Guy NathanHon NATHAN GUY (National—Ōtaki): Madam Chair thank you very much for the opportunity to take a call. I'm going to traverse some of the things that the Minister in the chair Andrew Little has just covered but before I do that I think this is a very dark day in the New Zealand Parliament. We have a Government that wants to be perceived as being open transparent caring and compassionate. Well this bill is the complete opposite to what they want to be perceived as doing and trying to achieve in society in New Zealand.This bill is an anti-democratic bill and when I look back and read all of the submissions that went through the Justice Committee there were no changes as a result of hearing all those submissions. From memory there were 43 submitters and 41 opposed the bill. Even the Clerk of the House opposed it. In the 13 years that I have been in the Parliament I have never known the Clerk to submit on a bill. So I find this bill an affront to democracy and I'm going to come to the important part which is new clause 7 a new part and all of the Supplementary Order Papers (SOPs)—the three that the Minister has just alluded to in his address—in a moment. But it's very important that in my first contribution to the committee I say this is a very very dark day that the Government is not prepared to hear from anyone with an opposing view.I feel for Andrew Little because I don't actually think that he agrees with this bill. He's having to ram this bill through because of New Zealand First—Kieran McAnulty: Is this to the SOP?Hon NATHAN GUY: —and I'm going to come on to the SOP in a moment.CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): It has been nearly two minutes so I'd appreciate it.Hon NATHAN GUY: What is really important on clause 3 is covering off—CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): We're not on clause 3.Hon NATHAN GUY: Sorry clause 7 and those three SOPs—in particular a very good one from Tim Macindoe SOP 71. I want to cover that off in some depth because what it says is that it ensures that the party has rules governing the process by which the party leader can expel a member of Parliament and it goes on to say that the secretary of any political party must register these under the Electoral Commission. That's very important and when Andrew Little gets up he says Oh well they're already in place." But I listened to his language intently because he appeared to soften after he'd said that and he'd dismissed the three SOPs because he said there is a point at which you can go too far and parties must be able to be free to make their own rules. So what he's appearing to say is "Oh don't worry. It's already in play here. We don't need it." But hold on a member of Parliament of a political party is selected under those rules but it's OK for the leader to sack the individual MP. Importantly this new clause inserted by this SOP of Tim Macindoe I think actually goes some way to strengthening up what is a dog of a bill. For the Minister to stand up and just dismiss these three Supplementary Order Papers I feel is really disappointing.And when he also talked about the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act—how it applies to these three SOPs already—it was interesting listening to some of the debate last night on the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. Effectively the Attorney-General had to sign off this bill and David Parker said that it is finely balanced and it could have a chilling effect. So for the Minister to stand up and say "Oh well it's all fine here with the Bill of Rights."—in essence David Parker when he signed it off his hand was shaking because he knew this could have a chilling effect.The Minister also talked about the rules for selection—that they need to be democratic and that they're actually already in place. That might be so to a degree but it's not so when a party leader can effectively sack an existing and sitting MP and I have real concerns."