Little AndrewHon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Justice): Thank you Madam Chair. So just four points to respond to from the member who's just resumed his seat Nick Smith. He made a reference to and described a fear of authoritarian States and it is a fear that I have too. And when this House in the past has legislated for the removal of voting rights for a part of our population as the member who's just resumed his seat did when he was Minister for the Environment abolishing the right of Cantabrians for their elected members on their regional council—Hon Dr Nick Smith: How's that relevant Madam Chair? I hope the Chair's going to be consistent.Hon ANDREW LITTLE: —that's authoritarianism—that's authoritarianism—and I regret to tell members and the public in the gallery that that has been the high-water mark of authoritarianism in this country in this House.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Ruth Dyson): Sorry to interrupt the member. I'd ask the Hon Nick Smith to withdraw and apologise for that comment.Hon Dr Nick Smith: What comment?CHAIRPERSON (Hon Ruth Dyson): You know what comment Dr Smith.Hon Dr Nick Smith: No I don't but I'm happy to withdraw and apologise.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Ruth Dyson): Thank you.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Could you clarify after I withdraw and apologise the comment that caused offence?CHAIRPERSON (Hon Ruth Dyson): I will consider it.Hon Dr Nick Smith: I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. Madam Chair you've been quite strict on Opposition members that we talk to this part of the bill. I'm very happy to have an argument about Environment Canterbury the district health board that Helen Clark dismissed etc.—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Ruth Dyson): Thank you for your advice; that's not a point of order. [Interruption] The member will resume his seat. I've just listened to two five-minute calls from the member which was an exact repetition of the four five-minute calls that he took before the dinner adjournment—with the exception of one minute and 21 seconds—so I really think he should reconsider his view that I'm being strict on his contribution.Hon ANDREW LITTLE: In relation to the Legislation Design and Advisory Committee that committee's advice was clear that they thought there needed to be some further safeguards in the legislation; that is what they said. That was their recommendation. In relation to the role of the Regulations Review Committee the Regulations Review Committee has the role of overseeing any promulgated regulation. It doesn't require the regulation to have been fulfilled or acted upon. Once a regulation is promulgated and publicised then the Regulations Review Committee has the power and the right and role to ascertain whether the regulation has been properly conceived and promulgated and meets its objectives.In relation to the question of binding on Parliament the parties in Government have said they will be bound by the result of the referendum. There's only one party that refuses to say whether they will be bound by the will of the electorate. That is the National Party.Hon Dr Nick Smith: We don't know what the question is.Tim van de Molen: Tell us the question and we'll tell you.Hon ANDREW LITTLE: And the members know that the question as I've said in my earlier contributions will be the subject of cross-party consultation. I've indicated the work that is going into the development of the question. The members know that. Individual members of the National Party know that. I expect they will be involved. But most importantly the people for whom it is most important are the voting public of New Zealand. They will have good neutral factual information about the referendum question about the question itself well in advance of next year's general election. There'll be appropriate places for people to get access to that advice. All of that is in train. All of that will happen. But this is a piece of legislation that puts in the mechanics for us to conduct the referendum questions that are slated for next year's general election.