Mathers Mojo: Electoral Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMathers Mojo: Electoral Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 18 March 2014. Volume:697;Page:16749. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MOJO MATHERS (Green):It is with a real sense of disappointment that I rise to speak to the Electoral Amendment Bill. I am particularly disappointed that National has reviewed and rejected the clause in the original bill with regard to having an EasyVote card. An EasyVote card would have brought voting into the 21st century. It would have modernised it streamlined it and made the process so much more efficient and user-friendly for everyone. It was the recommendation of the independent Electoral Commission and it seems incredible that the Justice and Electoral Committee rejected that.Not only did it reject the EasyVote card as a way of confirming your identity it has established an extra barrier making it harder for people to vote. This barrier basically says that “An elector who applies to vote must—(a) verbally … confirm his or her name; and (b) give … any other particulars [required] to find the elector’s name on the rolls.” That is a barrier to many people. It is barrier for people with a hearing impairment it is a barrier to those who use New Zealand Sign Language and it is a barrier to those with speech impediments. It is very very disappointing that the National Government has refused to adopt Supplementary Order Paper 416 put forward by Maryan Street which would have reinstated the EasyVote card as a way of confirming your identity. That is one that we supported strongly.This clause that requires verbal confirmation of identity or any clause in any legislation that requires someone to give verbal confirmation of their identity needs to be ringing alarm bells in any select committee process. We have over 6000 people in New Zealand who use sign language as their primary mode of communication and that needs to be recognised explicitly and considered in every piece of legislation that goes through the select committee process.There is an assumption that everyone in New Zealand communicates verbally but that is not the case. Some of us use sign language and some of us have to type on to iPads and use other ways of communicating. There is a provision in the bill though that says that the elector may confirm their identity by a “gesture”. That language is incredibly disrespectful. What does a “gesture” mean? If someone signs their name in New Zealand Sign Language is that a “gesture”? Will the returning officer actually understand what they are doing? Are we going to have sign language interpreters at every polling booth? And requiring someone who needs support to bring along a support person goes against the very spirit of being able to cast an independent vote. They should be able to engage in the political process independently. That is what the Government signed up to when it signed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which it supported moving towards greater independence for people with disabilities. This bill moves us backwards by saying that it is OK to just require people to bring along a support person.It is not easy for lots of people to engage in the political process or to get to the polling booth and this is yet another barrier for some of the most disenfranchised and marginalised people in our society. I am very disappointed that that has not been rectified as it should have been at the Committee of the whole House when the Government was given the opportunity to rectify this error by the select committee.