Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Madam Chair. Thank you for the opportunity to take a call on the title and commencement of the End of Life Choice Bill. I do want to take a call on this part of the bill because it is a significant part of the legislation and it does have ramifications and I would like to put on record my own views.Firstly I would like to endorse Supplementary Order Paper 396 in the name of my colleague Tim Macindoe. We as parliamentarians should be honest about what we're doing in the legislation that we're passing. His Supplementary Order Paper is about bringing some honesty to the title of this bill and saying what it actually is. This bill if passed will legalise euthanasia and assisted suicide in New Zealand and that is what the question should be if there were a referendum on this piece of legislation. The bill as it is currently titled is one which will create confusion and one which will mean many different things to many different people.Secondly I will be voting against the referendum Supplementary Order Papers in the name of Jenny Marcroft. This is a difficult issue and one that I have given a lot of consideration to. I understand the complexity of this issue. It's one that I've grappled with. It's one that I've talked to a lot of people in my electorate of Pakuranga about. A lot of people have approached me. A lot of people have shared their concerns their views their support—a range of different things—on it. But at the end of the day my job as a parliamentarian is to make decisions and I have the privilege and the responsibility of making decisions on issues which are incredibly important and incredibly complex.Mr Seymour tried to say that by putting a referendum at the end this is about giving the public a veto so that Parliament could then allow the public that opportunity. We don't do that with every piece of legislation. Every piece of legislation we pass here is passed by a majority. There is a rare occasion where a referendum is used on constitutional matters and some other matters but this is an issue which is complex and one which has ramifications on the fabric of our society. I asked the question: what does this bill do to the rights of doctors? What does it do to the rights of palliative care nurses and practitioners? What about the rights of those with disabilities and those who are terminally ill? This bill affects all of those people and changes the way they live and the way they operate. This is not simply about choice; this is far deeper and far bigger than that.I asked the member in charge David Seymour: what information is going to be given to the public so that they are able to be informed? What information will be provided? There is a referendum which is going to happen on marijuana—and Willie Jackson has alluded to this—at the next election. The Government is planning an education campaign—millions of dollars will be spent on that. Where is that in this Supplementary Order Paper? Where is that in this bill? Where is the public going to be getting the information from? Where is the awareness going to be? How is it going to be raised? That's not in the Supplementary Order Paper. That's not what I read. That is simply just putting this to a referendum at the next election.Finally I do want to speak to my colleague across the House the Hon Willie Jackson and I understand his dilemma on the issue. I understand his dilemma on a referendum. The principle which I believe we as parliamentarians should be applying when faced with difficult decisions and ones which do have potential ramifications on the sick the ill and the disabled is the principle of doing no harm. We should do no harm. If there is a risk that harm may happen that those who are vulnerable may be hurt that their lives may be ended against their will—things which are a reality under this legislation—then we should not proceed. So I will not be supporting the Supplementary Order Paper by Jenny Marcroft. I will be voting for Tim Macindoe's and I continue to oppose this bill.