Mallard Trevor: Member Vacancy — Northland Electoral District—Hon John CarterText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Member Vacancy — Northland Electoral District—Hon John Carter[Sitting date: 04 August 2011. Volume:674;Page:20366. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): The Labour Party is supporting this motion. In fact if we were not the motion would not have been moved and certainly would not be effective if it passed vis-à-vis section 131 of the Electoral Act. I think it is appropriate. It is an unusual situation to be in to follow a member’svaledictory but I think “Hone” Carter had one of those valedictories of the type where many members of the House would have preferred him to go on a bit longer. It was entertaining. It was probably like the member—always entertaining always caring and someone who was one of the characters of the House. I tend to say and it might be a sign of my own ageing that they seem to be fewer and farther between the people who were elected as a result of their good organisation in an electorate tying up the seat to get the National Party nomination and then continuing to keep it tied up in a way that meant that over a period of time—notwithstanding a number of perceived and actual sins—Mr Carter was able to be totally unchallenged as to his right to represent an area that he built as a National Party stronghold and one that was not always the safest of National seats. If we look at the demographics of the seat it should not necessarily be so but as a result of his character and his work it became a safe National seat.I was lucky enough to travel with Mr Carter I think at the beginning of 1994 to the United States. At that stage the then two-thirds owners of Telecom—two US companies—hosted us. I think these days one could not think of many less likely members of Parliament to be the ones seen to be leading the Parliament in technology matters but the objective was for some members of Parliament to gain a working understanding of technology. I think it is fair to say that I understood from that time about convergence and it is interesting to see that what was predicted to John Carter and me is beginning to happen now which is probably close to 15 years after the expectation of when it would occur.We had some interesting conversations. Probably my most interesting conversation with John Carter related to when I had heard him late one day talking to John Banks on the radio.Hon Members: Ha ha!Hon TREVOR MALLARD: I make it clear it was not the time when he was found to be offending; it was an earlier occasion. Subsequent to that we had a discussion I think at the diplomats and parliamentarians cricket match when we were both fit and able enough to play. I indicated to him that I had heard him I had recognised his voice and I thought that it was unwise for him to have done such a thing. Well he is a bit like me: slightly stubborn and does not always learn from the first mistake unless he is told off. There was a repeat performance the fall-out from which was his fall from grace and resignation as a whip. Probably more important I think it led to the interruption for a period of 15 years of the career of John Banks who was not reappointed as a Minister after that and suffered the even worse fate of not being allowed to travel to South Africa to the Parliamentary Rugby World Cup in 1995. The Rt Hon Jim Bolger—now of course Sir James Bolger—forbade him from going thinking that what were clearly racist comments would not go down well in the new South Africa. I think it is fair to say that it could have caused—Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Carter?Hon TREVOR MALLARD: No Banks’ comments; Banks’ comments were actually worse than Carter’s comments because there was a suggestion that the thing had been jacked up and Banks at the time was a Minister and therefore the offence was more serious. As I say Carter had been warned and he obviously was caught out later on.But having said that one of the important points about John Carter and the thing that I valued the most was that he always kept his word. We had a number of arrangements that were made behind the Chair over a period of time and John made it clear when he had made an agreement when he had indicated that he would have “best endeavours” to deliver he certainly tried very hard and he was always very thorough in that when there was a problem with what he was endeavouring to do he would come back he wouldindicate and there was clarity in the situation. I think that was a good sign of his integrity.I think John Carter has a good job in going to Rarotonga. I think there is a bit of a practice—though not normally for electorate MPs and I will refer to that soon—of members of Parliament taking up diplomatic postings. Of course he follows in the footsteps of the late Brian Donnelly in being the member of Parliament appointed to go to Avarua. I think it is fair to say that a number of us on occasion have indicated that such an approach would not be the worst possible thing. I had five words that I think I said to Helen Clark two or three times while she was Prime Minister when I was in her bad books and they were “Port Vila Hanoi New York.” For some reason she did not value my diplomatic skills in quite the way that would lead her to think it might be better for me to be appointed a diplomat rather than continuing my endeavours in the House.Louise Upston: I wonder why Trevor. I wonder why.Hon TREVOR MALLARD: Well I have always respected her judgment. Under MMP I signal—not now and probably not even as part of the next review but at some stage—that it would be worth looking at having a system whereby we do not have to go to a by-election when we have this sort of arrangement even if it is prior to the 6-month period before an election. A number of mature democracies are able when they have this sort of system to have people who are effectively deputy electorate members—people who when a member of Parliament becomes a Minister step in and effectively become an electorate member or effectively become a list member. There is a reversal of roles which means that the Minister is freed up from doing the work in the electorate. It is taken over by someone else but with the proviso—I think in all cases—that that reversal can be worked backwards again.I wonder whether at some stage we need to look at the possibility of another member stepping into the electorate seat role. I think because we do not generally affect the proportionality of Parliament—we are much more party-based—that it is something worth looking at. But I think we are having a little bit of trouble at the moment getting universal acceptance of the role of the list MP and the way that things work and we might not be quite at the point where we could convince the public that that sort of system should be developed. I think that would raise the possibility of another list MP coming to Parliament replacing the person who transfers over keeping the proportionality in Parliament and thereby saving millions of dollars in some cases in by-elections. I actually quite enjoy by-elections but all of us know they will not make any difference to the eventual decisions that go through this House.Labour supports this motion and we wish John Carter well but I hope that at some future stage we do not have to pass similar motions.