The Electoral Commission has been significantly revamped under the amendments to the Electoral Act that have been passed by Parliament during this term. The commission has already undertaken significant work, with the Botany by-election under its purview. It now has the carriage of the administrative arrangements for the Te Tai Tokerau by-election, and the general election, which is to come before the end of the year. Then it will take on further functions, including the work that is currently discharged by the Electoral Enrolment Centre, when it takes on those functions under the legislation.

The legislation provides for three commissioners, but only two are currently in office: the Hon Hugh Williams and Robert Peden, the Chief Electoral Officer. I remember when the Hon Hugh Williams was first appointed to judicial office back in 1989. I was the law clerk to the Chief Justice at the time, and I had to write the notes for the speech that the Chief Justice gave at the swearing-in of Mr Williams as a Master of the High Court, as Associate Judges of the High Court were then known. It is significant that although it is no longer a requirement of the Act that a judge act as Chair of the Electoral Commission, the House has chosen to recommend to the Governor-General that that tradition continue in this transitional period, as the new commission establishes itself.

It is also significant to note, because it will relate to a couple of comments that I am going to make in conclusion, that the Hon Hugh Williams not only has judicial experience, and therefore, as we would all hope, will bring an impartial approach to the very important position of Chair of the Electoral Commission, but also has significant governance experience in his own right. I recall that prior to his appointment as a Master of the High Court, he served as president of what was then the Manawat? District Law Society, and immediately prior to taking judicial office, he also served a term as president of the New Zealand Law Society. After he was appointed as a full judge of the High Court, he also served a 6-year term as chancellor of the Massey University Council. So in those roles he learnt at the coalface, if you like, what it is like to have to govern an organisation. What I hope we are seeing here is a transition from the tradition of having to have judges sitting as the head of the body that runs elections and matters associated with elections to recognising that although we need impartial people on the Electoral Commission, it is equally vital to have people with governance experience, particularly given the expansion of the role of the commission—the merging of the three electoral agencies—that the House has determined ought to occur.

The other current commissioner, as I mentioned, is Robert Peden, the Chief Electoral Officer. Mr Peden was formerly the chief legal adviser to the Electoral Commission, prior to taking on the role as Chief Electoral Officer. I do not think there would be anybody in the House who would question Mr Peden’s commitment to independence or to fearlessly policing the rigours of the electoral law, as it has been enacted.

I want to say one or two other things about the legislation as it now stands. It is instructive to compare section 8 of the Electoral Act 1993 with section 4D. Section 8 was the old appointments section, now repealed. Section 4D is the new one. Section 8 required, as I said, that there be a judge appointed to the Electoral Commission. It could be a judge at various levels of the system, but it was almost invariably a High Court judge. The appointment had to occur from—if a High Court judge—three candidates offered by the head of bench, the Chief Justice, for that purpose. So Parliament was very restricted in its choices as to who might head the commission. The Secretary for Justice sat, as of right, on the commission; so did a judge of the M?ori Land Court. All those requirements have been swept aside, and now there is just the requirement that there be the three commissioners. I think that is an important step forward, as I say, given the expansion of the role of the electoral agency and given not only the independence but also the governance expertise that we now expect of it.

The other significant matter in the legislation is the enhancement of the independence of the commission by the very words of the Act. I noted the careful words that were in the Minister’s speech. He correctly pointed out that no one other than the Governor-General appoints the members of the commission. It is also important to point out that these appointments are not made in the usual way on the recommendation or advice of a Minister; they are made on the recommendation of this House. In that regard it is of concern to see the Government House website describing the Chair of the Electoral Commission as having been nominated by the Minister of Justice. Of course, that is not the procedure. The procedure is that the Minister circulates names around the House to various parties, and the names that win unanimous approval are the ones that go forward under a communication from the Minister, but on behalf of this House. That is a very important point, I think, just to reiterate.

We come to the business of the motion: the proposal to finally appoint a third member of the Electoral Commission and to bring it to full strength, which is not something that could happen too soon, given the workload that I have mentioned and given the functions and tasks that the agency will have to fulfil over the coming months.

I am aware that there was another candidate who met the approval of parties around the House, and who might have been appointed to fill the deputy chair’s position and thereby bring the commission to full strength, but that person, although eminently qualified, has elected to perform paid work for the commission in its education campaign on the referendum, which is to occur at the end of the year. So that person’s skills are being utilised by the commission, but not in a governance role.

It is clear from Ms H?ria’s curriculum vitae that she has significant governance skills, so to that extent her appointment as deputy chair is to be welcomed. The only note of caution that I would sound on behalf of the Opposition is that although Ms H?ria has a very impressive CV, with respect to her, the danger, as often occurs with people who are busy directors, is that she may have too much on. Given the recitation of the appointments she holds that we heard from the Minister, and also given the busy workload that the commission will have over the next year or so, it will be very important that she and the other commissioners ensure that they have appropriate time to devote to the important work of the commission.

Having said that, I am glad to see that the commission is now at full strength. It is appropriate, given the tasks that lie ahead. I wish Ms H?ria and the other members of the commission well in the tasks that lie ahead of them, and I am delighted to confirm that the Labour Opposition will support this appointment.