Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A NUMBER OF female MPs were made to leave the New Zealand parliament yesterday evening after making declarations that they had been victims of sexual assault.
The speaker of the house David Carter ruled that the declarations by the women were out of order, reports the NZ Herald.
The incident arose after New Zealand Prime Minister John Key accused the opposition Labour party of ‘backing rapists’.
This was in relation to the detainment of New Zealand citizens in Australia’s Christmas Island detention centre.
Following this, a number of opposition MPs hit back and called on Key to withdraw his comments.
During this exchange, speaker of the house David Carter was asked if he deemed Keys’ remarks unparliamentary. He responded that he did, but that as it had not been raised at the time and a four minutes window had elapsed, he could not make the PM apologise.
A number of female MPs including the Green Party MPs Metiria Turei, Jan Logie, Catherine Delahunty and Labour’s Poto Williams all revealed that they had been victims of sexual assault.
The speaker initially warned the women that they would be removed if they continued raising the issue as a point of order.
Green MP Marama Davidson and Labour’s Poto Williams were thrown out of the house, and followed in solidarity by eight others.
Tweeting yesterday evening, Williams said: “It took tremendous courage to disclose our deepest hurts in the house today, The PM must apologise”.
It has since been found that detainees in the Christmas Island detention centre include individuals who have committed manslaughter, armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and assault – but not rape or murder.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I didn’t get this article. Why did they have to leave again?
I think there was a maul in the parliament and Richie McCaw when in from the side and assaulted the hooker but Dan Carter sorted it out with a long kick to touch.
*went in
Me neither, David. None the wiser heaving read that.
I assume they were thrown out for talking about something that wasn’t on the agenda or whatever it’s called in parliament. Isn’t the ceann comhairle always at it here when they don’t stick to the order of business.
The women spoke about personal sexual assaults they had suffered in the past. The speaker asked the first woman to stop, so she did, then started again. Same with the second woman. Eventually they were ejected because the Speaker deemed that what they spoke about (the assaults) shouldn’t have been mentioned at all. Then followed the second walk out from Parliament in two days.
Our lad Barrett would have a field day in he New Zealand parliament. Can we export him?
Something about rape not apologising and Christmas Island the rest is just nonsense
I’m happy to read the comments from those confused by the article.
I read it twice and started to think I was having a stroke as it appeared to me as gibberish.
Still don’t know what the hell it’s about, procedures? Protocol? Time limits or every New Zealand female MP has suddenly become a victim of sexual assault? I assume there exists medical and police reports to back up these sudden mass claims? Imagine if some of these claims turn out to be phantom events created for political convenience?
There is a shocking lack of information in Journal articles lately and it’s done IMO to present one side of the case with minimal info. Not only is it intentionally misleading but it makes the stories the equivalent of a complete fabrication.
Oh god if only we coud Kerry:-)
The media seem to want us to think these ladies were thrown out because they made declarations that they had been victims of sexual assault. Not the case. They actually got asked to leave because they continued one after the other to make the same point of order even after being warned not to, because the chairperson had already ruled on it .
Exactly. Clickbait.
This is the problem with gender quotas.
Parliaments will become feminist battle grounds to the exclusion of everything else.
Yeah. Rape and child molestation. How dare those feminists try to dominate Parliament with questions about the leader’s attitude towards such trivial matters!
B get off your feminist high horse. The matter while important was not on the order or business for that day. Like any other parliament house taking over with any off topic subject uses up time which has already been allocated to other matters and will result in members bring asked to leave. That is democracy not sexist nor anti feminist behaviour.
It was on the agenda. It was part of trying to get the Prime Minister to apologise for falsely accusing Opposition MPs of supporting rapists and sex “molesterers” [sic]. He wouldn’t. Now there is a national petition to try to force him to.
They wanted him to apologise for saying it and the time frame had passed so he didn’t have to say sorry . the women , in protest to this , all said saying they were victims . so your man threw them out !
I think I got it.
There is a massive prison ship staffed by commandos and filled by horrendous rapists but also there are no rapists. This ship is known as christmas Island because its almodt christmas.
At the same time in new zealand there was a politician man who said something and the other man said “don’t say that”. Also there was a time limit like on countdown or the weakest link.
Then people said they were sexually assaulted and the man said “leave this place!”. So they left, but christmas was effectively ruined.
I think there removal may have been for not following parliamentary procedure by introducing their revelations as points of order when they didn’t have the floor. Seemed to be in respone to the speaker not admonishing the PM for his view on rapists as unparlimentary within the accepted timeframe of four minutes of making the comments. Very confusing article.
have your say