Speaker’s Rulings — Address in Reply Debate—Maiden Speeches

It was my intention at this stage to call the Māori Party, but I think it is worth outlining to the House my response and some of the things which have led up to the situation we faced. The actual technical Standing Order issue that occurred earlier when I interrupted the speech from the co-leader of the Māori Party when he was attempting to move a motion is very simple: when there’s a motion on the floor, you cannot get up and start moving another one. There are processes to go through, and that’s very clear.

There has been through this week an ongoing discussion around whether or not the co-leaders of the Māori Party could have two speeches each in the Address in Reply debate. It’s been made clear that the current rules don’t allow for that. It was a matter that was discussed at the Business Committee, and the offer was made to the Māori Party for each of the co-leaders to have 15-minute speeches, starting now, recognising both their maiden status and the fact that they are leaders of non-specified parties. That was the approach that was taken, I think, with David Seymour in 2014, so there’s precedent and prior precedent for that. It’s become clear that that was not acceptable, and, therefore, I presume that is the reason that the members walked out.

I think it would be of value, because there is not long but some important correspondence around this matter, for me to seek leave to table the correspondence between the Clerk’s Office, myself, and the co-leaders of the Māori Party on this issue. Is there any objection to that? There appears to be none.

Documents, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.

Behaviour in the Chamber—Dress Code