Lees-Galloway Iain: Electoral Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Electoral Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 18 March 2014. Volume:697;Page:16748. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North):It is like looking in the mirror Mr Assistant Speaker! Look the people of New Zealand are used to the National Party putting its own vested interests and its own self-serving interests ahead of the best interests of the New Zealand public. They are used to the National Party putting its own interests ahead of the interests of the people of New Zealand. They have seen it before. They saw it with the Exclusive Brethren with its shady back-room dealings with the National Party and not wanting to be transparent about its funding of its own crusade against the Labour Government and with the fact that that was an agreed strategy both with Don Brash and with John Key at the time. People remember that happening when the National Party put its interests—Hon Phil Goff: And Joyce.IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: And Steven Joyce. That is right. Mr Goff is right. Steven Joyce was involved when the Exclusive Brethren cosied up to the National Party. So people remember that happening. They remember the Skycity deal where people who had good relationships with people in Cabinet were able to organise a deal that was in the interests of that Australian-owned gambling company Skycity. They remember the Warner Bros deal where people who work in the film industry no longer have the same working rights as people who work in other industries in New Zealand because of a cosy relationship between Warner Bros and people in Cabinet.They remember all the other deals and they will remember the day that the National Party passed legislation that does two things. It makes it harder for people to cast their vote particularly people at the margins of society and it fails to address the electoral rort that the National Party benefits from which is the coat-tailing provision that allows it to do deals with other political parties which are now essentially controlled by the National Party in order to stitch up additional seats for the coalition that the National Party wants to put together. That is the way this party operates. It does not operate in an open transparent and democratic fashion; it operates in a fashion that is behind closed doors that is made up of dodgy deals and that is done in the interests of the National Party and its mates. That is always its first priority put far far ahead of the interests of New Zealand. [Interruption]Scott Simpson has repeatedly said to me and to other speakers from this side of the House: “Tell us about the Electoral Finance Act.” Labour supported the repeal of the Electoral Finance Act. It was not the best piece of legislation. But—Hon Chester Borrows: You brought it in too!IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Listen—no no just be quiet for a second and listen. The values behind the Electoral Finance Act were the values of transparency and democracy and open government and they came from the deal that the National Party did with the Exclusive Brethren with people putting promoter statements on their material with the addresses of empty lots where nobody lived and where nobody had their offices. It was done to hide that money that was funding the National Party just like the Waitematā Trust is used to hide the money that funds the National Party. There is no belief in transparency from that party. There is no belief in democracy from that party.If it believed in democracy it would follow the recommendations of the Review of the MMP Voting System. The MMP review came out of the promise that the National Party made to New Zealanders that if they voted for MMP there would be a review and there would be changes made to our MMP system at the margins particularly things like the coat-tailing provision and where the party vote threshold is. New Zealanders spoke out. New Zealanders made it absolutely clear: 71 percent of New Zealanders want to get rid of the coat-tailing provisions. The MMP review—an apolitical review; it had no political persuasion whatsoever—recommended to Parliament that we get rid of the coat-tailing provisions.But that is not in the National Party’s interests. That is not what serves the National Party and the wealthy people who fund the National Party behind secret trusts. That is not in their best interests so they will not do it. Judith Collins now famous for being just another National Minister who does things for her mates and in her best interests not the public’s best interests blocked the advancing of the recommendations of the MMP review and that is what this National Party will be remembered for and what it is doing with this bill.