Katene Rahui: Electoral (Administration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Katene Rahui: Electoral (Administration) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10628] 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 Issues of electoral integrity are of special interest to every party in this House so we join with other speakers to acknowledge the important work being done in this Electoral (Administration) Amendment Bill. It is with real pleasure that we come to this bills in the wave of almost universal support across the House last night to address tobacco use and we note the widespread support across Parliament today for the legislative process around this bill. It is great to be experiencing the politics of consensus rather than the politics of conflict. 
The quality of the administration of by-elections and general elections is a vital component of an effective electoral system. Efficient administration can enhance equitable democratic participation a goal that we in the Maori Party have a keen interest in promoting. The Maori Party was formed as a channel through which Maori could direct their interest in Government to achieve participation in Parliament. Our existence addresses the first issue and we hope that electoral administration will work in a way to ensure that all New Zealanders can have confidence in the system with which they place their votes. Yet our experience out in the world is that we have been disappointed in the way in which the system operates as it has not always been efficient or integrated. The structure of the three agencies has not always been well understood by voters. The potential for confusion over which agency has responsibility for what has been evident and we have been unconvinced that the complexity of the tripartite arrangement has been helpful. 
Several administrative problems have arisen in Maori electorates which although isolated we believe should have been avoided. My colleague Hone Harawira told me that in the 2005 election voting papers ran out in several polling places in Te Tai Tokerau by mid-afternoon on polling day. It appears that a tangihanga had taken place bringing an influx of mourners into the area and there was an inadequate supply of ballot papers to cope. In the Tamaki Makaurau electorate in that same election some voting papers were not available for voters on the Maori roll in the South Auckland area until mid-morning. In Manurewa there had been a lack of Maori electoral rolls for a couple of hours as well. In other electorates electorate votes were disallowed because incorrect voting papers were issued. Concerns were also raised about reported instances of voters being confused about whether they were on the Maori roll or general roll. Those are just a few of the complaints that we have received pertaining to the administration of elections. 
Other matters have caused offence such as the incorrect pronunciation of Maori names by issuing officers in some polling places. It is not just a problem of causing offence; the problem is that if people are called an incorrect name—for example I often get called “Mrs Ka-teen” or things like that—they will not recognise their names and will not respond. These are real problems for us. As a political party the Maori Party has taken these issues as appropriate to either the Chief Electoral Officer or the Electoral Commission. Sometimes local representatives have raised their concerns with Electoral Enrolment Centre personnel. In general we have always been satisfied with the responses received but there is always a risk that in sharing concerns with one agency it might have been more appropriate to share with another or that a strategic response to the issues is limited by the fact that all of the key players are not in the same room together. 
When the idea to split the three agencies first came up in the inquiry into the 2005 general election we were not supportive. We know that many of our members appreciated the way in which the Electoral Enrolment Centre operated locally and was in touch with its community. The view at that time was that to replace its functions with a single Wellington-based operation would be detrimental. We also thought that to move to a single body would be an enormous task that would not be easily achieved without a risk of disruption to elections. It was our view that any changes should be contemplated with great caution. However as we thought further about the value of creating an amalgamated electoral administrative entity we have warmed to the idea of reducing the duplication of functions the confusion and the costs and complexities for political parties candidates and the general public. In light of our earlier concerns we also support the phasing in of the changes to ensure that we minimise any disruption particularly to the successful operation of the 2011 general election. 
If we could be so bold we would like to recommend some immediate priorities for the work programme for the new Electoral Commission. We support the thrust of many of the public submissions that said that the Electoral Commission could play a crucial role in informing and educating the public about the pros and cons of the various voting systems including MMP first past the post Single Transferable Vote etc. Dr Helena Catt was particularly positive about the inclusion of a clear education role for the new entity and the recognition of a role in encouraging participation. I want to draw particular attention to the submission from the Nelson Bays Community Law Service not just because it is in Nelson—I am from Nelson and the best people come from Nelson—but also because it had something really good to say. Its submission articulated its wish for the new commission to be in a better position to prevent the issues that confronted Maori voters in the last election. The Nelson experience reinforced our finding that in some polling booths there were an insufficient number of Maori roll voting papers and there was a lack of Maori roll data. It was the service’s view that both issues would have been extremely easy to rectify yet a lack of information had the immediate and adverse impact of compromising the right of individual Maori to vote. 
Another point the service raised was the suggestion that participation in democracy by our youth would be encouraged if all New Zealanders were automatically entered on the general roll at 18 years of age or older or if Maori entered on the Maori roll with the option to transfer to the general roll. This is a great idea. In fact it is an idea that can be found in the Maori Party policy manifesto  
He Aha Te Mea Nui 
. Combining these two ideas—the need to promote the value of voting as a concept of a healthy democracy and the issue about raising the youth vote—leads me to suggest that the new Electoral Commission could gain considerable value through looking at the campaign to get people enrolling and voting that took place in the United States. We have a large number of Maori who are not enrolled particularly young voters. Some estimations of the 2008 campaign put the figure at around 100000 people who were not enrolled in the vital age group between 18 and 35 years old. This could be an area where the electoral agencies could invest in schools including kura kaupapa Maori to promote the message that every vote counts. 
Another issue that we would like to put forward to enhance the role of the new Electoral Commission is the one around cultural competency. As I have noted there were concerns at some booths about the accuracy of the Maori roll and how election-day staff dealt with their needs. There were particular instances where staff failed to search for Maori voters on the Maori roll and as a consequence gave them general roll forms. These were voters who came to the booth without their early vote cards. The default position tended to be that they were immediately assumed to be general roll voters. In some of our electorates there were people including kuia and koroua who needed assistance but there was a lack of resources at booths to encourage them to ask for help. Another issue that came through to us about election day was the significant queues. In some cases where there were long queues of voters standing in the Maori roll line some of these voters became impatient and left. Our view is that we should be doing everything we can to encourage voters and time delays do nothing to promote that. It is felt that some training in how to engage with Maori to ensure successful face-to-face contact would be invaluable. 
All these matters of detail are important and there are many more. We are pleased to support the second reading of this bill and we look forward to further debate on such a crucial issue.