KEY POINTS:
An anti-corruption organisation's call for MPs to let an independent body review laws covering their election spending has found favour with some small parties but little interest from the two main parties.
The Greens, United Future and Act have responded favourably, New Zealand First and the Maori Party
are thinking about it, but Labour and National have been noncommittal.
Transparency International believes that to ensure public confidence in any changes arising from the Auditor-General's report on unlawful advertising expenditure last election, the review job should be given to an independent body.
A director of its board and former ombudsman, Mel Smith, said yesterday that after the public disquiet over the election spending issue, it was not sufficient for MPs to say any proposals would be referred to a select committee.
"I don't think that is good enough in this case."
Public confidence would be maintained and "perhaps enhanced" by having an independent body.
Act leader Rodney Hide welcomed the suggestion.
"Allowing politicians to set their own rules for election spending is like putting the fox in charge of the hen house," he said.
Mr Smith said that referring decisions about electoral law changes to independent bodies was not unusual.
Decisions about electorate boundaries were referred to the Boundaries Commission, and decisions on Broadcasting allocations were referred to the Electoral Commission.
The board was proposing a body that could set its own processes and receive submissions.
It could be set up by the end of next year.
United Future leader Peter Dunne suggested the Electoral Commission could be the independent body.
Mr Smith said that was an option.
"But I don't think an option is to say there will be no independence at all and just introduce the provisions by a bill and refer them to a select committee."
That appears to be the option favoured by Labour.
Prime Minister Helen Clark said last night that anything involving legislation had to be fully debated by a multi-party Parliament. "You can't get much more democratic than that."
Asked if she would support an independent body, she said she hadn't considered it at all.
A spokesman for National leader Don Brash said the party caucus had not had a discussion on what changes should be made "and that at this stage there is nothing on the table".
A spokeswoman for New Zealand First leader Winston Peters said the party would look at the recommendations. But they needed to be put in the right context.
"We already have checks and balances, provided by independent bodies like the Electoral Commission, a representation commission and the Auditor-General's Office.
Greens co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons said the Greens strongly supported some independent oversight.
But it could not be done without some input from Parliamentary Service about what parliamentary work involved and there should be some involvement of the Parliamentary Service Commission.
Maori Party MPs will be discussing the matter today, but said a review process already existed.
WHO WANTS WHAT
What is Transparency International?
An international organisation with more than 80 chapters that tries to reduce corruption.
Who is its face in New Zealand?
Among its directors are Michael Morris, a former national chairman of KPMG NZ; David Macdonald, a former Controller and Auditor-General; and Mel Smith, a former ombudsman.
What does it want?
For the review of election spending rules to be given to an independent body.
What do the parties think?
Labour and National are noncommittal. NZ First and the Maori party will consider it. The Greens, United Future and Act agree in principle. The Progressives have not responded.
