Mooney JosephJOSEPH MOONEY (National—Southland): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition to this bill. I've spent much of my most recent career working as a lawyer in the courts including in some of the High Courts of New Zealand and I rise today in the highest court in the country effectively. This is the House that makes the law. And the great mistake that the Labour Party has made in my submission is that this is creating a potential issue of division in our country by pushing through a change in our electoral system that is not bringing in the people of New Zealand to have an opportunity to properly discuss this properly engage in the select committee process. Giving New Zealanders less than two days to file submissions is not appropriate on a matter that strikes at the heart of how our democracy works at local government level.Whether it's right or wrong—and look I point to people who spoke at the Māori Affairs Committee and said they actually supported the change but they opposed the process. It's an important distinction and there's many people in New Zealand who don't have the opportunity don't have the time to look deeply into this issue and all they're going to see is a Government pushing through a change to the law without signalling it in the election without giving proper process to it pushing it through under urgency putting it through in a fast-tracked select committee process. That is not a process that inspires confidence of New Zealanders in our democratic arrangements and it will not inspire confidence—I would suggest—in the Labour Government.The member opposite has spoken about the National Government using urgency to push through legislation before. That has never been done for electoral law and this is important. Electoral law is the foundation of our country.And I'll make another point. I heard some of our members saying that this is a racist law that has to be changed urgently. Look I'll just point to the fact that it was a Labour-led Government back in 2002 that is responsible for this legislation. So we've had some almost 20 years since then and if it was that urgent the Labour Party should've done something before I would suggest.I cannot stress enough that our democracy relies on the trust of the people and those elected to serve them. It is not a proper discharge of the duties of the elected members' offices I would suggest by bringing this change to our local democratic systems in the way that they've done it. Not in urgency not pushing it through select committee process not having 12508 submissions—which is quite impressive in less than two days but not even the majority of those are read. Realistically the majority of those could not be read. Having some 70 people who wish to actually be heard at the select committee not having an opportunity to be heard and to discuss. And I know from my career in the courts that whether or not people agree with the outcome a critical part of the process for them feeling they have been involved in the process and they could accept the decision made—even if it's a decision they do not agree with—is being heard. People in New Zealand have not been heard effectively through this rushed process and the Labour Party I would suggest should really take this back and think about it and give it the appropriate time so New Zealanders can properly discuss this and even if they do disagree with it they at least have the option to be heard through the select committee process. So I do not commend this bill to the House.