Bridges SimonHon SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga): Thank you Madam Chair. Normally we know that the way this goes is while the title clause is a relatively narrow debate—because after all it's only the title; it's not the substance—I want to suggest Madam Chair to you and to the Minister on this bill that it's incredibly important. This is a charged bill. It's a bill where there are a lot of strong feelings and it is important—in fact I would say it is crucial—for New Zealanders particularly where there's been a shortened process that they know at heart what this bill is about. That's something that New Zealanders deserve. I know that the Hon Dr Nick Smith has proposed here that this be a Removal of the Poll Bill" and that's fair enough. I understand what he is saying. I actually prefer—I'm sorry; I've got that wrong. That was Christopher Luxon's amendment wasn't it? I prefer what Dr Nick Smith has said and I would put it to the Minister that that's the one that she should go for if she is genuinely truly trying here to have a title for this bill that accurately reflects what it does. And that's the "Screwing of the Scrum Bill" because that's what this bill does. It quite clearly screws—Kieran McAnulty: Point of order. Madam Chair the member well knows that Speakers' rulings are quite clear that any proposed amendment to the title of the bill cannot be used as an opportunity to critique the content of the bill.CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): It's up to the Chair to make that judgment but thank you for the point of order.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Thank you Madam Chair. As I was saying this should be the "Screwing of the Scrum Bill". I say that because that is the real agenda in this bill. It actually only goes one way and I say to Kiwis Māori non-Māori Indian Chinese Pākehā that actually that's not fair. If the only thing this bill allows is to add on to increase Māori wards that shows the real agenda I suggest here actually. We all heard it I think almost in as much in what the Minister said in her speech which was that this is what she wants to encourage; it's what she wants to see. Dare I say it Minister is that the real agenda here? I ask you that question. I'd like her answer on that. We've seen in this week as I said in my contribution at second reading the Mental Health Foundation crying foul about interference as they see it. Is that what we're going to see with local government here? A situation where actually this only goes one way; it's going to be tied to funding the issues; she wants Māori wards. Well I say actually it's screwing the scrum. I would propose what we actually should be doing here is having a bill that goes either way. If I was to become the Mayor of Tauranga—and by the way I'd be a tremendous mayor of that fair city. I know it's not going to happen. I just want to say it is not going to happen OK? He says furiously backing out of that entirely preposterous proposition. But if I was I'll tell you this much and this is true around many councils: I would want to do away with the Māori wards because by the way we'd get the thing that Willie Jackson says is so important. We'd get a Māori mayor in the most significant city in New Zealand. We would have that and I'd say you know what? Actually we don't need to have that. We don't need to have these wards anymore. But here's the serious point and I am being serious actually on this point—I think it's a very serious point—through this bill we can't do that. This bill should tell it like it is in the title. It is the "Screwing of the Scrum Bill". It goes one way. It goes the way that's preconceived. It fits with the biases and the viewpoints that the Minister and this Government have. And that's not fair when you're setting up a democratic system that should be able to go both ways. Actually I was going to make this point in my first reading speech and I got into such a lather I didn't have the time to make the point. But on the screwing of the scrum there's actually a fundamental point about the multicultural nature of New Zealand society. Why is it? And I appreciate the answer to be honest. It's too touristy—it's too touristy. Why is it though that if we're a pluralistic society this couldn't apply to Indian New Zealanders in certain parts of Auckland or Chinese New Zealanders? I think the basic answer to that is because actually we say one person one vote on their merits whether that's ratepayers at council or whether that's constituencies. So I'm about to run out of time but I ask the Minister these serious questions I would like her answer to. Why hasn't it got that name? Isn't that accurate? Is actually what she is trying to do here is get to a point where every single council in New Zealand has Māori wards? And if so actually why doesn't she just support the Māori Party's position? We don't see that. Why wouldn't she do what actually would be right here and have the ability to go either way—increasing Māori wards or in fact when cities get Māori mayors like in Tauranga as it could happen doing the opposite?"