English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:642;Page:11987] 
1. Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Leader—National) 
 to the  
Minister of Justice 
: Does he stand by his statement in relation to the Electoral Finance Bill that the Government “is seeking to encourage full and open expression from a diverse range of interests in the run-up to a general election.”; if so why? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Minister of Education) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Justice 
: Yes; because that is the Government’s intent. 
Hon Bill English 
: Why has the Government’s bill been criticised by the Human Rights Commission which says in contrast to the Minister of Justice’s opinion that the bill “will have a chilling effect” on the expression of political opinion during an election year and how come the Minister the Human Rights Commission and many other submitters have completely opposite views of what the bill will do? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The intent of the bill is to ensure that there is full and open expression. There is a select committee process under way and the Human Rights Commission has made a submission. I am sure that its views will be debated in full. 
Hon Bill English 
: When the Minister reads the bill rather than runs the Labour Party spin about its intent does he realise he will find out that the Ministry of Health will be allowed to put out a communications package during the regulated period from 1 January that talks about cheaper doctors’ fees under the primary care strategy but that if the same statement was made by the Labour Party it would be caught as an election advertisement? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: As we said yesterday to the member of course Government departments will continue to ensure New Zealanders get access to services and that will require them to make those services known. The hypothetical case he raises is something he is amusing himself with but I do not think it is relevant to this debate. 
R Doug Woolerton 
: Does the Minister believe that the hugely increased financial influence demonstrated at the last election is destructive to democracy? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The answer is clearly yes. That is why I think many people are deeply concerned at the continued argument by the National Party which seems to be determined to want to continue having large amounts of money flooding through its coffers during election periods that may well influence what voters do and may well influence policy rather than to do what so many other countries do and have a fair and an open contest. 
Hon Bill English 
: Why is it Labour Party policy that statements made by Government departments regarding the benefits of the Government’s policy would be unregulated and uncapped but that the same statements if made by the Labour Party itself would be subject to the political advertisement restrictions in the bill? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The member assumes an identical statement would be made by a political party and by a Government department. He has not given an example yet. Therefore this is merely hypothetical and I do not think it is part of the debate. 
Hon Bill English 
: When the Minister reads the bill does he realise that he will find out that in fact Government departments are not exempt from the provisions that ban electoral advertising during the regulated period—even though Parliamentary Service spending is exempt—and that the effect is that Government departments will have to check whether the statements they make constitute electoral advertising and if they do they will have to make statutory declarations and/or register as third parties because they will be subject to the law in the same way as everyone else? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: It is interesting that the member changes the argument each day. I think the argument that has been made that the select committee is the appropriate place to work through these issues so we get good consistent legislation is obviously right. 
Hon Bill English 
: Does the Government know whether Government departments would have to register as third parties if they spend over $60000 on making statements that might constitute political advertisements? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: If Government departments are going about their normal business of making taxpayers aware of services available to them of course they will not. 
Hon Bill English 
: Is the Minister aware that this postcard asking Annette King to fire Clint Rickards which is being given out in the main street of Wellington right now will next year be illegal because it is not authorised by a financial agent when it takes a political position? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I say to the member that that is exactly the kind of situation the Exclusive Brethren found themselves in. They were spending large amounts of money with no attribution and no address on trying to influence the election campaign. Does the member want to see that carry on or not?