Quinn Paul: Electoral Referendum Bill — First Reading 
Quinn Paul: Electoral Referendum Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10419] 
PAUL QUINN (National) 
: 
 I start by saying that for me it is indeed a humbling privilege to be able to serve as a member of Parliament in this House and it is a further privilege—and one that I treat with great honour and care—to have been appointed to the Electoral Legislation Committee. However although I hope to contribute fully to the discussion and decision-making process on the Electoral Referendum Bill I may not be able to say—as one speaker from the other side Pete Hodgson said—that I was responsible for this and that. Even if I could say that I guarantee that I will not be able to stand here and say that when any further bill is reviewed. 
I next congratulate the Minister of Justice who I think has done an outstanding job in maintaining an even hand across Parliament and bringing this bill before us with the support of all the parties in terms of the consultation he has undertaken and the support he has obtained thus far for the process that we have embarked upon. The commitment that he has led is to be held—I say this because Chris Finlayson would not let me get away with not saying it—in stark contrast to what happened over the previous change to the electoral finance legislation. I assure the Opposition that the Minister will ensure that the same consultation and even-handedness that we have seen so far will carry on. 
Obviously I think unlike the previous speaker from Labour that it is timely that this review takes place. When MMP came in many—in fact I think the vast majority—of the populace were of the view and understanding that a review would be held sooner rather than later. Clearly as time passed people agitated for that review to be held. National made a commitment to do so in its election promises; I think it might have been the last promise that we made when we went to the people at the 2008 election. So it is good that the review is to take place. 
The only other comment that I really want to make is that the most important thing in a democracy is to have freedom of expression and freedom of speech. We have heard comments about a spending cap. I say what is important is that people are able to express themselves freely and frankly in any form that they choose. Whether that is a contribution by way of money or by way of labour—by putting themselves forward as volunteers to deliver pamphlets—so be it. People should not be restricted from being able to contribute in the way that they choose. We sit here and criticise people who choose to spend money as a way of contributing. For me if we are to talk about a cap then it must be called a value cap and everything must be valued—not just the dollars. Let us talk about a value cap because everything needs to be balanced. As far as I am concerned we should not run down people who contribute by way of donations. If that means costing volunteer hours then so be it. If we are to put caps on we should put caps on everything. With those few words I say I look forward to deliberating and receiving submissions on the bill in the select committee. Thank you.