While Judith was teasing the spastic kid, Hipkins was showing he’s special too

While Judith Collins was teasing the spastic kid, Hipkins was showing he’s special too.

He takes exception to the speaker deciding to just have a document tabled and got all pedantic: Quote:

Judith Collins: Perhaps the Minister would like to table that.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I can’t quite tell if that was a point of order or not. I think, seeing as it was a letter that mentioned the honourable member, there is an expectation now that it be tabled.

PHIL?TWYFORD: I seek leave?

Mr SPEAKER: No, you don’t need leave. It’s just going to be tabled.

PHIL?TWYFORD: OK.

Chris?Hipkins: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I suspect the rule that you’re referring to talks about official documents and an obligation on Ministers to table official documents. I think it would be somewhat of a stretch to argue that a letter from a member of the Opposition is an official document. It’s not been produced by anybody official. However, I think, therefore, the appropriate course of action, given there is interest in this, is for the Minister to seek leave to table it.

Mr SPEAKER: My view is that it is a document which is received in the official capacity by the Minister. He has it in the House?I have seen it?and therefore I think it is appropriate that it is tabled under that Standing Order. So it will be tabled.

Document laid on the Table of the House.?End quote.

Then, just to reinforce how special he is, he decides to have a crack at the speaker again, and gets owned by both Gerry Brownlee and then Trevor Mallard.?Quote:

Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Speakers’ rulings 142(2) and 142(3) contain descriptions of what’s deemed by previous Speakers to be official documents. The definition adopted by previous Speakers is much more narrow than the definition that you have just adopted. The last sentence of Speaker’s ruling of 142(3) is: “It must be of an official nature and written by a Government official in the course of the officer’s official business.” That’s significantly narrower than the definition that you have adopted, and I’m concerned that it does actually set a difficult precedent for the House if any correspondence between members and a Minister is judged to be official documentation.

Gerry Brownlee: I don’t have it at hand, but there’s a Standing Order that makes it very clear that documentation used to attack a member of Parliament can be tabled in Parliament. There are other remedies for members. You’ve taken a pretty middle course here today, which has seen it dealt with. It’s quite clear that that question would not have progressed or been settled on by the Government if they did not have that letter. So it seems quite reasonable, given it is part of authentication, although not required for the question, that it’s tabled in the House, as you have suggested. The other point I would point out to the Leader of the House is that Speakers actually do make rulings themselves, without reference to the past.

Mr SPEAKER: Sorry, I’m just going to look up the?[holds up?Speakers’ Rulings]. I think the member needs to consider the whole of the Speaker’s ruling, and the beginning of the Speaker’s ruling is “An official document includes a document”. It doesn’t say that that is the only sort of document; it says “includes”. I think if the member had read the Standing Order in full?

Chris?Hipkins: Read the one above it.

Mr SPEAKER: I’m not going to read the one above it. I am going to give the Opposition two extra questions because a member’s interjected while I’m on my feet. But my view is that where a document has been received officially by a Minister, including by correspondence, the author of the document has indicated that she has no objection to it being tabled. It is within my power to order it to be tabled; I have. Right?where were we at? We’re at Question No. 6. End quote.

What an utter spastic. He goes to war with his own speaker and gets well spanked. How embarrassing for the so-called leader of the house.

This government are certainly looking very special indeed.

41%
×