web analytics
The Standard

So what happened here? PPL vote

Written By: - Date published: 10:38 pm, May 28th, 2014 - 31 comments
Categories: labour, maori party, national, workers' rights - Tags:

There has been some questioning of the vote for the second reading of the Paid Parental Bill Second Reading tonight.   The Nats cast the Maori Party votes for them, saying they were againts the Bill.  Sue Moroney stood up and made a point of order saying she had an email saying the Maori Party were giving their 3 votes for the Bill. [h/t Blue Leopard on open mike]

Blue Leopard said:

Something very odd just occurred in Parliament in the vote of Sue Moroney’s paid parental leave bill. Sue explained that Flavell is away because the birth of his first grandchild is occurring and National didn’t allow him to vote for this bill in absence on compassionate grounds. This was dubious enough of National, however….

Straight after Moroney had relayed this it was time to vote and when it came to the Maori party vote a National member got up and voted the Maori Party as 3 votes against. In response, Moroney got up and tried to table an email saying that the Maori party was voting for the bill, this process, however, was delayed by the Speaker who got up and said he had to accepted the ’3 against’ vote, and relayed that they had to take the word of whoever said it, because the person must realise it is extremely serious to meddle with another party’s vote.

This is the video of Moroney’s speech.  At the end is the vote count and Grant Robertson and Moroney’s points of order querying the Maori Party vote.

Twitter is a buzz with this.

Journalist Katie Bradford tweeted:

National have voted for Maori Party as 3 vote opposed to paid parental leave, despite the party making it clear it supports the bill.

Metiria Turei posted a couple of tweets.

Tweet One:

Curious little huddle of National Ministers just outside the Chamber. Will Maori Party correct their vote on PPL? They have 30 mins.

Tweet two:

Apparently Pita Sharples was in the middle of that little Nat huddle. I sincerely hope Maori Party correct their vote tomorrow.

This is indeed a very strange happening, and,  if the National party whip did cast the Maori Party votes against their wishes, was it a mistake or deliberate?


One News reports:

Labour’s bill to extend paid parental leave has been unexpectedly shot down in Parliament tonight.

National cast the Maori Party’s three votes as being opposed to the measure which would extend paid parental leave to 26 weeks.

However, Sue Moroney, the Labour MP behind the bill, says the Maori Party told her earlier today they would support the bill.

She said she is unsure if there was a late change of heart or if National made a mistake.

The issue looks likely to be addressed in Parliament tomorrow.

NZ Herald reports:

Mr Mallard later claimed the Maori Party would be trying to get the vote “corrected.” He said the Maori Party had been told by the Government that the Moroney bill was a confidence issue.

But Leader of House Gerry Brownlee denied that tonight.

National has filibustered on the Moroney bill to ensure the debate on it was delayed until after the Budget on May 16.

National extended paid parental leave in the Budget from 13 weeks to 18 weeks, starting next year.

So it’s looking possible that the Maori Party changed their vote at the last minute – possibly under pressure from the National government.  Shameful.

31 comments on “So what happened here? PPL vote”

  1. One Anonymous Bloke 1

    The speaker thinks Twitter might tarnish his non-existent reputation?

  2. Skinny 2

    Well the Maori Party can still have their vote corrected if there was a misunderstanding? Personally I believe if the vote stands as it is that this is par for the course for the Tory-Maori Party. Over the last 2 terms we have seen them vote for many terrible Bills which disadvantage poor Maori.

    • Colonial Viper 2.1

      Yep – I think the Maori Party MPs by being absent yesterday and now not pushing for any correction of the vote, has actually found a face saving way of supporting their Tory mates.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.1

        “Suffice to say that it was a mistake and we’re going to look to rectify it…”

        Te Ururoa Flavell

        • Colonial Viper

          Cool. Let’s see what the action actually is over the next 48 hours.

      • Skinny 2.1.2

        Which brings me to the point of the stupidity of the Labour Party by openly supporting the Maori Party, with their intention to cut the Left bloc’s throat by openly contesting the Maori seat Favell’s currently holds. There is no doubting that this seat is a 2 horse race between the incumbent Favell, and Mana’s Annette Sykes. A far different case to Hone’s seat up the far North, which is shaping to be a close affair between Hone & Labour’s Kelvin Davis.

        • blue leopard

          +100 Skinny. Good point.

          Labour needs to do this. Any competitive drive must channeled toward a single-minded focus against National/Rightwing, not fellow left-wing parties.

          The first goal is to boot National out. That is the goal to focus on. This is not rocket science it is very very simple. Don’t over-complicate. Think: ‘what can we do to maximize the possibility of National being booted out.’

  3. Tangled_up 3

    Shame on the Maori Party.

  4. wyndham 4

    This was no misunderstanding! I watched the debate and it was interesting to see Flavell suddenly “called away” ironically, considering the subject under debate, to the birth of a mokapuna.
    Sharples also came under the camera’s eye as he scuttled past the Nat that happened to be speaking – – – it appeared he was required to attend some discussion on MP voting ?
    If Upton deliberately gave an incorrect vote for the MP, is this a serious offence under those extraordinary so-called rules of the House? Or just an innocent mistake? Yeah. Right!

  5. Pasupial 5

    This Fairfax article has Flavell calling this vote theft an “administrative error”.


    {though there seems to have been a bit of a subediting error with phrase; “be with his daughter who was in labour, showed they “weren’t family-friendly”.”, given its own paragraph and not seeming to fit with the previous one or really anywhere else}

    I understand that Flavell had to be out of parliament to be with family. What were Sharples’ and Turia’s reasons for being absent from the vote? Why was; “Upston [who] blocked a move to have Flavell’s vote counted early on compassionate grounds”, proxy for the Maori Party vote?

  6. Mary 6

    Just wait to see what lolly the Maori Party will be claiming to have achieved from their mates as “proof” they’re getting “gains” for Maori just before the election. Watch to see puppet Sharples boasting shortly that the Maori Party has “forced the government” to do something like “a report into the gap between Maori and non-Maori achievement in education” or “an analysis of high Maori prison populations”. Bring on the election because whichever way it goes the Maori Party will be gone.

  7. adam 7

    And them [* deleted] strike again.

    [Karol:deleted unaccetable language]

    • Jim 7.1

      Adam that is a racist comment. I am surprised that this comment got through.

    • thatguynz 7.2

      Fucking muppet… Try for at least a semblance of decency.

    • Kaplan 7.3

      Agreed Jim. Although it could stand as a testament to adam, I’d like to see this expunged please moderators.

    • Kaplan 7.4

      Thank you Karol.

    • Colonial Viper 7.5

      If the Left keeps censoring terms with historical political relevance it shouldn’t be surprised that no one understands the history or importance of the Left movement.

      • Jim 7.5.1

        Yes terms like the one used by Adam are of historical significance. People like Martin Luther King died so that terms like the one used are no longer accepted by society. It is not the left or right that used this term but the KKK.

        • adam

          So now I’ve been called a racist, and a member of the KKK. Interesting, so I must have a lot of self hate going on ah Jim? I’m pretty sure the KKK would like to lynch me – but then again as the expert Jim – please do tell.

      • Bill 7.5.2

        Can’t remember the terminology used to differentiate those campesinos the masters held closer , but the same hierarchy of favour was present in Spain prior to the revolution. For what it’s worth, I don’t think such terms should be censored insofar as they speak to a historical and systemic truth that still has relevance today.

  8. Bob 8

    “So it’s looking possible that the Maori Party changed their vote at the last minute – possibly under pressure from the National government. Shameful.”
    While we are making wildly unfounded suggestions, I also heard that one of the secret donors to David Cunliffes trust were possibly the leader of the Skin Heads based on the promise Cunliffe would restrict foreign immigration and another was possibly Al Gore, in return Labour would give one of his 14 ‘Green Tech’ companies a massive Government contract should they win the election. Shameful.

    Radio Live is now reporting that the votes were a clerical error on the part of the Maori Party.

    • Colonial Viper 8.1

      Does that mean the votes will now be counted the other way. And will a re-vote be necessary to enact that.

    • Kaplan 8.2

      ‘were a clerical error on the part of the Maori Party.’

      Is it really plausible that a ‘clerical error’ that was a complete reversal of the Maori parties stated position was simply not noticed?

      Maybe someone with more knowledge of how these votes are executed could clarify this?

      • Tracey 8.2.1

        maybe a typo in the wording to the proxy?

      • blue leopard 8.2.2

        Good question Kaplan

        ….then again with a ruling party where black is white, bad is good and crisis is no crisis, perhaps the ‘clerical error’ was actually a comprehension one; National appear to have a real problem in discerning the difference between things especially between polar opposites, especially when wishful thinking is involved on their part.

  9. Tracey 9

    Given the nats will veto the bill, if the mp changes its vote and it passes, why would upston deliberately do this? Nats cant be scared that exercising the veto will reflect badly on them can they??

  10. North 10

    One does wonder why a half competent whip would not query a complete about face with the proxy giver. Specially since all we hear from the mongrel National Party is that they’re the scions of transparency and decency. Sleight of hand crooks is what they are. Even the Tory leaning TV3 Reid Poll says so. Forget about any other sort of ‘….’gate’. Cumulatively this government is ‘Shuddergate’ for New Zealand.

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Public service advertisements by The Standard

Current CO2 level in the atmosphere