The Citizens Initiated Referenda Act 1993 allows for citizens to propose a
referendum. These are non-binding referendums on any issue in which proponents have submitted a petition to Parliament signed by ten percent of all registered electors within 12 months. There were 3,298,009 voters enrolled for the
2017 general election, so at least 329,801 signatures would be required at a rate of approximately 904 signatures per day. In reality, more signatures would be required to account for variances in electoral roll numbers, duplicate signatures and signatures that cannot be matched to a registered elector. There are procedural requirements governing this process. It costs
NZ$500 to file a petition asking for a referendum with the Clerk of the
House of Representatives. The Clerk formally determines the wording of the question, which may be quite different from the original. Once the Clerk receives the completed petition, the number of signatures is initially counted, followed by sample groups of signatures being taken and the signatories' names and addresses checked against the electoral roll. The sampling of signatures is used to estimate the number of valid signatures for the whole petition with confidence, and if the lower confidence interval is more than ten percent of the electoral roll, the petition is presented to the House of Representatives. Within one month of the petition's presentation to the House, a date for the poll must be determined. The poll must be held within 12 months of the petition's presentation, unless 75 percent of MPs vote to delay the poll for one year. There is also a $50,000 spending limit on promoting the petition. New Zealand,
Italy, and
Switzerland are among countries whose laws allow for citizen-initiated referendums (CIRs) nationally. Its defenders view it as a form of "direct democracy". However, the Citizens Initiated Referendum 1993 went against the advice of the
Royal Commission on the Electoral System 1986. The Commission stated, speaking about referendums more broadly, "In general, initiatives and referendums are blunt and crude devices.... [that] would blur the lines of accountability and responsibility of Governments". A total of 48 petitions have been launched since 1993 on a wide range of topics. Only five (one in 1995, two in 1999, one in 2009, one in 2013) have come to a vote. The other petitions failed to gain enough signatures to force a referendum. Achieving the target number of signatures is a requirement for forcing a vote on an initiative proposed by citizens.
Firefighters The first citizens initiated referendum was held on 2 December 1995. The question "Should the number of professional fire-fighters employed full-time in the
New Zealand Fire Service be reduced below the number employed on 1 January 1995?" aimed to elicit a "no" response. Turnout was low as the referendum was not held in conjunction with a general election. Just over 12% voted "Yes" and almost 88% voted "No".
1999 election At the
1999 election two referendums were put before voters. One was on whether the number of Members of Parliament should be reduced from 120 to 99. Electors overwhelmingly voted in favour of the proposal, with 81.47% voting for this proposal. However, there were no moves to amend the
Electoral Act 1993 in line with this result until 2006 when a bill was introduced by
New Zealand First MP
Barbara Stewart to reduce the size of Parliament to 100. The bill passed its first reading, 61 votes to 60 and was referred to Select Committee. The Select Committee returned recommending the bill to not be passed, citing reasons including public misconception on the MMP voting system, population growth, and international comparability. The bill was subsequently voted down 112 to 9 at its second reading. The other referendum held in 1999 asked "Should there be a reform of our Justice system placing greater emphasis on the needs of victims, providing restitution and compensation for them and imposing minimum sentences and hard labour for all serious violent offences?". This measure passed by 91.78%. There was some debate over the phrasing of the referendum, as the question actually contains five separate questions; voters could agree with some, but not with others.
Parental corporal punishment Following the submission of a petition on 22 August 2008, the Clerk of the House verified to Parliament that the threshold for a CIR had been reached. Supporters were hoping for the referendum to be held alongside the 8 November general election, but it was decided by Parliament to hold the referendum by postal ballot between 31 July and 21 August 2009. The question asked was "Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?" Voter turnout was 56.1 percent. While 87.4 percent of votes answered 'no', the question drew widespread criticism from the public, parliament, and even then-Prime Minister John Key for being a
loaded question and for the use of the value-judgement 'good'.
Opponents of citizens initiated referendums The perceived lack of implementation of successful referendums has led to calls for such referendums to be made binding on the government of the day, similar to the direct democracy said to exist in
Switzerland.
ACT New Zealand,
Family First New Zealand, the
Sensible Sentencing Trust and
Kiwi Party all advocate binding referendums. However,
Kiwi Party President
Larry Baldock failed to submit enough signatures for a petition that might have led to a non-binding referendum on whether or not binding citizens referendums should be introduced after being granted permission to circulate a petition calling for that innovation, so the status quo remains. Although the Kiwi Party applied for deregistration, the cause has been taken up by the
Conservative Party of New Zealand and its leader,
Colin Craig. By contrast,
GayNZ.com has run articles strongly critical of the CIR lobby, as well as expressing concerns that CIRs could be abused to strip vulnerable minorities of their legislative protections, as has occurred frequently with referendums against
same-sex marriage in the United States and similar proposals that target
illegal immigrants in that country. In some New Zealand media outlets, the
Minaret controversy in Switzerland has also been cited as one current example of anti-minoritarian abuse of the 'citizens' referendum process. Even amongst conservatives, the issue has become contentious. The
Maxim Institute has announced its opposition to binding citizens referendums, citing the adverse fiscal management consequences that have ensued in the state of
California in a recent paper from
Richard Ekins, a
University of Auckland legal academic. Former New Zealand Prime Minister
John Key also opposes binding referendums on fiscal grounds, noting that California's contradictory tax cap and public spending referendums have made state fiscal management chaotic. However, a key problem with that argument is that ballot initiatives only make up 2% of the Californian state budget, once Proposition 98 is removed from the equation (Proposition 98 locks in education spending which probably would have been spent anyway and had always occupied about one-third of the Californian budget). During 2009, there was additional criticism from prominent New Zealand legal academics, such as Andrew Geddis and Bridget Fenton at
Otago University. They argue that CIRs are no substitute for more deliberative processes within the existing framework of
representative democracy, such as joining political parties, protest marches, voting within general elections and parliamentary select committee submissions.
Table of petitions and referendums The following table lists those petition questions lodged with Clerk of the House from 1994 to 2019. Questions lodged since then are not included. Note that some questions may have been worded so that "no" was the desired response by the proposer. The 1999 referendums were held in conjunction with the
1999 general election, which is likely to have played a role in the high proportion of voters. ==Local government==