Electoral (Māori Electoral Option) Legislation Bill

Members, we come now to Part 2. This is the debate on clauses 13 to 17, which is the “Amendments to Local Electoral Act 2001”. The question is that Part 2 stand part.

Thank you, Madam Chair. This is just an even briefer contribution from me on this one. I’ve got even less to say about it. I’m sort of looking nervously in the direction of the Hon Paul Goldsmith, who has something dismissive to say, no doubt. My sole question relates to clause 16. It’s to do with amending Schedule 1A where, in new clause 72(2A), there’s a report that’s done, following a census, and it might be that the census has been completed but the report hasn’t yet been completed, and so the legislation is contemplating a situation where the Electoral Commission has to supply, to the Government Statistician, information that’s listed in the Act, and then the Government Statistician has to prepare an alternative report for the purpose of the Act. So it seems like an interim kind of measure whereby if it’s the case that a census has just been conducted and there hasn’t been an opportunity for a report.

So my question, really, in addition to any general comments the Minister of Justice might want to make about it, is: how quickly could we expect this to take place? As soon as practicable after census day? I’m just wondering what would be a reasonable kind of time frame for us to expect in that scenario; not expecting a number of weeks or months or a particular limit to be put on it—a hard limit, certainly. Obviously, there’s a certain extent to which the phrase “as soon as practicable” could mean just that, and it might be that it’s practicable or not to have it within, say, four weeks or—I was going to say four months; really, actually that does sound quite long. Anyway, I’m now at the point where I think I’ve, basically, posed my question. The Minister is engaging with her excellent officials, who will, no doubt, provide some advice, and I’ll just sort of pause for a moment to allow her to get any advice that she needs to be able to answer that.

I’m looking to see if anyone else has any other questions to ask, and, if not, I’ll be in the familiar territory of just, simply, talking anyway, and I think the Hon Mark Mitchell has—

💬 Hon Paul Goldsmith: I can ask a question if you sit down.

OK. Well, I will sit down then. Fine!

One question I had for the Minister is: this is just a clarification that the changes to the definition of the Māori electoral population are indeed, as I understand it, sort of a technical change to ensure that there isn’t an overlap, or that you can’t be on the Māori and general electoral districts, and on the dormant roll at the same time—that there isn’t a policy shift in the way that we calculate people on the Māori roll for the purposes of determining how many Māori seats there are. If I can just get some clarification about that, I’d be keen.

Thank you to both members for the interesting questions. So, to clause 16, my understanding is that this is required—so, where a census is held in the year of a general election, you have an exemption so no boundary redraws occur within that period. That exemption is not required for local body elections; so that’s what that one is there. I just might have to get the member to repeat his question; sorry, I was slightly distracted. Sorry about that.

It was just asking the Minister to clarify that the changes made to the definition of Māori electoral population, particularly in clause 14, are technical amendments because of the fact that nobody can be on the electoral districts or general roll at the same time as on the dormant rolls, but it hasn’t been a policy decision to change fundamentally the way that the Māori electoral roll is calculated—or number is calculated—as relates to the proportion of Māori seats. So I just want you to clarify that.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for that helpful question. Yes, you’re right. So it restates the current position in the Electoral Act, and so no policy changes have been made at all with this one; just pulls it right through.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and can I just acknowledge the Minister in the chair, Kiritapu Allan, as well, in terms of bringing this piece of legislation to the Justice Committee and the bipartisan approach which she takes to be able to get important legislation like this through the House.

The only point that I was going to raise is sort of in the same vein as my colleague Chris Penk’s, and that is that through both parts, there is quite an important interaction between the Electoral Commission and the Government Statistician—both ways. So the Electoral Commission must, as soon as practicable on census day, supply information to the Government Statistician, and the Government Statistician must prepare an alternative report, which is Schedule 1A.

I was wondering—that interaction is actually really important. There is definitely, without a doubt, some risk that something may go wrong on both sides. And I was just wondering whether the Minister and officials had sort of turned their mind to how that would interact and how there’d be accountability in the legislation should either the Electoral Commission fail to get the information to the Government Statistician or the Government Statistician fail to prepare an alternative report.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Look, I think across all electoral law, that interaction between the Government Statistician and the Electoral Commission is fundamental. They are essentially one half of the other when it comes to working out who should, who can, and who ought to vote in any particular period. One thing that has been quite important as we’ve approached these amendments in this particular bill is that the Ministry of Justice has worked very closely with Statistics New Zealand on all these amendments to ensure that those critical relationships carry through and anything that’s been touched by this amendment for the Māori electoral option has been caught up. So my understanding is, and I’ve been advised, that Statistics New Zealand are comfortable with the engagement and with what’s been set out in this bill.

The question is that the Minister’s amendment to Part 2 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 280 be agreed to.

Rawiri Waititi’s amendment to Part 2 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 282 is out of order as being outside the scope of the bill.

Part 2 as amended agreed to.

Clauses 1 and 2 Title and Commencement