English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:641;Page:11209] 
6.  
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader—National) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: Does he stand by his statement in relation to the Electoral Finance Bill that “if a document seeks to support the election or to oppose the election of a given candidate or party it is within the context of the bill; if it does not it is not.”? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister of Justice 
: Yes. 
Hon Bill English 
: Does the Minister mean to tell the House that despite having notice of this question today and having been pretty much asked it yesterday he still does not understand that the Labour Government’s Electoral Finance Bill includes all sorts of expressions of political views in clause 5(1)(a)(iii) and that it is absolutely not confined to the matters he believes it is confined to? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I think the Minister was very clear in his answer yesterday and the member has quoted it back to him. If a document seeks to support the election or to oppose the election of a given candidate or party it is within the context of the bill; if it does not it is not. The member received that answer yesterday and I urge him to take the advice he has been given repeatedly by the Minister of Justice and that is to make use of the select committee process and to make his arguments through other members of the National Party who are on the select committee because that is the place to have that kind of debate. 
Ann Hartley 
: What is the intent of this bill and why is the National Party so outraged about it? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The intent of the bill is to provide a fair electoral system that is protected from undue influence and abuse. The bill contains proposals for reform and as has been said before it is the role of a select committee to take the time to look at how to refine this issue. On the second matter there may well be some difficulties that the National Party has in relation to spending during the last election that it does not want to talk about— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The Minister has no responsibility for the National Party. 
Hon Bill English 
: Why do the Minister and the Prime Minister keep quoting Britain and Canada when Canada has a broad definition of the political advertisement but it applies for only 6 weeks roughly not for the whole of election year and Britain has a narrow definition of electoral advertisement that applies over a whole year; and why does the Minister keep making misleading statements that our law is like that of Britain and Canada when it is not? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I think the point being made is that New Zealand is pulling itself into line with jurisdictions like those and there has been discussion about the fact that between Canada and the United Kingdom there are a range of ways of addressing this issue. We are making the effort to address the issue in this country and the select committee is an excellent place for the member to make these points. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Are there fundamental principles in this bill such as a ban on political policy being bought by outsiders or political promotion being facilitated by outsiders or worse still unhealthy— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Have you paid the money back yet? 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Listen loony tune take control of yourself. Take your pills before you come down to the House not halfway through question time. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Have you paid up? 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I am serious. I am not a medical doctor but I have seen those symptoms before and far too frequently in your case. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Please be seated. If members make interjections then they do get responses to them and that is what creates disorder. So would the member please just ask his question and would the interventions be kept to a moderate level. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Can the Minister confirm that some of the principles behind this bill include bans on political policy being bought by outsiders or on political promotion being bought by outsiders and bans on the unhealthy development of political patronage facilitated by outsiders purely because they have the money; and can he confirm that the objective of the bill therefore is to have free fair elections? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The member has quite rightly drawn attention to the fact that this bill is something the entire House should be interested in because it is about a fair electoral system free from undue influence and abuse. He has quite rightly listed the very things that concerned many people during the last election campaign and this is a chance for the National Party to put that right. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister confirm that what the Government has done is pick out the most sweeping aspects of both the Canadian and the UK legislation—that is the broad definition of political advertisements that applies in Canada and the very long regulated period that applies in the UK—and created an anti-democratic drift-net that is repressive by comparison with either Canada or the UK because it incorporates the worst elements of each? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: No. 
Hon Bill English 
: Does that mean that the Minister did not read his own handout that he put around the press gallery the other day which describes exactly those features of both systems but neglects to say that New Zealand picked the broad definition of advertising in Canada and the lengthy regulated period from the UK; and when is he going to stop making dishonest and misleading statements about the relevance of those two jurisdictions? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The answer is no. I simply invite the member who is so outraged about this issue to take it to the select committee—and he can sort out the GST issue while he is there as well. 
Hon Bill English 
: What is going on in the Labour Cabinet which is meant to be full of so many top-line political operators given that it managed to put together—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The member will please leave the Chamber. That was an entirely inappropriate intervention. 
David Bennett withdrew from the Chamber. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am sorry. Would the Hon Bill English start again please. 
Hon Bill English 
: What is going on in the Labour Cabinet which is meant to be full of so many top-line political operators given that it has put together legislation that has no support in Parliament from other parties and is now not even supported by the Prime Minister who chaired the Cabinet meeting that signed it off as Labour’s policy? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: This legislation provides all parties with an opportunity to ensure that they have a fair electoral system without fear of influence or abuse. Why the member would want to persist in arguing about the opportunity to sort out issues like the Exclusive Brethren and GST remains a mystery. 
Hon Jim Anderton 
: Can the Minister advise the House whether one of the intentions of this bill is to stop anonymous persons acting from fictitious addresses backed by a million dollars with deceptive advertising the day before the election from trying to defeat legitimate candidates? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I can confirm that and this of course is one of the fears of all right-thinking—and left-thinking—New Zealanders. They do not want to see a rerun of the kind of subterfuge that ran around during the last election where people were inundating the electorate with material then operating out of addresses that no one could find. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Does this bill contemplate in terms of political advertising and appropriate expenditure that it would be appropriate for someone who is a member of Parliament to receive a $50000 grant for apparel and a cosmetic makeover— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Tell us about Simunovich. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: —which no doubt Nick should have got as well—of the type that outsiders paid to Ruth Richardson in the National Party; would that be appropriate under this legislation? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Those kinds of arguments can be undertaken during the select committee hearings. That is why I say to members opposite that the fear raised by the New Zealand First leader is that people may well seek to influence elections in that way. For example they may want to apply make-up to Bill English in order to make him look like a Southern Man and that could be an example of undue influence on the electorate. 
Hon Bill English 
: When will the Government put up someone who was at the Cabinet meeting and who has read the papers and actually understands the bill—for instance the provision that means that if the New Zealand Amalgamated Engineering Printing and Manufacturing Union has one single member who is under the age of 18 it will be banned from registering as a third party and therefore cannot spend more than $5000 in election year? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I cannot hear. I do not know whether there is something wrong with the sound system today. We will have this answer in silence. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: All I can say to the member is that the bill has a fair intent. It is one I am sure he supports. He would like to clean up a number of issues around the National Party. The efforts he can put into this are properly put in at the select committee and I am sure the whole House will welcome his contribution.