Moroney Sue: Electoral (Reduction in Number of Members of  Parliament) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Moroney Sue: Electoral (Reduction in Number of Members of  Parliament) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:635;Page:6330] 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
: 
 Following on from the speech made by my colleague Lynne Pillay I get to make a contribution to this debate and as she rightly pointed out I do so because we have 121 MPs in this House. I come to this House to make a contribution having represented the most respected profession in this country—a fact seen if we look at the surveys that occur from time to time when New Zealanders get to have a say on which professions they most respect and which they least respect. It is a strange phenomenon for me to represent nurses one day as one of the most respected professions—nurses come in either first or second in every single survey—then the very next day to become part of one of the least respected professions that of a member of Parliament. I ask myself how I can go from being involved with the most respected profession one day to being part of the least respected profession the next day when nothing about me has changed—my principles are exactly the same and the things I would argue for are exactly the same. I am essentially the same person yet potentially the New Zealand public would judge me quite differently from one day to the next. 
I raise that issue because I want to put into context a little what happens for people when they answer such surveys some of the prejudices and biases they bring into that and perhaps some of the prejudices and biases they also bring to bear when they sign petitions. I can well imagine that some of the people who sign a petition answer a survey or respond to a question about how they rate members of Parliament and whether they want to see their numbers reduced may well quite happily say they would support having not one member of Parliament in the debating chamber—such is their view and their cynicism about members of Parliament. But I think that that is a superficial view and that is why I was pleased to see that the select committee had had an opportunity to address this issue in some depth because it is a question that needs to be looked at in an unbiased manner in looking at all the facts and figures and at what happens overseas. 
When thinking about what does happen overseas it occurred to me—and I imagine this happens for most members of Parliament if they get the opportunity to travel overseas—that one of the things that happens quite frequently is that other members of Parliament and people from other countries say to us what a wonderful country we have and what a wonderful system of Government we have. Certainly MMP and the diversity it brings with it is well respected internationally and it lends something to this country that I think would be very sad for us if it were missing—that is the diversity that our ability to have 120 MPs gives us. 
In particular it is an issue close to my heart that a reduction in the number of MPs in this House sadly would lead to a reduction in the number of women members of Parliament a reduction in the number of Maori members of Parliament and a reduction in the diversity we bring to debates in this House. I do not think that that is good for democracy so I am pleased to see the outcome from the select committee on this matter. 
Labour is not supporting the bill to go through a further reading but there has been a good debate and a good discussion has been generated. I thank Barbara Stewart for bringing forward the opportunity for this issue to be considered and I thank the select committee for its deliberations.