Jones Shane: Royal Succession Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeJones Shane: Royal Succession Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11454. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon SHANE JONES (Labour):Tēnā tātou katoa. I join my colleagues on this side of the House in saying we will support this Royal Succession Bill going to the Justice and Electoral Committee. Hopefully while it is at the select committee we will hear some submitters remind Parliament why it is important that we emulate what this party sought to achieve by ruling out any further fresh challenges via our judicial system up to the Privy Council. This bill although it actually seeks congruence with other members of the Commonwealth that have as their Sovereign the current Queen of England Queen Elizabeth II is also a timely reminder that over time this set of institutional arrangements will not last just as the Privy Council has been replaced by the Supreme Court.But one of the great obstacles that stand in the way is ensuring as we move forward with addressing anomalies addressing anachronisms—which this bill does do not theleast of which is banning people who practise the Roman Catholic faith. I suppose that goes back to King Henry VIII who as you would recall became the supreme leader of the Church of England. I would like to say that my tribe was—I suppose “colonised” is the right word. It was evangelised by the Church Missionary Society so we are Anglicans although our relations in Hokianga fell under the spell of Bishop Pompallier when he turned up for the Treaty of Waitangi resplendent in all his vestments etc. But we have remained faithful to the Church of England.I should just recite a little history for the other side of the House. King Henry tired of Catherine and then had the misfortune to fall into the arms breasts and various other parts of the anatomy of Catherine’s lady-in-waiting. That was Anne Boleyn. Actually there is a play on in Auckland dealing with the wiles of Anne Boleyn. Of course at the end that sort of all went to her head and she lost it. That saw Jane Seymour rise to the occasion. Of course Jane Seymour then after a coupling—probably an illegal one if you look at it from the Roman Catholic Church’s point of view—led to Edward. Edward however was the youngest sibling of Elizabeth the Virgin Queen. Various racy histories say that that is not entirely correct but that is another matter. Of course the first-born was Mary and she sort of pined endlessly for her mother Catherine.Hon Trevor Mallard: Hell of a whakapapa this one.Hon SHANE JONES: Yes. So I just want to demonstrate as someone who is looking forward to an eventual republican evolution that it should never be said by those make-believe monarchists over there that we are kūware or that this Māori does not know the whakapapa of the Anglican Church. Knowing a thing or three about the dangers of wahines myself I cannot imagine what the hell possessed him to have six wives but that is another matter. I have no intention despite recent behaviour to emulate that.Naturally we will support this. It is a timely reminder that this is part of our heritage. Heritage is not static; it evolves. I cannot be quite as pointed as Mr Little was because I certainly have a little affection for the current Queen. But the notion that Camilla should arrive at Waitangi and be welcomed by Hone Harawira is probably quite suitable actually—probably quite suitable. But I just cannot imagine embracing Charlie and his hoa rangatira as the new King and Queen of Aotearoa. That may be an issue for the mokopunas and children. Of course then it will go down to the current poster girl but I will not be quoted in Kaitāia by my mother and her generation saying anything destructive about Kate or the one in the puku.Let me come back to the notion that a piece of legislation should validate or invalidate marriages. I just hope that there are no parliamentarians in the House requiring such statutory interventions. Perish the thought.Hon Trevor Mallard: There was a county clerk who slipped his own divorce into a local bill.Hon SHANE JONES: Ha ha! I only fear that that was not John Carter. David Lange told very sort of royal stories rude stories about that fellow Northlander of mine John Carter. But anyway let Rarotongans deal with him for the moment until the poor Ngāpuhis the hapless Ngāpuhis have to deal with him. I understand he is coming back to stand against my friend Mr Wayne Brown—brown in name red in disposition and blue in temper. But anyway that is for another day.We will support this bill. We do not actually support some of the sentiments on the other side of the House. There is a big Māori agenda in terms of where royalty actually goes; I will leave Tainui to talk about their own royal problems. I am a Ngāpuhi so we can never agree. We are probably born to be republicans through the ringa kaha. However this is necessary. It seems somewhat incongruous to the modern functioning of this House but we cannot allow this House or our institutions to be completely cutadrift from Queen Victoria her whakapapa the Treaty and the rights and responsibilities that we have inherited by dint of our Judaeo-Christian ethic and Westminster parliamentary democracy which we have received and must be proud and honest stewards of in our time.I do not know whether or not this bill will capture the imagination of the young people as an earlier National Government member referred to; he must have different young people in his area because the young people of Kaikohe are not talking about this. The young people of Kaitāia over the weekend were talking about grassroots rugby. Unfortunately the word “grass” has a different meaning the further north you go. So—Hon Trevor Mallard: It’s a secret word.Hon SHANE JONES: I could not possibly comment—I could not possibly comment. John Carter has left the House. That would be something more appropriate to be delivered by my fellow Northlander and erstwhile colleague John Carter. I just feel that to suggest that the young people are somehow going to race forward and embrace these amendments is an exaggeration. We are doing it by dint of our responsibilities as parliamentarians and to support the Government of the day. After all we are Her Majesty’s loyal Opposition.I have no doubt that it is important however that congruency be achieved because I am quite confident that before the next election the current Prime Minister will receive a knighthood and not lead that party. He will not want to lead that party into Opposition. Well it is kind of related because we call the Opposition “Her Majesty’s loyal Opposition”. OK I will take that hint. I cannot really say much about Roman Catholics and I do not want to for fear of alienating most of the Christchurch MPs so I do not want to say much in that regard.But as I said we will tautoko the bill. It does not represent where the imagination and the spirit of the rank and file Kiwi are today but it is a part of our parliamentary heritage. In that sense I hope not to sit on the select committee but look forward to hearing what might come to that select committee. Kia ora tātou katoa.