Opposition calls for tikanga committee following haka debate
Speaking to 1News after the debate, Labour MP Willie Jackson said Speaker Gerry Brownlee should put a tikanga committee in place to be chaired by fellow Labour MP Adrian Rurawhe.
Jackson said he was worried the New Zealand Parliament would be "misrepresented around the world" over "the worst suspension" in its history.
"That would be disgraceful, given the amount of offences and what's gone on in this House for many years.'
He said Parliament could be perceived as being "absolutely racist, which it is not". He acknowledged efforts were being made, but not enough.
ADVERTISEMENT
'But if we put Adrian Rurawhe there chairing a Tikanga Committee, we'll be on track.'
During the debate, he called on the house to consider a tikanga committee that "all MPs" could work on, to go through Parliament's processes in terms of tikanga Māori and tikanga Pākehā and "come up with a sensible way and strategy going forward".
Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson said her party would have preferred to pause the Privileges Committee proceedings until the tikanga committee could evaluate the "incorporation of tikanga in Parliament".
"This would then allow the Privileges Committee to evaluate the conduct of MPs with any new Standing Orders that arise from this work."
Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer. (Source: 1News)
Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer said the Privileges Committee was not "fit for purpose" and a tikanga committee should have enacted the decision, the discussions and feedback.
1News sought a response from Speaker Gerry Brownlee to Jackson's request for a tikanga committee chaired by Rurawhe. Brownlee's office said: "Mr Speaker has no comment."
ADVERTISEMENT
Other members of Parliament made reference to the importance of a discussion on tikanga during last night's debate.
Interpreting the haka with 'no experience or knowledge'
Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi said it was an "absolute insult" to Māori to hear people with no experience or knowledge about haka interpret the haka.
'Whether they believe it disorderly, whether they believe it violent, it is an absolute insult to sit here and listen to peoples' interpretation of haka.'
ACT MP Karen Chhour agreed discussion around tikanga, te ao Māori, and "all those other issues" may need to be addressed in the future.
Green MP Ricardo Menendez-March said he welcomed the call to review the rules of Parliament to better incorporate tikanga.
Labour MP Arena Williams said the debate wasn't just about disorder but the "discomfort that happens when Māori protest in a way that the House hasn't learned to accommodate".
ADVERTISEMENT
"Let's learn from this. Let's bring tikanga into our practice. Let's do our best to understand it, so that we can represent the people who need us."
Haka echoed through Parliament and beyond
Last night's vote brings to a close a six-month-long process that has resulted in a 21-day suspension for Te Pāti Māori leaders Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, and a seven-day suspension for MP Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke.
Te Pāti Māori MPs in the House. (Source: 1News)
In November, the three MPs and Labour MP Peeni Henare performed a haka in response to the first reading of the controversial Treaty Principles Bill.
Henare appeared in front of the Privileges Committee in March, and it was recommended he apologise to the House.
The three MPs for Te Pati Māori were referred to the committee but ignored initial summons to appear in-person, claiming an injustice as they had been denied legal representation and were unable to appear together.
ADVERTISEMENT
Last month, the Privileges Committee found the trio had acted "in a manner that could have the effect of intimidating a member of the House in the discharge of their duty".
The report said it was not acceptable to approach other members on the debating floor and "particularly unacceptable" for Ngarewa-Packer to "to appear to simulate firing a gun" at another member of Parliament.
The committee's recommended suspensions drew criticism from the three Opposition parties.
The Speaker said it was 'unprecedented', and that no member of Parliament has been suspended for more than three days since it first sat in 1854.
He said it was important all perspectives and views were shared before a decision was made on the recommendation, meaning all MPs would be able to voice their opinion if they wished.
The debate was initially set to take place on Budget Day (May 20), but Leader of the House Chris Bishop deferred it to last night.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
Te Pāti Māori announces Ikaroa-Rāwhiti candidate Hayley Maxwell
Listening to articles is free for open-access content—explore other articles or learn more about text-to-speech. Haley Maxwell co-ordinated the Toitu Te Tiriti hīkoi in Gisborne. By Russell Palmer of RNZ Te Pāti Māori has announced Haley Maxwell will stand for next year's general election - for the one Māori seat currently held by Labour. Maxwell helped organise the Hīkoi mō te Tiriti in the region last year. 'Haley Maxwell spearheaded the historic Hīkoi mō Te Tiriti from Te Tairāwhiti right through to Kahungunu. Haley embodies the fierce compassion and courage that Ikaroa-Rāwhiti is famous for,' Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi said in a written statement. 'She has stood on the marae, in the courts and on the streets for our people. Parliament will be a stronger house with her voice echoing the roar of Te Tairāwhiti.'
Newsroom
4 hours ago
- Newsroom
Attorney-General rules her own Govt's voting crackdown breaches human rights
Electoral law restrictions announced last week are in breach of the Bill of Rights Act, Attorney-General Judith Collins KC says in a report belatedly disclosed to Parliament. She indicates more than 100,000 people may be directly or indirectly disenfranchised by rules banning enrolment in the final 13 days before an elections. Young people, and areas with larger Māori, Asian and Pasifika communities, are likely to be worst affected. Denying voters the political franchise is a heavy price to pay, she says, when there are alternative, less restrictive measures that could have addressed the same problem of speeding up the vote count. But Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has hit back. 'Allowing late enrolments, however well intentioned, has placed too much strain on the system,' he tells Newsroom. 'I don't accept that we are disenfranchising people by requiring that they are first enrolled. Many countries do this, such as Australia.' Professor Andrew Geddis, at the University of Otago, says the Bill of Rights notice ought to have been attached to the bill when it was presented, according to the wording of section 7 of the Bill of Rights Act. This would have allowed ministers to be asked about it, when the proposal first came out. 'However, it doesn't seem to have been,' he says. 'Instead, it quietly went up on the Ministry of Justice website just in time for the weekend.' 'Heavy price' for administrative convenience In its Regulatory Impact Statement, the Ministry of Justice did not recommend the option of closing enrolment earlier. 'Its impact on reducing special votes is uncertain, while its impact on democratic participation could be significant,' officials said. The Attorney-General's Bill of Rights inconsistency notice goes further, concluding the proposal for a 13-day registration deadline appears to constitute an unjustified limit on section 12 of the Bill of Rights Act, which says every New Zealand citizen aged 18-plus has the right to vote in Parliamentary elections. 'The accepted starting-point is the fundamental importance of the right to vote within a liberal democracy,' she says. 'A compelling justification is required to limit that right.' Citing Electoral Commission and Ministry of Justice data, she says about 3400 people would have their eligibility to vote directly affected by the law change. These include people returning from overseas after being away for an extended time, and people who become New Zealand residents or are released from prison during the registration period. But many more will have their right to vote indirectly affected, by being in effect excluded from the franchise by the practicalities of the operation of a 13-day pre-election registration deadline. There has been an expectation, since 1993, that electors can register as late as the day before polling day, or more recently, on polling day. Indeed, the trend (with accompanying publicity campaigns) has been towards greater flexibility as to when people may register to vote. In the 2023 general election, the special votes included more than 97,000 people who registered for the first time during the voting period, and nearly 134,000 people who changed electoral districts during the voting period. 'This gives some indication of the number of people who may be affected, and the farther out the registration deadline from polling day, the greater the disenfranchising impact is likely to be.' There were other options the Government could have embraced, Collins says, that would impose 'less onerous limits on the right to vote'. For instance, it could have reverted to a deadline of the day before election day (which was the rule from 1993 to 2020) or a deadline of three, five or seven days before polling day. The notice to Parliament also finds the announced law changes breach the rights of sentenced prisoners, by reinstating a ban on them voting. For most of New Zealand's history, sentenced prisoners have been denied the right to vote. In 1975, the Rowling Labour government gave them the vote but that enfranchisement was brief – the National government repealed it two years later. The Electoral Act 1993 allowed for a limited prisoner franchise, though those serving a a sentence of three or more years were excluded. That was repealed in 2010. Then in 2020, the Ardern Labour Government restored prisoners' ability to vote, after jailhouse lawyer Arthur Taylor took a successful case to the Supreme Court. Like the Attorney-General, the court said the ban was inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act. Goldsmith has now announced it will (again) be repealed. And he isn't wavering, in the face of the Attorney-General's notice. 'Citizenship brings rights and responsibilities,' he says. He rejects the inclusion of prisoners' rights in the Bill of Rights Act. 'People who breach those responsibilities to the extent that they are sentenced to jail temporarily lose some of their rights, including the right to vote.' Speeding up the vote count On the wider matter of when people are allowed to enrol, the law says an eligible voter can enrol right up to and including election day, at any voting place in New Zealand. According to public advice from the Electoral Commission, if people enrol early, then voting will be faster. The commission says that those who enrol before Writ Day (about a month before election day) will have their names on the printed electoral roll at the voting place. They'll also be mailed an EasyVote card, making it faster for the person issuing voting papers to find them on the roll. 'You can still enrol after Writ Day – but you may need to fill in an extra form when you go to vote.' Goldsmith justifies barring people from voting if they don't enrol more than 13 days out from election day, saying it should enable votes to be counted faster. 'The final vote count used to take two weeks – last election it took three,' he says. 'If we leave things as they are, it could likely take even longer. 'If you want to vote, you need to be enrolled. People have a whole year to get organised. I have every confidence New Zealanders can manage.' Ockers and 'drop kicks' Goldsmith says many countries require people to be enrolled before voting. Australia required people to be enrolled 26 days before the last election, and before 2020, New Zealanders were not able to enrol on election day. 'Those people were not disenfranchised, they were simply required to be enrolled. It is not difficult.' However, the Attorney-General points out the High Court of Australia has ruled on a voter registration deadline that departed from previous settings. She endorses that court's comments, that restricting the impact on the franchise of restricting the voter registration period is a 'heavy price'. Delivering a 2010 judgment on behalf of a seven-member panel of the High Court, Chief Justice Robert French had said the heavy price imposed on the constitutional mandate was disproportionate to the benefits of a smoother and more efficient electoral system, to which the amendments were directed. Last week, Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour said only 'drop kicks' enrolled late to vote. Goldsmith reiterates his unhappiness with the Act leader's comment. 'I said last week, Mr Seymour's comment was unhelpful. The purpose of the change, and a large number of other changes, is to take pressure off the system, so that the Electoral Commission can do its job effectively and efficiently.'
NZ Herald
9 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Labour's Chris Hipkins questions MMP system, seeks balance in power
'But, I differ a bit from the current Government in the sense that while I respect the important constituencies the smaller parties represent, and I also respect that we compete with them for votes too, I don't think under MMP the smaller parties should call all of the shots. 'I still think the bigger parties have a mandate to reflect the view of a much larger section of the electorate, and so I do think under MMP you need to keep proportionality in mind. 'Yes, there should be some concessions and some trade-offs to the other parties to form a government. But that doesn't mean that you should be doing things that you specifically told the electorate before the election that you weren't going to do. 'The Treaty Principles Bill is a good example. The Regulatory Standards Bill. Some of these things that no one knew they were voting for at the last election, and now they're being inflicted on them. I don't think that's the spirit of MMP or democracy,' he said. Talk of introducing a Capital Gains Tax has been the bugbear of successive governments. In the 2010s, Sir John Key ruled out a CGT while the then-Labour leader Phil Goff made it the centrepiece of his party's tax policy. Fast-forward to Dame Jacinda Ardern ruling out ever implementing one while she was Prime Minister. Enter, Hipkins, who carried the message through the 2023 election. Luxon's then the one to 'rule it out' while he's in rule. When it comes to Election 2026, Hipkins said Labour will have a 'different tax policy' to the one they had at the last election. He stopped short of confirming whether that means the reintroduction of a CGT, but did say he'll announce it by the end of the year. 'Because I think it is important, that is a big policy area. People want to know where they stand. 'In New Zealand, I think we've placed far too much emphasis on buying and selling houses amongst ourselves, pushing up the price so that potentially a whole generation of homeowners is being shut out of the housing market,' he said. Chris Hipkins and Christopher Luxon during a leaders' debate in 2023 and they will already be planning for another battle in 2026. Photo / TVNZ The Labour Party is yet to release any policy announcements for next year's election, but Hipkins said that's for good reason. He wants to make sure they'll be able to deliver on promises made. 'I think one of the valid criticisms of us last time we were in opposition was that we had some really good ideas, but we hadn't worked through the details of exactly how would we do that. Then, when we got into government, we found that some of the things that we'd said we were going to do, very well intentioned, we didn't have a clear plan for how we would do it. 'I think the same thing has happened to this Government. They've made promises with no plan on how they're actually going to do it, and I don't want to be in that position,' he said. In May, Act Party leader and Deputy Prime Minister, David Seymour, referred to Hipkins as 'poo Midas'. It was after NZ First leader Winston Peters 'permanently' ruled out working with Hipkins in any future government coalition. 'This guy's got the opposite of the Midas touch. I think they call him a 'poo Midas',' Seymour said. Hipkins said he's all for a bit of humour in politics, a 'little bit of a sledge' now and then, where it's funny. But the latest jabs from those at the top don't have him laughing. 'They're not very funny, and they're also not very good at it. So, I think they should just stick to actually doing what people ask them to do, you know, New Zealanders wanted them to fix the cost of living crisis,' he said. Listen to the full episode to hear more from Chris Hipkins about the possibility of free dental and whether we should 'tax the rich'. The Front Page is a daily news podcast from the New Zealand Herald, available to listen to every weekday from 5am. The podcast is presented by Chelsea Daniels, an Auckland-based journalist with a background in world news and crime/justice reporting who joined NZME in 2016. You can follow the podcast at iHeartRadio, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.
