McNair Craig: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
McNair Craig: Relationships (Statutory References) Bill; AND BILLS THEREFROM — Third Readings 
[Volume:624;Page:19184] 
CRAIG McNAIR (NZ First) 
: 
 In speaking to the third reading of this legislation I just want to share my concerns with the House. One of my many concerns is that it is possible—and we talked about this in the Committee stage debate on Part 1 and Part 2—for example that if a church were to decline the use of its church hall for a civil union ceremony it could get into legal trouble in that regard. The same is relevant to for example a taxi driver who is uncomfortable with a civil union ceremony because it goes against his or her religious or other beliefs. He or she would have to drive a couple to such a ceremony. Even under the law we have right now taxi drivers are not allowed to turn down passengers unless they appear to be intoxicated. Under the current law taxi drivers have to accept passengers whether they are going to a civil union ceremony to a marriage ceremony or even just to a normal commitment ceremony without any legal ties. Taxi drivers have to accept those couples and allow them to ride with them in their taxis. 
Here we are impinging on people’s rights—on the rights of average ordinary New Zealanders—to choose to say: “The law is the law but personally I am unable to do this.” They will get into legal hassles if they do say that because when a taxi driver says—[ 
Interruption 
] I am speaking very specifically to the legislation Mr Speaker. If a taxi driver says that he or she is uneasy about this legislation and does not want to carry a couple some of the civil union couples whom we are talking about in this legislation will get upset there will be complaints and matters will spiral from there. 
I believe that that will become even more possible if this Government includes hate-speech provisions in the law. I suspect that the Government does not want to make its own hate-speech law. I suspect that it is more crafty and deceptive than that and that it will probably try to insert hate-speech provisions into laws such as the Human Rights Act—into section 61 or section 131. It may even slip those hate-speech provisions into our law through tightening up the Broadcasting Act or other pieces of legislation—rafts of it—to further restrict New Zealanders’ rights to have their say and to say no they disagree with a civil union ceremony. From the hate-speech investigation that is going on right now and from what we have seen with regard to the Civil Union Act the Relationships (Statutory References) Bill and laws such as the Prostitution Reform Act we can see that this Government is slowly day by day eroding the laws and values that are contained in legislation. 
The Greens spokesperson Sue Bradford said that this country is not a theocracy. She is probably right but the fact is that New Zealand has had a broad stroke of Christian humanity running through its laws for the last 150 years ever since it became a democracy. That is an undisputed fact. The fact is—whether members want to get away from it or not—that those laws have stood New Zealand in good stead in the past and should do so in the future. But this Labour Government is doing everything in its power to change that and I think it is disgraceful.