8. Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill—StatementsHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) to the Minister of JusticeElectoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill—Statements8. Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) to the Minister of Justice: Does he stand by all his statements regarding the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill?Hon ANDREW LITTLE (Minister of Justice): Yes.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Can he confirm the advice of the Human Rights Commission that his electoral law changes would be illegal and unconstitutional in the home of MMP Germany because the constitution imposed on it by the Allies including New Zealand after the defeat of Nazi Germany specifically contains a provision protecting the freedom of speech and association of members of Parliament?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I'm aware that the Human Rights Commission made a submission to that effect. Since we don't have a written constitution or a basic law and since the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill if enacted does not undermine the freedom of MPs then I do not see that it applies.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Where is the justice in New Zealand insisting on basic democratic protections for Germany to protect freedom of expression and Parliament's independence but then proposing laws in New Zealand that contradict those?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: I'm not quite sure what that member is referring to but that is not what the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill does.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Is the Minister aware that in jurisdictions like Zimbabwe and Pakistan where they do have the sorts of electoral law he's proposing for New Zealand MPs have been dismissed for exposing corruption within their own Government MPs have been dismissed for voting differently on bills to what their leader directed them and MPs have been dismissed for holding press conferences without the consent of their leader; and is that what he wants for New Zealand?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: That member is very helpfully allowing this House to enter the realms of the absurdity and stupidity. None of those things will apply under the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Does he agree with the statement and I quote electoral law should not be the subject of widespread divergent and disagreement between the parties. The convention is that the parties will agree on electoral law because the voting public expect there to be a consensus on electoral law" a statement made by list MP Andrew Little in 2014; and if so why is he pushing through these major changes without any cross-party consensus?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: From time to time different political parties do have a different view about our electoral law and our constitutional make up. Those differences are often traversed well-versed. Some parties believe there should be a written constitution others don't. That is the nature of politics.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Does he agree with the statement "electoral law changes should come from thorough independent reviews and not self-interested political parties"; and if so why have none of the five independent reviews and commissions into MMP recommended any changes in respect of where an MP has fallen out with their party?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: Once again that member draws a long bow refers to a number of unrelated things and draws a conclusion. The reality is that this Government sticks to the fundamental principle of MMP which is that party political proportional representation is the be all and end all of MMP and it is not for individual MPs of the day to undermine the will of the electorate.Hon Dr Nick Smith: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My point of order is that my question specifically asked whether he agreed with the statement that electoral law changes should not be made unless they've been recommended by an independent commission or review.SPEAKER: I'm going to ask the member to leave the quote out but ask the very tail of the question again.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Does he agree with the statement that electoral law changes should come from thorough independent reviews and not self-interested political parties?Hon ANDREW LITTLE: This Parliament has passed electoral laws before that have not been the consequence of an independent review and equally it has declined to pass laws that have been as a result of an independent electoral law review like the previous Government refusing to fully implement the recommendations of the last review of our electoral laws."