Another lie in the house from Phil Twyford? UPDATED

It appears that Phil Twyford is taking lessons from Phil Goff. He claimed in the house yesterday in response to questions from Jami-lee Ross that the second reading on the?Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill was passed unanimously: Quote:

JAMI-LEE ROSS (National?Botany)?to the?Minister of?Transport: Does he stand by all his statements and actions?

PHIL TWYFORD (Minister of Transport): Yes, including my action of putting before the House the Land Transport Management (Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill, which passed its second reading in the House unanimously. End quote.

Except it didn’t, in fact it was nowhere near unanimous. Hansard recorded the vote, and the video above shows it: Quote:

A party vote was called for on the question,?That?the?amendments recommended by the Finance and Expenditure Committee, by majority, be agreed to.

Ayes 63

New Zealand Labour 46; New Zealand First 9; Green Party 8.

Noes 56

New Zealand National 55; ACT New Zealand 1.

Amendments agreed to.

Bill read a second time. End quote.

Phil Twyford has misled the house in a most serious manner. Surely this requires at the very least a correction, or a referral to the Privileges Committee.

Labour ministers are fast gaining the reputation for being liars, sneaky, furtive, secretive, arrogant and dishonest.

UPDATED: I’m told that Twyford whilst technically correct is actually being a smart arse. There was a second vote called for the Bill to read a second time but National’s whips didn’t record their votes, nor Act’s. Since there were no votes against it passed, but would have passed anyway, and it is trite for Twyford to claim in the house that it was unanimous, when it is plain to see that National opposed amendments and would have opposed the seconding reading as well.

It seems Twyford was just rubbing National’s whips nose in the finer detail, but it was still misleading as he gave the impression National voted for the bill to be read a second time, which isn’t the case.