Nicky Wagner’s “You are a bitch” redacted

Written By: - Date published: 6:30 am, July 10th, 2018 - 63 comments
Categories: Dr Deborah Russell, Nicky Wagner - Tags: ,

‘

Labour MP Dr Deborah Russell was “astounded” to learn that an insult spat at her in Parliament by National MP Nicky Wagner has been redacted from Hansard.

During the first reading of the Appropriation, and the Imprest Supply bills debate on 20 June this year, Dr Russell was meticulously dissecting a few of the many National Party lies about spending in health.  Hansard initially recorded . . . 

 

 

. . . showing Wagner interjecting “You are a bitch”. The revised Hansard still records other interjections made during Dr Russell’s speech but now omits Wagner’s insult.

[UPDATE:  Wagner’s insult has been put back in Hansard.]

The discrepancy was spotted by @reedflemming, who remarked on the MSM’s silence on this matter. “It’s surprising”, he said, “this hasn’t been covered by media: a direct, personal attack made in the House, and then edited out of Hansard – and not Nicky Wagner’s first time covering up her statements!” @reedflemming’s latter aside appears to be a reference to Wagner’s slithering attempt to reframe her statement that she would  “rather be out on the harbour” than hearing from disabled people. Or, perhaps, Wagner does have previous form when it comes to tweaking the official record?

Dr Russell tweeted, as part of the Twitter thread . . .

It should be noted that Dr Russell stopped her speech at the time of the insult and extracted a withdrawal and apology from Wagner. Assistant Speaker Adrian Rurawhe claimed not have heard the insult. And, Hansard stamps the word “draft” in great big letters on the record, presumably before it is actually printed and bound.  Yet, the video does – just – capture the insult. Listen carefully at about 4:50 in. Obviously, the Hansard scribe heard it. Now “WE” have too.

Parliament’s “What Is Hansard” web page, states:

“In New Zealand’s democracy, it is important you can access what is said by the people you’ve voted for and who represent you. Hansard’s work to report what politicians say helps make them accountable to you. It also makes sure that New Zealand’s democracy is accessible and transparent to everyone. […] Editors follow strict rules on what changes they can make to what MPs said in the chamber. This makes sure that Hansard is as close to verbatim (word for word) as possible.

Can MPs ‘improve” on what they said?

No. MPs are provided draft copies of their speeches, at the same time that the speeches are first published on the Parliament website. There are strict rules about what changes they can request. They can ask for things like corrections to a wrong fact or figure.

Strict rules also decide what changes Hansard editors can make to what is said in the House […]

Speaker’s Ruling 4/3 is very clear too, when it comes to editing Hansard: “Alterations of meaning or substance are not allowed.” Also, a precis of the Speaker’s Rulings states:

Because words are withdrawn does not mean that they are expunged from the record; they are still part of the debate and are recorded in Hansard. Once words have been withdrawn that is the end of them in the House and the House continues with its business without further reference to them, but that does not mean they cannot be reported by the news media.

If these rulings and the general principles stated on Parliament’s website are actually applicable and not PR, the record should never have been changed in the first place – BUT – does the application of the term “draft” mean the rules don’t apply? The Parliamentary website says of “drafts” “The pencil icon indicates a draft text which may be subject to correction; the text itself will carry a draft watermark.” Correction doesn’t mean redaction. 

Alas, this is not the first time Hansard has failed to accurately reflect all of what is said in Parliament. Going back over the Hansard for 5 December 2007 there seems to be no record of Michael Cullen accurately describing John Key as a “rich prick”, after Key insulted Helen Clark for not having children. It is recorded that Cullen did on the same day call Key a “scumbag”, a “coward” and a “braggart”. Bear in mind that the day before Key had directed one of his typically nasty remarks at Cullen’s wife. Cullen was seriously pissed off. Wagner, on the other hand, hurled her abuse in response to listening to the truth about National’s lies.

Funny what the MSM tells its consumers about, eh?

. My positive contribution to New Zealand is this big .

 

63 comments on “Nicky Wagner’s “You are a bitch” redacted ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. tc 1
    10 July 2018 at 7:51 am

    If only we could redact 3 terms of national gutting the NZ economy. The born to rule party show there ‘class’ yet again with the abhorrent Wagner.

  2. Hongi Ika 2
    10 July 2018 at 7:59 am

    Another “born to rule Tory ” ?

  3. cleangreen 3
    10 July 2018 at 8:07 am

    l done BLIP; 100% I missed that exchange in parliament.

    Those National MP’s are very toxic it seems, and so set on hateful actions that should be stopped.

    What right did the ‘clark’ have to dedact that hateful insults and her comments showing Wagner interjecting “You are a bitch”.

    The revised Hansard still records other interjections made during Dr Russell’s speech but now omits Wagner’s insult and this was wrongfully removed by the clark here and the speaker must restore the hansard records as a true and correct copy of the statements made in parliament.

    If not does this mean that any record under the hansard can be “doctored”

  4. Heather Tanguay 4
    10 July 2018 at 8:21 am

    What a piece of work Wagner is!

    • Cinny 4.1
      10 July 2018 at 8:51 am

      IKR… it’s like pot kettle black big time. Old wagner seems to be even more bitter after losing her electorate.

      The silence from the media about wagners words is deafening.

    • Grantoc 4.2
      10 July 2018 at 2:21 pm

      What faux outrage!

      You need to get over yourself Heather.

  5. R.P Mcmurphy 5
    10 July 2018 at 8:58 am

    it would be stepping over the bounds of propriety to name wagner but suffice to to say that it would be prefaced with ugly f*cking …….! and thats just her mind.

  6. ianmac 6
    10 July 2018 at 9:16 am

    A form of Dirty Tricks perhaps? Influence of the previous government’s “tinkers” alive and well?
    If Parliament was still sitting it could be raised during question time which would cause nasty Wagner to be further highlighted.

    • dukeofurl 6.1
      10 July 2018 at 2:13 pm

      No apologised and withdrawn so cant be raised further.

      What is likely to have happened , and as a long practice, someone in Bridges office has the job to clean up these sorts of things and as a matter of course the Hansard office has quietly accommodated them ( maybe other parties as well). remember that Key was used to a ‘word salad debating style’ and Trumpian regard for the facts. That all couldnt be left to stand and National had plenty of resources to look after any damage control

      You watch Wagner ‘disavow all knowlege’ tomorrow of how it happened

  7. John up North 7
    10 July 2018 at 9:32 am

    Firstly, I am in no way surprised at the lack of media recognition/attention to the character of this Nat MP. The media bias is ridiculous in it’s blatancy and the RW pr corps do a Stirling job of clouding that bias from the general public eg. Red Radio.

    Secondly, I am not surprised at the statement issuing from the Nat MP, as she has proven by previous statement to be a heartless seat warmer.

    My major issue and the most important one in this matter is the editing of the official record. That the Hansard is being “adjusted” after the fact, for what-ever reason is WRONG! Even if “both” parties in the debate agreed to a change in the record of what happened…………… it should never be allowed, we must be able to rely on the Hansard of being a true and correct record of parliamentary business.

    That this “adjustment” happened to remove the light shone on the NAT MP which showed her indulging in unsavory conduct speaks volumes to me about Nat party standard tactics, but to be aided in this by parliamentary clerks??????? WTF

    • Left_forward 7.1
      10 July 2018 at 11:05 am

      I’m completely with you John up North.

    • Draco T Bastard 7.2
      10 July 2018 at 11:44 am

      That this “adjustment” happened to remove the light shone on the NAT MP which showed her indulging in unsavory conduct speaks volumes to me about Nat party standard tactics, but to be aided in this by parliamentary clerks??????? WTF

      Yep. In this case the clerk that did it needs to be seriously reprimanded and the Hansard corrected to show the hate speech.

  9. Anne 9
    10 July 2018 at 10:26 am

    She said it alright otherwise why would she stand up and apologise when asked to do so? If it wasn’t true she’d be jumping up and down demanding an apology from Russell.

    The rwnjs will be arriving shortly denying she called Deborah Russell a bitch on the grounds nobody else heard it. They will claim that it was all an act on Russell’s part to grab attention to herself. 😉

    • mac1 9.1
      10 July 2018 at 11:16 am

      What language people use in insults can be very revealing of inner beliefs and prejudices. What do we make of Nicky Wagner’s choice of insult?

      I am pleased to see that the Hansard has been corrected to reflect what was said.

      I wonder what a scholarly study of Hansard’s interjections and recorded insults would reveal of the interjectors’ mind sets.

      Would they be as funny as Minister of Education, David Lange, who called out to the new spokesperson for Education, Lockwood Smith, who had lost some skin off his face from getting a gate-jumping manoeuvre wrong, “Huh, he’s been visiting kindergartens again!”?

      • dukeofurl 9.1.1
        10 July 2018 at 6:25 pm

        All your researchers need is to read Keys words recorded for posterity by Hansard and the live video versions.
        That would be fun as a meaningless jumble is turned into Churchillian prose.

        We can remember a separate instance when he later claimed to never provide a strong and unconditional promise to Pike River families but merely a weaker ‘if possible’ promise.
        The youtube sound track showed he did make a very strong promise verging on unconditional

    • james 9.2
      10 July 2018 at 2:29 pm

      But Anne – you are all OK calling other women a bitch – I see no reason why you would have issue with someone else using it.

      However I agree – it should never have been omitted by Hansard.

      • Robert Guyton 9.2.1
        10 July 2018 at 2:33 pm

        Anne’s not a politician in Government. What those people say is officially recorded and reflects upon them, as elected leaders of the community. It’s not the same thing, Confused James.

  10. You_Fool 10
    10 July 2018 at 10:30 am

    It appears the insult is now back in the hansard

  11. mary_a 11
    10 July 2018 at 10:46 am

    Wagner’s comment should not have been redacted from Hansard at all, even more so, that Dr Russell was not informed or advised of the fact, considering it was her statement Wagner responded to. And who instructed the clerk of the house to interfere with what can and what can not be recorded in Hansard?

    So is this redaction an indication of the future of Parliament from now on? Unfavourable statements from National MPs, or those that show the present Opposition in a bad light, will be removed, or worse not recorded at all?

    If so, NZers are being denied dutiful and honest service as is expected of the highest court in the land, Parliament.

    Even though a Labour led coalition is government, I have a sinking feeling Parliament is being influenced (possibly dictated to) by National filth!

    • Grantoc 11.1
      10 July 2018 at 2:29 pm

      If you check the reports on this incident, you will learn that the comment was redacted by a junior Hansard staff member, and has since been reinstated.

      From what I can tell Wagner apologised and withdrew her comment when asked to at the time, had nothing to do with its redaction and was fine about it being reinstated.

      It was a mistake by a junior parliamentary staff member. So get over it.

      • Robert Guyton 11.1.1
        10 July 2018 at 2:34 pm

        Wagner’s words weren’t “a mistake”. So get over it.

        • Grantoc 11.1.1.1
          10 July 2018 at 3:16 pm

          Robert

          The redaction was a mistake by a junior staff member is my point.

          Wagner owned the comment and apologised for it. End of story. This happens daily when parliament is sitting.

          The faux outrage demonstrated by several of your comrades on this matter is laughable.

          • dukeofurl 11.1.1.1.1
            10 July 2018 at 5:27 pm

            Mistake my a#%@

            Its a dirty politics under cover op. Cleaning the written record, erasing embarrassments. Too much has happened for it to be ‘coincidences’

            Why pick out a small comment from a sea of words for deletion, which in amazing coincidence would then match the ‘hard to hear’ on stored audio – but not that used for the transcription typists

          • Robert Guyton 11.1.1.1.2
            10 July 2018 at 6:10 pm

            Grantoc – the redaction doesn’t interest me greatly. I’m more focussed on Wagner’s comment; she said what in Parliament???
            “This happens daily when parliament is sitting.”
            Are you suggesting that MP’s say, “You are a bitch” on a daily basis? I hope you are not, though you are conflating. Politicians apologise, yes, often enough, but they don’t, so far as I know, audibly call each other “a bitch”. Am I wrong?

      • mary_a 11.1.2
        10 July 2018 at 3:15 pm

        Grantoc (11.1) … I do realise now the insult has been reinstated. However at the time of my comment and many others here, it was still a redacted statement.

        I very much doubt it was a “mistake” by a junior parliamentary staff member. Something only becomes a “mistake” when National gets caught out!

        • Grantoc 11.1.2.1
          10 July 2018 at 3:23 pm

          Mary

          Your final comment doubting that it was a mistake by a junior staff member and implying that somehow the Nats were able to influence the situation is a bit paranoic don’t you think?

          Hansard staff are employed by Parliamentary Services. Parliamentary Services ultimately report to The Speaker (One Mr Trevor Mallard). Can you really see Mallard allowing the Nats to have this kind of influence within an organisation that reports to him?

          • dukeofurl 11.1.2.1.1
            10 July 2018 at 5:30 pm

            Oh pleese. Informal net works in parliament abound, like any work place. When you want something done you go straight to to the ‘doer’, nothing to do with Mallard.

          • John up North 11.1.2.1.2
            10 July 2018 at 6:03 pm

            So a we are to believe a “junior parliamentary staff member” has the sole discretion to select and then “adjust” or “redact” any ol’ comment/s they feel like? I call bullshit! someone, gave direction, and the job was done!

            As dukeofurl said at 11.1.1.1.1

            “Why pick out a small comment from a sea of words for deletion, which in amazing coincidence would then match the ‘hard to hear’ on stored audio – but not that used for the transcription typists”

            We still need a big f*cken light blazing hard on this matter, to bring to light the saboteurs, booby traps and landmines lurking within the public service waiting to do their masters bidding and undermine this coalition govt. Hard enough to right the 9 years of poor management by the Nats without tools in place wanting to put spanners in the works.

  12. simbit 12
    10 July 2018 at 11:15 am

    I absolutely defend her right to call anyone a bitch…Free speech now!!

  13. adam 13
    10 July 2018 at 12:12 pm

    To try and get the official record expunged, wow the right in this country are turning into snowballs very fast.

  14. Ad 14
    10 July 2018 at 12:38 pm

    First piece of publicity the new member for New Lynn has generated in a year.

  15. Wensleydale 15
    10 July 2018 at 1:38 pm

    Every so often, the mask slips, and we see the real person behind the carefully massaged PR facade. Nice one, Nicky. You’ve basically confirmed what everyone suspected anyway.

  17. Stuart Munro 17
    10 July 2018 at 2:36 pm

    Give it a week or so and Bridges will be whining about a lack of civility.

    • Rob 17.1
      10 July 2018 at 8:02 pm

      He may but someone will draft it for him as a cliche
      He is incapable of thinking for himself or saying anything spontaneous unless an it is drafted for him

  18. BM 18
    10 July 2018 at 2:37 pm

    Who the fuck cares.

    Such trivial bullshit.

    • Tuppence Shrewsbury 18.1
      10 July 2018 at 2:40 pm

      Labour are Jealous that they didn’t think about it when they were furiously denying an 11.7bn hole in their figures.

    • Robert Guyton 18.2
      10 July 2018 at 2:41 pm

      I agree. Wagner though, comes out looking unpleasant. It’s a good airing of internal bile.

  19. Sabine 19
    10 July 2018 at 2:53 pm

    but but
    I thought Ncki Wagner is the nice one from that lot? Oh my where is the fainting couch.

  20. alwyn 20
    10 July 2018 at 3:02 pm

    Who is Dr Deborah Russell?

    Incidentally shouldn’t it be Trevor Mallard who should be getting the “Please Explain” request?
    The comment was apparently removed by some junior member of the Hansard team who reports, ultimately, to The Speaker.

    • McFlock 20.1
      10 July 2018 at 3:19 pm

      that’s the situation coming to light.

      So maybe wagner isn’t a coward in this instance, just a jerk who thinks calling people a bitch is part of her role in the legislature.

    • dukeofurl 20.2
      10 July 2018 at 4:18 pm

      Junior staffer – who likely has been doing ‘a favour ‘ for national Mps for a long time, there has been other exchanges in Hansard which arent as people remember or Youtube records.
      Theres a torrent of words in parliament why would this particular phrase stand out unless someone is queued to it?

      Im wondering if the ‘junior staffer’ is involved in ‘hushing’ the audio side of things as well.

      remember the recent fuss about ‘Silly girl’ No one could quite hear it on the audio as well – amazing coincidence to this similar situation

      • alwyn 20.2.1
        10 July 2018 at 6:36 pm

        “who likely has been doing ‘a favour ‘ ”
        Any evidence of that? Anything at all except your own over-heated imagination?

        “in ‘hushing’ the audio side”.
        Interjections are not printed in Hansard UNLESS the speaker replies to them. It is only then that any interjection will be reported. As Russell replied to it the interjection should not have been removed.
        Listen to the wild interjections from both sides of the House during Question Time. Then read the public transcript. The interjections, from both sides of the house are removed as a matter of course because the speaker ignored them.

        “remember the recent fuss about ‘Silly girl’”.
        Well yes. The only person who claimed to have heard this was a Speaker who is deaf in his ear on that side.
        The only one. Nobody else heard anything at the time and nobody who listened to the tapes afterwards did so either.
        But you know why don’t you? Somebody fiddled with the tape.
        Talk about a Conspiracy Theorist.

        • Robert Guyton 20.2.1.1
          10 July 2018 at 6:45 pm

          Nobody else admits to hearing “silly girl”, you surely mean, Alwyn. You like to be regarded as precise in what you say but there’s no way in the world you can know what you claim to know: “Nobody else heard anything at the time …”

  21. Anne 21
    10 July 2018 at 4:36 pm

    The Herald, presumably in an attempt to minimise Wagner’s use of the word “bitch”, has listed former and current MP’s use of the word bitch in the house.

    February 2015: Ron Mark about National’s Gerry Brownlee: “This is the Minister of Defence whose biggest whine and bitch was that he could not understand the acronyms.”

    • May 2007: Former National MP Chester Borrows in the anti-smacking bill: “although they may bitch and moan continually that all we do is bitch and moan at each other, on this occasion there has been consensus and there has been compromise.”

    • Hone Harawira, June 2006 on dog micro-chipping legislation: “We have seen National chasing votes on this issue like a bitch on heat, and, of course, we have been graced intermittently by the presence of New Zealand First’s very own poodle.”

    • June 2006: Ron Mark on dog micro-chipping: “When a cocky’s dog slips his leash on the farm and goes straying because a bitch down the road is on heat, it does not have its collar on.”

    • May 2006: Ron Mark after referring to National’s Simon Power as “bitching” on: “I withdraw the word; I did not mean to call Simon Power a bitch.”

    When Power objected, Mark responded: “I withdraw, if I have offended the member’s sensibility. “Bitch”, I would assert, Madam Speaker, is a female dog.”

    • December 2004: then Act leader Rodney Hide on the Aquaculture Reform Bill: “we have set up an incentive for one racial group in New Zealand just to bitch, whine, and complain to the Government.”

    Not one of them used it in the context of a bitch as in “a woman is a bitch” except “Cameron Slater” who was never an MP so what he’s doing on the list who knows.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12086472

    • BLiP 21.1
      10 July 2018 at 4:48 pm

      ‘

      Yep, definite minimisation by the MSM. Note how both Stuff and the Herald stories claim Wagner’s insult was delivered in “heated debate”. Watch the video and you will see there was nothing heated about the debate at the time and Wagner’s insult was delivered with calm, measured malice.

      • dukeofurl 21.1.1
        10 July 2018 at 5:38 pm

        Thats because they are writing the story from the same background ‘cheat sheet’ supplied by National press secs
        Watch Hosking tomorrow run the same version….heated blah blah… answering to Mallard…blah blah …they all do it…blah blah

      • John up North 21.1.2
        10 July 2018 at 6:09 pm

        Personally, I think the MSM are off on the wrong track………… probably on purpose.

        The BIG Deal is not about what Wagner said, but the Hansard being manipulated to mis-remember what actually occurred in parliament.

        MSM are currently doing the magician thing by making sure the public all have their eyes on the wrong hand.

        • dukeofurl 21.1.2.1
          10 July 2018 at 6:17 pm

          Thats how I see it too. Its really the Old Dirty Politics operations back again – if they went away.
          Dirty Politics was really about The Beehive being the hidden hand behind what seemed to be arms length actions by bloggers ( and others)

  22. Ken 22
    10 July 2018 at 5:09 pm

    National is toxic.

  23. JustMe 23
    10 July 2018 at 7:20 pm

    Really Nicky Wagner there is that quote ‘it takes one to know one’. In this instance the name calling you used shows you up in true form.
    I suggest you stop behaving like a spoilt B(word)and start behaving like an adult for once in your political life-time.
    But then it does look like National MPs are very good at having school-yard temper tantrums and name calling. Remember even John Key resorted to name calling those who protested against his government. That shows how lowly in calibre the National Party MPs are, Still birds of a feather flock together.
    Let the likes of Wagner and her ilk carry on with the name calling as it’s proof they are doing a wonderful job at destroying the very political party they are members of.

  24. Tricledrown 24
    12 July 2018 at 12:22 am

    DTB this is part of breaking down the peasants here it’s Straw(man) argument’s for piling on the BS.
    The ruling “class” love to rub the poor nose in it Bullying the peasants into submission.
    Being nasty to the peasant’s is a good bit of sport recognise their beaters lining up in unison shoot down the democratic rights of the not so well off.
    They claim they back the free market.
    But they get paid off by the monopolist Cartels.
    But as Adam Smith says anti competitive business should be punished with National and ACT especially ACT (which wouldn’t exist with out the funding from the Cartels) that dominate our retail especially food retail even more where these global monopoly’s selling us diabetes and obesity.
    The ruling class want pheasants feeling their social anxiety.
    This argument is a dog whistle to the ruling class that they don’t have to follow the rules.