Hughes Gareth: Members of Parliament (Remuneration and Services) Bill — Second ReadingText is subject to correctionHughes Gareth: Members of Parliament (Remuneration and Services) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 22 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:14085. Text is subject to correction.]GARETH HUGHES (Green): Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker.Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. I rise to speak in support of the Members of Parliament (Remuneration and Services) Bill. I do not think there is anything that probably excites the talkback callers and gives the newspaper cartoonists more creative ideas than MPs’ remuneration and so-called perks. If we are going to have a public that have confidence in our Parliament and our elected representatives it is critical that we get this right. The Green Party believes we are making a step in the right direction with this bill and that is why we will be supporting it.Obviously it is something that we have talked about for an awfully long time in this Parliament. For 10 years or more the Greens have been the ones championing having a transparent regime when it comes to expenses when it comes to travel and when it comes to pay because not only is it the right thing and the reason that the public could have more confidence in us but it is also the way that we can make the right decisions in our daily lives. We have seen it on the front pages of the papers in New Zealand and around the world particularly in the UK. It is critical that we get this right. Transparency and sunlight are an important part of it. Ultimately it comes down to your principles and the Green Party’s core principle is appropriate decision-making.When you see the cartoons of the pigs with their heads in the trough it is obviously not appropriate to have those who are benefiting from the decisions being the ones making them. That is why for a long time we have called for an independent body to set our pay our travel and our accommodation entitlements so that we can do our work.I would like to say that the Greens can quite proudly take a bit of credit for some of the movement we have seen in New Zealand. At the time of the superannuation scandals that we saw in this Parliament it was the Greens who voluntarily decided in 2009 to release publicly our expense accounts. Now Parliament has followed suit which is a very positive step. Metiria Turei back in around 2009 I think it was put a motion to the Parliamentary Service Commission which is part of the reason that we are here today. It was great to see the Law Commission’s report in 2009.What we see in this bill are some steps in the right direction. We see the so-called Chris Carter clause—the $10 maximum penalty per day for MPs absent without leave—finally being increased to a meaningful amount. We see the voluntary disclosure regimefor MPs’ travel and accommodation become statutory. And quite rightly we celebrate with other parties in Parliament new clause 17(1)(ab) where entitlements to services should be determined in a way that has regard to the particular requirements of any members in Parliament with physical or sensory impairments.It was a bit of a battle behind the scenes to get the appropriate services so that Mojo Mathers could do her job as New Zealand’s first profoundly deaf MP. It is unfortunate that we had to push and we had to struggle to get there but I am glad that our Parliament has got there and now we are doing the right thing in terms of this legislation. I am sure that we will deal with that in the Standing Orders review as well. We are doing the right thing because any MP with an impairment be it physical or sensory should be able to represent their community their electors in this Parliament. What this Parliament should not be doing is sending the message to those Kiwis with those sensory or physical impairments that it is going to be harder for your party or your colleagues if you are in the House. That is why we think it is important that a strong message is sent. Their voices are valued in this House of Representatives and it is great to see that in this legislation.Where we had difficulty with this legislation was in the original proposal both by the Law Commission and in the original first reading copy of the bill and that was to have the travel and accommodation entitlements dealt with by the Remuneration Authority. We still believe that that is the appropriate venue for this. We do not think it is appropriate to put that back on the Speaker’s shoulders. Obviously I think that transparency and appropriate decision-making are critical. That is why Metiria Turei has Supplementary Order Paper 369 in front of this House to try to ameliorate this.I think the arguments around MPs’ travel to and from Wellington are spurious. Obviously MPs have to do it. But the core of the matter is who makes the decisions who sets the rates. Instead of the Speaker of Parliament setting them it should be an independent authority. It is critically important that Parliament sorts out these issues so that the public can have confidence in us and so we can have appropriate decision-making. That is why I think we obviously need to have an independent body to set our travel and accommodation entitlements.I think it is high time that this Parliament and members of this House got rid of their voluntary personal travel perk. It is a perk. I voluntarily renounced it when I entered this Parliament in 2009. What we need to do is make Parliamentary Service travel expenses able to be requested under the Official Information Act and obviously we need to do a lot more to clean up the system. Kia ora.