Labour's legal steamroller

By HELEN TUNNAH and RUTH BERRY

The Government is defying heated opposition and an appeal from a supporter of change to take a "deep breath" and hold a referendum as it moves closer to abolishing the right of appeal to the Privy Council.

Former National Party Attorney-General Sir Douglas Graham, who also tried to scrap ties to the London court, said Labour should not press on with only a slim majority in Parliament and with no clear popular support for the change.

"I hold strongly to the view that constitutional matters should have strong support in the House before they are passed," he told the Herald.

"I think they should take a deep breath. If you've got a majority of three on a constitutional issue, then it should go to a referendum."

But Prime Minister Helen Clark yesterday remained unapologetic about pressing ahead.

"If this country, 163 years after formal colonisation, is not ready to run its top court of appeal, when will it ever be ready.

"I do not believe that a change in the court structure requires a referendum. If a constitutional change gives more New Zealanders better access to justice in their own country, I think that is well worth pursuing."

Labour, backed by the Progressive Coalition and the Greens, intends to pass the Supreme Court Bill quickly, perhaps by early next week.

It will not slow passage of the bill, which scraps appeals to the British Privy Council and sets up a Supreme Court with local judges as the final appeal court, despite opposition from Maori and business interests, and the concern of at least one of its MPs.

Te Tai Hauauru MP Tariana Turia was yesterday voting with her Labour colleagues, but said through a spokesman that she still thought a Supreme Court should be delayed because many Maori wanted a constitutional review first.

"The various iwi hold to their original submissions.

"She will continue to advocate their point of view," her spokesman said.

He could not say if Mrs Turia would vote against the bill later.

The three parties supporting the law change total 63 MPs out of the 120 in Parliament.

Although court changes are not technically constitutional issues, National, New Zealand First, Act and United Future say the abolition of Privy Council appeals is so significant that it should be approved by 75 per cent of MPs, or by the public through a referendum.


Sir Douglas, who introduced a bill to scrap the Privy Council for National in the mid-1990s and still supports a change, warned Labour that it did not have enough support.

He said it was not fair to say the issue was too complex for people to vote on.

"Most people would have a view without straining too much about whether judges in England are a good thing."

Opposition MPs put up a host of amendments last night in an attempt to delay proceedings.

They included proposals for delays in the enactment of the legislation and one by Act MP Stephen Franks for the bill to contain measures preventing judges using the new act as "a licence to become activists".

All, including the main Opposition amendment seeking a public referendum, were rejected.

Only a handful of Labour MPs were in the chamber, and none - apart from Margaret Wilson, who made a short speech - spoke in defence of the Supreme Court.

New Zealand First leader Winston Peters accused Labour's Maori MPs of being too tired or too shy to speak on behalf of their constituents.

"Where's the Maori voice today from Labour? Gone."

His colleague Dail Jones said Labour, as a minority government, and without significant support among MPs, had no mandate to make the change.

National's justice spokesman, Richard Worth, said it was "foolish" to claim the Privy Council was available only to the wealthy. He said the voice of Maori was against the bill.

National MP Georgina Te Heuheu said the bill was the next step in Attorney-General Margaret Wilson's desire for a republic.

"One day New Zealand might move to a republic, but it will move there because the New Zealand public want it, not because Margaret Wilson has an agenda."

Mr Franks said the Supreme Court was being born into controversy.

"It will probably start with the least public respect a court could ever have been started with."

The Federation of Maori Authorities and Business Roundtable both said yesterday that the Government lacked the "moral authority" to pass the legislation.

Federation spokesman Paul Morgan said Maori had made it clear they wanted a constitutional debate before Privy Council ties were cut.

Business Roundtable head Roger Kerr said the Government's decision to go ahead was outrageous.