Parker DavidHon DAVID PARKER (Attorney-General): Thank you Mr Speaker. I'm quoting from Stuff: Either Collins believed in the vast left-wing conspiracy to normalise child rape—which is scary. Or she didn't believe it but tweeted it anyway because she knew some of the people who read her tweets would have no problem believing it was true." Anyone in this House can make a mistake but they shouldn't double down and they shouldn't defend the indefensible. This is a serious issue.Just a couple of weeks ago on 24 July the House of Commons released its report Disinformation and "fake news": Interim Report. They said that the "threat [arising] from what [is now called] 'fake news' created for profit or other gain disseminated [sometimes] through state-sponsored programmes or spread through the deliberate distortion of facts by groups with a particular agenda including the desire to affect political [decisions]." We know that that's happened overseas and that it has been serious in the United States and in Britain and Indonesia it's a serious problem. Then they go on to say "the focus of our inquiry moved from understanding the phenomenon of 'fake news' distributed largely through social media" to what they say is "Arguably more invasive" and that's obviously false information which is being used in "the relentless targeting of hyper-partisan views which [plays] to the fears and prejudices of people in order to influence their voting plans and … behaviour." And that's what Judith Collins did. She didn't just do it; she then denied that she had done it and she misled the media.What did she do? She said she didn't call out people for fake news herself: "I've never used the term to people and I've never used it about websites." Again another newspaper found that to be incorrect: "[Ms] Collins [earlier] called a Newshub story 'total fake news' [herself] on Twitter in February." Then what happened next? Well you'd think there'd be a little bit of contrition. You'd think that she might've gone back to this website and she might've seen other headlines like "Australia To Forcibly Vaccinate Citizens Via Chemtrails"—maybe that's the conservative party linked with the National Party—"Investigators: Anthony Bourdain … Killed By Clinton Operatives"; "Katy Perry: 'Human Flesh Is The Best Meat; Cannibalism Got A Bad Rap'"; or "Real Life 'Vampire Outbreak' Reported In New Zealand"—perhaps that's the first one she checked and wasn't put off by.There is a serious thing going on here though. After you had embarrassed yourself your party and your leader in that way why would you double down? Well that's what the Hon Judith Collins did. After when she was asked if she had discussed the tweet with party leader Bridges Collins said no. Bridges speaking at the same to time to reporters around the National Party caucus corridor said he had talked to Collins about the issue. Now which of those two accounts is correct? They are absolutely irreconcilable. Both of them cannot be true.Why would you throw your leader under the bus? And if you were Judith Collins having such made such an obvious faux pas why would you stick to your guns? Well actually Newshub is running a poll on who National's leader should be at the moment—results: Judith Collins 40 percent; Simon Bridges 21 percent. That's what's happening. There is nothing too low for Judith Collins. She has proven it time and again in this House—misusing social media. Retweeting ridiculous claims about left-wing conspiracies for paedophilia is unbecoming of any member of Parliament. I say it's too low even for Judith Collins of Oravida fame.There are lots of people better qualified for being the future Prime Minister of New Zealand than Simon Bridges but Judith Collins is not one of them. This latest episode I think is well described by the media as being both misjudgment when the original tweet was made followed by denial misrepresentation and poor judgment time and again subsequently. That's the National Party for you."