King Annette: Electoral Finance Bill — In Committee 
King Annette: Electoral Finance Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:644;Page:13604] 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 This part contains the miscellaneous provisions of the Electoral Finance Bill. There are five subparts to it: “General provisions and penalties” “Regulations and transitional provisions” “Consequential amendments” “Amendments to the Broadcasting Act 1989” and “Amendments to the Electoral Act 1993”. It includes penalties for breaking electoral laws including the time limits for penalties to be laid and the liabilities of candidates party secretaries and third parties. The Justice and Electoral Committee recommended a substantial increase to the penalties for the most serious electoral offence: corrupt practice. A period of imprisonment is to be increased from 1 to 2 years. In addition for party secretaries and financial agents corrupt practice will carry a maximum fine of $100000 which is up from the $4000 in the Electoral Act. For all other persons the maximum fine will be $40000. 
This part also contains amendments to existing electoral law the Broadcasting Act 1989 and the Electoral Act 1993. The reason why these clauses are included in this bill is that a robust election law needs robust enforcement. We know that not all parties care about that. After all we are still waiting for the National Party to pay its GST from the last election. These penalties will make sure that those who have no regard for democracy and for the rights of everyone to be heard will be accountable for their actions. 
This bill also gives more tools to the referees who protect the system. I think that even the National Party agrees with us on this point. After all in July this year Bill English said: “National opposes covert campaigns and the law already requires transparency. However the law doesn’t work because of the lack of sanctions.” So I look forward to the National Party’s support for the sanctions that have been put in Part 3. 
There is also an opportunity to discuss the Supplementary Order Paper in the name of Christopher Finlayson. He wants to take out the words “third party” from the bill and replace them with “interest group”. I have to say how PC is that? After all his own leader and deputy leader have found nothing wrong with the use of the term “third party”. Mr English said in December 2006: “We are happy to outlaw third-party advertising that attacks political parties”. Mr Key said in August this year: “National also thinks third parties should be cut some slack.” 
Christopher Finlayson 
: I raise a point of order Madam Chair. I am sorry to interrupt the Minister but I just thought I should point out to her that this material is not relevant because the question of nomenclature for “third party” or “interest group” was decided in the context of Part 1. So this discussion is redundant. 
The CHAIRPERSON 
: There are some amendments so the discussion is in order. Would the Minister please continue. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Just to conclude in September—only a couple of months ago—Mr Key said he supported some controls on third parties. So it seems a good time to be able to debate Mr Finlayson’s amendments. I think this is a very important part of the bill in terms of there being a need to have sanctions on those who would like to rort the system. I commend Part 3 to the Committee.