Latest news with #budgetDebate
RNZ News
23-05-2025
- Politics
- RNZ News
Labour accuses govt of trying to avoid scrutiny by passing bill under urgency
Usually Parliament would not sit beyond midnight. File photo Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone A post-Budget debate about changes to an accommodation supplement unusually dragged on into the early hours of Saturday morning, as opposition parties tried in vain to block the changes. The House sat under urgency to debate a dozen bills, when a vote on the Social Assistance Legislation (Accommodation Supplement and Income-related Rent) Amendment Bill was called at about 11.30pm. Usually, Parliament would not sit beyond midnight, but once a vote commences, it cannot stop without leave. That leave was sought by Labour MP Kieran McAnulty, but denied by government MPs. Instead, opposition parties filed several minor amendments, dragging out the proceedings. McAnulty accused the government of trying to avoid scrutiny by passing the bill under urgency. "There's no reason for this bill to go through under urgency, it's got nothing to do with the Budget really," he told RNZ. "They are going to try and save money from this bill to fill the gaps in their Budget. "It should go to select committee and New Zealanders should have an opportunity to have their say." "We saw this with the Pay Equity Bill recently and now they're doing it with this bill as well, and we oppose it. Many New Zealanders don't know it's happening, because it's getting rushed through." Under the change, every boarder a person has will be taken into account, when their accommodation supplement is calculated by Work and Income. Currently, only those with three or more boarders have their supplement reduced. McAnulty said more than 7000 people would be affected by the changes, which would reduce subsidies by roughly $100 a week. "We don't think it's a good idea for the government to be taking that sort of money away from people, so we're pretty keen to fight it, and that's why we put up a lot of amendments to try and improve the Bill, and to keep the debate going." Social Development and Employment Minister Louise Upston said the Bill addressed the inconsistent treatment between landlords who have renters and those with boarders. "I want to emphasise to the House that these changes will only affect those who receive board payments and not any housing subsidy paid to the boarder. It will only impact those people who are unfairly advantaged over those who receive another form of income. "Most people who receive housing subsidies will not be impacted by these changes," she told the House. "It just means that border number one and border two are treated in the same way that borders three, four and five are." The opposition also criticised how the process unfolded, with McAnulty saying the presiding officer should not have allowed a vote to be put to the committee. "If a member calls for a vote, they have to say it in a very specific way and, if they don't, then the the presiding officer shouldn't allow that to be put to the committee." A move to recall the Speaker to resolve the disagreement was blocked by government MPs. "Whatever way the Speaker decides, we respect and then we move on," McAnulty said. "There is a strong convention in Parliament that, if a member moves to recall the Speaker, that is not opposed and so, in this instance, the government opposed it twice, which goes against all conventions and is really disappointing, because ultimately, it means that the government can, once it gets into committee, shut down the opposition's ability to ensure that the rules are being followed." McAnulty said Labour was happy to own up to causing the late night at Parliament, but said the government should front on its decision not to recall the Speaker. "We're accountable for the number of amendments that we put forward and the delay in the debate, but it'll be very interesting to see if the government decides to front up, and explain why they wouldn't let the Speaker come and rule on that matter," he said. Leader of the House Chris Bishop told RNZ the proposed recall of the Speaker was "ridiculous". "You don't recall the Speaker over someone allegedly calling for a vote in slightly the wrong way." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
CTV News
23-05-2025
- Politics
- CTV News
Councillor's refusal to apologize renews concern about deteriorating civility in council chambers
Debates are expected and arguments are not uncommon, but a tense standoff between a pair of city councillors on Thursday was the latest example of the deteriorating decorum during committee meetings. The Budget Committee was debating a motion by Coun. Susan Stevenson and Coun. Paul Van Meerbergen seeking more information about the costs to install and maintain future bike lanes. Coun. Skylar Franke explained that the information is readily available to councillors without requiring a formal motion and was recently considered when Council approved the Mobility Master Plan (MMP). 'If we are looking for savings, we do see that there is a much more heavy burden (on taxpayers) from car infrastructure,' Franke argued. Van Meerbergen pushed back against Franke's suggestion. 'When you listen to some of the previous rhetoric trying to make the point that roads and cars cost more than bikes, you've really got to give your head a shake,' he said. 'It borders on the nonsensical when you hear some of these arguments. We need a better road system.' 052325_Van Meerbergen councillor city of London File - Councillor Paul Van Meerbergen in council chambers (CTV News London) Budget Chair Elizabeth Peloza halted Van Meerbergen after Franke objected. 'Calling my comments nonsensical is offensive, and I would appreciate an apology,' asserted Franke. But Van Meerbergen would not apologize. 'If you check the record, you'll see that I stated 'borders on the nonsensical'. I did not state the name of anybody, and I'll leave it at that,' he countered. Franke again demanded an apology, 'I do not engage in rhetoric. I share my feelings and opinions, and I do it without trying to offend anyone.' Van Meerbergen replied, 'Like the other councilor, I too engage in rhetoric. She engages in rhetoric all the time, to make these equivalencies between the cycling system and the road system.' After several tense minutes, Franke decided the budget meeting was more important than pressing the issue with Van Meerbergen. 052325_budget meeting London city councillor skylar franke Counciller Skylar Franke during the Budget Committee meeting on May 23 (Daryl Newcombe/CTV News London) 'In the interest of saving time for this committee. I will retract my request for an apology,' she stated. 'But I would hope that other members of council would see fit to choose their words wisely.' Shortly after the tense exchange, Stevenson lamented the deteriorating level of respect during debates. 'The diversity of opinion and thought is not something that I'm finding is here enough, as much as I would like to see it' she told colleagues. Stevenson and Van Meerbergen's motion was defeated (4-10). After the meeting, Peloza acknowledged the deteriorating decorum in council chambers and its impact on decision-making. 'If you really want an efficient meeting, choose your words wisely,' she advised. 'Some people perhaps prefer controversy, which might result in media coverage by several (news) outlets, which just leads to things being less efficient.' A year-and-a-half still remains in this council's term. 'When we share this space, the public is watching,' Peloza added. 'It's really important to hold ourselves to a (level) of decorum and professionalism that Londoners require of us.' The next meeting of the budget committee is June 11.
