Bishop Chris; Peters Winston; Waititi Rawiri; Ngarewa-Packer Debbie; Robertson Grant; Swarbrick ChlöeURGENCYHon CHRIS BISHOP (Leader of the House): I move That urgency be accorded the continued second reading of the Legal Services Amendment Bill the introduction and passing through all stages of the Pae Ora (Disestablishment—Ricardo Menéndez March: Point of order.SPEAKER: Sorry just a moment. You can start again in a moment. We've got another point of order from Ricardo Menéndez March.Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Well I'm in the middle of—Ricardo Menéndez March: It's a new point of order.SPEAKER: I've called him because he's called a point of order OK?RICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): Sorry this is a new point of order—if I may. I was waiting for this to conclude so—SPEAKER: That's good—get on with it. It's all right. RICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH: —that I could raise it in relation to question time. So this is in relation to Speaker's ruling 23/6 and I've raised Speaker's ruling 24/2 in relation to occurrences that happen during question time particularly from interjections from the Deputy Prime Minister particularly around that a point of order should use absolutely objective language and not accusatory language and the language involved when raising points of order is very different from the language involved in debate as well as constantly raising trifling points of orders being itself disorderly. I just want to reflect that there has been throughout several question times constant interjections from the Deputy Prime Minister which they themselves don't amount to legitimate points of order. And what I want to get a sense of understanding and reflection about is the standards that we're setting for the rest of us in terms of us also therefore being allowed to make interjections which they in themselves don't actually—SPEAKER: Well that's a very good point. I'll take that under advisement. I will come back to the House on that. It's not something that—Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Deputy Prime Minister): Point of order Mr Speaker.SPEAKER: A separate point of order?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: It's a separate point of order but it has insight with respect to what was just said because that objection is being raised long after the time he should have raised it and for that reason you should have ruled it out. We've got people who don't understand Speakers' rulings here or Standing Orders and they're getting up and showing their ignorance every day—Hon Member: Thank you—sit down.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: —and he gets offended by it. But that should have been ruled by the fact that when he saw objection—[Interruption] And by the way points of order are heard in silence.SPEAKER: That's right; they are but there has to be a point of order.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Yes my point of order has been succinctly made. If he had any point of order it had to be raised at the time he saw offence not some time later. That's the old Standing Order.Hon CHRIS BISHOP (Leader of the House): I move That urgency be accorded—RAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori): Point of order. I move that this House hold an urgent debate on the appropriate use of urgency. The manner in which this Government has used urgency to progress its agenda including the disestablishment of the Māori Health Authority is an abuse of power.SPEAKER: Well that would be great if it were down on the Order Paper or if you had sought leave for such a motion; you simply cannot move it. RAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori): I seek leave of the House to hold an urgent debate on the appropriate use of urgency. The manner in which this Government has used urgency to progress its agenda including this disestablishment of the Māori Health Authority is an abuse of power.SPEAKER: The leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is.RAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori): Point of order. The Government's use of urgency has deprived this House and the public the ability to scrutinise significant legislative measures—Rt Hon Winston Peters: Sit down!SPEAKER: Sit down. You can't use a point—sit down.Rawiri Waititi: Oh I'll sit down because you said sit down; not because he said sit down. SPEAKER: Yes sit down because the Speaker stood.Rawiri Waititi: Yes but not because he told me to sit down. SPEAKER: No of course not—you wouldn't listen to him; you'd be focusing on me. So the thing is you can't use a point of order to make a statement; it has to relate to a point and the House has made it very clear to me that I must now no longer indulge on the basis of his seniority in this House the Rt Hon Winston Peters—and I won't—but you cannot do that today.RAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori): Point of order. I move That the Pae Ora (Disestablishment of Māori Health Authority) Amendment Bill—SPEAKER: No. You can't do that.RAWIRI WAITITI: Well I seek leave from the House that the Pae Ora (Disestablishment of Māori Health Authority) Amendment Bill is out of order while it is currently subject to an inquiry by the Waitangi Tribunal as of Standing Order 116.SPEAKER: Well I hate to you know keep on getting pedantic about the rules here but the bill that you're talking about is not on the Table of the House. Therefore the leave cannot be put.Hon CHRIS BISHOP (Leader of the House): I move That urgency be accorded the continued second reading—RAWIRI WAITITI (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori): Point of order. I'm just wanting clarification from the Speaker that the Pae Ora (Disestablishment of Māori Health Authority) Amendment Bill is not going to be discussed in the House through urgency. Is that what you're telling me?SPEAKER: That's not what I said.Hon David Seymour: Mr Speaker point of order.SPEAKER: No sit down please Mr Seymour. What I said is quite simply (1) you cannot move without leave of the House; (2) you can't seek leave of the House to effectively discharge a bill that at this point is not tabled. It may well be tabled later today but it is not tabled currently.Hon DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Point of order. Mr Speaker I suspect I speak for quite a few members who are having their patience—SPEAKER: Well it would be good if you had spoken to yourself and made it a real point—[Interruption] Enough! Thank you.Rawiri Waititi: You speak for yourself!SPEAKER: Hey!Hon DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Mr Speaker with respect I think I have a right to raise a point of order without you interrupting. I think it's probably not just me but it's certainly me who is a little bit tired of repetitive trifling points of order from someone who hasn't taken the time to understand the rules and I'd like you to take a tougher line on him because we're all getting a little tired of it.SPEAKER: It's an interesting view but the Speaker will always make his own decision about what advice he might give anybody in the House any time they might need it.DEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori): Point of order. I'd like to record—and take that particular Minister to task—that it is inappropriate to give a personal reflection which puts one of the parties in disrepute because we are using the Speakers' rulings in a way that he doesn't think is appropriate. SPEAKER: I'm sorry; it's an interesting point but it's a debating matter. This is the end of this. I'll now call on the Hon Chris Bishop.Hon CHRIS BISHOP (Leader of the House): I move That urgency be accorded the continued second reading of the Legal Services Amendment Bill; the introduction and passing through all stages of the Pae Ora (Disestablishment of Māori Health Authority) Amendment Bill; and the Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Amendment Bill; and the passing through all stages of the Land Transport Management (Repeal of Regional Fuel Tax) Amendment Bill.There's been a bit of debate about urgency in the House and can I just say to the House the reason why the Government is seeking this urgency motion is to progress the necessary stages of our 100-day plan. The coalition parties collectively campaigned on repealing the Māori Health Authority not because we have an objection to improving Māori health outcomes—in fact quite the converse—but we campaigned on it because we don't think a giant new bureaucracy is the right way to go about doing that. We also campaigned on repealing the Auckland regional fuel tax. The National Party—and I think I'm right in saying that the ACT Party said the same thing—at two successive election campaigns sought a mandate from the New Zealand people to repeal the Auckland regional fuel tax going all the way back to early 2018 when it was introduced. And news flash for the Opposition: at the election in October last year that mandate was delivered by the New Zealand people and we have pulled together our 100-day plan and we are now proceeding to implement it.Members opposite cry crocodile tears about urgency because I've sat where they sit for six years and I realise it's grim times and I know exactly what they are going through. Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour): Mr Speaker point of order. I refer you to Speakers' rulings 14/3 14/4 and 14/5 around the need for reasons for moving urgency and I won't invite you Mr Speaker to reflect on whether or not Mr Bishop's moving of this motion is in the spirit of those Speakers' rulings given that such a motion is not debatable. He is introducing debatable material into this he is failing to actually fulfil his job to give specific reasons for the bills; rather he's attacking the former Government the Opposition for actions that he believes have been undertaken. That is not within the spirit of moving an urgency motion.Hon CHRIS BISHOP (Leader of the House): Mr Speaker point of order.SPEAKER: I have been listening to the contribution or the reasons being given by the Hon Chris Bishop who now may want to participate in the—point of order is it?Hon CHRIS BISHOP: I'll speak to the point of order and say I think that's fair enough. I'll bring it back a bit.SPEAKER: Yeah well thank you very much for your generosity in that regard. I was going to direct you that way. Carry on.Hon CHRIS BISHOP: The very simple reason for urgency is that the coalition parties sought at the election a mandate to implement these policies. Two of them—in fact all three bills in this urgency motion—Hon James Shaw: Point of order. I mean it is interesting hearing his justification for the over-use of urgency but given that it is not a debatable motion if he is going to make those points we do feel that we ought to have the ability to respond to those points because they're not valid.SPEAKER: Well the problem is that Standing Orders don't provide for that. I recall at the time that the Standing Orders Committee made the determination that there should be reasons given with no debate. I opposed that at the time. I wasn't listened to. I'm now obliged to follow what Standing Orders require of us. I would ask Mr Bishop to conclude his commentary as quickly as possible.Hon CHRIS BISHOP: The next point I was going to make is that all three of these bills are repeal bills—in other words they wipe from the statute book bills that the Parliament passed. Many of them have been through select committees previously. The Government considers urgency is more than justified in this case and we therefore move the motion.CHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green—Auckland Central): I seek leave of the House for a debate laid down immediately on the Government's use of urgency.SPEAKER: Well we're actually in the middle of considering a motion so you might want to think about putting that at a future point. Procedurally we now need to go to the vote.