Youth MPs accuse government of 'censoring' them, ministry says otherwise
Photo:
RNZ / Alexander Robertson
The protocols followed for this year's Youth Parliament are the same as previous years, the Ministry of Youth Development says after accusations of censorship.
However, the email sent to one Youth MP carries the subject line "changes required", and stated the ministry "have had to make some changes".
Some of the Youth MPs involved say they will not be suppressed and the issue has fuelled the fire to make their voices heard.
The Labour Party has criticised the approach taken after
some Youth MPs were asked to remove parts of their speeches
, because some of their speech lacked political neutrality by criticising "this government".
Changes recommended included the removal of general mentions of the Treaty Principles Bill, funding for Māori and Pasifika, and Pay Equity. Speeches about "youth voice" and "freedom of speech" were also edited.
In a written statement, Ministry of Youth Development general manager John Robertson said the same protocol had been followed as was used in 2022, and the feedback provided on the Youth MPs' speeches was "generally focused on supporting them to convey their arguments clearly and effectively, and in keeping with the non-partisan approach of Youth Parliament".
"We also advised some Youth MPs that changes were required to their speeches to avoid putting themselves at risk. Youth MPs are not protected by parliamentary privilege. This means young people could be held liable if the contents of their speech raise concerns around defamation, copyright, privacy, contempt of court, or broadcasting standards.
"However, as noted above, the final decision about what they say is made by the Youth MPs."
Robertson said the ministry had in some cases told the Youth MPs "it is your decision around what your speech does and does not contain".
"From here, it is your choice how you use [our] feedback. You are the one stepping up to speak and we fully respect your right to shape your speech in the way that feels right to you," it said.
However, the email RNZ has seen did not include such a statement.
The ministry confirmed it had provided feedback to "about half of the 80 young people who will deliver speeches", and that they were shifting from the approach used in 2019 and 2022 of livestreaming the speeches to instead sending the recordings to the participants after the event.
This was "due to resourcing constraints... the participants are welcome to share this footage with others, and online", the ministry said.
Minister for Youth James Meager said the speeches were not censored.
"We do not censor the speeches of Youth MPs. We provide feedback, and in some cases suggest changes for them to consider, but we have been clear to all Youth MPs that they make the final decision about the content of their speech."
He provided a written statement, much of which matched the ministry's statement word for word.
Minister for Youth James Meager.
Photo:
RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
However, the Youth MPs spoke to reporters at Parliament with one - Thomas Brocherie, a spokesperson for Make it 16, a group pushing for a voting age of 16 - said the approach taken to the speeches was diluting the value of the Youth Parliament.
"We have been told to not argue on either side of contentious issues such as the pay equity reforms or the Treaty Principles Bill for the excuse that they are current topics in the current Parliament. This is not just illogical, it is censorship," he said.
"We cannot say we value democracy unless we actually show and prove we value democracy. Silencing the stakeholders of the future does not value democracy."
Another Youth MP Nate Wilbourne, a spokesperson for Gen Z Aotearoa, said rangatahi were being silenced and censored.
"We've been told to soften our language, to drop key parts of our speeches and to avoid criticizing certain ministers or policies. This isn't guidance. This is fear based control."
Brocherie said the emails being titled "changes required" was "not at all a suggestion, that is blatant editing, they want us to change something to suit their purpose, to suit their agenda".
Youth MP Lincoln Jones said they were provided with "a PDF of edited changes... delivered to our inbox, and that was the expected requirement, that we speak that speech".
"It's honestly like they've gone through with it with a microscope to find any little thing that might be interpreted wrong against, I guess, the current government."
Some of them sent responses to the ministry asking for clarification about the changes.
"And what did we get? An automatic copy and pasted reply that is not at all in the principles of what Youth Parliament is," Jones said. "They claim to listen to us, they claim to want to uplift us, they send us an automatic copy and pasted response on the thing we have three minutes to speak about. That's not good enough."
He said the experience had encouraged him even further to put himself forward to become an MP.
"It honestly fuels that fire within me, and I think for all of us to put it out there and to make our voices heard."
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
29 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Leadership rumour laughed off as Willis and Sepuloni clash
Minister of Finance Nicola Willis. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone You can listen live to RNZ's political panel on Morning Report at 8am every Wednesday. Analysis - Finance Minister Nicola Willis' seven interruptions in 30 seconds is a targeted attack on Labour's rumoured capital gains tax policy reminiscent of Sir John Key's "show me the money" moment. But the strategy this early is not the slam dunk Key's jibe - less than a month before the 2011 election - was hailed as by columnists. Speaking on Morning Report' s political panel, opposite Labour's deputy Carmel Sepuloni, Willis interrupted her opponent to ask - six times - how Labour would pay for its promises, with a distinct seventh interruption half way through for good measure. Labour's promises at this point are, however, only promises to reveal policy at some point including a tax policy before the end of the year, which could explain how other promises would be paid for. This takes some sting out of the Finance Minister's criticism, but also leaves Labour without an effective way to combat it. The panel started with host Ingrid Hipkiss asking about Willis' recent trip to London. "If we're really quiet, Carmel, do you think we'll be able to hear the gentle whispers coming that we may be speaking with New Zealand's next prime minister?" she said, referring to a social media post by a former gossip columnist Willis had laughed off the previous day as coming from "an exuberant fan". Sepuloni was quick to emphasise the rumour of division, saying "the conversations around rolling the leadership really ramped up" during the London trip last week, Labour Party Deputy Leader Carmel Sepuloni and Labour Leader Chris Hipkins. Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver Willis again laughed the suggestion off, saying a leadership spill was "not on the cards" and suggesting that while plenty were quick to criticise, "every now and then, there's a fan who's just as exuberant in the other direction, and that's all there is to it". She said the trip had been "fantastic" and allowed her to speak lenders the government was borrowing from, and "they can see that we're a sensible government, doing the right things to manage the public finances, they back our plan". Sepuloni said Willis needed to recognise "much of that debt has actually been built up under her watch". "They decided to give out tax cuts that they were told were unaffordable and give tax breaks to places like landlords, 2.9 billion to landlords, tax breaks to the tobacco industry. I think New Zealanders are questioning the priorities of this government." Hipkiss asked Sepuloni the inevitable question about what Labour would do, leading to the following exchange with Sepuloni talking over Willis' interjections: Sepuloni: Our priority would certainly be on what I've mentioned already. We need support Willis : How would you pay for it? Is the question. Sepuloni : need suport for New Zealanders to get into work.... Willis : How would you pay for it? Sepuloni : Well, we certainly wouldn't be giving tax breaks.... Willis : How would you pay for it? Sepuloni : ... value of 2.9b ... Willis : so you wouldn't give tax relief to people struggling. Sepuloni : to landlords, our focus would be on work ... Willis : how would you pay for it Sepuloni : ... and jobs. We wouldn't have been pausing and ... Willis : How would you pay for it? Sepuloni : ... and ending up with 18,000 fewer jobs in the ... Willis : How are you going to pay for it? Sepuloni : ....construction industry. It's about choices Nicola, and your government have made choices that are completely out of step with what New Zealanders want. Willis : Okay so she gave a long answer, and this is exactly Labor's problem. They want to promise everyone everything, and they will not front up with how they want to pay for it, because the way they want to pay for it is putting new taxes on an economy that is already struggling. The discussion soon veered back to the coalition's approach, with Willis again highlighting the crackdown on local councils' spending and the government's "concerns" about keeping food prices under control. "The last government attempted some reforms in that area. It's pretty clear they're not delivering enough. So we are working hard on what the next steps are," she said. Sepuloni came in with an interjection of her own - Labour's frequent refrain that the government has been unable to find a single family receiving the maximum $250 a fortnight from the FamilyBoost scheme. Willis had to rework the scheme after it was revealed to be less effective than expected . "This was a government that promised thousands of families $250 extra a fortnight through their FamilyBoost scheme and now they can't identify one family who have received it," Sepuloni said. "I am just going to correct a factual error there," Willis said, "because there are more than 60,000 families that have received a cheque - money into their bank account." "Everyone who has applied has received their full entitlement, and actually now there's a human reality to that I saw at Parliament a couple of weeks ago, an Uber driver, he stopped me, he said 'I want a photo with you, because that family boost money has made such a difference to my family'." It was unclear what "error" Willis was referring to: many families are receiving some funding but no evidence has been forthcoming of any families being eligible for the maximum amount under National's tax policy from the last election. "I'm glad you had another exuberant fan," Hipkiss observed, "let's move on to teachers and correcting factual errors". Public Service Minister Judith Collins corrected herself on Tuesday after claiming last week striking teachers were earning an annual salary of "about $140,000", far more than what most would earn . "It's actually really disappointing that we've got a government who have been pointing the finger at our teachers and blaming them for going on strike when actually this is off the back of them having their pay equity claims pulled, and now what we're seeing is that they've been offered a 1 percent [annual] increase," Sepuloni said. "We're just saying 'look (secondary teachers' union) PPTA, represent your workforce fairly, come and do your job which is negotiate with us, let's strike a deal," Willis replied. "We value teachers very, very much. They are going to be the key to us lifting educational achievement in our schools. They're going to be the key to getting a replacement to NCEA working and we want to negotiate with them to get a fair deal." Collins last week billed the strikes - taking place today - as a "political stunt". On Tuesday she said it was a case of mixing her messages up a bit.
RNZ News
29 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Police receive 1000 submissions over Canterbury changes
Superintendent Tony Hill Photo: RNZ / Nathan Mckinnon Police have received around one thousand submissions, including petitions, on a controversial proposal to restructure Canterbury staffing . The changes could see some roles disestablished to focus on road policing and 24/7 hubs created in Rangiora and Rolleston. Federated Farmers has expressed its outrage, organising two public meetings in North Canterbury and Selwyn. Police are now working their way through the feedback, which includes 200 staff submissions and 800 from the public or external parties. District commander superintendent Tony Hill says the feedback shows police need to take more time examining some aspects of the proposal. Earlier, Hill said the proposal was designed to focus on core police services and meeting demand now and in future. He accused Federated Farmers of scaremongering over the proposal , which was a "refocusing" rather than a reduction in sworn officers. Some roles would be disestablished, but those officers would be encouraged to apply for other roles, he said. However, hundreds of North Canterbury residents turned out to a fiery meeting in Culverden , angry about the proposal to remove the town's two police officers. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Invercargill mayoral candidates pitch back to basics approach ahead of election
Invercargill will soon have a new mayor. Photo: RNZ / Nate McKinnon Invercargill's mayoral candidates are pitching a back to basics approach ahead of this year's election. For the first time since the 1990s an incumbent was not standing for reelection, and instead ratepayers have eight candidates to chose from, including sitting councillors and fresh faces. The Southland Business Chamber hosted a lively debate in Invercargill on Tuesday night to help community members decide who they want to lead the city. With the rubber chicken of shame for those who overran their time and some favourite pie chat, the debate had a healthy mix of tough questions and meaty answers. Candidates tackled questions covering council amalgamation, water reforms, rates caps and project spending. Sitting councillor Alex Crackett said she wanted the basics done right to keep costs down. "I've heard from pensioners who are having to choose between buying a loaf of bread or paying for their rates. This is not the Invercargill that we should accept," she said. "We need steady, experienced hands on the basics - the roads, water, waste, because our strong foundations give us room to dream bigger." Current deputy mayor Tom Campbell backed the investments and projects that helped to revitalise the city, but said they did inevitably feed into rates. Now his priorities were affordability of rates and finding efficiencies in the council. "The new building phase has to be over. There are infrastructure projects to do, but that has to be it for capital works funded by ratepayers," he said. Current mayor Nobby Clark has opted to stand down, watching from the audience instead on the stage last night. The mayor's brother, Andrew Clark, copped flak for standing for the top job in both Tasman - where he currently lives - and the southern city. He was after responsible, disciplined spending. "Without hesitation as your new mayor, I would find an alternative water supply as a priority for Invercargill," he said. "You are completely solely dependent on the river. In the event of an earthquake or severe drought, there would be real problems in the community." Sitting councillor Ian Pottinger said he wanted to help the city's citizens and has an open door policy. The council's two mana whenua representatives can only vote on committees before votes go to the council, but he would like to see some changes. "I would give each committee delegated authority that made the decision, it stands, and then their vote has purpose," he said. "I do like the way it is now with both the reps. I think it works great." Sitting councillor Ria Bond also wanted to focus on the essentials and cutting back costs that were not core council business. "I know the frustration when councils choose vanity projects or short term wins that leave ratepayers paying the price for decades," she said. "As mayor, my focus will be clear and it will be disciplined." Tom Morton was not onboard with amalgamating councils, and said he had gone door to door to speak with people "Speaking to urban people, not rural people because we're in an urban environment and urban people have different needs to the rural people," he said. "Just to save money is not a good reason. We need to keep Invercargill for Invercargill and worry about what's happening in Invercargill." Stevey Chernishov, who used part of his introduction to spruik his men's conference, said the city was spending too much on businesses from outside the region and he wanted money to circulate around the district. "If you want a personality for Invercargill city, if you want somebody who's going to smile and challenge the system that's currently in place, I'm here to tell you that what we need to do is build a localised and enterprising southern New Zealand," he said. Gordon McCrone, whose party website has content described as disturbing and dangerous , was barred from the debate. The website has since been taken down. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
