Bridges SimonHon SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga): Thank you Madam Speaker. Look it was good—really good actually—to speak on the Moriori Claims Settlement Bill—Tāmati Coffey: Better Treaty partners.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: —in the House just before. But I tell you what Tāmati Coffey it ain't good to speak on this one. That's because actually pretty much everything about it is wrong—everything about it is wrong.The bill—we'll start with the process—and Tāmati Coffey says Look it's all fine. They got a chance to be heard." And that went something like this: "Mr Jones you've come along for your submission; thank you your time's up. Oh Mr Smith." That is how it went in that committee because literally the thousands of people that wanted to have a submission did not have the time.But you know that's really not the serious point; the serious point is this: it was done in urgency. There was absolutely—despite what Nanaia Mahuta Tāmati Coffey and others say—no need whatsoever to do it in urgency. I've said before and I'll say it again: this is a local democracy bill being passed anti-democratically. I see the sad irony in that. Members on this side of the House see the sad irony in that. I think actually reasonable fair-minded New Zealanders will see the sad tragic irony in that—a democracy bill passed in rapidity anti-democratically. I note once again—it was in the first reading but I think it's such a salient point—the way Chris Hipkins the gentleman who came to this House and moved the urgency motion used to rail with his arms up in the air he used to shake and yell when we used urgency—and we did it much more sparingly dare I say it than this Government did on bills that were much more—Hon Members: Ha ha!Hon SIMON BRIDGES: They laugh. I don't know why they're laughing. Go check the record. Go through the Hansard. Go do the Parliamentary Library check on all that. Well I look forward to hearing the member over there whose name I don't even know—that's the contribution she's made in this House over the last few years—do that. But actually we used it sparingly and already we're seeing that isn't the case. By the way what did we do on Tuesday night last week while I'm talking about urgency? We finished at 4 o'clock. What did we do on Wednesday night? We finished at 4 o'clock. What did we do on Thursday night? We finished at like 3.30 in the afternoon. And now they come because they've got a bill and they arrogantly they sadly ram it through this House.That leads me to the other point: the arrogance—the arrogance; actually I would say worse than that the deep cynicism—of going to the election with a Labour Party manifesto and when I spoke in the first reading I said it never mentioned this in one place. Actually Chris Luxon makes a stronger point and that's that it did mention it; it just said the exact opposite of what they've done in Government. Well there's plenty of words I can't use in this Parliament to describe that but sadly they all fit actually. When you go to the election in the electorate—because you know the electorate doesn't want it because you know it will lead to votes going to other political parties in this Parliament that may actually not be in this Parliament any more you go do that you say one thing to them and then before the paint's even dry on your warrants as Ministers you do precisely the opposite. I say actually there's a deception involved in that. This bill is based on a deception. It's sad. It's arrogant. It's cynical. And that's what it is.Tāmati Coffey made I think another point that was made in a different sort of way by Nanaia Mahuta as well. It was effectively this if I sum it all up: well you know what local government they are so in favour of this; they think it's wonderful. Well here's how that ran—and I thought it was a remarkable revelation from Nick Smith in this Parliament at question time to Nanaia Mahuta—it's kind of like this: those who the Government thought would need to toady up to them would want to curry favour would come along and do what the Government wanted they got an advanced heads-up.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Six days.Hon SIMON BRIDGES: Six days heads-up to write their submission and to get on it. That's how cynical this is. I'll use another word; I reckon that's "dirty"—I reckon that's dirty to—Hon Member: Ha ha!Hon SIMON BRIDGES: —the member over here laughs—to go to one side the side on your side and say "You know what here's the confidential heads-up to make your submission". But anyone on the other side—New Zealanders right? Not people from other parts; New Zealanders—who want to come along or have a strong view on this "We're not telling you if you're going to be agin it because we're going to ram this through in urgency." Well I say that's deceptive it's cynical and it's dirty to give a heads up to one side and not the other.I'll just say actually in a week when we've seen the Mental Health Foundation I think it was talking about a Government that wants to shut them up and makes it quite clear that they don't get funding if they do that is it actually any wonder that those local government mayors come along here cap in hand and say "Nanaia Mahuta is wonderful. I agree with everything she said on this."? Well you know what? In a broken local government system in the way it works that has every lever facing towards the Government because they need Nanaia Mahuta and Jacinda Ardern so much actually I think that's pretty self-evident what's gone on.This bill's retrospective and that's wrong. We can play live and all that but you know whether it's criminal or civil whether it's a bill on posters whether it's a bill on rubber stamps whatever it is they should not be retrospective.So I say for all of those process reasons this bill's wrong. I also say actually—and I agree with the many good points that Christopher Luxon said—this bill's wrong in substance special representation. We're increasingly going to look back I think at this in the long-run and say that it's the wrong thing to do. It's not a situation where in Parliament there are fewer Māori than Māori in New Zealand actually we're strongly represented. In council that hasn't always been the case but what the stats show quite clear is it basically is today. I have a complete confidence in New Zealanders both in Māori and non-Māori New Zealanders to elect the right people who know what they're doing. I say to the other side: actually have a little faith in us have a little faith in Māori.Hon Members: Ha ha!Hon SIMON BRIDGES: And they laugh again because their arguments are so weak. Frankly Tāmati Coffey came to this House with a fourth-former's speech and that's why he's laughing right now because his arguments are so weak. Have a little faith in Māori have a little faith in the people that you used to represent and have a little faith in New Zealanders.I think this is a real shame that we're going to spend now because it is in urgency because it's a flawed process because I think fundamentally for all the reasons Christopher Luxon said and more it's a flawed bill arguing tooth and nail over it. We know what the end result is going to be—let's be honest about that—because of the super majority over there where they just do whatever they want as arrogantly as they can. But that doesn't make it right. It doesn't make it a good process. We will be fighting tooth and nail because it's the right thing to do."