The Privileges Committee report on Te Pāti Māori's haka last year will be debated and voted on next Tuesday, with Parliament's Speaker calling the proposed punishment 'very severe'.
The Committee suggested Hana Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke be suspended for seven days - and co-leaders Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi for 21 days.
Newstalk ZB political editor Jason Walls unpacked the ongoing issue.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Jason Wool's political editors with us. Now, Hey, Jason, Hey, hmmm,
so it sounds very much like Jerry thinks this is
too harsh.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
A it does sound like that, I mean, just to
catch people up. It was quite an unusual situation in
the House today. It's quite unprecedent, unprecedented. The recommendation that
came from the Privileges Committee, as outlined by Jerry Brownly.
Speaker 3 (00:19):
These punishments recommended by the Committee are very severe and
are unprecedented in this Parliament as far as I'm aware,
since the House first met in eighteen fifty four, no
member who's been found guilty of contempt has been suspended
for more than three days.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Which is obviously quite a long time. And he goes
on to point out that a twenty one day suspension
for the co leaders was agreed to buy quite a
narrow margin within the Privileges Committee. Now, remember Tipati Marii
were giving given an opportunity to speak at said committee.
They did not. They instead called it a quote silly
little committee and did not appear worried at all about
(00:56):
its determinations. Despite this, the committee extend did its deadline
for their determination, allowing Tea Party Mary the opportunity to
submit Tea Party Mary then again declined, and when the
recommendations were being considered, Tea Party Mary then leaked them
on Facebook along with a poll asking supporters how long
they think the committee was going to suspend them for. So,
(01:18):
in short, there was the opportunity for the party to respond,
but Brownlee is giving them yet another chance.
Speaker 3 (01:26):
In particular, there's a long standing convention for speakers to
safeguard the fear treatment of the minority un teamed on
that convention by ensuring the House does not take a
decision next week without due consideration.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
So therefore there's going to be a debate without a
time limit, when members who can speak for as long
as they like, can speak as many times as they
like on Tuesday. This is in budget week, by the way,
just letting you know. They can also try to pass
motions in a bid to challenge or change how long
the suspension is for, i e. If a member wanted to,
they could move that the suspension be but for four
(02:01):
days rather than twenty one as I understand it now.
Speaking to the ruling was Shane Jones, who I think
makes quite a good point here.
Speaker 4 (02:09):
You are expecting a wide ranging debate potentially involving the
three people who did not turn up to the Privileges Committee,
but who may very very well be in the house.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
You know. And he's bang on, I think Meanwhile, Ty
Party Marty have taken to the program the Hui, where
Debbie and Arawdi were both brought to tears when they
were discussing how this has affected them.
Speaker 5 (02:31):
Country loves my aca, the world loves myka hm, but
that feels like they don't love me.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
Then Araladi had a crack at Judith Collins.
Speaker 5 (02:42):
For who to label us as nothing should have been
kind of terrorists in this place, you know, as the
unruly natives. And it's sich same rhetoric when we all
phetically being ourselves.
Speaker 2 (02:53):
But at the end of it, it was Judith Collins
who had the final word when asked if the twenty
one day punishment was too long.
Speaker 1 (02:58):
Oh, I'm sure they'll think of that next time that wished.
Speaker 3 (03:00):
To behave like that.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
And there we have it.
Speaker 1 (03:03):
When he says that she's liken them to terrorists, what's
he referring to.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
No idea, She's never done that to my knowledge. It
has never happened. I think he's putting words in her mouth.
That's just not something that the Attorney General would say.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
Okay, And when he's angry with brooker'sy over the sea bomb.
Speaker 2 (03:18):
He's not happy.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
But this is one of the lowest I've ever seen.
When you go to that sort of tandem language, nothing
is beneath you after that, is it.
Speaker 2 (03:27):
So we asked Broke about this today she said it
was rather odd. Now the Speaker has decided that he
was in fact wrong to allow the question yesterday, and
he was wrong to have and have not addressed the
use of the word in the house when it happened.
You all know the word that I'm referring to here,
And that's not the only walk back today. Have to
listen to what Chris Hopkins said just before going into
the house.
Speaker 6 (03:48):
So, in so far is our quoting from a rather
controversial comment yesterday meant that the Labour Party was contributing
to the distractions around that. I think we will own
that it would have been better if we had quoted
from something else rather than from that particular column.
Speaker 2 (04:02):
So essentially they were wrong to do that. But this
is what Chippy said yesterday.
Speaker 5 (04:06):
It's Gini's primary Christian in the House today.
Speaker 6 (04:09):
It's quoting directly from an article that was published in
the paper.
Speaker 5 (04:12):
A widely criticized article.
Speaker 6 (04:14):
People, we live in a country of free speek.
Speaker 2 (04:16):
So something is obviously gotten to Chris Hopkins.
Speaker 1 (04:19):
Well, the thing that's got to Chris Hopkins is that
are backfired.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
Right, Yes, a big way, in a big way.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
Hey, did you see I'm very excited to tell you
that there are going to be some people in the
budget lock up with us.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
I knew you were going to bring this up as
soon as I saw it today.
Speaker 1 (04:35):
Did you think, oh, no, here they come, these economists.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
No, I'm going to teach them how to read that budget.
It doesn't okay. You said on air the other day
you called said I had a ba or bugger all
or something like that. I still remind you I do
have I do have an economics degree about related.
Speaker 1 (04:53):
Saying that about you because it was a lie, then.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
I do have some very and I made listen. My
argument was never that I was going to sit there
and say, oh, I know best, but rather than everybody else.
My argument was the first take on the numbers is
just a pure this is what it says in the budget,
and then we go to the CTU and then we
go to the Taxpayers Union for reaction. Afterwards, that was
all I was saying.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Okay, thank you, Jason Heather three days running, Jason Wills,
Political Editor.
Speaker 6 (05:20):
For more from Hither Duplessy Allen Drive, listen live to
news talks. It'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Jason Wool's political editors with us. Now, Hey, Jason, Hey, hmmm,
so it sounds very much like Jerry thinks this is
too harsh.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
A it does sound like that, I mean, just to
catch people up. It was quite an unusual situation in
the House today. It's quite unprecedent, unprecedented. The recommendation that
came from the Privileges Committee, as outlined by Jerry Brownly.
Speaker 3 (00:19):
These punishments recommended by the Committee are very severe and
are unprecedented in this Parliament as far as I'm aware,
since the House first met in eighteen fifty four, no
member who's been found guilty of contempt has been suspended
for more than three days.
Speaker 2 (00:35):
Which is obviously quite a long time. And he goes
on to point out that a twenty one day suspension
for the co leaders was agreed to buy quite a
narrow margin within the Privileges Committee. Now, remember Tipati Marii
were giving given an opportunity to speak at said committee.
They did not. They instead called it a quote silly
little committee and did not appear worried at all about
(00:56):
its determinations. Despite this, the committee extend did its deadline
for their determination, allowing Tea Party Mary the opportunity to
submit Tea Party Mary then again declined, and when the
recommendations were being considered, Tea Party Mary then leaked them
on Facebook along with a poll asking supporters how long
they think the committee was going to suspend them for. So,
(01:18):
in short, there was the opportunity for the party to respond,
but Brownlee is giving them yet another chance.
Speaker 3 (01:26):
In particular, there's a long standing convention for speakers to
safeguard the fear treatment of the minority un teamed on
that convention by ensuring the House does not take a
decision next week without due consideration.
Speaker 2 (01:40):
So therefore there's going to be a debate without a
time limit, when members who can speak for as long
as they like, can speak as many times as they
like on Tuesday. This is in budget week, by the way,
just letting you know. They can also try to pass
motions in a bid to challenge or change how long
the suspension is for, i e. If a member wanted to,
they could move that the suspension be but for four
(02:01):
days rather than twenty one as I understand it now.
Speaking to the ruling was Shane Jones, who I think
makes quite a good point here.
Speaker 4 (02:09):
You are expecting a wide ranging debate potentially involving the
three people who did not turn up to the Privileges Committee,
but who may very very well be in the house.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
You know. And he's bang on, I think Meanwhile, Ty
Party Marty have taken to the program the Hui, where
Debbie and Arawdi were both brought to tears when they
were discussing how this has affected them.
Speaker 5 (02:31):
Country loves my aca, the world loves myka hm, but
that feels like they don't love me.
Speaker 2 (02:39):
Then Araladi had a crack at Judith Collins.
Speaker 5 (02:42):
For who to label us as nothing should have been
kind of terrorists in this place, you know, as the
unruly natives. And it's sich same rhetoric when we all
phetically being ourselves.
Speaker 2 (02:53):
But at the end of it, it was Judith Collins
who had the final word when asked if the twenty
one day punishment was too long.
Speaker 1 (02:58):
Oh, I'm sure they'll think of that next time that wished.
Speaker 3 (03:00):
To behave like that.
Speaker 2 (03:02):
And there we have it.
Speaker 1 (03:03):
When he says that she's liken them to terrorists, what's
he referring to.
Speaker 2 (03:07):
No idea, She's never done that to my knowledge. It
has never happened. I think he's putting words in her mouth.
That's just not something that the Attorney General would say.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
Okay, And when he's angry with brooker'sy over the sea bomb.
Speaker 2 (03:18):
He's not happy.
Speaker 3 (03:20):
But this is one of the lowest I've ever seen.
When you go to that sort of tandem language, nothing
is beneath you after that, is it.
Speaker 2 (03:27):
So we asked Broke about this today she said it
was rather odd. Now the Speaker has decided that he
was in fact wrong to allow the question yesterday, and
he was wrong to have and have not addressed the
use of the word in the house when it happened.
You all know the word that I'm referring to here,
And that's not the only walk back today. Have to
listen to what Chris Hopkins said just before going into
the house.
Speaker 6 (03:48):
So, in so far is our quoting from a rather
controversial comment yesterday meant that the Labour Party was contributing
to the distractions around that. I think we will own
that it would have been better if we had quoted
from something else rather than from that particular column.
Speaker 2 (04:02):
So essentially they were wrong to do that. But this
is what Chippy said yesterday.
Speaker 5 (04:06):
It's Gini's primary Christian in the House today.
Speaker 6 (04:09):
It's quoting directly from an article that was published in
the paper.
Speaker 5 (04:12):
A widely criticized article.
Speaker 6 (04:14):
People, we live in a country of free speek.
Speaker 2 (04:16):
So something is obviously gotten to Chris Hopkins.
Speaker 1 (04:19):
Well, the thing that's got to Chris Hopkins is that
are backfired.
Speaker 2 (04:22):
Right, Yes, a big way, in a big way.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
Hey, did you see I'm very excited to tell you
that there are going to be some people in the
budget lock up with us.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
I knew you were going to bring this up as
soon as I saw it today.
Speaker 1 (04:35):
Did you think, oh, no, here they come, these economists.
Speaker 2 (04:38):
No, I'm going to teach them how to read that budget.
It doesn't okay. You said on air the other day
you called said I had a ba or bugger all
or something like that. I still remind you I do
have I do have an economics degree about related.
Speaker 1 (04:53):
Saying that about you because it was a lie, then.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
I do have some very and I made listen. My
argument was never that I was going to sit there
and say, oh, I know best, but rather than everybody else.
My argument was the first take on the numbers is
just a pure this is what it says in the budget,
and then we go to the CTU and then we
go to the Taxpayers Union for reaction. Afterwards, that was
all I was saying.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
Okay, thank you, Jason Heather three days running, Jason Wills,
Political Editor.
Speaker 6 (05:20):
For more from Hither Duplessy Allen Drive, listen live to
news talks. It'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.