Nash Stuart: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNash Stuart: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 29 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5493. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STUART NASH (Labour—Napier): I would like to talk about clause 27 and this is about the method of voting. There is a little bit of confusion—I apologise; I am just a simple boy from the regions so hopefully someone will be able to enlighten me.What it says in “Method of voting” clause 27(1)(a) this is talking about the first flag referendum is: “An elector voting in the first flag referendum—(a) must”—the word “must” is important because in legislation we have the word “must” which compels someone and we have the word “may” which does not compel but recommends “mark the voting paper by expressing a first preference for 1 option;”. OK?So you have got to put a “1” for example—1 2 3 4. It sets it out in schedule 1 how this is supposed to be.I suppose my concern about this is that in the second referendumclause 27(2) it talks about “[you] must mark the voting”—you “must”; again it has used the word “must”—“paper with a tick in the circle …”.Where this breeds a little bit of confusion—again I would like the Minister in the chair Michael Woodhouse to enlighten me on this—is if for example in that first referendum a voter does not put 1 2 3 or 4 or has only one flag design that they would like and they tick that box. Is that valid? Is that vote informal? Or does it still stand if a voter has given a very clear preference for their flag design? Perhaps there should even be a “clause 27(1)(c)” that says for example “If it is obvious that the elector has clearly indicated a preference for only one design this shall be deemed a valid vote.”Again I have the same point around clause 27(2) where it says—again this is the second referendum here where there are only two preferences; so it is the current New Zealand flag and the design that wins out of the first preference—“An elector voting in the second flag referendum must mark the voting paper with a tick in the circle …”.My concern about this is if for example—I am making an assumption here that could be right or might not be—people have partaken in the first referendum where it is a 1 2 3 or 4 and in the second referendum if they put a “1” as opposed to a tick in one of the boxes but it is still very clear that their preference is for one of the options i.e. they have not spoilt the paper in any way then will that vote be informal? Again perhaps there should have been a clause 27(2)(a) where it says: “If it is obvious that the elector has clearly indicated a preference for only one design this shall be deemed a valid vote.”If we go to clause 32 it talks about informal voting papers. This is where I am a little bit confused because as mentioned—I do this a lot; you look at the writing of the legislation because it has to be tight for a reason we all understand that—this is where the words “must” and “may” often change a clause quite substantially in legislation. It says here: “A voting paper is informal if the Returning Officer is satisfied—(a) in the case of the first flag referendum that the voting paper does not clearly indicate the voter’s first preference;”.So to me this says that in that first referendum if a person puts a tick or puts a cross just beside one preference then that vote is valid.However in clause 27(1)(a) that may indicate that that vote is ruled out.I have the same concern for clause 27(2) in the second referendum where it says that the elector must tick the second flag referendum with a tick in a circle. Again we look at informal votes here at clause 32(b) which is “in the case of the second flag referendum that the voting paper does not clearly indicate”—so we are talking about a different issue an informal vote here—“the option for which the elector wished to vote.” I suppose my concern here is that there is the sort of common sense aspect to this. I am assuming that the returning officer will use the pragmatic approach where even though the legislation says in the second referendum that it must be a tick if however the elector has put a cross or put a “1” but it is very very clear what their preference is—