John MacDonald: Gun salutes and c-bombs don't belong in Parliament

"I've seen some bad times in this house, but this is one of the lowest I've ever seen. When you go to that sort of standard of language, nothing's beneath you after that, is it?"  

That was Winston Peters yesterday after his coalition colleague, Brooke van Velden, used the c-word in parliament.  

And I’m with him 100%.  

He said he was disgusted that the word was said in Parliament, and he was disgusted that the word was used in a newspaper article at the weekend – which is why it came up for discussion yesterday.    

And the timing of it was interesting, because just hours after the c-bomb went off, it was announced that the co-leaders of Te Pati Māori have been suspended for three weeks, and one of their MPs suspended for a week.  

This is in relation to them getting out of their seats in Parliament and doing the haka as a protest against David Seymour’s Treaty Principles Bill.  

The part of it that actually got them in strife wasn’t the haka, it was the two-finger gun salute given to David Seymour while they were out of their seats.     

If you were to ask me: “What’s worse? The two-finger gun salute in Parliament or an MP using the c-word in Parliament?” I would say that the bad language is way worse. Hands down. 

And if you were to ask me: “What’s worse? MPs doing a haka in Parliament or an MP using the c-word in Parliament?” Same. The bad language is way worse than that too. 

I’m not defending the Māori Party MPs, because what they did is not the kind of thing I expect in Parliament. At the time, I thought it was a great piece of theatrics, but it’s not appropriate.  

Just like I’m not going to defend Green MP Julie Anne Genter crossing the floor that time to go nuts at Matt Doocey. That didn’t meet my expectations of parliamentary behaviour either.     

Which is why I think that ACT party deputy leader Brooke van Velden has to be hauled over the coals. Even though she, reportedly, had permission from the Clerk of the House. 

And why I agree with Winston Peters and with Judith Collins who have both been saying since yesterday afternoon that we have reached a new low. That behaviour in Parliament has reached a new low.  

It’s believed that van Velden is the first MP to intentionally use the c-word in the House. This was when she was replying to a question from Labour about the Government’s pay equity changes. 

Or, more to the point, a question referring to the opinion article at the weekend about the pay equity row, where the writer used the c-word. 

I don’t know why Labour even brought it up, when it seems to have been silent about the derogatory nature of the article. I thought the article itself was appalling, but the writer seems to have gotten away with it because her employer is backing her to the hilt.  

But that doesn’t mean that Parliament should turn a blind eye. 

I wasn’t impressed with Speaker Gerry Brownlee's handling of things yesterday. Not once did he interrupt van Velden, only saying afterwards that it might have been better to refrain from using the word. Saying “more discretion” could have been used. 

The wet bus ticket treatment from the Speaker doesn’t give me much hope that standards in Parliament are going to improve. 

I know people have been saying forever that parliamentarians behave badly but I think Parliament needs to up its game big time.  

That is where laws are made. Parliament is where we look-to for leadership. And this is probably a bit old school, but Parliament sets the standard for society.  

Some people say it should reflect society, but I say it should set the benchmark, and our politicians should show us what a civil society looks like. 

See omnystudio.com

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Morning's Podcast with John McDonald
from Newstalk ZB.

Speaker 2 (00:13):
Quote. Start the quote today. I've seen some bad times
in this house, but this is one of the lowest
I've ever seen. When you go to that sort of
standard of language, nothing's beneath you after that, is it?
End of quote. That's what Winston Peters said yesterday after
his coalition colleague Book van Velden used the C word

(00:36):
in parliament and I'm with them one hundred percent. I'm
also with him one hundred percent in terms of the
word being used in that article which started this whole thing,
the article at the weekend, so he said he was disgusted,
missus Winston Peter's disgusted that the word was said in
parliament and he was disgusted that the word was used
in the newspaper article, which is why the whole thing

(00:59):
came up for discussion yesterday. And the timing of it
was interesting, ah because just hours after the sea bomb
went off it was announced that the co leaders of
departy MAI have been suspended for three weeks and one
of their MPs suspended for a week. Now. This is
in relation to the time they got out of their seats,
you remember this, got out of their seats in Parliament

(01:23):
and did a hacker as a protest against David Seymour's
Thready Principles Bill. The part of it that this is
the interesting bit, The part of it that actually got
them in strife wasn't the actual hacker. It was the
two finger gun salute that they gave David Seymour while
they were doing it, while they were out of their seats.
But if you were to ask me, have you were

(01:46):
to say, oh, mate, what's worse? What do you reckon's worse?
MPs giving another MP the old two finger gun salute
in parliament or an MP using the C word in parliament?
If you ask me that, I would say the bad
language is way worse, hands down. And if you were
to ask me, oh, what's MP's do in a harker

(02:08):
in parliament or an MP using the C word in parliament,
and I'd say, well, the bad language way worse than
that too. Now I'm not defending the Mighty Party MPs
because what they did is not the kind of thing
I expect in parliament. It just shows us where we
got to in terms of parliamentary behavior. At the time,

(02:29):
I thought I might have even said it. I thought
it was a great piece of theatrics, but not appropriate
behavior for parliament, just like I'm not going to defend
Green MP juliean Genter crossing the floor that time to
go nuts at Matt Doocy. That didn't meet my expectations
of parliamentary behavior either, which is why I think that

(02:50):
Act Party Deputy leader Brook van Velden she has to
be hauled over the coals for what she did yesterday
and why I agree with Winston Peters and with Jude
of the Collins who have both been saying since yesterday
afternoon that we have reached a new low, that behavior
in parliament in general has reached a new low. Here's
a little bit of what Judith Collins was saying to

(03:11):
Mike earlier on.

Speaker 3 (03:12):
You know, there's a lack of civility now and it's
not acceptable and I feel that, you know the comments
of the print journalist in the Sunday Star Times this
last Sunday was one of the lowest points I think
I've seen in twenty three years. That and what happened
on the fourteenth of November and Parliament, it's just the

(03:36):
sort of behavior towards each other that is despicable.

Speaker 2 (03:40):
Yeah, it's believed that Brook van Velden is the first
MP to intentionally use the sea word in the House
when Share was replying to a question from Labor about
the government's pay equity changes, or, more to the point,
a question which referred to that opinion article, that shocking
opinion article at the weekend about the pay equity row
in the Sunday Star Times where the writer used the

(04:03):
sea word. Now, I don't know why Labor even brought
it up when it seems this is Labra I'm talking about,
When Labor seems to have been silent about the derogatory
nature of the article written by Andrea of NTS. I
thought the article itself was appalling, but she seems to
have gotten away with it because her employer seems to

(04:24):
be backing her to the hilt. But that doesn't mean
that doesn't mean Parliament should turn a blind eye. I
thought just said. Listening to it again when I heard
her on with Mike this morning, I thought that Judith
Collins sounded despairing as she should, as we all should.
So I wasn't impressed with Brook van Velden also was

(04:44):
it impressed with Speaker Jerry Brownly either. Not once did
he interrupt her yesterday. He only said afterwards that at
it might have been better to refrain from using that word,
saying that more discretion could have been used when he's
right there, Brook van Velden, she didn't have to use
the word to get her message across at all. But

(05:04):
the old wet bus ticket treatment from j Harry Browne
the Speaker doesn't give me much hope that standards in
Parliament are going to improve anytime soon. Winston Peters, he
doesn't think the standards of behavior can get much worse.
I think he's underestimating things there. I think there's a
bit more, bit more regal room for bad behavior. And look,

(05:25):
I know people have been saying forever, for as long
as I can remember, people have been saying, oh, those
parliamentarians they behave like a bunch of kids. You know,
it's always been the rhetoric. But just because we've been
saying that forever, I think we have reached a point
where Parliament needs to up its game big time. Because
Parliament is where laws are made. Parliament is, whether you

(05:50):
want to admit it or not, Parliament is where we
look for leadership. And this is probably a bit old school,
but I'm feeling old school in relation to this. Parliament
sets the standard for society. Some people will say, oh,
it should reflect society, and that's what we've got now,
it's reflecting society and do you like what you see?

(06:11):
So some people say it should reflect society. That I say,
it should set the benchmark for society. And instead of
reflecting the worst parts of society, our politicians should show
us what the best parts of a civil society looks like.

Speaker 1 (06:28):
For more from Caterbory Mornings with John McDonald, listen live
to news talks at be Christ Church from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.