KEY POINTS:
Justice Minister Annette King came under fire for inventing the "new jurisprudence" of the Law of Common Sense in Parliament yesterday as MPs battled over new election financing rules.
Annette King's repeated refrain since the Electoral Finance Bill was reported back from select committee on Monday was that "the law of common sense" would apply to resolve some of the anomalies the National Party had presented as problematic under the bill.
Helena Catt of the Electoral Commission has said on National Radio that the commission did not want to be "the arbiters of common sense" and yesterday National Party MP Tony Ryall took the chance to tackle Ms King on it in debate, saying the commission's public concerns about the bill showed it had deeper flaws that could not be dismissed as trivial.
"This bill is full of innumerable problems, inconsistencies and difficulties that the law of common sense will not fix. The law of common sense - that new theme of jurisprudence of the last 48 hours - is not going to fix the issues that Helena Catt, the independent public servant in charge of the electoral system, has highlighted in the last 24 hours."
Ms King laid out a definition to be used by the commission.
She said other changes made by the select committee - such as a tighter definition of what constituted election advertising and more flexibility for third parties - would meet the concerns of most submitters and had the support of most of the parties in the House.
The bill has the support of Labour, the Greens and NZ First, ensuring its successful passage.
National Deputy Leader Bill English (opposes)
Mr English said the bill was a "piffling, waffling, vague, partisan disgraceful piece of legislation", and with just six weeks before MPs and outside groups had to abide by its terms, Justice Minister Annette King still had officials rushing through amendments to it.
The Government had set out to use its majority in Parliament to skew the electoral laws to feather its own nest.
"The Government is filling its pockets with public money for the next election campaign, passing law to make legal what was illegal in the last election, and clamping down on public opinion that might criticise it in election year."
Justice Minister Annette King (supports)
Ms King made it clear the changes were largely in response to the advertising campaign by the Exclusive Brethren in the last election, referring at least three times to preventing wealthy interests having a disproportionate influence.
The select committee had ironed out the problems in the bill and the rules on advertising and funding would help ensure a level playing field, regardless of the wealth of participants.
"The product now is legislation that promotes freedom of expression by ensuring a few wealthy individuals cannot use their money to buy an election and swamp the voice of ordinary New Zealanders."
Green MP Metiria Turei (supports)
Mrs Turei said the current law had failed New Zealand in the last election because it had allowed the Exclusive Brethren to exploit a loophole in it.
"We must know who is providing money, so we can track its influence. We want to see if the fundraisers are affecting the way they vote in Parliament and the way they act in Government."
United Future Leader Peter Dunne (supports so far, but undecided for future)
Mr Dunne said the bill did not limit freedom of speech and most people in Parliament agreed with its aims for more transparent financing of political parties.
"The problem we get into is that politics has intruded into this argument."
The process of the bill was worrying and that was the fault of both major parties.
"With the election next year we face a very difficult choice. If we do not pass this legislation at this time, we will get into the [2005 election] situation all over again."
National MP Tony Ryall (opposes)
Mr Ryall accused Labour of acting out of self-interest and said Labour's actions were an invitation for a retaliatory law.
"You can't have an electoral law where the victor changes the law to suit themselves. Labour are changing the rules to suit themselves and I think they'll rue the day ... Are they inviting the National Party to change the rules the next election to suit the National Party? Are they wanting National to do to Labour what Labour intends to do to the people of New Zealand in this bill?"
He also criticised United Future's support for the bill, in a thinly veiled allusion to Peter Dunne.
"It's simply appalling that Government parties who like to stand on their hind legs and lecture Parliament regularly about the rights and wrongs of constitutional process, as they sweep their cowlick from side to side, are prepared to stand up and support this legislation which is completely contrary to the democratic values of this country."
Maori Party MP Hone Harawira (opposes)
Mr Harawira said transparency in electoral financing and tighter rules on donations were desirable. But it was hard to ignore concerns raised by the Electoral Commission, and the calls by the Human Rights Commission and the Law Society to return the bill to the select committee for further public submission.
"No government should ever be so arrogant as to make changes to the way in which we elect our representatives without first taking such an important principle to the people for discussion ... The Maori Party will not be party to a bill which restricts freedom of speech, and neither will we be party to a bill which penalises people for daring to do so."
Mr Harawira said the complexity of the bill was also an issue.
"It's a complexity which descends into outright absurdity when we find that if someone brings 300 koura to a hui, those juicy crayfish might actually have to be sent to the Electoral Commission to get stamped before being sent back to the hui. And before anyone tries to tell me that the limit only applies to political events, believe me when I tell you that any hui for Maori is a political hui."
New Zealand First MP Doug Woolerton (supports)
Mr Woolerton read out a list of the donations National had received from trusts at the last election, and said the bill would deal with secret trusts.
"The public of New Zealand are concerned about that, and there are concerns about secret trusts."
