KEY POINTS:
The Green Party wants a "citizens' jury" into taxpayer funding of political parties to get well under way before the election to try to stop it being scuttled if National wins.
During negotiations last year over the electoral finance legislation, the Government promised the Greens it would hold
a "citizens' assembly" comprised of ordinary voters to look at the funding of parties.
The jury was allocated $4.3 million in the Budget, but the terms of reference and logistics of running it have not been finalised.
The jury is unlikely to survive a change of government. Yesterday National deputy leader Bill English said his party did not support it and described it as "part of a grubby deal done between Labour and the Greens over the Electoral Finance Act."
Green co-leader Russel Norman said the party wanted the assembly running before the election so it was harder to derail if there was a change of government.
Dr Norman said the jury was the best way to consider the issue of party funding, because it was non-partisan.
However, Mr English said National would repeal the Electoral Finance Act, which it had criticised because Labour had not got the usual bi-partisan agreement that applied to electoral issues.
"We just don't trust a process cooked up between Labour and the Greens. The last one has turned out to be a disaster and I hope they don't exploit the goodwill of well-meaning people this time."
National had not been consulted over the jury or the experts who would be appointed to an independent panel that will also look at party financing.
Similar concepts overseas - such as the 2006 Citizens' Assembly which considered whether Ontario should move to a proportional representation model - have taken up to six months of meetings and public hearings before making recommendations.
Dr Jonathan Rose, a political science lecturer from Queens University who was the academic adviser to the Ontario Assembly, said public assemblies were ideal for considering highly political issues, such as campaign financing.
He said such assemblies must be more than a "knee-jerk reaction to an issue" and must have credibility in the public's eyes. They must be non-partisan and have enough resources to consider all the arguments.
"It has legitimacy because it is comprised of average citizens who have no agenda. I wouldn't want to get into a plane designed by a citizens' assembly, but they are ideal for deeply complex issues where there are powerful arguments on both sides, like electoral financing. Also, if politicians have a conflict of interest in the decision, they shouldn't be involved."
The jury is expected to be closely modelled on the Ontario Assembly and consist of one person randomly chosen from each of the 70 electorates. It is likely to be chaired by the chair of the expert panel. Experts will be called to provide it with information and it is also likely to hold public hearings.
