Bishop Chris; Tisch LindsayCHRIS BISHOP (National): The inquiry from the Justice and Electoral Committee into the 2014 election was one of the first things I had the privilege of doing after I was elected to Parliament in that election—the 2014 election. It was a really interesting experience on the committee and I want to acknowledge all the committee members who have spoken in the debate so far. It was a collegial committee and we worked our way through the submissions on that inquiry and it became very clear—I think reasonably early on in the committee's inquiry—that we were going to end up with some form of legislation down the line to make improvements to our electoral system. We consulted widely. We had trips up and down the country—to Auckland and Wellington at least. Colin Craig turned up in Auckland and we were all very worried for a while but it turned out that he just wanted to make a submission about I think it was the Broadcasting Act allocation of funds in the end so it actually turned out to be a bit of a damp squib but it was fine. I think what we have produced as a Government out of that parliamentary inquiry is a sensible piece of legislation—14 changes as other speakers have made mention to adapt the Electoral Act to shifts in technology and voter behaviour. I just want to highlight one thing in particular that I am very keen on and that is the new amendment to prohibit campaigning and the display of campaign material within 10 metres of advance voting places. I think it is going to be worth having a discussion at the select committee as to whether or not that 10 metres is the appropriate space around the advance polling place. We canvassed this in the committee and with submitters but it may be impractical in some areas for those 10 metres to be enforced particularly in urban centres in which there are advance polling places in libraries and community centres for example near main thoroughfares. So we are going to need to have a bit of discussion I think at the Justice and Electoral Committee as to whether or not that is an appropriate space around an advance polling place but I have no doubt we can reach some sort of unanimity or at least some consensus on that. Just in closing I do want to just rebut a couple of the comments from Metiria Turei there who said that this is a real missed opportunity to make improvements to MMP. She said that the National Government promised to make amendments to MMP after the 2014 election. That is a fallacy. That is not correct. What was promised was a review of MMP which is exactly what happened and there is no consensus on moving forward on some of the changes that the Greens seem to want to promote. For example the removal of what is known as the electorate seat threshold waiver which is the ability for MPs who win an electorate seat to waive the ordinarily enforced 5 percent threshold—there is no consensus on getting rid of that. The other point I would make because the Greens are very concerned about proportionality under MMP is that it is often forgotten that the electorate seat threshold waiver helps proportionality. It makes the Parliament more representative; it makes it more democratic; it makes it more proportional. It was more proportional after 1999 when the New Zealand First Party missed out on the 5 percent threshold and Winston Peters won Tauranga; it was more proportionate after 2002 when Jim Anderton won Wigram; it was more proportionate after 2005 when Peter Dunne came into Parliament with two other colleagues on the back of winning Ohariu-Belmont. So with those brief remarks I commend this good bill to the House.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): A 5-minute call on behalf of the Green Party—Kennedy Graham.