Speaker’s Rulings — Privileges of the House and Speaker's Actions

Earlier today members raised a number of points of order relating to my conduct and the conduct of the police. I want to respond to those points before the House adjourns for the week. Members questioned statements that I have made outside the House on two incidents, one involving Shane Ardern, and the other involving a demonstration in the gallery yesterday. Let me deal with the latter first.

I announced publicly yesterday afternoon that trespass notices have been issued against the demonstrators concerned. I considered it was appropriate for me to do this as soon after the incident as possible. I could also have informed the House of my decision, and perhaps on reflection I should have done. However, the issue of trespass notices following incidents in the gallery is not uncommon, and it has not been the practice to take up the time of the House with them. Mr Prebble questioned why disorderly behaviour charges have not been laid, as has occurred with Mr Ardern. As with Mr Ardern, that is entirely a matter for the police. The fact that I have issued trespass notices does not preclude other charges being laid. Just as I did not interfere with the police over Mr Ardern, I have not done so in this case. It is a decision for them.

The statements that I made on Friday in relation to Mr Ardern were made in response to reported public comments by Mr Ardern that he had no regrets and would do it again. On reflection, I feel I should not have responded to them in public, and I apologise to the member concerned.

The police indicated to my office that they intended to interview Mr Ardern. I regarded that as a matter solely for them. No question was raised as to the interview occurring in Parliament House, and I was unaware of that having been the case. I understand from Mr Ardern that the police rang his office for an appointment, which was made with his secretary last Tuesday. I do not regard that as satisfactory. Mr Worth drew attention to parliamentary practice in Australia and to the fact that the police exercise their powers in Parliament House under the general control of the presiding officers. Subject to any specific statutory differences, I think that this is broadly the position in New Zealand too.

In the year 2000 I issued to all members a circular on the serving of legal process on members, emphasising that this should happen in Parliament House only with the agreement of the Speaker and the member concerned. The Clerk is in the process of revising that circular for reissue. I think it should also deal with the question of the exercise of police powers in the building. I want to discuss this matter with the Commissioner of Police, with a view to devising appropriate procedures for police conduct in Parliament House. Those procedures should take account of our security needs, while not infringing Parliament’s privilege of control over its precincts.

Finally, there is one other point that I wish to respond to. That is the allegation that has been made more than once that I have never explained my actions over the Hon Harry Duynhoven to the House. That is not correct. I gave a ruling on 23 July describing the course I was intending to follow, and a second detailed ruling on 7 August explaining why I had acted as I did. These rulings are on pages 7211 and 7748 to 7749 of the daily Hansard. Some members may not agree with my actions. That is their right. But it is not true that I have never explained my position on that case to the House. I will make sure that a copy of this ruling is put in every member’s box, eventually.

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Thank you for those considered rulings. To follow up on the points you made about the process in respect of police activity in Parliament itself, I wonder whether there is some way that you can communicate with the Commissioner of Police with some urgency, because Shane Ardern’s office has been rung by the police four times, I think, today. [Interruption] Was it more than four?

💬 John Carter: I’m not aware of the number.

Well, at least four times today his office has been rung by the police, pressing for an appointment to enable them to issue a summons to Mr Ardern—in Parliament! This is putting a great deal of pressure on his secretary, who, despite our consistent advice not to agree to that, may well end up doing so on the next phone call. I would suggest that you take up this matter with the police directly, so that they understand that a summons cannot be issued in Parliament to a member of Parliament. If they could stop hassling Shane Ardern’s office for such an appointment, it would be greatly appreciated.

I appreciate the member’s point. It is properly raised, and yes that will be done. I will discuss this matter with the Clerk, and he can explain the proper procedures to the police. But I can assure the member that that will be done.

The House adjourned at 5.48 p.m.