Goldsmith PaulHon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): Well thank you Mr Speaker and thank you for the opportunity to speak on this bill. If we believed what the member on the other side—Rachel Boyack—said that there's really nothing to see here in this bill; it's nothing to worry about; it's just offering a few suggestions; nothing to worry about; nothing to see here then maybe we might be sucked in to voting for it. But we aren't because we see that it's part of an agenda that is unfortunately becoming increasingly divisive in this country in the way that the Government is running New Zealand over the last four years. That is of deep concern to us—the divisive nature of the way the Government continues to operate.And so if we look at it in relation to local government and Māori wards what we've seen is—first for a long time in our history local governments have had the ability to bring in Māori wards in their district but they've had to ask the people whether or not they agree with having a Māori ward by a referendum. That was always the pattern. And generally over time when people were asked they didn't want one. Most of the referendums lost—my guess is because the majority of people were wary about dividing the population along ethnic lines and extending that into a new area of Government—i.e. local government.So what happened was that in the last election there was no mention of this—the Government never talked about changing all this. They concealed their goals in this matter. But when re-elected they suddenly rammed through legislation under urgency in this House changing the rules so that no longer did councils have to ask the population. I mean who would want to ask the population? Who would care what the population thinks? And so they did away with the requirements for a referendum and it was just up for the council to decide if they wanted to create these new wards. Lo and behold all of a sudden it was easy to do because it's very easy if you don't ask anybody whether you like something or not. You just do it. And we've seen a large number of councils introduce these wards.The primary thing that this legislation does is it finalises those provisions made under urgency to make that change and it was a change that we opposed that we don't agree with. We believe in the National Party on this side of the House that New Zealanders can be trusted to make decisions about how the democracy works in this country. We're not of the view that Willie Jackson is that democracy has changed. I don't recall going to a constitutional convention where we decided that we were changing the nature of our constitution or our democracy. I don't recall a referendum of anybody asked. I don't recall ever hearing Jacinda Ardern standing up and saying Oh by the way vote for me and I'm going to change the way democracy works in this country. I'm going to change our democracy." I don't recall her ever saying that because she never did. But Willie Jackson now thinks that's the case and the Government keeps pushing through changes to the way in which we make elections.But this bill—so not only does it entrench the idea that we shouldn't ask the population in a referendum about whether we want to introduce Māori wards into a particular council; that the council alone can decide. Now the next step which is also being introduced in this bill is every six years our councils must reopen the issue and reconsider it and put it as the first item of agenda to be considered or not and must engage with the community. I must say you do have to admire the chutzpah of this Government where they bring in a piece of legislation saying "It is important you know that the councils must engage in consultation with the community and Māori community about this issue." Tomorrow we're going to be giving the third reading and passing—well this Government is going to be passing a bill the Canterbury Regional Council (Ngāi Tahu Representation) Bill where nobody asked the population and in fact the Canterbury Regional Council made a deliberate decision not to consult the people in relation—DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member can—Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: It is entirely relevant Mr Speaker to this bill which I'm about to say.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yeah I'll decide that OK? You can mention that upcoming bill in passing but you cannot debate it. You debate this bill. So it better be relevant.Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Thank you Mr Speaker and thank you indeed. The point I was making was that with this bill and in this introduction the Government is saying that they're requiring councils to consult with their community about these issues and I'm pointing out the rank hypocrisy of that given the way that the Government has operated and continues to operate in the very same sector. This is exemplified—and nobody's looking; they're all sort of looking down because it's a little bit hard to follow the logic that their own Government is following here. They want councils to consult when they are on the issue of Māori wards but when they are forced through by legislation—are changed to the very foundation of our understanding around equal voting rights and how the system works in Canterbury—they do it because the Canterbury Regional Council asked for it. But lo and behold the Canterbury Regional Council made a deliberate decision not to ask the community. So the only point I'm making and I won't labour the point any further is that it is rank hypocrisy.Then we hear if I go further on the issue of rank hypocrisy—we heard from the Prime Minister only a week or so ago saying with great sanctimony at the local government—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I'm going to caution the member: linking that term and another member—in this case the Prime Minister—would be completely out of order. So be very careful.Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well just speaking to that point of order sir sorry—DEPUTY SPEAKER: No. I have just made a ruling. I've just made a ruling and I'm on my feet. You don't question it. It would be the end of your speech if you did.Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH: Well there we go. So OK I will never refer to anybody as a hypocrite again in this House. The Prime Minister said "It will not be the policy of any Government I lead to embark on another substantial reform of local government or governance unless it is sought and unless there is broad consensus amongst local government about the need for and the direction of the change." Well again it's an interesting comment: "unless there is broad consensus amongst local government". Can anybody suggest a group that wasn't included when she said "unless it is sought for and unless there is broad consensus amongst local government"? Is there another group maybe the public—whether they might have any interest or broad consensus in it whether that might be a relevant consideration? No but she did say that she wouldn't be introducing things without broad support and consensus. And again I make the point—and I hesitate to make the point—but the reality is that tomorrow a bill in this exact same area of local government governance is being passed with no evidence whatsoever of any broad consensus around that issue.So we're left here with a situation that—what are we trying to achieve with all this? We're trying to deal with the question in relation to the way that local government and our democracy in this country operates. And we on this side of the House have an expectation that New Zealanders will be consulted about and have an opinion about and a chance to have their say about when we change the fundamental rules of how democracy works in this country. That's always been the approach in New Zealand. If you want to change the rules if you want to introduce a Māori ward you have a referendum you put it in. If you want to take them away you have a referendum and so forth. This Government has changed those rules and Willie Jackson has just announced that democracy has changed. But nobody else seems to be prepared to defend it or explain it in any other way other than just agree with it lump it and move on. And that is no effective way to run a country.The problem with it is that it leads to a sense of resentment and it also leads to a sense of divisiveness in this country. And it is my view that this Government will go down in history as one of the most divisive Governments in recent history because they keep on dividing New Zealanders between one group and another group—one group and another—whether it's landlords and house owners whether it's farmers and city folks and in this case people on the Māori roll and those not. And that's not any—DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member's time has expired."