Tanczos Nandor: Electoral Matters Bill — Second Reading 
Tanczos Nandor: Electoral Matters Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:621;Page:16756] 
NANDOR TANCZOS (Green) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of the Green Party to support this bill and this Justice and Electoral Committee report back. I will not make a lengthy speech because I sat in on only part of the select committee consideration of this bill. My co-leader Rod Donald was there for the bulk of it and of course he is well known for his erudite positions on electoral matters. I will not be able to do him justice if I carry on for too long so I would like to address just some of the issues in brief. 
We do support this bill because we think it makes a number of useful amendments to electoral matters. In particular the Greens are pleased to see that some of the recommendations that select committees have made over the years have been picked up. Recommendations from 1996 1999 and 2002 have been picked up particularly those in relation to broadcasting matters. If we look at the report back we can immediately see that three major things have been picked up: that the Electoral Commission will no longer be required to invite all broadcasters to provide free or discounted time for election programmes; that only registered political parties will be eligible for allocations of time and money; and the creation of more clarity around the issues of advertising during opening and closing addresses. Those are matters that we are supportive of and commend. 
We are also pleased to see clarification of the law around when MPs must vacate their seats because of their relationships with foreign nations. In particular there is clarification that MPs must vacate their seats when they acquire a fresh foreign allegiance while in office—an allegiance to a foreign State head of State or power. That provision is broadened slightly to cover situations where the allegiance is to a person rather than a country or State. Also the allegiance has to be a fresh one. The bill clarifies areas where there has been confusion before. A member who had dual citizenship who was simply renewing a passport might in the past have been seen to be breaching the Act. The bill now makes it clear that is not the case. That is an obvious and sensible thing to do. And the bill clarifies that where a member accepts nomination as a candidate for a foreign governing body that is obviously a situation where a member has a clear conflict of interest and that person should have to vacate his or her seat in those circumstances. 
However we were along with other members of the committee incensed at the continued domination of the Electoral Commission by the old parties and their refusal to acknowledge that we are no longer in a first-past-the-post Parliament that this is an MMP environment and that things have changed. The question of party representation on the Electoral Commission has to be addressed. It is interesting to see the old parties of Labour and National find their common interest when it comes to these things and shut out all of the other smaller parties. Yes it is a shameful thing but that is what they did in the select committee. I have to say it was quite bizarre to hear discussions in the select committee in which both National and Labour members were adamant that when their party was the non-Government party its representative was able to represent all of the other non-Government parties of Parliament. They were saying that when they provide the Opposition representative that representative can represent everyone. The Opposition representative technically covers everybody including United Future members who support the Government on confidence and supply issues while at the same time viciously attacking it for its “think pink” policies at every opportunity and attacking the very principles that underpin the Labour Party—they do that at the same time as they say they support the Government—and also the Greens who have helped the Labour Party Government pass all of the progressive legislation that it has passed. All of the progressive legislation that it has passed has had the support of the Greens yet at the same time we have had the door slammed in our faces when it comes to developing a more friendly working relationship with the Government. The National Party thinks it is able to represent the full scope of these things and that is quite bizarre. 
Of course it is quite unacceptable that only two parties are represented on the Electoral Commission when it comes to defining and deciding issues around funding for political parties with regard to broadcasting and other matters. The Greens ACT and United Future have said that party representation should simply be abolished; that actually it is not just a question of getting more representation that there should not be party political representation on that body and that it is quite inappropriate that it should continue. It is unfortunate that it has remained in place. 
Judy Turner 
: I agree. 
NANDOR TANCZOS 
: We do agree on some things. I have to say I was even more disgusted by the position of New Zealand First which looked like it would support the position of the Greens ACT and United Future on this matter then suddenly turned round and presented the committee with the comment that the commission should have two additional members: one for New Zealand First and one for the other parties represented in Parliament at the time. What a bizarre thing to say! That party had five members in the last Parliament. Their luck is in and their numbers have gone up in this Parliament although some members of the public could be forgiven for thinking there is actually only one member of New Zealand First. I think some of its own MPs think there is only one member of New Zealand First judging by their own comments in the media. When asked: “What do you do?” one of them—I cannot remember which one—said: “Oh I don’t do anything. I leave it to Winston.” We can all be forgiven for thinking that there is really only one member of New Zealand First and the others are just kind of voting fodder to make him look good by showing he has some back-up. That was quite a weird reference to find in the report back of the select committee. 
It is not acceptable that party political representation on the Electoral Commission remains particularly within an MMP environment. As I have said it shows how the T. rex parties find their common interest when it comes to these matters and we think it is a real shame. Nevertheless we do support the bill.