When MPs return to Parliament after a two-week break, the first day or so in the debating chamber can involve a surprising amount of catch-up on the endless business awaiting attention, and on rejuvenated arguments and debates, as well as on not losing ground in the inch-by-inch battles over procedural interpretation. Some of the catch-up is official business, some is tactical and some is political.
Select Committees don’t experience the same level of catch-up. They typically lose so many sitting days to extended sittings in the House that many keep working across the sitting breaks, at least to some degree.
Refreshed MPs add new debates to business backlog
The House
Parliament’s ‘mail box’
Each sitting day the Clerk of the House informs MPs of what you might describe as mail. New bills, reports from committees, papers from entities (things like Annual Reports or Statements of Intent), and newly arrived petitions. Most days there are a few, but after a two week break, the weight of new reading is staggering.
On Tuesday the Clerk announced 13 petitions, 64 papers, 15 select committee reports, and two new bills. Just reading the titles of that two-lozenge-worthy list took six and a half minutes. Thank goodness most are now electronic and can be found on Parliament’s website. Papers can be found here, petitions are here, committee reports are here, and bills are here.
Labour MP Camilla Belich tried to add an extra item to the mailbox, when she asked the House to agree to introduce a new member’s bill – the Crimes (Consent Reform) Amendment Bill. The bill would establish “affirmative consent as New Zealand’s approach to consent to sexual activity”. She wanted it debated on member’s day. Permission would need to be unanimous, and was never likely to be given. The move was a political response to National’s promise to introduce consent law post-election. Belich was saying something like ‘if you care, why wait?’
Noting events
When MPs return there are also often events that need mentioning in the House. This week there were four.
The recent deaths of Bill Birch (a senior National Party MPs from the 1970-80s), and Sam Neill were both given brief attention. The recent triumph of Ryan Fox at the British Golf Open was also noted. Arguably, if only one of those events had occurred it might have resulted in some speeches, rather than a motion.
A recent policy decision was also given an airing when the Speaker agreed to the requested urgent debate into the Government’s decision to give financial assistance to New Zealand’s remnant cement company.
The procedural recap segment
Something else that often happens after a break is a series of reminders of where things stand in any ongoing procedural tussles. These reminders might come from the Speaker or the Opposition.
This is the parliamentary version of the ‘previously on…’ segment at the beginning of a TV episode.
This week, for example, Shadow Leader of the House Kieran McAnulty made a gentle point early in the week’s first Committee of the Whole House. Labour supports the bill being considered, but the Government has offered substantial amendments to it half way through the parliamentary process. McAnulty wanted to remind everyone that the Speaker had spoken about this kind of thing recently – regarding the importance of giving fair notice.
“We are faced with, at this stage, an Amendment Paper from the Minister that is just as large as the bill. I’d like some reassurance from him that …the Finance and Expenditure Committee has considered all aspects of this and that the inclusion of this amendment bill is not contrary to the guidance that the Speaker gave the House only last sitting week.”
New stakes in the ground
With a new sitting block there are also often new issues to raise, new issues raised by media across the break, maybe newly scandalous events to pick up on, or political feuds to continue or begin. For example, this week there have been various (sometimes oblique) responses to comments by Shane Jones and Stuart Nash.
There was also a new squabble over a privilege issue. During Tuesday’s debate on the Arms Bill, Labour’s Ginny Andersen accused the Minister in charge of the Bill (ACT’s new deputy leader Nicole McKee), of having broken parliament’s rules by sharing privileged information with a gun lobby group. McKee was outraged by the claim and demanded a retraction, and while Andersen professed herself happy to provide evidence, matters of privilege shouldn’t be raised or debated in the House, nor can they be retracted in the House. They have to be raised directly with the Speaker.
New energy
At the end of the previous sitting block MPs were visibly drained after long days of urgency. Their speeches did not sparkle. Humour was a rarity.
After a week or two with family in their home electorates, MPs have more zest, better humour, and sharper snark. So for example, Labour MP Camila Belich typically debates the careful nuance and detail of law. But on Tuesday, considering New Zealand First’s English Language Bill she was refreshingly acerbic. The bill is, at its core, just eight words long, and boldly asserts that English is officially allowed in New Zealand.
Bellich called it “statutory recognition of a fundamental truth. What is the Government going to legislate for next? That it should get dark at night, that the sun should rise in the morning, that the sky is blue, and that flowers should bloom?”
All of that on just the first day back.
*RNZ’s The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament’s Office of the Clerk. Enjoy our articles or podcast at RNZ.
