Macindoe TimHon TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): Thank you very much Mr Chair. I can answer the questions for Dr Nick Smith and that is that poodles have much more bark than the members opposite. Here we are again back debating—as I think he has correctly labelled it—the most obnoxious piece of legislation that's come before this Parliament in a very long time. And yet again members opposite have their heads down they show no interest whatsoever in taking a call—we know that's because they're humiliated by it. There are some honourable members opposite who know that this is an appalling travesty against our electoral system and so I don't blame them for not wanting to take a call. But here we are in week four of a four-week sitting session and it's been several weeks since we last had the business of the House interrupted by this travesty and I had really hoped that during that time some members opposite would have developed the intestinal fortitude to say This is appalling. We are going no further with it."CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Order! It is inappropriate to use that term and I just want to remind members. You're calling into question a member's courage and so—no.Hon TIM MACINDOE: Well I apologise sir—I didn't think I had used that word but I shall move on.The Hon Dr Nick Smith also asked a very important question as we move into clause 5 of this particular bill and it is the one that has some of the most outrageous aspects to it. The question was: which one of our constituents has said to us recently "We want you to give Winston Peters more power."? Anyone? No. Well I have met recently with Grey Power in my electorate I've had a forum in my electorate and I've had a number of opportunities with party members and others to ask "What do you think about what's going on at the moment?" And what they've said to me is that far from wanting this House to give Winston Peters more power the thing that really gets their goat is the fact that here he has got a bill where he will add to the appalling nature of the system. They hate the fact that Winston Peters chooses the Government. We have an electoral system which takes away from the voters the ability to choose the Government and gives it to the leader of a minor party. They really hate that and they tell me regularly how much they hope we can get away from it.So what do we have here in clause 5? We've got a provision that says the leader of a party can write to the Speaker effectively saying "I'm fed up with this member of my party. He's upset me. He"—or she—"has said something that I don't agree with and therefore off he goes." Well that is an appalling affront against democracy. And so I so agree with Dr Nick Smith when he says that this is the "Mugabe clause" because it's the way that tyrants behave. I say particularly to the Green Party—it's good to see one of the co-leaders here—your party has a history of standing up for human rights. Your party the Greens has a history of speaking out against—Marama Davidson: Stop pretending to be all righteous. Cut it out.Hon TIM MACINDOE: —appalling abuses of power. And here we have Marama Davidson actually defending the indefensible. I'm fascinated. I'm so pleased that here she is prepared to say "We have spoken about these things when we've been out in the public forum. We've spoken about these things at our party meetings." But she won't come into this Chamber and take a call and explain why suddenly this outrageous abuse of human rights is OK.Well I want to speak to the first of my Supplementary Order Papers and it's in respect of clause 5. Supplementary Order Paper 65 calls for a new paragraph to be added in new section 55D after paragraph (d). For the benefit of those who are listening let me just point out that sections 55AAB to 55E have been inserted supposedly—and here is the ultimate irony—to enhance public confidence in the integrity of the electoral system by the measures that follow: to enhance public confidence in the integrity of the electoral system. What a joke Mr Chair. This does exactly the opposite. This fundamentally undermines public confidence in our electoral system. So I'm seeking to insert new paragraph (e) in new section 55D after paragraph (d) to "state that after consideration of the conduct of the member the parliamentary leader of that party for which the member was elected confirms that the party secretary of that party agrees that written notice—". [Bell rung] Mr Chair? CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): The Hon Tim Macindoe.Hon TIM MACINDOE: Thank you Mr Chair because it's important that I get this out: "should be given by the parliamentary leader under section 55A(3)(b)."Now Mr Chair as I say this is very important. I've spoken in that previous call about the fact that essentially this is a bill that gives Draconian powers to the leader of a party to wield extraordinary control over members of his or her own party in such a way that frankly requires them to become sycophants absolutely supplicants supplement—sorry I'll get the right word. It requires them to be absolutely pandering—I'll go for a different word—to the whims of the leader of a party who wants to reign supreme call all the shots and will not brook any opposition.So what I'm saying in this amendment—and I call on members of the governing parties to support this amendment to this clause—is let's just take a little bit of power back to the party which saw that member elected presumably under the party list although it could also apply to electorate members by saying that the party general secretary—and they have different names. We have a general manager in our party but it's the person performing the role of ensuring that the rules of the party are upheld and abided by not only in the selection process but also in the way that the MPs conduct themselves in the business of the House.We do have an obligation to uphold the fundamental principles and policies of our parties. No one disagrees with that. I'm not going to come in as a National Party member of the Parliament and then suddenly start day after day articulating the policies of the Green Party or the Labour Party or New Zealand First.Simeon Brown: Hopeless policies.Hon TIM MACINDOE: They are hopeless policies Mr Brown and that's a very good reason why I wouldn't do it. But I also wouldn't expect the party to tolerate it if I did.But that's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about taking away from members of Parliament the ability to stand up for things that are important to them in their electorate or that they believe are fundamental to the policies that saw them get elected. If a party moves away from the policy the MP who wants to stand by the policy is suddenly caught high and dry if the party leader says "Well I'm sorry I don't care what you think about the policy now. I've decided to take us in a different direction so you either come with me or get out of here."So I believe it's very important that this particular Supplementary Order Paper is adopted because it will at least give a little bit of an oversight function back to the political party so that the party leader cannot behave as an all-controlling tyrant à la Robert Mugabe as he used to do for about 30 years in Zimbabwe. That is something that all members of this House should be—Jamie Strange: Sounds like Robert Muldoon.Hon TIM MACINDOE: Jamie Strange wants to make a comparison with Sir Robert Muldoon? Surely not—surely not—because whatever you might've thought of Sir Robert Muldoon he ultimately came to power in an election and he left power in an election. Members of the National Party had a very proud record Mr Strange of standing up against Sir Robert Muldoon particularly in the latter days of his administration and they have been celebrated and acknowledged. So to compare Sir Robert Muldoon with Mr Mugabe is deeply offensive and I'm surprised to hear that member say that.But as I say I'm talking about giving the party the ability to rein in the party leader. If this vile offensive repugnant totally undemocratic bill is ever to disgrace the legislative books of this nation at least let's rein it in a little bit by taking away from that party leader that total tyrannical power—Hon Shane Jones: No no no.Hon TIM MACINDOE: And yet we've got the Hon Shane Jones saying "No no no." He wants Winston Peters to tell him what to do and if Winston Peters doesn't like him to get out of here. Well I thought Winston Peters was grooming him to be his successor but oh no—well maybe that's it. Maybe what we're having is the Hon Shane Jones saying "When I take over from the Rt Hon Winston Peters I want to have the same power. I want to be able to tell all of my cronies all of my colleagues 'You either buck up you do exactly what I say or you'll be out of here.' " So thank you Mr Jones for outing yourself. You've actually added an insight into this bill that has previously been lacking.I implore all members of the committee to support my Supplementary Order Paper."