Smith NickHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): Thank you Madam Chair for the opportunity to speak to new clause 7 which is actually very important in the context of this bill. The unusual new electoral law that we will now have is one in which a political party removes a member's membership and consequential to that they can now be dismissed from this Parliament. Previously whether a person was a member of a political party was not critical to their membership of the House and this goes all the way back to our deep traditions where a member was a member of Parliament first and a member of a political party second. So the important amendments that National is wanting to advance in new clause 7 relate to ensuring that political parties have democratic rules. If you think this is merely an academic question I'd ask the committee to reflect on the rules of the New Zealand First Party that are a matter of law right now: a New Zealand First member has to sign a contract for $300000—effectively the equity of about half a home—in the event that they fall out with Winston Peters.I don't think there is a member of this House who does not view with contempt that rule in New Zealand First. Far from there being a redundancy payment where you know if you have a blue with your boss and you get laid off—and I hear Labour members say that you should have a redundancy payment in the event that you're dismissed—what New Zealand First has is the opposite and that is: if you leave the New Zealand First Party you have to pay the party $300000. And to give this Parliament some idea of the lack of integrity—so ironic given the name of this bill—by the Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand in one breath he says every one of his MPs has signed the contract and a month later he says that none of his MPs has signed that contract. I'd love the New Zealand First member who's in the Chamber to provide clarity around that.Why does that matter? Because the rules of political parties are now far more important in terms of our democracy because if any member of this House loses their party membership they're on exit out the door and are gone from this Parliament. So in clause 7 we are saying that it should be a new requirement for parties to have a proper process if they are going to remove a member of Parliament's party membership. Why should we do that? Well I have to say that you need only look at the conduct of the New Zealand First Party to give you the willies about the way in which—Jamie Strange: What?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Indeed. The member may not have been here when Brendan Horan was thrown out of New Zealand First. Actually I could give you a long list of MPs—Hon Members: Oh!Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Well isn't it interesting. Members opposite think this is a laughing matter. They think our values as a democratic country and the right to sit in this Parliament are a laughing matter. Iain Lees-Galloway thinks it's all a big hoot. That's the value that he puts on our democracy. He thinks that if a party leader like Winston Peters wants to dismiss one of these New Zealand First MPs well what the heck? We on this side of the House take a very different view of the seriousness and the importance of our liberal democratic values and we want to ensure that the rules of political parties have some facet of democracy if parties are going to exercise these new powers. I would love the Minister in the chair or a member opposite to argue why we should not require a political party to have fair and democratic rules before they go down this Draconian road of removing a member from this House.Now the specific amendment simply adds to the requirements that political parties have when they register their rules with the Electoral Commission. I was able to find out from the Electoral Commission—not from New Zealand First; they don't have their party rules up on some website; no no no!Chris Bishop: The website's not even up online.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: As my colleague points out the openness and transparency of this Government is so great that the pivotal party in this Parliament doesn't even treat New Zealanders with dignity by having their own website and making that information publicly available. So the provision in new clause 7 requires a party not only to have fair and democratic rules around when they want to kick someone out but actually to disclose those rules. If this Government is going to stand true to its values of being the most open and transparent Government ever where is there a more important place for that openness and transparency than in the way in which members of Parliament may be booted out?The Minister in the chair Andrew Little has made the point that Oh look there are some other countries that have provisions." In fact in question time the Minister in the chair made reference to Japan. Here is the key difference though: in Japan if a member voluntarily resigns from the Japanese democratic party or the liberal party they're required to resign from Parliament. But this bill goes a lot further. In this bill it's not a matter of whether someone voluntarily resigns; if they get forced and frogmarched out of their party then they are dismissed from the Parliament.Do you know which countries around the world have the provisions that are in this bill? Well let me list them. The officials provided the advice. They have that law in those wonderful democratic countries—fellow members you know those countries that you dream that New Zealand was like! Zimbabwe Sierra Leone and Pakistan are the only three countries.Hon Iain Lees-Galloway: "Serra Lone"?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Now Mr Iain Lees-Galloway thinks it's funny. He think it's funny that we are passing a law that will align our Electoral Act with countries like Zimbabwe.Kieran McAnulty: Don't forget "Serra Lone".Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Yeah that's right. So why doesn't the member take a call and defend these electoral laws rather than having some joy and some fun around pronunciation? You see those are the values with which those corrupt members opposite—CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Order! Order!Hon Dr NICK SMITH: —view the democracy of this country.Simeon Brown: They don't like that do they?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: They don't like that do they?Darroch Ball: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I think it's quite obvious what the point of order is. That member can't be saying that we're corrupt on this side of the Chamber.CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Yes I agree with the member. We were tracking quite well until that point. Could you please withdraw and apologise.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I withdraw and apologise.I say to that member opposite—I say to him—why are we passing an Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill that aligns our democracy with a country like Zimbabwe? I say quite openly: Zimbabwe is a corrupt country. It is a disgraceful country. It is a country where members of Parliament have been dismissed from their House of Representatives for—you know what?—holding a press conference without their leader's permission and for raising questions of financial propriety within the Zimbabwe Government. That's the sort of law that members opposite want to put on our law books. They wonder why we are debating with passion these issues this morning: because those things matter Iain Lees-Galloway and I ask you to have a look in the mirror—have a look in the mirror—around the anti-democratic provisions that you are putting into our Electoral Act that are a disgrace and need some checks as we are proposing with clause 7.So my challenge to the Minister in the chair is: now we're giving the power to political parties to be able to remove members of Parliament why is it not proper that there is some transparency and some openness about those rules that those political parties should have to operate before they initiate these Draconian provisions of removing a member from this House? If we are going to have this sort of provision on our law books at the very very least we need to know that a political party has registered with the Electoral Commission a proper process a fair process for that member of Parliament to be able to contest and to provide some check on these anti-democratic and Draconian powers that are being asked of our Electoral Act."