Brownlee GerryHon GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam): So here we are taking up quite a bit of Parliament's extra time where select committees could have been sitting and progressing some of the matters that might have improved the general statistics around the year of delivery for the Government—although that would be a pretty hard call to make. So we are here trying to solve a $66 problem. That's the average amount of donation as pointed out by my colleague Dr Nick Smith received anonymously by political parties at the last election.Hon Tim Macindoe: How much?Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: $66. That's why we're here today to change the law to make a $16 difference in the average amount of anonymous donation that has to be declared.You can't help thinking that this is in the House today because the Government had a very bad week last week. The Government had a particularly bad weekend just before the House resumed on Tuesday. I think the Prime Minister gave her Ministers a bit of a hurry up and said Right we've got to get on the front foot. We're being buried by this New Zealand First anonymous donation scandal so we need to put something out there that tells the people of New Zealand that we're on the case." Andrew Little would have said "I've got something: I can solve the $66 problem." by coming to the House with this amendment bill that we're dealing with today.But the real question is: why is there no reference as Dr Smith has said to the foundations or other entities that are set up to support political parties? Why is there no reference to that? Now we have in the name of Dr Nick Smith an amendment to the bill that would put those foundations under the same regime as anybody else. The National Party has a foundation; we declare every donation to that foundation.The real question is: where did the $840000 that New Zealand First received in the lead-up to the 2017 election come from? Where did it come from this $500000 into this capital-funded foundation and $340000 into their campaign itself? All anonymous; no declarations at all. But here we have them colluding with the Government to take up Parliament's time to solve a problem about a few people from offshore who save up their pennies and send their $66 to the Green Party—because they're the ones who are the major beneficiaries of anonymous donations.Just think about the numbers again given by Dr Smith this morning: two for Labour; three for National so we got our you know nearly $200; four for New Zealand First that apparently was only a small fraction around $250 of the unexplained $840000; and then 10 about $660 to $700 for the Green Party.We're here solving that problem to make sure that in future all of those donations coming to around about 15 donations—so what's that? About 15—oh I can't think how much it is. A very tiny amount. A very tiny amount—a very tiny amount. But this bill does not deal with the issue that New Zealanders are struggling with at the moment and that is the high and mighty finger-pointing exercise at everybody else by New Zealand First while there is no explanation for the $840000 that made its way into their kitty in the 2017 year. So the amendment that's been put up by Dr Smith would mean that that sort of arrangement comes under the scrutiny of the Electoral Commission. Mind you let's be clear that if the Electoral Commission do use the legislation they've got now then New Zealand First is in some trouble—no question about that—but that is something for them to announce not for us to announce here in the House today. What I will say is simply this: if we are going to have Parliament's time taken up on an electoral amendment bill dealing with issues that are pressing it cannot be the $66 anonymous donations declared by parties; it has to be about the $840000 undeclared by New Zealand First."