English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:643;Page:13196] 
2.  
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader—National) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: Does she stand by her statement in relation to the Electoral Finance Bill that “This Bill does not restrict free speech. It simply restricts rights to ‘purchase’ speech through advertising.”; if so why? 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 Yes; this bill does not restrict freedom of speech but it does restrict the rights to purchase speech. The bill sets out to prevent any individual or organisation buying an election because it has the financial clout to do so. 
Hon Bill English 
: If the Government is serious about that definition of free speech—that is that it is still free speech despite restricting the right to purchase speech through advertising—why does it not apply to the Government and politicians the same restrictions on the right to purchase speech through advertising as it now wants to apply to private citizens and organisations? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Any member of Parliament who wants to advertise as a candidate at an election would be covered by this bill. Any member of Parliament who carries out his or her normal duties as a member of Parliament when it is an election year has the right to carry those out as long as he or she does not electioneer. The absurdity of what Bill English has been saying is that members of Parliament have $64000 to spend on promoting themselves. I do not know what he spends his money on but I know members on this side of the House do not spend their money on electioneering. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I ask the member to give her answer in silence and to just address the question without any peripheral comments. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: I am addressing the question. It is an important question because members on this side of the House do not spend their electorate budget on electioneering. It is against the rules to electioneer and just as Tony Ryall and Judith Collins hold up pamphlets I could at this moment hold up Nick Smith’s pamphlet put out only in the last few weeks that says “Change the Government … nick4nelson.” Tell me that that is not electioneering. It is electioneering. That is not allowed under the rules and it should not be allowed under the rules. However members of Parliament should be allowed to go about their legitimate business in an election year. 
R Doug Woolerton 
: Does the Minister agree that the important thing to ensure in electoral law is that the voice of the New Zealand public is heard at election time not just the voices of well-funded lobby groups? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Absolutely and it is interesting to read the press releases that have come out since the bill has been reported back by the Justice and Electoral Committee. The only negative press releases we have seen repeated every day come from the National Party. I would prefer to listen to organisations like the National Council of Women which represents many more people than the members across there at this stage. It says that this is a much better bill for the work that has been done on it. 
Heather Roy 
: How does this bill not breach freedom of speech under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act when by closing third party registrations before candidate nominations a group could spend only $1000 on speaking out about a candidate whose views it opposes and is this Government not railroading this bill through the House before it can be challenged in the courts for being inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: The date by which a third party can register that it wants to be involved in the electoral system—in fact wants to campaign for a party or candidate—is in this bill writ day. I believe that the date could be changed to the date for closure of nominations. 
Hon Bill English 
: More amendments! 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Well I have to say that every electoral bill that has ever been before this House has been subject to amendments in the Committee stage. I ask the member to show me one time when such a bill has not. Those comments are nothing more than crocodile tears. 
Heather Roy 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I think the Minister was a little diverted from answering my question by retaliating across the House. Perhaps she would like to address my question rather than interjections. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: The member asked about the date by which a third party can register. I addressed the question. The fact the member asked several questions means that she probably has to sort out her questions better. 
Hon Bill English 
: Is the Minister aware that the new definition of “publish” in terms of election advertisements now includes any manner of bringing a political view to the public including comments on Internet forums press releases that are put out even if they are not published by the media and someone going down the street door-knocking and saying: “Vote National.”? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: That question borders on the ridiculous. The law of common sense applies as it always has in electoral Acts. The law of common sense applies and the member knows that. One could argue that under the Electoral Act now a press release could be covered but it is not covered because trivial matters are not taken into account. The law of common sense applies. A bit of common sense from the National Party would be appreciated. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister understand how depressing it is for the House to find that after months of listening to the last justice Minister who had not read the law and did not understand it we are now afflicted with another one who has not read the law and on her third day of answering questions is reduced to saying this law will work only if we ignore it? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Mr English might like to tell New Zealanders that they are dumb and do not know what they are talking about because that is exactly what he is saying today. Let me read to the House what the National Council of Women said about the changes that have been made to this bill. The council believes that the Justice and Electoral Committee listened to the concerns that were raised by the council and that the committee addressed those concerns and it says that the council supports the intent behind this bill. Those sorts of people believe that we got it right: that we know what is happening. Only the National Party says we have not. One has to ask why the National Party protests so much. Why is it so upset about this bill when a consensus has been built in this Parliament around what should be in the bill? 
Hon Bill English 
: Is the Minister aware that if someone goes door-knocking down a street knocking on doors and saying: “Vote National.” then under her law that action constitutes the publication of an election advertisement and therefore such persons constitute promoters under the law; and if those persons are promoters then when they knock on a door they will have to give their name and address to the person they are addressing present the authorisation by the financial agent for the party for which they are canvassing and then say: “Good morning.”? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: If the person were a National Party campaigner he or she would probably be told to buzz off. I say to that member—[ 
Interruption 
] I am answering the last part of the member’s question about saying “Good morning.” The member is wrong. That example does not apply. No one expects someone who knocks on the door to say: “This is an election advertisement.” That example is patently ridiculous and everyone who has listened to those examples given to the member by David Farrier off the National Party blog says they are ridiculous. 
Hon Bill English 
: Has the Minister bothered to go and read her own law which states that any expression of a view that encourages any member of the public to vote one way or another communicated to the public in any manner constitutes an election advertisement and the other part of the law which states that anyone who publishes an election advertisement is a promoter—that is in her law—and that any such advertisement must include his or her name and address which is why for instance placards must now include the name and address of the person who is holding them? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Under the Electoral Act as it stands one could argue that a placard should have an authorisation on it. But I have to say that nobody I know of has been prosecuted under the current Act because he or she held up a 1c placard that did not have his or her name on it. The law of common sense applies. I suggest to the member that he apply it. 
Hon Bill English 
: Where in the Electoral Finance Bill does it give some kind of exemption by applying the law of common sense—because I have seen no reference to it whatsoever nor any evidence that common sense has been applied? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Let me just put it to the member that the current Electoral Act has loopholes in it we could drive a bulldozer through. In fact three High Court judges said in the Clarkson case that there were huge loopholes in the current Act and that anyone who had intent could drive a bus through them. So in response to the member asking where everything is in the Act I say the law of common sense has applied and has been applied. 
Hon Bill English 
: When a well-meaning citizen or community group picks up— 
Hon Chris Carter 
: They certainly won’t be knocking for National. 
Hon Bill English 
: Well they are now. Can the Minister tell the public and the House what will happen when a well-meaning member of the public or community group looks up the Electoral Finance Bill and reads the Draconian provisions that mean that any person expressing a point of view in any form at all about whom to vote for is covered by the Act and has to comply with its regulations; and whom does that person approach to find out which rules now no longer apply because of common sense and which rules will continue to apply because Labour wants to clamp down on public opinion? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: It is not Labour that wants to clamp down on public opinion. We have here a National Party that is desperate to spend the money from its mates that it has hoarded away—money the National Party thought it would be able to buy the 2008 election with. The National Party now finds that the majority of this House will not allow it to spend the money in the way that it did with its sneaky little deals with the Brethren and others. That hurts but the people of New Zealand believe that there ought to be a fair open and transparent approach to the Electoral Act. That is what they are getting. And that is what the majority of this House will vote for. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: What a bunch of cheats! 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Nick Smith has just made an offensive remark. I require him to withdraw and apologise. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the member please withdraw and apologise. I did not hear the remark because of the noise. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I said that the Labour Party is just a bunch of cheats. I think that is true. If we look at the intent of the Electoral Act we see that there is no intention other than to try to favour the Labour Party. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I ask the member to withdraw and apologise. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I reluctantly withdraw and apologise. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No. I ask the member to withdraw and apologise in accordance with the rules. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I withdraw and apologise. 
Metiria Turei 
: Does the Minister agree that the rules around who can spend what and who can say what during election campaigns should be determined largely by the people of New Zealand; if so does she also agree with the Greens that a citizens’ assembly a group of randomly selected members of the public resourced with independent advisers would be a much more democratic way to make electoral finance law? [ 
Interruption 
] 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: The member who has just asked the question can tell from the response from the National Party that those members do not encourage democracy at all. They do not encourage it at all because as soon as the member mentioned allowing the public to have a say they all went into their position of moaning grizzling and so on. I say to the member that there is a lot of merit in the Greens’ proposal and as has already been said to the member it is something that we would consider. But the rabble over there will not consider it. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: In the light of the questions from Mr English has the Minister received any— 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I would have thought that someone of Dr Cullen’s experience would know that that is not how to start a question. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: In the light of the questions from Mr English has she received any reports that National Party canvassers do not say “Hello” do not say who they are and do not say whom they are calling on behalf of; if so does that explain why National has lost three elections in a row? 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Madam Speaker— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No the Minister is not responsible for National Party canvassing. [ 
Interruption 
] If this level of noise continues then I will be asking members to leave the House because it is impossible for me to hear. I could not hear any of the answer from the Minister before. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: I was just about to say that— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: No I am not asking the Minister to repeat that. Members are on their last notice.