Electoral (Māori Electoral Option) Legislation Bill

I present a legislative statement on the Electoral (Māori Electoral Option) Legislation Bill.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: That legislative statement is published under the authority of the House and can be found on the Parliament website.

I move, That the Electoral (Māori Electoral Option) Legislation Bill be now read a third time.

This bill promotes Māori participation and engagement with the electoral process and it has been a long time coming. This change is about fairness and supports our 2020 manifesto commitment to continue to protect the integrity of New Zealand elections and voters’ access to the polls, including a review of financing rules. The timing and frequency of the Māori electoral option has been raised as an issue for a number of years, including in the Electoral Commission’s reports after each general election, and in the subsequent select committee inquiries. Māori have been calling for the removal of a major barrier to electoral participation for years.

Although, generally speaking, we have a robust electoral system that gives priority to making it easy for voters to take part, the timing and the frequency of the Māori electoral option is confusing and frustrating for Māori voters, and their ability to take part meaningfully in elections. The Māori electoral option is a four-month period that occurs every four to six years where Māori voters can choose to move between the general and Māori electoral rolls. The option period is the only time when Māori voters can change their roll choice.

I just first, briefly, want to acknowledge my predecessor the Hon Kris Faafoi, who stewarded this bill into the House for its first readings. I also, too, want to acknowledge my colleagues, particularly Parliamentary Under-Secretary Rino Tirikatene for his constant and consistent pleading to this House that we make these amendments. Both those members, they picked up—or, rather, submitters picked up—on the themes. Both the Ministry of Justice and the Justice Committee were in no doubt that the change is well and truly overdue. The last Māori electoral option was in 2018 and the next one is due to be in 2024. This timing means that, without changes being made, Māori will be locked into their roll choice for two general elections—the first in 2020 and then the second in 2023.

Submissions were clear that the four-month period every five to six years for Māori voters to change rolls is unjustified, unfair, and often difficult to understand. Māori voters can feel trapped on an electoral roll that doesn’t represent who they are. This undermines the trust and confidence in the electoral system, and we know Māori are already less likely to be engaged in the system than other voting groups. Many submissions noted more flexibility to changing rolls would allow the Crown to better meet its obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

I want to acknowledge the chairperson Ginny Andersen and her colleagues on the Justice Committee for their work in stewarding through this bill. This bill amends the Electoral Act to introduce the continuous model, and the Local Electoral Act is also amended to reflect that change. It also makes consequential changes to the Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Maori Constituency Empowering) Act, and the bill has received strong support at the local government level. It is important that the rules for local elections and general elections are aligned as much as possible.

The continuous model introduced in the bill allows Māori voters to change rolls at any time, except during certain pre-election periods. Māori voters will not be able to switch rolls in the lead-up to a parliamentary by-election. The by-election exception recognises that Māori voters can switch rolls in order to vote in a by-election that they may not have otherwise voted in. It follows the principle that the voters for a by-election are expected to be largely the same population who voted in the electorate at the previous general election. It also recognises that by-elections involve a small poll of voters focused on a single electoral outcome.

Following amendments made during the committee of the whole House stage last night, Māori voters will also not be able to switch rolls in the three months before polling day for general elections and local triennial elections. These new exception periods align with the period leading up to a general election when, traditionally, parties and candidates begin stepping up their electoral campaigns and voters start turning their attention more towards their upcoming electoral choice. We know that more voters attempt to change rolls in the period immediately before a general election. Over 22,000 people tried to change rolls in the lead-up to the 2020 general election.

As a result of the changes in the bill, the Electoral Commission must provide Māori voters with information about the type of roll they are enrolled on and the differences between the Māori and the general election rolls before general and local triennial elections. This will provide Māori with the opportunity to change rolls, should they wish to, before the exception period begins.

The bill has also needed to accommodate for the rare situations where the three-month period leading up to a general election is not possible, or where the Prime Minister announces changes to a polling day. The bill also adds back in some technical provisions that are in the current Act but weren’t required in the bill as introduced.

This bill will go through this House in unanimous fashion. I want to particularly acknowledge my colleagues across the House—Paul Goldsmith and his contemporaries—for the way that they have engaged with the Government with respect to the amendments that came through in the Supplementary Order Paper last night. I want to acknowledge Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, who have been passionate advocates for these amendments as well. I want to acknowledge Golriz Ghahraman and the Green Party for their consistent advocacy for these amendments in this bill. I want to acknowledge Nicole McKee, who spoke with her colleagues, and through some discussions, the ACT Party, I understand, will be supporting these amendments. This is an impressive state for this House, recognising the constitutional significance of our House getting to a point of collegiality and recognising the significance of the amendments proposed. I thank every single member that has participated in terms of getting our House to where it is today.

Others will speak to, no doubt, their various personal experiences of what it is to change rolls or what it might mean for their young up-and-coming siblings or children as they start to talk with them more about the significance of voting, what it means to participate in either roll, and how it makes New Zealand a little bit unique in the global sphere. I am glad that these discussions, hopefully, will be happening in the home and at schools to increase participation of all New Zealanders in our democratic processes.

I’m incredibly pleased to be stewarding through this bill this afternoon. I look forward to Māori having greater flexibility to be able to change to a roll that best reflects who they are for the 2023 upcoming general election. I commend this bill to the House—oh, sorry, sir. Finally, I just want to acknowledge the—sorry, sorry.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member is still on her feet.

I’m still on my feet. I really must acknowledge a couple of officials—Georgie Handley and Hayley Denoual for their work in terms of all of the various ups and downs and changes. I just want to acknowledge them. I commend this bill to the House.

Are you sure? The question is that the motion be agreed to.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s my pleasure to speak on this bill, which gives the ability for people on the Māori roll and on the general roll to switch between those two rolls at any time, with exceptions that I’ll come to in a moment. We’re moving away from the current situation where it’s generally an opportunity once in five years, following the census. We look at this in a pragmatic way in the sense that, in an ideal world, one should be able to choose which roll one is on a little bit more frequently than that and not be locked in, waiting for the next census.

The idea of it being based around the census was, of course, related to the very important need to ensure that the number of Māori seats is proportional to the number of people on the Māori roll so that we preserve the principle of equality of voting rights in this country, which is that all New Zealanders have an equal say in who governs them and who makes significant decisions about their lives. That’s why it has been based on the census, so as to get those numbers right. That process will continue, but not quite as rigidly as in the past. There will be a particular period once every five years where that number is arrived upon for the purposes of proportionality, and that’s as it should be.

Now, the question here was: how do we make it easier? That’s a simple thing that we’re doing here in this bill. I don’t buy some of the arguments that were put forward around saying that all this will increase turnout in voting and things like that. I think, fundamentally, the primary responsibility for getting people to vote is for the politicians who are seeking their votes. It’s the job of the politicians to persuade people to vote for them, and if people don’t vote in large numbers, well, that’s primarily the fault of the politicians and not somebody else’s problem to resolve. That’s a challenge for all of us: to persuade people to vote for us.

The National Party voted against this bill at the first reading, primarily because there weren’t any exceptions for the period around general elections and local body elections. When introduced by this Government, the bill said that you could change at any time—including on election day itself—between rolls. They had one exception for by-election periods, noting—as the previous Minister of Justice Kris Faafoi said—that the risk of tactical roll-switching would occur so that people living in one electorate facing a by-election in either the general or the Māori electorate that they also lived in could switch between the two and engage in the by-election. We thought that that logic applied equally to the period of a general election and local elections, and we were concerned that the same sort of tactical roll-switching could occur.

The Government, at length, listened to our argument and brought in the Supplementary Order Paper last night which achieves that. The legislation now means that there is a restriction around the general election period and local election periods, so we’ve indicated that we are prepared to support it. Now, this is a slightly unusual set of circumstances because, to be honest and frank—let’s not beat around the bush—the Government doesn’t usually agree to our proposals on these matters and on electoral reform matters. What’s different in this case, primarily, is that our votes are actually needed because this bill required 75 percent of the support of Parliament. Therefore, it would not have passed without our support.

Now, we could have, I suppose, driven a harder bargain for that vote. For example, we could have said, “Well, Minister, why don’t you apply the same level of bipartisanship to electoral finance rules?”, which are being rammed through against our wishes at the moment, or we could have driven bargains in all sorts of other areas. We didn’t do that because we didn’t think that was appropriate, because this is a matter regarding the ability of people to switch between rolls and to have their opportunity to vote. So once the Government did agree with our primary concerns, we were prepared to vote for it.

The only point that I would make is that it’s done in goodwill and we do strongly believe that electoral laws should be approached with a genuine attempt to get agreement across the aisle. There are bills currently before the House where the Government hasn’t followed that approach and doesn’t follow that approach. My suggestion is that they should, particularly in the area not just around electoral finance but also around that principle of equal voting rights, and what we’re seeing is that this bill doesn’t disturb that basic, fundamental principle that all New Zealanders should have an equal say in who governs them, who forms the Government, and who makes important decisions about their lives. But that principle, of course, is under attack right now at the local body elections, following the passage of the Canterbury Regional Council (Ngāi Tahu Representation) Bill against our implacable hostility.

This is a moment of bipartisanship across the House and I don’t want to spoil it entirely, but we do need to be honest that that bipartisanship doesn’t extend to some pretty fundamental issues around how our democracy works in this country. Moving away from the principle of all New Zealanders have equal voting rights is a very significant and, we think, a very poor and negative move which will make our country poorer and weaker and less cohesive. So we will continue to resist that, and I do implore the Government to take a more bipartisanship approach to that fundamental issue than they have so far.

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Can we have some of that partisanship focused on the bill, please, in the three minutes you have left, because we haven’t heard much about the bill to date.

Well, I hesitate to argue with the Speaker, but I don’t agree at all with his assessment. We’ve been talking, fundamentally, about the voting rights—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Everything but the bill—but if we could have the bill, please.

Thank you, very much, Mr Speaker. Anyway, you’ve disturbed my train of thought, but I’ll conclude it there, other than to say that we think this is something that we can celebrate as a House. This will be, in a small way, something that will certainly make it easier for people to switch between the Māori roll and the general roll, and that may certainly give greater flexibility to those people in those circumstances.

It’s all part of ensuring that our electoral system, which is one of the most precious things that we have as a country—it is one of the most precious bastions of our freedoms and our democracies, and we need to look after that and cherish it and make sure that it works effectively. In so far as this legislation helps, with our support, then we are happy to support it. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. I’m proud to be part of a Parliament that is removing a longstanding barrier to Māori participating, by making it easier for Māori to change rolls, between the Māori roll and the general roll.

Māori seats were created way back in 1867, and it’s a fascinating history to see how that changed over time. Way back then, it was done as a way of enabling landholders to vote, because, back in those days, Māori couldn’t vote. That was a long-fought fight. When I look back in the past, one thing struck me; it was back in 1986, when the royal commission into electoral law reform took a look at those seats. It was back then that they first stated that those Māori seats had begun to be seen as an expression of Māori status as tangata whenua in New Zealand. With that status, and that right also, should be the right to change freely between the two rolls, and so it’s good to see this bill being supported right across the House today.

I’d like to really acknowledge the other parties in the House for the constructive discussions. I know that we had a good debate around how to make this work in a way that we could all achieve agreement, and it’s good to see that the Supplementary Order Paper that was tabled last night and agreed upon will enable that three-month buffer area to go in place before a general election, as well as a by-election, which is what the bill already provided for. That was for the reason that there was a view that it might be a way of either gaming or strategically voting. It’s great to see that we can achieve agreement by having this voted on by all parties in the House, and I’d like to acknowledge ACT, the Māori Party, National, and the Greens for being able to do that.

Look, every year, I have people come to my office or I encounter those people on the Māori or the general roll who, in the months coming up to the general election, for one reason or another, wish to change rolls, and they’re always incredibly dismayed to learn that they cannot. It doesn’t seem right that, under the current rules, Māori don’t have the opportunity to change rolls until a really small window of time. The last Māori electoral option was in 2018, and, under the current rules, they wouldn’t be able to change until 2024 if it wasn’t for this bill being passed today. That means, unless the law is changed, Māori voters are locked into their choice of roll for two consecutive general elections, and that doesn’t seem right. So it’s good to enable people, I guess, to remove barriers as much as possible, to facilitate people voting. We know, when we look at our turn-out rates, some of the lower turn-out rates are in Māori seats, are in rural areas, and if we can encourage this information to flow right through New Zealand so that people know that they can change and, if they wish to, they have the right to feel connected to whichever seat, in whichever way they choose to do so—because that’s part of democracy in New Zealand.

I’d like to also note that this bill does fit with a wider plan that we have in place. It’s part of our 2020 manifesto commitment to continue to protect the integrity of New Zealanders’ voting rights, access to the polls—including reviewing, as has already been mentioned today, those financing rules, which we are also doing. It’s part of the two-track process that we’re doing. There are some changes coming into force before this election, but also a wider review of how our electoral system is working, whether our voting age is right, how those people overseas are being included, how we fund political parties, the length of our parliamentary term, the changes to the party vote threshold, and also the ratio of electorate seats to list seats. These are all critical issues to New Zealand’s democracy that are in a longer trajectory that we need to look at closely as we change and continue to evolve.

I’d like to conclude by saying that I’m really proud to have chaired the Justice Committee, to have heard all these submissions, to have worked alongside the Minister, the Hon Kiritapu Allan, some excellent officials, colleagues from across the House, to make New Zealand’s democracy stronger, and to enable people to vote as much as they possibly can. I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Firstly, can I just acknowledge the Minister, the Hon Kiritapu Allan, and the chair of the Justice Committee, Ginny Andersen, who has just sat down: the Minister for bringing the legislation to the committee, and the chair for doing a very good job of chairing the committee. I think that there was bipartisan effort on both sides. We wanted to make sure that we could pass this legislation, but we wanted to make sure that it was fair. So can I acknowledge the other members of the committee as well who are obviously in the House tonight.

I did take issue with one of the comments of the chairperson of the committee around participation. I don’t think that it was affecting the participation of someone to engage in our democracy, but I do accept the fact that it was affecting participation in terms of whether or not they’d chose to be on the general or on the Māori roll, and I think with this change, it has definitely helped with that without a doubt, and I assume that was the issue she was making in relation to that.

The bill replaces the current Māori electoral option with a continuous option. At present, electors of Māori descent can only change between the Māori and general electoral rolls in a four-month period that occurs every five to six years. So that did limit participation and choice, and the committee did recognise that. Of course, the continuous roll now means that, within that four-month period, they can choose to change between both the Māori and the general roll.

One of the issues that we talked about—and it’s something that all of us turn our minds to as representatives in our central government level but also as representatives at the local government level—is: how do we increase participation? How do we actually get people to want to use their right to vote? And it does puzzle me. I suppose, I’m probably being a bit naive, but when you look at our history as a country and the sacrifices that were made during the First World War and the Second World War to make sure that we actually retained those fundamental rights that we were able to protect and defend in what I think is one of the best democracies in the world, of course—and I see that my friend and colleague Harete Hipango is in the House today—a huge contribution was the 28th Māori Battalion; that was certainly involved in action during the Second World War and has become a very famous battalion not just here in New Zealand but globally in terms of the contribution that they made.

So it’s a message for all of us, I think, as a country that, when it comes to actually exercising and using that right to vote, we should always go back in time, and I know it’s hard to do sometimes and to think about the massive sacrifices that were made as a country—the massive individual sacrifices that were made and the massive sacrifices that were made by families—to actually allow us, and give us the right, to actually make that vote and cast that vote.

But, anyway, I’m getting a bit philosophical here. I just want to say that we support the bill. Again, I want to thank and acknowledge the Minister for being prepared to make the changes to the bill that would then allow us to be able to support it and make sure that it could come into the House today and that we could pass it. So thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

Kia ora e te Māngai o te Whare. I’m delighted to rise as a member of the Justice Committee and take a short call in support of this bill. I want to thank the Minister of Justice, as she has thanked her predecessor Mr Faafoi, for finally bringing to fruition something which has been long sought in successive electoral inquiries: the ability for people to switch between the Māori and general rolls according to their consciences and not to have to tolerate a wait of four to six years and a very short window of opportunity when it was open.

It seems to me that, in the protection of our democracy, the encouragement and the inclusivity of the voting process is absolutely crucial and, thus, this is important. It is important to assure tangata whenua that they have that ability to vote as they see their identity. So I am very proud to support it. I’m also very proud that, in an electoral change, we are doing this by consensus—that is extremely important when it comes to electoral law reform.

Finally, I want to give a shout-out to my colleague Minister Allan, because I think that’s the first time I have ever heard anyone thank the officials by name, who have worked on a difficult and important piece of legislation. Long may that sort of inclusivity, collegiality, and democratic approach to discussion continue. I commend this bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I would like to open by congratulating the Minister, the Hon Kiritapu Allan, for bringing this bill to the House—a very long-overdue change to our electoral system that makes it far more accessible and fair and actually just recognises the significance of the Māori roll. We know that arbitrary technical barriers to electoral access mean that fewer people vote. Fewer people voting means our democracy is weakened, and Māori are one of the groups for which we hold the most concern when it comes to access to our democracy.

We know that there are demographics that suffer worse, and Māori are one of those. And I know that my friend from the ACT Party will follow me, as her leader did, when I spoke on my own strengthening democracy member’s bill, and that party took great issue to this, but Māori do still suffer the consequences of colonisation and so does our democracy. So that is why this bill is important. The idea that Māori have to wait years to switch rolls never served a real purpose that was about tangata whenua voting and participating in our democracy; it always undermined Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Democracy is particularly important to me, and that is why my member’s bill—the first that I ever got to put into the ballot as a parliamentarian—was aiming to strengthen that democracy. And I just want to speak to the significance of us as a House of Representatives making these changes according to the recommendations of independent bodies like the Electoral Commission, like the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, and our Justice Committee after inquiries that often involve thousands of New Zealanders, including experts feeding in. I want to note that changes like this were deliberately buried by successive Governments. Politicking over our electoral laws does weaken democracy.

So what I wanted to do is to bring light to some of those changes that have been recommended by independent bodies after consultation or after expert inquiry and say, actually, we do need to get things like money out of our democracy, discrimination out of our democracy; that we need to encourage and recognise Māori participation through upholding Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

But I do want to say, on this particular bill, that we are also disappointed. Māori voters should be able to change rolls at any time: during a general election and during a by-election. There’s no reason that they shouldn’t, and we know that that change was introduced to what the Electoral Commission recommended because of politicking; because of negotiations with the Opposition that won the day and weakened what would have been the perfect outcome.

Now, the other night it was a bit sad that the National Party had the Hon Paul Goldsmith get up and read from their canned notes about what a devastating thing it would be if voters in an electorate voted strategically, and that we must prevent Māori from doing so—Paul Goldsmith, of Epsom, for National. Bit sad? Bit tough—bit tough that he had to get up and say that. So apparently it’s only bad when Māori do it.

This is a one vote per person democracy. It’s never going to be perverted by one person voting in an electorate while not voting in another electorate and then switching their rolls for a different election. We need to uphold the mana of our people and say that that isn’t cheating. Fearmongering about Māori switching rolls is unhelpful, it’s prejudiced, and I think the member—not quite for Epsom—should know that better than anyone.

But we come back to the bill, and the prioritisation of electoral reform. So I do want to congratulate the Minister and the Government for actually prioritising some of these reforms that we know have been a long time coming, including the Māori roll change that we’re seeing come through tonight—including some of the limits that the Government and this Minister put in place in terms of transparency in our electoral donation laws. We know that, last term, the electoral reforms that we got through also included some restoration to the right of prisoners to vote. So these are a suite of changes, and they come together to acknowledge that different demographics have different challenges and that the one vote per person democracy can’t exist—that our democracy can’t thrive—unless we are constantly reviewing and reforming it to be fit for purpose for a modern Aotearoa, and that politics should be taken out of democracy reform. We should listen to the Electoral Commission and the Justice Committee and the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal and Waitangi Tribunal when they tell us something needs to be done, rather than placing party interests first.

This is a good start. I look forward to the change that will come—either under this or the next Government—that will allow Māori to change rolls whenever they please, because it is their right to do so. So I commend the bill to the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. It’s a privilege to be able to stand here today and speak on the Electoral (Māori Electoral Option) Legislation Bill. First of all, I’d like to thank the Minister, Kiri Allan, for just allowing us to be part of the discussion. Even though we know you already had the amount of support you needed for the Supplementary Order Papers to go through, you still allowed us to be part of that discussion so that we, as a party, could make a decision and come on board with where you’re at. So we really appreciate that, and that’s how we get good law and that’s how we get a whole House that is on board with laws like this—by having those discussions and working together, and we’re very grateful for that. So I just thought I’d like to start off with that.

The ACT Party were supportive of the intent of this bill from the beginning. We did vote against it in the first place because we just couldn’t vote for it in the way it was first presented. But with the alternative options that have come since then, we will be supporting this bill.

I have personal experience with not being able to switch rolls, and so that’s why I’m kind of proud to be standing here today speaking on this, and making a change to something that has affected me personally. And I liked the fact that the Minister was talking about education, about what each roll would mean for a person, if they were to switch from one to the other.

When I originally enrolled to vote, as a young one, I had no understanding of what each roll meant. So I thought, because I’m a Māori, I need to tick “Māori”. I didn’t understand that that meant I was going on a completely different roll to the general roll—had absolutely no idea; nobody had told me that. I mean, I may have still made that decision with a bit of education, but I made that decision completely on the basis that I thought “Māori ticks Māori”. And so I wanted to come off the Māori roll because I had been moved from up north and I was living in Auckland, and that was the place I was connected to at the time, and I wanted to vote for my local person and was unable to, because I was on the Māori roll. And then years passed, and I thought to myself at the time “I’ll have to get off that roll”. Years passed—I rang them up and said, “Can I please get off of this roll and on to the general roll?” And they said, “You’re outside of the time frame to be able to do that.” I said, “Well, when is the time frame?” And they said “Sorry, you’ve passed it”. So I spent two elections voting on a roll that I didn’t want to be on. So I appreciate the changes that have been made here.

In the end, the only way I did get off the roll and change rolls was by setting myself a Google reminder, because I wasn’t getting the reminders from the Electoral Commission, and the time frame was so short that if you missed it, you missed it, and too bad. So thank you very much for bringing this bill to the House and allowing this to happen. The education, I think, is really important so that we understand what each roll means and what it would mean if you do change. So we are really happy about the greater flexibility and the freedom of choice—which is what ACT is all about, freedom of choice; so we’re very grateful.

So I will leave it at that, because I think we need to just get on with it and make sure that people have the freedom to be able to choose what’s right for them. Thank you.

E te Māngai o te Whare tēnā koe, otirā tēnā tātou katoa. Te pānuitanga tuatoru o te Electoral (Māori Electoral Option) Amendment Bill. Tuatahi māku e mihi kau ana ki a koe e te Minita, nāu i ārahi tēnei pire i roto i te Whare i tēnei ahiahi, nō reira, mihi kau ana ki a koe, otirā ki ngā mema o taku komiti, o te Komiti Justice, tēnā rā tātou katoa.

[Greetings, one and all—the third reading of the Electoral (Māori Electoral Option) Amendment Bill. Firstly, I’d like to acknowledge the Minister, you who has guided this bill in the House this afternoon, thank you, and also to the members of my committee, the Justice Committee, thank you one and all.]

I just want to take a brief opportunity to talk to a couple of points in this third reading speech, particularly in light of some of the speeches that have been made this afternoon. First and foremost, I just want to say that the Māori seats, to me, are a taonga to our Parliament here in Aotearoa, that they have long existed, and that people with great mana have held those seats and represented us. While I stand here as the MP for Northland, I am actually on the Māori electoral roll, and my MP is Kelvin Davis. I fundamentally believe in our Māori seats, and that is why I am on the Māori roll, even though I stand and represent in the general. Such is the great thing about my whakapapa, being bicultural and being bilingual. I am very proud of that fact.

I do, though, agree with what everybody has said in the Whare tonight. The fact that Māori have not been able to switch rolls for some five to six years, based on a census cycle. Then the census gets delayed, and points have been made around, for example, Māori getting a four-month window to do that, and being lucky if they got the letter with the little orange guy on it and actually did something about it in that short time frame—maybe even having to set their Google alerts, and then missing that opportunity for another four, five, or six years—was just so unfair. So I’m really proud that, across the House, we have been able address that fundamental issue. While there are a few bits in there that some, you know, strongly agree with and disagree with in terms of the compromised position that we’ve reached, I do want to acknowledge the Minister, the Hon Kiritapu Allan, for leading that, and everybody for finding something that this Parliament can support and reach that threshold.

The one that I did want to talk to—based on my own personal experience—if I may, is the provision around changing or not being able to change around by-elections. So in 2015, I found myself in the situation of being in a by-election. I had just voted in the general election, my MP that I voted for was successful, Kelvin Davis was in Parliament, and I then became the candidate again for the Northland seat—and this was the Northland by-election. Should I be able to change rolls and then vote for myself and then everybody in my whānau do the same? And I would argue that there would have been thousands of Ngāpuhi that would have done that if they were given that opportunity. So I understand that there is a bit of a problem there. I do think that it is fair that if you have just participated in a general election and you have selected your person with your one vote, that it would be, I think, a perverse outcome to then get a second opportunity in a by-election. That is quite opportunistic. And, I mean, I’m a strategist. I come from Ngāpuhi. I can see why something like that would be promoted.

So I do want to say that I do actually genuinely support that amendment that has been made there, because I do think it does undermine our one person, one vote democracy that we have in Aotearoa. So that, therefore, would destroy any arguments that this is an unfair system. Māori should be able to switch rolls, they shouldn’t have to wait five to six years to do it, but I do agree with that one particular limitation that we’ve put on it. Based on my own personal experience, I’ve seen what could very well have happened in our by-election, should that have been allowed to occur. I commend the bill to the House.

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I rise to speak on behalf of the National Party in regards to the Electoral (Māori Electoral Option) Legislation Bill. This bill is going to be supported by the National Party.

Following the select committee process, the Government has agreed in principle to include an amendment requested by the National Party to preclude the Māori option exercise in the three-month period prior to the general election or a local body election, in the event that a vacancy triggering a by-election is gazetted—so those three options. Just hearing from my colleague from Northland, it’s a very good example of why that’s a good thing and I acknowledge the point about strategy and the importance of strategy. To be fair, a point had been raised earlier that, in the initial version put forward, if a vacancy was triggered by a by-election, that it could not be exercised in the, I think it was, three months prior to that. The reason for that was to preclude the risk of tactical vote switching. In fact, it’s good that this is now brought into line to have that same time period prior to a general election or a local body election to ensure that risk of tactical vote switching is precluded.

So, with that, the National Party is pleased to support this bill, which aims to support Māori participation in parliamentary and local authority elections by reducing those restrictions. It is a fair point that it’s too long for electors of Māori descent to only be able to change between the Māori and general electoral rolls in a four-month period which occurs every five to six years following a census, which is certainly a long period of time.

I should just touch briefly, in the brief time available I have in this House to speak on this bill, to just go through a little bit of the background to this. The electoral franchise was established under the New Zealand Constitution Act 1852, which theoretically gave everyone the right to vote, but only if someone had individual title issued by the Crown—i.e., freehold title. That means if someone didn’t own land freehold in an individual title, they could not vote in elections. It became clear over time during the 19th century that that meant it precluded a lot of Māori, who owned land communally.

In 1867, the Māori Representation Act was passed by Parliament which set up four electorates for Māori; three in the North Island and one covering the entirety of the South Island. That meant that all Māori men over 21 years of age were eligible to vote and to stand for Parliament who did not own individual title issued by the Crown, which actually meant that they had a right that wasn’t available to other ethnicities at that time in New Zealand, who could only stand or vote if they had individual title issued by the Crown. So it was quite a progressive step by this Parliament to ensure that there was representation for Māori in Parliament who did not fit the rules, which weren’t appropriate at that time. I would say it was quite progressive of the parliamentarians of that time to recognise that issue and provide space for it.

Fast forward to 1893: the Electoral Act then gave all New Zealand women the vote, including all Māori, meaning all adults in New Zealand were then able to vote from that point forward. So, as a result, New Zealand has one of the oldest continuous democracies in the world now, and I think we can be very proud of that. We do need to be very careful when changing any electoral system to uphold the integrity of that history that we have developed over a long period of time, and to ensure that we do have appropriate representation in this House, but also that we do ensure that we uphold that principle of one person, one vote, which has stood this country in very good stead.

So this is a good little bill. I do remember seeing, actually, in the Māori Affairs Committee, possibly about a year ago, some data which actually indicated that quite a few had shifted from the Māori option on to the general roll over a period of time. The good thing about this is that it gives people the opportunity to switch from either the Māori roll or to the electoral roll in a principled fashion, and, by that, I mean that it’s done with that time period to protect the integrity of the system—prior to a general election, a local body election, or a by-election—but that it enables them to vote in the election in the way that they feel most appropriate. So, with that, I commend this bill to the House.

Debbie Ngarewa-Packer—a five-minute call.

Kia ora. Tēnā koe e te Pīka. Tēnā tātou e te Whare. I rise to take a call on behalf of Te Paati Māori and my tūngane Rawiri Waititi during this, the third reading of the Electoral (Māori Electoral Option) Legislation Bill.

This is momentous for us as Māori, which is why it was the first thing that Rawiri did when he got in, and something that Labour has been working on for some years. From day one, we promised to address racism. We’re not precious about who led this bill, because anything that not only identifies racism but addresses it is a win for us all as Māori. So we commend our Minister Allan for using her role, progressing and finalising this mahi tahi.

For far too long, tangata whenua have been locked out of participating freely and equitably in our political system. We know all too well, which has been said before me, the reality of Māori voter suppression. This goes right back to 1867 when the four Māori electorates were set up to limit the representation we had in this place. At the time, we would have held a majority of the seats, which is why tangata whenua have pushed for decades for change, and I agree with my esteemed colleague Willow-Jean Prime that Māori seats are taonga, as are our people’s rights.

Thousands of Māori have requested change to electoral rolls over the years. Until now, they’ve been locked out from changing, for up to eight years at times. This has, no doubt, led to thousands of Māori disengaging from the electoral process altogether. Since 2011, the commission has proposed legislative changes. The 2017 report on the general election recommended that voters of Māori descent be able to change roll types at any time, as this would better meet the needs of Māori voters. So this bill was an opportunity to undo that which negatively targeted tangata whenua.

I want to be clear to our whānau, though, that it is typical of big parties’ politics that there were opportunities this bill missed doing. And we should always be concerned, as tangata whenua, when we hear Labour worked with National to arrive at this third and final reading. It’s important we understand what trade-offs were done at our cost. Had Labour worked with Te Paati Māori instead of National and focused on who we’re serving, rather than who owns the bill, this would have included two critical aspects of Rawiri’s member’s bill. One: the more on a Māori roll, the more seats or candidates we get into Parliament. Rawiri’s bill proposed to get an increase for proportional seats without waiting. Labour’s bill makes us wait up to eight years at some stage so census and administrators can be prepared. Rawiri’s bill acted on the will of people; Labour’s has primarily acted on the will of administrators. Labour has us as secondary concerns. Rawiri’s bill proposed Māori could change rolls—

💬 DEPUTY SPEAKER: Ms Ngarewa-Packer, could we speak about this bill, not another bill, please.

Yeah, no—I am, thank you. Labour’s bill—they’re very much the same—puts limitations on us as demanded by National that we can only change at specific times. This is why we must always have an unapologetic voice like ourselves in Parliament. Our people, te iwi Māori, expect that their representatives in this House work together. So while we’re disappointed that Labour demonstrated the opposite in voting down Rawiri’s bill, which would have advanced us further while weakening their own bill, we support that change was important, even if only in part.

So let’s get this racism and voter suppression off the law books once and for all. But let’s be very clear, whānau mā: our rights should never have been traded off. We are tangata whenua. Our electoral participation is a basic right for Māori to exercise in Aotearoa, granted in article 3 of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. We should be treated equally. We should never have limitations put on us. So we will keep pushing to keep advancing the cause of constitutional transformation and the restoration of our mana motuhake. But, let’s be very clear: this is one small step on the path to restoring the rights and power of tangata whenua in Aotearoa. Nō reira, tēnā tātou katoa—finished!

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. I love the Māori electoral option, and this bill makes it better for people who choose to be on the Māori electoral roll. That’s why I support it, and that’s why it’s a simple speech and a short call from me.

The “What could this bill have been?” debate isn’t what we’re having tonight; it’s about whether this bill is good for Māori voters, and it is. It’s good because it changes two very long-held complaints about the Māori roll that people have told the Electoral Commission multiple times, and that my colleague Rino Tirikatene has advanced through the parliamentary process and has not been able to do without a Labour majority Government behind him. It is a change which Minister Allan has very carefully negotiated and has landed on a position that everyone around this House can be happy with, and I am really proud that, tonight, we around this House agreed on something which has been so long negotiated.

This sends a message—a really important message—to anyone watching but also to people who follow our electoral law reform process, and to Māori voters, that we in this House support the Māori seats. We in this House believe in their constitutional importance, and we are going to make it easier and more accessible for people who choose to be on the Māori electoral option to choose to be voting for those seats. That’s so important—what we’re doing today—and I’m really proud to be giving this kōrero.

So there’s two issues: when you can change rolls, and the frequency of being able to change rolls. Those are the two things that this bill deals with. It doesn’t change who’s on the roll and it doesn’t change how you get on the roll, but those are two things that have come through time and time again as being confusing and frustrating for Māori voters. It’s a change that’s really about fairness and increasing access. It’s about reducing the electoral barriers that Māori voters face and that they tell us at the Justice Committee and the Electoral Commission are barriers to their more meaningful participation in our electoral system.

It’s something everyone around this House supports—increasing access to participation in our democracy—and it’s something that I reflected on while listening to the speeches around the House. It’s a really important and unique feature of our electoral system which actually protects us from some of the more vitriolic politics that we see overseas—you know, that divisiveness, the culture war that is characteristic of some of the democracies that we compare ourselves to in modern, social media - driven electoral campaigns where race-based politics and where huge class divisions play out on a national scale and are bruising for our communities.

The fact that we have a Māori electoral option, where people feel heard, where people feel themselves reflected in the people who represent them, and where people get to choose what kind of say they have in their election—for a group that has felt the effects of colonisation and has been the most marginalised in our history, that is really, really important to the way that we have that conversation about our culture and about the way that we get along with one another under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the way that we progress. I’m really proud that we have this option. I’m really proud that we have agreed tonight on something that will be enduring to make it more fair and accessible for Māori to participate. That’s why I commend this bill.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thanks to others who have contributed in this debate—not only this afternoon but in prior stages. Others have spoken about the mechanics of how this all fits together—the compromise that was reached and so forth—and, if I get time within my contribution, I’ll touch on that as well. But I thought at this, the late stage of the third reading of the bill, it might be helpful—certainly more interesting than another route that I could have taken—just to sort of reflect on some of the themes that have characterised the way that the bill is being passed, and what it will mean for the way that our democracy works.

So, the electoral law in general—I think a key principle is that we should maximise opportunities for participation without compromising the integrity of the system. And that might sound like a really obvious statement—to want to maximise participation—and it might also sound obvious to say, “Well, of course we don’t want the integrity of the system to be compromised.”, but we do have choices to make, as policy makers, about the way that we design a system that gets as much engagement activity as possible, of course without undermining the feeling of confidence that people have that everyone’s had a fair go—an equitable go. But I don’t say an equal go, because, actually, in a funny way—I mean we’re talking about separate systems, in terms of the Māori roll and the general roll, and so if we sort of start with that baseline principle that I think every member of this House would agree at that high level—that we all agree that there should be maximum participation without compromising the integrity of that system—then that gives us a framework to analyse whether this bill is, you know, going to be really useful in that space.

Ultimately, as you’ve heard, on the National Party side, we’ve concluded that it will, and that is thanks to the discussion, the dialogue, and ultimately the decision of the Minister of Justice to accommodate the points that were being made by the National Party and by the ACT Party—albeit that ACT had a different mechanism in mind for how to, you know, go some way to achieve the same end. So that was my first point.

My second is that legislative process does actually matter. We’ve got a different bill in front of us now, that we’re all going to vote upon very shortly, than was introduced at its first reading some time ago. It is an iterative process; there are a lot of steps along the way. The most efficient style of lawmaking, of course, would be in the style of urgency to rush everything through in one go, but we would have missed the opportunity for those conversations to be had; those genuine concerns to be voiced, acknowledged, and, ultimately, addressed.

So, we’ve reached this point now because we’ve got a legislative process that says, yes, there’s a first reading, then the select committee has a crack; second reading reflects what had happened at the select committee. A committee of the whole House stage introduced the amendment that was, effectively, the turning point in terms of how the House as a whole could view the bill. So sometimes, just sometimes, we see that our democracy works really well in this way—that we have these different stages and readings as they are, of course, known.

The third point I wanted to make is that I think this process has been a triumph for civility. I think the level of dialogue has actually been really high; I think, actually, throughout the whole process, perhaps with a couple of exceptions, but certainly in terms of the Government engaging with, you know, this side of the House, the Opposition. I can speak at least on behalf of National and, I think, ACT—from the gracious contribution of Karen Chhour—would say the same, that we’ve had really good engagement. It’s been dialogue that’s been civil and that’s been helpful, and I acknowledge and we all were amused by the contribution of Willow-Jean Prime, who reflected on her own situation up north when engaged in a by-election in which it would have been possible, but for the mechanism that is in this bill, ultimately, for, you know, her friends, family, whānau to have switched a roll before being able to vote in that Northland by-election.

Of course, the ultimate irony is, from a National Party point of view, we probably would have rather that she’d won rather than the gentleman—and I use the term loosely—who did ultimately win that by-election, in any case. But you can’t win ‘em all, and he’s nowhere to be seen now—and long may that last. Anyway, I don’t mention by name—it’s sort of almost like Voldemort. But, anyway, I shouldn’t say that in his absence. He’ll have plenty to say, no doubt, if he gets the chance.

So my fourth point was about the value of compromise. And I know that there are others in this House, and we’ve heard a contribution from a member in this debate, who think that the fact of compromise in this bill is negative. I actually have a different view. I think the fact that there has been a compromise reached after discussion across the aisle—literally across the aisle, in the sense of how we’re physically set up here—that’s a good thing, and it reflects a willingness to listen and engage. Politics, famously described as the art of the possible, is sometimes regarded as somehow dirty or compromising—there’s that word again—in that kind of way. But, actually, I think, for people who have a different view to be able to find enough common ground to have the same view—such that they can vote for the same piece of legislation, ultimately, at its third reading, as compared with the first reading and the earliest stages of its introduction—as I say, I’m unashamedly prepared to say that I think that’s a good thing.

There’s also a democratic principle at play here in terms of the House or Parliament. I’ll just say—actually, I should just broaden it out—this place is the master of its own destiny. I refer, in the first place, to the entrenchment provisions in the Electoral Act. So that’s the basic mechanism that says one side or the other can’t change electoral law without, roughly speaking, what we might refer to in another context as near unanimity, so 75 percent—otherwise known as a “supermajority” by some—that that’s needed in order to be able to make such big changes that would affect the system as a whole, fundamentally.

So, for that reason, it was inevitable, I suppose, that the justice Minister, the Hon Kiritapu Allan, would approach us and seek our agreement, and to understand what would be needed in order to get that. But, actually, as our ACT colleague has said earlier, she engaged with other parties too. So I think that it’s at least possible to conclude that she did it for all the right reasons, and we give her credit for that.

In terms of this place being its own master, which is appropriate, representing the whole people, I was amused by a very arcane exchange on Twitter last night—of course, on Twitter; I think it still exists despite everything—between Messrs Edgeler and Hehir, regarding what would happen if the House were to purport to pass a law, or Parliament were to purport to pass a law, despite Standing Orders, and how we would deal with the relativity of those different bodies. Of course, normally a simple majority is required to pass a law but, of course, we also have these rules around a 75 percent majority being needed. I wasn’t intelligent enough to follow all the way along—certainly not at 9 o’clock last night. I should probably have a look at it again today; I probably wouldn’t understand it either in that occasion, so I’ll move on.

But finally, in terms of those overarching themes, my sixth and final point is that it’s important for lawmakers, politicians, if they’re to be taken seriously as negotiators on behalf of a particular position, for their word to be their bond. When the second reading was about to take place, that’s when the discussion took place between the Minister and our spokesperson, the Honourable Paul Goldsmith. Those two understood each other well enough to say that there would be a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) coming. The National Party took the Minister at her word that that would be the case and that we would vote for it at second reading—notwithstanding that we still hadn’t seen that SOP to effect that change. Indeed, it did come. And so we in turn keep our word and say that we will vote to support this bill and allow its passage.

I’ll just touch very briefly on a couple of the slightly more negative aspects of the discussion. I think it was unfortunate that, from a couple of the smaller parties—and I don’t mean ACT; the other ones—have stated, with a degree of hyperbole, I think, about people being prevented from participating in a process equally and fairly, as though a choice hadn’t been made. Now, we accept that it’s unfairly constraining a person to only have a four-month window every five years, and that’s the basis on which we’ve agreed. But I think it’s, as I say, hyperbole to say that a person voting in such a situation has to cast a vote that doesn’t reflect who they are—that’s part of who they are; if they’re in a position of having dual ethnicity, then they can choose to be on the Māori roll or indeed the general roll. And, of course, the party vote system is such that the electorate vote and the significance of being on one roll or the other only applies, you know, to the extent of 50 percent.

Nevertheless, a worthwhile change; a good change. We’ve been happy to support it because, as we said, just circling back to my original point, by doing so we’ll maximise participation in the electoral process, we won’t unduly compromise the integrity of the system, and we’ve been able to do that by coming together as a House, and I think that’s a good thing.

Kia ora e te Mana Whakawā. It’s a real pleasure to take this call on the Electoral (Māori Electoral Option) Legislation Bill. I just want to recognise how important it is and what the Māori electoral option does. I know that my friend and colleague Willow-Jean Prime talked about people switching rolls to the Māori roll, and vice versa, particularly. But what it is about is electors being able to choose how they participate in democracy, whether that be switching to the Māori roll or from the Māori roll. That’s, at heart, what this is—it’s about choice when people want to make it; not in some discrete window every five years.

I want to bring it home, and pretty much literally, because there’s a constituent who lives in Rutland Street, around the corner from me. In July, they sent me a letter via text message. The letter reads something like this: “Dear elector, thank you for your recent enrolment application form. When you last had the option of registering as an elector in a Māori or general electorate, you chose a Māori electorate. For the time being, you must stay enrolled in that electorate, as the Electoral Act only allows changes to be made during a Māori electoral option. The next Māori electoral option is scheduled to be held in 2024.” So that’s the letter you get.

So Shar Sullivan-Todd of Rutland Street sent me that, and she said, “This is bullshit!!! Spence”—her son—“is stuck on the Māori electorate, yet again, until 2024. What the”—I mean—“WTF?” That is, basically, what people think of the law as it stands. So I’m very happy, and my response was: “Hello, how are you going? We have legislation coming to change that.”, attaching the press release. She said, “Jeez Louise!”—she’s of that age—“Spencer will be relieved.” Do you know what? Spencer, come 2023, 31 March, get out there and reenrol in the electorate that you want to be enrolled in, because that’s when this bill comes into force. This is an ordinary person around the corner from me who can now change rolls from—I think he wants to change from the Māori roll to the Christchurch Central electoral roll—and I’m very happy about that. So, Spencer, get out there, do it.

Every elector in the country who’s on the Māori roll, or Māori on a general roll, now has the choice to choose how to participate. That’s a great thing. It is strengthening our democracy. It’s great to see cross-party consensus on this. I absolutely commend it to the House.

Before I go on, may I just remind our members to—I know that the member was quoting from a response from one of his constituents, but can we just use respectful language in the House.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a third time.