Paraone Pita: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Paraone Pita: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7774] 
PITA PARAONE (NZ First) 
: 
 I am delighted to take part in this debate. Notwithstanding what this bill does which includes not least of all questioning the integrity of members of Parliament it will be responsible for electing—or should that be “selecting”—the next member of Parliament for New Plymouth. 
I refer to the issue of the commencement date: “This Act comes into force on the day on which it receives the Royal assent.” That date is unknown. I wonder whether unlike a whole lot of other legislation that this Government has recently introduced the uncertainty in terms of the date is related to the issue of the Treaty of Waitangi. I have no compunction in mentioning the Treaty of Waitangi because that was the first visa to be issued for this country and it allowed many of us to be here in this House today. 
I refer to immigration and the question of allegiance to our country. What is the symbol we all face when we give allegiance to anything particularly to our country? It is the flag. If that is the case then why does the subject of this bill—and we say that his allegiance is not in question—have a Dutch flag in his office which I suggest if I can go even further was paid for by the taxpayers of New Zealand? 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: As a Minister? 
PITA PARAONE 
: As a Minister. I have to ask myself where the allegiance of that member lies. 
The other issue is that Maori members on the Government side of the Chamber have been very silent in this debate. A number of them have talked about the importance of tino rangatiratanga. Does that mean that the time it takes before the royal assent is given to this bill will allow them to question the issue of tino rangatiratanga and where they stand in this debate? Do they agree that as a consequence of this bill one of their fellow members will have his position as an MP legally restored—someone who has shown allegiance to another power? Those Maori members who support the notion of tino rangatiratanga are quite happy to see that responsibility given to someone who has already shown his allegiance to another country. If that is tino rangatiratanga I would like them to go out on to the marae of this country and explain to the very people whom those members represent how that is tino rangatiratanga. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: There are too many people walking around the Chamber. Under Standing Order 82 members must be seated. 
PITA PARAONE 
: If it is OK for members of this House to break the law then why do the same rules not apply to many of my relations who break the law? Is it because they are Maori? I have to ask myself that. How will I be able to go out of this Chamber today and explain that to my relatives in the far north who try to lead a lawful life? Do I have to say: “No we’re all waiting for the royal assent. When the royal assent is give—I am sorry Joe Public Joe Marae Hohepa Public—one can’t break the law.”? That is not to say that I promote the idea that our people should go out and break the law but this is all about tino rangatiratanga.