Hudson BrettBRETT HUDSON (National): Thank you Mr Chair. Thank you for an opportunity to speak on this clause. I do agree it's an operative clause and that the clause itself is very clear and no one argues with what it means and no one argues that it is the right of this Parliament to choose to enact this and indeed the bill if that is the will of Parliament. But I think it's very important when looking at this clause that we look at it within the context of the section it amends because there are many other conditions under which a vacancy—traditionally under the principal Act—can be created in Parliament and this clause is quite different to all of those.Except for an incredibly dark period in this country's history when our democracy suffered under the yoke of a dictatorial piece of legislation that was introduced with a bill under the same name as this bill—except for that short time where the Rt Hon Winston Peters was also part of that coalition Government with Labour—the provision of leaving a political party never formed a criterion for the eviction or the removal from the New Zealand Parliament.So as parliamentarians here consider whether we should adopt this particular clause and indeed whether we should adopt and support this bill I say they should reflect upon the Electoral Act history in New Zealand and ask themselves this question: do we have confidence that the New Zealand Parliament in its long history has considered the prospect of people leaving their political parties and what implications that should have on their membership in Parliament? Yes they clearly have. They clearly have for several reasons. One is that members in this House today have noted a number of instances where members of Parliament have left or even been expelled from their party and remained in Parliament at least for a period of time as an independent. Jim Anderton was one that of course I can remember. I am old enough to remember the deep fight between him and how he saw the Labour Party leaving him. But there's one even closer to home for me—actually closer to my actual home because just down the road from me in the electorate of Ōhāriu lives the Hon Peter Dunne. We are both residents in Khandallah. Of course Peter Dunne left the Labour Party and through a succession of party forms served in this Parliament a number of years both under the old electoral first-past-the-post system and then under MMP and retired as leader of the United Future party.So we look back and think if we've had all of these changes in our history I believe it is very safe for us to say that Parliament has considered over the years that parliamentarians might from time to time leave the party under which they were elected into Parliament. Parliament has considered that because the electoral laws in this country have gone through a number of iterations. The principal Act here is the Electoral Act 1993. That big change was of course preparing our electoral law for MMP. I don't think there's any question at all whether the Parliament of the time considered the potential for people to leave their political parties under MMP because it had already begun. Peter Dunne had left the Labour Party ahead of the MMP election. In fact a number of people from the National Party had left and formed parties also.So we can absolutely categorically state that Parliament in its history has considered what should happen to an MP if they leave the political party under which they were elected and except for those dark years when the Rt Hon Winston Peters has been part of a coalition with the Labour Party this Parliament has consistently said it should not impact their right to sit and stand in fact in this House as members of Parliament. Why is that? Because first and foremost once elected members are elected as members of Parliament: country first then party then self.That is why when they're not a member of the party under which they were elected they remain in this House because first and foremost they were elected to serve their country—to serve all of the people of New Zealand. Yes they came into Parliament sharing the values of a particular party. In the past it has happened that on occasions they have felt that the values of the party they entered in and their own personal values have diverged but they serve the country and they have the right to serve in this Parliament.