Andersen GinnyGINNY ANDERSEN (Labour): Thank you very much Mr Speaker for the opportunity of speaking on this bill. I think it's important to bring things back to basics. There's been some rather wild speculation about what kind of mayhem is going to ensue as a result of this bill so I'd like to go right back to saying exactly why this bill is needed. The reality is we face having two referendums coming up for two different reasons in New Zealand and both of these will be tied to the forthcoming 2020 election. This Government has already committed to holding a referendum on legalising the personal use of cannabis alongside 2020 and now as a result of David Seymour's member's bill the End of Life Choice Bill we will also be requiring a referendum on that piece of legislation. Currently there is no existing legislation that would allow the conduct of either of these referendums. The Government therefore has approved the development of a single bill to provide the necessary legislative framework for these referendums to be held within the 2020 general election. That's it really. So what we've heard about what I've just explained—what's just been said—is that it will compromise free and fair elections for the history of New Zealand it will compromise our democratic society we'll be just like Russia—to quote the Hon Dr Nick Smith—and if we haven't we're going to be held at the mercy and our democratic principles will be compromised as a result of giving New Zealanders a right to vote and to have a choice on two very important issues for our future going forward. I would like to touch on one other point. One of the other main criticisms we've heard that has not been true today is as around why the bill is time limited. There's been great concern that this is tied specifically to the 2020 election. The bill is time limited in that it only allows referendums to be conducted alongside of the next election and this approach was taken so that the bill could serve as a proof of concept should more permanent and long-term legislation be required in the future. The reason why it's been tied to that is that it is a substantive piece of work to go through all the existing pieces of legislation to amend them in order to have an overarching and long-term piece of legislation in this place and that's a big piece of work that may well yet be done. A more comprehensive and enduring framework would be more complex than the current bill as it would need to incorporate postal referendums contained in the Referenda (Postal Voting) Act 2000 and the Citizens Initiated Referenda Act 1993. It would also need to address issues such as the time frames for the calling of referendums voting and the returning of the result. In the current bill these dates have been derived from the time frames of the 1993 Act for the general election. So a comprehensive bill would need to determine its own time frames for stand-alone ballots and for postal ballots. These are the two main myths that we've heard today cleared up. So what we have is an opportunity through the End of Life Choice Bill. All members in Parliament had the opportunity to vote on a Supplementary Order Paper to the primary bill that included the words of the referendum that is proposed. So I would strongly see that as being an excellent opportunity for there to be a good debate around how that's done. There's been a clear understanding of what those words are and how that will be carried forth. In terms of the second referendum the cannabis one that is going to be circulated through a draft exposure bill where people will have the opportunity to have the full understanding of what is being proposed and have a vote on it as to yes or no. Now I think that's very clear. I think the people of New Zealand are clever. They understand what's going on. I do think that some of the arguments posited from the other side treat the general public with a level of not giving them the confidence of knowing that they can read that they can think. People understand these issues and what they mean and they're able to take some good understanding of their own and vote according to their own views. They don't have to have members of Parliament looking over every single issue in order to inform them of what their rights and what their views and what their abilities to vote are. I think it's going to be a really exciting time next election. I look forward to seeing what both of these very important questions pose in the forthcoming voting process and I really hope all New Zealanders engage fully with the voting system. I commend this bill to the House.