Roche Denise: Local Electoral Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Roche Denise: Local Electoral Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 06 November 2012. Volume:685;Page:6340. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DENISE ROCHE (Green) 
: 
 The Greens will be supporting this bill the Local Electoral Amendment Bill (No 2). It is weak in parts but it is a step in the right direction and that is a direction that the Greens feel very passionately about. It is about ensuring there is transparency and accountability in elections. 
The Greens have got a really good track record of creating bills and legislation that ensure transparency in our democracy. We believe that local government elections should be subjected to the same scrutiny as general elections. We have always resisted any attempts by the wealthy to buy elections. We have just had an example in Auckland recently where the Communities and Residents trustees of the Auckland Energy Consumer Trust changed the rules of their organisation which is owned by the public so they could post out a $320 dividend to every electricity account holder in Auckland and they also posted a nice pictures of themselves. The voting papers arrived within a few days. Needless to say the same Communities and Residents trustees were re-elected. This bill will not fix that but it will go some way towards creating a system where there are some limits on the amount of money that can be donated to a local government election campaign anonymously and that is the part we agree with. 
For some time now we have had our own bill in the ballot the Local Electoral (Finance) Amendment Bill which puts a cap on donations by individuals or groups at the sum of $5000 and removes the ability to have anonymous donations for any amount over $500. It also has rules for the regulation of third-party spending and penalties for avoiding the rules relating to donations. As well as that as my colleagues have already said it ensures there is a register of pecuniary interests for members of local authorities and that would be open to the public. Amongst other things in my bill the preamble says that the purpose of it is to maintain public and political confidence in the administration of local body elections. It also says it will prevent the undue influence of wealth on electoral outcomes and provide greater transparency and accountability on the part of candidates and other persons engaged in election activities in order to minimise the perception of corruption. We have had this bill in the ballot since before the last election. 
Public confidence is certainly something that we need a lot more of now and we are more justified in wanting a bill like this now because of the behaviour as others have stated of Mr John Banks during this campaign to become mayor of the super-city in Auckland. The legislation that forced the amalgamation of the seven councils in Auckland is partly to blame for the fact that there is now more than ever a need to mend our political system so that we are more transparent. The legislation that created the super-city created the super-mayor and it created the super-allowance the super-spending allowance with more than half a million dollars being allowed for each mayoral campaign candidate. This is why there was so much forgotten soliciting or forgotten donations during Mr Banks’ failed campaign. 
The second point of my Local Electoral (Finance) Amendment Bill is to prevent the undue influence of wealth on electoral outcomes. This bill says that only donations of $1500 or lower can be anonymous and that a donation from Skycity for example would not have been anonymous. Under this system which we support Mr Dotcom would have to split his cheques not into two $25000 sums but into 33.33 cheques which I think would give him overuse syndrome. 
 When you consider that this bill is really an attempt to remove the wriggle room that allowed Mr Banks to fudge his campaign returns and to get away with it we need this bill more than ever. We will be supporting it. The Prime Minister is on record as saying that the existing legislation is an ass. Well we think this legislation could be stronger but we agree that this is probably about covering the one that belongs to Mr Banks.