The House

The Annual Review Debate allows Parliament to grill government ministers on performance in their areas, unless someone runs out of time first. They did.For the past two weeks the main event in Parliament's debating chamber has been the Annual Review Debate. This ten-hour-long debate happens every year in the run-up to a new budget.Formally, it is the Committee of the Whole House stage for the bill that confirms the government's books for the period initiated two budgets ago. The Appropriation (2022/23 Confirmation and Validation) Bill.In the House, the debate is introduced to the MPs like this: "The annual review debate is the debate on the financial position of the Government and the annual reviews of departments, Officers of Parliament, Crown entities, public organisations, and State enterprises, as reported on by select committees."The build up to Annual Review Debate is a series of inquiries by the select committees. Each subject specialist committee selects a range of government organisations within their purview to investigate, with written questions and public hearings, including grilling the ministers responsible.The results of all of those investigations are collected in a huge and fascinating report (see volume 1 here and volume 2 here). It is that report that is being debated in The Annual Review Debate. The debate is a committee stage, but with many more ministers appearing than usual. The ministers turn up in the House one at a time, and answer questions mostly from opposition MPs, about the performance of their own parts of the government.Keeping an eye on the clocksThe Annual Review Debate is ten hours long, and each party is allocated a portion of that time according to their size. The debate is not all nicely timed-out speeches though, it is questions and answers. Sometimes lots of questions and few answers and sometimes a few questions and really long answers, depending on which minister is at the Table.At the front of the debating chamber a member of parliament's staff sits with seven timers; one for each party. Every time an MP or a minister gets up and speaks that time is knocked off their party's total.It is a count-down to zero for each party, and each party is responsible for managing its own time-resource to make sure that they have enough for: The apolitical introductory speeches to be made on behalf of a select committee for each subject section of the debate (a mix of parties, but most committee chairs are from governing parties). All the questions they want to ask (mostly from opposition parties). All the answers to those questions (entirely from governing parties)…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Members of the public give some last-minute advice to the Government about its budget plans, via committee hearings into the Budget Policy Statement.There have always been a lot of rules that guide the way that governments plan and report their proposed and actual spending.The current approach possibly dates back to 1989, with the instigation of Labour's Public Finance Act (PFA), and then especially National's slightly more recent Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1994. The highlights of those two Acts now exist together, and tinkering continues.Two of the overarching themes of that law are: declare a plan, and avoid surprises. Both messages are satisfied in the annual Budget Policy Statement (required by the PFA), which the Government released in late March, outlining the Government's goals, objectives and strategies. Since then the Finance and Expenditure Committee has been examining it.The Budget Policy Statement achieves something else as well - an opportunity for budget feedback from the public.Unless the House is sitting under urgency, proposed new laws usually spend time being examined by a select committee. At that point the public is usually given a chance to weigh in on the plan.But this is not true of budgets. Appropriations bills do go to Select Committee, but not for public input. Instead, there are extensive hearings when the committees themselves question the ministers about their plans.The main chance the public gets to input into the strategic direction of a new budget is at the hearings held into the Budget Policy Statement, and yes, that's prior to the budget's release. That timing means it's more of an opportunity for the public to pitch their own ideas for a budget, and respond to the broad budget objectives outlined in the Budget Policy Statement, rather than budget specifics.I've listened to some of the submissions this year. There have been a wide range of both submitters and topics. The budget covers pretty much everything under the sun and therefore so too does the advice. Some submitters have come from organisations and lobby groups from across the political spectrum; others were from private individuals.I'm pretty sure that all the submitters are aware that, disasters notwithstanding, the budget is already set in stone, and so their submissions won't effect change - but regardless of that, this is not just an exercise in shouting at clouds.It is a chance to raise issues, voice opinions and engage MPs in debate about different approaches and ideas. As well as being a key aspect of New Zealand democracy, that kind of personal input into the halls of power is always a worthy undertaking.The budget itself will be revealed in three weeks on May 30th.Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

In the lead-up to the Budget, Parliament goes over the head of the Government, asking the Governor General to add in some cash for Parliament's three watch-dogs.The Government's budget is decided by cabinet, after many months of work from the Minister of Finance, Treasury and individual ministries and agencies. But they don't get to make all the decisions. Before the budget gets presented Parliament gets the chance to add a few items itself, by-passing the Government (kind-of) to fund its own watch-dogs. Ultimately, it is Parliament that has the power to approve or reject the entire budget, but that decision is over something designed and proposed by government. This bit is different.These extra Appropriations are voted on by Parliament and presented separately. In fact they are made in the form of an Address to the Governor General, with details of funding for the Officers, to be added to the budget. (Fun fact, that address is a physical thing, not an email. It is printed on 'Goat Skin', which these days is just a high quality parchment rather than the former skin of a goat.) On Monday, the Leader of the House (who is the Government's senior representative in the debating chamber), moved that the House recommend two things to the Governor General. Both to do with three Parliamentary watch-dogs who keep an eye on government: The three Officers of Parliament are the Ombudsman, the Auditor-General, and the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. They all report to Parliament as a whole (through Parliament's Speaker and the Officers of Parliament Committee) rather than to a particular minister or cabinet like other government entities.The first was updates to last year's Estimates for those watch dogs; i.e. their actual spend rather than their estimated spend. The second was their estimated spend for the coming year.This is all separate from the Government's own budget development process because these entities are designed to apply independent scrutiny to the Government's actions including use of public funds, legal accountability and environmental stewardship.Government's might feasibly find them to be a thorn in their side and desired to defund them. Or at the least the Officers could hold their punches in case that happened.The level of funding is determined (with input from Treasury) by by the Officers of Parliament Committee, a cross-party committee of MPs. That committee is chaired by the Speaker who is the nominal 'minister in charge' of the Officers. So today's motion doesn't come as a complete surprise to MPs.The Three Officers of Parliament Who are these three entities known as Officers of Parliament?…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

James Shaw's valedictory statement included thanks, humour, yarns, surprising allies, warnings and advice for MPs on avoiding the endless policy tug-of-war.In the last year or so Parliament has heard some unusually good valedictory speeches from a variety of outgoing MPs. Just a few weeks ago from Labour's Grant Robertson for example, or late last year from National's Todd Muller. This week it was former Green leader James Shaw. So on the Sunday edition of The House we featured highlights of James Shaw's farewell statement. The radio broadcast of audio highlights can be heard here. The full speech can be read below, and at the bottom of this article is an embedded video of the event.Hansard's record of the valedictory:Thank you - you haven't heard what I've got to say yet! Thank you, Speaker. E mihi ana ki ngā mana whenua ki tēnei rohe, a Taranaki Whānui ki Te Ūpoko o te Ika, Te Ātiawa Whānui, Tēnā koutou katoa. E te Māngai o te Whare, tēnā koe. Nga mihi nui kia koutou katoa. One night, during the course of the 2017 election campaign, I was so exhausted that I swallowed my tongue in my sleep, and I woke up- It didn't feel funny at the time. I woke up on the floor on my hands and knees, choking it back up.That was a difficult campaign. When Parliament rose for the six-week election period, I delivered the adjournment debate speech for the Green Party, and 10 minutes before I was due to speak, I got the news that the Colmar Brunton poll that night had us down 11 points. We were on 4 percent. It seemed likely at that point that I was about to become the last leader of the Green Party and to deliver the last speech by a Green Party MP in Parliament.Well, 12 weeks later, I was the Minister of Climate Change. I was on my way to Germany to the United Nations annual climate summit, but first I had to stop over in Rome to meet the Pope.Now, there isn't a roller coaster on this planet that comes close to the white-knuckle ride that is politics, and I am simultaneously saddened and elated to be leaving it. Actually, I am mostly elated to be leaving it. I've been in Parliament for 10 years, Green Party co-leader for nine, six as a Minister of the Crown, and I have to say it has not been easy to work out what it is that I want to say, here at the end of it all.There are a great many people to whom I owe a profound debt of gratitude. Sometimes, in these speeches, the acknowledgments come at the end, but I'm going to start with them, because if there is one thing that I want to express, it is gratitude…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

This week Parliament hosted both American and Ukrainian delegations. We chat with Galyna Mykhailiuk, who lead the visiting Ukrainian MPs.It's always news when the Prime Minister heads overseas, or a foreign leader arrives here. But prime ministers are comparative home-bodies. It's much more common for other ministers to travel. Collectively, even backbench MPs travel more than Prime Ministers. The backbenchers travel for many reasons, but most equate to either visiting other Parliaments or meeting groups of other countries' MPs.The reverse is even more common. Parliament hosts many MPs and politicians from other countries as guests. Most sitting weeks there are groups visiting from somewhere.This week, for example, a group of young American politicians from various institutions have been in town, and a delegation from the Ukrainian Parliament, the Verkhovna Rada. A delegation of Ukrainian MPs brief the Foreign Affairs Select Committee. (Left to right) Olga Koval, Galyna Mykhailiuk and Laroslav Zhelezniak.The Ukrainian delegation has been a little different, with one of them being a Parliamentary representative of their President, and the Ambassador accompanying them as well. This has meant that while it has been a Parliamentary visit it has also had tones of a ministerial one. Certainly the MPs had messages to share from the wider Ukrainian government and people. Their busy week included meeting various ministers and MP groups, including a formal dinner as guests of the New Zealand Speaker. They also visited New Zealand Military trainers at Linton Camp (who have been training Ukrainian forces in the UK), and the Royal New Zealand Police College to learn from their training approach.I caught up with the delegation leader Galyna Mykhailiuk after they had briefed the Foreign Affairs and Trade Committee on Ukraine's current and future needs, and how New Zealand can contribute. You can listen to our chat at the link above or watch that select committee briefing here. https://vimeo.com/showcase/10758106/video/920194696RNZ's The House - journalism focussed on parliamentary legislation, issues and insights - is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk. Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

MPs listen to hundreds of Select Committee submissions. But occasionally, like Camilla Belich today, they get to sit on the other side of the table themselves.MPs listen to hundreds, even thousands of submissions from the public on bills and petitions, even on Parliament's own rules. It would not be surprising if backbench MPs' dreams featured an endless parade of proffered opinions.Very occasionally a backbench MP finds themselves on the other side of the table, getting to bend the ears of their colleagues.This Wednesday morning for example, in the Education and Workforce Committee, Labour Whip Camilla Belich got to be a submitter, the first to speak on a Member's Bill she adopted from former MP Ibrahim Omer. The Crimes (Theft by Employer) Amendment Bill seeks to add a new criminal offence for employers who intentionally fail to pay owed wages to employees. After her 15 minute submission I asked Camilla Belich how it was to be on the other side of the table. "It is a different experience. I think one thing I would note is that it's quite hard to know how much time you've used. And so I would be probably be a bit kinder now to submitters when they go over because it's really hard to tell - it goes really quickly. What is an MP's objective in submitting on a bill they are sponsoring?"I have to convince them to allow the Bill to go forward and convince them that it's a worthy bill to have their support. and also the officials, to try and make sure that they understand the policy intent of the bill."Camilla Belich is also a member of this committee, and gets to keep on offering advice, staying in the room when they close the door and go into private session. Consideration is when the committee decides whether a bill needs amendments, and if so what.Ministers sponsor many government bills but never get a view behind the Select Committee curtain on their own work."Ministers don't get the opportunity to sit in select committees and be part of the determinations because we do have that separation. So it is a unique experience that a backbench Member of Parliament gets to do when they do have a member's bill.And often we'll sub someone on to the committee to be on there for the consideration of the bill. So even if it's not your committee, it's usually something that you get to do as part of that process."Ministers appear before committees to answer questions in Annual Review and Estimates hearings related to their plans and performance. They could also appear before committee to submit on all their own bills. …Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The Annual Review Debate begins this week, when Parliament quizzes ministers about past performance. Kieran McAnulty explains...One of Parliament's big piece debates begins this week. The Annual Review Debate happens every year as the penultimate stage of a long review of prior government spending and performance (for the financial year ended almost a year previously). It will stretch across 10 hours and give the opposition a chance to question a line -up of government ministers about their portfolios. This questioning is a follow-up to months of hearings in the subject specialist select committees.One of the people managing it in the House (from the Opposition point of view), is the Shadow Leader of the House, Labour MP Kieran McAnulty. Phil Smith chats with him about the event. Labour MP and Shadow Leader of the House, Kieran McAnulty in the debating chamber.Kieran McAnulty - The Standing Orders give some scope to ask questions about current work programs as well, so it's not entirely looking backwards. But that remains a big part of it. The annual review debate is interesting, because it's time-limited. And there's a process beforehand where the Opposition registers their interest in certain topics with the Government. And the convention is that the Government will try and accommodate that, but is not really required to fully, but on the whole they do. And so we've gone through that process. Phil Smith - When you say the topics, you mean, which ministers are going to turn up around? Yeah, that's right. So the Minister of Finance, Minister of Environment, etc, etc. Associate ministers will be in the house as well during that allocated time period. And if there is a question directed to them, or they are the more appropriate person to answer it, then they can do so from their seat. Whereas the minister, the lead minister, is usually sitting at the Table.This is the Committee stage debate of the Appropriations (which means budget) Confirmation and Validation Bill, which is the one that sort of ties up all the loose ends on the budget, before the budget. In a committee stage, the Minister responsible for a bill always sits at the table, and is available to answer questions. Well, you know, hopefully answer questions. But then this is like one of those except it's a whole range of ministers. Yeah, I can understand why it has been set up this way. It's so that Parliament has an opportunity to scrutinize the areas that it has expressed an interest in. And then certain time allocations are given to ministers. So that this time limited debate can be efficiently run…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Over the last six years, parliament's clerks have had to vet about 40,000 written questions each year. So how are written questions used and what are the democratic benefits?Over the last six years, Parliament's clerks have had to vet about 40,000 written questions each year. A written question - from an opposition MP to a minister - is a commonly used tool in Parliament, but not well-known outside political circles.They are not as familiar to the public as the more theatrical and confrontational oral question, as asked during Question Time. Written questions exist in the shadow of their oral cousins. You can find them published on Parliament's website: both question and - when it is given - the answer alongside it. So how are written questions used and what are the democratic benefits? Ginny AndersenDrilling downOpposition MP Ginny Andersen of the Labour Party says the written question is a great tool for holding the government to account. One of the benefits is that there is no limit as to how many questions an MP can lodge. In terms of what they are about, being factual is the key concern."You look for a range of different sources: it might be a report in the media; it could be a statement the minister's made; it may be something they've even said in an oral question that you'd like to drill down a bit further and get some additional information."It's really important that it's based on fact, and you also need to verify where you've got your source from."It can be helpful to consider the written question as part of a set of questioning tools used by MPs to keep tabs on the Government."So the three main tools would be the Official Information Act and putting our question through that way; and then once you've got a pile of information from the OIA then you would look further with written parliamentary questions. And then when you've got an area you think is of high interest (in the public interest, to hold the government to account), that would be when you put up an oral parliamentary question," Andersen explains.Browsing through the list of written questions on Parliament's website, you will see groups of questions by an MP to the same minister, a sequence of related interrogations on a common subject (such as a statement, a meeting or a policy). Is the written question format just a fishing expedition?"It can be. You usually have a general direction that you think you're wanting to head in," Andersen says…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

MPs have some of the highest pressure jobs in New Zealand, and the stressors aren't always what you might think. So does anyone help them carry the load, and how do they personally cope?We all know that Members of Parliament have a job that comes with a great deal of pressure. Mentally, it can be tough going, and sometimes this results in MPs making mistakes that can unravel not just their career but the work they have done along the way too.In this piece, The House speaks to several experienced Members of Parliament to gauge what mental health support, pastoral care or mentoring is available to help MPs cope with the strain. AwarenessAmong his portfolios, the National MP Matt Doocey is the Minister for Mental Health, a newly created role. A background of his own journey with mental health issues, as well as having worked in mental health before coming to Parliament, has helped him reach a particular level of awareness about how to recognise and manage issues that crop up.Not everyone was comfortable talking about it, but awareness of mental health issues in the workplace at Parliament had come a long way in recent years, Doocey suggested."In a way we are not too dissimilar to many workplaces that are grappling with the issues around wellbeing and better mental health. I'm of the age that I can remember a time in workplaces where you were probably told to leave your personal issues at the door when you went to work, and people weren't interested in what was happening with your life outside of work. "But now we see quite the opposite, where it is expected that there is a level of understanding around how we support people's wellbeing at work and maybe the pressures they are facing."For MPs, their workload can feel overwhelming at times: the long hours spent on the job, the sense of responsibility, and the turmoil of electorate work. Throw in ministerial portfolios and frequent media interactions, then pressures can build substantially.MPs have some avenues available for help in the system. A first port of call that an MP can go to is usually the party whip (or musterer, as the Green Party calls it). Doocey was a whip for National when it was in opposition last term."It's sort of like an operational management job, you work with the individuals and your caucus like a team, and help support them to understand where they need to deliver, but also there's a pastoral care side as well. And quite often either the whip or senior MPs can be supporting other MPs about issues they're facing," he said. …Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The latest from the House Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

It was a sitting block of just one week but it had its share of surprises, routine stuff and signs of a changing culture around scrutiny at committee level. Even in a sitting block of only one week a lot goes on in Parliament, this one just finished having its share of surprises, routine stuff and signs of a changing culture around scrutiny at committee level. So much lawmaking has happened in a short time this year at Parliament that it's possible for us to forget some of the huge amount of legislation passed under urgency in recent months. The four week sitting block across February and March, the first since 2018, may have finally done our heads in. But whether for long or short blocks, The House is here to help. Here's a wrap of our week's episodes in the audio available below:At Parliament, some of the most interesting and unexpected debates occur on Members' Days. Those alternate Wednesdays when the House debates bills put forward by backbenchers - rather than ministers from the government. There was genuine surprise when the ACT and New Zealand First parties voted for Green Party MP Tuiono's Member's Bill at its first reading. Meanwhile, a fascinating debate illuminating philosphical divides in the Parliament during the first reading of soon-to-retire Green MP James Shaw's Member's Bill seeking to amend the Bill of Rights Act 1990 to provide for the right to a sustainable environment.Among the list of submitters and subjects for this week's select committee hearings at Parliament, the Auditor-General's office featured often. The Auditor-General is one of the three Officers of Parliament, entities who have a particular job to hold the government to account. The Auditor-General has a busy working relationship with Parliament that is set to deepen with the new provisions for extra scrutiny of government that stem from the last Parliament's Standing Orders review. The Speaker has begun steering ministerial answers away from outright attacks on the previous government, and towards answers. Of course this is something the previous government also did. The road to positivity for new governments is long and difficult. But this week's Question Time exchanges found Gerry Brownlee inviting MPs asking questions to experience "a think-on-your-feet moment".Also this week, first readings and referral to the Māori Affairs Committee of Te Pire Whakatupua mō Te Kāhui Tupua/Taranaki Maunga Collective Redress Bill and Te Korowai o Wainuiārua Claims Settlement Bill, while the Ngāti Hei Claims Settlement Bill was read a second time.RNZ's The House - journalism focussed on parliamentary legislation, issues and insights - is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk. Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Members Day this week had it all: surprise votes, big and niche issues, success and failure. A bill from a retiring MP led to an environmental rights debate which included gaping philosophical divides and a parting shot.Some of the Parliament's most interesting and unexpected debates occur on Members' Days - the alternate Wednesdays when the House debates bills put forward by backbenchers, rather than government ministers.Members Bills range widely, originating from across the parties, and bringing a wider subject range and a broader scope of political philosophy. They sometimes deal with ideas a government might be nervous to champion, or which are so specific no government would quite get around to them. Listen to a report on this week's members bills from The House This week's members day included examples of all the above, some unexpected voting, and an unsuccessful attempt at a final legislative hurrah from former Green Party co-leader James Shaw. The successful billsThe unexpected voting happened on two bills. The Greens surprised National's Stuart Smith with their support during the second reading debate of his bill easing cellar-door tasting rules. The bill isn't done yet, but is finding pretty wide support. It's an example of a niche issue unlikely to catch a government's attention. The second unexpected voting was on Green MP Teanau Tuiono's bill which was agreed to by every party except the National Party. It would reinstate the possibility of New Zealand citizenship for some now quite elderly Samoans who had their citizenship unilaterally removed by a law passed back in 1982. Unusually that debate was watched by a visiting delegation of Samoan MPs, including the Speaker of Samoa's parliament. That bill will now go to a select committee for public feedback, which I suspect might be both fascinating and emotional. There was also a small fixit bill from Labour MP Greg O'Connor, which will add more specificity to the requirements made on child sex offender overseas travel reporting. That had unanimous support. A parting shot: Environment v EconomyThe most divergent debate was on James Shaw's bill, which was attempting a first reading. James Shaw had delayed his political retirement to be able to speak on it. It would add another right to those guaranteed by the New Zealand Bill of Rights (an aspect of New Zealand's constitution). That "everyone has the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment." James Shaw said that around "about 80 percent of countries around the world already recognise this right in their domestic legal systems" …Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The work of the Auditor-General's office features often in this week's select committee hearings at Parliament, and for good reason.Among the list of submitters and subjects for this week's select committee hearings at Parliament, the Auditor-General's office features often.The Auditor-General is one of the three Officers of Parliament, entities who have a particular job to hold the government to account. As this week's committee action shows, the Auditor-General has a busy working relationship with Parliament that is set to deepen with the new provisions for extra scrutiny of government that stem from the last Parliament's Standing Orders review. The Auditor-General's work provides Parliament with an independent view of how public organisations are operating. And there are a lot of them to keep an eye on: every single public service entity.Watchdog"There are about four-thousand, and a good two and a half of those are schools. So that's a very wide range, says Mark Evans, the Auditor-General's Director Sector Engagement, Parliamentary Group."From small entities like schools and cemetery boards to the very large departments like MBIE and MPI and other large crown entities."What the Auditor-General's office looks at is not simply the financial information."So the financial statements, assurance that money is being spent as it should be, but also what's being achieved with that money. So how do we know if it's being spent as it was supposed to, but also what's the result."In order to gauge the effectiveness of public organisations, the Auditor-General's office has many inquiries and reports on the go at any one time. Often these reports are considered by MPs in relevant select committees, or the Auditor-General's staff come to Parliament to discuss their findings with the committees.For example, this week, the Finance and Expenditure Committee has been considering an Auditor-General's report titled 'Making infrastructure investment decisions quickly'; the Governance and Administration committee digested the Auditor-General's 'Insights into local government 2021' report as well as its report into the Auckland Council's preparedness for responding to an emergency; meanwhile the Economic Development, Science and Innovation committee is tomorrow due to hear from Auditor-General officers about their General Inquiry into Callaghan Innovation's procurement process.Enhanced scrutiny…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The Speaker has begun steering ministerial answers away from outright attacks on the previous government, and towards answers. The road to positivity for new governments is long and difficult.When the government changes from one party to another, you might expect that party's refrain would also switch, that the once-opposition, now-government MPs would suddenly go positive - singing of new happy times. Equally, you'd think was-government, now-opposition MPs would flip into dour mode. But neither happen, at least not for a long while. Both sides tend to stay partially stuck in their prior mode. This behaviour is especially obvious from an incoming government, and in the debating chamber.For example, on Tuesday the Prime Minister was asked in Question Time whether his government's newly announced truancy policy had been approved by cabinet yet.He responded: "Well, as I said, we have an ambitious government, and that is fantastic because what we observed over the last six years was a government that spent more, borrowed more, taxed more, and delivered worse outcomes. Your government had six years. You did very little; you failed at it. What we're doing is declaring nine key targets - two in the education space - we're marching hard towards it, and every quarter, we're going to be doing things to make sure we make progress on it."Not so much an answer as an excoriation with a vaguely relevant affirmation tacked on.New governments spend months, if not years, largely sticking to their oppositional refrain and attacking the previous crew. This is not new. You might remember in 2017 (when a Labour-led government took the reins), just how often the 'nine long years' mantra was repeated in reference to their predecessors. The new, National-led government, has also held tightly onto their opposition mindset.This is evident in various places, but most obviously during Question Time where it serves other purposes as well. The attack-posing-as-an-answer is a common approach in Question Time, but it is obviously beginning to try some MP's patience. After a number of questions to the Prime Minister where he had received similar replies, the Leader of the Opposition, Chris Hipkins, complained to the Speaker about this approach…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Petitions to Parliament don't always result in a change to law or policy as intended, but they can be an effective way of the public getting a message to those in power. A petition can be an effective way for the public to get the attention of Parliament, and it doesn't necessarily need lots of signatures. It's not often that a petition to Parliament results in a law change, but changes can occur as a result of MPs considering a petition and digesting submissions on the topic. It's a journey that the petitioner invites MPs and the wider community to join them on, and sometimes it can venture quite far into the territory of Parliamentary process. Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer alongside other MPs holds the Dawn Raids petition after co-petitioners Josiah Tualamali'i (left) and Benji Timu (behind her) presented it on the steps of Parliament, 21 June 2021. When it was first established as a specialist committee in the last Parliament, the Petitions Committee considered about 430 petitions in that 53rd Parliament. About half of these resulted in a basic report to Parliament by the committee; roughly a quarter were referred to other committees; and about 20 were referred to a government minister for response. Regarding previous Parliaments, in the 52nd Parliament, 240 petitions were reported back by select committees; in the 51st, 144; and in the 50th, 114.A select few petitions have resulted in a Special Debate by Parliament. The relatively new provision of Special Debates offers MPs the opportunity to speak about other issues that aren't immediately about legislation, relating for instance to some of the areas that committees have been working on and reported back to the House about, things that otherwise wouldn't be debated.Mobility ParkingLast month a Special Debate was held on a petition that had been presented two years earlier, requesting that Parliament change the law to substantially increase fines for misuse of mobility parking spaces, including on privately-owned land that is used publicly, and urging the government to run an education campaign to desist able-bodied people from misusing mobility parking spaces for public use. The petitioner, Claire Dale, faced numerous hurdles in getting traction with her petition, from launching on the day of a Covid-19 lockdown, to pandemic disruptions, to trying to present the petition when Parliament grounds were occupied by anti-vaccine mandate protestors. In the end the petition had a few thousand signatures…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

As he departs from Parliament, Grant Roberson outlines the skills and requirements for being a successful MP, and what he would replace Question Time with.One of Parliament's natural orators has left the building after nearly 16 years as an MP. A lot of Parliamentary experience and skill has departed with him. So RNZ's parliament show, The House, made an attempt to catch some tips. On his final day at Parliament, as his office was about to be packed away, Robertson sat with me in Labour's caucus room to talk MP skills. He's a good man to ask. Yes, he's a former Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister but he also shone in the House - politics' gladiatorial ring.After his valedictory the previous evening MPs from across the House were buzzing. "Did you hear that?" one Nat said as I passed him in the hall, "What a great speech." He was right, it was. Funny, touching, thoughtful and punchy. Introducing that final outing, the Speaker, a long time political foe, described Robertson as a 'great parliamentarian'."That does mean a lot to me", he says of that descriptor. He also likes that it highlights a key facet of the role, sometimes overlooked. "Ultimately the job title is Member of Parliament. And the debating chamber is where we do the heavy lifting of that job. That does mean a lot to me. And I've always enjoyed the debating chamber particularly. That might have come through," he adds with a chuckle. On public speakingIt's clear that Robertson was in his element speaking in the chamber, but he wasn't instantly comfortable. "It's not like it all clicked into place straight away" he admits. He still remembers the first proper speech he gave (his maiden speech). "I did think I was going to faint"."I always tell school kids that when I was their age, I either wanted to be a lawyer or an actor, and now I get to be both.""I've always enjoyed debating and public speaking. And I think they are pretty important skills; and being an MP, if you don't have them, you are going to struggle. But for me, I was fortunate that I had a bit of that coming in, and so felt comfortable talking."It helped that he'd worked in Parliament before becoming an MP, had been a keen observer of Parliamentary Debate, and had written speeches for other people to deliver in the House. "And so I guess I had an idea of how that side of the job worked. And I enjoyed it. And I think fundamentally, if you enjoy something, you'll often end up looking like you're quite good at it."On speech writing …Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

A look at the tactics of primary questions during Question Time, with help from Grant Robertson, Judith Collins and Gerry Brownlee.Question Time is one of the most public (though probably not most effective), ways that Parliament keeps an eye on the actions of its chosen executive.But watching them try can be both confusing and frustrating as questions are repeated, evaded, avoided and ruled outside the rules.Questioners tactics vary wildly, but never so much as whether to start wide, or go in narrow and early. In this article (and audio - below) retiring MP Grant Robertson reflects on his approach, what works when, why MPs change their tactics and the impact of the Speaker. We also look at how tactical opinions change when an MP moves across the House, and at the role and approach of the Speaker. General versus specific primary questionsDiscussion of Question Time usually alludes to general or specific primary questions. A primary question is the first of a series of questions that an MP asks - usually of a minister.A general primary question is usually a version of: "Does he stand by all his statements and actions". They are incredibly common.Specific primary questions vary enormously, but as an example on Thursday 28th March Priyanca Radhakrishnan asked the minister for Disability Issues the very specific question: "Did the reports she received from Whaikaha that she referred to in her answer to question No. 4 yesterday contain figures of those who used disability support funding for pedicures and massages, or did they just contain anecdotal evidence?" They can be a lot shorter. For example, while chasing the same issue the previous day, Chris Hipkins asked the Prime Minister: "Does he have confidence in the Minister for Disability Issues?"The ministers answering questions get a few hours warning of what the primary question will be, when the day's primary questions are published here. Pros and Cons of general versus specific primary questionsBoth approaches have advantages and disadvantages. The general opening question approach gives very little warning of what the follow-up questions (supplementaries) will ask about; which makes it much harder to prepare good answers. But, with less warning and less preparation there is usually more leeway given by the Speaker in deciding whether the answers suffice. General openers may allow much more waffly and unspecific answers (though Speaker's expectations vary enormously). Specific primaries give prior warning so ministers should come better prepared and MPs would hope, be held to a higher standard of answers. Sometimes they are. Grant Robertson in full flight during his valedictory speech…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The principle that all MPs are honourable and that they should be taken at their word has been tested multiple times this week in Parliament.One of the foundational principles of Parliament is that all MPs are honourable and that they should be taken at their word.However, the word of MPs has been challenged multiple times this week in the House, and Parliament's Speaker Gerry Brownlee used a flexible approach when issue was raised about it.During an exchange in Question Time the Opposition's Barbara Edmonds asked Finance Minister Nicola Willis if she agreed with former prime minister John Key that "her commitment to fully fund her tax changes through Public Service cuts is too hard and risks plunging the country into discontent, as reported by the New Zealand Herald?"In response, Willis said Key would be very unhappy that his comments were being mis-characterised. "I would put to her that we should have honour in this House with comments that we make and how we represent others," Willis said.At this, Labour's Kieran McAnulty raised a point of order, reminding the Speaker that MPs take fellow members by their word. "Barbara Edmonds was quoting John Key. If the minister disagrees with that, she should say so. She should not be questioning the honour of members in this House in order to respond to a fair question," McAnulty said. Labour MP Barbara EdmondsIt's one thing for an MP to challenge how something is characterised by a fellow MP, but quite another to bring their honour into doubt in the process. The Speaker agreed that all members elected to this House are considered honourable members, and that Willis' reference was problematic, saying a "withdrawal and apology for the reference to the dishonourable nature of members would be helpful to the whole House". Willis withdrew and apologised.Unparliamentary languageA presiding officer can direct a member to withdraw and apologise for their comment if it's deemed to be unparliamentary language. Unparliamentary language can include offensive words or references to a member's private affairs, imputations of improper motives against another MP, accusations of racism or lying.Implying that an MP is lying is considered one of the worst offences, being an offence not just against the MP it's directed at but the whole House.Today though, during general debate, opposition MP Duncan Webb raised a point of order when MPs on the government benches interjected, shouting that his fellow Labour MP Priyanca Radhakrishnan was "making it up". Webb said this "must be an unparliamentary remark". Brownlee's response drew laughs…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

This week's sitting of Parliament began with two finance bills that have deadlines attached.Parliament's sitting calendar sometimes looks a little random, but the calendar can be forced into odd shapes by legislative deadlines. This week's sitting began with two bills with such deadlines attached.First up was the second reading of the bill that contains the final tally of government spending from the financial year that ended eight months ago (July 2023). The Appropriation (2022/23 Confirmation and Validation) Bill is one of the harbingers of a new budget about to arrive. Deadline bill 1: A wrap on past spendingTuesday saw the second reading (with no debate, as always), of the spending wrap-up. The House keeps its powder dry for the next stage, the committee stage, when it spends 10 hours grilling a roster of ministers over their department's performances in what is called the Annual Review Debate. (Note that the grilling will not necessarily relate to the 2022/23 year, and the ministers under fire won't have been in charge for that spending).The Annual Review Debate must be completed before the new budget is announced, so it kinda needs to start soon. Deadline bill 2: Tax law just in time for the year's endThe second bill to begin this week - and this one is always debated - is even more urgent. It needs to pass by the end of the week. Now that's a real deadline. That is presumably also why Parliament is sitting this week and not the week after Easter. That would be too late. This bill needs to complete the committee stage and third reading. Committee stages have no fixed time limit so the government has set aside an extra Wednesday morning sitting - just in case. (Just as well, as it turns out - the bill filled out both Tuesday night and Wednesday morning).The Taxation (Annual Rates... etc) bill is an annual event, and is always left until pretty close to the deadline. It is the setting of the tax rates for the financial year about to end. Which is pretty momentous by itself, but it is also always a huge list of other tweaks and fixes and adjustments to dozens of tax measures. This year's version of the bill is called the Taxation (Annual Rates for 2023-24, Multinational Tax, and Remedial Matters) Bill. It includes measures on flood payouts, on disability beneficiary trusts, on multinationals and on and on. It's an omnibus bill, meaning it will amend more than one existing law. In this case, it's tinkering with eight of them, with over 90 sections of details. It makes you realise that to be a good tax lawyer must be to live inside an almost permanent professional refresher course, as you try to chase an endlessly moving target. …Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

This weekly edition looks at thresholds: regarding what gets the nod for Urgent Debates, and also what it's like being a List MP on the cusp of Parliament.In this weekly edition of The House, we look at thresholds, or how things make or don't make the cut, in two aspects of the Parliament system.Urgent debatesUrgent debates are much requested by MPs of the Speaker, but seldom approved. An unsuccessful ruling this week on a request by Labour for an Urgent Debate on disability funding, offered no signal that they won't be even less frequent in future.Parliament's rules provide that the Speaker can allow for an Urgent Debate to take place if it meets three criteria: It must be a debate on "a particular case of recent occurrence", it must be a matter of administrative or ministerial responsibility, and it must "require the immediate attention of the House and the Government."Over the previous five parliaments only 17.8% of requests were allowed. So far this Parliament, five urgent debates have been requested - and five have been denied, including one this week.A full report on this story from earlier in the week can be read here.List cuspThe other matter about thresholds relates to list MPs trying to make it into Parliament on the cusp of their party's vote result in a fluid post-election configuration, those who become a virtual prisoner to the vagaries of MMP. Among the new and re-elected MPs who got into Parliament after October's general election, there are at least two who had to first endure a period of waiting and uncertainty.On election night, Labour MP Tracey McLellan lost her Banks Peninsula electorate seat in a tight race. Initially it seemed she would get in anyway, via the Labour party list; however other results changed as the special votes came in, so she was out. She then teetered on the edge of Parliament for almost three months, until Rino Tirakatene retired and she moved up the list and back into Parliament to replace him.Celia Wade-Brown of the Green Party knows well about hanging around while waiting for special votes to come. After all, that's how she became Mayor of Wellington in 2010. Although she didn't quite get into Parliament after special votes were processed following October's election, her opportunity came in January, and she found out while mountain-biking on Makara Peak.A full report on this story from earlier in the week can be read here.RNZ's The House - journalism focussed on parliamentary legislation, issues and insights - is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk. Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The Health Select Committee has been digesting the Auditor-General's report on how well public organisations are working to meet the mental health needs of young people.Parliament's health select committee has been digesting the auditor-general's report on how well public organisations are working together to meet the mental health needs of young New Zealanders.The auditor-general's work includes inquiring into how public organisations are operating, and it also watches how public money is spent. Its findings offer an independent view that can inform Parliament and the public.In its report, 'Meeting the mental health needs of young New Zealanders', the auditor-general concluded that "a more youth-focussed, integrated, and coherent system of care is required to meet young people's mental health needs". "Mental health is the biggest issue facing young New Zealanders today" - Leanne McAvineyAuditor-General's interestYou may be wondering why the auditor-general probed this area. The assistant auditor-general of sector performance Leanne McAviney, who came to talk to the committee along with a couple of colleagues, gave a helpful answer."Mental health is the biggest issue facing young New Zealanders today," she said. "It affects people's ability to participate in education, work or just to cope with the challenges that come with that transition into adulthood. And the costs of inaction to support youth mental health are high."McAviney said early and effective intervention was linked to a range of positive outcomes.Those included improved achievement in education, increased lifelong earnings and greater life expectancy."So our office has a deep interest in this matter and has a continuing interest in how well government agencies work together to address some of the country's most complex challenges, and this is one of them. Our work examining the response to family violence and sexual violence is another example."Report's main findingsFour key findings from the report were shared with the health select committee by the senior performance auditor Dr Rachel Patrick."First, many young people in distress can't access the support they need, when and where they need it. So we've seen government investment into new primary level mental health services and that is making a difference in making primary mental health care more available to young people. Yet at the same time, we're seeing growth in waiting lists at the specialists end of the system, so for children and young people in particular," Patrick said…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Urgent Debates are granted or denied by Speakers. Most are denied. This week a Speaker's ruling moved the goal posts for that allowance, a lot.If you're familiar with stories from The House you'll know that we regularly mention that, against all appearances, governments in New Zealand are subordinate to parliaments. You might even say we bang on about it. To recap: Parliament has a variety of jobs. It provides an executive, it passes laws, permits and approves revenue and spending, and generally keeps a close eye on what that executive (the government) gets up to. Government's in their turn, often seem to struggle with this arrangement. They often forget they're not the boss and regularly resent or avoid scrutiny. It's an eternal tug-of-war. The Beehive wrapped up by its big brother, Parliament. There are many ways that Parliament attempts to maintain reasonable scrutiny of the Executive, for example by asking thousands of written questions (which are mostly answered by the government ministries). Also by asking oral questions, though some executive members have new and creative definitions for 'answer'.A lot of oversight is done via select committee processes. Particularly the regular Estimates and Annual Reviews processes, which are mammoth undertakings.There are also the usual debates and discussions in the House, and occasional extras like ministerial statements and urgent debates.The rare debateThis article is about that last category - the urgent debate. Much requested, seldom approved and given a ruling this week, maybe even less frequent in future.Parliament's rules especially allow for Urgent Debates to be requested so long as the Speaker agrees the proposal meets three criteria: It must be "a particular case of recent occurrence", it must be a matter of administrative or ministerial responsibility, and it must "require the immediate attention of the House and the Government."In short, it must be recent, be the government's problem, and be worth the time.Urgent debates are requested a lot more often than they are allowed. Over the previous five parliaments only 17.8% of requests were allowed. Some Speakers are more generous than others so the per parliament numbers vary quite a lot. The graph below gives numbers by parliament, not by Speaker. The Speakership changed hands mid-parliament in January 2013 (Lockwood Smith replaced by David Carter), and in August 2022 (Trevor Mallard replaced by Adrian Rurawhe). …Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Due to vagaries of the MMP system, some list MPs must endure a period of waiting and uncertainty before they can enter Parliament.Have you ever wondered what it's like to be a List MP sitting and waiting on the cusp of your party's vote result in a fluid post-election configuration? It can be touch and go.Among the MPs elected to Parliament after October's general election, there are a few list MPs who first endured a period of waiting and uncertainty due to the vagaries of the MMP system.On election night, Labour MP Tracey McLellan lost her Banks Peninsula electorate seat in a tight race. Initially it seemed she would get in anyway, via the Labour party list; however other results changed as the special votes came in, so she was out. She then teetered on the edge of Parliament for almost three months, until Rino Tirakatene retired and she moved up the list and back into Parliament to replace him."I knew I was in a position that was touch and go, and also I had to go through that waiting for specials which took another three weeks. Initially I was elected on the list, so post-election night I was in, and then other results flipped so then I wasn't. So it was quite a roller coaster of in-out-in," McLellan said."But that's okay, it's part of democracy, that's what happens and you've got to be prepared to roll with it. We don't have that security, because we're putting ourselves out there. It's a precarious position to be in at the best of times."Despite mixed emotions after the election, McLellan said it was a chance to take some time to figure out how to feel about things. After the intensity of an election campaign, a few weeks away from politics can be therapeutic, whether resting by the sea or getting back into a rhythm with something else."I did go back to work for a bit, but only because there was some tasks that needed to be done and I thought well rather than hang around and wait I can go back and do that," she said."The New Zealand Nurses Organisation, which is where I worked beforehand, just so happened, over Christmas period, there were some things that they needed an extra pair of hands, and I said 'well, I've got that'. So it was good to get back into a routine." Celia Wade-Brown of the Green Party knows well about hanging around while waiting for special votes to come. After all, that's how she became Mayor of Wellington in 2010, although she had a more decisive win in 2013…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

A big new wooden superstructure is about to be built out the back of Parliament House, and is planned to be ready to fit dozens of MPs by the next election.Parliament is about to expand, and it's not the number of MPs potentially rising - although that is something that the plan to expand is taking into account. A big new wooden superstructure is about to be built out the back of the Parliament precinct, and it is projected to be ready to fit dozens of MPs by the 2026 election. The building's completion will also mean various Parliament staff who have been working elsewhere around the Wellington CBD can finally come back to the precinct.For a few years now, some backbench MPs' offices have been stashed away in virtual cupboards in the attic of the Parliament Library. Such is the lack of room in the main Parliament Building that MPs have had to be accommodated here and there in temporary offices across the complex like a motley jenga construction. It's an inefficient layout, but change is coming.'Siberia'Groundworks have just been completed for what will be the first significant new building on the Parliament precinct since 1977 when the Beehive got up and running.Built to "environmentally conscious design", using New Zealand materials and recycled materials to reduce construction waste, the six-storey wooden building will be located around the back of Parliament House on Museum Street, the little road that juts off Bowen Street at the intersection with The Terrace and runs behind the Beehive.A little over a quarter of MPs, or around 30, will be accommodated in the building, according to Dave Wills, the manager of the Buildings Project Management Office at Parliament, who spoke to The House about the Future Accommodation Strategy project.The new building for MPs will stand in what was until recently the rear carpark of Parliament. Wills noted that this carpark space has had many buildings on it over the years, including less than glamorous offices that earned this particular part of the precinct the 'Siberia' tag."It was referred to by one of our past Prime Ministers as 'Siberia', out the back there. It was a location for backbenchers at the time. And the new building will very much be focused on backbenchers and the parties that support them as well."The project, which is to be funded under a $257.5 million budget appropriation, also encompasses a new security building, also to be constructed out the back on the carpark space, where it meets Balantrae Place…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

New goverment, new parliament, new Leader of the House. Chris Bishop is now the Minister responsible for shepherding the Government's legislative agenda. He explains how.Hutt South MP Chris Bishop is now the National Party's third ranking minister and Leader of the House. Before becoming an MP he was a humble political advisor in the ministerial office of Gerry Brownlee.At that time, among other roles, Brownlee was Leader of the House. Bishop's job was to help manage that. What 'that' is we'll get to in a moment. It's "a nice bit of symmetry", Bishop says. He's not alone in that symmetry."Interestingly, Chris Hipkins used to do the same job for Michael Cullen, I believe; and then he became Leader of the House under the last Labour Government." Now, of course, Bishop in turn has a smart young staffer who helps him carry out the role. "I've got great staff in my office. So, very lucky."Before we get further into this article it might help to provide some context on that Leader of the House role. New Zealand's cascade of powerWho really runs New Zealand can be confusing, so here's a quick run down through the big-wigs. (Feel free to rewrite the below to be sung to "I know an old lady who swallowed a fly".)The person who holds the ultimate power in New Zealand is the King, His stand-in on the ground is the Governor General.The group that wields that power (on behalf of the King), is the House of Representatives. (We'll call it parliament for ease, but strictly speaking Parliament includes the King.) Parliament's 'boss' is the Speaker (who actually outranks the Prime Minister).The leader of the group that holds sway in Parliament is the Prime Minister. The smaller gang who, with the Prime Minister, decide how to exercise their group's dominance in Parliament, is the Cabinet. And, finally, the person in charge of turning those decisions and that dominance into law is the Leader of the House. My apologies to any exacting constitutionalists. A terrible name, a potent jobAs a ministerial title, Leader of the House is a terrible, confusing name. The 'House' part of the title is the House of Representatives (Parliament's House, i.e. the legislature), but the Leader of the House does not lead the House. A more accurate but tedious title might be Legislative Oversight and Liaison. Or, from Parliament's point of view, 'the annoying person who keeps bringing us extra work'…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

A rare four-week sitting block at Parliament has wound up, with the Government's programme of moving legislation through under urgency used throughout.Today MPs finished the last week of a rare four-week sitting block at Parliament, during which the government's programme of moving legislation through under urgency continued at breakneck pace.Here's a little summary of what went down this week:The Road User Charges (Light Electric RUC Vehicles) Amendment Bill was read a first time. The previous government sought to encourage the adoption of electric cars by exempting them from Road User Charges (usually paid by vehicles that don't use petrol and the inherent excise). This bill removes that exemption from fully electric cars and PHEVs (plug-in hybrids). PHEVs will end up paying the excise on their petrol and then also a Road User Charge. Transport Minister Simeon Brown said it was only fair that light electric vehicle owners also pay their fair share for using roads.Also in the transport space, the remaining stages of the Land Transport Management (Repeal of Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill were passed, removing the 11.5 cent per litre Auckland regional fuel tax imposed by the previous government. The Greens' Julie-Anne Genter was a frequent speaker throughout, warning that without more investment in public transport, the Bill would create more road congestion.MPs turned to the first reading and referral to select committee of the Firearms Prohibition Orders Legislation Amendment Bill under the name of Associate Minister of Justice Nicole McKee who said the Bill would help public safety by giving police greater search powers to enforce prohibition orders upon gangs. Green MP Tamatha Paul however said the Bill would disproportionately add to the workload of police and was a misguided attempt to curb gang behaviour.Earlier, the Business Payment Practices Act Repeal Bill passed through all stages, repealing legislation that was due to come into effect this year requiring businesses to disclose the time they take to pay invoices. ACT's Laura Trask spoke in support of the repealing bill, saying the main reason for urgency without repealing it the former legislation means that "3,000-plus businesses would have to upgrade their technology and then the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment would have to spend an enormous amount of money to get the system up and ready to go"…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Taming Question Time is not easy but this week the Speaker has attempted to reign in the use of Points of Order to make out of order points.MPs' jobs are tough. But probably the toughest regular hour for any MP is presiding over all the other MPs during a rambunctious Question Time. It's akin to a relieving teacher managing a class of manic, grandstanding, fourth-formers on a wet, windy Friday afternoon when everyone just wants to be somewhere else. Gerry Brownlee has been settling into the role of Speaker of Parliament and finding his rhythm. Every Speaker's approach is different and Brownlee tends towards hands-off, often commenting after questions and answers play out, rather than intervening. Brownlee does however intervene once a dodgy question becomes a dodgy tactic. This week that was patsy questions from the Government side, plainly arranged as opportunities to attack the opposition (a no-no).A New RulingThe week began with the Speaker making a rare set-piece ruling, attempting to reign in another bugbear, the use of Points of Order to make out-of-order points. "Members-this may be helpful for the member-a number of members have raised with me the issue of too frequent a use of the point of order process to raise trivial points of order. In future, when a member raises a point of order, I expect them to indicate the rule or practice of the House that they think has been breached. Raising a point of order without doing so will be considered disorderly. Of course, members may continue to use points of order to draw my attention to their wish to exercise a right given by Standing Orders, such as to seek leave, to make a personal explanation, or to move a motion."Points of Order serve many purposes, but most often draw the Speaker's attention to a possible breach of the rules. They are an essential part of the mechanism, but are often misused and can get petty, irrelevant, disruptive, or can forget to mention the rule at issue.Doffing kid glovesAs the Speaker intimated there have been complaints. In the House those complaints have particularly been about the Deputy Prime Minister, Winston Peters. He has a reputation for using a pointed point of order to make a sharp point. In this Parliament that reputation hasn't been much added to. Interpolations from Peters into the flow of debate have been frequent, but less pointed and (as MPs have noted), more often 'out of order' than 'point of order'. Last week the Speaker acknowledged the House wanted him to doff his kid gloves. …Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Due to the increasing demands on the work of the Office of the Clerk in an environment of funding constraints, the efficiency of some key Parliament functions could suffer.A select committee has heard that due to the increasing demands on the work of the Office of the Clerk in an environment of funding constraints, the efficiency of some key Parliament functions could suffer.The bodies that run Parliament have effectively been crying poor for years, but are without a minister in cabinet to argue their case. However their message was clear to Parliament's Governance & Administration Select Committee last night as they discussed the Annual Review of the Office of the Clerk of the House of Representatives, and the Annual Review of the Parliamentary Service.The Clerk of the House, David Wilson appeared before the committee alongside the Chief Executive of the Parliamentary Service, Rafael Gonzalez-Montero and Parliament's Speaker, Gerry Brownlee. The staff in the politically-neutral Office of the Clerk perform a range of functions critical to the Parliament system, including facilitating the operations of the House and select committees, providing specialist advice on legislation, and producing Hansard. However cost pressures on the Office are rising. What's more, the Office falls within the Government's wide gamut of government organisations anticipating indicative spending cuts.StretchedAs a result of recommendations following the regular Standing Orders Review in the last Parliamentary term, new mechanisms for applying scrutiny to the Executive have been introduced for this term, such as mandatory scrutiny weeks, as well as scrutiny plans and review briefings.This creates an even larger workload for the Office of the Clerk. One of the committee's members, National's Cameron Brewer, asked Wilson how it would affect the Office of the Clerk's budget."It does make it challenging. And there was a range of other changes to Parliamentary Process suggested at the last review of Standing Orders where we just had to say to the Committee we couldn't afford to support those," Wilson admitted."These ones, the most significant changes made, yeah they do stretch the Office of the Clerk's resources. We'll be alright for this financial year, but it remains to be seen for future ones. We're really in a position where we can't take on additional functions, unless they come with funding." National MP Cameron Brewer in Parliament's Governance & Administration select committee, 4 March 2024…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The new Parliament has spent most of its existence under urgency. What is that, and why use it? New Zealand's 54th Parliament first met in December last year. Since its first (largely ceremonial) opening week Parliament has sat on 16 days. On 11 of those days 'urgency' has replaced the usual rules. The five days when urgency wasn't accorded included four Thursdays (which are short days), and one Members' Wednesday. There has been time for just one full Members' Day so far in seven weeks (plus a couple of hours on a Thursday). Members' Days (when non-government bills get debated), usually happen every other week.'Railroading the House'If you've been following Parliament you will have noticed that opposition MPs are getting increasingly tetchy about just how much urgency is being used, and for what. James Shaw on Thursday last week argued that urgency had been used so overwhelmingly that its use needed to be debated in the House."By my count, the Government has put 16 bills through urgency and one item of Government business not through urgency. So recognising your point about the accumulation, there has to be a point at which we're able to debate whether it's appropriate for a ratio of 16 urgent items to one to go through the House, because the Government has the majority and is essentially railroading the House. We're at the point now where they can't argue that just because there was an election means that they can overturn parliamentary democracy."James Shaw's count may well be better than mine. My count is 14 bills passed in 7 weeks using urgency. Most of them passed under urgency through all stages and the rest under urgency except for the third reading. None of those bills have been sent to select committee.That amount of urgency is not normal. By comparison - in a study from Victoria University of Wellington of 24 years of New Zealand's parliament (from 1987 until 2010), the average number of bills passed through all stages under urgency was 10. That's 10 per Parliament! So we've roughly hit that average in seven weeks with more than 90 percent of the Parliament yet to go. James Shaw in the House. Urgency is not a sin Urgency isn't always bad. It is not some cosmic sin. It is there as an option in Parliament's rules because there are frequently good reasons for it. Like fixing mistakes in legislation.It is not unusual for Parliament to quickly pass a bill to fix a newly found flaw in recently passed law. Ironically those mistakes do seem more likely to result from legislation passed under urgency…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The new Parliament has spent much of its time so far, debating under urgency. What is that, and why has it?The 54th Parliament isn't quite three months old yet, but has already employed unusual levels of parliamentary urgency. On The House we look at what that means, as well as both practical and tactical reasons a government might opt to speed things up.The audio from this edition of The House is available via the link below. The written article for this story will be published with the Sunday edition of the House. Winston Peters listens to the ACT leader David Seymour speak at their coalition announcement. Since it roared into gear, the new Parliament has offered few opportunities for anyone to get bored.Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

This morning's debates in the chamber provided multiple examples of how difficult it can be as a presiding officer when contentious bills are going through under urgency.This morning's action in the chamber provided multiple examples of how difficult it can be as a presiding officer when contentious bills are going through Parliament under urgency.One of the big challenges is refereeing debate when it gets fiery, particularly among Opposition MPs who are frustrated and angry that laws they passed are being systematically dismantled. This has become a recurring theme in the months since the 54th Parliament began, during which time there has been an unusually frequent use of urgency.People watching on Parliament TV today may have noticed perhaps the most fiery speech ever given by Labour leader Chris Hipkins while he was debating the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Amendment Bill. Pointing to evidence that the coalition government's move to liberalise tobacco laws will be deadly and costly, he clashed with Assistant Speaker Maureen Pugh who said "do not bring the Speaker into your debate, and do not disrespect the Chair". Hipkins denied he had brought the Speaker into it, and then claimed she'd interrupted his flow in order to do the bidding of the government, who he was also fingering during his speech for doing the bidding of the tobacco industry. He withdrew and apologised before continuing his speech.Another reason why it's been getting testy for those in the Speaker's chair is because in many cases, these bills are being rushed through all stages without the opportunity for public consultation. So Opposition MPs are naturally eager during the Committee of the Whole House stage of the Bill to ask detailed questions while conveying their concerns with the legislation. It's incumbent on the presiding officer to keep the debate on topic, and this is what Deputy Speaker Barbara Kuriger attempted this morning during the committee stage of the Pae Ora (Disestablishment of the Maori health Authority) Bill. Some MPs were unhappy with Health Minister Shane Reti's answers to their questions on the Pea Ora legislation. Kuriger, finding their questions to be repetitive, sought to offer some direction to MPs by advising that she was "looking for very new questions, not speeches of dissatisfaction" in the Bill. This brought her into an exchange with Green MP Ricardo Menendez-March who asked her to "reflect on why you would come into the Chair to make a reflection and then only allow for one call, rather than in good faith allow the members to scrutinise". It ended up with Kuriger reminding Menendez-March not to argue with the Chair…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade select committee has been holding its annual review of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Winston Peters, has told a select committee that New Zealand's diplomatic presence overseas must grow, despite government plans to reduce spending in his ministry.The Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade select committee has been undertaking its annual review of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT), with the minister appearing to answer questions. Hearings like these are one of the ways that Parliament attempts to supervise the work of the government that it funds. As he did in his previous two stints as Foreign Minister (2005-2008 and 2017-2020), Peters continues to emphasise the importance of engaging more with the international community, for the sake of New Zealand's long-term security. This includes increasing our representative presence in other countries, particularly where trade opportunities beckon, but also giving a level of Overseas Development Aid that is commensurate with being an OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) member country. But Peters again warned that New Zealand cannot afford to rest on its reputation of punching above its weight internationally, particularly in a world where geopolitical dynamics have changed dramatically."We've got a massive task on our hands. Not only do we have to beef up our engagement and our collectiveness to countries that share our views and share our values, but we've also got to beef up our trade big time. We've got to put more people on the ground," Peters said, adding that New Zealand stacked up unfavourably in this regard compared to the likes of Singapore, Ireland and Nordic countries.Expansion v CutsLabour MP Damien O'Connor was curious to know how Peters could expand New Zealand's diplomatic footprint while his ministry - like dozens of other departments - has been asked by the National-led coalition government to cut spending by at least 6.5 percent."Of course we can always find economies, but we've got to start with firstly understanding that there's some things you cannot sacrifice. What I'm talking about is anti-inflationary, because it's not spent inside the New Zealand economy, it's spent offshore," Peters replied.Another senior Labour MP, David Parker, chipped in with questions around New Zealand's level of Overseas Development Aid (ODA), which currently sits at about $1 billion annually (of which 60 percent goes to the Pacific Islands)…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Fa'anānā Efeso Collins has been fondly remembered and much praised by his colleagues. Here is his own message; the maiden speech he gave a week ago.Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Mai i ngā hau o Ōtāhuhu-nui-a-Rangi, o Maungarei, o Motukaroa; mai i ngā awa o Hikuwaru, o Tāmaki e rere ki te Waitematā, kei te Mānukanuka-o-Hoturoa, ko Kaiwhare, ko Taramainuku kua tau, kua tau ki ngā whenua o Ngāti Toa Rangatira, o Taranaki Whānui ki Te Ūpoko o Te Ika. Tēnā anō tatou. It is an indescribable feeling to stand up and address this House. As a son of Samoan immigrants who made the mighty Ōtara 274-Southside hard-their home, I am well aware of the giants whose shoulders I stand on and the masters whose feet I learnt at. The courage, foresight, entrepreneurial spirit, and hope of our ancestors who journeyed thousands of years ago through the vast waters of Te Moana-nui-a-Kiwa brings me here today.My parents arrived in New Zealand in the early 1960s, told that this was the land of milk and honey. Dad started off as a taxi driver with South Auckland Taxis, and mum on the factory floor at New Zealand Forest Products in Penrose. We lived in a four-bedroom State house on Preston Road in Ōtara, and I attended local schools: East Tāmaki Primary, Ferguson Intermediate, and the great Tangaroa College. We're forever grateful for the State house that was our home for around 20 years, and the quality public education we received from our local State schools.I did try my hand for a short period at a decile 10 school outside of Ōtara, but that experiment lasted only two weeks. It was during the time in the late 1980s, when families from poorer areas were being discouraged from going to local schools because they weren't considered up to scratch. I'm glad we changed course and decided to high school it in Ōtara, where the motto of our school was "Waiho i te tokā tu Moana"-"Steadfast like a rock in the sea".Later, at university, I went on to write my Master's dissertation on brown flight, critiquing the Picot reforms that have wreaked havoc on our public schooling system. That period was also a challenging time for my family because we were being told by our teachers to stop speaking Samoan at home and only to speak English. My parents didn't want us to fail at school, so we were allowed to speak English at home and over time we stopped speaking Samoan altogether. In the end, I lost my language. I struggled, I was embarrassed, and I felt incomplete. Even speaking to you in Samoan this evening gives me major tremors…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Parliament has paused out of respect for the Green Party MP Efeso Collins who died unexpectedly in Auckland this morning.It's been a sad day at Parliament with news of the sudden death of Green Party MP Fa'anānā Efeso Collins in Auckland this morning, barely a week after he gave his maiden speech as a Member of Parliament.Raised in South Auckland, this New Zealand-born Samoan spent three terms on the Auckland Council serving as chair of the Ōtara-Papatoetoe Local Board, and councillor for the Manukau ward. He was a leading voice advocating for people living on society's margins.As mark of respect Parliament adjourned until next week, but not before several party leaders or senior MPs spoke about Efeso Collins. "One of the first things that you notice about Efeso is his graciousness, his huge smile, and his reassuring voice. He was joyful, he was funny, he was kind, and thoughtful. He conducted himself quietly and kindly and gracefully," said the Green party co-leader, James Shaw."He worked to change not by forcing his ideas on others, but by listening and seeking out ideas from others. He was a man full of empathy, a man who knew that the first step towards change is an open heart, a man who embodied the idea that our work here is to serve the communities that we represent; to be their voice for change."Efeso Collins was a good man. He was called to come to Parliament because of what he could see of the worsening poverty, the inadequate incomes, the profound inequities that affect and shape Pacific communities that he came from. Aotearoa needed him. We needed him. Every day that Efeso came to work, I know that he carried the expectation of his South Auckland community. It was a responsibility that he wore solemnly, but he also made it look easy-fun, even," Shaw said.The Prime Minister Christopher Luxon spoke next, acknowledging Collins' deep commitment to public service and advocacy for his Samoan and South Auckland communities in the various leadership roles that he held over the decades. Collins, he said, was just getting started in his promising Parliamentary career."I met Efeso almost two years ago, and, in fact, the two of us caught up just a couple of weeks ago and we were talking about balancing family and work life in this place and his hopes for starting out here. In all my interactions with him, Efeso was always so friendly, gracious, generous, kind, positive, and collaborative, with a lovely sense of humour. He certainly lived by the words he uttered in his maiden speech, which was to lead with the spirit of peace and love and service. He was what I would call a true servant leader," the Prime Minister said…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Wise MPs apologise hard and early, but Casey Costello's correction may be late. The Speaker appears to have revealed he is considering a complaint over a matter of privilege.MPs in Parliament's debating chamber go hard and they go early. Even MPs who would blanche at that phrase would admit some of the most interesting things happen early and quickly. For example, Tuesday began with fleeting acknowledgement of a visiting US senator, and before beginning debates, MPs agreed which of them will be on The Intelligence and Security Committee and privy to the world of secret squirrels. But even more interesting was an underwhelming apology. Listen to the radio version of this story from The HouseAn ersatz apology Before Question Time began New Zealand First's Casey Costello (Associate Health Minister - Smokefree Policy), got in early to 'correct' an answer before Question Time compounded her woe."I'd like to make a personal statement regarding my answers as Associate Minister of Health to oral questions on 30 January 2024. I'm speaking specifically to the questions that asked if I was being truthful when I denied to the media that I had requested advice on freezing tobacco excise tax. On review of my response, I acknowledge that there is confusion arising from my understanding of the differentiation between seeking specific advice and accepting advice being offered. I had no intention of misleading the House, and I apologise for any confusion."Quite a few ministers have corrected answers this Parliament. Going hard and early by owning up to a mistake is a wise move. Attempting to brash it out is just asking for trouble. Costello is pretty tardy comparatively, and may have forgotten about the correction part.The wisest approach is to say 'sorry, I got it wrong', but often ministers veer off dramatically before admitting to an actual error. In Ms Costello's case the heart of the equivocation was..."I acknowledge that there is confusion arising from my understanding of the differentiation..."The Leader of the Opposition, Chris Hipkins was not satisfied and raised a point of order.Hipkins: "Generally speaking, when a Minister is correcting an answer they have given, they state what the incorrect answer was and what the correct answer was. I don't think anyone in this House would be any the wiser as to exactly what it is the Minister's just corrected."The Speaker, Gerry Brownlee responded. …Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

This weekly wrap of The House looks at the repeal of major water reforms passed in the last Parliament term, and a Select Committee hearing on news media's existential crisis.In this edition of The House we look back at two of the more important subjects MPs were grappling with this week in the debating chamber and select committees.One is Parliament's repeal of major water reforms passed last term by the previous government, with the Water Services Acts Repeal Bill being passed through all its stages under urgency. The other concerns the existential crisis facing this country's news media in a digital market dominated by tech giants, being relayed to the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Select Committee as it heard submissions on the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill. RNZ Chief Executive Paul Thompson tells MPs in the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Select Committee about the challenging media landscape while submitting on the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill.Meanwhile, in case you missed it, last Sunday's episode of The House looked at Parliament's bible, Parliamentary Practice, which has now been updated in a new 2024 edition, explaining all the many rules, practices and precedents that make Parliament tick. Get stuck in.On the Sunday prior to that, The House explored a new change at Parliament whereby all public hearings of select committees are being live-streamed to Parliament's own website instead of on Facebook, a move welcomed by advocates of open government. RNZ's The House - journalism focussed on parliamentary legislation, issues and insights - is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk. Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

A select committee is considering views on a bill that seeks a more level playing field in the digital market that our media industry operates in, where tech giants dominate.Parliament's Economic Development, Science and Innovation select committee today heard from a range of New Zealand's news media companies about how the changing media environment and the dominance of tech giants are killing them.The committee has been listening to submissions on a bill that seeks a more level playing field in the digital market that our media industry operates in. They argue that the tech giants whose digital platforms host news content that the media outlets produce are able to generate great revenue from this but share almost none of it with the outlets who do all the work. Economic Development, Science and Innovation select committee chair Parmjeet Parmar (left) and Willie Jackson listen to submissions on the Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill.This imbalance is something affecting all New Zealand media companies, from the big outlets like RNZ, Stuff or the NZ Herald, to small town newspapers such as the Ashburton Guardian newspaper, whose co-owner and managing editor Daryl Holden was among those submitting to the committee this morning."Simply those digital internet companies such as Google, Meta (which runs Facebook and Instagram) and Microsoft are creaming it at the expense of every New Zealand media company who in many ways are slowly but surely bleeding to death. That's because those internet giants are using and sharing news produced by New Zealand media organisations on their mega digital platforms at zero costs to themselves. They are reaping unimaginable wealth and power building their businesses almost entirely off content created by others," Holden said.The Fair Digital News Bargaining Bill seeks to create a bargaining system between New Zealand news media entities and operators of digital platforms to support commercial arrangements for news content. It was introduced by the previous Labour government and passed its first reading last August. Small stepThe difficulties facing the Ashburton Guardian, which employs seventeen local people and is considering going digital-only, are not uncommon for media outlets in this country. Holden welcomed the bill as a small step that can be taken to bring tech giants to the negotiating table."It's been reported that Google's revenue in New Zealand was 78 million dollars in 2022 but it also paid its parent company in the US a separate service fee of 870 million that year. A small country of 5 million delivers nearly one billion dollars of value to Google. What do New Zealand media companies get out of it? Bugger all," he explained…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The Water Services Acts Repeal Bill has passed through all stages while Parliament went into urgency.If you've been following the news, you'll know Parliament has repealed water reforms legislation that was passed last year by the previous Labour government.The coalition government's Water Services Acts Repeal Bill passed through all its stages under urgency, having been introduced in Parliament yesterday and then debated into the night until it its third and final reading this morning.The audio below features some of the debate's salient points of exchange between the two main interlocutors in the debate, the Minister of Local Government, Simeon Brown of the National Party, and his predecessor in the role, Labour's Kieran McAnulty.RNZ's The House - journalism focussed on parliamentary legislation, issues and insights - is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk. Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

An unusually long sitting block begins today at Parliament, beginning with another repeal of law passed by the previous government.An unusually long sitting block commences today at Parliament, with the Government resuming its repeals of legislation passed by the previous government.This week is the start of a four-week sitting block, which is a bit unusual. It's been several years since Parliament has sat for more than the usual chunks of two or three weeks at a time. The Government will go into urgency today to move various bills through, resurfacing for the regular day for Member's Bills on Wednesday, and later in the week a bunch of the remaining maiden speeches for MPs new to Parliament after October's election. Labour MP Kieran McAnulty, the Shadow Leader of the HouseFour-weekerIf the prolonged government coalition negotiations didn't hold things up enough already, Parliament had only resumed for a week at the end of January following the long summer holiday when it subsequently went into recess again, adding to the sense that the start of this Parliamentary term has been fractured. So the shortest of blocks is now followed by the longest, with the Shadow Leader of the House, Labour's Kieran McAnulty, admitting to being surprised that the National-led government has opted for the longer block."The whole idea of a four-week block was brought in, I think, when Chris Hipkins was Leader of the House back in 2018, and was quickly got rid of because it's not very popular with MPs. I'm pretty sure the staff don't really like it either, and it's pretty hard for any government to have enough legislation lined up to fill four weeks. So we were surprised that they brought it back, but happy to go along with it. Let's see whether they can fill it in," McAnulty said.Water worksFirst up on the Order Paper, after a motion for urgency is moved by the Government, is the debate through all stages of the Water Services Acts Repeal Bill which will dismantle the previous Government's so-called Three Waters legislation that was passed last year.While the Coalition Government hasn't tabled a replacement regime yet, the Local Government Minister Simeon Brown said the Government is working on this, and that it would recognise "the importance of local decision-making and flexibility for communities and councils to determine how their water services will be delivered in future"…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Parliament's Clerk has just published a new edition of Parliament's own bible, a vast and fascinating compendium of our democracy - Parliamentary Practice in New Zealand.In Parliament's debating chamber, sitting at a desk in front of the Speaker presiding, there is always a clerk - a member of Parliament's secretariat. They are the team that administer the House and its many committees, the brainy worker elves of democracy's legislature.They are also the experts on all things Parliament. They attend the chamber to take official note of everything that occurs and is agreed, but also to offer expert advice on the many and complex mysteries of parliamenting. Listen to the Sunday edition of The House with this story, and a story about MPs' Maiden Speeches. The Clerk of the House, David Wilson sitting at the Debating Chamber's Table, with reference volumes at hand.Thankfully this knowledge is not part of a hermetic mystery cult, known only to the initiates. It is freely available.The Clerk of the House of Representatives and his staff regularly update Parliament's very own bible, explaining all the many rules, practices and precedents, in a volume called Parliamentary Practice in New Zealand (PP). More than 700 pages of information about everything from how MPs are chosen (e.g. did you know the Clerk still has your physical election ballots under lock-and-key); through to how MPs can lose their jobs again (yes, MPs can be sacked for a variety of reasons). And everything in between.Without Parliamentary Practice and the clerks' help MPs would be lost in the byzantine ways of democracy, doomed to blindly stumble through their parliamentary careers making endless mistakes. You might think some do that regardless. Parliament's bible, Parliamentary Practice has now been updated, with a new 2024 edition published.It is available as a physical volume but can also be found on the Parliament website: in its entirety here (good for searching), or by browsing its many sections here. Last week the new edition had the kind of glitzy launch party that one might only dream about in a cash-crunch - i.e. there was a brief comms email to announce its existence. Heady with imaginary champagne I sat down to chat with its editor, the Clerk of the House of Representatives, David Wilson.He calls Parliament Practice "a really comprehensive guide to how Parliament works" and it is. It's a weighty tome, but without bumf.It fills a necessary troika with its sister volumes: Standing Orders (Parliament's procedural rules), and Speakers' Rulings (Parliament's compendium of precedent). …Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Live-streaming of public select committee hearings is now being hosted on Parliament's own website instead of on Facebook.From this week, all public hearings of select committees are being live-streamed to Parliament's own website instead of on Facebook, a move welcomed by advocates of open government.Shifting away from the use of the social media platform for hosting select committee live-streams was something recommended in submissions to Parliament's regular Standing Orders review last term. While still a work in progress in terms of its functionality, the move is a first step in bringing together Parliament's select committee and House-sitting content into the same place.Each select committee already has its own page on Parliament's website with information on membership and schedules among other things, and now it will also feature the latest live streamed video of public hearings. It's a small breakthrough in the bid to make Parliament more accessible to the public, as Parliament's Digital Lead, Winnie Nadi, explained."We want to make it as accessible as possible for people and as enjoyable for people to search for things and be able to filter and really understand what's happening," she said."Some of the features in the beginning will be quite basic as we test the live-streaming and make sure that it works. As we move in the next few months, we'll have some filtering and searchable content, and it will be a lot more similar to what you can do with the House sitting stuff on our on-demand platform."The way Scottish and Welsh parliaments host their select committee content has provided useful models to learn from."We have had a lot of conversations with Scotland, with Wales, late at night, just talking about how they use their videos. We've noticed that we have more features in some things, and less in other things. So we're going to continue to talk to them so that we can grab all of the good features and make sure New Zealanders have that," Nadi said. The current home page of Parliament select committeesCommittees and public interestSelect committees do much of the work in terms of applying scrutiny to government actions. So the team that facilitates the committees' activities places much importance on the ability of the public to see and hear the work of select committees and engage with their representatives in committees. …Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Being a government minister is harder than it looks. Parliament is a tough master of its governments. This week a clutch of ministers made mea culpas, and one is learning fast just how hard it can be.I suspect opposition MPs and politics watchers sometimes observe government ministers and think - 'well, that looks like a doddle'. From observation, the job mostly involves finding ways of avoiding questions about the role.But a minister's job is full of fish hooks, made worse because ministers essentially work inside a fish bowl owned by Parliament. And to strain that metaphor to its breaking point, those hooks are hard to remove if you don't remove them quickly. New and returning ministers have been learning (and remembering) this early on in this government. Christopher Luxon and Mark Mitchell when they were in opposition. This week both walked back statements made to the House. Misleading the House The easiest hook to remove is one barbed with Parliament's dislike of falsehood. The House does not take well to Ministers who mis-speak, offer alternative facts, employ terminological inexactitudes; or just plain get the facts wrong. A minister misleading the House is considered a breach of privilege, which is very naughty indeed. However, the breach must be intentional and accusations of such intention can be avoided if a minister follows protocol and corrects mistakes 'at the earliest opportunity'.So three times on Wednesday alone government ministers interrupted business in the House to correct errors.They do that by asking permission (seeking leave) to make a personal statement. Minister for Police Mark Mitchell got his mea culpa in early. It was a good tactic to pre-empt impending questions which would have been embarrassing. He didn't exactly admit an error either. "I should have been clearer" was Mark Mitchell's euphemism for admitting that either he had been wrong, or had changed his mind. It wasn't clear which. James Shaw caused the Prime Minister difficulties over our genocide responsibilities. Later on, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon attempted to extricate himself from a tangle James Shaw had left him in over whether the ICJ's opinion of a plausible risk of genocide in Gaza "would trigger New Zealand's obligations under article 1 of the to take action to prevent genocide before it occurs."…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The first piece of legislation Parliament is looking at in 2024 disestablishes a Crown entity that MPs all agreed has been doing great work. But they don't all agree that it should go.The first piece of legislation that Parliament has been looking at in 2024 is the Productivity Commission Act Repeal Bill, which is being debated under urgency. It found some MPs scratching their heads at the end of an independent Crown entity whose work they applaud.Since its inception in 2011, the Commission has conducted research and inquiries in order to provide recommendations to government on ways to improve productivity - not so much regarding workplace or individual productivity - it has more of a focus on the effectiveness of laws, policies, regulations and institutions. The Commission, which has around twenty staff, was created as a condition of the ACT Party supporting the National Party government led by John Key on confidence and supply. Now ACT wants to disestablish it, although its leader David Seymour was at pains to point out that "this is not, in any way, an indictment on the quality of the work of the Productivity Commission".'Tremendous work'"The Productivity Commission has done some tremendous work over the past decade or so, and that work will remain available as an asset or a taonga for New Zealanders to be a guide for policy formation," Seymour said while introducing the bill last night."I just make the case that if you look at the five most prominent inquiries according to Treasury, they are things such as housing affordability. I remember reading that report as a young staffer in a ministerial office here in Parliament when it came out in 2012. It remains very good advice for any Government wishing to improve housing affordability. Another one... regulatory institutions and practices; more effective social services, 2015; new models of tertiary education; New Zealand firms reaching for the frontier. "If you look at some of these subjects, they are clearly areas where, despite the best advice, Governments over the past decade, including those members opposite who have recently been retired from the Government benches by the voters, have failed to implement the policy process. The case I make is that we are much better at this point in time to retain the assets that the Productivity Commission has generated in its various pieces of policy advice and make sure that we do a better job of implementing them."New ministry…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

Leader of the House, Chris Bishop, outlines the week to come in Parliament. A week with 19 maidens and just two bills. Students are back in the classroom, and are matched by MPs, back in Parliament. But doing what exactly?The election seems like a long while ago but the 54th Parliament is still very new, and still has the initial set-pieces of any new Parliament to sweep through before it can get knee-deep into legislation. There are two new bills this week however (see below). Listen to Leader of the House Chris Bishop outlining the week on The HouseUnboxing MPsThis new Parliament is still fresh enough that the public hasn't met all the new MPs yet. Hearing from more of the recently elected will be a feature of the week. The plan is for six new National Party MPs on Tuesday (from about 4:15pm):Rima Nakhle, Cameron Brewer, Dana Kirkpatrick, Carl Bates, Carlos Cheung and Miles Anderson.Another six fresh National Party MPs get unboxed on Wednesday (from roughly 3:30pm): Mike Butterick, Catherine Wedd, Tom Rutherford, Grant McCallum, Nancy Lu and David MacLeod.And on Thursday from 4:15-ish, a combination of four ACT MPs (who TBA), and three new Green MPs:Tamatha Paul, Kahurangi Carter and Scott Willis.Different days focus on MPs from different parties for logistical reasons. MPs usually invite family and friends to attend their maiden speeches, and the political parties usually host a function afterwards. Clumping the MPs makes organising the post-match events easier. The functions are also why maiden and valedictory speeches are almost always scheduled in the lead-up to when MPs pause debating for dinner. Other BusinessThe week began with a motion in memory of the recently deceased former Governor General, Sir Michael Hardy-Boys; and a Ministerial Statement from Judith Collins on a recently announced Defence deployment to the Red Sea Combined Task Force. You can hear Chris Bishop (link above), explain the recent changes to the way Ministerial Statements are managed with more Q&A, and less speechifying. With the focus on the Address in Reply Debate (including Tuesday and Wednesday's maiden speeches), there is a paucity of debating time for legislation. The House will consider two bill this week though. One is scheduled for debate through all stages under urgency. The New Zealand Productivity Commission Act Repeal Bill will be introduced and debated under Urgency on Tuesday evening. …Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The House offers a selection of some of the highs and lows, and behind the scenes chats, from a year of great change at Parliament.There's no denying it's been a year of great change in Parliament - 2023 began with a brand new Prime Minister, and ended with another new Prime Minister, a new Government and a new Speaker.So much has happened that it's almost hard to believe there were three months without the house sitting (during the election and subsequent period of government formation). So The House offers a recap by way of this audio compilation below. Rawiri Waititi about to be sworn in as MP on the opening day of the 54th Parliament, 5 December 2023.Not everything made it into the audio version, so here we summarise some of the highlights from our coverage. There were estimates hearings broken down, ministerial grillings unpacked, Question Time tactics fleshed out, and select committees dissected. Not only that but The House looked at the ways select committees tweak legislation. There was also an explainer on the very different way that MPs cast a Personal Vote on conscience issues (sex and alcohol-adjacent topics mostly).The final thing Parliament did before it adjourned for October's general election was agree on some alterations to the rules that will apply in the 54th Parliament. These are changes that the parties and the clerks have been working on since last year. Some of those MPs spoke about the changes, and interestingly about what changes they did not achieve.We went behind the scenes with the work of people who make parts of this place work - people like Maika Te Amo, the head of Parliament's Māori Language Service whose work is in demand more than ever because of an increased appetite to learn te reo Māori among members and staff from different parts of the Parliamentary system; or Rachel Hayward who holds two official titles simultaneously: Secretary of the Cabinet and Clerk of the Executive Council - two interlinked and overlapping roles. Because we look at the ways the public engages with Parliament, The House also offered a look at four activists who have long participated in the Parliament space - in protests, delivering petitions, submitting at select committees and more - from single or multiple issue campaigners to the lifelong activist who became an MP and got out the other side with activism intact.Efforts are underway to make Parliament more accessible for people who live with disability, and not before time, after the recent creation of a Senior Accessibility Advisor at Parliament…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

When governments change, the new bunch typically want to quickly make a mark. The first weeks have been long weeks, all about marking fast marks.It's a truism that when governments change, the new bunch want to quickly make a mark.That can be achieved by passing bills a new government has waiting and ready to go, or by tweaking bills already under consideration. Those things both happened back in 2017, the last time power swapped between the two major parties.Another tactic is to wind back some of the laws made by the previous lot. That's the initial move this time around, with two weeks of rewinds under urgency to begin the new Parliament.Urgency is not new, the 2017 coalition also used urgency in its initial weeks to pass the Families Package (Income Tax and Benefits) Act. Christopher Luzon's new government has passed three policy bills under urgency in each of the first two 'normal' weeks of the 54th Parliament.New legislation takes months to write. Doing it well can involve years of research, consultation and development. But new governments don't have years to make early impressions. They need laws written fast.If you have any spare Christmas wishes, feel free to send in them in the direction of the Parliamentary Counsel's Office - the group that draft government legislation. I presume they will not be having a very relaxing summer.The repeal tactic has one major advantage. A repeal bill is much easier and faster to draft. It gains time to work on the more substantive things.The simplest of billsOn Thursday Parliament focussed on a bill to repeal the Taxation Principles Reporting Act, which was passed a few months ago. If you ignore titles, headers etcetera, the bill is three lines of text. Not full lines either. The crucial section is just 10 words long. A bill like that can be produced pretty quickly. Three weeks downSo far, the 54th Parliament has sat for three weeks. The first week was all ceremony and set pieces. The other two weeks have been largely spent under urgency to effect six repeals and one new piece of legislation. That bill was a reinstatement of a partial repeal made by the previous government. Three bills were repealed last week and three this week. This week's billsThe reinstatement bill extends employment trial periods to all employers. Trial periods are currently restricted to employers with fewer than 20 staff. The guts of this bill removes just eight words from the current law, which would have made it an appealing early objective. The first of the repeals this week repealed two different laws - the two large laws that quite recently replaced the Resource Management Act after years of development. …Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

There's a look in the eyes of many people who work on precinct that tells you they just want this parliamentary year to finish already, but it's not quite done yet.There's a look in the eyes of many people who work on precinct that tells you they just want this parliamentary year to finish already. But it's not quite done yet and this morning's grinding committee stage action prolonged the torture.Parliament's in urgency and running later than it normally does towards year's end, as the coalition government continues dismantling the previous government's legacy laws. Among the repeals being passed through all stages under urgency this week was the Resource Management (Natural and Built Environment and Spatial Planning Repeal and Interim Fast-track Consenting) Bill.As MPs wearily resumed their seats in the chamber at 9am this morning, they were still grinding through the committee stage of this Bill. It's the stage where MPs debate the details. It can last as long as there are still things to discuss, and is the stage when the Opposition can slow things down with proposed amendments and questions to the minister in charge of the legislation. In this case it was the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure, National's Chris Bishop, who was fielding the questions and amendments. Many of them.Although the MPs have had an arduous year and are desperate to go home, start Christmas shopping or get to their bach in Kinloch, Labour MPs in particular sought to grab their only chance to interrogate the inner details of a bill that's undoing legislation they had passed only a few months ago. They couldn't prevent it being overturned but they could slow it down very slightly. You could say they wanted to make the Government work for it.As such, the Labour MPs got forensic with their questions and proposed plenty of amendments. And each new amendment proposed gave the MPs something new to discuss, more questions for the minister, a longer debate. Sometimes amendments are proposed on the go, scribbled on a piece of paper and given to the clerks. Labour's Kieran McAnulty penned one such proposed amendment to this Bill, seen in the picture below. However he pointed out it was incumbent on Bishop to answer a question that McAnulty had been putting to him before the Opposition MP could proceed with the proposed amendment. Bishop then indicated he was happy to look at it, and McAnulty headed off to the printing room. But before he could even leave the chamber, this part of the committee stage was closed off by the presiding officer without McAnulty's amendment getting the chance to be tabled…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

The Speaker's role and approach are crucial to Parliament's good functioning. Gerry Brownlee has outlined to MPs what approach he will take in enforcing Parliament's rules regarding Question Time.Gerry Brownlee has begun Parliament's week by outlining his approach as Speaker to Question Time. Each Speaker tends to come at their job with slightly different interpretations of Parliament's many rules. Brownlee had promised he would give guidance as to his own approach after a combative first full week of Question Time. Listen to the radio version of this story with audio from ParliamentEach Speaker's approach has a huge impact on how, and how well, Parliament undertakes its core role of being a check on the Executive. Here is Gerry Brownlee's ruling (in bold) with with notes and explanations. "Members, as I suggested last week, I want to set out my approach to the answering of parliamentary questions. It's well established that Ministers are expected to answer questions unless they consider it not in the public interest to do so: Speaker's ruling 199/3. The public interest test is a high one and should be used sparingly: Speaker's ruling 200/1."Note: Re The Public Interest - There are a few reasons within this 'out' that might lead ministers not to answer a question. They include something that is sub-judice (being considered by a court), not wanting to prejudice a current police operation, privacy, commercial sensitivity, and national security.Gerry Brownlee continued..."Ministers are accountable to the House for the public office they hold and should, therefore, endeavour to give informative replies: Speakers' ruling 200/6. That is the cornerstone of responsible Government."Notes: Re 'Responsible Government' - The phrase 'Responsible Government' does not refer to a government acting responsibly. It seems unlikely that anyone would agree what that might look like. It refers to the fact that every government is responsible to parliament. Parliament is the boss, so answers aren't just ministers being polite to pesky opposition MPs, they are actually responding to someone who is in part - their overseer. The Parliament chooses the Executive from among its members, and can also remove them from office."Informative answers" is a very generous description of many ministers' responses.Gerry Brownlee continued..…Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details

It's early in the 54th Parliament and things are dynamic, with many MPs either still finding their feet or feeling out the others to see how they roll.Two weeks in, but really only one full week so far, and already the 54th Parliament feels kind of heavy and intense.Maybe it's the fiery exchanges in Question Time, or the unique energy that comes from going headlong into repealing laws that the previous parliament deliberated on and passed just a few months back. Maybe it's the end of year grind and pre-Christmas dread kicking in. Or maybe it's simply the usual birthing process a parliament goes through whereby it finds its own shape and mood. Chris Penk in select committeeSo things are dynamic in this freshly minted Parliament, and many MPs are either still finding their feet or feeling out the others to see how they roll. In this Sunday edition of The House, we take a look at the Parliament discovering how the new Speaker Gerry Brownlee will interpret the rules, this week's contention being whether he can force adequate answers from ministers or indeed any answers.We also sit down for a chat with National's Chris Penk to hear about how he's undergoing the transformation to government minister after being in opposition for six years. Penk of course is freshly sworn in as the Minister for Building and Construction, Minister for Veterans Affairs and Minister Land Information, in addition to Associate Minister of both Defence and Immigration. The member for Kaipara ki Mahurangi is the first to admit being a minister is a different level of responsibility and intensity to being the senior whip in opposition, but he is nothing if not enthusiastic.RNZ's The House - journalism focussed on parliamentary legislation, issues and insights - is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk. Go to this episode on rnz.co.nz for more details