Appointments — Assistant Speakers

I move, That Margaret Ann Hartley be appointed Assistant Speaker. Ann Hartley was, of course, the Deputy Speaker in the previous Parliament, so she comes to this nomination with a considerable amount of experience. I think it is fair to say that she had something of a baptism of fire as Deputy Speaker in the previous Parliament. There is something about a woman in authority that seems to lead to a certain kind of chromosomal outbreak on the part of some colleagues within this House, but it is just a matter of adaptation over time, I can assure them.

Speaking from long experience over time, I can say that one gets used to women in authority and actually comes to enjoy it after a period of time, and I recommend it to members opposite in that respect. It is not really enough to sit on the front row of the paepae; sometimes it is more important to fully participate in all the activities from a leadership role, as you have demonstrated so well yourself, Madam Speaker. I have much pleasure in nominating Ann Hartley.

This motion proves just how hollow the claim in the Speech from the Throne was, that the age of winner-takes-all politics is gone. If it had gone, then the motion would have nominated someone from this side of the House for an Assistant Speaker’s position.

I respond to Dr Cullen’s rather acerbic comments of a few moments ago, suggesting that Mrs Hartley was rather unfairly treated as Deputy Speaker at the time. I tell him that we reject that utterly. Yesterday this House unanimously installed Margaret Wilson as the Speaker. Every party expressed its deep respect for her abilities as shown in that position. The reality is that if no one in this House is any more elected than anyone else, then whoever sits as a presiding officer has to have the confidence of all the House in order to be able to exercise the authority that gives it any sort of direction. So we will move an amendment to the motion. We will nominate—

💬 Hon Dr Michael Cullen: Oh, not Brian Connell.

Dr Cullen will have his fun, but let me make it very clear. Labour’s intention, in putting Ann Hartley in the position of Assistant Speaker, is to simply create a transit lounge before she goes off to Niue. That is the deal. We know that it will not be long before Dianne Yates explodes in such an apoplectic way that Labour will have to do something for her. We know that Dover Samuel’s days as a Minister are dependent on the term of one or two high commissioners around the place. There will be an exit from the Labour benches into all sorts of preferred positions as it tries to manage its own caucus. We believe that in nominating John McGregor Carter to be Assistant Speaker, we nominate someone who has long political experience. He has been in this House since 1987, he has served as a senior whip for a very, very long time, and he is well respected not only in this party but across Parliament. So as an amendment to the motion, I move, That the name “Margaret Ann Hartley” be omitted and the name “John McGregor Carter” be inserted.

The age of winner-takes-all is over. That was the National Party’s—

💬 John Key: Loser takes all!

They will get over it. [Interruption] As for the Tauranga result, the matter is sub judice, and I will see the member in court in Tauranga on 28 November. He will not be laughing then.

I go back to the primary purpose of this speech. The age of winner-takes-all is over, as evidenced by the appointment of the Deputy Speaker today. Such obvious evidence was provided to the member, yet he missed it.

But the real problem with the nomination from the National Party is that it would mean that it would be denuded of more talent, denuded of experience, and bereft of parliamentary knowledge. It desperately needs Mr Carter on its own benches, not filling in over in the Chair. It is a party of people who have been out of power now for 6 years. It has a front bench comprised largely of people with no experience in Government. It is a party that cannot do without the experience of John Carter. Otherwise, we would support him. We know he has the ability.

National has a back bench with a whole lot of ambitious people who will soon use this Parliament as a ladder to climb over their colleagues. One needs to understand the procedures of Parliament to stop such things from happening. That being the case, we have to decline the nomination from the National Party, and for the most obvious reasons, and go with some experience and some unity in respect of the new Government.

The Green Party will certainly oppose National’s amendment to the motion, and we would like to express our sincere confidence in Ann Hartley’s ability to take up this position. We believe that she did a very good job as Deputy Speaker in the last Parliament. She proved her ability to deal with some of the most abusive behaviour in the House, which is, I think, unfortunately still a very regular occurrence when members are dealing with women who are in positions of responsibility. In my view, and certainly in the Green Party’s view, Ann Hartley did a very good job of withstanding that abuse. She conducted herself with calmness and firmness, and she resolutely refused to be undermined and bullied by those around her. We certainly look forward to her taking up this role again, and we will vote against National’s amendment and support the Government’s motion.

I rise to support the amendment. There is no reason why this House should believe what Winston Peters said, because if he was sincere in his remarks about Clem Simich, he could have made him Speaker of the House. He decided not to, so there was no sincerity in those remarks of congratulation.

There is one problem with the nomination that the Leader of the House has made, which is that Ann Hartley did not earn the respect of the House when she had ample opportunity to do so as a Deputy Speaker. We voted against her last time, and she won that vote. Over the last 3 years Ann Hartley has had the opportunity to show the judgment, the temperament, and the balance that are required of a senior officer of the House, and she has failed to earn the respect of the House. Few officers of this Parliament fail in that respect. Most of them are given time. They do get a baptism of fire, but they get the opportunity, and they make it. The next nomination on the list is Ross Robertson. I admit that I was a sceptic when he took up office. But he earned the respect of this Parliament, and that is why we will support that nomination. However, we cannot support this one. We are dealing with a Government that is a curious mix of the reluctant and the incompetent: those who are reluctant to go, and the rest of them, who are incompetent. Ann Hartley happens to fit into both categories.

I just want to say a few words, first of all, in response to Winston Peters, who said that the time of winner-takes-all is over. That is a bit rich coming from Winston Peters, who has just lost the seat of Tauranga and who promised the people of New Zealand that he would not take the baubles of office. That loser has taken the biggest bauble of office his greedy chops could reach around. That is what Winston Peters has done. He demonstrates now in this Parliament that the loser can take all, because he has done that with the shonky agreement he has entered into with Helen Clark.

I heard Dr Cullen say that some people gave Ann Hartley a hard time as Deputy Speaker because she is a woman. Well, I can tell Ann Hartley that I think Dr Cullen was referring in part to me. Doing that had nothing to do with the fact that she is a woman; it was all to do with contesting vigorously in this House and with ensuring that the Standing Orders have their play. Just to demonstrate that to Dr Cullen, I say that ACT will support Ann Hartley’s nomination as Assistant Speaker, because we think that she can, and did, learn. We look forward to Ann Hartley being a good Assistant Speaker.

I rise on behalf of the Māori Party to wholeheartedly support the motion of the Government that Ann Hartley be the Assistant Speaker. She has our wholehearted support and the absolute respect of this caucus.

United Future will be supporting the amendment that has been moved. We do that because we have a very high regard for Mr Carter. We think he has performed well in the various roles he has held in the past. In this particular position of Assistant Speaker one is not entirely removed from partisan debate. The concerns that have been expressed about his being a loss to his party are therefore not as relevant. We think he could do a good job, and we are prepared to support his nomination.

Madam Speaker, I would first like to congratulate you on your election and I look forward to working with you. I would also like to congratulate the Hon Clem Simich, whom I very much enjoyed working with in the last Parliament; I think we had an excellent team. I thank all members, and assure all members that I will certainly, as a presiding officer, be working in the House to make sure that I serve the House well.

I move, That H V Ross Robertson be appointed Assistant Speaker. I do so with the Government’s stand of a 100 percent record on votes in this House during this forty-eighth Parliament we now have. I call the member Ross Robertson. I call him many other things as well, and some of those are well known in public. I call him a friend; I call him a colleague; I call him somebody who has performed extraordinarily well in the job. Indeed, he has on occasions been known as “Spot”, which is a tribute to his terrier-like qualities, his extraordinary energy, and the fact that he gets around his electorate and around everything he has to do. He has been a member of this House since 1987, and he is universally liked on all sides of the House. Of course, he brings to the House a dedication to its standards. He would like to impose upon us a code of conduct, with some of us wanting to plead guilty in advance but declining to do so, and we have not accepted that particular suggestion. But I am very confident that he will continue to perform that role with distinction.

On behalf of the National Party, I say that we will certainly endorse H V Ross Robertson for the position of Assistant Speaker. We believe that Mr Robertson exercised independence and neutrality in a very fair and even-handed way during the last Parliament. In particular, members of the National Party are confident of his working knowledge of the Standing Orders, and look forward to welcoming him and his continuing in that role.

New Zealand First wholeheartedly supports this appointment. But I want to respond also to the comments of Rodney Hide, someone who grossly overspent at the last election.

💬 Rodney Hide: Ha, ha!

Oh yes, he did. He forgot his colleagues and his fellow candidates, went to Epsom, and grossly overspent. Members should not ask me; they should ask Richard Worth. They need not believe me; they should believe him. Richard Worth knows, so do the people who work for him, and Rodney Hide has the temerity to come here and fail to recant on that fact. It was he, with Don Brash, who sat in our office, in our caucus, making every offer possible: “Anything you want, you can have.” It was Don Brash who said in July to the media that he was very happy for the leader of New Zealand First to be the Minister of Foreign Affairs—though he never discussed it with me. [Interruption] Oh yes, he did.

💬 Dr Don Brash: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. At no time did I offer to Mr Peters the position of Minister of Foreign Affairs in a National-led Government—or any other ministerial position.

💬 Rodney Hide: Point of order—

💬 Madam SPEAKER: No, I do not need any assistance. [Interruption] I do not need any assistance, Mr Hide, I am on my feet. I know this is, in effect, the first day, but I remind members that when points of order are taken they are heard in silence as a matter of respect. I also note that when a member speaks, it must be relevant to the motion. I think the member was straying off the point of the motion as he continued in his speech. So I ask the member to continue his speech but to speak to the motion before the House.

I will. My real point is that Ross Robertson would never behave like that. It is not in his nature—that is why he is qualified for the job. He has enormous experience, unlike the people who are now complaining. But my real point is that what Mr Hide had to say, given what Don Brash told the media in July without any consultation, is like that word one cannot use in Parliament, but its first letter resembles a rugby goalpost. It is a word I cannot use in Parliament but it starts with “H”, and today we saw the first attempt by those people to gainsay every action they took before the last campaign.

💬 Gerry Brownlee: I seek leave to table Mr Winston Peters’ Rotorua speech, so that everybody can see who else is a person beginning with a letter not dissimilar to a rugby goalpost.

💬 Madam SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that speech. Is there any objection? Yes, there is objection.

I seek leave to table the press statements of the visitation to the New Zealand First office by one Rodney Hide and another Mr Don Brash, whose purpose we all know was certain. They should not deny it now or try, in my absence from Parliament on important public business, to get away with a total, undiluted piece of hypocrisy.

💬 Madam SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table those press releases. Is there any objection?

💬 Gerry Brownlee: What’s he tabling?

💬 Madam SPEAKER: Press releases. Is there any objection? Yes, there is objection.

I rise to support Ross Robertson in this role. I should add that Ross Robertson is a very well-behaved member of Parliament and an excellent Assistant Speaker. Now, without Jonathan Hunt, he probably knows the Standing Orders better than anyone else here in Parliament.

I know that he would not behave like Winston Peters behaves. I was at the meeting with Don Brash, and I know for a fact that the allegation that Mr Peters has made is totally false. There was no suggestion at that meeting that the National Party would have Mr Peters as Minister of Foreign Affairs. In fact, Mr Peters wanted an offer to be put on the table that Mr Brash resolutely refused to put on the table. What was very clear from that meeting is that Mr Peters decided to support a Labour Government. That is the fact of the matter. He decided to go for the baubles of office and to support the Labour Government. It may well be that Mr Peters is now embarrassed about that, as he well may be. He may be unable to explain it to the people of Tauranga, he may well be unable to explain it to his own members of Parliament, and he may well be unable to explain it to the president of his own party, Doug Woolerton. But he should not bring that embarrassment to this House and try to reinvent the history of what happened at a meeting.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I was prepared to let this debate go on for a fair while, in the interests of open democracy, but a second rant that is the same as the first does not address the issue, which you so appositely put to me that I should do. I wish you would do that to this member now, before he bores us all witless.

💬 Madam SPEAKER: The question of relevance is equally applicable in this instance. Has the member concluded?

I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Allegations were made against me by the Rt Hon Winston Peters—[Interruption] There we go. Are New Zealand First members going to be allowed to interrupt on a point of order, after a warning?

💬 Madam SPEAKER: Are you speaking to a point of order, Mr Hide?

Yes.

💬 Madam SPEAKER: I am sorry, I thought you were continuing your speech. Please continue.

The point of order is that allegations were made by Winston Peters against me, in terms of spending, that were totally unfounded. Allegations were made about a meeting that I attended, and Mr Peters made that point. I am allowed, under the rules of debate, to respond to those allegations. I think it is very unparliamentary for Mr Peters, just because we are pointing out the truth, to say, in responding to what we said—[Interruption] There he goes. I am raising a point of order, Madam Speaker. I have been constantly interrupted by Ron Mark, I am now being interrupted by Winston Peters, and I do not see any protection from the Chair.

💬 Madam SPEAKER: I thank the member. He has made his point of order in full. I remind members that we would not have these points of order if all members were relevant and stuck to the motion that is before the House.

We rise to support Ross Robertson.

💬 Hon Dr Michael Cullen: Nearly a royal “we”.

It is a very, very royal “we”. I say to Mr Peters that this is just the start of what is to come. He will be held to account for the decisions that he has made in becoming the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

The Greens are happy to support the nomination of Ross Robertson for Assistant Speaker. We find it unfortunate, given that on Tuesday we will begin a 19-hour debate on the formation of the Government and its programme, that the election of the presiding officers of the House has to be disrupted by the kind of debate we have just had. It is not that that debate should not occur; we do not think that this is the appropriate place for it to occur when we are electing our presiding officers. We enjoyed Ross Robertson’s running of the House in a friendly way, his attention to the Standing Orders, and his fairness. And I really enjoyed the way he started each session with “Kia ora.”

The Māori Party rises to support the nomination of Ross Robertson to be Assistant Speaker. We know that he manages the House really well. The one thing I am really proud of is that he always attempts to pronounce Māori correctly. Kia ora, Ross.

It may come as a considerable surprise to the House when I say that I agree entirely with everything that the co-leader of the Green Party said. Ross Robertson was a superb Assistant Speaker in the last Parliament, for all the reasons that members have outlined. He will be equally so in this Parliament, and we have every delight in supporting his nomination.

Motion agreed to.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Kia ora tātou, e ngā iwi, e ngā hoa, e ngā hau e whā, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.

[Greetings to all, to the tribes, to friends, to the four winds, greetings, greetings, greetings to you all.]

It is with humility that I gratefully accept the profound honour that you, my parliamentary colleagues, have offered me to serve in this House as one of your presiding officers. This forty-eighth New Zealand Parliament is blessed with many new sets of lungs, alongside seasoned politicians who are well accustomed to the delicate difference of opinion of this place. I will ensure that every member has the fullest opportunity to define, defend, and deliver his or her visions according to the letter of the Standing Orders and Speakers’ Rulings, and in the spirit of engagement that our public expect. On this 400th anniversary of Guy Fawkes’ plot, it behoves us all to be inclusive of all opinion, for this is a chamber of ideas. This is a place where continuous streams of ideas are tested, according to our Standing Orders and the Speakers’ Rulings. It is like a river that flows from bank to bank, so that its true potential is realised for all.

Lastly, I just say this: last year members unanimously celebrated 150 years of our parliamentary democracy. We enter a Parliament that is finely balanced, like our German MMP counterparts. I trust that we will all work together, tātou tātou, to ensure that this House grows in public esteem. Tihei mauri ora!