The justice minister hopes the gang patch ban will eventually cut down on overall crime, new top cop says he's open to looking into bodycams for the country's police officers.
Like calling someone a “liar”, it would be considered unparliamentary language which could have seen her ejected had she not withdrawn the comment.
During Question Time on Thursday, Stanford was responding to Tinetti asking about the Ministry of Education’s cancellation of school bus routes in rural communities.
After fending off the question as an operational matter, Stanford slipped in an attack on Labour, by pointing out “that in 2023, under that member’s government, 29 routes were cancelled,” prompting uproar in the House.
During the following question, Labour’s Duncan Webb told the Speaker that Stanford had made an unparliamentary remark when returning to her seat, and it would probably be appropriate for her to apologise.
The comment had not been picked up by the microphone.
Labour's Jan Tinetti. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Assistant Speaker Barbara Kuriger said she also had not heard the comment and asked if such a comment was made, prompting Stanford to immediately withdraw and apologise.
Tinetti later explained what the comment had been.
“So she said ‘stupid B, I, T, C, H to me, except the words ... I think she was frustrated and under pressure from the question, and that was her response.”
She claimed it was not the first time Stanford had made such remarks.
“One other question that I had, she has said something similar as she sat down. And another question a few weeks ago that Willow Jean asked about Te Ahu o te Reo Māori, she also said the same.
Education minister Erica Stanford. Photo / Mark Mitchell
“This was the first time that we decided to stand up to complain to the Speaker about it, because when there’s form like that, you can’t let that go.
“To start with I sort of brushed it off because that’s what I tend to do and then I thought about it and thought no, because I wouldn’t say the same ... so I’m a little bit offended by it, but I also have broad shoulders as well, so it’s not something I’m going to spend a lot of time thinking on.”
She said it was obvious she had been getting under Stanford’s skin over the past week, “but that doesn’t make it acceptable”.
“We have got on really well in the past. In fact, I had a meeting with her just last night around NCEA, so we have civil conversations. So I certainly don’t expect to be treated like that in the House.
“I wouldn’t find that acceptable in any workplace, let alone in a place where we’ve got strict rules for a reason.”
