McClay Todd: Electoral Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
McClay Todd: Electoral Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1354] 
TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua) 
: 
 It gives me pleasure to stand up and speak on the Electoral Amendment Bill and in so doing to support it. I am encouraged by the common sense that has been shown by most parts of the House in addressing this important issue through the bill’s first reading and in the Committee stage. I congratulate the Minister Simon Power on once again meeting an election promise that the National Party made—a commitment that in the first 100 days of office we would repeal the Electoral Finance Act. This Minister is starting to develop a reputation for action and it is well deserved. This is yet another commitment made and honoured in 100 days in office. I congratulate him on that. 
There has been a lot of intelligent debate around the repeal of this Act. Such intelligent and sensible debate probably could have been shown in 2007 when the House last focused on this issue. It is good to see that the Minister has said that once the Act is repealed all parties in the House—indeed all stakeholders in New Zealand—will have an opportunity to consider a new bill to provide transparency and openness when it comes to how we govern our elections. Again it is a shame that this was not a possibility in 2007 when the bill was last considered. The commitment that has been shown and certainly the well-deserved reputation for action that has been developed over the last 3 months is diametrically opposed to the previous Government’s first 3 months of office. It did not deserve any such reputation. 
This legislation is about common sense. In 2007 we heard a lot in relation to this legislation about the fact that we were governed by common sense. It is quite easy for members opposite to have all the answers today. It was shown just a short few months ago when New Zealand voted that the answers were not there. Labour members were found wanting. I am glad that those members have come around to realising that New Zealand deserves good electoral law. They will have an opportunity to show how reasonable they are and how much common sense can be applied to this issue in the coming months. 
The people of New Zealand want their say. Some old ladies in Rotorua came to me during the campaign and said they were concerned about this nasty bill they had heard about that had been passed. They asked why they could not stand up and have their say. They are women who for the previous 20 years had been wearing their pinnies with the National Party badge on them and they asked why they could not wear them any more. The answer was that those pinnies would be illegal were they to wear them. I feel for some of those people in Rotorua. It was bad legislation and the Opposition I am glad to say has recognised that. 
What were others saying about this legislation 2 years ago and last year during the election campaign? The  
New Zealand Herald  
stated that democracy was under attack. Those were the words of the  
New Zealand Herald 
: “Democracy under attack”. We also read in the  
New Zealand Herald  
that if the law was passed it would be Labour’s epitaph. Well that has certainly been the case. The Electoral Commission referred to the bill’s “chilling effect” and the New Zealand Law Society and the Human Rights Commission also condemned the bill. The  
Listener 
 stated during the course of the debate on the Electoral Finance Bill when it was first discussed in this Parliament that it was a “great electoral hijack” and a “dog’s breakfast”. Well I have canvassed opinion pretty widely and I did not see a single dog that was willing to swallow this legislation but it was rammed through the House. 
I spoke a moment ago about the law of common sense and what was said in this very Chamber. With this legislation the law of common sense applies as it always does with electoral Acts. Finally when it comes to electoral law we have some common sense and it is the legislation we are debating today—the repeal of the Electoral Finance Act—that is sponsored by the Minister Simon Power. Finally we can see that there will be some common sense. 
What were the problems with this legislation out on the campaign trail? I can say that all parties on both sides of this House probably spent much more time than they needed to—far too much time—considering the legal ramifications of legislation that was rammed through the House rather than being out there having open discussion and debate promoting democracy and listening to constituents. That is really what I want to say: elections are about debate openness and dialogue and the Electoral Finance Act did not allow any openness debate or real dialogue throughout the width and breadth of this country. In fact the very way it was adopted in 2007 had little to do with debate openness and dialogue in New Zealand. 
Many hours were spent considering the Electoral Finance Act. In fact lawyers told me that they were looking forward to the result of the election and that they thought there would be great income for them in sorting out the many problems the Electoral Finance Act would create once declarations were made. The great news is that the lawyers will not have that work to do thanks to an outstanding result on the part of the National Party. Without a million people in New Zealand deciding that they did not like the legislation and that they wanted a change many of us today might still be considering the advice our lawyers have been giving us. 
A farmer in Waikite which is in my electorate of Rotorua phoned me and said that many years ago he had been a strong supporter of the National Party and that last year during the election campaign he was again a strong supporter of the National Party. He asked me to tell him about the legislation that was rammed through Parliament without enough consultation. He asked what people could do out there in the rural areas where they want change growth more productivity and where they want somebody to sit down listen to them and represent them. He asked whether he could go out and paint his sheep blue. I said that would be a wonderful thing to do. Would it not be a great thing if all the sheep of New Zealand farmers who supported National were blue? I said that the problem with that was who would authorise the sheep. Members cannot tell me that if a farmer in my electorate wants to paint his sheep blue so that people can see exactly which way he votes he should then have to consider how he will authorise the sheep. Indeed why does the Act suggest that an authorisation would be needed? Every member of the House who campaigned last year had to have business cards. Those business cards had to be authorised. 
Why was Labour which was in Government but is now the Opposition so worried that every small piece of literature—every card I put on a doorstep of the thousands of doors that we knocked on in the Rotorua electorate—had to be authorised and if not for that we would be breaking the law and the people of Rotorua could not be trusted to decide what they should be doing? 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Why doesn’t he authorise the lot not each one individually? 
TODD McCLAY 
: I remember Dr Cullen voting for this legislation and I am glad that today he will be supporting its repeal. It will be a great thing that he will be able to apply a little bit of common sense to the debate that will be taking place in the coming months. To have this debate means that we will be able to have good legislation in New Zealand and we will be able to agree on the way that we are elected not only as constituency members of Parliament but also as list members of Parliament so that all of us can be considered. 
It is a pleasure to stand up and speak on this legislation. I commend it to the House and I am very happy to give my vote to supporting it. I believe that through open Government consultation with the public and listening to all of those who want to have a say and be involved in election processes in 2011 we will have a great opportunity to make sure that not only is democracy something that is strong in New Zealand but it is also something that every single New Zealander should he or she wish will have an opportunity to take part in and to speak about. On behalf of Rotorua I happily put forward my vote to support this bill and to repeal the Electoral Finance Act. Thank you.