Smith NickClause 3 RepealHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): Clause 3 of this bill exposes the rort that is behind this bill. I want to reflect on what the Minister in the chair Andrew Little said in introducing this bill when it first came into the House. He said This has nothing to do with the particular coalition issues the Government has." He said "We need a framework a framework for referendum so that when we have issues that are required to go to a referendum we can then manage them." Except clause 3 says that this is a power that's only going to be given to the current Government. That is what the Government is saying is "We're going to grab the powers off the Parliament to set the topics and the wording of referendum but we're only going to do it for us; it's not a power that we ever want to give to a future Government." That in my view just exposes how shallow and opportunistic this bill is.This bill is not about providing a sound framework for referendum to be held at general elections. We know from the Legislation Advisory Committee—in their submission they made the point very strongly that this bill compromises free and fair elections that this bill is a fundamental shift of power from the Parliament to the executive and they argued that by having a termination clause that this bill only applies to the current Government really does undermine it being a genuine electoral reform for advancing and improving New Zealand's democracy. This is a crude dirty deal to be able to hold the Government together with the diametrically opposed views between the Green Party and New Zealand First on cannabis. So "Let's break the conventions around every one of New Zealand's 20 referendum held at general elections being authorised by the Parliament. Let's take Parliament out of the picture but let's just do it for us."Here's a question I've got for members opposite. If a future National Government wanted legislation of this sort and give the power to Cabinet so that a future National Cabinet could just decide to have a referendum on getting rid of the Māori seats—let's have a referendum on capping the amount of tax capping the amount of debt any of those issues—would members opposite agree that that's appropriate? Absolute silence. Every Labour member in the Chamber has got their head down. They know that if National did that they would object. We know from their own track record they would object. When we had the flag referendum they argued very strongly that there should be a full parliamentary process about the issue of the flag. So can some Labour member please put the case as to why Labour's position on referendum is that they should go through a full parliamentary process when it comes to flags when National's the Government but when Labour's the Government they can have a different set of rules. Can some Labour member explain to me why this only applies—if the Minister in the chair is correct and this is a sensible long-term reform so that Governments can have referendum why does clause 3 say it only applies to 2020? It's because it's a rort. It's because it's against New Zealand's democratic traditions. It's because this is the power that they want but they don't want any future National Government to have.Well actually the National Party has high values around electoral law and that's why every—Hon Andrew Little: Ha ha!Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The member in the chair laughs. Let me put the case. Every single electoral law introduced by Amy Adams Judith Collins and Simon Power was consulted on with the Opposition. What consultation was there with the National Opposition on this bill or the other two? Zero—zero! Not one Government electoral law reform bill was passed by the previous Government without multiparty support. This has none. This provision clause 3 of this bill does expose the fact that this is a bill of political convenience. This is a bill that as the Legislation Design and Advisory Committee says the moment one Government pulls this dirty trick it has changed the convention of 165 years and it gives licence to any future Government in New Zealand to use the same. That's sad for New Zealand's democracy. The right to call a referendum at a general election and the right to determine the wording should rest with Parliament."