Twyford Phil: Governor-General Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Twyford Phil: Governor-General Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:668;Page:14787] 
PHIL TWYFORD (Labour) 
: 
 I find a lot of merit in Supplementary Order Paper 173 in the name of Keith Locke. We have heard the two key provisions on it being explained by colleagues over the last half hour or so. The first deals with the appointment of the Governor-General and would require a 75 percent majority in this House for any recommendation to go to the Sovereign for the appointment of the next Governor-General. As a fellow republican with Keith Locke I appreciate the sentiment behind this. It is not that this Supplementary Order Paper is about republicanism; it is simply about the appointment of the Governor-General. But implicit in this Supplementary Order Paper is the idea that we are a democracy and it is appropriate that this House as the assembly of the elected representatives of this nation should have a say in the appointment of our head of State. That seems to be entirely consistent with the thrust of the Governor-General Bill which we will debate this afternoon and which is fundamentally about modernising the arrangements surrounding the Governor-General. I commend the member for this Supplementary Order Paper. 
As my colleague Chris Hipkins has pointed out new clause 5A on the Supplementary Order Paper deals with the term of the appointment of the Governor-General by setting it out in law that the Governor-General is not to be appointed for a term greater than 5 years. That effectively puts in place a term limit: a person who has been appointed as the Governor-General cannot be reappointed as the Governor-General. A clear line can be drawn between that and the provisions in the bill. Clause 8 of the bill deals with the annuities and it states that if the Governor-General has held office for a total period of less than 2 complete years he or she must be paid an annuity. Of course the bill also sets up the Remuneration Authority as the body that will set the level of that annuity. 
Although I think the case can be made that this Supplementary Order Paper should be debated today I am mindful that colleagues have already made the case that such a significant change to the way that the Governor-General is appointed deserves to have the benefit of a proper and serious process of public and parliamentary scrutiny in accordance with the fact that this would be a pretty significant change to our constitutional arrangements. We have heard from Mr Locke that a couple of the submitters Lewis Holden and Dean Knight came along to the Government Administration Committee and submitted in some detail on this very issue. But I am persuaded by my colleagues that that is not enough and that the bill would have to be changed and then run through a select committee process in which members of the public could come along and have a say on this matter. I like what my colleague Chris Hipkins had to say and if there is a procedure that would allow Mr Locke to propose that the House send the bill back before the select committee with this Supplementary Order Paper to be considered by the public then I would certainly be keen to support that. I express the hope that my colleagues on the Labour side of this House would also support that provision. 
This is not a republican Supplementary Order Paper but it is a democratic one. It is worthy of consideration; I think it has a lot of merit. I hope that we can find a way to ensure that this bill is sent back before the select committee so it can consider the content of Mr Locke’s Supplementary Order Paper.