Winston Peters apologises for calling Te Pāti Māori MP Tākuta Ferris a 'dickhead' in the House
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has apologised for calling Te Pāti Māori MP Tākuta Ferris a "dickhead" in the House.
Photo:
RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has apologised for calling Te Pāti Māori MP Tākuta Ferris a "dickhead" in the House, but is questioning whether the word is offensive.
The Speaker will review the incident, and report back to the House on Thursday.
Peters was answering questions from Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson on behalf of the Minister for Oceans and Fisheries, Shane Jones.
"Does he think it's hypocritical that last year Aotearoa pledged $16 million to the Global Fund for Coral Reefs, yet this year we've had the largest coral by-catch event in 15 years, dredging up to six tonnes of ancient coral from the sea floor?" Davidson asked.
"No such pledge was made by any such country as named by that questioner," Peters responded.
Peters has repeatedly bristled at other MPs referring to the country as Aotearoa. The Speaker, however, is
no longer hearing points of order over the use of the word
.
"Are you sure?" asked Ferris.
"Yes, I am positive. Unlike you, you dickhead," Peters responded.
The comment could be heard on the hot mic, and has been recorded in Hansard, the official record of things said in the House.
Ferris later raised a point of order.
"I've witnessed many times in this House disparaging comments being made between sides, and I'm quite sure that being called a 'dickhead' would fall in line with that tikanga of the House," he said.
The Speaker said he had not heard the allegation until Ferris brought it up, and encouraged Peters to withdraw and apologise.
Peters initially refused to apologise, arguing that Ferris had not raised the matter of offence. Ferris said he had taken personal offence, so Peters apologised.
"On the basis that when I was trying to get my thoughts together on the answer to Marama Davidson's questions, he was interrupting me. I apologise for calling him what I said he was."
As the matter was now in the hands of the Speaker, Peters would not answer questions about the incident on his way out of the House.
The New Zealand First leader is often critical about the language
used by other MPs
.
But in this case, he questioned whether the word he used was offensive.
"Is it bad language?" he asked reporters.
Peters instead said it was "wrong" that another MP was interfering with him being able to hear a question.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
2 hours ago
- Scoop
The House: Parliament's Reaction To The Middle East Crisis
Parliament's week began with an assurance that the safety of New Zealanders in the Middle East is the first priority. The tense situation in the Middle East, and indeed, intervention from one of our allies is something that no government could ignore, so when the sitting day began on Tuesday, the first item of business was not Question Time, but a Ministerial Statement from Foreign Minister Winston Peters, followed by debate and questions. Peters emphasised that the government's main focus amidst the tension in the region was to get New Zealanders out of harm's way. "The government is committed to supporting New Zealanders caught up in this crisis," Peters told the House. "Since the beginning of the conflict, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade has provided around the clock, 24/7 consular support to New Zealanders in Israel and Iran-and to their families back home in New Zealand - and will continue to do so." The statement was also peppered with lines advocating for three D words: diplomacy, de-escalation, and dialogue - treading a delicate line of not signalling outright support for either side, citing New Zealand's limited influence in the Middle East. Perhaps as a reaction to accusations of fence-sitting in recent days, Peters finished the statement by offering a list of what New Zealand does and does not want in the region. "We want de-escalation and dialogue. We want a two-state solution, with Israelis and Palestinians living in security and peace side-by-side. We want humanitarian aid to get to those who need it. Ultimately, we want peace. "What we do not want is New Zealanders in harm's way. We do not want ever escalating rounds of military action. We do not want a nuclear Iran. We do not want Hamas holding hostages and terrorising Palestinian and Israeli civilians alike. And we do not want Israel occupying Palestinian land. "Ultimately, we do not want another generation of young people in the Middle East, scarred by conflict, replicating the enmities of today and yesterday. This cycle of conflict, now generations old, must end." Statement benefits Ministerial Statements are used by the government to brief Parliament-and by extension the public-on an unfolding situation or event and explain the government's plan of action in response to it. They resemble a press conference wherein a minister delivers a statement, followed by questions or comments from MPs from other parties, generally spokespersons on the relevant topic. There is a tactical benefit for governments in getting in first and delivering a Ministerial Statement (instead of waiting for the Opposition to request an Urgent Debate), in that you can lead the messaging, and so try to control it. Equally though, there is a benefit to the Opposition from Ministerial Statements - because they are able to both make comments and ask questions. Ministerial Statements are more flexible than either Question Time or Urgent Debates. The Q & A Labour leader Chris Hipkins generally agreed with Peters' advocation for diplomacy over the conflict saying "there is much in the statement by our Minister of Foreign Affairs that I completely agree with". "We also welcome the possibility of a ceasefire. We also endorse the non-expulsion of ambassadors from countries who have taken actions that we disagree with. "If we want international diplomacy, if we want international dialogue, the role of diplomats has never been more important. We also want to acknowledge the New Zealand Defence Force deployment, and they go with our full support." Opinions diverged over whether New Zealand should have called the US strike on Iran a violation of the UN Charter, with Hipkins asking Peters whether the government believed the strike was in line with the Charter's clause on the right to self defence. Peter continued to tread a delicate line in his reply. "Unlike some, we wait till we get the evidence, and we've said it constantly day-after-day that instead of rushing to judgement, as we were asked this morning by the media, 'Has peace broken out?' - 'No,' we said, 'We're going to trust but verify,' and when we sought to verify we found that what they were saying by way of questioning was wrong. "And in this case, we're going to find out the facts as time goes by. There'll be some days yet-maybe sometime yet-before we can establish as to the immediacy of the problem and the level of deterioration with respect to the Iran position on gaining nuclear capability in terms of weapons." While Hipkins wasn't quite able to milk the committal he wanted from Peters, the two weren't especially adversarial in their exchange. That mood wasn't to last though, with Green co-leader Marama Davidson the other opposition MP to question the minister. After a speech advocating upholding the rules-based order, Davidson asked whether the minister would condemn the Israeli and American strikes on Iran. This question seemed to open the floodgates for a shouting match between the two parties, which perhaps is a lot easier with the new seating configuration in the House (New Zealand First are now close to the Greens, having swapped with ACT to allow the new deputy prime minister to sit next to the prime minister). A Ministerial Statement which began in a relatively statesmanlike fashion then morphed into a political tit-for-tat. "I have to say when it comes to the proxies for Iran that have committed so much terrorism and the loss of thousands of lives, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, with respect to Iran-when it comes to that, the Greens have been not a syllable, not a sound, not a mutter, not a murmur, no condemnation whatsoever," Peters said. "We've condemned all parties, and shouting out like that typically just disposes me to point to that member and say that member's only got one side, and, for the first time ever, she's mentioned Iran's people. Yes, Iran's people have been under 40 years of desperation." After a few minutes of back and forth and argy-bargy, Speaker Gerry Brownlee blew his metaphorical whistle. "Neither party here is displaying the sort of decorum that you'd expect out of Parliament. I refer both sides to Speaker's ruling 150/1, which means that neither side of the House has carte blanche to say whatever they like as a result of a ministerial statement." *RNZ's The House, with insights into Parliament, legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk.
RNZ News
2 hours ago
- RNZ News
'We were the silent victim' - children with parents in prison form new panel to help kids
Pillars youth panel Ngā Rangitira Apōpō pictured with Minister for Children Karen Chhour and Chief Children's Commissioner Claire Achmad. Photo: RNZ / Lillian Hanly Rangatahi impacted by a parent in prison say more needs to be done to ensure they are not punished for the crimes of their family members. They have formed a youth advisory panel - Ngā Rangatira Mō Apōpō - which met with Children's Minister Karen Chhour on the steps of Parliament. They handed her an open letter calling for the establishment of a whānau navigator role in criminal district courts to help those left behind when someone is sent to jail. About 20,000 children are impacted by whānau incarceration in Aotearoa. Children who - while they have done nothing wrong - are nonetheless punished. Courtney is one of them. "Me and my siblings lost both of our parents in the justice system at the same time and we didn't know till my older sister got a very unfortunate call from my family's lawyers and after that, our Nana was left in charge of us four kids. "We didn't have any support, we were left in the dark, we didn't even get to call our mum or dad or see them for ages." Four children's lives turned upside down. Pillars chief executive Tuhi Leef and Youth panelist Courtney. Photo: RNZ / Louise Ternouth Courtney is part of the Ngā Rangatira Mō Apōpō youth advisory panel run by Pillars, which gathered at parliament asking the government to do more to help those like her family. She said the rangatahi felt while their parents broke the law, it was not fair they were made to suffer due to uncertainty and a lack of support. "All the stories on that panel, all our backgrounds, it's all different, but we all can agree that we were the silent victim and it was horrible not knowing what was happening. "We all have forgotten what our parents looked like or what their voices sound like because of some lack of communication, yeah, I don't want that for anyone else." The letter presented to Chhour makes the case for a whānau navigator role in criminal district courts. Whānau navigators would help families to access wrap around services, and ensure they are informed of their rights around prison visits and communication with their whānau member in detention. Minister of Children Karen Chhour gathers with rangatahi impacted by a parent in prison at parliament. Photo: RNZ / Lillian Hanly A similar 'kaiarahi' role has been established in the Family Court and Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment Court. The panel is being supported by the group Pillars, which helps children and whānau of prisoners. Researcher and youth advocate Corrina Thompson said it was essential a whānau navigator was in place as soon as someone entered the judicial system. "Far too often, children are largely invisible from the point of arrest, right through court proceedings, through to prison and sometimes it's not until the person arrives in prison that the fact that that person is a parent with children is even known. "That point between a first appearance in court and prison can actually be a really long time for a lot of people months, in some cases years." Thompson noted that the government's tough-on-crime approach also impacted innocent families of offenders. "There is not just here in New Zealand, but internationally very strong evidence to say that if we want to get tough on crime, we have to get strong on housing, strong on support, strong on culturally responsive intervention prevention, rehabilitation not being tough or soft on people." Rangatira Mō Apōpō youth panel gather on parliament's steps to advocate for justice reform. Photo: Supplied / Pillars If there is government support for the proposal, Pillars and the youth panel are hoping a two-year pilot can be rolled out at district courts. Chief Children's Commissioner Claire Achmad has added her support to the idea. "Children with parents and whānau who are in prison they should be supported to fulfil their full potential and have all of their rights and needs met. "This particular advocacy and idea that Ngā Rangitira Mō Apōpō has brought forth is a tangible way for us to make these children visible and I really want to see the government take it forward and implement it in action." The Ngā Rangatira Mō Apōpō panel pitched a similar idea in 2022, which they said received support in principle from the previous Labour government. As for Wednesday's proposal, Chhour said it was still early days. "I'm not going to make any commitments to supporting the changes what I'm saying is, that I've met with them I've spoken with them... and there's room to have conversations about what that could look like." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Scoop
2 hours ago
- Scoop
Government Cuts Off Public Voice On Controversial Bill
Te Pāti Māori condemns the Government's decision to restrict oral submissions on the Regulatory Standards Bill to just 30 hours, calling it a deliberate move to shut down dissent. 'This is not a process. It's a purge. The Government is pushing a dangerous law and silencing those who would challenge it' said Te Pāti Māori Co-leader Rawiri Waititi. Despite repeated system failures and hundreds still waiting to be heard, Ministers have refused to extend the deadline. Māori voices, tangata tiriti, constitutional experts, legal academics, unions, and community advocates are being locked out. 'The Crown never intended to listen. They've built a submission process designed to collapse under pressure and it did. Now they're cutting the cord' said Co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer. 'The Regulatory Standards Bill hands sweeping power to unelected officials and opens the door for corporate veto over worker protections, environmental safeguards, and Te Tiriti rights.' 'This is the machinery of suppression dressed as reform. Thirty hours isn't public consultation it's an alibi' said Waititi. Te Pāti Māori is demanding an immediate extension to the submission timeframe and guarantees that every voice has the right to be heard. 'We will fight this Bill in Parliament, in the courts, and in our communities' said Waititi. 'A government that shuts its ears is not fit to govern.'
