O'Connor SimonSIMON O'CONNOR (National—Tāmaki): Thank you Mr Chair. I'm pleased to take a call as we look at clause 6 and I'm going to particularly focus on clause 6(2) which is talking about the replacing of—as my colleague Chris Penk had mentioned with the great NATO alphabetic code there—19 Zulu (4)". There's a couple of points I want to make to the Minister. It is fundamentally—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I'm sorry to interrupt the member. Which—SIMON O'CONNOR: Are we on clause 5? CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): We're on clause 5 so—SIMON O'CONNOR: I was erroneously—but that's easy enough. I can switch to clause 5 just like that. The whole point of holding a referendum or in fact referenda is ultimately to try to understand what the people think and one of the most fundamental policies I would have thought and I'll put it to the Minister is that any elected official—it doesn't matter if it's a board of trustees on a council or in Parliament but perhaps I should do the hierarchy the other way around—is to be responsible to the people. I think there's a disingenuousness in the debates that have been had or discussions and lack thereof in that actually simply allowing someone to be elected and then to continue as they want is not sufficient in these cases and why it's not sufficient is we're removing a polling option that has become established within New Zealand's democracy. So I suppose as other colleagues are doing I am encouraging the Minister to explain to this committee why a particular polling option—in this case a referendum around the establishment of seats—is being withdrawn. I can understand to a point the logic of saying a person has been elected or persons have been elected. They're able to do what they need to do or are willing to do over three four or five years or whatever their term is. But when one thinks about this logically I would suggest that that ultimately can become an undemocratic approach when the removal of a chance to go back to the electorate or the constituency or the ward to discuss a matter is being deliberately withdrawn. So I suppose the crux of my argument at the moment is that the process of referendum or referenda—if I use the right declension—has been established and now it is being removed. I suppose another part of what I'm trying to put across to the Minister and would like to have her address is this sort of—well already the resentments are being built up. There are those that want this and those that don't. Are we actually through the removal of referenda here in clause 5 creating a rod for New Zealand's democratic structures and the harmony of our people because no matter what happens whenever this bill is passed or otherwise there are going to be resentments. The funny thing about resentments if we've learnt anything about this history of this country is (a) they don't go away and (b) they become costly. So I do wonder if she has any thoughts there. Actually I might just leave it there for now. I would like the Minister to try and respond to those but the fundamental points are: does she understand—again it's only an opinion on my part—that the provision of referenda has become established and we are now looking to remove an element of a democratic process; and why? Does she also understand potentially the resentment which this will build? As I say there will be those that celebrate this and that's fine—we remain a democracy. But there will be those who are upset. Then I suppose the third point—which is where I started with the first point just to confuse things—is: are we really saying that once a person is elected they can basically do whatever they want with the hope that they'll only simply be held to account at the end? I think the answer has to be no. Those of us who particularly represent seats but all of us as members of Parliament know that we are elected but we are constantly going out to the people and engaging to understand where they sit. Is there ultimately a difference between that—if you will—informal conversation through to the formal which is the referenda? So here in clause 5 the removal of a referendum is for me very concerning. I'll return to a couple of the other points later if the Minister would like to address those questions."