Personal Explanations — Earlier Personal Explanation—Correction

I seek leave to make a personal explanation to the House.

💬 SPEAKER: Is there any objection to that?

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Well, what about?

Relating to a personal explanation I gave last week.

💬 SPEAKER: The member has sought the leave of the House to make a personal explanation which relates to the personal explanation he made in the House last week. I just say to members that it is very unusual to deny a member the right to make a personal explanation.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

💬 SPEAKER: A point of order, Chris Hipkins, before I put the matter.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Yeah, absolutely, and it is very unusual to deny a member a right to make a personal explanation, because it is important that where a member feels they have been misrepresented, they are able to set the record straight on that. However, if a member does that and does not fully tell the truth in that and then seeks to subsequently correct it again, that’s going to bring the whole process into disrepute. Members have to have the opportunity to correct where they’re misrepresented, but not to make a political statement which they then try to recant from.

💬 SPEAKER: What we have generally done as a House in the past, when and if people wanted to make corrections to statements that they had made to the House in whatever circumstance—and I can think of only one example, and it involved myself and I was wrong—we have given leave for that to occur, because, generally, as a House, we have felt that it’s important that members have the opportunity to set the record straight and have it accurate in the House.

💬 Rt Hon Winston Peters: I seek some clarification here, because if this is an explanation that is subsequent to a complaint on a privileges matter, then at that point, one has to ask whether this member is entitled to seek this refuge or, rather, give an explanation to the Privileges Committee.

💬 Hon Gerry Brownlee: There have been many members who are sitting in the House today who have made personal explanations to clarify situations where there could have been a matter of privilege raised potentially, but what is important is that every member has the right to ask for the indulgence of the House to make a personal statement, and it should be up to the member to determine whether or not the matter they want to raise before the House is appropriate for the House.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Speaking further to the point of order, Mr Speaker, where a member seeks to make a personal explanation that, therefore, makes it clear that a personal explanation they had earlier given was not true, is that member still able to be referred to the Privileges Committee for the abuse of the process in the earlier personal explanation?

💬 SPEAKER: The answer to that is they certainly could be, but I will remind members that the test for reference to the Privileges Committee is relatively high, in that it involves, I think—the Deputy Prime Minister will probably correct me if I’ve got it wrong—mens rea: it’s got to be deliberate. So if a letter is before me, and that’s something which, of course, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on now, correcting it would be a factor I would take into account. Is there any objection? There is none.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. At question time on Thursday last week, I made a personal explanation that rejected the police Minister’s statement that I had said police were bullying people. I accept that, in response to an interjection from the floor at the meeting we are talking about, I did make that comment.