Luxon ChristopherCHRISTOPHER LUXON (National—Botany): Listen firstly can I just say we really appreciate the Minister engaging with us in this stage of the process. She is very respected she's incredibly thoughtful and I think her explanations of context are genuinely appreciated in the House and on this side. I just want to say I think it is a real shame however that we haven't had a chance to actually discuss this and get into these conversations in the process. The process hasn't really given us the chance to have a proper conversation. It hasn't really given us the chance as the Minister said to try and reconcile or bring together the binary views that we heard through the submission process and I think that's a really big shame because I think we're actually better than that. I think we should attempt to try and reconcile those binary views. That has been the story of our history and our progress thus far and I think we've got to keep working hard at what the Americans would say about Perfecting our union". I think that's really important.So I think we do need to take a step back and actually reflect and think that the process does matter because as I said it hasn't really helped us reconcile or resolve those binary views. We're no richer or wiser as to why this bill's actually happening. And you know it's surprising because the "what" is really clear—about what's being done here—the "how" is pretty clear but the "why" isn't clear and that's because of the process. I don't understand fundamentally why the Government wouldn't want to go on a decent process that actually takes the New Zealand people with them. When you reflect on the fact that the process kicks off with a bill a day later it's passed at its first reading then we're into a two-day submission process from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.—over two days we do some quick Zoom meetings. We had 12500 submissions; 9500 of those submissions were against the bill and we didn't really hear those—we heard some of those perspectives but we didn't really understand or try and engage with all of that. So I think the process is bad. You couple that with the poor public consultation coupled with the poor departmental advice the regulatory impact statement advice the manifesto commitments the way the Cabinet's gone and I just don't understand why the Minister and the Government wouldn't want to get that process straight so that doesn't become a hurt or an irritant or a pain point for the public to deal with as they deal with this issue. I think explaining why we're doing this is really important because otherwise it just does actually as the Minister says "harden hearts" and I think that's a really disappointing thing and a sad thing if that is to happen.I think the problem with the process as I said is that we're not even trying to take the New Zealand people with us. We're not even trying to get their buy-in from a Government point of view to what is a really significant change to electoral law. I think if we leave this House and we go out across this country whether it's in my electorate of Botany or whether it's in Bishopdale in Christchurch the people of New Zealand don't fundamentally understand the rationale for the legislation. They get what you're doing they get how you're doing it but they don't get the "why". And I think that's important because we've lost an opportunity to really take them with us. That's what clauses 2 to 6 in the Schedule are really all about because they are certainly I think causing that hardening of hearts or those binary views.If you look at clauses—you know clause 2 is really very much around the "Territorial authority or regional council may resolve during transition period to establish Māori wards or Māori constituencies". Clause 3 is very much about revoking the resolution made under section 19Z before commencement date. Clause 4: no poll can be demanded. Clause 5: demand by polls already given is revoked. So there's a whole bunch of issues there and I think the question I've got is what do we say to the people who've already invested heaps in this process? When you think about it we already have—where is it? It's up in Whangārei in the northern region we've got 8700 people who've already signed a petition above the 5 percent threshold. We've got Whangārei—5100 people already signed above the petition. Kaipara's 1376; Tauranga 6000; Taupō 1700; Ruapehu 551. So what do we say to the 25000 people that have already signed petitions? How do we help them understand or engage in this issue? They haven't really had a chance to be able to do that and so I think sadly we've never really debated this issue properly and been able to take the New Zealand people with us. And these people here who are voting for this petition how are they left? How are they feeling? They feel frustrated they feel angry—that drives the division that the Minister's so keen to avoid and we're all keen to avoid but this isn't helping this process.So I would just ask the Minister—I would be really interested in her views about given her genuine intent for reconciliation and perfecting our union what has been the thinking about why the process has to be so rushed. Why haven't we taken the opportunity to have a decent process that then enables the New Zealand people to go through the debate through the discussion and actually go along the way? Thank you."