Power Simon: Electoral Referendum Bill — Second Reading 
Power Simon: Electoral Referendum Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:669;Page:15852] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I move  
That the Electoral Referendum Bill be now read a second time 
. This Government committed to provide New Zealanders with an opportunity to express their opinion on the MMP voting system. This bill provides for a referendum on the voting system to be held in conjunction with the 2011 general election as the first step in a two-stage process designed to maximise voter participation and provide a clear decision on the type of voting system that New Zealanders want. The 2011 referendum will ask voters whether they wish to keep MMP or change to another voting system. If 50 percent or more voters opt to keep MMP the bill provides that the Electoral Commission must review MMP and report on whether any changes are necessary or for that matter desirable. If the majority of voters opt to change to another voting system the Government has committed to hold a second referendum in 2014 that will ask voters to choose between MMP and the preferred alternative system. This approach follows a similar process to that taken in 1992 and 1993 when MMP was introduced. 
Once again I commend the all-party Electoral Legislation Committee—in particular its chair Amy Adams but all members—for its careful consideration of this bill. I am advised that the committee received well over a thousand submissions on the bill reflecting the high level of interest on this issue from New Zealanders. The majority of submitters expressed support for the process set out in the bill although suggesting some amendments. Some submitters considered that the voting paper could be made clearer by simplifying the language. The committee has proposed a number of changes in response to submissions. The committee also recommended that the alternative voting systems in Part B of the voting paper be listed in alphabetical order rather than being determined by lot. In response to submitter concerns the committee has described the supplementary member voting system in schedule 2 using the key features recommended by the Royal Commission on the Electoral System in 1986. The description now provides that each voter would have two votes and that of the 120 seats in Parliament 90 would be electorate seats and 30 would be party list seats. 
Some submitters suggested that a review of MMP should take place regardless of the referendum outcome. The committee concluded by majority that the bill should retain the requirement for the review to take place only if 50 percent or more electors vote to keep MMP. This approach will provide a clearer indication of voters’ preferences with regard to the broad type of voting system that they favour. Voters who prefer MMP in principle but wish to see it modified would vote to retain MMP. Those voters who disagree with aspects of MMP would need to decide whether their concerns were fundamental enough to make them want to vote for another voting system in the referendum. 
Many submitters sought expenditure limits on referendum advertising. The committee by majority recommended an expenditure limit of $300000 during the regulated period. The committee has also recommended a number of technical changes to align the referendum advertising provisions in the bill with the election advertising regulation proposed in the Electoral (Finance Reform and Advance Voting) Amendment Bill. By considering these bills together the committee has been able to deliver a coherent package of electoral reform. 
I once again thank all political parties for the constructive way that they have engaged on this bill as well as the one considered by the House in the second reading just previously. This is a critical electoral and constitutional issue which in my view should require the type of approach taken by Parliament in this instance. I am confident that the committee’s recommendations support the Government’s objective of providing for a clear neutral and unbiased referendum process. I commend this bill to the House.