Bridges SimonHon SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga): This bill goes against centuries and centuries of thought on democracy and Parliament. Actually I say to the members over there—Darroch Ball is laughing—this bill was a constitutional outrage even before Winston Peters was born Mr Ball. It absolutely is wrong at every level and can I say from the outset I don't actually believe that Andrew Little believes in this bill. I think he knows even as its sponsor that it is the wrong thing to do at every level and that it goes against centuries and centuries of constitutional thought that this Parliament here is based on. But what he knows is it is the price of the ministerial limo that he drives in. He knows that it is the price of being in coalition with—and I agree with the member David Seymour—the Rt Hon Winston Peters given the chips that he has on his shoulders and possibly other parts of his body.Mr Deputy Speaker our form of—Madam Deputy Speaker I'm sorry. I won't do that again. Our form of Parliament has evolved and we heard here from I think it was Ginny Andersen the member over there—Well we're MMP now." Our Parliament no doubt has evolved from first past the post to mixed-member proportional but we cannot deny the history and the constitution of this country as informal as it may be and what it means for us today. And we are absolutely based on the views of Edmund Burke and the as they say "Burkian" view of things going back to 1774 when he spoke as the member of Parliament for Bristol.He made quite clear the importance of constituents the importance of the role of members of Parliament and I want to quote. He said "But his unbiassed"—that is the member of Parliament—"opinion his mature judgment his enlightened conscience he ought not to sacrifice to you to any man or to any set of men living. These he does not derive from your pleasure; no nor from the law and the constitution. They are a trust from Providence for the abuse of which he is deeply answerable. Your representative owes you"—and by "you" he was talking about constituents but of course it is also his party I would suggest—"not his industry only but his judgment and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion." And he goes on and talks about the role of a member of Parliament and the need to exercise his conscience.And the members opposite laugh but that now is part of the constitution of New Zealand. Centuries have evolved and this is absolutely part of our constitution I would argue. We come here today as MPs as he said look hundreds of years ago to exercise our individual judgments not only to our constituents whether we're list MPs or elected MPs but as members of parties—our individual judgments as members of Parliament not ultimately those of others: our constituents not them and not our parties either.And of course we have now for centuries listened to others as of course we should and grouped up with others. Parties have evolved. They didn't use to be there. But what is true is that despite that we still need to rely ultimately on our individual judgments. When this bill changes that it is changing part of our constitution. Because if that's not the case I say to the New Zealand First members—and I say it to them because actually the Greens are doing the wrong thing and I'm coming back to them and Labour's doing it as the price of the agreement that they've signed up to. But if that is not the case we might as well not be here. If ultimately all that matters is what their leader says why are they here?Darroch Ball: Rubbish. That's rubbish.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Darroch Ball might as well be a sheep controlled by the sheep dog a television controlled by the remote control because ultimately if all that happens is he has to do what his leader says which is what this bill does then what a waste of time ultimately members of Parliament are. And we see this all the time. The most obvious is the conscience bills where we vote according to our conscience. I note on the euthanasia bill where actually we started to see—and we saw it with New Zealand First. They simply vote on party lines on that issue like the sheep that they are. They may well behave like that but I certainly don't. And by the way I have never crossed the floor in this Parliament and actually I hope in a way I never have to. They're rare occasions but it is outrageous—it is outrageous—that Chris Hipkins with a smile on his face as the price of the ministerial limo he now gets into and drives back to Lower Hutt or wherever it is that he goes is the locking in of something that means MPs in this House are now sheep robot remote-control people to their party. I think that is a crying shame.And I say to the Māori MPs in the Labour Party: you've been here before actually. I'm talking to you you know. You shouldn't be signing up to this because you know—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Can I just remind the member not to bring the Speaker into the debate. Thank you.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: The members know that they've been here before and they don't want to be again.And I say also to Labour MPs on the right of their party—we just head from former police union man Mr Greg O'Connor but actually on the right of the party the Stuart Nashs of this world: you don't want to be rolled over by a bill like this which actually means fundamentally when you feel strongly on an issue you don't get to have your say rare occasions that they are.Hon Dr David Clark: Don't bring the Speaker into the debate.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: I didn't. I made it quite clear that I was referring to the right-wing members. I know there's not many left Dr Clark but the right-wing members left of the Labour caucus dwindling—Hon Willie Jackson: There's none.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Well Willie Jackson says "There's none." There's probably never a truer word spoken in jest but there you go.And so why are we doing this? Why are we doing this? Why are we going against centuries of political and constitutional thought so that members of Parliament ultimately are treated like sheep led by the old sheep dog? Well as I said Andrew Little won't agree with it but we're doing this because of one man's—Darroch Ball: Ha!Hon SIMON BRIDGES: —historical grievances. Well Darroch Ball laughs. I don't know if he knows he's got GPS trackers in those flags on the finials right there so he knows where you're going Mr Ball. I say having dealt with the New Zealand First MPs—Hon Member: Well well.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: It's tough crowd. They're not in much good humour are they? I say to the other MPs in the other parties—to the Green MPs over here—they should go back and read the debates on this bill in the late 1990s in the early 2000s where to a person the Green MPs in this Parliament the Rod Donalds the Jeanette Fitzsimons the Nandor Tanczos—actually literally every member of Parliament you would hold up now as Green MPs as ones you follow and think did the right thing all spoke strongly against this bill. [Interruption]Chlӧe Swarbrick as a new member looks on at that. Well I say it's a pretty serious issue actually. There's two decades—oh more than two decades. There's three decades of vehement opposition to this and you're selling your principles as a result of this bill. I say it's a real shame that the Green Party is doing that. We know why the Labour Party is doing it—the ultimate political pragmatism from them to keep their seats and their limos. And in New Zealand First—well some of them probably don't even know what they're doing themselves. But as we've heard before ask the former weather man from Tauranga and he won't be the last. Ask the many NZ First MPs. You have as members of Parliament signed away those rare occasions where you feel really strongly about something as members and want to come to this House and voice your view.Can I finish on a more optimistic note—because we will be opposing this bill given how bad it is. I've one hope and that is actually that the courts will read down these provisions and the way they deal with members of Parliament. I note with great interest—and it's a shameful little thing that they've done—that the Attorney-General here has not provided a section 7 report on this bill. He has not Bill-of-Rights-vetted it and I know—and may all of New Zealand know—the reason for that. That's because he knows it would not get a clean bill of health under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.And I say when this bill comes as it will eventually to the courts that they will have the temerity and the integrity to actually—where Parliament couldn't because of the pragmatism and the compromise on that side—uphold the rights of individual members—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): I apologise to the member. Thank you."