Sowry Roger: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
Sowry Roger: Electoral (Vacancies) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7768] 
Hon ROGER SOWRY (Deputy Leader—NZ National) 
: 
 This part—which has two clauses one being “Commencement” and the other “Expiry”—is important because it shows the nonsense that this House is putting through today because of the Government’s desire to make sure that the law as it applies to everyone else does not apply to one of its own. That is the simple issue here. 
The Government has started off by spending 15 minutes of the 4 or so hours we have spent debating the bill by justifying it which is a pretty half-hearted justification. The justification has centred around the fact that the law was so archaic that it needed to be done away with and that Mr Duynhoven broke an old archaic law so it does not really matter and we should just change it. 
So where do we change it? We change it in this part and we do not change it for ever but just for the course of this Parliament. Once the election has been held that is fine. We will go back to the old archaic law. Presumably if another Labour MP breaks it the Labour Party will try to change it again for the next Parliament. If the law is so bad I ask Mr Barker why it is not being changed for good. Why not do that in this bill? Why just change it for this Parliament? Because that simply does not make sense if the law is as archaic and as bad as Mr Barker has said. The two principles do not add up I say to the Minister. Mr Duynhoven will get his Dutch passport out of this. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: New passport. 
Hon ROGER SOWRY 
: A new passport perhaps. Who knows? What happens in the next Parliament presuming that he is an MP if he reapplies? Will we have to come back to debate another bill? Will we be back here changing the law for him again? 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: No we won’t; they won’t be in Government. 
Hon ROGER SOWRY 
: That is right. The Labour Party will not be in Government because New Zealanders—and Labour members should listen to the radio at the moment—are outraged at this. 
Government Members 
: Ha ha! 
Hon ROGER SOWRY 
: Government members laugh. Labour has the view which is the height of arrogance that Mr Duynhoven broke the law but the Government will change the law for him and it will be OK because Labour is the Government and it can do that. It is above all that nonsense of having to live by the same rules as everybody else. It is so tiresome is it not when one is caught out breaking the law? It was fine when there was an allegation that Mr Smith broke the law. The Government let him go and fight his one in the court. We had Labour Ministers saying that he should be held responsible for his actions. That is what Margaret Wilson said. Damien O’Connor said: “The law is the law and it should apply.” Then about 2 weeks later Mr Duynhoven broke the law. Where is “The law is the law and it should apply.” then? Oh no we have a different standard of citizenship for Mr Duynhoven. He is allowed to have Parliament spend 10 to 12 hours of its time changing the law to suit him. 
Dianne Yates 
: Can the member sit down? 
Hon ROGER SOWRY 
: The member for Hamilton East who is sitting there knitting asks me to sit down. I say to Dianne Yates that people in this country expect us to be here debating. They do not expect us to be sitting here knitting away and making decisions that change the way parliamentarians are elected. At the end of this day Mr Duynhoven will not have been elected by the people of New Plymouth but by the knitter from Hamilton and her Labour colleagues. That is who will have elected him not the people because this report has found that he should have already gone.