Bennett David; Rurawhe AdrianHon DAVID BENNETT (National—Hamilton East): Thank you Mr Chair. My copy of my amendment is with you as well so bear with me as I take it from memory. Essentially what I wanted to do was to follow up on a question I've asked the Minister a number of times and he has refused to answer when he has stood up and spoken in this committee. Just 10 minutes ago he spoke in this committee and did not answer this question—that is how that proportionality will work out in regards to constituent MPs against list MPs. He's been very cute in not replying to that after many requests in this committee.I go back to the very example he used in the earlier parts of the debate when we talked about a by-election result. His words were that it is the expression of the will of the electorate". So he is very happy for the "expression of the will of the electorate" to mean that there can be a change in the dimensions of this House through a by-election but at the same time he will not take that to the full extent when it comes to list MPs and believes that list MPs aren't subject to that rule.You can't have it both ways in this Parliament. I request that the Minister explain why he is devaluing list MPs and he is—he is continuing to do that. I know that he's a list MP himself and I know he feels this Parliament hasn't been just to him over the years and that's not our fault. There's many other list MPs on the other side of the House who will feel unjustly treated through their political careers as well but that is just the nature of being a list MP which is no different in this House from being a constituent MP.His very words this afternoon were that if a member won a by-election there would be no problem with the proportionality change in the House—if New Zealand First for example picked up another member and the New Zealand National Party lost a member because of the proportionality change from losing a by-election. "No problem with that at all." he said in this committee. But if there is any change in list membership because a member of a party disagrees with their leader then no that cannot happen. That disproportionality cannot occur in the Minister's view. I request that he explain that to this committee: how he can have two points of view in regard to the different MPs when under our system every MP is exactly the same every MP has the same vote.I request that the Green Party take time tonight to look into their soul because the Green Party—Hon Tim Macindoe: They've sold it.Hon DAVID BENNETT: The Green Party has sold it. But I request that the Green Party look at these amendments and look at this bill and have one more go at it. This is not necessarily for the Green Party to think about tonight. What I said in my last speech is very true. This is the tip of the iceberg for the Green Party in relationship to the other parties in this House. This is the end of the green movement. We've seen that in political polls around the world. Around the world the green movement is being shut out as the two major parties tend towards more green policies. The green movement needs to show that they have a reason for people to vote for them and there will be no reason for them to be voted in in the future if the Green Party doesn't stand up to people like Winston Peters and doesn't stand up for principles and doesn't stand up for the values that they believe in. Every time the Green Party bends over and lets Winston Peters run the roost in this House the Green Party loses more votes and more votes and more votes. I don't want to see the Parliament without a Green Party in it.CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): I'm sorry to interrupt the member but it has come time for me to report progress.House resumed.Progress reported.Report adopted.The House adjourned at 9.55 p.m."