Smith NickHon Dr NICK SMITH (National): It is an absolute farce that the Minister is giving five days for the select committee to call for public submissions for those public submissions to be heard—remember—from councils and for it to receive advice from officials hear those submissions and report the bill back to the House. I cannot believe that the Minister was able to say with a straight face that this would result in a thorough process. Every other member of the House could see it for the cynicism. I've heard that member give speeches in this House saying that when you're dealing with local government matters you need to make sure there's time for a council meeting so that the council can discuss its submission. How many councils are going to be able to have a meeting in the next five days to consider this significant change in their electoral law? It is indeed a complete joke. Let's just test the reasons that the Minister of Local Government has given for this five-day select committee process. The first is that because the provisions would result in a poll of 5 percent of people it would take up that democratic provision but that Minister was involved in putting in the law. Remember the law that she is wanting to repeal—that she today called racist—is a law that she in the Helen Clark Government put on our law books and she even spoke at its third reading with high praise. Now the member now says that we need to do this in a rush because it's retrospective. Here's my point for the Minister: councils that have begun the process under the existing law have voted for it on the basis that there was the check of a referendum. I've heard from councillors who said I voted for Māori seats in my area on the basis that there was a protection in the law and a referendum for the citizens of my community to have a say." and now that is being taken out of the process. What's the Minister's answer for that councillor and those councils—[Interruption] Well no let's be frank: councils that have made the decision that they would like a Māori ward did so in the knowledge that there was a referendum provision put in place by the Labour Government in 2002. Yes they did—that's exactly what they did—and that is being taken away. How many members of this House believe that the reason the Minister of Local Government is doing this is to save money for the ratepayers? Oh come on—pull the other one. This is a Government that has spent tens of millions hundreds of millions billions and the amount that's involved in the expenditure on a few referenda to give the public a say is diddly-squat in the big picture. There is not a member of this House Minister who believes you're taking away this referendum procedure because of the cost. Now I want to commend my colleague Chris Luxon on the amendment that he has moved that says a date of 15 May. That would at least give New Zealanders some opportunity to have a say. Why is it that members opposite will not give New Zealanders the opportunity to have a say on this bill? This is a bill in which they are taking away New Zealanders' right to have a say and to have it resolved in a referendum. This is not a provision that they can justify. I heard Willie Jackson give a speech and he said "Well this is what we've got a mandate to do." Well the problem is that your mandate from your local government policy was to "uphold local decision making" in democratic institutions of local government. Your policy was to "ensure that major decisions about local democracy involve the full participation of the local population". Can a member opposite—one of those Labour new members—explain to me how giving five days for a select committee process—Hon Michael Wood: Point of order Madam Speaker. The referral today is supposed to refer to matters relating to the referral to select committee not the substance of the debate and the Labour Party policy on this issue. ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): That is correct. Thank you the Hon Michael Wood. Continue the Hon Nick Smith. Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Well I say to the Chair and to the member that when Labour says in its manifesto that it's going to "ensure … major decisions about local democracy will involve full participation of the local population" can a member please explain about having a five-day select committee process—Mr Michael Wood how does a five-day select committee process live up to the promise you gave to the electorate of major decisions about local democracy involving full participation? Would Mr Wood please answer me: how many days will submitters have? How many days will there be? We know the select committee's got five days. How many days will there be for any council in New Zealand or any ratepayer or voter that wants to have a say? Would any member opposite please tell me? Five days for the select committee—how many days will New Zealanders councils iwi members of the public have to make a submission on this bill? The silence is deafening. Not a member of the Government who campaigned on a policy of ensuring full public participation in decisions on local government will answer a very basic question: how many days are they going to give the New Zealand public to have a say on this bill? We know they're giving the committee five days so it'll have to be less than that. Actually I don't think anybody will be making a submission between now and midnight so by the time you take the remaining days of this week we're really talking about—if they're lucky they might get a day and a half. Is there any member of this House who would put hand on heart and say that full public participation is met by giving electors less than a couple of days? [Hon Willie Jackson holds up two fingers] Well at least I have an answer—I give Willie a credit. He's going to give two days. Two days Willie is the amount of time that New Zealanders will have to make submissions on this bill. Could one of those Labour members opposite tell me whether they think that giving two days for submissions meets your manifesto commitment of enabling full public participation in the decision making on the very core of our democracy and how their local council is elected? It's a joke. It is farcical. It is cynical. I don't think there is a single member of this House that believes the Minister's motion matches up to the very policy that she campaigned on at the 2020 election. I fear for our democracy when the Minister of Local Government says that two days for making a submission lives up to the Government's policy of ensuring basic and important decisions about local democracy involve a full participation. I have a simple challenge for the House: let's vote for Labour's manifesto because Labour's manifesto I'm sorry is best represented by the amendment moved by Chris Luxon. That would enable the select committee to have until 15 May. My challenge to members opposite is to have the courage of your convictions vote for the manifesto commitment that you made—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Order! The Hon Nick Smith we're not voting on the manifesto. Hon Dr NICK SMITH: —show that you are true to your word and support the amendment that there be a reasonable time for the select committee to consider this bill."