Andersen GinnyGINNY ANDERSEN (Labour): Thank you Mr Speaker. Thanks for the opportunity of responding to the referral motion that there should be a shortened report-back time to three three and a half months on this important bill regarding referendums going forward. I would just like to point out to members that this still enables the Justice Committee to do a thorough and full job of hearing submissions on this particular issue. I would also like for members to draw their mind back to the previous Government where we saw bill after bill go through this House without a regulatory impact statement without a Bill of Rights—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): No we're not debating that. The member needs to—GINNY ANDERSEN: So when we talk about democracy—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! The member needs to come to the motion not anything else from previous Governments. GINNY ANDERSEN: So when the select committee considers this it is important to note that after that New Zealanders also get the opportunity to vote at the general election. So not only is there an opportunity during the shortened select committee period for submissions to be considered thoroughly but after that all New Zealanders who are of voting age and able to get the opportunity to vote on these issues again. It is an awesome opportunity when there is such great attention from media from discussion from—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): No again that's not actually what we're debating. We're debating the shortened report-back time not the election. GINNY ANDERSEN: So by having a shortened report-back period we believe strongly that it will not compromise the scrutiny and ability of this House to do its job properly. In fact in terms of it being unconstitutional those considerations have not actually been delivered. That argument has been changed by the Opposition from once being considered to be unconstitutional—that debate has now changed to it being a convention. So it is important to note that there is a full and able opportunity for New Zealanders to have their voices heard on this issue by being able to come forward and either write or be heard in person at select committee and then once again to have that fulsome opportunity at the next election. What we need to also note is that the issues that have been raised in this debate by the members opposite have not demonstrated how a reduced select committee consideration period would actually impede the good process and the scrutiny of this bill going forward. I have not heard a valid argument to be able to demonstrate how it would be unconstitutional or against in any way good process to have a shortened period in which members of the general public are able to submit on this legislation. It will still go through the exact same process of being publicly notified on the parliamentary website of having full opportunity and notification of anybody who wishes to to come forward and submit and it will have the full attention of all members in this House. So I stand in support of a shortened select committee period because I do not see in any way by the arguments raised today that a shortened select committee period would impede upon democracy and good process occurring within this House. Thank you.