Mark Ron: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
Mark Ron: Civil Union Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:622;Page:17519] 
RON MARK (NZ First) 
: 
 I rise to take my first call in the debate and I do so prompted by a rather interesting speech from a person I do have some time for although some could argue that he was not elected to the House but passed into it by legislation—the Hon Harry Duynhoven. He raised questions around the issue of putting the bill to a referendum to allow the people to decide as to whether it should pass through Parliament at all. 
I take up a couple of points that were made by Mr Duynhoven. The first point is the statement that we should not put take a poll of the people in order to find out whether they feel that this legislation is acceptable. That is a rather interesting statement coming as it does from a member of the most poll-driven party in the history of this country. There has been no party or Government in the history of this nation that has been more driven by its consistent behind-the-scenes taxpayer-funded polling. In fact I had the comment made to me that people suspect very strongly that certain members of Cabinet and the Government take a poll before they even get out of bed to decide whether it is a good idea to appear in public that day. 
Brian Connell 
: Where did that come from? 
RON MARK 
: It came from the honourable Mr Brian Connell. The other point I want to make is that Harry Duynhoven and the Government should wake up. We are now a Parliament full of MMP MPs—men and women who were elected here after 1996 as a result of a referendum in which the country spoke very loudly and very firmly on the need for change. We have trumpeted all over the country about what a great and wonderful thing that was. We have exhorted the virtues of the new House—its diversity its mixture of different ethnic groups its diverse views and philosophies and its greater representation of different parties. How did that come to be? It came to be as a result of a referendum. The public gave its verdict. It is a little bit strange for a member to then stand up and say that we should not have a referendum. 
The idea of a referendum is not new to New Zealand First. It is an old idea. Our policy on decriminalisation of marijuana is that we can live with the result if the public can. We would have a referendum make it binding and the result would be the decision. That is a policy this party has had since 1993. I was one of the first people in my caucus to argue for the idea of a referendum on conscience issues. I was one of the first to argue for it around the question of the death penalty. I know there is a calling out there for the death penalty for people who commit heinous crimes on children in particular. But it is not an idea that fits well with a large slice of New Zealand and my argument was always that we should put it to the people. If the people are fair just and know what they want they will tell us. We as a Parliament then have a simple direction as to what to do in order to meet the people’s expectations. I do not see anything wrong with that. 
The only reason one would vote against such a notion would be if one was scared. Mr Duynhoven should not talk to me about needing the courage to come here and make a decision off one’s own bat. There are plenty of people in the House who have courage and have convictions and can stand up for the things they believe in. Indeed this bill is before the Committee because Mr Tim Barnett has displayed the courage necessary to put the issue forward and to campaign on it. He will take the decision of the public if at the end of the day the people of the Christchurch Central electorate say they have had enough of it and do not re-elect him. So be it. But therein is the other point and Mr Duynhoven made that point too. He said that if the public do not like his decision they will not re-elect him. 
 There is only one flaw in that argument. We know that there are certain safe seats in this country in which constituents still do not have their head around MMP. I know that if I put a dead horse with a red ribbon around its neck in the race in Christchurch East and just said it was a Labour horse it would win— 
Simon Power 
: It’s won twice. 
RON MARK 
: —yes twice—and that is the fact of the matter. The referendum idea is the one way in which we could get a clear direction from the people of New Zealand as to whether they want this bill. I asked the opponents of the referendum idea what they are scared of. If the polls are suggesting that the public wants this legislation what are they scared of? They should vote for it.