Unprecedented Suspensions for Māori MPs Spark Debate in New Zealand Parliament

WELLINGTON – May 2025

Three Members of Parliament from New Zealand’s Te Pāti Māori have been handed unprecedented suspensions following a dramatic protest in parliament, where they performed a haka to oppose a controversial bill. The disciplinary action has ignited nationwide debate over Indigenous rights, parliamentary decorum, and the limits of protest in democratic institutions.

The suspended MPs include Te Pāti Māori co-leaders Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi, as well as the party’s youngest representative, Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke. Their protest took place in November during the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill—a piece of legislation widely condemned for attempting to reinterpret the foundational Treaty of Waitangi. Signed in 1840, the treaty forms the legal cornerstone of Māori-Crown relations and guarantees protections for Māori communities.

During the protest, the three MPs performed a powerful haka in the chamber, with Maipi-Clarke famously tearing up a copy of the bill—a moment that went viral globally, garnering hundreds of millions of views. While the bill was ultimately defeated during its second reading in April, the consequences of the protest continue to reverberate through New Zealand's political landscape.

This week, the Parliamentary Privileges Committee released a report recommending disciplinary action. Ngarewa-Packer and Waititi will be suspended for three weeks, while Maipi-Clarke faces a one-week suspension. The report argued that their demonstration was in contempt of Parliament and could have been perceived as intimidating to other members.

The committee noted that while haka have been performed in Parliament before, this specific incident disrupted the voting process and included actions deemed unacceptable. Notably, the report criticized Ngarewa-Packer for allegedly simulating the act of firing a gun with her hand—an interpretation she strongly rejected, asserting that the gesture was a traditional "wiri," a movement rooted in Māori cultural expression.

“These actions were more than symbolic,” said Judith Collins, Attorney-General and chair of the committee. “In over two decades in Parliament, I have never witnessed anything of this magnitude. It is the most serious breach we've ever encountered.”

The penalties—among the most severe ever issued in New Zealand’s parliamentary history—include the loss of salaries for the duration of the suspensions. The three MPs will also be barred from participating in next week’s crucial budget debates.

In a defiant response on social media, Te Pāti Māori described the ruling as "the harshest punishment ever delivered" and framed it as a reactionary move by what they called "colonial powers" against Indigenous resistance.

“When tangata whenua stand up, the establishment strikes back with full force. This ruling is not just about us—it’s a message meant to silence dissent,” the party’s statement read.

Reactions from other political parties were mixed. The opposition Labour Party agreed that the protest constituted a breach of parliamentary rules but argued that the punishment was disproportionate. Labour leaders suggested that a one or two-day suspension would have sufficed.

The Green Party went further, opposing the suspensions entirely. They expressed concern that Te Pāti Māori constituents would lose their representation during key legislative discussions, particularly the upcoming budget debate.

Despite the controversy, the MPs remained resolute. In statements included in the privileges report, all three defended their actions as legitimate expressions of cultural resistance.

“In a moment where the very essence of our identity and rights was under attack, haka was not only appropriate—it was necessary,” Ngarewa-Packer wrote. “It was a response for the hundreds of thousands of Māori who continue to endure harm.”

The final decision on the suspensions is expected to be confirmed by a parliamentary vote in the coming days. As debate continues, the incident has sparked wider conversations in New Zealand about the balance between tradition and parliamentary conduct, the recognition of Indigenous expression, and the ongoing legacy of colonialism in Aotearoa.