Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Helensville): Thank you very much sir. Like others I speak against the referendum Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 292 in the name of Darroch Ball of New Zealand First. It was once said Isn't it funny how all those in favour of abortion have already been born?" The aphorism of Ronald Reagan—RIP—is appropriate to reflect upon as we consider whether a referendum is a good way of deciding such a fundamental matter as this.The rights of vulnerable minorities are disproportionately engaged which is the point that the New Zealand First members who have spoken in favour of the referendum have failed to acknowledge. There's the possibility of a tyranny of the majority. That means that on certain fundamental issues it is right that those who are in a position yes of power and yes of privilege—that is a position that we 120 do occupy admittedly temporarily but that's called a democracy. I presume the Hon Ron Mark would not have it any other way. So it is and as a matter of consistency with previous stances that I've taken along with Simon O'Connor I too resist the call that there should be a referendum on this matter.It has been said sometimes that males should not have the right to speak on the matter. I think far too many of my fellow males in this country do abrogate their responsibilities in relation to child-rearing so I think that we have a bigger societal issue—my sex does in relation to that.Let me simply note that some of the strongest pro-life advocates that I've heard and the most compelling are females who speak from a point of view of connection—literal physical connection—to the issues involved. I won't repeat the points that others have made in relation to the New Zealand First position. It is a matter of consistency over time I will acknowledge that much but in order for that to be true then the third reading vote if the SOP on the referendum fails should reflect that; otherwise it will be clearly noticed by those who watch such things I would say.The debate has progressed through the House and the committee of the whole House producing unusual alliances. There have been intersections of issues that have thrown together unlikely political bedfellows in a sense—a classic example would be that of the free speech or free expression in relation to the so-called safe zones in which some of us have found ourselves voting together with others whom we're not normally meeting in these lobbies the Ayes and the Noes on conscience issues. But nevertheless that particular matter I thought was one of a matter of principle and I applaud those who saw it along similar lines notwithstanding that they're on the other side of the debate.My point in relation to the proposal that there be a referendum is that there are complexities that do play out in this House to which ordinary New Zealanders getting on with their lives as best they can in the face of a global pandemic this week as it happens are not necessarily concerned with and should not necessarily have to be concerned with either.The detail is important likewise. There is a considerable amount of detail in this bill and many of us have thrashed that out. Let me just say that I have much more respect for those who have spoken and engaged on the detail—notwithstanding that they have come to different conclusions than me—than those who simply refuse to engage. I do note that if New Zealand First wishes to state some sort of populist but apparently principled stance as lawmakers then their engagement with SOPs other than those in their own name would be a really good indication of that; sadly that has been lacking.Others have made the point around democracy and the need to respect that in the context of the select committee process rather than simply grandstand at the end of the process in relation to the referendum. I think New Zealand First voters might say to them such as they are now that in abrogating their responsibility in the way that they're proposing this committee of the whole House does "You had one job." That would be the expectation of what I would say to New Zealand First from their voters: "You had one job." You are lawmakers duly elected to this place. You are supposed to spend the time that you have in this place to consider these things not pass the buck. As such there is no way that I can support this referendum SOP; I will be voting against it accordingly."