Urgent Debates — Ministerial Resignation—Hon Kiritapu Allan

I have received a letter from David Seymour seeking to debate, under Standing Order 399, the resignation of the Hon Kiritapu Allan as a Minister. This is a particular case of recent occurrence for which there is ministerial responsibility. Not every ministerial resignation warrants an urgent debate; however, debates have generally been allowed where the actions of a Minister have raised questions of probity. Therefore, I call on David Seymour to move that the House take note of a matter of urgent public importance.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I move, That the House take note of a matter of urgent public importance.

This resignation signifies a very human tragedy wrapped up in a Government in disarray. The events surrounding Kiri Allan’s resignation are sad. She is a person who I think most members would agree was someone of great talent and promise, and yet something that few of us understand has gone wrong and led to these tragic events. It is critical that the public understands what has happened because for the probity of Ministers, and ultimately the respect of the public on this House, it’s just not acceptable to have a Minister of the Crown who is breaking multiple laws on one night—who is driving while over the limit, or at least the infringement offence limit for alcohol consumption, and who has resisted arrest while serving as the Minister of Justice. Those are things that, despite the clear human tragedy at the centre of this resignation, the people deserve an explanation for in order to uphold the probity of ministerial warrants and this House. It is also absolutely critical that people understand the circumstances in which this person was put into this tragic position, because while it is a human tragedy it is also the case that it comes after a cascade of missteps and administrative bungles by this Government that are accumulating—along with the costs and the frustration faced by New Zealanders who put their trust in this Government.

We now have a Government that has no more gas left in the tank. It can’t even field a full Cabinet. The fact that Kiri Allan will not be replaced in Cabinet raises questions over whether or not this Labour Party has the talent to field a full team, and whether or not she felt pressure to remain on the field because they simply did not have any subs on the bench capable of doing the job. It has led to one person holding the justice portfolio and the police portfolio. That is a real problem for New Zealand or any democratic nation, because the Minister of Justice is accountable for upholding those parts of the apparatus of State that uphold, in turn, the rule of law. The Minister of Police is responsible for advocating for the police who have to be restrained by that same rule of law. When a person is put in both positions, that creates a conflict of interest. And, unfortunately, conflicts of interest have led to much of the difficulty that this Government has.

It might have been possible to find someone to replace Kiri Allan as the justice Minister from within the Cabinet. An obvious choice would be somebody in the form of the Attorney-General, who is a lawyer. Perhaps that person could have helped. However, unfortunately, it was found that he was already busy with other jobs. Or perhaps he just doesn’t want any job, but doesn’t even want to be the Minister of Revenue. Perhaps if it wasn’t for the Natural and Built Environment Bill, he would be off completely.

You see, since the Prime Minister said she had “no gas in the tank” back in January, there have been a total of five ministerial departures or resignations in just seven months. First, there was our Prime Minister—which we can come back to—then there was Stuart Nash, who was found to be leaking information to donors in breach of Cabinet confidentiality. And then there was Meka Whaitiri, who was planning to jump ship to another political party and the Prime Minister knew nothing about it. And then there was Michael Wood, the guy who had a conflict of interest with his ministerial portfolios that he failed to declare—and when asked not once, not twice, but over a dozen times to resolve that conflict of interest, he didn’t do it. So Michael Wood is gone. And now, sadly, we see the departure of Kiritapu Allan.

This is a Government that simply cannot hold it together. And people are right to ask: how can a Government so incapable of managing itself be asked to manage the many problems that New Zealanders face, with the inflation that ravages the cost of living, the lawlessness that ravages our streets. It was astonishing, just a moment ago we had what’s called a “patsy question”: a backbench Labour MP asking the Minister of Justice—or was it the Minister of Police? I think it was Justice; it’s hard to know—what is being done about gangs. What the Minister may not have known is that just an hour earlier, Sylvia Park was stormed by armed police, followed by ambulance officers, because two gang—

Hon Grant Robertson: Point of order, Mr Speaker. Speakers’ rulings and Standing Orders are clear around debates of matters of urgent public importance. They are specific to the matters that are in the letter for the debate. While I know there needs to be a time for context, I believe, after listening to the seven or so minutes that the member has been speaking—the vast bulk of his contribution—his speech has not been about the resignation of the Minister.

SPEAKER: Yes, I’d have to agree with that summation of the contribution so far. I will ask the member to speak to the topic of the urgent debate. That’s why I granted it. We’ve had quite a bit of stuff in there that is not related, and the current topic certainly isn’t a narration—unless he can bring it very quickly to the topic at hand, then he should do so.

DAVID SEYMOUR: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I note that my letter did include the conflict created by one person holding both positions, and my letter also pointed to the—

SPEAKER: I just warn the member: he’s having a habit of really commenting on the ruling I’ve just made. I’m well aware of what the application was. You don’t need to—in a way which I think is disrespectful to this House—comment on that, and I’d ask him to stop doing it.

DAVID SEYMOUR: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The resignation of Kiritapu Allan has occurred in a context. It’s occurred in a context of the management of people. It has occurred in a context where a person facing serious challenges was asked to work at full tilt. Having been under question for the challenges that she was personally facing, she was returned to work where she carried out a heavy schedule of announcements in the run up to an election, which amounted to reversing the positions that she, as a Minister in her Government, had been required to uphold for years as a Government and for years, in her case, as a Minister. That could only reflect back on the nature of the Government, the culture that had been imbued in it, and the leadership that it had. We cannot escape the fact that this tragic sequence of events is inextricably linked to the context of that workplace.

We cannot avoid the fact that we have had a Government that for a long time has sought to make policy based on the hope that if only they announce that many houses would be built, it would happen. When you have a Government that constantly tries to ensure that things will happen simply by wishing it so, the frustration that amounts, the problems that arise in the public domain, the pressure that comes back on to Ministers as a result. Well, unfortunately, all of those things which fully reflect upon the Government have been contributing factors to this particular tragic sequence of events. The Government has lost a Minister in highly questionable circumstances that bring into question ministerial probity—not just because of that individual’s choices, which are clearly wrong and for which she has apologised, lost her job, and moved on. But they have occurred in the context of a Government that is failing at multiple levels and cannot be a good place for a Minister to be, where there is not a replacement to come on—all of these things, Mr Speaker.

I can understand why the Minister of Finance doesn’t want to hear them, but, nevertheless, they remain true. They are the true context in which these events occurred. It is simply the case that what we find ourselves with now as New Zealanders is a Government that can at best be described as a caretaker Government: one that cannot field a full team, one that cannot manage itself—let alone the challenges of inflation, of lawlessness, and of division that have grown up like mushrooms under this Government. Failing and lacking the ability to manage itself or any of the problems that New Zealanders face, this Government will now amble towards 14 October, and at that time people facing these problems—this inflation, this lawlessness, and this division—will have to ask themselves: are they not better with a new team? Is it not possible that New Zealanders can hope to see a Government focused not on itself and its multiple losses of personnel, but instead focused on their problems and on solving them with practical solutions that aren’t satisfied simply with sounding good, but actually work? That is the challenge that is now before New Zealanders. That is what this unfortunate sequence of events has brought about, and that is the arena into which ACT enters to provide a better solution, a better way forward, and one that is not going to be so tragically negligent of people that come to serve in the Government.

I finish by giving my best wishes and regards to Kiritapu Allan at a personal level. She is a person that I have known and interacted with over the years and found to be a good person, a person of great intelligence and capability. She has chosen a course, and I respect, obviously, and would like to support from afar that choice that she makes. We wish her all of the best and we hope that all people who come here to do the job can find themselves in a circumstance where they can make a difference as part of a strong team that is responsive to the problems and challenges New Zealand face and put in place coherent solutions that actually solve those problems. Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

It is with regret and a heavy heart that I rise today to speak on this motion.

I want to begin by sending my aroha directly to my friend Kiritapu Allan. I have admired the work that Kiritapu has done as a Minister and admired the work that she did before then. She is a person of extraordinary talent, intellect, heart, and mana.

Many New Zealanders first came to understand who the Hon Kiritapu Allan was during her struggle with cancer, and the bravery and the courage that she showed during that period of time. I still have people who talk about the period of time where she was the Minister for Emergency Management and was needing to deal with a particular emergency in New Zealand whilst also knowing, herself, how unwell she was. What people saw there was a person who exhibited the strong qualities of leadership, as I say, and of courage and of bravery and also of enormous intellect as well.

The tragic events of Sunday night have been traversed extensively in the media and I remain very cognisant of the fact that they are also matters that will come before a court in the very near-term, and, obviously, this debate is taking place in that context. Very soon after those events early yesterday morning, Minister Allan tendered her resignation to the Prime Minister after a conversation with him. In doing so, she acknowledged, as she did publicly, that she knew that this was the only course of action that was possible. She fully understood that, as a Minister of the Crown and, in particular, as Minister of Justice, she could no longer remain in that role, having gone through the circumstances of Sunday night. She quickly and swiftly moved to resign and had that resignation accepted by the Prime Minister.

That is undoubtedly the right thing to do. As Kiritapu Allan referred to, herself, in her statement, she understood that these actions were inexcusable, and therefore did not offer any excuse, and moved quickly to resign. That is the right thing to do. There is no excuse for the actions that have been acknowledged by Kiritapu Allan, including the driving while under the influence, and also the charges that have been laid. The consequences of that is that she is no longer a Minister, and she has suffered the consequences for that.

What I want to do, though, is place on record that while I understand and believe those to be the right actions to take in this situation, I do think this House can recognise that we have had a person working as Minister, who is a good New Zealander, a person who is able to relate well to other people, who is able to drive forward policy in a number of portfolio areas, and who represented, I think, to New Zealanders someone who they wanted to be in their House of Parliament.

My reflection is that as a group of people here, we are stronger and better for the diversity that is in this House. We are stronger and better for making sure that people can see a career in politics even if they’re not perfect. From time to time, myself and others have stood in this House and probably said and done things, preying on the imperfections. It’s part of what we do here, and it’s not always right. But I especially think, when we know and when Minister Allan has been brave enough and courageous enough to talk about her own mental health struggles, that we do, as a Parliament, need to think about how we make the job we do—the important job all of us do; not just the Government but the Opposition parties as well—how we make it possible for people to be able to fulfil those roles with a diverse set of backgrounds, with a diverse set of current experiences, including struggles with mental health. I think we can do better, and I do include myself in that along with everybody else.

We need to understand and respect the fact that mental health issues are things that can be worked through. Getting well is what it’s all about; looking after your wellbeing, making sure that you understand how to manage issues when they arise, and that as a group of people in a population, we do that.

I mihi to Kiritapu for the way she’s talked about mental health. I think it’s opened up conversations just in the way that she talked about cancer. It’s opened up conversations among New Zealanders that weren’t happening. She should be proud of that and we should support her and others in doing so—and I acknowledge my old student political colleague Todd Muller in this regard as well, as another person in this House who also did that.

We do need, as a country, to understand the importance of mental health as an issue and understanding how we support people in all walks of life to be able to stay well, and when they are struggling, to be able to be supported to retain their wellbeing and get back to the place that they want to be.

The resignation of a Minister is always challenging for a Government. The Prime Minister’s decisions around what to do when faced with that, in this particular instance, is a recognition of the short period of time that exists between now and when this House rises and we go to the election. We have just five more weeks of this House, and it’s appropriate that Ministers take on the responsibilities that Kiritapu Allan had, to allow us continuity and to be able to move forward towards the election. I’m extremely proud to be part of this Government and this ministerial team: people working every hour of the day to make this country better.

Kiritapu Allan has been a valued member of that team and I am very confident that in years to come, her name will be heard again as doing something significant for Aotearoa New Zealand. She is a person who will make change for the better in the future in her life. What we want for her now is to be able to be given the space and the time to get well, for her situation not to be unnecessarily politicised, but for all of us in this House to gather around her, her whānau, and her friends and give them the aroha and support that they deserve.

Kiritapu, we are thinking of you, you are one of our whānau, and we will always love you.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. We’re speaking in an urgent debate on the matter of the resignation of Kiritapu Allan as a Minister. It’s a perfectly appropriate debate to have, because this is a serious event. The Minister of Justice was arrested, allegedly for resisting arrest, and she has resigned, and it’s absolutely appropriate that the House should discuss that. And we’ve heard some criticism from the other side of the House, as if this was somehow inappropriate, and I don’t agree with that at all. It is quite right for us to talk about these matters and to put them in the wider context.

The context is that this is the sixth resignation we’ve had this year from the Cabinet. I’ll just quickly run through them. Jacinda Ardern first, when she knew the game was up in January, and after five years there was very little to show for the efforts. Second, there was Stuart Nash for leaking information to donors and texting the Commissioner of Police about matters. Third, there was Meka Whaitiri, who showed such a level of animus within the Government that she made sure that her resignation was announced when the Prime Minister was on route to Britain to have a very unwelcome arrival in the airport there. Then, there was Michael Wood—the “16 times is not enough” Michael Wood—which descended into comic farce over a senior Minister not dealing with matters appropriately around conflicts of interest. Fifth is Kiri Allan, as was said, the Minister of Justice, resigning because of resisting arrest and a number of other serious matters. And the sixth, that we shouldn’t overlook, which happened pretty much at the same time, was David Parker leaving his post as inland revenue Minister because he was unhappy with the decisions made within the Cabinet over the wealth tax—not doing what usually is regarded as the honourable thing to do, which is to leave the ministry, full stop, if you don’t agree with what the Cabinet agrees, but that’s by the by. And so what we have is the “great resignation”.

Now, we talked about that in the context of 2022, post-COVID, people leaving their roles. What we see under this Government’s “great resignation” is a Labour Party getting close to the election with nothing to show for their efforts.

When it comes specifically to Kiritapu Allan and her resignation, much has been said and written over the last 24 hours. On the issue of her wellbeing and her mental health, I, of course, like most members of the House, do not know the details and what goes on in anybody’s experiences. We are all very conscious that we are all fallible human beings, we’re all struggling in a high-stress environment, and we all share concern for any member of Parliament—in particular, for Kiri Allan at this time—going through a difficult period. And so I don’t propose to add anything more to that, because I don’t know anything more about it. But what she has said, of course, is that none of that excuses her behaviour on Sunday night, and she has taken responsibility for that, as she really had no choice to do anything otherwise.

And so what can we talk about here? Well, we can and we should—it is appropriate to assess her performance as the Minister of Justice. There has been a lot written. It was written that she was on top of her game. I think it was actually a much more mixed performance as Minister of Justice, because she is responsible for a Government which has struggled to make progress in the wider law and order space. And they have had, I think, I believe, the wrong priorities. And she has prioritised reducing the prison population by 30 percent, even at a time when there has been a real increase in crime.

And so we’re all conscious of the fact, as we go around door knocking and talking to New Zealanders, that there are two issues that they are most worried about. They’re worried about the cost of living and they’re most worried about law and order. And we’ve seen, throughout the period that the Minister who has resigned was the Minister, a period of no movement being made on very large reductions in sentences so that people with serious violent convictions are ending up on home detention. We’ve seen a massive expansion in cultural reports with little to yield for it. We’ve seen a massive increase in ram raids and youth crime generally. We’ve also seen a very significant increase in the delays in the court system. So these are real, real challenges that affect people’s lives. People’s lives have been kept on hold for a long period of time.

And then a final area is we’ve moved away, as a country, from equal suffrage in the local government setting. The Minister of Justice should be standing up vigorously for the principle of equal suffrage—all New Zealanders having an equal say in who governs them and who makes decisions affecting their lives—and she failed to do that. In fact, she failed to even talk about that as an issue. And so that is a perfectly legitimate thing to analyse.

So, like many Ministers, people will look back and see what was achieved. They’ll be conscious of the particulars over which she resigned, but they will also make a judgment about the overall effectiveness of the Government in the justice space.

And I suppose the broader context that we debate in this debate is the consequences of this resignation—what it means for the Government, and what it means for what we have here, and what we all see is a Government that has been overcome with chaos, with confusion, and with incompetence.

Why does that matter—why does it matter? Because, ultimately, the confidence that people have in the Government really has an impact in the confidence, generally, in the country. If we go back to the fourth Labour Government, when it fell apart at the seams and Lange was fighting with Roger Douglas and the whole thing blew apart—that had a terrible impact on confidence as well, because—to understand the relationship—when people are confident about how a country is governed, they are more likely to invest, and if they are more likely to invest, the country has a better chance to grow and to create jobs and to do well. And the inverse is true. When people don’t have confidence that the place is well managed, that a Cabinet is coherent, and that the people within it govern themselves and the country well, they tend to hold back—particularly now, when we have got to a state where the Prime Minister can’t even remember who some of his Ministers are, because there has been such a rapid turnover. That sense of chaos is building.

When you have one Minister being both the Minister of Police and the Minister of Justice—which has been parodied up and down the country as the “Minister of Catch and Release”—that all leads to a sense of lower confidence in the way that the Government is managing itself. And, ultimately, that is unhelpful for a country, and that is why we strongly believe the time is well and truly past for a change, so that we can reassure New Zealanders that they have a Government that can conduct itself well, that it has Ministers who are able to stay the term, and who will obey the rules.

Kiritapu Allan’s case, I suppose, clearly is the most egregious in terms of breaking the laws as a Minister of Justice, but there has been, like I say, a number, over the whole period of the year, where rules have been broken and ministerial understandings and conventions have been moved away from—whether it was Nash, whether it was Wood, or whether it was David Parker.

So there’s a lot to reflect on in this. Nobody takes any joy from the personal downfall of any Minister. I would hope that all people across the House recognise that and they recognise the personal struggles that we have seen here. Like I say, I don’t have any specific insight into that and can only offer my thoughts to Kiri and those who know her and love her. But we do quite rightly expect that our Ministers will obey the law, obviously, and that a Cabinet will be coherently run in good discipline and good order so that New Zealanders can have confidence in that Government.

What we are seeing right here, right now, is the slow and steady disintegration of this, the fifth—is it the fifth?—no, the sixth Labour Government. That is a problem—a political problem—for this Government. It’s a political problem for Chris Hipkins, but it’s a broader problem for New Zealand, because, like I say, when people look to Wellington, when they look to the Government and they see such chaos, the implication is that people will feel less confident, ultimately, to make plans, to invest, and to have a long-term view because so much is so unsettled. And that’s why it’s so important that we restore good Government and good governance in this country. Thank you very much

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise to speak in this debate, as I hope others have done, with grave sadness and a sense that, in fact, we shouldn’t be here debating a deeply personal, tragic circumstance in the workplace of the person who, with so much courage, has in fact owned her actions many, many times over. I send nothing but our absolute aroha from the entire Green Party caucus, from myself, and I know many, many others out there in Aotearoa to Kiri—or Minister.

It is sad that we are standing here and debating this issue, but I want to hold that I have, in fact, been heartened by the fact that the vast majority of the reporting since yesterday—when we all woke up as a nation with some shock and sadness to the news of what had occurred in terms of the traffic incident and the resignation of a talented Minister in our Government—has in fact been different than it might have been a few years ago. There seems to be a greater understanding of workplace stress, of mental health, of the way that we talk about things like this in our communities and, in fact, the standards that we hold our leaders to when they stumble. So that actually made me feel a lot better.

And then I saw some of the political commentary in terms of my colleagues in this House and I feel compelled to comment on that, in that I think it has set us back, and in that I think we have a responsibility as members of this House to show better moral leadership. I want to say that as the last speaker, Paul Goldsmith, was wrapping up his speech he started to talk over and over again about how confidence would be eroded out there in the public. But I actually want to say to members of the public, because I know that many, many are finding it challenging right now in a post-COVID environment, in an environment where we’ve always had challenge in terms of accessing mental health care, that, actually, no one will lose confidence in you if you stumble, if you talk about your mental health challenges or crises openly, that your workplace—unlike this one—will probably not make a public spectacle of you, and that, actually, as leaders, most of us in here would have chosen not to be standing up and debating something this personal and turning it into a challenge against your competence.

I wish, on behalf of the National Party, that in the media we’d seen someone like Matt Doocey, the spokesperson, or Todd Muller, a former leader—both of whom have spoken about their own experiences—front for that party rather than Chris Luxon or Paul Goldsmith, who actually turned it into an issue of Ministers needing a psych report to come back to work if they experienced challenges. I want the public to know that if you come forward and say that you are struggling with your mental health in your place of work, no one’s going to institutionalise you and require you to come back with a psych report.

When I went forward and talked openly about suffering from multiple sclerosis it was in part because members of that community kept telling me not to come forward because when they had talked about their chronic illness, they’d realised that they weren’t being promoted at work, they weren’t seen as being competent enough, as other members of our disabilities community have since come forward and told me. So I felt like it was really important to talk about the way that I might need more support in the workplace as a multiple sclerosis sufferer, but that I can still do it. Because maybe it’s important to have people with chronic illness in this place, and maybe it’s important for this place to trust and respect us, just as it’s important that members in this House trust and respect those of us who happen to represent the vast majority of people out there in the world in Aotearoa who have at some point in their lives had mental health challenges.

And I want to finish by commenting with maybe as much sadness and disappointment on the fact that David Seymour felt the need to call this debate at all, and that he had to be stopped twice during his speech for politicising what should have been an urgent debate only about the matter in hand, that it is shameful that in election year some members of this House still think that anything at all is up for debate. That’s not what New Zealand wants. That is what calls the competence of us as politicians into question, not the fact that Kiri Allan suffered from a mental health challenge, that she lost a battle on that day, because we know that she will rise again. We know that life is long and that it’s OK to have challenges. What’s not OK is to see a workmate, see them stumble, and see a personal profit. That’s not the politics that the people out there deserve.

So with that, I want to send our aroha and support to a leader who we know will rise again, and to all the future leaders who will stand, who we will stand next to, who we will lift up no matter what your challenges, whether it’s mental health, whether it’s chronic illness, whether it’s disability, whether you happen to be a queer Māori young woman like Kiri—you’ll be OK. Kia ora.

I too would like to begin my short contribution by acknowledging Kiritapu Allan and sending our love from her Labour whānau to her. I’d also like to acknowledge that the events of the last 36 hours once again highlight that this is a workplace like no other. I can’t imagine a workplace anywhere else in the country where someone clearly makes a mistake, they acknowledge their mental health challenges, and then there is a discussion and a debate that is televised on TV for the whole country to see. I think it highlights something that I’ve always been struck by in my time in this House, which is that when we see an MP stumble or when we see an MP—from whatever side of the House—clearly see their careers sometimes disintegrate within a matter of hours before our eyes, it is nothing that any of us find comfortable and it is not something to celebrate. It highlights what a different and difficult workplace this place can be.

I would like to acknowledge also the members of our caucus. Events like this have a ripple effect, and it’s never about one person. We become pretty close in these jobs as a caucus and as colleagues, and when one member falls, that does have a ripple effect throughout the team. So I would like to acknowledge the very many members of our caucus who have wrapped their arms around Kiri in the last days and months to support her at what clearly was a trying time.

Kiri has been brave in acknowledging that she was struggling with mental health issues. Last week, she came back to work, and the consensus was she was on top of her game. It was Kiritapu at her very best: articulating policy in her clear ability to communicate and to talk to New Zealanders in a way they understood was on show. But what we saw and what we can’t ignore is that yesterday morning, we saw a Minister who had to have a conversation with the Prime Minister and the Prime Minister did advise that he did not believe that it was tenable for her to continue to hold her ministerial warrants, for very real reasons. I think it has been clearly documented what has happened from there, but I think the best thing now is that Kiri takes the time to heal, that she spends time with her whānau and with her friends, and that she does spend that time healing.

I think that for the rest of us, it is time to reflect on the fact that there are no quick fixes when it comes to mental health. It is something that we have to make sure that we understand that things can change quickly and without warning, and it is something we have to think about in terms of our workplace here in Parliament. But we also, as a Labour caucus, need to continue to focus on all of those New Zealanders who are doing it tough at the moment, all of those members in our communities who are looking to their Government for hope and for support to address the cost of living, to tackle things like crime, and to make sure we have a health system that is serving New Zealanders and an education system that is fit for purpose, and that is exactly what Labour will be doing.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I first met Kiri in 2017 when we were both asked to participate in a press gallery debate to raise funds for a charity—I can’t remember what it was now. We both participated in that, and then later on, sitting out the back of The Backbencher, we had a drink together and we talked about an area that we both love, and that is the East Coast of the North Island—Gisborne, from Ruatōria down to Wairoa, where, obviously, Kiri’s family is from and my family is from also. I spent a good chunk of my adult life living over there. I transferred there in the police as soon as I had the opportunity and spent most of my time over there as a police dog handler, operating out of Gisborne. I just have to say that it certainly gives me a sense of comfort to know that Kiri is now back in Gisborne, a very, very strong community there, with her family, and they will be wrapping the support that she needs around her now.

I want to talk to two parts of this. The first part is the human side. I do want to address some of the comments that my friend and colleague from the Green Party, Golriz Ghahraman, made, because, in this country, we are still fighting to overcome stigma. We are still fighting to allow mental health and depression to be spoken about openly as if it’s any other ailment, whether it be a broken arm or a broken leg or a bronchial infection. It’s just quite simply a chemical imbalance in the brain. No one wakes up in the morning asking to have mental health issues. No one wakes up in the morning wanting to be depressed. And we’ve still got quite a long way to go. I’ll just say to the Green member that she spoke about a psychological report as if it was a bad thing. It’s not a bad thing. A psychological report is quite simply a report on someone from an expert in that field—that is passionate and trains and has the ability to care for and provide a diagnosis and a support plan going forward, just like it would be the same if it was a broken arm and you had an orthopaedic specialist or an orthopaedic surgeon—

Ingrid Leary: Are you saying to mandate it?

Hon MARK MITCHELL: What I’m saying quite simply is this: if we want to get rid of stigmas, let’s not continue to talk about them as if there is a stigma, as if there is an issue attached to those types of things. There’s not. There quite simply isn’t.

The human side of this—and I’ve been very clear about this. I consider myself, and I like to think of myself, as a friend of Kiri. I know that when she was facing the terrible challenge around cancer, which she took on bravely—and, by the way, still remained very committed to her role as a Minister, as much as she could, and I think she deserves our admiration for that—I certainly, on a personal level, tried to support her as well as I could through that cancer battle. We stayed in regular contact, and when she put her hand up, again bravely, a few weeks ago and said, “I have got some mental health issues. There are some personal things happening in my life.”—and the tough thing about this job here is that it’s a huge privilege but the reality of it is that you live in a fishbowl; you look out and everyone else looks in. We just have to accept that. That is the nature of this role. We serve the people that send us here. They expect us to be able to do that role, and they’ll hold us to account. That’s how the system operates, and that’s how it should be. But it is very hard when you’re dealing with deeply personal issues and those have been played out in public.

When she put her hand up and she said, “I’m going to have to step back and take some time off because there are some personal issues and it has impacted and affected my mental health”, I did send her a message. I sent her a message of support, and I said, “Good on you for being brave enough to put your hand up, because maybe that will just help others to put their hand up and say that they need help as well.” But my issue with what has happened with Kiri, and I’ve been very clear about it, and some people don’t like it, is that she should have been—and I don’t know whether she did have, because we don’t know the details about her return to work. I want to acknowledge the Hon Willie Jackson, who is in the House. It appears that he has definitely been trying to provide her with support behind the scenes. But my point is quite simply this: she is in a much worse situation now personally, where she’s got some big mountains to try and climb. That, in my view, didn’t need to happen.

If someone is supported properly and if there is a proper process to allow them to come back and re-engage in the workplace, whether it be light duties or whatever the plan may be, as long as they’re properly supported, you’ve got a very high chance of success, of actually getting them back into the workplace. I’ll just say this: often when people are depressed or they’re suffering from mental health, they are not in the best position to judge whether or not they are ready to go back to work. They need people around them that are able to step back and have some perspective, whether that includes professional advice or advice from a counsellor—whoever is providing that support and that treatment—to be able to actually step in and make those decisions. I think what we’ve seen played out in the last 24 hours, in my view, was avoidable.

Now I want to come to the important part too, and that is the fact that—we all wish Kiri a speedy recovery and we all want to see that happening, but the reality of this is that our country at the moment is experiencing a massive crime wave. We’ve got a cost of living crisis. We’ve got interest rates going up. We’ve got Kiwis now trying to borrow money just to get themselves through week to week. They’re having to prioritise, and it is tough. And one thing they expect us to be able to do is come to this place and take that seriously and think about them and make the decisions and do the things that we have to do to make this a better country and an easier country to live in and raise your family. I think that when you’ve got the justice Minister—[Speaker gestures to member] Yes, thank you, Mr Speaker. When you’ve got the justice Minister—and this is the justice Minister; this is one of the highest law officers that we have in our country—in a position where they’re failing, allegedly—and I must say “allegedly”, because we do understand that this is an ongoing police investigation and case—not complying with our front-line police, that is about as bad as it gets.

I just want to say one thing: in the last six years, our front-line police have had to deal with a lot. But one of the things that has been very tough for me to watch is that there’s been a loss of respect in the way that gang members, youth, and juvenile offenders treat our police officers. They are not paid enough to be spat at. They’re not paid enough to be assaulted—

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Mr Mitchell, I’ve asked you to keep this narrow. Keep it narrow or you will be sitting down.

Hon MARK MITCHELL: And therefore, Mr Speaker, we should be sending a signal from this Parliament, from this House of Representatives, that we should be complying and respecting our front-line police officers. We had the person that held the highest position in our Parliament, in terms of the Minister of Justice, that completely failed on that level. And we have to take steps as a Parliament, all of us, and especially as a Government, to restate the fact that our police officers deserve to be shown that respect.

Just very quickly: when I was in Gisborne recently, I was very lucky that, at the police station there, they had a ceremony for me where they presented me with my old armed offenders squad cap, which was 20-plus years old. I hadn’t worn that for over 20 years, and somehow they still had it in the station. During that meeting, they recognised the fact that they respected Kiritapu Allan. They respected her as their local MP. What’s really important now is that this House and this Government gets up and very clearly says we respect the role of our police officers. Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

E te tuahine Kiritapu, ahakoa he taumaha koe, i tēnei wa ka hoki mai anō koe, e mohio ana au. Kia kaha katahi ka toa, tō mātou aroha ki a koe i tēnei wā. Nō reira kia kaha kia māia kia manawanui.

[Sister Kiritapu, although you are feeling heavy, you will return, I know that to be so. Be strong and you will win. Our love to you. And so be strong, be brave and be resolute.]

It’s a very sad time for this whole Parliament, and I agree with our lady from the Greens, Golriz, who said it for many of us—that we did not need to have this type of debate today. Mr Seymour, on one hand, talks about supporting Kiritapu, and then this whole debate turns into a political kōrero. It saddens many of us today, but what will be will be.

Her resignation is tragic, and as Megan Woods said, we thought she was OK a week back. Yes, we’re not experts, but she was adamant, and particularly with me, that she was ready to come back to work. Mental health’s a funny thing—well, it’s not a funny thing; it’s a terrible thing, I should say. I should put that in a better place. We saw how she operated in the media conference last week. She was absolutely on her game—brilliant, actually. According to Claire Trevett, she gave a masterclass performance in the media conference on ram-raiding and justice. So who would know, when you see a Minister like that on top of her game? She worked well in the House after taking questions from the Opposition. Then just a few days later, down she went.

It was shocking for all of us to see how she went down that track. For me, I take this very personally. My uncle Moana Jackson talked to me about Kiritapu six years ago. He said to me, “I have this young woman who is a great, great talent, and you better look after her.” So that’s when I first met Kiri. I hadn’t met Kiritapu before. He said that she’s got talent and brains and she’s a contemporary of people like—I think you’re a bit older than her, Tama, but she’s part of that legal crew who are so brilliant—that young, Māori crew.

So he put it on me to support her, and so her and I have grown very close over the last six years. I suppose on Sunday I was very sad because she got in touch with me at 6 o’clock and said she was a bit lonely and she wanted to go for a kai. I wasn’t in Wellington at the time, but I thought everything was OK. We were happy at the end of our kōrero, but at 10 o’clock on Sunday night, it all went wrong. So just so saddened by this.

But I suppose I’m buoyed and happy when I see the type of support I heard from the Greens; the Māori Party have been very supportive. Our women out there—I saw Professor Linda Smith salute her. She has a lot of support out there that other MPs would love, but I think it is because she represents so much. She’s young, she’s brilliant, she’s funny, she’s a young leader, and she’s also proudly from the coast. You know, she’s such a hard case, and at the same time is incredibly brilliant. So she’s got so much support out there. So I’ve heard the kōrero. She’ll rise again, and I’ve said that to her too. Politics is a funny game. Politics is all about timing. A few of us know that—a few of us know that.

Hon David Bennett: Winston. Ha, ha!

Hon WILLIE JACKSON: Yes, that’s right, Mr Bennett. Like, when is the right time to come into politics? When is the right time to leave politics? When is the right time to come back into politics? For Kiritapu Allan, she is, without doubt, one of our mana wahine. She has been a leader for Māori, she has been a leader for her community, and she is revered right across the spectrum. I said yesterday when I was speaking to an interviewer that she’s a bit different to some of us who just want to smash into the Opposition. She always rose above that. That’s why people like Mr Seymour gave her a good mihi, and others from the Opposition, they supported her, because Kiritapu never really got too personal with anyone, and that was her great strength. I’m glad now she’s going to find some wellbeing with her whānau. I wish her all the best, and she will be back. Kia ora anō tātou katoa.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I genuinely rise taking no pleasure from having to take part in this debate. I want to pass on my empathy and best wishes to Kiritapu Allan, and at this time, when her personal and private life is under such public scrutiny, just remind her that this too will pass, and many people have talked about the likelihood of her rising again. So I want to endorse those sentiments.

I want to speak about Kiritapu Allan’s resignation and the context of this, and it has been talked about before that her resignation comes within the context of five other resignations under this Prime Minister—so Jacinda Ardern, Stuart Nash, Meka Whaitiri, Michael Wood, Kiri, and, of course, David Parker. But not only does it come within the context of those six resignations but it also comes within the context of many areas of failed reforms and failed behaviour from this Prime Minister.

I believe that in the context of this resignation, the Prime Minister is the common denominator of many of these issues. We’re talking about a Prime Minister who, while an experienced politician, was certainly not an experienced people manager, and he was certainly not experienced in exercising judgment over staff or people that he worked with. I said very early in my time here that Chris Hipkins wasn’t capable of running a bath because he had never run anything, and I stand by that, and so I think Kiritapu Allan’s resignation has been an incredibly sad consequence of a person being in a position of leading who did not provide that support and leadership that she should have been able to expect.

I talk about the context of the things that the Prime Minister has been involved in in his time as Prime Minister and also as a Minister. I look at the education reforms of the vocational education sector that have been a complete and utter disaster. I look at the roll-out of the vaccines—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! Come back, come back please to within the debate.

PENNY SIMMONDS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. So I’m wanting to traverse the areas where I believe that the Prime Minister, and at the time when he was the Minister of these various areas, Chris Hipkins, has let down not only Kiritapu Allan but a large number of people. When I look at farmers who have lost hope for their—

ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! Order! I’ve warned the member once to come back to within the scope of this debate which is an urgent debate centring around the resignation of a Minister. I’ll ask the member again to stay within the parameters of the debate.

PENNY SIMMONDS: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I do think that the Minister resigning is very much as a consequence of the lack of support and the leadership that was not shown to her by the Prime Minister, and I believe that there have been a number of signals over the last few years that this Prime Minister, in his role as a Minister, has done similar things to people within those areas and now to his Cabinet. When we read through six Ministers in the last six months who have resigned, there is a common dominator, and the common denominator is Chris Hipkins, who lacks the experience and lacks the judgment to be able to offer the support that should have been able to be expected of a leader in that context.

Tēnā tātau, tēnā koutou e te Paati Reipa i homaihia tēnei rima miniti ki au ki te Paati Māori ki te tuku atu i ngā korero kei runga ō mātou ngakau i tēnei wā nō reira mihi nui ki a koutou.

E Kiritapu ko koe tērā e matakitaki mai rā i tō wā kainga, ka tiki ake au i ngā kōrero kei roto i te pae pera tapu, i a Hone, nāna i kī nei kei roto i te pouri te māramatanga e whiti ana.

Ka pērā pea taku korero ki a koe me te mea hoki ka tiki atu au i ngā korero a ngā matua tūpuna, he wahine he whenua ka mate te tangata, he wahine he whenua ka ora hoki te tangata nō reira kia kaha ki a koe kia maia kia manawa nui.

Koinei hoki te mihi hangai tō ki a koe i tēnei ahiahi.

[Greetings, everyone, thank you, Labour Party, for allowing me, the Māori Party, these five minutes to express what we feel right now. Thank you.

Kiritapu, you are sitting and watching this from home. Allow me to make reference to the Bible, to John who said, “Within the night there is always light shining.”

That may be what I have to say to you. Also I would like to reference our forefathers who said, “Through woman and land our people perish, but through woman and land our people also thrive.” And so be strong, be confident, and be compassionate.

These are my kind sincere words to you this afternoon.]

This whole debate focused on Kiritapu and the Government, to me, is a very narrow-minded debate. Instead what we should be debating is the institution of Parliament that continues to uphold a misogynistic culture that was imposed by British men. Everyone sitting in this House is responsible for upholding that culture. Suddenly, everyone here has turned into mental health professionals, when this is the very institution and the very people that choose, every day, to create mental unwellness amongst our people.

Kiritapu Allan is only one casualty among a long line of people who have suffered from the misogyny of this Parliament—especially our wāhine Māori: Alamein Kopu, Georgina te Heuheu, Metiria Turei, Claudette Hauiti, Nanaia Mahuta, Marama Davidson, Meka Whaitiri, Louisa Wall, and now Kiritapu Allan.

This place is unsafe—more so for Māori, and more so again for wāhine Māori. The record shows for itself that the rules and traditions of this place perpetuate an unsafe culture. This place is makariri—which means “cold”, Mr Brownlee. It is void in spirit and this affects Māori more than anyone else in the House. Why? It’s because it was built with the aspirations of ridding Aotearoa of its indigenous people through subjugation and assimilation.

It is our responsibility—every one of you here—to do better, to challenge the very institution of this House that perpetuates misogyny and racism. How do we do that? Through constitutional transformation. We’ve been very clear about constitutional transformation—Te Paati Māori has policies based on it. The Matike Mai report shows a way we could do that to ensure that is a Tiriti-centric Aotearoa, a system that is based on Te Tiriti, a system that allows tikanga Māori to be part of any political system here in Aotearoa. Our Aotearoa hou shows that.

What does an Aotearoa hou look like? It looks like how we would treat you on the marae. This is the way Kiritapu Allan and all these other wāhine Māori and all of us here in this room—none of us exclusive of this—would be welcome to an Aotearoa hou. What does that look like? It looks like how we would treat you on our marae. We will welcome you. We will feed you. We will house you. We will care for you. We will love you. That’s the type of system we should be looking at.

This is not about an isolated case of Kiritapu Allan—kāo. This is about ensuring that this is a safe place for everyone, that this is a safe place for minorities, that this is a safe place for tangata whenua, that this is a safe place for tangata Tiriti, that this is a safe place for wāhine Māori. The record shows that it has not been a safe place for our wāhine Māori. I named a whole raft of wahine Māori that had been affected by the Westminster system that has been imposed on us here in Aotearoa.

So our challenge is to everyone here. This is an opportunity for us to start to look at a system that is more accepting—that is more accepting, that is more Tiriti-centric, and that builds an Aotearoa hou.

So, in saying that, ki taku tuahine, e Kiritapu, kia kaha ki a koe, he wahine Māori koe he tangata whenua koe, kauaka rawa e tukuna tētahi kia tuarua koe ki runga i tā tātou whenua me nama tahi tātou i ngā wā katoa. Madam Speaker, e te Whare, ngā mihi ki a tātou katoa, tēnā tātou. Kia ora tātou.

[To my sister, Kiritapu, may you be strong, you are wahine Māori. You are people of the land. Don’t allow anybody to say you are minority on our own land. We are number one always. Madam Speaker, the House, acknowledgments to us all, thank you all.] 

Vanushi Walters—five-minute call.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Like many of my other colleagues today, I rise with a heavy heart as well and join them in sending aroha to Kiritapu and to her whānau.

It’s really difficult to see someone who has such a heart for improving our justice system to have to step back in this way. I met Kiritapu many years ago when we were both working at YouthLaw Aotearoa and we connected really in terms of her passion for young people. That’s something that has followed her through her role as Minister of Justice. Kiritapu was always someone who I think, while she had the ball, really was running, and that of course is very difficult to do when you’re going through your own personal circumstances as well.

It is undeniable that her actions on Sunday night are unacceptable, but I think what that shows us is that mental health issues don’t discriminate and they don’t always present in the most obvious of ways. Sometimes they do sit under the surface and often the scale of those issues sits under the surface as well.

I want to acknowledge that there has been a reallocation of the portfolios as a result of her resignation. I just want to acknowledge Minister Andersen as someone I know to be focused on responding to community concerns and very connected to justice issues across the portfolio. I would say to all those who are experiencing mental health issues that your present circumstances don’t determine where you go; they merely determine where you start.

I believe it’s time now for us to give Kiritapu and her whānau some peace to talk with themselves and some privacy. Kia ora.

The debate having concluded, the motion lapsed.