Dr Nick Smith: Parties are entitled to exit MPs from their caucus but not from Parliament.

OPINION: Democracy is fragile and must be vigilantly protected. That is why New Zealanders should be concerned by the Government's proposed changes to the Electoral Act.

Pushed by Winston Peters, it will enable party leaders to dismiss MPs from Parliament.

It risks turning our parliamentarians into party poodles. An MP who questions a policy, criticises a leader, or votes differently to their party faces dismissal from Parliament by their party leader. This is a fundamental change to the centuries-old principle that the public alone gets to hire and fire MPs.

The greatest harm would be to stifle debate and further concentrate power with political parties and leaders. Our Parliament is already much more rigid along party lines than most western democracies. Dissent and debate are essential ingredients to a properly functioning democracy.

READ MORE:

* Waka-jumping bill gives too much power to party leaders

* Why Winston Peters wants to stop 'Waka jumping' – again

* Waka jumpers should be free to take the leap

* Horan situation raises 'waka jumping' law again



A survey of other Parliaments around the world shows just how far out of whack this bill is from democratic norms. Every democracy faces tension between MPs standing on a party ticket but who fall out with their party. Only a few failed democracies like Zimbabwe and Bangladesh allow a leader to sack an MP. The courts in Europe have struck down such laws as unconstitutional.

The Inter-Parliamentary Union has been advocating since 1889 on best practice for parliaments around the world. It is damning of the sort of law being proposed here, saying it creates "political party dictatorships". It argues the free mandate of MPs is an "indispensable guarantee of parliamentary democracy". It states that "while party loyalty and discipline are necessary … they must never impair the full and effective exercise of freedom of expression and association by any member of that party since these are overriding fundamental human rights".

This concern is shared by New Zealand constitutional law experts. University of Otago law professor Andrew Geddis says using the law to quash internal party disagreement comes at too great a cost to our wider parliamentary democracy.

The origin of this law change lies with Winston Peters' deep resentment of nearly half his MPs defecting during the first MMP government. These eight MPs dared disagree with his walking out of the Jenny Shipley-led government. They believed they were acting in the best interests of New Zealand.

New Zealand First now has a rule that any MP who leaves or is kicked out has to pay the party $300,000.

I do find it ironic that when I was a junior member of the National caucus in the 1990s Peters was the strongest champion of the rights of MPs to free speech and association. Consistency is not his strongest trait.

It is claimed the power of the leader to sack an MP from Parliament is constrained under the bill by party rules and a two-thirds vote of MPs. This is ineffective. Two-thirds of NZ First's caucus hold ministerial and other positions at the discretion of the leader.

Parties are entitled to exit MPs from their caucus but not from Parliament. This law change is particularly obnoxious for an electorate MP, elected by their constituents.

The Government justifies this law change on the basis that MPs who vote differently to the party line are upsetting the proportionality of Parliament. This erroneously assumes that political parties and leaders have a monopoly on integrity.

The history of New Zealand parliamentary dissidents suggests it is the party and its leadership that more commonly strays from a party's elected mandate.

Derek Quigley was closer to core National values than Rob Muldoon. Most people would accept that Jim Anderton was closer to Labour Party philosophy when he left during the Rogernomics era in 1989. Tariana Turia totally reflected the views of Labour Māori voters when she left over the foreshore and seabed issue in 2004. Hone Harawira left the Māori Party in opposition to its agreement with the John Key-led National Government.

The latest example was Kennedy Graham and David Clendon abandoning the Greens over the benefit fraud controversy.

A simple tick in the ballot box can never be simplistically translated into clear positions on every issue. I crossed the floor as a junior MP over the Employment Contracts Act in the 1990s to provide for a graduated minimum wage for workers under 20. Such dissent would be impossible under this proposed law.

I am particularly astounded by the Green Party's support for this law change. They described a near identical bill in 2005 as one of the worst to ever come before our Parliament. It is hardly acceptable for the New Zealand Green Party to be the champions of human rights and democracy abroad while voting for erosion of these values at home.

Freedom of speech and tolerance of dissent are core Kiwi values. We must reject this attempt to weaken our parliamentary democracy.

Nick Smith is a National Party MP and Cabinet minister in the last government.