Lees-Galloway Iain: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 11 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5574. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): I would like to look at clause 68 “Validation of irregularities”. Clause 68(1) says: “In the circumstances described in subsection (2) the Governor-General may by Order in Council do any of the things described in subsection (3).” That sounds to me like the Governor-General has quite broad scope actually to act and to do a variety of things: to extend the time lines that are included in the legislation and to validate any things that have or have not been done. Basically my reading of this—and again I was not on the Justice and Electoral Committee so if members who were on the select committee could give us a little bit more information about this that would be helpful—is that the Governor-General has quite a lot of scope to be able to do things by Order in Council.I wonder whether one of the circumstances in clause 68(2)(b)—“if anything cannot be done at the time required by or under this Act;”—is if one of the things that cannot be done is for the Government to run a surplus or maybe to get the country’s debt below $101 billion which might actually be a step in the right direction towards being the time when you would spend $26 million on a flag referendum. If that were not to happen I wonder whether the Governor-Generalmight be able by Order in Council to do one of the things under clause 68(3)—that is subclause (3)(a): “at any time before or after the time within which the thing is required to be done to extend that time;”. So in other words what I am getting at is if the Government cannot get us back to surplus or at least get the debt below $100 billion and actually get us a step towards the point where you would spend $26 million on a vanity project for the Prime Minister maybe the Governor-General might be able to say: “You know what? Let’s extend the time before we have the first referendum and let’s just wait until a time that is a little bit more appropriate for this referendum to occur.”I think what we have heard loudly from the public—whether you are for or against the idea of changing the flag—is that people have made it quite clear that now is not the time and one of the reasons that they are quite clear that now is not the time is the fact that we are not in surplus and we are at such a deep level of debt. OK fine pass the legislation now if we must but set this up as a process that will occur a bit further down the track. I think that here in clause 68 in Part 3 we may actually have the mechanism for that to happen. Cabinet could decide to listen to the people of New Zealand—that would be a first. It could decide to do that and it could instruct the Governor-General by Order in Council to extend the time before which the referendum actually occurs.Tim Macindoe: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Again I draw your attention to the question of relevance. There is nothing in clause 68(2) that is remotely relevant to the comments that this member is making. He is attempting to bring in ludicrous matters that are totally extraneous to a very very tight and technical provision.Chris Hipkins: The point that I would make to you is that the Speakers’ rulings are very clear that the question of relevance is a matter for only the Chair and that it is in fact disorderly for anyone other than the Chair to interrupt a member’s speech to question them on relevance. The senior Government whip has done that twice now when in fact the only person who has the prerogative to do that is you as the Chair.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): I invite the member Iain Lees-Galloway to continue with his speech. We will all be listening closely to what he has to say relevant to the particular clause.Hon Bill English: Except me—I’m not listening.IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: I could tell that you were listening Mr Chair. It is a shame that the Minister in the chair has just admitted that he is not listening. He may as well just go out there and say that to the public of New Zealand: “I’m not listening.” The Deputy Prime Minister the Minister of Finance has just admitted that he is not listening. He is not listening to this debate and that is exactly what the Government is doing. It is not listening to the people of New Zealand who have overwhelmingly said: “This is not the time for this debate. This is not the time to—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Chester Borrows): Well exploited but get back to the clause.IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Well I was very happy talking about the clause before I was interrupted by the senior Government whip and before the Deputy Prime Minister interjected that he was not listening and I was quite happy to respond to the interjection from the Deputy Prime Minister that he was not listening. But honestly I know that the senior Government whip is very keen to shut this debate down but those were serious questions. I was not on the select committee. I am reading this clause—I am doing a close reading of this clause—and I want to know either from the Minister who is not listening or maybe from one of the members opposite who was on the select committee whether that is possible. Is that possible under clause 68? Could Cabinet through the Governor-General by Order in Council extend the date or perhaps delay the date for the referendum to a point in time that might be more acceptable to the public of New Zealand? That is my reading of clause 68 and I would be very happy to have that clarified either by the Minister or by any member opposite.I would like to touch on clause 69 “Amendments to Flags Emblems and Names Protection Act 1981” which replaces section 5 regarding the New Zealand flag. This is an interesting thing that is going on with the current flag—which is called the 1902 flag—which would be “recognised as a flag of historical significance to the Realm”. I find new section 5A(2) really really strange. New section 5A(2) allows people in the event that the flag changes—