Smith NickHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): This bill is bad law it's bad process and it's bad principles. The Minister has made a complete hash of the law and let me explain. What occurred during the committee stage is that the Minister's Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) got gutted. Let me explain what a nonsense of a law we are now debating on the third reading that just explains why we should not be passing electoral law in a mad rush under urgency.Now in Part 1 of this bill we limit the right to vote to extending it to those that have been sentenced to a term of three years or less. Right-o! So we've established in Part 1 under this Government bill that if you are in prison for a sentence of less than three years then you are entitled to vote. But in Part 2 of the bill with the amendments that have been supported by the House we now have—and I'll read the provision very specifically. The prison manager must as soon as reasonably practicable advise the prisoner of his right to enrol and must ensure those enrolment details are passed on. Except in Part 2 of the bill there is no distinction between those that have served more than three years than not. We now have a bill that requires a prison manager to act illegally.Now the Minister has understandably abandoned the House. The Green Party—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Ruth Dyson): The member has been here long enough to know that he can't refer to the—sit down please. The member has been here long enough—even longer than me for goodness' sake—to know that he cannot refer to the absence of a member. He will withdraw and apologise and then recommence his speech.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I withdraw and apologise. In the Minister's speech of the third reading the penny had not even dropped that half his SOP had been gutted by the Green Party and converted this law into a nonsense and into bad law. Can the next speaker in the Labour Party or Government please explain the shambles? We know we've got a shambles on light rail. We know we've got a shambles on the border. We know we've got a shambles in respect of KiwiBuild. And now we've got a shambles in our electoral law where this very bill says something in Part 1 and something very different in Part 2. I invite parties opposite to take responsibility for the shambles of a Government between the coalition partners that can't even write decent electoral law.Here's what's further: there was a provision in Part 2 of this bill. It said that if a prisoner had their sentence extended—let's say someone's doing time a trial is held for a further crime and the length of their sentence is extended beyond three years they shouldn't be voting under the Government's policy but now they will because the Green Party gutted that part of the bill as well. That is the extent of the mess that we now have from this bill. And that is why I say it is bad law.But I also want to say it's bad process. Let's just go through how appalling the process has been around this jiggery-pokery by the Government parties with New Zealand's precious democracy. The first thing that occurred is that we have a longstanding convention that Government bills are consulted in electoral law with other parties. That is a convention that applies to the 1993 Electoral Act the MMP Act. That is a convention that was consistently applied by Minister of Justice Simon Power by Judith Collins and by Amy Adams and all credit to them for having the respect of New Zealand's democracy that the governing party of the day does not get to screw the scrum on the next election and make it easier for their re-election. Zero consultation on this bill.But here's the second thing: why is it only 11 weeks from the general election under urgency that we're changing the electoral law to allow prisoners to vote? Why wasn't it done in year one? Why wasn't it done in year two? This is an issue that's been around since Adam was a cowboy. If we go all the way back to 1974 Labour changed the law to allow its prisoner criminal mates to be able to vote and that was repealed in 1976. This is not a new issue. There is no justification for the rush that has gone with this law.Here's the third thing: why was this bill rushed through by select committee chairman over there Meka Whaitiri and her mates from the Labour Party? Why was it rushed through when this country was in the biggest civil emergency in the lifetime of every parliamentarian? Why was it that the select committee delayed dealing with sexual violence legislation? I'm sorry rape victims you're not important. We delayed legislation to provide greater protection for first responders—that's our policemen that's our Corrections officers that's our ambulance officers. Hang on a moment their rights aren't important. Damn the ambulance officers damn the cops damn those people who every day put their life on the line to make our country decent. This Government is focused on the rights of criminals and rushing it through. I found it horribly offensive that not just one day but 12 days of the lockdown rather than helping my constituents with the dozens of problems that occurred through the COVID emergency their attention their needs had to be put second-rate because the Labour Party felt that the most important issue facing the country during the COVID emergency was giving the right to vote to prisoners. That was offensive and that was wrong.But it was worse than that. The normal process for a bill is it goes to a select committee for six months. This bill spent less than half of that at select committee. And I draw this to the House's attention: the Electoral Commission last year said that if there were to be any changes in electoral law for the 2020 election they need to be passed by this Parliament at least six months before the election date. Here we are under urgency eleven weeks out from a general election and this Government is playing jiggery-pokery for some small electoral advantage.The last part I have to say is that it was insulting to New Zealanders—insulting to New Zealanders victims of crimes and others—that they had to make submissions on this bill while they were in lockdown. Where their very basic freedoms were being compromised they were being forced to make submissions on this bill after the Government had given assurances to this Parliament that for the period we were adjourned for the period of the emergency we'd only be dealing with urgent COVID-related legislation. How can any member look this Parliament in the eye and say that this legislation was in any way related to the COVID emergency?The last bit I want to come to is the matter of principle. Members on this side of the House say that when you go to prison you are there to lose your freedoms. You lose your freedom of association you lose your freedom of movement you lose your freedoms of access to information. It is absolutely proper that while somebody is serving their time in prison they do not have the right to stand for this Parliament or to participate in our election. It's actually more than just a matter of principle it's actually a matter of practice of just practical reality. Only MPs are allowed in prisons. So what about the candidate who is not a member of Parliament? How do they campaign for the votes in prisons? I have spoken to so many prison officers the practical people who work in our prison system who strongly believe as does the Corrections Association that this is unprincipled poor law.I want to rebut two points that were made very cheaply by Minister Little. The first he said was: how could I talk about democracy when I had made a decision as a Minister to suspend Environment Canterbury? I remind you Helen Clark suspended the Auckland Area Health Board. This Government has suspended local authorities when they have been in difficulty. It is a complete red herring and my passion for democracy and good electoral law is as strong as anybody's. Then the last thing the Minister said was: well what would I know about elections with my own electoral record? I'll compare my electoral record with Mr Little's any time you like. Mr Little has stood for Parliament in a constituency seat three times and been rejected three times. I've stood in a constituency seat 10 times and won all 10 times and continue to have the mandate of my community. I'm not going to have a lecture from Mr Little about the principles of democracy.This is bad botched law. This is bad process. This is bad principles. This is nothing other than the Labour Party stitching up a cheat electoral law change that they think will give them a few more votes.