O'Rourke Denis: Local Electoral Amendment Bill (No 2) — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Rourke Denis: Local Electoral Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee[Sitting date: 11 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11024. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First):Although the Local Electoral Amendment Bill (No 2) does some very good things and will be supported by New Zealand First it is far from perfect and it is incomplete. However it is just enough and just in time for this year’s local government elections.Clause 15 inserts a good new section section 61(2)(ca) requiring a candidate profile statement to include whether or not the candidate’s principal place of residence is in the local government area in question. That is a desirable provision because voters ought to have that information but it does not preclude a candidate from living outside the area and does not preclude him or her stating what connections he or she has with the area. Of course some people who do live within the area may in fact have very little genuine connection with it so voters need to be aware of that too.Most important however are the provisions which are long needed concerning anonymous donations. The need for those of course was well demonstrated by the John Banks issues in relation to hislast unsuccessful Auckland mayoralty campaign. This is an important issue for transparency and democracy in local government. The bill addresses the matter that the John Banks electoral return from the 2010 local body elections highlighted. It revealed a gap in the existing legislation that allowed candidates to call donations “anonymous” that they knew or ought to have known were not in fact anonymous donations.New section 103(F) inserted by clause 27 says: “If any person involved in the administration of the affairs of a candidate in relation to his or her election campaignknows the identity of the donor of an anonymous donation exceeding $1500 the person must disclose the identity of the donor to the candidate.” Many New Zealanders will welcome that new provision. I worry a little that it will be necessary to prove actual knowledge which may be difficult and perhaps we ought to have added the words “or ought to have known” in the section as well. Nevertheless it is a satisfactory section as it is and it will help solve the Banks problem at least as far as legislation can go.The bill provides in new section 103(H) inserted by clause 27 that anonymous donations may not exceed $1500 and that “If an anonymous donation exceeding $1500 is received by a candidate in relation to an election campaign the candidate must within 20 working days of receiving the donation pay to the electoral officer responsible for the conduct of the election to which that campaign relates the amount of the donation or its value less $1500.” I think that will also be a welcome provision to most New Zealanders.New section 103(I) inserted by clause 27 provides for offences relating to contravention of section 103(H): “A person who enters into an agreement arrangement or understanding with any other person that has the effect of circumventing section 103H(1) or (2) commits an offence ...” and so on. That is a very important provision as well.I also want to mention new section 103CA proposed to be inserted in clause 27 by Supplementary Order Paper 198 which is also supported by New Zealand First: “This section applies to a donation (other than an anonymous donation) that is made up of includes or is wholly or partly funded from 1 or more contributions. … the donor must at the time of making the donation disclose—(a) the fact that the donation is funded from contributions;” and disclose the details around it. This of course applies only to contributions over $1500. New Zealand First will support that but we would have preferred to see it apply to all donations or at least be limited in the way that Holly Walker recommends in her Supplementary Order Paper 200 which New Zealand First will also support.The bill also provides for postponement of a local election—and Eugenie Sage has just spoken about that—so that in the case of a natural disaster or an emergency there can be an Order in Council for postponement of up to 6 weeks at the discretion of the Minister. But I note that new section 73A(6) inserted by clause 21 says: “Before recommending the making of the Order in Council the Minister—(a) must be satisfied on reasonable grounds that the order is necessary … and (b) must have consulted every local authority and electoral officer that will be affected.” I think subsection (6) does sufficiently limit the Minister’s discretion about postponement and that this would preclude the Environment Canterbury situation which many of us are so concerned about. So New Zealand First could not support Supplementary Order Paper 201 or 215 in the name of Eugenie Sage. Supplementary Order Paper 201 gives postponement power to an electoral officer and we think that would be an excessive power to be administered by an official. Supplementary Order Paper 215 requires the agreement of local authorities in addition to consultation and New Zealand First feels that that would be excessive and unnecessary and would unnecessarily limit the overall thrust of the section.However there is one very serious defect in the bill by omission. As I have said the bill does need to do more than it does. The bill that we see now does not cover third-party donations and expenditure and we in New Zealand First think it should. There is a potential gap for third-party campaigners to receive donations and use funds to promote a candidate without the candidate’s permission and appropriate regulations should be necessary for that. We accept that it is a complex policy area and one that perhaps wedo not have time to deal with in this legislation. It is one that New Zealand First wants to see in future legislation on these matters.Overall the bill is a good one and does deserve support but we think it is still a work in progress in the way that I have described. For that reason New Zealand First will be happy to support the bill and we hope that other parties in the House will all do the same.