SpeechHon ALFRED NGARO (National): I want to speak on Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 292 and Darroch Ball has been speaking on this. Now he's often made passionate purposeful speeches in this House and I've heard him speak about this and just as he's made his point of view in regards to the personal vote—well these are personal votes. Why? Because they're conscience votes. But I want to remind the member of the process.So the member needs to remember that even though it is a conscience—and in this case this is a Government bill by the way. This is a Government bill; you are part of that Government. You are part of that coalition Government. You cannot resile from that. So as a coalition member of that Government you are part of this process. This is not a member's bill or a private member's bill that's being introduced: this is a Government bill. I want to go on the record in stating that to Mr Ball as well.I want to also state to him this: that he's made his passionate plea. He's talked about principle in the House. That the view of this particular issue—and it's a moral and a conscience issue in regards to abortion and the reformation of this Abortion Legislation Bill—is that it should be the voice of the people. Well Mr Darroch Ball you need to remember that there was a submission process: 25000 submitted—that is substantive. Just like you when you quoted the euthanasia bill End of Life Choice Bill: 39000—that is substantive. Out of that 91.6 percent voted no. Now how much of that is not a voice of the community and of the people? That is significant. Now if that's not enough to give you an indication as to how you should be directing your votes—on behalf of the party by the way—then that to me lacks your responsibility in this House on what you have voted. You need to be part of the process. You've seen the submissions: over 25000 directly telling us what they should be.So the fact is that you've said that this referendum is part of your SOP. New Zealand First stands on that. So here's the challenge I'm going to put to you: if your SOP is not voted on you've block voted to vote for this SOP will you block vote as a party on principle—that you've come on in the House time and time again—will you block vote the other way then? If you do not get your SOP around the referendum will you do the same? You've stood in this House and you've declared: Let the people have their voice; let the people have their say."Let me just say this is not just a small amendment that you're making; this SOP is quite substantive. Clause 2 in here states: "(1)(a) means of a referendum held on [a] polling day … (b) includes any fresh referendum required to be held if the High Court on a petition declares the referendum under paragraph (a) to be void." You've made it very specific and very clear in your explanatory note: "If the majority of electors voting at a referendum do not agree that the Bill should come into force this Bill [will be] repealed." You've been very specific you've been very detailed so my challenge to you Mr Darroch Ball and to New Zealand First: if you're going to stand on principle then be principled the other way. If the SOP does not come through in your direction then vote against the bill. Why? Because that's the principle that you've spoken in this House on.You're telling the public you're telling the nation and you're even telling your own supporters that that's what you're voting for. So I'm going to be very specific in my speech in regards to your referendum SOP. Let it be heard in this nation that you've made that speech. Let it be heard in this nation then because if that SOP fails to go through and then you have broken-up views on conscience votes then I'm going to tell you this now and I can't use that word but it could be "hypocritical"—it could be. It could be the fact that what you're doing is that your words do not match your actions. So I'm going to put it on you. I'm going to make it really clear: if you do not have your SOP and your SOP fails in the House then I would challenge you to block vote the opposite way and vote against this. Why? Because as you've said very clearly it goes against every single principle that you've voted on in every single conscience vote.But in this case may I remind you that this is a Government bill. This is not a member's bill. It's the same Government that by the way you are a coalition member for. So in that case you have more responsibility. You knew that I was going to say this so I'm going to say it again: vote to your principles. If the SOP fails then vote to oppose the bill. Why? Because that goes against everything that you stood for.Can I say this: this SOP here 292—in our case there were times where there was a referendum; we've had them in our season as a National Party. Why? When we had the flag referendum we had to stand on that view to put it out to the public. So I'm not opposed to referendums but what I will challenge are people that stand in this House—a party that would stand in this House and stand on a referendum and yet when the proof in the pudding comes they vote against it."