Robertson Grant: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 29 July 2015. Volume:707;Page:5487. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): Thank you very much Mr Chairman and I am quite sure we will come back to my colleague the Hon Ruth Dyson who has a number of important matters to raise under Part 2 of this bill.I want to raise two matters in this first call on this both of which eventually find their way to schedule 1 which we are considering under Part 2 of the bill around the voting papers. But I want to first talk about how the voting papers will make it to electors or to voters in these referenda. As other colleagues have mentioned this is as the Government tells us a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. I think that is challengeable in some ways but if we just for a moment accept the Government’s rhetoric that we are talking about a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to change the flag surely we should be coming to the House to debate under Part 2 the use of the best way in which we could engage New Zealanders in this vote. I mean I have a personal view which I doubt is shared by all of my colleagues that this is actually the kind of referendum that 16 and 17-year-olds should be participating in potentially because I actually believe that we are talking about something with such long-lasting consequences that actually we should be looking at extending the franchise to the greatest number of people.That was not something picked up during the discussion but when we actually look at the way in which ballot papers will be distributed we have a sorry lack of imagination from the Government in terms of how it will get material out in particular the fact that it is relying on two or three main ways of ballot papers returning. The first of those is obviously the postal vote. I think everyone in this Committee knows that postal services are declining—be it in terms of the number of days of delivery of postal services or be it the positioning of postboxes both of which are declining. In my own electorate here I am currently in discussions with New Zealand Post about the loss of postal services in a number of parts of my community and here we have in Part 2 a piece of legislation that anchors itself on the postal service and getting things back through that way. But it is all right because the Government has got a solution. It has discovered a thing called the fax machine and that is apparently going to be what will rescue this referendum from its possible low turnout! There is an enormous amount of time in Part 2 devoted to how the fax machine will be used to return ballot papers. I am going to go out on a limb here and suggest that most organisations and places that people who might want to return their ballot papers would go to do not have fax machines any longer. They actually do not have them.Dr Megan Woods: No!GRANT ROBERTSON: I know it is tragic. I know that—Dr Megan Woods: Is this the future?GRANT ROBERTSON: This is the future.Hon Trevor Mallard: I’ve got one—I’ve got one but it hasn’t been attached for 4 years.GRANT ROBERTSON: It comes as no surprise to me to learn that the Hon Trevor Mallard is in possession of a fax machine. It sits very well alongside his fondue set and VHS recorder that he also has at his house. But most New Zealanders will find that they will struggle to find a fax machine.Hon Trevor Mallard: What’s wrong with a fondue set?GRANT ROBERTSON: That is right. Let us not go any further on this Mr Mallard or I will start talking about fondue sets and key parties in the 1970s and we do not need that.So we have here in Part 2 the idea that the fax machine is the next best thing alongside the return of the ballot papers. This is a sad indictment and unfortunately will lead to the very problem that Jono Naylor accidentally revealed when he gave his speech earlier on which is that the Government knows it is heading towards a turnout of under 50 percent for this referendum because Mr Naylor stood up and said—Denis O’Rourke: Under 25.GRANT ROBERTSON: Well indeed—under 25 Denis O’Rourke says and that is quite possible as well because Jono Naylor a man with experience of poor turnouts in local body elections stood up and told us that that is what you get with these things. Well that is not good enough. That is not good enough for a referendum of this type.But as I said I want to move on to the question of the actual ballot papers themselves that will be released. I want to ask a question of the Minister in the chair to get absolutely clear and that is the question of the randomisation of the ballot paper.Hon Member: Oh good question.GRANT ROBERTSON: Thank you. In clause 13(4) we know that for the first referendum it says: “For the purposes of subsection (3) the Electoral Commission must arrange the alternative flag designs on the voting paper in random order.” This is repeated for the second referendum in clause 14(2): “For the purposes of subsection (1) the Electoral Commission must arrange the 2 options on the voting paper in random order.” What I want clarification on from the Minister in the chair is: is random order the same as a unique order on each ballot paper? So to explain it is possible in schedule 1 when we view the voting paper for the first flag referendum to see the four options put out. Is what we are saying here in this bill that they will simply be not necessarily A B C and D but D B C and A or will it be on each ballot paper that they will be uniquely random? This is actually a very important point because there is a lot of international research that would tell you that the order in these situations is very important. In one British study we are told that if you are first you are twice as likely as the second position on a ballot paper to be voted for.Hon Trevor Mallard: Didn’t work for Chris Bishop.GRANT ROBERTSON: No it did not Mr Mallard and we will make sure that gets in Hansard for you there. So that is good. To have the four in random order is not actually enough. It needs to be uniquely random.But that is only the first issue that I have with this. Obviously in the second referendum we have got two options and similarly the question would be raised for that. What concerns me about the ballot paper for the first referendum contained in schedule 1 is that we run into that question that is—I mean I wonder whether anybody who is watching tonight can see this bill in my hand. They probably will not be able to and they do not do close-ups onParliament TV but they would see that in extremely small writing to the left of the options it says—says he looking over his glasses—“Write number(s) here”. I can already see the beginning of the problem.Hon Ruth Dyson: Sorry where are you at? What page?GRANT ROBERTSON: Sorry Schedule 1 of the bill. I can already see the beginning of problems here of attaching to options A B C and D numbers 1 2 3 and 4—whether or not people will be able to sufficiently understand the question they have been asked. So let us read the question they have been asked: “If the New Zealand flag changes which flag would you prefer?”. The answer to that question under this ballot paper is four options that you have to rank. You do not have to put that in obviously but you will be presented with four. The question is actually not what is then done. If you are a person who thinks visually rather than somebody who thinks in terms of words you are actually getting two different instructions. You are being asked which flag you prefer a singular and then you have four boxes that you are being asked to fill numbers in on. I think there is a risk that Mr O’Rourke’s 25 percent turnout could turn into a 25 percent turnout and then half of the ballot papers being spoiled or invalid because people have actually failed to understand exactly what it is they are being asked.This of course brings us back to the very point of why we are doing the referenda in this order why we are having the conversation this way because New Zealanders are going to have a ballot paper placed in front of them. If they have got decent eyesight they will be able to work out that they have to write some numbers in the boxes underneath the flags. But actually they may well think they are answering a question that is: which flag would you prefer? I suspect there will be a great deal of ballot paper spoiling that goes on. There are instructions of course and I do need to point out that the ballot paper says that there will be instructions above. I think we all know from other electoral processes that it does not matter how many instructions you put on a ballot paper or above a ballot paper like this people will continue to make mistakes. Unfortunately I do not think the voting paper for the first referendum is clear in terms of what is being asked of New Zealanders.So on those two points on Part 2 I would like a response from the Minister just to clarify for us whether or not there is going to be a unique random ballot paper—each ballot paper will be uniquely random. If that is not the case I think we have a significant problem. If it is the case then he can at least provide some reassurance to us. But I also think it is time for a Minister to get on their feet and explain to us why they are locked with Mr Mallard somewhere in the 1970s asking New Zealanders to fax their ballot papers back.Hon Ruth Dyson: I take offence on behalf of Trevor.GRANT ROBERTSON: That is right. Ruth Dyson takes offence on behalf of the 1970s but I say that we are now in the 21st century. It is now time for us to have a modern election.