Watts SimonSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): I rise on behalf of the National Party and as the member of Parliament for North Shore to speak on the Electoral (Integrity Repeal) Amendment Bill second reading. What is interesting from listening to the last speaker Tangi Utikere is that Labour have done everything this evening to not talk about this bill. That is because Labour's position on this bill is indefensible. This bill repeals the changes made to the Electoral Act under which a party leader can sack an MP from their party and from Parliament. I want to acknowledge the bill's sponsor the Hon Dr Nick Smith for the significant contribution that he has made this evening and through pushing and supporting this bill through Parliament. I think there has not been an occasion when the Hon Nick Smith has not been principled in his approach and I also want to recognise the Rt Hon David Carter who introduced this bill. I must say as a new MP having only been in this House for six months to listen to some of the characterisation by some of the more senior members within this House around the lack of principles of someone such as the Hon Dr Nick Smith by the Hon James Shaw I found quite disappointing. I must say that National supports this bill but disappointingly Labour do not and they are voting it down. I want to make four key points in regards to this bill. MPs are in this House across the political spectrum because the people of this country decided that we are the MPs that should represent them. The voters decided that not party leaders not the Prime Minister. Labour is voting down this bill for one simple fact: they want to keep the current bill to keep their backbench MPs and their Māori caucus in line just in case they go off-piste. Labour are not concerned about what is in the best interest of our country but rather in their own self-interest. Many respected experts across this great land are against the current law. The New Zealand Law Society multiple law faculties four departments of politics three departments of history and over 15 university academics across this country were enthusiastically in favour of this amendment. Various legal experts a number that we have just discussed this evening have declared that the current law breaches the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. Professor Geiringer from Victoria University of Wellington law faculty has stated The current Act's powers to remove an MP do not have to be actually used in order to have a chilling effect on MPs' actions and expressions." I repeat: "The current Act's powers to remove an MP do not have to be actually used in order to have a chilling effect on MPs' actions and expressions."If that was not only enough on the global stage we are a significant outlier. As we have heard this evening this current law would breach the constitution of the United States of Canada of the United Kingdom and of Australia. If that wasn't enough it would also be a breach of the basic law in Germany the home of MMP and the European Union regards such laws as undemocratic and are not allowed by new member states. Be under no illusion: the current law undermines a crucial democracy check on Government through distorting confidence votes and that is why this House needs to do the right thing and support the amendment of this bill. I commend this bill to the House."