Re: Harry Duynhoven - part II
The proposed Bill to appoint Harry Duynhoven to Parliament is unique in our Constitutional history. Never before has
the executive sought to usurp the proper role of the people and appoint a Member of Parliament. In any other
parliamentary democracy an MP who loses his or her seat would either step aside gracefully, or stand for the seat again
in a bye-election. It is quite unjustified and indeed unprecedented for the Government to use its majority to appoint an
MP.
It is a matter of regret that the Government and the Speaker have ignored the opinion of the Government's own legal
adviser, the Solicitor General, as well as the clear meaning of section 55 of the Electoral Act. Common sense and the
rule of law requires that the Government permit a bye-election to occur. Any other decision is unprincipled political
expediency and a constitutional and legal outrage.
The Government's cavalier treatment of our Constitution is discreditable. The only course of action that a responsible
Government could take would be to accept that Harry Duynhoven lost his seat two months ago, and allow a bye-election to
occur. After due reflection the Electoral Act might later be amended, however there would then be no reason for this to
occur. Legislation should not be amended in the misguided pursuit of short-term political gain.
John Cox - Auckland