Turei Metiria: Electoral Referendum Bill — In Committee 
Turei Metiria: Electoral Referendum Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:669;Page:16409] 
METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I shall take a brief call on the Electoral Referendum Bill. The Green Party was very pleased with the discussion at the Electoral Legislation Committee about how the referendum was to be structured. There was a lot of discussion about the nature of the ballot paper itself and ensuring that the language used was readily understood. We used an English for speakers of other languages process to test that it was easily understood and that simple language was used to help those for whom English is a second language or who have difficulties with literacy. Some good work was done on this bill. 
The Green Party was also very pleased to see caps on spending by the various players involved in the referendum campaign. Of course at the last referendum we saw extraordinary amounts of money thrown at an attempt to keep first past the post—and the same people will attempt to return us to it this time actually. They fought very hard last time for first past the post and used vast quantities of money. So we are very pleased to see the caps notwithstanding the fact that I know that other parties disagree with it. 
The issue we had with the bill however was the question of the point at which MMP will be reviewed. The provision in the bill as it stands is that if MMP wins the first referendum in 2011 there will be a review of MMP at that point. It will concern a number of factors and the bill sets out some of those. That is good; we should continually review our electoral system to see what is working and what is not. MMP is still comparatively young in this country. It has been in use only since 1999 so it is important to— 
Hon Member 
: 1996. 
METIRIA TUREI 
: —1996 sorry. It is important to look at it and in light of the experience we have had to decide what changes need to be made. When the public are asked about MMP they have lots of ideas about what could be changed and that is an important discussion for us to have. But the Greens say that that discussion should have happened before the proposition of a referendum was put forward. Voters the public citizens are entitled to a structured and resourced discussion on the kind of electoral system they want. If MMP was going to be put to the vote again there should have been a chance for the public to engage in a discussion on the flaws and benefits of the current system of MMP before going to a vote on it. That would have been a way to ensure that our community had the best information available and were able to participate in the kind of system we should have. That did not happen because of some strange electoral promise that it appears National made to somebody although nobody knows whom. It came out of the blue that there would be a referendum. So now we are to have one. It is always up to the public to decide to vote on the electoral system and that is fair enough. 
As I said MMP will be reviewed after the 2011 election if it is successful in the referendum. But if it is not successful then the system we will have during the period 2011 to 2014 in the lead up to a runoff between MMP and a new system is the old form of MMP which has not been changed since 1996. It will be compared with a very new system that will have been developed in light of our experience of MMP and in light of different electoral developments internationally. It will be a system that has been devised according to the best practice that we know of at the time. So it will not be a fair runoff. It will not be a fair runoff. Not only that; because of the process for constructing the new system and what it will look like information about it will have been made very clear and available to the public. There will be a lot of discussion about the way that a new system might work and a lot of public engagement in that process. But there will not be a lot of discussion about and engagement in the MMP system that we use now because so much focus will be on the new system. So the public discussion on the two different options they will be asked to vote for will be very very different. The level of knowledge and information available to the public about the two systems that they will have to choose from will be very very different. Because MMP will not have been reviewed there will be the same level of public discussion about MMP and how it could be better. 
The Green Party says there should be a review of MMP regardless of the outcome of the 2011 referendum. We say the public is entitled to have a say on and make changes to the MMP system regardless of the referendum result so that should MMP not succeed at the next referendum the public will have the best choices from which they can make their decision. They will have available to them the most information about the benefits and the disadvantages of both systems. That is only right because the voting system is a system that belongs to the people it is a system that belongs to citizens and citizens are entitled to make decisions based on the best possible information. There will not be that opportunity for our community to have the best possible information and to be able to make a choice between the two best types of systems because the old creaky MMP that we know could do with a little bit of looking at will be set against the brand new shiny version of something completely different and we do not even know what it will be. There is a real disincentive here and I think the Government has set up the referendum in such a way to make it more difficult for a proper set of choices to be put to the electorate in 2014 if MMP does not make it through the 2011 referendum. 
I know there are lots of concerns about the nature of this discussion but in my view no matter what our views are about how we construct electoral law the No. 1 most important thing is that the public have the best access to the best possible information so that they can make the best decision in their interests because the voting system belongs to them. The Government in constructing the referendum as it has done in this legislation has taken from the community and from citizens the ability to have access to that best possible information and that is wrong. We should not be doing that in legislation and we certainly should not be mucking around with that principle when it comes to the most important question of all which is not what Government one elects but how one goes about electing a Government. That has got to be the most critical constitutional electoral decision that any community will make—not who is elected but how they are elected. 
What we want in this country is the fairest most transparent and most representative system for electing people to Parliament who are therefore represented in the formation of the Government. That is what MMP does. It is a much fairer system than the one we had in the past. We should always be looking to improve and make fairer and more representative our electoral system so that the public can have confidence that when they go to the ballot box their vote will count which happens under MMP—people have two votes and both count—and that they are represented in this House of Representatives first and foremost; that their voices will be represented in this House by the people whom they most prefer to speak for them which is part of what representative democracy is all about. But also when we make laws about how that process works we must have first and foremost in our minds the need for our people to have a fair system that they can have some faith and trust in. 
I have already said in the earlier debate on the electoral finance law that I have concerns about the integrity of our electoral finance system. On this matter I think there is an issue of integrity too. We are not ensuring that we have the most integrity in the process by which we are to choose our electoral system. I am not sure whether the Labour Party has put up the Supplementary Order Paper that it was intending to put up to make this change but I want to highlight for the community that a real concern is that people will not have the opportunity to make changes and to discuss and consider the MMP system in the way that they ought to should it not be successful in the referendum in 2011. Thank you.