Dalziel Lianne: Electoral (Administration) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Dalziel Lianne: Electoral (Administration) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:10894] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour—Christchurch East) 
: 
 I think that point made by the Minister in the chair the Minister of Justice is the point I would like to follow on from because I read in the Justice and Electoral Committee’s report a recommendation that the Standing Orders Committee develop a procedure for appointments to the Electoral Commission and also to other bodies that are not Officers of Parliament such as the Independent Police Conduct Authority and the Abortion Supervisory Committee which the Minister mentioned. 
The select committee had in its report the particular recommendation of an adaptation of the procedures for the appointment of an Officer of Parliament. I thought that that had kind of a nice ring to it given the debate that had obviously occurred at the select committee over whether the Electoral Commission should be an Officer of Parliament or an independent Crown entity. 
I agree that the commission should be an independent Crown entity. I am not of the view that it should be an Officer of Parliament. I think that the select committee dealt with all the arguments that had been put to it quite neatly. I also agree that having the Speaker being accountable to Parliament for the commission’s operations could create some problems. Obviously that is a very political sphere and that could lead to an inappropriate line being drawn where we would not want it to be drawn. I also think that the board structure as the committee identified is not really in line with individual appointments as the other Officers of Parliament are and I think it really does suit that model better. 
But I quite like the idea of making a recommendation to the Standing Orders Committee so I would not mind if the Minister made a response to that particular proposal. I understand that in the meantime the Minister plans to consult all party leaders about appointments and he is making that point I think by using the example of the Abortion Supervisory Committee making appointments only where there is a broad level of support across all parties. I think that is to be commended. 
As I understand it further some of the features will include the appointments being made from application rather than nomination to ensure that the selection process is as consistent and transparent as possible. We got this information from the Minister’s office today so I assume I am reporting this accurately to the Committee. The board positions will be advertised online and in the major dailies. Candidates will be shortlisted and interviewed by an independent panel appointments will be referred through the Cabinet appointments process and then the consultation will occur with political parties. 
That seems like a good-enough process to be working on at the moment but I do think that it would be enhanced by having the Standing Orders Committee look at adopting a particular process that would then be adopted by all Governments in the future. I think that transparency would enhance confidence in the process and in the individuals who take up the appointments on the board. I certainly commend that work of the select committee. 
The second thing I really want to do during Committee stage of this bill is to refer to the objective of the Electoral Commission in new section 4C in Part 1. The commission is established to “administer the electoral system impartially efficiently effectively and in a way that—(a) facilitates participation in parliamentary democracy; and (b) promotes understanding of the electoral system and associated matters; and (c) maintains confidence in the administration of the electoral system.” I am concerned about the commission’s capacity to meet the second objective—the promotion of the understanding of the electoral system and associated matters—given that other events are occurring at the moment. 
Under another bill that the House is addressing at the moment—and I refer to it because it will become a requirement of the Electoral Commission should MMP survive the referendum ballot next year—there is a substantially new role for the Electoral Commission. In fact the one previous time that a review of the MMP system occurred it was dealt with by a special select committee chaired by the Speaker. Of course there was no such role for the Electoral Commission in the establishment of the Royal Commission on the Electoral System which led to the promotion of MMP as an alternative system here in New Zealand and all the subsequent legislation that has passed through this House has all gone through parliamentary processes. So in the past we have had Parliament a royal commission and a special select committee of Parliament chaired by the Speaker to look at MMP. 
So if MMP survives the referendum vote then a new role for the Electoral Commission will be to conduct a review of MMP with specific issues defined in the legislation for the commission to look at but not I think limited in that regard. I do not think I can overstate the significance of this new role but I am raising one real concern that I have. It will be vital that the commission is able to ensure that there is very high-quality information out there about the nature of our current electoral system because there will be very powerful vested interests that are determined to get rid of proportional representation. 
I really worry that a brand new organisation which will be running its very first general election—and I know there will be a merging of those who have current interest and involvement in the work of the commission—will have the general election as its priority. We have a major constitutional issue being decided by way of referendum and I know that it is not the final decision but it will obviously be of significance in terms of what happens next. 
With no limits on spending on the referendum and unlimited access to television there is a real risk that democracy will be subverted by totally misleading advertising designed to undermine proportional representation. If members thought it was humorous to see paper bags over the heads of a few people whom we would not apparently know as list MPs—which was all they managed to throw together when they suddenly realised that the people of New Zealand were going to vote for change back in the early 1990s—then they can dream on. That is not what it will be like next time. Those people those opponents will have unlimited access to television in the middle of an election campaign. 
I could write the script myself. I know exactly how they will prepare for it. It is perfectly obvious to anyone who is concerned about retaining a system that produces a fair result. Unless this matter is addressed the first test for this new commission could potentially represent a travesty of democracy leaving the commission with no ability to meet that most important objective of promoting understanding of the electoral system and associated matters. 
I want some reassurance from the Minister that there will be sufficient resources available to the Electoral Commission so that it can participate in this process in a way that ensures that people get access to quality unbiased information. I am sure that unbiased information will be outspent 100:1 by those who oppose proportional representation and want to return to the happy days of a single party Government who could ram through as Sir Geoffrey Palmer described in  
Unbridled Power 
 anything it chose to ram through. 
Parties of both colours were guilty of doing that—both red and blue—and unfortunately there are people who hanker for those days. Most people who were involved in the red days now belong in the blue and yellow corner. Therefore they probably do not see it quite in the same light. But given where their support base is I am sure that they will be backing removal of proportional representation because if they get majority National Governments able to deliver more to their agenda than a Labour Government would then I am sure that they will be pushing for that change. That is a serious concern that I want to put on the table and I hope the Minister can address it.