Latest news with #DuncanWebb
Scoop
16 hours ago
- Business
- Scoop
Labour Will Repeal Regulatory Standards Bill
Labour will repeal the Regulatory Standards Bill in its first 100 days in Government. 'The Regulatory Standards Bill has no place in a fair and democratic New Zealand and Labour is committed to repealing it in our first 100 days if elected next year,' Labour justice spokesperson Duncan Webb said. 'This Bill is another concession by Christopher Luxon to ACT that puts corporate interests ahead of the public good, making it harder to pass laws that protect people and the environment. 'Under the Regulatory Standards Bill, laws that would keep people healthy and safe, like requiring landlords to heat homes, limiting the sale of vapes, or keeping our air and water clean would be at risk. 'It allows David Seymour to create his own hand-picked 'appeals body of regulatory economists' to criticise laws that are out of line with his minority views. 'Put another way, it takes power away from communities and hands it to corporate friends of the ACT Party. 'Christopher Luxon was too weak to stand up against it, but Labour will repeal it,' Duncan Webb said.
RNZ News
07-06-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
The House: A sentencing hearing in Parliament
Rawiri Waititi speaks in the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. The noose is a reference to a tupuna who was hanged in Mount Eden Prison. Photo: VNP / Louis Collins The fate of the three Te Pāti Māori MPs who performed a haka during the vote on the first reading of the Principles of Treaty of Waitangi Bill last November was decided on Thursday , following a long, and at times intense debate. The Privileges hearing outcome was something the Government clearly wanted finished, and it ended the week. Leader of the House Chris Bishop, kicked off Thursday's debate by asking the House to bring down the curtain on an issue that has lingered in Parliament for seven months. The debate boiled down to whether the recommended punishments - all unprecedented - were fair, or even wise. Before the debate paused a fortnight ago, the positions of the two largest parties ( National and Labour ) had been outlined. The Privileges Committee Chair, Judith Collins had stood by the recommended punishments, while Chris Hipkins moved an amendment to reduce them to more historically usual levels. Some of the speeches stepped beyond a simple defence or opposition. Some were personal, some philosophical, some emotional. A few moments are noted below. Labour's Duncan Webb, who is Deputy Chair of the Privileges Committee, is a former jurist and went for the dissect-the-facts approach. It felt like a trial defence summary. "It's well known that those three members chose not to attend the Privileges Committee or provide any explanation. They weren't required to attend the committee. They were not called to attend and therefore did not have to. Whilst they can't claim credit for cooperation - nor can they say they were denied an opportunity to explain - neither can they be punished. "It appears that some members of the committee may feel affronted that the members didn't come to the committee when they were invited. They may even consider that the members were defiant in not attending. "However, they were not required to attend. This is no justification for the imposition of a punishment that is disproportionate and arbitrary." Te Tai Tonga MP Tākuta Ferris took Te Pāti Māori's first call, and took a constitutional approach, questioning the underpinnings of the institution making the judgement. "This debate is not about a haka. It is not about a suspension. It's not about the interruption of a vote. "It is, at its heart, about the fact that this House continues to ignore Te Tiriti o Waitangi, that this House continues to ignore Māori sovereignty, and that this House continues to ignore all of the constitutional rights that flow forth from those two things. "The fact of the matter is simple: without Māori sovereignty, there is no Te Tiriti o Waitangi. "Without Te Tiriti o Waitangi, there is no constitutional right for the presence of the Crown in this part of the world. "Without the constitutional right, there is no Parliament." New Zealand First Leader Winston Peters is a harsh critic of Te Pāti Māori. There was a sense that the pot was boiling over as Peters, himself a member of the Privileges Committee, launched into Te Pāti Māori MPs. "No ordinary Māori, Māori, or non-Māori should accept the behaviour or the intent of this party of absolute extremists, screaming out that everybody else in the Parliament is here only by their behest. "Have a look in the mirror. Mr Ferris, look in the mirror. What is the majority of your DNA? What's the majority of your DNA? Well, if you're disgraced by your European DNA, we over here are not. We are proud of all sides of our background because we are New Zealanders first and foremost. As for blood quantum, if the cowboy hat wearer is an example of blood quantum, I'm going to a new biology class." Winston Peters speaks in the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. Photo: VNP / Phil Smith Labour's Willie Jackson also focused his speech on Te Pāti Māori, playing what could be called the role of 'good cop' and encouraging them to compromise. "You know I love you, but a little bit of compromise could help the situation... I know it's hard to apologise, but I want to say to you Te Pāti Māori that not every single Māori in the country supports you and they don't support some of the strategy. "They love you, I love you, but some of the stuff is not going down well. "This is the centre and a celebration of the Westminster system, and I think our challenge - as, I think, you know - is that we have to imbue some of our Māori culture into the system. "We have to get a partnership going, and I don't think the kōrero so far is going to help with the partnership. You know, we have to get the House to embrace some of our values." Willie Jackson speaks in the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. Photo: VNP / Phil Smith Former Speaker Adrian Rurawhe is also from Labour's Māori caucus. His speech was a change of pace and had a touch of elder statesman. He began by speaking of a new precedent set - a government majority within the privileges committee punishing the opposition. Raiwiri Waititi and Adrian Rurawhe chat during the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. Photo: VNP / Louis Collins "There are no winners in this debate. Each party in this House might think they're winning by talking to the people that support them, but there are no winners in this debate - none - especially not this House. "The Privileges Committee of the future will have a new precedent, without a doubt - a new range of penalties against members who err in the future. You can guarantee that. "You can also guarantee that Governments of the day, in the future, will feel very free to use those penalties to punish their opponents. "This is what we are doing in the House today." The House also heard from the ACT party, who the Te Pāti Māori performed the haka in front of. One of the key points of contention was whether the ACT MPs were victims of intimidation. All three ACT MPs who spoke certainly thought so, with Karen Chhour, who compared the debate to an HR meeting. "I've listened to the speeches across this House, and the hate and the anger that's been chucked from both sides of this House, and it actually really saddens me - it really saddens me. Somebody can say that I don't have the right to stand here and speak, but that's what this place is about. "Four and a half years ago, when I had the privilege of being elected into this place, I felt that burden of what was expected of me when I came to this place, to represent the people that I wanted to come here to make a better life for." "This is what the Privileges Committee is there for - sort of like our HR, where we sit down and we discuss what the issue was and, hopefully, can come to a medium ground where there is a little bit of contrition shown from those who have had the accusations brought to them, and then a simple apology could be enough." Demanding an apology for behaviour found to be intimidating is actually one of the most common punishments recommended by the committee. The Committee's report noted that the MPs not meeting the Committee had no bearing on their decision. As in most courtrooms, where the accused have the chance to represent themselves. All three Te Pāti Māori MPs in question spoke during the debate. Rawiri Waititi used his speech to not only defend his and his colleague's position but as a rallying cry. Rawiri Waititi speaks in the debate on the Privileges Committee's majority recommendation of parliamentary suspensions for three Te Pāti Māori MPs. Photo: VNP / Louis Collins "Turn our rage into power and make this a one-term Government. Enrol! Vote! If you hear the haka outside these walls, add your voice. If you see injustice trending online, amplify the truth. "If you feel fear, remember fear is the coloniser's last currency. Spend it into worthlessness by standing up. You can bench my body from this house for 21 days, but you will never bench our movement." The Greens' Steve Abel, who was the last to speak, also picked up on the courthouse feel to it all, but not just any courthouse. "We're not supposed to critique the courts, but I guess this is a court of our Parliament. The Privileges Committee represents the Parliament. We have two of the most senior members of this Parliament on that Privileges Committee, the then Deputy Prime Minister, Winston Peters, and the Attorney-General, Judith Collins. "Two of the most senior members, both lawyers, have egregiously punished one of the newest members of this Parliament. "What is the message that that sends to young people watching about the justice of this House, to newcomers to the House? "What is the message that it sends about a young Māori woman who has come and spoken with such certainty of the people she represents? "I think it sends a very bad message and I believe it renders the character of the Privileges Committee under that leadership as something of a kangaroo court." After three hours of debate, the House finally came to vote. All amendments put forward by the Opposition were voted down, and the original motion supporting the punishment recommended by the Privileges Committee was agreed upon, thereby kicking off the suspension period for the three Te Pāti Māori MPs, who also lost their salary and their votes in the House whilst suspended. - RNZ's The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk. Enjoy our articles or podcast at RNZ. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Scoop
29-05-2025
- Business
- Scoop
National Caves To ACT To Ram Through Regulatory Standards Bill
Once again National has caved to ACT by today agreeing to shorten the select committee process for the Regulatory Standards Bill. 'The Regulatory Standards Bill puts corporate interests ahead of our communities, environmental protections, and Te Tiriti o Waitangi,' Labour regulation spokesperson Duncan Webb said. 'The Prime Minister failed to show leadership on the Treaty Principles Bill – and he's failing again. Christopher Luxon is clearly too weak to stand up to David Seymour. 'For a Bill that claims to attempt to embed 'good law-making', it is staggering that National would agree to cut short the public's chance to have their say. 'Under the Regulatory Standards Bill, laws that would keep people healthy and safe, like requiring landlords to heat homes, or limiting the sale of vapes, would be at the whim of whether David Seymour thinks they're a good idea or not. "It is unbelievable that the Government is cutting short the time the public will have to weigh in on such a consequential Bill. 'Today, the Government voted to shortcut the select committee process from six months to four months, all because David Seymour wants this wrapped up before the end of the year. They also cut short the public submission period from six weeks to four. 'Luxon needs to start standing up to the extreme voices in his Government, but instead he's bending over backwards to accommodate them,' Duncan Webb said.
Scoop
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
David Seymour's Bill Harms Our People And Environment
David Seymour's Regulatory Standards Bill would take New Zealand backwards by making it harder to protect our people and the environment. 'This Bill favours corporate interests ahead of our communities, environmental protections, and Te Tiriti o Waitangi,' Labour regulation spokesperson Duncan Webb said. 'Just like the Treaty Principles Bill, it's another concession by Christopher Luxon to David Seymour – soon to be Deputy Prime Minister – that's out of touch with what Kiwis want and just takes New Zealand backwards. 'Laws that keep people healthy and safe, like requiring landlords to heat homes, would be at the whims of whether David Seymour thinks they're a good idea or not. It would make it harder to keep our air and rivers clean and reduce climate emissions. 'It's ironic that the man who thinks that women's pay is wasteful spending also thinks that we should be spending $18 million a year administering his new scheme for evaluating regulations. 'But it's no surprise, given that the whole show would be overseen by a board appointed by, and answerable to, David Seymour, giving him sign-off power over every minister and department. 'This Bill is a dangerous power grab that is not in the interests of the majority of New Zealanders,' Duncan Webb said.
Newsroom
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Newsroom
Labour and Greens queried possible punishments, Act took it further
Act MP Parmjeet Parmar only raised the idea of imprisoning MPs after her Privileges Committee colleagues requested information on the full range of penalties and international precedent. The advice was sought during deliberation of punishments for Te Pāti Māori MPs who performed a haka in the House during a vote on the Treaty Principles Bill last year. Parmar's request was singled out by Labour leader Chris Hipkins as a 'stain' on Parliament, but the committee members representing the Labour and the Green Parties also requested advice to the same effect as Parmar. The point of difference between Parmar's request and the requests made by Duncan Webb (Labour) and Ricardo Menendez-March (Greens) was the word 'imprisonment'. Parmar's fellow committee members requested advice from the Clerk of the House around the range of punishments available and international comparisons. Parmar went further, and specified that she would like advice on the full range from the minimum to imprisonment. In a statement the Act Party told Newsroom the specified range was 'an exercise to help the Committee to put any proposed penalty in context'. The party rejected claims that it argued in favour of imprisonment of MPs, but said 'we like to keep our options open'. Labour's committee representative Duncan Webb says he didn't ask specifically for imprisonment advice. 'I asked for international comparisons – we were discussing suspension. Despite suggestions to the contrary only the Act member was keen on imprisonment,' he says. Parmar's question was not asked in a vacuum. It followed requests made by the Green and Labour MPs around the possible punishments and, according to the Party, was intended to provide context around the maximum possible punishment. The Act Party rebuked criticisms of the three-week sentence, and instead called for further measures to be taken. The advice given to the committee, from the Clerk of the House David Wilson, recommended reaching broad consensus if intending to recommend a punishment that went beyond previously imposed. This did not happen. The Act Party was targeted by Te Pāti Māori during their haka, as the Treaty Principles Bill came from their leader David Seymour. This was ruled out of order by Speaker of the House Gerry Brownlee. In the six months that followed, the Privileges Committee deliberated on what the offending MPs would receive as punishment. Each party is represented on the committee by a senior member. Te Pāti Māori MPs did not engage with the committee after their request to appear as a group was rejected. Party leaders have previously expressed frustration with the mechanisms of a Western parliament, and have called for the formation of an alternative Māori parliament. A fourth MP, Labour's Peeni Henare, also joined the haka. He did not advance towards the Act MPs, and engaged with the Privileges Committee. Following an apology to the committee, Henare's sanctioning process concluded. The committee's final report detailed a majority recommendation to issue a three-week suspension to the co-leaders of Te Pāti Māori, Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi, and a one-week suspension to MP Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke, who initiated the haka. Their refusal to attend committee hearings was not considered in the sentencing. Previously, the longest suspension suggested by the committee – and agreed to by Parliament – was three days. Then-Prime Minister Robert Muldoon criticised the Speaker in a 1987 press release, netting him the suspension. In another departure from the norm, the committee's recommended suspension was not a unanimous opinion. Efforts to meet in the middle evidently failed, and the Government's majority won out. Leader of the House Chris Bishop said there was 'too much of a gap between the parties'. Hipkins said: 'It is wrong and against the traditions of our democracy for a Government to use its majority in Parliament to suspend and remove from the service of the people of New Zealand its political opponents.' Before eventually deciding to delay the vote to confirm the suspensions, House members delivered speeches. During Hipkins' speech, he said he was 'absolutely shocked' to learn a member of the committee had asked about the possibility of imprisoning another MP. He likened the behaviour to that of 'tinpot dictatorships and banana republics', and said 'the fact that the question was even asked is a stain on this House'.
