Let’s start with Te Pāti Māori. On November 14, 2024, MPs Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke, Rawiri Waititi, and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer performed a haka during the first reading of the divisive Treaty Principles Bill, a protest against legislation that erodes Māori rights. The haka, a profound expression of cultural identity and resistance, often used by the New Zealand All Blacks, disrupted the vote, prompting Brownlee to suspend the House and dock Maipi-Clarke’s pay for 24 hours.
The Privileges Committee, chaired by National’s Judith Collins, went even further, recommending unprecedented suspensions: 21 days for Waititi and Ngarewa-Packer, and seven days for Maipi-Clarke, the harshest penalties in New Zealand’s parliamentary history. The committee claimed the issue wasn’t the haka itself but its “intimidatory” nature. Te Pāti Māori called the process “grossly unjust,” arguing it dismissed tikanga Māori and silenced their voices.
Yesterday, RNZ reported:
Te Pāti Māori MPs to be temporarily suspended from Parliament over haka
Te Pāti Māori MPs will be temporarily suspended from Parliament for "acting in a manner that could have the effect of intimidating a member of the House" after performing a haka during the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill.
Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke will be suspended for seven days, while co-leaders Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi will be "severely censured" and suspended for 21 days.
The three MPs - along with Labour's Peeni Henare - were referred to the Privileges Committee for their involvement in a haka and protests in the House in November, at the first reading of the contentious Treaty Principles Bill.
The suspension means the three Te Pāti Māori MPs will not be present at next week's Budget debate.
Contrast this extreme punishment with Brooke van Velden’s slap on the wrist for her recent disruptive profanity. In a heated debate, van Velden repeatedly used the C-word to criticize Labour’s Jan Tinetti, who had simply asked what the government thought about an opinion piece written by Andrea Vance, who had used the C-word to describe government Ministers. Brownlee’s response? A mild reprimand, requiring van Velden to withdraw and apologise, with no further action. No suspension, no pay docking, no Privileges Committee referral. This leniency for a coalition MP, whose deliberate use of a vulgar slur was undeniably disruptive, stands in stark contrast to the draconian measures employed against Te Pāti Māori to try and silence their concerns about the government's anti-Māori agenda.
Brownlee’s track record as Speaker raises questions about his impartiality. His rulings often favour the coalition of chaos government, as seen when he overruled the Clerk of the House and his assistant speaker on a fast-track bill amendment, prioritising coalition interests, which caused the Labour party to lose confidence in him as speaker. The haka incident further exposes this bias. While Brownlee claimed the haka’s disruption of a vote was a “cardinal sin,” he downplayed van Velden’s vulgar outburst as a mere breach of decorum. The Privileges Committee’s recommendation amplifies this disparity, punishing a culturally significant act of protest far more harshly than a crude verbal attack.
My overseas friends keep telling me the scenes they saw in parliament yesterday were sickening & I've had to explain to them his name is Gerry Brownlee & he has always looked like this pic.twitter.com/9g7pxQG73c
— Liquid Times (@Liquid_Times) November 15, 2024
This isn’t just about inconsistent rulings; it’s about whose voices are being valued in Parliament. Te Pāti Māori’s haka was a response to a bill threatening the Treaty of Waitangi, a cornerstone of New Zealand’s constitutional framework. Van Velden’s C-word, however, was the government trying to blame Labour for an article written by a reporter...a personal jab, lacking any cultural or political weight whatsoever. Yet, the Māori MPs face prolonged suspensions at the exact time the government is announcing another austerity budget, a budget that is set to once again disproportionately and adversely impact Māori. The message is clear: colonial norms trump tikanga, and coalition MPs get a free pass while Brownlee stacks the decks against opposition MPs.
The Privileges Committee’s decision sets a dangerous precedent, signaling that Māori expressions of resistance in the house (which are now a part of New Zealand's everyday culture) will be met with maximum government force. Brownlee and Collins must answer: why is a haka deemed more “intimidatory” than a minister’s unwarranted and disrespectful profanities? Until Parliament reconciles its rules with tikanga Māori, such injustices will persist, eroding trust in our democratic institutions. And once that trust has gone, it's nearly impossible to get back.
