Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): Thank you Madam Chair for the opportunity to speak in the committee of the whole House stage of the Referendums Framework Bill. My first question to the Minister in the chair Andrew Little is: what is the plural of referendum"? I note that elsewhere in the same legislation he refers to "referenda" and that's presumably because a previous piece of legislation has that reference. In his comments just now he got it right actually one out of two times in relation to that existing Act—so 50 percent is probably as good as it gets. So that's my first question which I don't expect an answer on particularly.More seriously but remaining within that purpose clause: why is that we are concerning ourselves with this legislation only with the first general election after the commencement of this Act? Why is it not that the Government would have provisions that were indefinite in the usual way until such time as they are repealed and/or replaced? Of course the Government has previously said that they could allow themselves in a further term were they to be elected—which of course is no certain thing; very uncertain thing in fact—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Ruth Dyson): Sorry Mr Penk. If I just could just draw your attention to the fact that I am of the view that that's in Part 3 and we're debating Part 1.CHRIS PENK: Thank you Madam Chair. Respectfully the purpose does specifically refer to the purpose being in relation to the first general election after the commencement.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Ruth Dyson): OK. Good. Thank you.CHRIS PENK: Thank you Madam Chair. So I'm interested to know why it is that the Government has not adopted an approach that would be normal whereby you would simply have a piece of legislation that continues until such time it is actively discontinued. Elsewhere in the bill there's a repeal provision a sunset clause but I won't get to that at this point because we're on Part 1 of the debate.The next aspect that I'm interested to know the Minister's thoughts on and the Government thinking on—also within Part 1 of course—is in clause 5 the interpretation clause: "general election". So the meaning of that I suppose is clear enough but again questions arise. At least hypothetically there's a situation where a referendum that's intended to be conducted by the Government isn't arranged in time ahead of the 2020 election and I'm thinking specifically in relation to the possible legalisation or decriminalisation of recreational cannabis. It might be the Government—or perhaps the Parliament or whoever; it could in fact be just the Government—that arrives at a decision to hold such a referendum but that's not reached let's say by March of next year in time for that to be on the ballot paper for the 2020 general election. There might still be a general election after that before the repeal date. So with that theoretical possibility out there I'd be interested to know why the Minister has decided presumably as a conscience decision not simply to allow it to be the first general election after the commencement of the Act or the first general election after an Order in Council or Act declares such a referendum to be held provided that it's before the expiry of the Act—whichever the first of those I think would be the logical way to construct such a provision.I should acknowledge in relation to that the Minister has said that he expects prior to Christmas it would be that the drugs-related referendum would be established by the Government parties. But of course expectation and reality are not always the same thing. I'll say no more than that on that particular point.I also wonder if the Minister can explain why it is that a referendum—and the meaning of that within the interpretation clause is a referendum declared by an Act or by an Order in Council—would be available to the Government to set up a regime where it would be an Act of Parliament that would declare that a referendum is to take place rather than allowing the Government simply to do that. And it could be then that the Cabinet and the ministry the executive branch could be allowed to implement the mechanics and come up with the rules surrounding that. That's not a particularly attractive proposition so far as we are concerned on this side of the House but at least it would be a tighter regime than what is currently suggested in that meaning of "referendum" in the interpretation clause.My next question—and I note that the Minister is diligently writing these down for which I thank him and I look forward to the responses shortly no doubt—is in relation to the interaction with the Citizens Initiated Referenda Act. I've brought that up for two reasons: one is that it uses the plural of referenda correctly but also because there is no other reference within Part 1 to that under Schedule 1. So I wonder if the Minister can advise—obviously with recourse to his officials if that's helpful—the interaction of this piece of legislation with that other Act that it seems to me could at least potentially be relevant. For that to be true on a factual basis it would have to be that there was a citizens initiated referendum between now and the 2020 election but that's not impossible. So I wonder if that's a deliberate act—and I say that with a lowercase "A"—on the part of the Government to preclude that possibility or if it's something that simply hasn't been contemplated.My final question is really in relation to the purpose of the Act or the purpose of the bill. There is a whole purpose section of course but I wonder what the purpose of the purpose is—what's sort of the underlying problem that is sought to be fixed by way of this legislation and why we do not simply have for example the existing regime which has almost invariably—or invariably depending who you listen to—been the case whereby an Act of Parliament can actually set out all the rules of the game instead of having the sort of hybrid model that we've got on the Table in front of us today.So I'll leave it there at least for now in relation to Part 1 and look forward to responses that the Minister is able to give on those particular points."