Mitchell Clayton: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Clayton: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 29 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5481. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CLAYTON MITCHELL (NZ First): I was up like a rocket. Thank you Mr Chair—I appreciate this call. It is the quick or the dead around here this evening. Welcome back after a great break.I am here to talk about Part 2—provisions relating to the referendum—and specifically on clauses 10 11 13 and if I have got time I might even get to clause 20. I would just like to start by talking about Jacqui Dean who made some pretty bold statements around the New Zealand flag versus the Australian flag. I have to say that New Zealand did have its flag before Australia but if the Australians want to change their flag because they are getting confused with which is their flag and where it sits then let them change it. It sounds likely that they have got more support in their country for breaking away and becoming a republic than we have here in New Zealand at this current stage.Clause 10 talks about the subject of referendums. We are talking about Supplementary Order Paper 102 which I think in light of what is going on here today New Zealand First will find itself supporting. The simple fact is that it says in Supplementary Order Paper 102 that 50 percent of electors must return votes. If they do not return those votes then the second referendum will be null and void. I think that is going to be a very strong indication for this Government particularly from New Zealanders suggesting that they do not actually want this referendum. The money would certainly be better spent elsewhere in our communities than just for the sake given on having that second referendum at the cost of some $7 million to $9 million.We move on to clause 11 which is about the appointment of dates for the referendum. Just quickly it is talking about getting this bill through quite quickly so that the Government can be given 90 days for the referendum to take place. After that first referendum there is another 90 days until the second referendum can take place which would probably make it around about January or February before we could actually get it under way and implement things in relation to this bill.I think the timing of this is absolutely pertinent. When we are talking about the 100-year commemorations of the landing at Gallipoli—and we have got of course the World War I commemorations—the timing of this let alone the fact that New Zealand First strongly opposes this referendum being held in the first place is absolutely inappropriate. So we would question that and its part in that regard.I would now like to talk about clause 13 “Alternative flag designs”. I find it difficult to come to the conclusion that a small group of members from this Committee can sit around the table and consider the 10000-odd flags that have been put before them—and clearly there are a few there that you can just look at in a second and put aside—and whittle that number down to just four. That to me is undemocratic in itself—that you are allowing a select small group of elected members to justify their reasoning for putting forward what they think is the right design.We heard from the Prime Minister today about the things that he holds as reference points—the silver fern; it is on this and it is on that. Well that is just his opinion. When you have a very small group of people making a decision for a very large group of people I have some concern with that.It does bring me to this fantastic competition that Gareth Morgan recently held. I do not necessarily think that this flag that I am holding up is a particularly great flag option but I do have to ask the question whether Gareth Morgan is a New Zealand First supporter because it does look like Labour on the left National on the right and of course New Zealand First coming right up the middle and I do quite like that idea. I cannot take that flag seriously in all seriousness. I am not trying to make a mockery of this process but the reality is that we are going to get some weird and wonderful designs out there and who is to say that we have the choice as members of Parliament to make that decision for the wider community. I just want to touch again very strongly on Supplementary Order Paper 102 which would stop the second referendum if we do not have 50 percent or more votes returned that are not ruined.We now turn the page and we are on to clause 20 “Electoral systems for referendums”. The first referendum is conducted in accordance with the preferential voting system that would of course allow the voters—