playbook for how we as New Zealanders engage in not
just politics but society at
large. I commend this bill to the
House.
is that the motion be agreed to. The Hon Dr Nick Smith. National will
be supporting the first reading of
the Election Access Fund Bill and
we wish to acknowledge the work of both
Chloe Swarbrick and Mojo Mathers in
Chloe Swarbrick and Mojo Mathers in
bringing it to the House. The
bill is about making our democracy
and parliament more accessible for
people with disabilities
by providing extra support that is
available both for voters but
also for candidates that may have a
disability. National wants our
democracy to be as vibrant and
representative as possible while
also ensuring our elections are fair
and that we have the
highest standards of integrity around our
and that we have the highest standards
and that we have the highest voting systems. Now New Zealand,
in my view, can be very proud
of its rich democratic heritage. We are one
of the oldest,
continuous parliaments in the world, starting
back in 1854 albeit only men
initially owning property being
able to vote. The Maori seats were added
in 1867. In 1879 the property
owning requirement was removed and it is
requirement was removed and it is
first country in the world to first country in the world to
provide women with the
vote in 1893. Further changes
Further changes were made in lowering the age from
21 firstly to 20 and then to 18 in the 60s
and 70s. This bill is a logical
progression of being a
leader in ensuring parliament is as
progression of being a leader in 20
progression of being a leader in representative as possible, albeit,
it is focused on the practical
barriers rather than the legal
barriers to participation. I also
want to acknowledge the
efforts that the Electoral Commission has already
made to try and be as inclusive as
possible of
possible of people with disabilities. For instance, I note
that our current electoral system
provides a dictation service
that our current electoral system provides a dictation service for
those people who
either through being blind or other disability are
not able to mark the voting paper. I
also note that in the 2017
electoral review the level of satisfaction
in people with disabilities grew from
people with disabilities being satisfied with the electoral system
at our last election.
satisfied with the electoral system
should not strive to be better. The areas we need to improve are not
just the mechanical processes of how
one might vote, but actually
the electoral system in a
broader sense of how people
are able to participate. I know from my own
experience of being a
candidate in 10 elections, that some
organisations, like the Deaf
Association make special provision
at their expense, of which
they have limited resources, for
candidates and for people with disabilities.
They have repeatedly expressed to
me a desire of rather than
having a separate meeting
separate meeting of people over there of people with disabilities,
separate meeting of people over actually there being a sign
language interpreter at
interpreter at the general candidates meetings so that people
can be fully inclusive and
that's not just valuable from
the capacity for those people with disability
being able to participate, but also
in making sure that we
don't sort of cubby hole away those issues that
are important to
people with disabilities, but they are actually
issues for all voters as we
go through that electoral and that
contest process. Now there are
important issues of detail with
this bill that National will want
to scrutinise. We are interested
in the data around the levels
of participation of people with
different
different types of disabilities because we want the funding to be
focused on those areas where
the participation levels are poor,
actually by international standards,
Mr Speaker, New Zealand has a very
high level of
participation in elections but here is an
opportunity to improve it further. We
also want to ensure that any allocation of
additional resources is done in a
political neutral way and that we
are neither going to
be advantaging or disadvantaging any
particular candidates or parties. There has
been a history, not just in New
Zealand but overseas, of public
taxpayer resources being used to
taxpayer resources being used to
screw the scrum politically.
While we want to provide the
support for disabilities, we also
want to ensure that it is being
done with integrity. National has a
high level of confidence in the political
neutrality of the
Electoral Commission and the bill
properly provides for that. We would prefer
as much of the funding as possible
is going to
organisations, whether it be the Blind Association, whether it be
the Deaf Association, whether it be the
body representing people with
disabilities of all sorts a than
necessarily going to
political parties, which we think has a
organisations,
parties, which we think has a greater level of risk. To be
parties, which we think has a greater level of risk. To be clear,
National has historically,
and continues to not support, state
funding of political parties.
Political parties should stand or
fall on their merits in being able
fall on their merits in being able
to generate support but
we do support state funding for ensuring
that people with disabilities are
able to fully participate in
our electoral process. I want to
conclude by underliing
National's broader philosophy
broader philosophy around people with disabilities and I want to
acknowledge the work of both my
colleague Nicky Wagner and Shane
Reti in championing the importance
of recognising and providing for
the rights of people with
disabilities. Their focus has been about ensuring
everyarm of Government
recognises and supports inclusive approach
of people with disabilities. National
believes that we need to focus more
on what people can do rather than
focusing on
focusing on those things people cannot do. We also want
to empower as much as possible,
people with disabilities to be able to make the
choices for themselves rather than a
temptation by Government agencies of
using the funding support
to control people's lives. People
with disabilities have as much right to
make choices about their
life as do others. Mr Speaker, if we look
at the recent Commonwealth Games where
there was the inclusive approach of
people with disabilities, is
in the same vein and the
philosophy behind this bill and yes, Mr Speaker, this
parliament will need
to make some further changes to be
more accommodating of those people with
disabilities. There is one issue
I would have with the mover of the
bill, in suggesting this bill should
go to the Govt
Administration Committee. National would prefer it
went to the justice select
committee. The
committee. The justice select committee is where all other
electoral bills go. The
justice select committee is where we
have responsibility for doing the review
of the 2017 election. We
regularly have engagement with the
Electoral Commission. We have got other
have engagement with the Electoral electoral bills. We think that would
be more appropriate and I would ask
the member to
consider whether the Justice Committee would be
the more appropriate committee. It
is my intention to move an amendment
to the mover's motion
to ensure that's where it goes. Again,
I compliment the mover of the bill, Mojo
Mathers, the work that has gone into this
bill. National supports the concept.
We will want to
scrutinise the bill further, as I have indicated, but
it is a further step along the road of
ensuring this parliament
and our democracy is as inclusive as
it possibly can be. The
Hon Carmel Sepuloni.
would like to welcome all would like to welcome all
individuals and groups from
the disabled community that are here
on the precinct today and