Youth MPs accuse govt of 'censoring' them
The protocols followed for this year's Youth Parliament are the same as previous years, the Ministry of Youth Development says, after accusations of censorship.
However, the email sent to one Youth MP carries the subject line "changes required", and stated the ministry "have had to make some changes".
Some of the Youth MPs involved say they will not be suppressed and the issue has fuelled the fire to make their voices heard.
The Labour Party has criticised the approach taken after some Youth MPs were asked to remove parts of their speeches, because some of their speech lacked political neutrality by criticising "this government".
Changes recommended included the removal of general mentions of the Treaty Principles Bill, funding for Māori and Pasifika, and Pay Equity. Speeches about "youth voice" and "freedom of speech" were also edited.
In a written statement, Ministry of Youth Development general manager John Robertson said the same protocol had been followed as was used in 2022, and the feedback provided on the Youth MPs' speeches was "generally focused on supporting them to convey their arguments clearly and effectively, and in keeping with the non-partisan approach of Youth Parliament".
"We also advised some Youth MPs that changes were required to their speeches to avoid putting themselves at risk. Youth MPs are not protected by parliamentary privilege. This means young people could be held liable if the contents of their speech raise concerns around defamation, copyright, privacy, contempt of court, or broadcasting standards.
"However, as noted above, the final decision about what they say is made by the Youth MPs."
Robertson said the ministry had in some cases told the Youth MPs "it is your decision around what your speech does and does not contain".
"From here, it is your choice how you use [our] feedback. You are the one stepping up to speak and we fully respect your right to shape your speech in the way that feels right to you."
However, the email RNZ has seen did not include such a statement.
The ministry confirmed it had provided feedback to "about half of the 80 young people who will deliver speeches", and that they were shifting from the approach used in 2019 and 2022 of livestreaming the speeches to instead sending the recordings to the participants after the event.
This was "due to resourcing constraints... the participants are welcome to share this footage with others, and online", the ministry said.
Minister for Youth James Meager said the speeches were not censored.
"We do not censor the speeches of Youth MPs. We provide feedback, and in some cases suggest changes for them to consider, but we have been clear to all Youth MPs that they make the final decision about the content of their speech."
He provided a written statement, much of which matched the ministry's statement word for word.
However, the Youth MPs spoke to reporters at Parliament with one - Thomas Brocherie, a spokesperson for Make it 16 (a group pushing for a voting age of 16) - said the approach taken to the speeches was diluting the value of the Youth Parliament.
"We have been told to not argue on either side of contentious issues such as the pay equity reforms or the Treaty Principles Bill for the excuse that they are current topics in the current Parliament. This is not just illogical, it is censorship," he said.
"We cannot say we value democracy unless we actually show and prove we value democracy. Silencing the stakeholders of the future does not value democracy."
Another Youth MP Nate Wilbourne, a spokesperson for Gen Z Aotearoa, said rangatahi were being silenced and censored.
"We've been told to soften our language, to drop key parts of our speeches and to avoid criticizing certain ministers or policies. This isn't guidance. This is fear-based control."
Brocherie said the emails being titled "changes required" was "not at all a suggestion, that is blatant editing, they want us to change something to suit their purpose, to suit their agenda".
Youth MP Lincoln Jones said they were provided with "a PDF of edited changes... delivered to our inbox, and that was the expected requirement, that we speak that speech".
"It's honestly like they've gone through with it with a microscope to find any little thing that might be interpreted wrong against, I guess, the current government."
Some of them sent responses to the ministry asking for clarification about the changes.
"And what did we get? An automatic copy and pasted reply that is not at all in the principles of what Youth Parliament is," Jones said.
"They claim to listen to us, they claim to want to uplift us, they send us an automatic copy and pasted response on the thing we have three minutes to speak about. That's not good enough."
He said the experience had encouraged him even further to put himself forward to become an MP.
"It honestly fuels that fire within me, and I think for all of us to put it out there and to make our voices heard."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
18 minutes ago
- RNZ News
E-mail to Youth MPs 'could have been clearer'
About half of the young people invited to learn how Parliament works were asked to remove parts of their speeches mentioning government policies. Photo: RNZ /Dom Thomas The Ministry of Youth Development has acknowledged the way it communicated with Youth MPs about changes to their speeches could have been clearer. Youth MPs representing coalition parties' MPs have also pushed back on the accusations of censorship from their peers. About half of the young people invited to learn how Parliament works by emulating the job of MPs were asked to remove parts of their speeches mentioning government policies, including pay equity and the Treaty Principles Bill. Some decried this as "censorship" . In a statement, Ministry of Youth Development general manager John Robertson said it was long-standing practice to review Youth MPs' general debate speeches and suggest changes. "We've looked through our correspondence and acknowledge we could have been clearer and more consistent in our language. The e-mail headers said 'General Debate Speech feedback - changes required' and the content of our e-mails went on to explain our feedback was just 'recommendations'. "We accept that this could have caused confusion." Since the accusations of censorship, the ministry has underlined that it was up to the Youth MPs what their speeches would contain and "we fully respect your right to shape your speech in the way that feels right to you". Some of the Youth MPs have done just that - vowing to deliver their speeches without the suggested edits. Robertson confirmed members of the Youth Press Gallery - assigned to emulate political reporters - also had their work checked by the ministry before being it could be distributed more widely. He said the Youth Parliament was intended to be non-partisan, and this was explained to participants from the start of their induction. "Both general debate speeches and youth press gallery contributions are moderated, and we may suggest changes. This is a long-standing practice with Youth Parliament." He reiterated the ministry's guidance was intended to ensure articles and speeches remained focused on policy rather than party, did not breach defamation, copyright, privacy, or contempt of court laws, followed principles of no naming, no blaming, no shaming, and made no false assertions or claims not backed by fact. On Wednesday, Youth MPs representing MPs from New Zealand First, National, and ACT held a press conference of their own, accusing campaigners for Make it 16 of hijacking Youth Parliament for their own politicking. "They knew the entire time they could do their speech. They're just stirring this whole thing up because they came here with an agenda," said Jerry Wei, Youth MP for Karen Chhour. He dismissed concerns the speeches had been censored. Bryn Pierce, Youth MP for Andy Foster, said some speeches that other Youth MPs disagreed with were disrupted by walk-outs or repeated points of order. "That is not an environment where Youth MPs can truly feel safe to share their voice," he said. The press conference ended up being joined by other Youth MPs, keen to debate each other on Parliament's steps. Benjamin Kingsford, Youth MP for Jan Tinetti, said it was a shame the debate about censorship was being reported on instead of the content of the speeches. "We've had amazing speeches about mental health, about sexual abuse, about the environment, about the economy, about all of these issues that actually matter to New Zealanders." He said the Youth MPs should acknowledge other people's opinions, and move forward together. Elite Reti, Peeni Henare's Youth MP, said he hoped young people would continue to have their say. "I think the main message on this Youth Parliament is that we have opinions. We're all going to disagree on certain things. Maybe we'll agree on other things, some fundamental things," he said. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Iwi leader rebuts claims of consent power grab
Ngāti Waewae leader Francois Tumahai has rejected claims that a revamped iwi agreement with the West Coast Regional Council gives Māori too much say in planning and resource consents. The regional council has reworded more than 20 clauses in its Mana Whakahono a Rohe partnership document with Poutini Ngai Tahu, mainly to clarify how it will work in practice. Former chair Allan Birchfield, who signed the original document in 2020, has strongly criticised the new version, saying it puts iwi on the same governance level as the council. 'I am voting against (the amendments) because they will give iwi full control of the Council's consenting and compliance role under the RMA,' he told yesterday's council meeting. Mr Tumahai, one of two iwi reps on the council, says Mr Birchfield is deluded. 'He's had it explained to him, but he won't listen. Every other councillor has supported the changes but he has his world view, and he won't change it,' the Ngāti Waewae chair told Local Democracy Reporting. The agreement spells out how staff will involve manawhenua in resource consenting - a requirement under the Resource Management Act (RMA). 'The council will treat Poutini Ngāi Tahu as an affected party for all applications … where there is potential for adverse cultural effects, unless it is demonstrated otherwise,' an expanded clause says. Council staff would decide if adverse effects were likely by talking to the environmental agencies of the region's two Rūnanga, Poutini Ngai Tahu partnership manager Ashley Stuart said. A new clause in the agreement says the council will also 'strongly encourage' people applying for resource consents to talk to manawhenua themselves early on, through the iwi's environmental consultancies. Without a letter of approval from the iwi, the council will treat the consent as 'limited notified', adding potential costs and delays. Ngāti Waewae's environmental agency was already issuing at least one letter of approval a week to people checking in over resource consents, Mr Tumahai said. The council held back three of the amendments for further clarification, but endorsed the majority. Cr Birchfield was the sole objector, saying independent legal advice should been provided before these were put to council. "These are major changes … they should be deferred and the community should also be consulted,' he said. The former chair said he had signed the Mana Whakahono agreement in 2020 on the understanding it was a consultation document that would help to speed up and lower the cost of consenting, but this had turned out not to be the case. 'I did receive considerable criticism at the time and those critics have proven to be correct. This agreement is part of the reason why the council's compliance and consent function is so costly and delayed.' Mr Tumahai told LDR there were multiple factors causing the delays. 'It's convenient to blame Māori - we're kind of used to it - but I think with the changes the council is making we should see an improvement within a couple of months.' Part of the problem was overly-complex consent forms, and the council's use of North Island consultants who did not understand the West Coast context, Mr Tumahai conceded. The council had been swamped with applications for resource consents as the price of gold soared, and had to hire external planners to cope, he said. 'We had a workshop today on creating new templates with standard conditions for alluvial mining, and a schedule that walks you through how to apply - that should simplify it for everyone and speed things up.' Cr Birchfield - a veteran miner - did not attend the workshop, telling LDR later he needed to be at work to smelt some gold. Mr Tumahai said the clamour over consent delays was coming from a handful of miners who had not been successful with their applications. "They're not coming to grips with modern requirements and they are the ones making the noise.' The revamped Mana Whakahono agreement also sets out priority areas for improvement in which the council and iwi will collaborate as Treaty partners. They include planning for new sewerage infrastructure, and coastal retreat where buildings are at risk from erosion, flooding or sea level rise. District council and industry discharges into rivers or the sea are also seen as priorities for change, but over time. 'The discharge of wastewater into freshwater and coastal waters is an outdated solution from the last century which is culturally abhorrent to Poutini Ngai Tahu and is becoming unacceptable to others within communities,' the agreement declares. - By Lois Williams, Local Democracy Reporter
The Spinoff
3 hours ago
- The Spinoff
Gone By Lunchtime: Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the supermarket
We discuss our issues. With an election about 15 months away, there are few better ways to get a sense of the political terrain than the Ipsos Issues Monitor, a survey that tracks the issues of greatest concern to New Zealanders, the parties they consider best equipped to deal with those issues, and how all of that has changed over time. In a new episode of Gone By Lunchtime, The Spinoff's politics podcast, Toby Manhire, Annabelle Lee-Mather and Ben Thomas assess the latest edition of the study. Cost of living had been subsiding in recent surveys, but the line has now poked back upward, with 55% picking it as one their three chief concerns. At the same time, respondents have, by a narrow margin, nominated Labour as the party better equipped to deal with the problem. Health, meanwhile, is second on the list of concerns, underscoring the challenge being taken on by Simeon Brown as health minister. Also on the agenda for discussion: Shane Jones is promoting a bill that would oblige Ngāpuhi to undertake a single commercial treaty settlement; does he have a point? And we reflect on the formidable legacy of Takutai Tarsh Kemp, Te Pati Māori MP for Tāmaki Makaurau since 2023, who died suddenly last week at the age of 50.
