Lees-Galloway Iain: Members of Parliament (Remuneration and Services) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Members of Parliament (Remuneration and Services) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 14 November 2013. Volume:694;Page:14727. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): I will have to write down that contribution from Jami-Lee Ross after I have finished mine. That was astonishingly short. I can understand members’ reticence to make a contribution on this bill but I think we do owe it to the public to at least discuss the contents of the bill and discuss what it is designed to do. It may be something that we as members feel a little uncomfortable discussing in front of the public but the fact that it makes us feel a little uncomfortable discussing it probably ought to be one of the reasons why we do actually have a proper debate about this Members of Parliament (Remuneration and Services) Bill.The purpose of this bill is to establish a new framework for setting entitlements for members of Parliament and the executive. It repeals the Civil List Act 1979 and changes the law regarding the salaries and allowances of members of Parliament the support services provided for members of Parliament Ministers and certain electoral candidates the annuities and other benefits and privileges for former Prime Ministers and the benefits and privileges for former members of Parliament. Essentially what that all means is that it modernises the regime for giving members of Parliament and members of the executive the resources and tools we require to carry out the tasks of being a member of Parliament and being a representative of the people of New Zealand.A number of members have said—those who have contributed to the debate today—how these things have changed over time. One reason why the regime for pay and support services for MPs has changed is a desire for greater transparency—a desire expressed both by the public and by members of Parliament. But another reason is simply the fact that the environment in which members of Parliament operate now and the expectations of members of Parliament have changed over the years. There was a time when members of Parliament did not receive resources to open an office in their electorate. They did not receive resources to staff offices in their electorates and to provide services to their constituents although most members of Parliament did. They either funded it themselves or relied on volunteers—often members of their family—to provide those services to their constituents. A decision was made pleasingly some decades ago that that was not adequate and our constituents deserved better service than that so resources were provided to members of Parliament in order to provide those services.Likewise with the advent of air travel and other forms of travel it was deemed appropriate that members of Parliament should not only be able to travel to and from Wellington to carry out their functions here as legislators but also be able to travel around the country to carry out their functions as representatives. This is because we do not just represent the people of our constituencies—although for those of us who are electorate members of Parliament it is our primary function I believe to represent thoseconstituents—it is also incumbent on us to make sure that we are representing the interests of people across the country. Most of us hold portfolios of one type or another and it is a requirement that we travel around and actually speak to the people working in those areas so that we actually have a grasp of what is happening at the front line what is happening in reality and we do not get stuck in the ivory tower that is the parliamentary complex.Hon Maryan Street: Or in Nelson.IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY: Yes—Ms Street suggested Nelson might also be an ivory tower. So these resources are very much made available to members of Parliament so that we can provide the services that are expected of us.Other more recent innovations are the internet and email. I am sure all MPs—just like probably most other people in New Zealand and workers in New Zealand—have a love-hate relationship with emails. They certainly give constituents far better access to us. It is certainly much faster—usually—to email your member of Parliament and hopefully get a timely response from them rather than relying on old-fashioned mail. But that of course means that we have to be resourced in order to provide that service; we have to be accessible and available to our constituents. That ultimately is what the resources side of this is about.Of course it is also about ensuring that members of Parliament are reasonably recompensed for the work that they do. As Chris Hipkins rightly pointed out I think it is about striking a balance and ensuring that someone does not need to be independently wealthy—they do not need to be a rich person—in order to enter Parliament because it is a House of Representatives. We ought to represent the whole diversity of our nation—rich poor old young ethnicities of all varieties backgrounds of all varieties careers of all varieties. If we were to overly restrict the remuneration of members of Parliament that would limit the different kinds of people who could come into this place. Nor should you come to Parliament in order to become rich. That is not a reason to seek election and to seek to represent the people whom you purport to represent. I think we have over the years come up with systems that do strike that balance appropriately. However members of Parliament are well remunerated when compared with most people in New Zealand. I think we have to acknowledge that although we think it is a fair remuneration we are amongst the top income earners in New Zealand. It is understandable that there is scrutiny and an expectation that we will be absolutely transparent about what we earn and the way we use the resources that are available to us.So the key changes in this legislation are around improving transparency and are around ensuring that we have the right matters dealt with by the Remuneration Authority and the right matters dealt with by the Speaker. Particularly I think it is important that members of Parliament acknowledge that our primary function when the House is sitting is to be here in the House legislating. That is our job. That is not to say that there are not good valid reasons why some of us for some of the time need to be away from the House but our primary role is to pass legislation. That is actually what we are sent here to do. That is what people elect us to do.One of the key changes that this legislation allows for is to the penalties for being away from Parliament without good reason without the authority of the party whips or the Speaker depending on the different regimes for different people whether they be independent small parties or part of a larger party. It is true that the penalty system that was in place before really had no impact. There was no incentive to carry out our primary functions and be here in the House under the old system. The new system certainly does create an incentive for members of Parliament to be here. With it will come a new regime where we are now all going to be checked off to make sure that weare here in Parliament to ensure that at least at some point in time in the day we make an appearance here in the debating chamber and/or that we make an appearance at a select committee and if we do not do that that there is a good explanation for that that the Speaker or the whips are aware of. I think that does create the right incentives and that members of the public will appreciate that that expectation has been built into the legislation.I think that this is good legislation. It strikes the right balance both in terms of the remuneration of MPs and also placing the correct responsibilities with the correct authorities so that the right decisions are made. It grants members of Parliament the tools they require to carry out the functions of this role to an adequate level and ensures that the constituents that we serve get the services that they expect from their members of Parliament. I commend this bill to the House.