Sharples Pita: Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill — Second Reading 
Sharples Pita: Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:643;Page:13026] 
Dr PITA SHARPLES (Co-Leader—Maori Party) 
: 
 Every year on 9 August the International Day of the World’s Indigenous People is celebrated. It is a day that provides the world with an opportunity to focus on indigenous peoples—to address the issues of exclusion discrimination poverty and marginalisation that are still very much part of the daily reality for many indigenous peoples. 
This year 9 August was marked by another significant event referred to as “credit-crunch Thursday” which is the day the world banking community took fright. It was a day when simply all international banks on the brink of a complete financial meltdown stopped lending to each other. So here we are just 3 months later throwing caution to the wind and allowing the liberal use of taxpayer funds for political party spending. The Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill extends the interim and narrow definition of electioneering in order to validate the range of spending allowed under the auspices of taxpayer funding. 
So where does 9 August fit in the greater scale of things? How does the credit crisis the disparate economic outlook of Maori New Zealanders feature within the argument over election funding? The answer is nowhere. And this is one of the most serious issues we have regarding the funding entitlements for parliamentary purposes. The payment of funding entitlements does not occur in a vacuum so when we look at the context of estimated spending for this appropriation bill we cannot ignore other realities such as the fact that bankruptcy levels in New Zealand are now at an all-time record high. New Zealand households now owe some $78 billion—a $5 billion increase in this financial year. 
Having established that this appropriation bill has nothing to do with financial reality it only remains to be seen what the funding entitlements for parliamentary purposes really stand for. In this bill the provision will apply to the close of 30 June 2009 for funding to be used by the performance of individual members of Parliament or political parties in meeting their roles and functions. We in the Maori Party have supported the pursuit of tikanga such as accountability transparency and integrity in association with the funding of political parties and election campaigns. But this is where the challenge of this legislation is so apparent because of course its origins are anything but in line with tikanga. Its origins are based firmly and squarely in legislation that invalidated the invalid spending for purposes deemed improper by the Auditor-General after the 2005 elections. We know that the confidence and trust of te iwi Maori is essential towards enhancing democratic political participation. 
The question we must ask is: when we look at this bill what is the record of honesty that we know of the parties sponsoring this bill? Can we really trust any party that can support retrospective legislation to condone past illegalities? Can we trust any party that can call for strict rules of sub judice to be applied in debates in this Chamber but then go outside and suddenly it is open season on matters before the court? Integrity and honesty are hardly the image however that we associate with parties that have variously interpreted the rules regarding the broadcasting spend or parliamentary funding to serve their own needs. There is no way to entertain corruption illegalities invalid spending or abuse of power in the running of democracy. 
And so we look towards this bill as with any bill to ascertain how it can guarantee the active exercise of responsibility. If one was to believe yesterday’s editorial on the front page of the  
New Zealand Herald 
 that active exercise of responsibility being debated in this bill is being potentially undermined by backroom deals being struck by Labour the Greens and New Zealand First in the secret election spending laws being dreamt up outside of this Chamber. So while all other political parties are being lulled into a false sense of innocence that basically this bill is nothing more than a temporary stop-gap to continue interim definitions of funding for parliamentary purposes some other players are merrily reforming electoral spending laws. What presumably is going on behind closed doors is laws to favour the political parties that are putting the bill together. And this hilariously is supposed to be a bill about how to enhance participation in the democratic process! 
In the interest of supporting transparency good governance and ethical practices in our Parliament we in the Maori Party want to share four important concepts that could be helpful in the legislative process. The concepts that we believe complement transparency are: rangatiratanga which is chieftainship or leadership; kaitiakitanga which is sustainability and protection of taonga; kotahitanga which is unity of purpose; and manaakitanga which is mana enhancement. We believe that these four concepts are central to the pursuit of a healthy political democracy. 
The bill before the House today is merely an exercise to adjust the time frame that was due to expire on 31 December 2007. But although this bill is just to stretch out the time boundaries at the same time the Electoral Finance Bill is spinning along regardless. The question that we are of course curious to know the answer to is whether the Justice and Electoral Committee will keep to the original time frame anticipated for the Electoral Finance Bill of reporting back by 25 January 2008 or whether miraculously there will suddenly be sufficient agreement behind closed doors for the process to be sped up before Parliament breaks up this year. 
We return again to the central concept of democracy and enhanced political participation. Remembering that this appropriation bill is based on the premise set up by the Auditor-General Kevin Brady that there needed to be fairness in matters of parliamentary expenditure we cannot help but be influenced by the power of messages put forward from groups such as the Law Society or the Human Rights Commission regarding electoral law reform. The Law Society stated in its submission on the Electoral Finance Bill that it would “make participation in our parliamentary democracy an arduous and perhaps even legally dangerous undertaking for ordinary New Zealanders”. The Human Rights Commission has famously described the restrictions on election activity as a “dramatic assault” on the fundamental rights “which undermines the legitimacy of political processes”. 
Just as the Government could carelessly callously disregard the priorities and world views of indigenous peoples by voting against the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples it would appear that it is also seemingly oblivious to the fact that democracy is generally considered to be about sanctioning a system of decision-making processes that promote free and equal rights of participation—not three parties in; all other parties out. 
It is perhaps useful to conclude with the wisdom of Aristotle who said: “If liberty and quality as is thought by some are chiefly to be found in democracy they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the Government to the utmost.” It is because these factors are not found on this legislation that the Maori Party has no alternative but to vote in protest against the Appropriation (Continuation of Interim Meaning of Funding for Parliamentary Purposes) Bill.