Yesterday in Parliament was pretty weird. Act MPs staged a show down event and expressed increasing dissatisfaction with their Government’s speaker Gerry Brownlee. They tried to table correspondence between the party and the Speaker’s office but were prevented from doing so by other parties.
They then staged a protest by wearing Act lapel badges, banned by a current Speaker’s ruling.
Things were pretty tense.
You may wonder why such scenes of disunity between the coalition’s partners should have erupted in Parliament.
My simple take is that it was a good old PR exercise and an attempt to stir up further culture wars to divert attention from the damage this Government is doing to our country.
Radio New Zealand has the details in this article. It includes this jaw dropping comment that Seymour made to Brownlee.
You appear to give a green light to racial harassment in this Parliament”.
The background is set out in this passage:
ACT had written to the Speaker last week, asking Brownlee refer an incident involving one of its MPs to the Privileges Committee.
One of its MPs Laura Trask felt “shaken, saddened and angry”, the letter read, after MPs from the Greens and Te Paati Māori opposed her chairing a sub committee on the repeal of section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act.
“She was told by other members that it would be better if it was someone who was Māori or Pasifika because submitters, quote, ‘could not see themselves in her’.
“In no workplace in New Zealand is that acceptable. The Speaker has an obligation to stand up to that. He hasn’t,” Seymour said.
Brownlee did give Seymour the chance to table his correspondence, but it was blocked by other parties.
And Labour has accused Act essentially of saying bollocks.
Committee member Labour’s Carmel Sepuloni said the opposition to Trask chairing the sub committee was based on her relative inexperience, not her ethnicity.
“This is a really disappointing and actually quite ridiculous misrepresentation of what happened… the main part of the conversation was the sensitive nature of the submissions and the fact that the vast majority are opposed to this bill.
“Laura is from the ACT Party that is proposing this bill. We don’t know that Laura has the experience with the social sector in the communities and the people that are coming through.”
Is there a lot of anger? Well yes. The repeal of section 7AA is based either on a particularly bad understanding of the law or the intent to insult Maoridom for political advantage or both. And it is not an isolated event. Act’s treaty principles bill is a complete misrepresentation of reality and deeply insulting to Maori. And in area after area of Government activity savage cuts are causing absolute havoc to the way our country is operting.
Calm analysis and persuasion has not worked. I am not surprised that there is anger.
And causing carnage in so many areas and then playing the victim card is so annoying.
The incident shows how brittle current inter party relationships are in the Government. The chances of the Government remaining intact are diminishing by the day.
If ACT MPs can't handle the opposition to their gutting of public services then they are at best incredibly naive, at worst arrogant a…holes.
Then tears at bedtime for TV last night from Karen Chhour who said Parliament is toxic and isn't a safe place for her. I mean, really? She is a Minister and member of the Executive with huge power, staffing and resources, salary and all kinds of protection surrounding her in the "Halls of Power" as she called it. Someone from TPM said something nasty to her apparently. Don't know what but it had something to do with being called a puppet I think. Or it may have been because she couldn't answer a question in parliament because she refused to take off her ACT badge. As for that Laura Trask; what a sook. First term MP. Entirely valid to question her suitability for the sub chair.
Arriving at a local Hospital to be greeted by a screen rather than a Doctor might make a few people feel unsafe too!- as will many other CoC govt. funding slashing measures, and no collectives or Mecas for Charter Schools, compulsory abandoning of local Govt. Māori wards…
Karen had a hard life-as per many of us-so why the hell did she join Act? Thick or bad…
Unfortunately many former liberals and leftists are seduced by the dark side and the lure of filthy lucre. Includes Michael Bassett, Donna Awatere, Darleen Tana and virtually the entire front bench of the fourth Labour government.
"Karen had a hard life-as per many of us-so why the hell did she join Act?"
That is what I have been wondering. How did she end up with them? I don't think she is a bad person but politically easily led. She probably is being bullied behind the scenes and some of it will be coming from her own party. There are covert ways of bullying and victims don't always recognise it for what it is.
Thick or bad? Remember Cuba loving lefty Donna Awatere who joined act until she like so many others in act got caught out. The word ‘recidivist’ come to mind.
They called her a puppet in Te Reo. Not the worst thing ever said in Parliament …
Was it korotao or karetao mickysavage?
"E te Minita, ka aroha ki a koe kua karetaohia e tō pāti. Kia kaha rā"
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/inside-acts-dramatic-tiff-with-speaker-gerry-brownlee/6QGQ6EZPEBE5DCB7R2JRFDRLHM/
Well it's not that harsh. Just a frankness which the Tory members need to hear. I'd have said much worse, called her a tool or one who spent to much time inside etc, etc, etc…
I pose the same question as when Jacinda once called David Seymour a prick. Was anything said that was incorrect?
No doubt Chourr has experienced only a tiny trickle of the ocean of online hatred for Ardern. Welcome to dirty politics.
Hipkins and mallard tried to get David to remove his Lapel pin 5 years ago but failed and an exemption rightfully allowing lapel pins was written into rule.
So David is correct to protest. He knew the rules because someone tried the same silly games 5 years ago.
[lprent: That is an assertion of fact. Those need to be substantiated. You should be easily able to corroborate it with the written current standing orders or current speakers rulings or somewhere in the written parliamentary rules.
Because this sounds to me to be a fiction and I know that Act supporters are more prone to myth making than accuracy when it comes to facts. So I’m putting you into temporary moderation until you either substantiate the fact with a link, change it to an opinion or apologise for asserting deliberate misinformation.
BTW: That Mallard may have decided one way on a day isn’t sufficient. To have a hope of binding subsequent speakers, it would have needed to be a actual written ruling.
We’re not that interested in propagandists playing stupid games either. ]
see my mod note.
Yes . Party lapel pins doesnt appear in Speakers rulings.
Page 18 refers to pins for sports teams only
"It is not appropriate, unless the Speaker’s permission is sought, to advertise sports teams in this Chamber. Nothing is allowed to be advertised in this Chamber. There are times when members wear ties and pins of sports teams, and I have no objection to that whatsoever….2011, Smith
Party logos were for a time displayed on boxes , and that was ruled out 2013, Roy & 2019 Mallard
That was what I vaguely remembered.
Brownlee reminded Seymour yesterday, that the Business Committee had agreed the previous day that NO insigna of any sort would be allowed in the House.
More lies. Small or big.
The toxic sense of victimhood from the ACT parties entitled little pluotcratic snowflakes is born from a sense the rules don't apply to them, because of they represent the posh classes.
Honestly, I have zero time for people who spend their entire lives punching down on the powerless on behalf of money and power complaining someone hurt their feeling by saying something harsh.
Saw a post today about party political lobbying and dodgy legislation:
Some things money can't buy – for everything else there's ACT.
ACT is right to call out the racism of the Greens and Maori Party.
Another ACT ventriloquist dummy said something.
It's not ACT, it's 'FACT' ( Fascist Association of Consumers and Taxpayers)
Racism when it suits, huh, Robin?
Try upholding the Law of Contracts (which ACT is supposedly very *hot* on), aka, The Treaty of Waitangi.
That'll do for starters.
When you start feeling sympathy for Gerry Brownlee, you just know ACT has over-stepped the line.
Thought the same when I heard Chris Hipkins on radio defending the Speaker!
Neo Liberalism has plagued this country for 40 years now, and Seymour is a true believer in the tradition of Chicago Boys, Thatcher, Pinochet and Reagan.
'Chicago Boys, Thatcher, Pinochet and Reagan.' Well said but you forgot the Koch brother (s) and their ilk who really hold the funding strings.