a4c2bb8545dc49f6f7870\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I think I will hear one more.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022 data-id=\u0022666499f2ec42419ab179aff1fcabfbe5\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000562\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022666499f2ec42419ab179aff1fcabfbe5\u0022\u003EDr RICHARD WORTH (National):\u003C/span\u003E Thank you, Mr Chairperson, for the opportunity to contribute on a narrow, but, I think, important aspect of this bill. It focuses on clause 5(1)(a). The clause is headed \u201CMeaning of election advertisement\u201D, and it is clearly one of the central definitions in the bill. It is also the subject, incidentally, of a National Party amendment. I would like to start by asking why this particular clause is a central definition. The reason is that Subpart 5 of Part 2, which has eight clauses in it, contains the general rules governing election advertisements. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000563\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EI will take one example to show the linkage. Clause 53 is headed \u201CElection advertisements not to be published in regulated period unless certain conditions met\u201D. I would like for a moment to take the time of the Committee to look at clause 5(1)(a), because three points arise that I think are deserving of further consideration. The first issue is the meaning of the phrase \u201Cany form of words\u201D. I ask what \u201Cany form of words\u201D means. It seems to me that \u201Cany form of words\u201D can mean only two things: either orally or in writing. So in this use of the words \u201Cany form of words\u201D are we talking about the possibility of oral-type statements? I think that needs to be made clear. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000564\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThe second issue that is tucked away in clause 5(1)(a) is the phrase \u201Ccan reasonably be regarded\u201D. I would say to the Minister in the chair, Rick Barker, that that is an unusual form of drafting in this particular context. It poses a possibly objective test, but who is the judge, the determiner, of the phrase \u201Ccan reasonably be regarded\u201D? If we look at the body of the legislation, we see that the possibilities are the Chief Electoral Officer, the Electoral Commission, the police, and the courts. There needs to be greater certainty around that. This is not, as another Minister has said, all to be judged by the law of common sense\u2014whatever that phrase of gibberish actually means. There needs to be clarity around both those issues. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000565\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThere is a third issue that I think is critical to be decided in the context of clause 5(1)(a), and that relates to subparagraph (ii). There we are talking about comments that attract scrutiny that can extend to three classes of case defined in the legislation. Those three classes of case are \u201Cview, positions, or policies\u201D, and presumably the draftsman has very deliberately chosen those three categories of activity. But what this bill is supposed to be all about is capturing policy advertisement that should be caught by \u201Celection advertisement\u201D.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000566\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EI give the example of a radio interview being given by a politician, or a politician making comments at a public meeting, and he or she says: \u201CIn my view what the National Party should do if it comes into Government is\u201D, then says whatever that might be. Is it intended that that type of comment would be picked up by this extended definition of election advertisement? I do not think so. I think it is intended to attract proselytising for votes\u2014statements that are more related to policy. What if these aspects of politics do not have any aspect of policy in them? That, I believe, is a significant shortfall. I invite the Minister to respond to that point, because it seems to me that in a setting where what we are looking for on ballot box day and the days that follow\u2014certainty\u2014may well be denied us. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000567\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022d21515bb-0193-4167-a21d-982058b53604\u0022\u003EThe Minister started off a few moments ago by offering the view\u2014and I noted the words\u2014that this legislation was substantially about some people who give money to a party and want to know where it came from. That is an amazing test, when we think about it, because those who presumably gave the money know exactly where it came from. It came from precisely their pockets. It is an example of very loose wording in a statutory setting, which causes concern.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022 data-id=\u0022ae90598a358d41cf8e10f5f324a4f055\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000568\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ae90598a358d41cf8e10f5f324a4f055\u0022\u003EDAVID BENSON-POPE (Labour\u2014Dunedin South):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022 data-id=\u0022da2bffbfde5346ccb9d5172a26c5a874\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000569\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022da2bffbfde5346ccb9d5172a26c5a874\u0022\u003EANNE TOLLEY (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Prior to the call being given to my colleague Dr Worth, you indicated that you would take only one more call. Could I point out that this bill has two substantive parts: the one we are debating, and the next part. This bill is not huge in terms of the number of parts, and the substantive issues are confined to Parts 1 and 2. National has tabled two Supplementary Order Papers with 17 amendments. Members on this side are addressing individual amendments to clauses, and I crave your indulgence to allow a bit more debate on this substantive part of the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000570\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225f6156935e594ccdafbf7090dc754a2e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: We have had a considerable number of speeches. Parts 2 and 3 are substantial, and I assure members that they will be given every opportunity to have their say.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022fdfeb497d4114afb9e763c8141f23b74\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000571\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fdfeb497d4114afb9e763c8141f23b74\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (National\u2014Ilam):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I appreciate that your ruling is consistent with what the Chair may rule in these circumstances, but you must take account of the considerable public interest in this bill. In fact, the prospect of this bill passing has caused considerable public odium. If presiding officers are prepared to shut down the debate after just a short period, what do you think that does for Parliament? I have been able to get to the Chamber only in the last few moments, because of other duties. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000572\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002255df43a45d364f0198032854b7e1b3cf\u0022\u003EDavid Benson-Pope\u003C/span\u003E: Ha, ha!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000573\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022767269b9cb0d4f67a3ef75776b6125f0\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: There is the laughing Benson-Pope on the other side of the Chamber. Everybody knows how valuable his contribution is around this place! Therefore, it should not be taken into account, at all. I would be disappointed if, Mr Chairperson, you fell for the pressure that he clearly is trying to bring upon you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000574\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EI think it would not hurt if the Committee spent the rest of the evening debating this part. There is no hurry to get out of this place. There is a very limited amount of work that the Government proposes for us, before the House rises sometime around 21 or 22 December. I would ask you to consider the public attitude towards this bill, the requirement that it is properly debated, and the fact that members come and go from the Chamber according to other duties they have.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022 data-id=\u0022fc1b93abccd94e898df2580eb6282fc0\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000575\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022fc1b93abccd94e898df2580eb6282fc0\u0022\u003EDAVID BENSON-POPE (Labour\u2014Dunedin South):\u003C/span\u003E I welcome the member\u2019s contribution. I think it is good that people have been able to get to the Chamber to debate the bill. This part has not been discussed for only a short period of time\u2014contrary to the comment that was made. We have been discussing this part for 2 hours and 20 minutes. That is more time than would be given to a lot of other issues in Committee to be dealt with. Mr Chairperson, your ruling was quite clear. I think it is entirely appropriate that you make it\u2014and you are able to, of course. I would welcome members on the opposite side of the Chamber focusing on the issues rather than personalities as Mr Brownlee has done. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000576\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022fa33eb61281949d9960a9a190e4cd43d\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you. I have not made a decision yet.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u0022f2d45c473ee745b8b42f23f520366301\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000577\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f2d45c473ee745b8b42f23f520366301\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E Mr Chairperson, I think you and I are the only two people in the Chamber who have been here the length of time we have, and I have to say that in my time I have not seen debate on a bill of this magnitude, which is a constitutional issue and which changes the very fundamentals under which Parliament is elected, be truncated. Let me tell you that I have watched with great interest tonight and I have listened clearly to the various contributors, and all of them, including myself, have chosen a specific aspect of the bill, have addressed their speeches to a specific clause\u2014every member on this side. I have listened very carefully, trying to see whether there was even one sentence of either repetition or irrelevant debate, and, Mr Chairperson, you cannot say that that has occurred tonight. So I ask you to think about this. We are making a fundamental, constitutional change to the way this democracy of New Zealand works. I will support your putting the question to close down the debate, if anybody\u2019s speech is either repetitious or irrelevant, but that has not yet happened. I would ask you to give those members\u2014be they from our side or from any other party\u2014who have a very heartfelt view to express the opportunity to do so.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022aaacc43b0a854c17888347b956b223f8\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000578\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022aaacc43b0a854c17888347b956b223f8\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (National\u2014Ilam):\u003C/span\u003E There are 19 clauses in this part, and they are very, very substantial clauses. There are 17 amendments to those clauses. Mr Chairperson, if you think about anybody trying to deal with each clause and each amendment, then you will see that, so far, about 4 minutes and 10 seconds has been allowed for each one. On a bill that is of constitutional importance for New Zealand, it would be difficult for the Chair to mount an argument that adequate time has been given to each one.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000579\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002204d6393cbe0f428ba8cf0bad7a8d35f9\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the honourable members for all of their contributions, and I assure members that they will be given a fair opportunity. I have noted down the number of members seeking the call. I consider that we have had sufficient time on this part, and I am going to put the question. The question is that the question be now put. As many as are of that opinion will please say \u201CAye\u201D, of the contrary opinion will say \u201CNo\u201D\u2014 \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00222ff41fe2d883487199534c396df2dcaf\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000580\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222ff41fe2d883487199534c396df2dcaf\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (National\u2014Ilam):\u003C/span\u003E Point of order, Mr Chairperson\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000581\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022509658ed2d8646e4bf0058f6dd95faf3\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I refer members to Speaker\u2019s ruling 9/6. Once I have accepted a closure motion and commenced to put the question, all progress is deferred until the closure is considered. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022ffc9e8ae1c094ed180776eee464e92c1\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000582\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022ffc9e8ae1c094ed180776eee464e92c1\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (National\u2014Ilam):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. You referred earlier to the Standing Orders, and presumably you will back those up with a Speaker\u2019s ruling, and no doubt you would be proved right. But there is one thing where you have failed, and that is to recognise that prior to your accepting Mr Benson-Pope\u2019s plea, there were calls for a point of order. Your responsibility is to look to the floor of the Chamber to see what comments are arising as a result of proceedings. Points of order are legitimate comments. I seek leave to recall the Speaker. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000583\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b266881352424717aafcb476c15c1d84\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I want the member to reconsider his seeking leave to recall the Speaker. We have had a considerable length of time to debate this issue. I am happy to consider the will of the Committee\u2014if that is the wish of members. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000584\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022358dc56d23f941e5874485737d6caf51\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: You have given 4 minutes and 10 seconds to each of the substantial points that people on this side of the Chamber wish to speak to. Actually, that is wrong, because peppered throughout that time have been comments from the Minister in the chair, and comments offered in 5-minute slots from members on the other side of the Chamber. Mr Woolerton, for example, made a contribution earlier in the day. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000585\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022443b43cf4df04cd7a1140705f0e26709\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: And Mr Brown.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000586\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022ba6d13040ef548ac9c00c9cba6042925\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: I am told that Peter Brown also did. These are people who support this bill. The argument opposing this bill has been severely shut down to well below the 4 minutes and 10 seconds that might have been allocated, in the total debate, to every substantive point of view here. Although, Mr Chairperson, you know that this side of the Chamber has enormous respect for you personally, I think it is a matter that the Speaker should rule on. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000587\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00224950c7c3f6f949468e353a918f04f02c\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: The reality is that a motion may be moved that the Chairperson obtain the Speaker\u2019s ruling on a matter of procedure. There is no debate on the question. The member is perfectly entitled to recall the Speaker, if the member wishes to do so. It is under Standing Order 179. I would just say to members that there will be ample opportunity, and I will allow ample opportunity, to speak in the rest of the debate. There are still Parts 2 and 3 to debate. They are significant parts\u2014I believe, more so than Part 1 is. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022d59c2b73ffdd4d06a3184d1e383aac9d\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000588\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d59c2b73ffdd4d06a3184d1e383aac9d\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (National\u2014Ilam):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. It is unseemly for the Committee to get into a debate with you in the Chair\u2014quite unseemly\u2014but it is equally unacceptable for the Chair to suggest to members of the Committee that their personal view of what is most important in this bill should be what guides the Committee\u2019s will and wish to speak on the bill. Core to this particular part is the purpose of the bill, and we know that the entire purpose is driven by the paranoia that Labour has, for fear that it might be driven out of office by honest voters in this country; but to simply say: \u201CThis is not such a relevant part, and therefore I will curtail the debate.\u201D, after the entire Committee, those for and those against, have been restricted to just 4 minutes on each of the substantive issues, is a disgrace.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000589\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f083682f7cf24a8bb07988a49f4d7ed9\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: I thank the member. Can I just say that I am the sole judge of relevancy on this matter, and I have judged that the speeches have been relevant to date, but I am happy to put the question. However, if the member wishes to recall the Speaker, then the member can put that motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022df596a6a0d23458286a43904aa9e6599\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000590\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022df596a6a0d23458286a43904aa9e6599\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (National\u2014Ilam):\u003C/span\u003E I move, That the Speaker be recalled to give a ruling on the matter.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000591\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000592\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002221df0c20a3164d92a89afa6ec27b89f2\u0022\u003EHouse resumed.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000593\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u0022fb7219ed213d4c329ff38d741ed16d7f\u0022\u003ESpeaker Recalled\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022 data-id=\u0022294340a447524de581ed3f2709f6bf4f\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000594\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002270fa4cbd-9380-4916-9f2a-78da059d220e\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022294340a447524de581ed3f2709f6bf4f\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson)\u003C/span\u003E: Madam Speaker, the House has decided that you should be recalled. We are debating Part 1 of the Electoral Finance Bill. As the Chair, I considered that we had had sufficient time to debate the issue and the clauses. However, members felt that there was insufficient time given. As the sole judge of relevancy and as the Chair of the Committee, I judged that it was time to put the question. However, members have not agreed with that, and they have asked that you be recalled.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000595\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223dab681f49c14e2ba3b81ac7430cc6a0\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u0022a2c33b2b1e964e1ebf46d481cb0c4a13\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000596\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022a2c33b2b1e964e1ebf46d481cb0c4a13\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (National\u2014Ilam):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Recalling the Speaker to the Chamber is not a decision that has been made lightly. We realise that when we recall the Speaker to the Chamber, the Speaker is immediately put into a difficult position, because the person who is acting as the Speaker\u2019s representative\u2014in fact, the Chairman of the Committee\u2014is doing so with the best wishes of the House perched firmly upon his shoulder and with the authority that you carry as Speaker. However, this bill is not one where there is a clear-cut opinion, and if we look at the public opinion on this matter, then that assertion is well backed and very clear. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000597\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EIn this case we are also aware that at the moment the Government itself is conducting negotiations with other parties to see which of the many, many amendments the National Party has put forward in the name of Chris Finlayson, our shadow Attorney-General, may win the vote of the House. It seems to us that each of those amendments, along with the particular clauses that those amendments relate to, should be debated thoroughly by this House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000598\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe proposition was put to us that this is not a substantial part in the whole bill. People need to understand that there are some 19 clauses in this part, so there are 19 points of law that the House has to consider under this part. There are 17 amendments proposed to this part and, as I said before, a good number of those are being considered by the Government as we speak. We have discussed only four of those amendments through the last 1 hour and 40 minutes of debate, meaning that there has been only a cursory consideration of these matters by the House. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000599\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThis is an extremely important bill, because it limits the rights of some New Zealanders and it enhances the rights of some other New Zealanders. Our argument is simply that when members are wishing to take a call and when there has been virtually no incidence of repetition through the debate so far\u2014and we would suggest that Hansard would verify that claim\u2014then there is still time, surely, when we have so much time between now and the Christmas break, to consider all of the matters in this very, very important bill, and also to consider some of the matters in the House that we know are being discussed in some of the back rooms of Parliament tonight.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022 data-id=\u00226bc195907fa94e48a4d312167efd8d84\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000600\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022f9a94bf3-a948-4410-8413-403a7454114b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226bc195907fa94e48a4d312167efd8d84\u0022\u003ETIM BARNETT (Senior Whip\u2014Labour):\u003C/span\u003E I support the position taken by the Chair, and in doing that I will make five distinct points. Firstly, the time of the debate, according to our records here, is 2 hours and 20 minutes of debate, followed by 15 minutes of discussion. It began at 4.32 p.m., so a considerable time has been spent on this part. Secondly, certainly we accept that there has been a range of speakers and viewpoints, but the bulk of the speakers in that time have been from the National Party. Thirdly, the Minister in the chair, Rick Barker, has been the Minister in the chair right through that period and he has responded to each issue raised as we have gone through. So there has been genuine debate, and that is exactly what this part of the bill\u2019s progress is about. Fourthly, as has been mentioned, there are three further questions to be put\u2014the two further parts of the bill and then the initial clauses and commencement\u2014so a lot of the issues raised will be covered in those further debates. Lastly, there is a mechanism in the House by which it is possible to structure debate on significant bills, which is to go to the Business Committee and raise proposals for how that can be structured. I have attended the last few meetings of the Business Committee and I am not aware at all that the National Party has raised those matters. Thank you, Madam Speaker.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022 data-id=\u002291147ca53e184ab6b699e61b6e90f201\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000601\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002291147ca53e184ab6b699e61b6e90f201\u0022\u003ER DOUG WOOLERTON (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E As you heard from previous speakers, Madam Speaker, there has been extensive debate on this bill. I can think of many occasions when we have had far fewer speeches on any number of debates that I have listened to in the House. I can say fairly that the National Party, in my view, has been well represented. I can tell you, just as a matter of interest, that there have been many comments from the National Party to the effect that the bill is a nonsense and is not worth pursuing, and that was also those members\u2019 attitude in the Justice and Electoral Committee. I say this only to make the point that I am amazed at the seriousness with which National members pretend to take this closure motion and at the hurt feelings they tend to portray, because I can tell the House that that is not what they have portrayed hitherto.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022 data-id=\u00223766a3424f644210b2c8487f84a8c00a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000602\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00223766a3424f644210b2c8487f84a8c00a\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY (National\u2014Whangarei):\u003C/span\u003E There is also a procedural matter to consider here. What happened was that the Chairman indicated that he would take a final call and he turned to do that, but the National Party challenged it through our senior whip, and there was a series of points of order about it. During those points of order David Benson-Pope rose to argue that putting the closure motion would be the appropriate thing to do. After those points of order the Chairman said that the question was whether the question should now be put, but no Labour member or any other member of this House, including David Benson-Pope, actually moved the motion that the question be now put. So that vote was\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000603\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002224708d4572ae4d749b7a6edf1b229c85\u0022\u003EDavid Benson-Pope\u003C/span\u003E: Did so!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000604\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022cbb83aab-9566-44c4-9029-8bda4aaca7f2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002254adee97ae7a41d79913132d8092c544\u0022\u003EPHIL HEATLEY\u003C/span\u003E: No, Hansard will show that the members opposite never actually moved the motion. The Chairman put that question to the Committee before a member had moved it. David Benson-Pope took a point of order, but he never moved that motion before the Committee.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022 data-id=\u00226e3476f697714b078c38e3ff05e8ad80\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000605\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226e3476f697714b078c38e3ff05e8ad80\u0022\u003EHon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National\u2014Pakuranga):\u003C/span\u003E I want to canvass what I think is now a very serious issue with regard to one of the most major constitutional reforms that this Parliament may process. I expressed before, when Mr Ross Robertson was in the Chair, that he and I were probably the only two members in the House who have been here as long as this. I have been through debate after debate in this House where members of both Opposition and Government have repeated the same old mantra time and time again, and I think we are so sick of it that we would have liked to see a closure, as well. But tonight I have specifically followed every speech. Not only are there 19 clauses in this bill but also in some cases those clauses fragment\u2014like clause 5, which fragments into clause 5(1), clause 5(2), down to clause 5(2)(da).\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000606\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00224a11ce4e-9fb3-4738-b0be-5a9f81d975da\u0022\u003EThe speech I gave focused solely on clause 5(2)(g). If the Chairperson of this Committee were to rule that there had been repetition and irrelevant debate, then I would go with his ruling. But I do not believe that anybody listening to tonight\u2019s debate would say that had yet been the case. I know that there are members on the Opposition side of the Chamber who still have points on fresh fractions of clauses within the 19 substantive clauses, and I see no reason, as long as those people are given a right to make the claims and arguments that they want to, and as long as they are not repeating themselves, why this House would not want to allow that to happen. I think that there would be a severe breach of the democratic right of this Parliament should that debate be shut down.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022 data-id=\u00220f3d513ac2614e1aab0fa7b8911229ee\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000607\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022330c030b-99be-4461-8aaa-9a10ee5bd889\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00220f3d513ac2614e1aab0fa7b8911229ee\u0022\u003EDAVID BENSON-POPE (Labour\u2014Dunedin South):\u003C/span\u003E I will respond just very briefly to the statements made by Mr Heatley. It is my understanding of events\u2014and it is confirmed by my colleagues sitting beside me\u2014that this discussion, and ultimately your recall, Madam Speaker, started when I was granted the call by the Chairman of the Committee and I moved, in the proper language, the closure motion.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022 data-id=\u0022f786bbacaa414cd895d6f2c0a0e36077\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000608\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022022cfe6b-bae4-4028-b68a-ccffb4269442\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f786bbacaa414cd895d6f2c0a0e36077\u0022\u003EMadam SPEAKER\u003C/span\u003E: I thank members. We have had sufficient argument on this, so I thank the member. As members have said, and as I appreciate, the point is an important one. But I would refer members to Speakers\u2019 rulings 60/7 and 60/8\u2014but in particular Speakers\u2019 ruling 60/7\u2014where the position is set out quite clearly that in these instances the Chair is the sole judge of whether a closure should be accepted. The Chairperson has been the person who has listened to the debate, and, even though I have also listened to the debate, it is the Chairperson who has been in the Chamber listening to the debate who is the best person to judge that. It is not for the Speaker, in accordance with the Speakers\u2019 rulings, which I uphold, to second-guess the Chair\u2019s judgment in that respect. Of course, if in fact the Committee does not agree with the Chair\u2019s decision to accept the closure, then it is always open to the Committee to vote down the question\u2014and that question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000609\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00226c15d9976b294fd2aa77194cc48ef68e\u0022\u003EIn Committee\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000610\u0022\u003EDebate resumed.\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000611\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u002274d52b72b4e8457aa46438bc377a3536\u0022\u003EPart 1  Preliminary Provisions (continued)\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022ab88accdef874d52b591a76154aea8e3\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the question be now put.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EMotion agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000612\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to Part 1 to omit \u201Cthird party\u201D in each place where it appears and substitute \u201Cinterest group\u201D be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022d79c7603a5d7428ea32baafeeaf4a965\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000613\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to insert new clause 3A be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e83cd7ee516244e2909d8988f80380de\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000614\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 4, to insert the definition of interest group, be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022a26a512c560347539e1d2d7283894122\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000615\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 4, to add new paragraph (c) to the definition of periodical, be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00224a87efc052f948cea9b8e972330414fd\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000616\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 4, to omit and substitute the definition of publish, be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222c18e3d8b47f4bba82e019974092d283\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000617\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 4, to omit and substitute the definition of regulated period, be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022684897822df94ff18dd3eb5254240d03\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000618\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 4, to omit the definition of third party, be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002271f4517c1ba948d6b2879cf30eb37a79\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000619\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to omit clause 5 and substitute new clause 5 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022e985a21e140d404793ac84400ee25599\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000620\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment, set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson, and the following amendment in his name, to clause 9 be agreed to:\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000621\u0022\u003Eto add to paragraph (c) the words \u201C; and\u201D\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022861021a268b648209359887ad91863e7\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000622\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 14(1)(b) be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00229ec893f60c704cb5a865d3bcb9ede7de\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000623\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 14(2)(a) be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00222cf3230062734616b8431baec4ab6a71\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000624\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 14 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00223d17499234e34a2aa7cebcf347bb1c40\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000625\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 16 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002268cbcccdcc6e4636ad10cb76801fdac2\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000626\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 17 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002289ebadb88c1c4430ab624e147e58ff23\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000627\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 18 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022a467e2673b2b426abcd72dc282d3ab24\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000628\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 166 in the name of Christopher Finlayson to clause 19 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00224f9b8c9c89e2494c87201fc351f39df5\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendment not agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000629\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 162 in the name of the Hon Annette King to Part 1 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u0022b525e94a0e0043928ed84de40aa9aa51\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000630\u0022\u003EThe question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 163 in the name of the Hon Annette King to Part 1 be agreed to.\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u002238c285fe7210436cb66eb8ff8886682a\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That the amendments be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAmendments agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca id=\u00227697aa999b3c43178d81560bc98a57c2\u0022 name=\u0022division\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EA party vote was called for on the question, That Part 1 as amended be agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EAyes 65\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand Labour 49; New Zealand First 7; Green Party 6; United Future 2; Progressive 1.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENoes 56\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003ENew Zealand National 48; M\u0101ori Party 4; ACT New Zealand 2; Independents: Copeland, Field.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp class=\u0022HpsDivision\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsItem\u0022\u003EPart 1 as amended agreed to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000631\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsSubproceedingHeading\u0022 id=\u00224136e5a80f134b34a1601b82a643b622\u0022\u003EPart 2  Election campaigns\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022 data-id=\u002204a5a31a8f1248e8b50928f6a0adcf18\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000632\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u002204a5a31a8f1248e8b50928f6a0adcf18\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Justice):\u003C/span\u003E I begin by thanking my colleague the Associate Minister of Justice Rick Barker for shepherding through the first part of this bill. I was unable to participate in the debate on the first part because I was returning from the far north, where I have just opened the new Kait\u0101ia hospital. It was a great day, I have to say, because it was in the 1990s that the previous National Government said it would close that hospital, and 7,000 people marched. I went back to honour that promise today.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000633\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022ae94eea7-ba5f-4303-bf71-49e708bc9888\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002214b0733901064193acc7e4186a576fe7\u0022\u003EJohn Hayes\u003C/span\u003E: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. None of this speech has anything to do with the part of the bill under consideration.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000634\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022c4c0010229c54edc81b3569ee1926569\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: They were remarks that the Minister used by way of introduction.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000635\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225c6ed753dbd948b1aa604567e557f53f\u0022\u003EHon ANNETTE KING\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I went back to honour that promise that was made, and that is what Labour is doing with the Electoral Finance Bill, which is before this Committee today. We promised to bring in a fairer, more transparent election financing approach, to do away with the sneaky approach and the backroom deals we have seen in the past, and to stop the National Party members from screwing the scrum\u2014and they are old scrum-screwers from a long way back. There is not a trick that they have not tried. The latest one\u2014in an effort to get themselves a few more votes before this bill is in place\u2014is to bring out a shonky DVD that breaches copyright. We want to shine the light on those who believe that money can buy anything, including democracy. We want to give clearer rules. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000636\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EWhat members have heard are the protests from the self-interested. National Party members have shamelessly used organisations like the Human Rights Commission and the Electoral Commission in their adverts and in their speeches, and not once have they acknowledged that the Human Rights Commission and the Electoral Commission have said that changes made to this bill have considerably improved it and that they support most of this bill. Those members never mention that. That is how dishonest they have been. How could anyone trust them to bring in such a bill? I have been very disappointed with what I have heard in this debate today as I travelled around. The debate has not been about the bill, except, perhaps, for Christopher Finlayson\u2019s speech. It has been about making political points. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000637\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EWe are discussing Part 2, which deals with election campaigns. It contains the financial rules proposed for candidates, political parties, and third parties. It contains the key definitions and general provisions relating to the disclosure of donations. It establishes a new regime for protected disclosures, which enables donations over $1,000 to be made to political parties or third parties via the Electoral Commission. It sets out general rules relating to all election advertisements, whether published by candidates, political parties, or third parties. Part 2 sets out the regime for election expenses of candidates, political parties, and third parties. The Justice and Electoral Committee made some very important and far-sighted changes to the donation regime. The overwhelming message in the submissions to the select committee was that the public wanted stricter rules in this area. That is what the public said they wanted. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000638\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EI listened to Nicky Wagner tonight. She said that we need to have people power. She said we need to listen to what the public say. Well, the public said they wanted stricter rules in this area. Why is the National Party opposing stricter rules in this area? If it really believes in people power and in listening to the public, why does it not listen to those submissions on this bill? The public wanted greater transparency about the source of political funding. Being transparent about where one gets one\u2019s money from must be an absolutely basic element in a decent and proper democracy. Why would we not want people to know where our money comes from? Why would people want to hide where they got their money from, unless they have something to hide? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000639\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EMembers of the select committee listened to submissions and increased the threshold for those who are listing as a third party, from $5,000 to $12,000. People do not need to list if they want to spend under $12,000 in the campaign. So if a person wants to spend less than $12,000 promoting a particular party, he or she is able to do so without listing as a third party. A third party can also be a lobby group. It can be an individual. It can campaign for an individual member or on behalf of a party and it can spend up to $120,000. Every member of a family could be an individual who could spend money, if that individual wanted to, as a third party. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000640\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EPart 2 also deals with anonymous donations. There were a large number of submissions around anonymous donations. The candidates wanted anonymous donations dealt with\u2014anonymous donations to candidates, to political parties, and to third parties. Do members know what they said? They said they should be capped at low levels. That is what the people power said. That is what the public said. They wanted anonymous donations capped at low levels. Why do the National Party members not want to listen to the people? Why do they not want to have an anonymous donations regime in the bill? They do not want it because that is where they got most of their money from, and they do not want any fetter on their ability to buy the next election. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000641\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EPart 2 also deals with the issue of Government advertising. Some submitters raised concerns that Government departments would engage in election advertising. It is very clear now in this bill that they cannot. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000642\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EI want to mention clause 80(d), which covers a member acting in his or her capacity as a member of Parliament. The Electoral Commission has asked Parliament to give it some clarification as to how we interpret that. We are not going to put it in law; the commission has asked for an interpretation. That is what it has asked for\u2014it wants an interpretation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000643\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EWell, I gave my view 2 weeks ago. I gave my view, and my view, I have to stress, is my view. But what the Electoral Commission is interested in is what this Parliament thinks, what the members of this Parliament think, and it wants to be guided. The Electoral Commission said that it wants to be guided by what this Parliament says. I am prepared to say that my interpretation could be wrong. I might be wrong. In fact, I am prepared to admit that I could be wrong. I read the comments of Bill English today in a question to the House. He might be right in terms of that interpretation. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000644\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EWhat this Parliament needs to do now, in the Committee stage of this bill, is to give its views, which will be listened to. Of course, Bill English is very worried. He said, about the interpretation I gave, that political parties would be suspicious of my definition because it would mean that Government members will be allowed to talk about what the Government is doing, but Opposition members will not be allowed to talk about what they would like to do if they become the Government. He said: \u201CHow ridiculous is that?\u201D \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000645\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EI am prepared to listen to the views of this House. Of course, the members opposite do not want to listen to anyone else\u2019s view, but I am prepared to listen\u2014and not only to the noisy National Party. I welcome comments, because there are other parties in this House and they deserve to have a say as well. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000646\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EI also want to mention an amendment to clause 22A. This is a National Party amendment, because this clause will make it clear that one has to include one\u2019s GST. Which party did not pay its GST? The National Party. It has squirmed and wormed its way around that issue. It did not pay its GST, and it is very clear that it will not be able to blame it on the publishing company, or the publicity agent, because it is in the bill\u2014National pays GST just like everybody else. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000647\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002209a5b71a-ca7e-4e7c-9e09-f9e63f18aa12\u0022\u003EThese are important amendments in this bill. Part 2 is an important part, and I look forward to the debate on it.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022 data-id=\u00222493029162cc489fbcb970a5140590ba\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000648\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00222493029162cc489fbcb970a5140590ba\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE (National\u2014Ilam):\u003C/span\u003E What an utter disgrace it is, and what an incredible admission it is, for the Minister of Justice to come down to the Committee at 20 past 9 at night, after almost 12 months of consideration of the Electoral Finance Bill, and after standing in the House for a couple of weeks and putting in the Hansard record a view that was designed to give judges, who ultimately will have to determine many aspects of the bill, some clarity\u2014that Minister went on the record, and put her views with regard to what an MP may and may not do according to clause 80\u2014and say: \u201CI might be wrong. I might be wrong, and I am prepared to listen to the views of the other side of the Committee.\u201D Well, I ask the Minister where the ministerial Supplementary Order Paper is that sorts that out. It is non-existent, is not there, will not be there, and Labour does not care.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000649\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EWe have had the ignominy today of the Prime Minister standing in the House and saying that if a candidate is not sure what the new electoral law means, he or she should consult a lawyer\u2014go and consult a lawyer. So Queen\u2019s Counsel up and down the countryside will be advertising their services as election consultants, while poor old candidates out there try to work out what all this means.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000650\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EIt is worse than that. We have had the particular Minister who just spoke saying that many of the interpretations in this bill, if they cannot be sorted out by common sense, will be sorted out by the courts. Worse than that, we had the Attorney-General stand in the House today and say that the Electoral Commissioner was now happy enough with this bill. Having seen it move from being completely unworkable to now being somewhat unintelligible, she is happy enough to call all the parties together for a seminar, after the bill has been through the House, after it has had this mickey mouse consideration, to work out what it all means\u2014a bit of a handholding gathering where those who consider themselves to be tinpot experts on this matter decide, with the Electoral Commissioner, what the law means. Well, the law should be very clear about what it means when it leaves this Parliament.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000651\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EI want to make this comment to you, Mr Chairperson, and I intend it to also be a message to others who might sit in the Chair tonight. On the last part there were some 33 speeches in total. The National Party got only 11 of those 33 speeches. That is hardly proportionate, it is hardly fair, and it is hardly reasonable. Although I am a great subscriber to the view that anyone elected to this House\u2014no matter how he or she is elected\u2014is no more or less elected than anyone else, I want to make it clear that it is unacceptable for the Government to run the jackboot over this Committee on a bill of such constitutional importance as the Electoral Finance Bill; a bill that the Acting Minister of State Services is uncertain about what it means, a bill that the Attorney-General is uncertain about what it means, a bill about which the Prime Minister is saying \u201CI don\u2019t know what it means; just consult a lawyer.\u201D, and a bill that the Committee itself is struggling to work out what are the good aspects of it and what are the bad. The reality is that the vast majority of it is bad. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000652\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EI make this observation: this week in Venezuela, the home of President Hugo Chavez, a vote was taken among the people as to whether he could stay in power for longer than the constitution currently allows\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000653\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002274e3a888272c48b9be3015355e463f99\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: For life.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000654\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022438b82ecf2c3459d8b871aa68919c855\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: Could he stay there for life? Well, by a narrow margin he was prevented from doing that. But the interesting thing is that, in this country, if this bill was about whether the Labour Party could stay in Government forever, the margins that we are seeing in the votes tonight would be enough to carry it through. There are no constitutional thresholds in this country. We simply have the tyranny of the majority. It is a disgrace for Helen Clark to be exercising that principle on a bill like this. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000655\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EWe see the member over there exiting the Chamber, screaming at the top of his voice. I do not doubt that he is off to circumvent the provisions of this part of the bill by picking up another brown paper bag full of cash over a lovely tea of fish and chips with one of that party\u2019s great funders.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000656\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EA number of things in this bill are utterly ridiculous. We know through the political process that many people in this country have interests that prevent them from expressing a political view in a public way\u2014hundreds of people. We are a small country. We have recently seen a debacle over the State Services Commission and the horrible politicisation of Government departments. We know and accept that many people who do good work for a Government have a view that is politically different from that of the Government of the day. But this bill makes it clear that they cannot exercise their right as a citizen in this country to make any sort of substantial donation to a political party, without their name coming into the public arena. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000657\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EWe see the provision for anonymous donations. The word \u201Canonymous\u201D means that no one knows. Someone might anonymously choose to go along to the Labour Party, perhaps to Mr Owen Glenn, and say to him: \u201COwen, I want to support the Labour Party. I want to support Helen Clark.\u201D Actually it would be a very short queue; none the less, it is possible. He or she goes along to Owen Glenn and says: \u201CI want to make an anonymous donation.\u201D He will now be required to say: \u201CWell, thank you for your money. I\u2019m going to have to record your name, I\u2019m going to have to record your address, and I\u2019m going to have to record the amount that has been given to the Labour Party, and I\u2019m going to have to put that into the mix, so that a number of people know about it.\u201D I would ask this simple question: if no New Zealander goes to the ballot box having to declare how he or she votes, why should any New Zealander have to say what small amount he or she wants to give to any particular political party?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000658\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b81957642f3e4127988a047b1ea5f057\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: What about the trusts?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000659\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b425a61d088c40479808473bcee61897\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: I have a question for that member: \u201CWhat about the unions?\u201D. [Interruption] The brains trust from Wanganui says: \u201CWell, the unions have to declare who they are.\u201D So we see the Amalgamated Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union up there, and apparently that gets past the anonymity thing. Well, I do not know, and no one in this Chamber knows, where that union gets its money from. No one knows that. No one dives in behind that union and says \u201CWe want to know where you got your dough.\u201D Well, hang on, here we go.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000660\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00222a849ed4-a817-45a7-8b86-dbc9dd210193\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232e2d3439113421893ad3b3086e6e0cb\u0022\u003EJill Pettis\u003C/span\u003E: Got it from the members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000661\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00220945097ddfe14aa581796571080e5388\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: Mrs Pettis says that it got it from the members. I apologise for the damage I have done to the walls in impersonating Mrs Pettis. She says that it comes from the members. Well, what is wrong with individual people, unnamed, as union members are, making a donation to a trust? Oh, here she goes.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000662\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f95d0b56d7024af5940329556bf43809\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: What about your cake stalls?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000663\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00223b3f8ada3b3f4c258812592240e7e1c8\u0022\u003EGERRY BROWNLEE\u003C/span\u003E: The outgoing member for Waitakere has just said \u201CWhat about your cake stalls?\u201D. The classic example was given in the select committee of a cake stall that raised $1,800. That member said: \u201COh my goodness. How does anybody raise $1,800 from a cake stall?\u201D. That is the sort of anonymous money we are trying to get to.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000664\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003ETonight we see a bill before the Committee that is driven by the paranoia of the Labour Party. It is not paranoia about where the money comes from, but paranoia and fear that Labour may be tipped out of Government at the next election. There is no doubt that that is where it is heading. Mrs King said: \u201CWhat about people power?\u201D. I tell her to go and look at the opinion polls, go and look at what the focus groups are telling the Labour Party about this bill. No one likes it. No one in this country likes the idea that any single politician is going to create advantage for himself or herself through the laws of this country. That is what this bill does. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000665\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022e6b4dc55-3561-49a8-a871-ae005354ef90\u0022\u003EThe members on the other side talk about wanting to stop wealth from being a big factor in the coming election. What about the wealth of New Zealanders that the Labour Government is going to put its hands on to promote its programmes, quite legally, if this bill passes, to convince New Zealanders that they should vote for it? Does anyone in this Chamber think that New Zealanders will be happy that $15 million of taxpayers\u2019 money is used to promote Labour Party policies?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022 data-id=\u0022d5d274c92fc54fe59d8f599653e119a2\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000666\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022d5d274c92fc54fe59d8f599653e119a2\u0022\u003EANNE TOLLEY (Senior Whip\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. Could I ask, please, that the Hansard of the Minister\u2019s address that opened the debate on this part be made available to us in writing by the end of the sitting tonight? I believe that the Minister laid out some quite pivotal information that will be necessary for us to continue this debate tomorrow.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022 data-id=\u00226fcfd7a1f40c431fba3699d42d99476a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000667\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226fcfd7a1f40c431fba3699d42d99476a\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: No, that is not something that is done for members, I am afraid to say. The member who made a speech may inquire into doing that, but not other members.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022 data-id=\u0022f95574b4b0a64707962955e5ad7f5b1a\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000668\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022f95574b4b0a64707962955e5ad7f5b1a\u0022\u003EHon MARIAN HOBBS (Labour\u2014Wellington Central):\u003C/span\u003E I rise to address the issues raised in Part 2 of the Electoral Finance Bill, which is about election campaigns, candidates\u2019 election expenses, parties\u2019 election expenses, and third parties\u2019 election expenses. It is not third parties\u2019 advocacy expenses but third parties\u2019 election expenses, and there is a difference. For me, this is an essential part of the bill. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000669\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003EMany of us have been invited to meet with women from the United States of America who are involved in politics. Some of us have been delighted to meet with the women who are involved in Emily\u2019s List, and they say to us so often that it is extremely hard for a woman to stand for Congress in the United States. To stand for Congress in the United States one has to earn millions of dollars. Women do not have access to millions of dollars, so we immediately\u2014[Interruption] I am quoting from Emily\u2019s List, and that is exactly what Emily\u2019s List says. I am sorry for Opposition members if they have never met the women from Emily\u2019s List, who describe that that is why they have raised money, as women\u2014because women are not able to get corporate money and support. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000670\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003EHowever, those people who do get corporate money and support find that they become lobby fodder, that they are there to support the cigarette companies, that they are there to support the National Rifle Association, and that they are there to support abortion or not abortion. They are lobby fodder. That is one thing this bill and this part is about\u2014it is about stopping the buying of votes. It is about stopping the buying of elections. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000671\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003EThe Opposition has been calling out for freedom of speech. I support freedom of speech, probably more than anyone on that side of the Chamber. I have been arrested for exercising my freedom of speech. But I do not support the freedom to buy speech, and this is what this bill is about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000672\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003EI very much support one person, one vote, and not $1.2 million, one Government. I support one person, one vote. The Opposition supports $1.2 million equalling one Government. That is the difference, and that is what I stand here for. [Interruption] I do not care who is doing the buying. I want to say this again, because I have heard this conversation come up before: I do not care who is doing the buying. If it were the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society, or my friends the Society of Friends, the Quakers, I would be just as angry as if it were the Exclusive Brethren. I do not care who is buying the election. What I care about is that one group puts itself above the law, puts itself above human rights, and says \u201CBecause we have money, we have the right to buy an election.\u201D It is not who the buyer is. It is the fact that someone is trying to buy a Government, rather than vote for a Government.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000673\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00221583b5cb-f4e0-4981-97ba-193c338ff404\u0022\u003EMr Hide argued earlier this evening that it was the right of the Brethren to spend their money in order to have their say. He might have said that it was the right of the Society of Friends, or the right of the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society. He added that he defended the Brethren\u2019s hiding who they were. I so disagree with that; that is so anti-democratic. If a group wants to buy an election or support somebody, it should put its money on the table, put its real name on the table, and put its real address on the table\u2014be honest, be brave, be upfront, be democratic\u2014and that is what I am here to support tonight.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022 data-id=\u00226e049415c6ac4c3a966318aec69f3b72\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000674\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00226e049415c6ac4c3a966318aec69f3b72\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL (National\u2014Bay of Plenty):\u003C/span\u003E What an amazing admission was made by the Minister of Justice in the Committee not 20 minutes ago. Two weeks ago the Minister of Justice took particular pains to read into Hansard her definition of an MP\u2019s activities that would not be covered by the spending rules. She specifically said that for the avoidance of doubt and so the judges know, she would outline the activities of members of Parliament that would not require them to declare their spending to be for election purposes. She came down to the Chamber not 20 minutes ago and admitted that what she had said was wrong, that it did not count, and that she was now open to further discussions about what that would mean. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000675\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003ESo there she was 2 weeks ago, trying to instruct the judges by way of Hansard, and there she was 22 minutes ago, saying that she was completely wrong, that Bill English has a point, and that now she wants us all to talk about it. She said we should have a seance and try to get it right; that is what she said in this Chamber 22 minutes ago. And Anne Tolley is dead right to try to get the Hansard, because I bet when we ring up and ask the Minister\u2019s office for it at 8.30, we will not get it. The Minister said she was wrong, and the Government was going to have to rethink what she had said. Even though she had tried the gimmick of reading the legislation into Hansard 2 weeks ago in order to try to guide the judges, she has had to stand in the Chamber today and say that she had got it wrong, that Bill English has a point, and that we need to work on it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000676\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EWell, that is what we said to the Government when it first brought this loathsome legislation to the House. We asked why we did not do what parliaments have done for generations, and try to get agreement from the major political parties about how the matter should be dealt with. But instead we have had the remarkable sight today of the Minister of Justice coming down to the Chamber and admitting that the advice she tried to give the judges 2 weeks ago was wrong\u2014and that is summed up even further by the 150 amendments that she tabled only hours before this debate began earlier today. She has been in the Chamber, together with the outgoing member for Taupo, trying to justify all the provisions in this bill, yet 150 amendments have come through. And the Minister came down 24 minutes ago and admitted that the advice she gave to the judges was absolutely wrong. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000677\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThen we listened to the debate of Marian Hobbs. Well, Marian Hobbs does not want to tell the Committee that she was elected to Parliament on the back of over $800,000 of anonymous donations to the Labour Party in 1999. What did the donors get from Marian Hobbs in return for that? And she did not talk about the fact that she was re-elected in 2002 on the back of $350,000 of anonymous donations to the Labour Party\u2014\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000678\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022977cccaf-581d-4f48-924e-32bf6c54a93d\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002232e7c9d318804ec9bca505e64814c822\u0022\u003EAnne Tolley\u003C/span\u003E: Plus the unions.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000679\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00229a4e7a6d6aaf4db183d9c9b22fd04c96\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: \u2014plus the big union money. But she stood up in this Parliament and said such donations buy influence, and that all that money has to be controlled because it buys influence. Well, she was a Cabinet Minister; she was the Minister for the Environment. So what about the money that the big forestry companies donated to the Labour Party? Did she change her actions as the Minister for the Environment because of the money that forestry companies donated? Did she do that? Oh, there is silence from that member. So that is the question. Marian Hobbs can stand up and say that people are bought because of donations, but she was a Minister, so let us hear her explanation of the $800,000 of anonymous donations that Helen Clark pocketed at the 1999 election in order to get herself elected\u2014$800,000 from what New Zealand First says are the secret manipulators of New Zealand politics. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000680\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThe Labour Party received $800,000 of anonymous donations, yet we sat for days in the Justice and Electoral Committee as Labour members tried to say that people knew who the anonymous donators were. It was amazing. Lynne Pillay would sit in the select committee and say that we needed to make sure that people really knew they were anonymous. Well, Mike Smith, general secretary of the Labour Party, signed off that the $800,000 of anonymous donations that Helen Clark received in 1999 were completely anonymous, and once we had pointed that out to Labour members, they never said a word again about that\u2014never said a word again. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000681\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003ELet us also talk about the really \u201Chonest\u201D Labour Party, and ask about the \u201COwen Glenn clause\u201D. It is clause 25C(1)(a). Into the select committee those members came on their little ponies, being really tough and saying they were going to stop foreigners donating to political parties. They were going to stop foreigners donating to political parties, said Lynne Pillay, Charles Chauvel, David Benson-Pope, and the rest of the lefties on that select committee. So they proposed an amendment they brought forward that said any individual who is not a registered voter in New Zealand may not donate money\u2014that every person who lives overseas and who is not a New Zealand - registered voter may not donate. Do members remember that the whole debate centred on Chris Finlayson\u2019s brother in Germany, and whether he could make a donation? So those members decided that anybody who is not registered as a New Zealand voter would not be able to donate to parties. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000682\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThen we asked how that left Owen Glenn, the man who has donated over half a million dollars to the Labour Party.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000683\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u002285ec30d4-6394-433a-a12e-2c4def705dd0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022cef084d42b2d48dc99f3430148ae2d75\u0022\u003EJudith Collins\u003C/span\u003E: What does he get for that?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000684\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022b3940364f9774914b2404ca55d5a7c79\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: Well, I ask Mrs Collins what he gets in return for that, because Marian Hobbs says that if people donate to political parties, they expect something for that. Let me tell members about the \u201COwen Glenn amendment\u201D. Mrs Pillay and her friends came into the select committee, and said they would stop foreigners donating money. They said that because foreigners were not on the electoral roll, they could not donate to parties. Then we said: \u201CWell, what about Owen Glenn?\u201D Within minutes a coffee break was announced. Those members said they would just break the committee and deal with that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000685\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EFifteen minutes later came the announcement that some amendments would have to be made to that provision.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000686\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022fd427be0-7196-4605-b39e-d665553240b0\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022d0a2bc1c6a9e46ae99942f939369369c\u0022\u003ELynne Pillay\u003C/span\u003E: That is such a story\u2014yeah, right!\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000687\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00226d36164f10704c7ab1be8414c7fdb1a2\u0022\u003EHon TONY RYALL\u003C/span\u003E: Every member opposite on that committee knows that is exactly what went on. All of a sudden, what happened? Well, the Labour members must have gone to check on the residency status of Owen Glenn, because what came back was the wording that an overseas person is \u201Can individual who\u2014(i) resides outside New Zealand;\u201D. That is Owen Glenn. He lives in Australia, and he gave the Labour Party half a million dollars. I do not know whether he gave it any of the $800,000 of anonymous donations in 1999. Here is the \u201COwen Glenn clause\u201D: \u201Cand (ii) is not a New Zealand citizen or registered as an elector\u201D. Everyone knows that Owen Glenn is a New Zealand citizen, so that provision will allow him to make his big donation to the Labour Party again, even though Labour\u2019s original proposal would not have allowed him to do that. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000688\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003ESo I tell members opposite not to give us the high and mighty stuff from Marian Hobbs about Labour not wanting there to be any money in politics. The fact is that Labour Party members wanted the big money when they were trying to get elected in 1999 and Helen Clark pocketed $840,000 of anonymous donations. It was $340,000 at the next election. Hundreds of thousands of dollars came from Owen Glenn. So let us not start all that nonsense about what Labour is trying to do. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000689\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThe fact is that this legislation is all about skewing the playing field in favour of the Labour Party, to give it every advantage in the run-up to the next election. It is absolute hypocrisy for anyone to stand up and say the things that have been said by Labour Party supporters, not only in this House but around the country, about this issue. This bill is an abomination. It is a breach of democratic principles in this country. It is based on the political manoeuvrings and scheming of the Labour Party, because if it really did want to stop anonymous donations it would have prevented Owen Glenn from giving it another half a million dollars. And if those members opposite really wanted to stop anonymous donations, they would have made other movements. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000690\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EIn fact, did members hear the Minister of Justice say that Labour wanted to stop anonymous donations? The bill as introduced was silent on anonymous donations; there was not a word in it on anonymous donations. Labour members decided they wanted to put a provision about anonymous donations in the bill because someone else pointed that issue out to them. There was not a word in the bill about anonymous donations when it was introduced, but they subsequently decided they wanted to put a provision about anonymous donations into the bill because someone else pointed that issue out to them. Although there was not a word about it in the bill as introduced, they brought amendments to the select committee, and now in the Committee of the whole House they have come in with another 150 amendments. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000691\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003EThe failed Minister of Health, who is the short-term Minister of Justice, came into the Chamber not half an hour ago and announced that what she gave to the House 2 weeks ago was absolutely wrong, and that the judges should ignore it. That is what she said\u2014that the judges should ignore it. That is simply no way for a Minister of Justice to treat the House.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000692\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u00225bb762a3ac5f43dcbb68456d7ece2a7e\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: Before I call the next speaker, I ask the member who has just resumed his seat whether he used the word \u201Chypocrisy\u201D in relation not only to people outside the Chamber\u2014he mentioned it in relation to supporters, which he is entitled to do\u2014but also to members in the Chamber. Did he mean to include members in the Chamber?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000693\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002289d922ac1612437db40ddb01fb1c73fd\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: That would have been unparliamentary, Mr Chairperson. It was certainly not my intention.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000694\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u00220ed9ad81-05c1-4171-80c6-24fa02cade42\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002295daf2824f8a46cb80a0f539b5f6d0a2\u0022\u003EThe CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich)\u003C/span\u003E: Thank you, Mr Ryall.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022 data-id=\u0022e96b429bc9cf4e8a9c5856428ff07c94\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000695\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u0022e96b429bc9cf4e8a9c5856428ff07c94\u0022\u003ER DOUG WOOLERTON (NZ First):\u003C/span\u003E I find it amazing to have all the bits and pieces wheeled out from the Justice and Electoral Committee\u2014not in total; just little excerpts. I enjoyed the pony bit, but none of them are actually accurate. That concerns me, because that is what we have seen depicted in the newspapers up and down this country in recent times. We have heard all sorts of things, except what actually happened in the select committee and except what the bill is actually about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000696\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EThe bill will not stop the Exclusive Brethren Church from spending money on an election campaign for the National Party, or on anything else, and it was never designed to. What the bill does do is make sure that everybody knows who the players are. It makes sure that people who spend $1.2 million or $1.4 million on an election campaign come under the caps and come under the electoral law, just like political parties do. That is what it is all about. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000697\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EThere were two groups of submitters in the main, and their concerns were exactly as the Minister of Justice read out. The first group was concerned about anonymous donations to political parties and where the money was coming from. The second group had concerns about whether they could participate or whether this electoral law would close down advertising campaigns, how much they could spend, and that sort of thing. That part of it was completely taken out of the bill by the select committee, but we will not hear National members talk about that, because, sadly, they chose not to participate in any meaningful way in the select committee. They chose a line of obstruction and belittlement, and that is what they continue to do. I believe that if National had used John Key, with his formidable negotiating skills, to talk to the Labour Party and to the other parties in the House in a proper,upfront manner, then National members could have changed this bill quite a bit. But, no, those National members chose a line of obstruction. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000698\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EOne of the things that has concerned me a bit is when Dr Helena Catt said that she could not define what an MP did. Unlike the National Party, I welcome the Minister\u2019s honesty and candour in saying that she would like to hear from people what MPs do. How we are going to define that when the National Party quite obviously is not going to participate in that debate, either? \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000699\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EThe one good thing about this is that the whole of New Zealand, if this issue is being reported correctly, now knows that the National Party was invited to participate. In spite of what third parties say, in spite of what newspapers say, in spite of what lobbyists in the National Party say, MPs do have a unique role in this country. We have a job of representation\u2014I am getting so excited that I am fogging up my glasses It is our unique job to represent people. It is our job to bring their concerns to this Parliament and to debate them. It is not the job of the lobbyists or the job of the newspapers; it is our unique role, and one we take seriously. It is one that I believe can be defined, even though it may take a little bit of doing. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000700\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022b63935ee-d78b-43a8-a3bc-996e7951fb9b\u0022\u003EQuite clearly, if we are asked to go to Invercargill, or to Whangarei, from one end of the island to the other\u2014and the Minister in the chair, the Hon Annette King, has said she was up north today\u2014then we should do so. If we are called to account to address a meeting and to tell people what we as a political party intend to do, we should be there.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\u003Ca name=\u0022member\u0022 data-type=\u0022article\u0022 data-memberid=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022 data-id=\u00228cceee2fa7554b1a98eac1db1026ba95\u0022\u003E\u003C/a\u003E\u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000701\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsByToc\u0022 id=\u00228cceee2fa7554b1a98eac1db1026ba95\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader\u2014National):\u003C/span\u003E There are any number of stupidities in Part 2 of the Electoral Finance Bill that we could talk about\u2014for instance, that it is illegal for Television New Zealand to run the election ads it is obliged by the Broadcasting Act to run; that if people carry a placard in a protest, they have to put their name and address on it and get it authorised by their party\u2019s financial agent; and that there are now 97 different requirements that people have to meet to have a public opinion in election year. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000702\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022a83ea07a-806c-45ad-95bb-eb2c481cd0e2\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u0022f58b781e827d4ab58b7c9d7113ab583e\u0022\u003EHon Tony Ryall\u003C/span\u003E: How many?\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000703\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsBy\u0022 id=\u002226cff9a9c268492984330e58778bcfc6\u0022\u003EHon BILL ENGLISH\u003C/span\u003E: There are only 97 in this part of the bill. The Government had 2 years; why could it not come up with 197? Then at least it would have something to show for it. \u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000704\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EI am going to be selfish; I am going to talk about the effort that MPs have made to understand how they can comply with this part. If they do not, there is a $40,000 fine.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000705\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EProgress reported.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000706\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EReport adopted.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000707\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003EThe House adjourned at 9.56 p.m.\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n      \u003Cp id=\u0022id200712045d615c491ad345fa8daf7b8d7f4a3f87000708\u0022\u003E\u003Cspan class=\u0022HpsNormal\u0022 id=\u0022bb158206-360b-4757-8d72-f7d0994e1fb3\u0022\u003E\u003Cbr\u003E\u003C/span\u003E\u003C/p\u003E\n    \u003C/div\u003E\n  \u003C/body\u003E\n\u003C/html\u003E"