Dear readers, Parliament is now in urgency. That would be the fifth Parliamentary week in a row that we have gone into urgency.Perhaps its time to rename urgency as normalcy if this is the approach National is going to take.
In all seriousness, while there is a place for urgency, and (before the right begin to howl) all governments have used it, this is getting beyond a joke. Meanwhile, elsewhere in the complex the hearings on the Emissions Trading Bill are taking place from 9am to 9pm each day, with some submitters given only a few hours notice of needing to submit and then being given a very short time to state their cases. Concerns are being raised from those on all sides of the debate. It appears from media reports that National even tried to get the committee to agree to having all 184 people who wanted to submit in public put through in one day.
Lest anyone think these issues are ‘beltway’, the excessive use of urgency and the rushed select committee processes should be of concern to all New Zealanders. Apart from being anti-democratic, they open the door for bad and poorly considered law. There will necessarily be simple drafting errors but more than that Select Committees are either not getting a say or not getting enough time to properly scruitinise the Bills.
Earlier this year National put through the bill creating national standards for literacy and numeracy without a select committee process. In other words without giving parents, teachers, experts in the field the chance to have a say. Inevitably Anne Tolley has now had to delay the whole process to try to deal with issues that have come up since the Bill was passed. These could have been dealt with in a Committee. We all know about the ramming through of the Auckland governance legislation without any public process. There are numerous other examples.
As an MP I expect, and I am happy, to work hard and do some long hours. But whether I support the laws being passed by National or not, I want to know that I am part of upholding our democracy and making good law. That is being put at risk.
This is absurd. Government is not a game and our country is not a toy.
Why are they so scared of having their bills properly scrutinised?
‘Normalcy’.
*sigh*
“Dear readers, Parliament is now in urgency.” I’d be more surprised if it wasn’t in urgency. They certainly do seem to be abusing urgency
I guess it’s one way of keeping the country in the dark about the details while giving the appearance of momentum.
“with some submitters given only a few hours notice of needing to submit and then being given a very short time to state their cases.”
- Clearly they’ve made up their minds already.
And while the House is sitting so is the Education and Science Committee hearing submissions on the bill on Polytechnics. From 9am to 6pm. There will be a question time.
The national standards law went through all stages in 24 hours just before Christmas. Several of us complained about some unintended effects of it then and have spend a lot of time this year challenging aspects as the resulting work has wound its way through the political and educational systems. It would have been so much easier, fairer and more democratic if there had been a proper select committee process at the beginning.
[...] http://blog.labour.org.nz/index.php/2009/10/21/a-state-of-urgency/ Parliament is now in urgency. That would be the fifth Parliamentary week in a row that we have gone into urgency.Perhaps its time to rename urgency as normalcy if this is the approach National is going to take. In all seriousness, while there is a place for urgency, and (before the right begin to howl)
Tea Party time anyone?
Surely this is taxation without representation.
I am appalled by National’s abuse of the Parliamentary process. It would seem there needs to be a multi-partisan agreement on Urgency and its use. I say multi because Labour is barely any better than National in this regard.
Just as National are hypocrites for saying one thing in opposition and another in government, so too are Labour.
What would Labour do differently in government?
Former Clerk of the House David McGee wrote in his book of Parliamentary proceedure that urgency “varies depending on current political circumstances and the exigneces of the Government’s legislative programme.”
43rd Parliament (1990-93) – 30.25% of sitting hours in urgency
44th (93-96) – 9.21%
45th (96-99) – 30.73%
46th (99-02) – 13.12%
47th (02-05) – 21.38%
I would love to know what the proportions are for the 48th and 49th Parliament(so far)
But even a causual look suggests that for this period, National led Governments use urgency more often than Labour led ones.
It will be fascinating if this trend continues.
Paul: As I said in the post I know Labour has used urgency often in the past, but I would argue not in the excessive way that National are doing. In particular the very regular by-passing of Select Committee. With one big exception, we mainly used it for first readings
In any case I do agree that all parties bear some responsibility here and I think there is a room for a cross-party discussion of the use of urgency. From a personal point of view I would like to see some limitations on its use.
In my opinion, Mr Brownlee, as leader of the house, is abusing the rules around Urgency.
I was inspired to look up Standing Orders, linked to this page http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/, around Urgency, I see that the Minister moving Urgency has to inform the house of some “… particularity why the motion is moved.”
So what’s so Urgent this time?
Is it possible to get the shambles ACC legislation that’s going up soon? Can’t seem to get it on http://www.parliament.nz
As a previous Labour Government Minister of Finance said:
Looks like National Ltd® has learned well.
Trevor, you mention the Polytechnics bill, and a blog on this bill would be enlightening. Any chance?
Jennifer – John Hincliff had a thoughtful piece on the Polytechnics Bill yesterday you might be interested in. It points out that the Bill is fundamentally undemocractic – ironic that National Ltd® is using an undemocratic process to push it through – a kinda double-jeopardy situation. Overall, though, the Bill looks to me like its setting the institutions up for subsequent sale.
Thanks Grant and Trevor, now I know I AM needed at Education and Science at 5pm, I was wondering!!!!
Blip: That was a Roger Douglas thing wasn’t it? Move so fast that the opposition has not enough time to rally. 2009 just like the 80s eh.
I wonder how the Government’s lawmaking under urgency compares with sausage making. At this rate, I hope the New Zealand people will not collectively suffer food poisoning.
[...] Grant posted earlier we have been in urgency. Well once
Is it possible to remove or restrict the ability to bypass select committee through urgency via legislation? If so, Labour still has plenty of Member’s Bill slots unused…
“We all know about the ramming through of the Auckland governance legislation without any public process”
That is not actually true. The only part that didn’t go to a select committee was the transition agency part. The main legislation has been before the select committee. And all of it was debated in open Parliamentary session.
Hinchin is another lobbyist for a vested interest group that doesn’t like change – in this case polytechnics. The fact is that these reforms are similar to the setting up of DHBs by Labour early this decade, those health boards also have a large number of ministerial appointees. Polytechnics receive large amounts of government funding. The government has decided that reforming the governance structure of polytechnics is more cost effective than the bloated bureacracy of the Tertiary Education Commission. A few months from now all the whining will have hopefully stopped as the polytechs get on with their job instead of paid political lobbying.
[...] Left-wing bloggers such as No Right Turn and Labour MP Grant Robertson are crying foul over the government’s use of urgency and getting stuck into Leader of the [...]
[...] we are about to go into urgency, again, for the sixth parliamentary