Privilege — Conduct of Members in the House—Consideration of Question of Privilege

Members, I’ve received letters from the Hon Shane Jones, Suze Redmayne, and Todd Stephenson raising a matter of privilege around the conduct of some members during the vote on the first reading of the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill on 14 November 2024. In line with usual practice, those members have been asked to respond to me by 1 p.m. on Thursday. I’ll then consider whether a question of privilege has arisen, and whether that question will stand referred to the Privileges Committee in each case.

Point of order, Mr Speaker.

SPEAKER: Point of order, the Hon Shane Jones—well, let me sit down first.

Hon SHANE JONES: You’ve earned it. I don’t want to comment on anything that may or may not make its way to the Privileges Committee, but I’m concerned, based on what happened—the coordinated level of disruptiveness and the prevention of votes being cast—at whether or not the Standing Orders that we currently have are still of the level of robustness that will provide protection to the essence of our democracy.

Separate from the Privileges Committee, I’m asking for you to consider whether we’ve reached a point where you should invite a number of very senior parliamentarians to consider whether the Standing Orders are now incapable of dealing with the event that took place last week. That event will no doubt be dealt with in some manner or form after a view has been formed by you pertaining to privileges violation. I’m not seeking a response today, but it is very important, in my view, that the House and New Zealanders see you take this position and this issue incredibly seriously and provide back to us a level of guidance, whether or not the deterrence, the range of censure options, are such that we now need to reform, sharpen, and bring the Standing Orders into a world where it is apparent that a host of members no longer fear the consequences.

I’d like to very briefly offer support for that course of action, understanding that there’s a course of events that need to take place. I think some of the changes, particularly around the use of social media, have changed the incentives for people’s behaviour around the rules of Parliament and that perhaps an early Standing Orders Committee could be convened to address those changes.

Thank you for those comments. Can I just make the first comment to the Hon Shane Jones that it would be unfortunate if some aspects of your contribution today were to be construed as some critique that I was not taking this matter seriously. That is not the case—I take it very seriously. You and the Hon David Seymour quite rightly point out that there are limitations on what a Speaker can do within the Standing Orders. Last week, one way or the other, both at the time of the incident and matters subsequently, that position was significantly challenged. The right place, as the Hon David Seymour points out, for this discussion is the Standing Orders Committee. That committee will convene at the earliest convenience to the House; obviously, not in the recess week, but perhaps the week after, as a bit of dust settles, to work out exactly what might be a better set of rules—which the Standing Orders are—should events like this occur in the future.