McKelvie IanIAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitīkei): Thank you Mr Chair. I've been trying—I just about wore my legs out trying to get a call on this bill for slightly different reasons to some. But certainly with respect to the Local Electoral Act 2001 I probably have more experience in this House than anyone of trying to implement various parts of this—what I think is a pretty untidy—bill and if you go back to the Local Electoral Act 2001 it is a very difficult bill for local people and for councils in my view to instigate. So my opposition to it is for slightly different reasons than some others but I certainly have had experience of this and I've found it very difficult to implement a lot of the pieces or clauses of the Local Government Act with respect to the Local Electoral Act 2001. I note my Government colleague on the other side of the House has also had some challenges with this very piece of legislation and in recent times. My question to the Minister relates to some issues that she actually raised last night that the Minister raised last night with respect to this and that is the fact that we're going to go through a phase of getting this Act implemented in time for the 2022 election—CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Can I just interrupt the member and tell him we're not debating the substance of either the principal Act or the bill; we're just debating clause 3 of whether this is the principal Act not whether it should be amended. That's it.IAN McKELVIE: Which is exactly what I am debating because with due respect I think this is absolutely applicable to what I'm debating. CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): No I don't think so. All this clause is saying is that this is the Act that's going to be amended. What you're venturing off into should be debated in clauses 4 and 5.IAN McKELVIE: I would have thought I was debating exactly those changes to the Local Electorate Act 2001.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Exactly so it's not a debate on the changes; it's a debate on whether this is the principal Act or not—that's it.Ian McKelvie: I raise a point of order Mr Chair. I think that's the point I'm getting to because it's exactly the argument I'm going to put and my question to the Minister will reflect that.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Well that's not a point of order but the member's got two minutes and 12 seconds left if he wants to continue.IAN McKELVIE: So my question to the Minister with respect to whether this is the principal Act or not is how do you establish having gone through a process already in some council's cases of going to a referendum on this very point and then having that referendum having dismissed the proposed changes in the past 12 months then expecting a council to implement those changes to this Act as we move forward from this point? Because those councils have got until May this year to change effectively what was a referendum result imposed on those councils some 12 months ago. I think that's very relevant as to whether this is the principal Act or whether the principal in fact goes back to the point raised in the Local Government Act 2001. So that's effectively my question to the Minister: does the Minister anticipate that those councils who have had a decision imposed on them by referendum with respect to this principal Act in May of last year will then go back to the public in May of this year and overturn effectively those referendum results?