Turei Metiria: Electoral Referendum Bill — Third Reading 
Turei Metiria: Electoral Referendum Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:16470] 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 A number of interesting and important issues have been raised so far in the debate on the Electoral Referendum Bill. Following on from Pete Hodgson’s speech I agree with the analysis of the supplementary member system as described by Lianne Dalziel: it is just first past the post in drag. I think the public will be able to see that easily enough. 
I do not think there is anything inherently wrong with a politician or political party saying which system they think is better. The Green Party makes no apology for saying that it wants to have a system of democratic representation that is as fair as possible for all New Zealanders and that all New Zealanders are entitled to be represented in the House of Representatives. That is after all what it is for. 
We should always strive for the best possible system one that provides the greatest level of fairness and representation. There is no doubt that our current system of MMP provides a much greater level of representation and fairness for a much broader section of our New Zealand community than first past the post ever did. There are people in the House representing views that were never otherwise heard in the House and that is the point of a representative democratic process such as we have in this country. 
It is nothing to be ashamed of and we should always strive to make it better. I agree with Pete Hodgson that it is always a decision of the citizens as to which system they use. We use the referendum system so citizens can make that decision and rightly so—it is a decision that belongs to them and them alone. 
It is very important to talk about the different kinds of systems that are possible for the management of a democratic process such as we have in this country and to analyse them on the basis of their ability to provide fair and genuine representation for all voices in the community: not just the wealthy; not just the property owners as was the case in the past; and not just those who are privileged and have access to people with power but all of those who have been marginalised in the past by the systems of power we have by the elite and by the influence of wealth on our political system. 
The people who have been most marginalised—whether it is women Maori young people or people who have a different analysis of power—are all entitled to representation here as well and there is no doubt that MMP has provided that representation. We see that by looking at those sitting in the Chamber as we speak. There are more Maori in the Chamber there are more women in the Chamber and there are younger people in the Chamber specifically because we have an electoral system—MMP—that provides for a much greater level of representation for all communities. That is a good thing. We must protect that and continually strive for it. 
We are pleased with a number of very good things in this legislation which sets up the referendum to look at our electoral system in 2011. The caps on spending that apply to electoral finance have been applied here as well. All the political players in the referendum debate will have a cap on their spending to ensure that there is a level playing field for everyone involved and that is good. We do not want money to be the major influence on how citizens decide their political system will be managed. It is very good that we have the spending cap. 
I will raise one query around the decision to have the referendum at this time. Amy Adams raised a number of issues about the size of electorates for example and a whole lot of subsidiary issues that sit around the kind of electoral system that we might have. I note that a constitutional review has just been announced by National and the Maori Party as part of their confidence and supply deal. The constitutional review covers a range of matters from matters that are as significant and deep as the role of Te Tiriti o Waitangi in our constitutional arrangements which really is the first question to operational matters like how many MPs there should be. 
The breadth of the review is such that it makes one wonder why we would have a referendum on MMP in the middle quite separate from that discussion. If we will be talking about how we should be governed and asking citizens to discuss and make decisions about how we should be governed and all the different aspects of that—what value is set for how we should be governed what the principles are by which we should be governed how we should structure the process for governance who should be part of that process who should make the decisions what the constraints are and all of those things—then surely the electoral system is part of that discussion. 
To have these two very different processes occur at the same time does not make any sense from the point of view of having a rational discussion about our constitutional arrangements. It is a disappointment. By splitting out MMP in a referendum at this early stage we are predetermining what will happen with our electoral system while at the same time we are asking the public to discuss that very issue in a completely different forum. It does not make any sense from a practical point of view. We want the public to have a broad discussion about these issues yet they have been separated out structurally. It is not a good way to go about it so I am disappointed. 
I am disappointed that in the deal between National and the Maori Party they were not able to see that these issues fit together and that they should have been dealt with in a more consistent and systematic way so we could provide a system for the public to have that discussion in a very a systematic way with the greatest level of support. I think that was a missed opportunity and will continue to be a missed opportunity over the next few years. 
Overall the Green Party supports this legislation. I reiterate that it is absolutely the right of citizens to make decisions about the electoral system they use to elect those who will govern on their behalf. We look forward to that process.