Privilege — Consideration of Report of Privileges Committee—Conduct of Hon Peeni Henare

I move, That the interim report of the Privileges Committee on the question of privilege concerning the conduct of four members during proceedings of the House be noted.

The Privileges Committee report on this issue has been presented to the House and is on the floor for members to see. On 10 December 2024, the Speaker ruled that concerns raised by three members about the conduct of the Hon Peeni Henare, Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke, Debbie Ngarewa-Packer, and Rawiri Waititi following the first reading debate on the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill gave rise to a question of privilege. The Speaker ruled that the issue of members leaving their seats to participate in an activity that was disorderly and disruptive to the procedure of the House is something that should be considered further.

The incident in which this question of privilege relates occurred during the first reading vote, when Ms Maipi-Clarke began performing a haka. Several members from Te Pāti Māori, the Labour Party, and the Green Party rose to their feet and joined in. The members whose conduct is at issue, in this question of privilege, left their seats to stand on the floor of the House.

This interim report focuses on the conduct of the Hon Peeni Henare. We received a written explanation from Mr Henare on 29 January 2025. He appeared before our committee to answer further questions on 12 March 2025. While participating in the haka, Mr Henare left his seat and advanced on to the floor in front of the Labour Party seats. In his written response to us, Mr Henare stated that his conduct did not reach the threshold of previous privileges complaints where contempt was found, as he was across the floor of the House from other members. He stated that “If there was disrespect, I apologise unreservedly.” In his hearing with us, he again apologised for breaking the rule of stepping away from his seat and on to the floor of the debating chamber. He said, “I know the rule with respect to that, and I knew that, in doing so, I would be breaking that rule.”

As a committee, we have been tasked with determining whether the Hon Peeni Henare’s actions following the first reading debate on the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill amount to a contempt of the House. Standing Order 417 sets out that “The House may treat as a contempt any act or omission which—(a) obstructs or impedes the House in the performance of its functions”. Mr Henare’s conduct in stepping on to the floor of the Chamber to participate in the haka while a vote was being taken did obstruct or impede the business of the House, as the vote was not able to continue. Our view is that this is undoubtedly disorderly behaviour. However, we find that Mr Henare’s actions do not amount to a contempt.

We recommended that Mr Henare be required to apologise to the House for acting in a disorderly manner that disrupted a vote being taken and impeded the House in its functions. Mr Henare has, now, so apologised. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

The question is that the motion be agreed to.

Madam Speaker, thank you. I don’t have a huge amount to add to that comprehensive description of the proceedings of the Privileges Committee. I note, as I recall, the committee was unanimous in its resolution on this matter, which is always a good thing. I just want to recognise that Mr Henare came to the Privileges Committee, both in his written submission and in person, and he was fulsome in his comments—and frank and sincere—and that assisted the committee in its deliberations considerably and enabled us to dispose of this matter relatively promptly. It’s good to see that the matter is now concluded in respect of Mr Henare. He has apologised to this House, and I endorse the findings of the committee.

The Green Party acknowledges the report that we’re debating today and the existing rules that therefore guided us to come to the conclusion in this report. I want to acknowledge the Hon Peeni Henare for his contributions to the oral hearings and particularly acknowledging his comments that helped us understand that he was carrying the many, many, many constituents behind him when he chose to make the actions that led to this report.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Firstly, I would like to acknowledge the chair of the Privileges Committee for producing a record of the disruption that occurred in the House before the first reading vote on the Treaty principles bill. I will not repeat all that, and I will also not repeat the details that are covered in the committee report, other than to reiterate the conclusion that Peeni Henare’s conduct, including participating in a haka, was disorderly and did obstruct or impede the business of the House as the vote was not able to continue. Peeni Henare has apologised for his conduct, and ACT accepts his apology.

I would like to give special emphasis to his statement that he made during the Privileges Committee hearing. In that, we had several questions, and I would say that he really sincerely answered all those questions. One question we had was about if it was all pre-planned, and Peeni Henare said it was not pre-planned. ACT accepts that. The actions were not calculated. We accept that. We accept that, yep, lapses of judgment can occur.

It is important that any disorderly conduct in the House is taken very seriously, because it’s about the message that we send out—because what we do here is not just confined to our four walls—to, especially, our young people. Are we saying to our young people that it’s OK to break rules? Are we saying to our young people that it’s OK to break rules and feel proud of that? Or are we saying that it’s OK to try to then get some attention on social media after breaking rules? These are not the messages that we want to send out, because our audience is not just here in New Zealand but we have an international audience as well. So, whatever we do here, we are also, through those actions, speaking to our future leaders, and that’s why our conduct in this House is really important.

In this House, we know that on sensitive issues, there are strong disagreements, and there is a way to express those disagreements: that is through debate and that is through casting the vote after the debate is done. We need to respect these ways because that is how our democratic system works and that is what makes our democratic system the best system in the world.

Finally, I would like to urge the House to reflect on the perverse incentives of things being done to go viral on social media—acts that disrupt actions in the House to get attention on social media, acts that go against democracy, acts that go against the rights of other fellow members to cast their vote are the kinds of actions we need to reflect on. We also need to reflect that if these kinds of actions are put on social media to make them go viral, are we really serving the public that we are here to serve? It’s important that we do justice to our job and we do justice to people, those who have elected us. We are here to make New Zealand better, and that starts with our own actions. I thank the member for his apology.

Motion agreed to.