Political Diary

Kevin Hague's All Whites speech lurched from ski-jumper Eddie the Eagle to Anzacs at Gallipoli. Photo / Mark Mitchell

TUESDAY

The challenge for politicians speaking to a parliamentary motion congratulating someone for something is not to sound like they are bathing in reflected glory.

Moving a motion marking the All Whites' World Cup triumph, Acting Prime Minister Bill English manages to avoid such an accusation, delivering his prepared speech in an emotion-free monotone that suggests he is more the rugby player than a soccer fanatic.

Opposition leader Phil Goff is more passionate about the draw with Italy but reminds himself not to get too carried away.

The Greens' Kevin Hague, however, raises eyebrows with a lengthy speech that manages somehow to combine the All Whites with famed no-hopers as British ski-jumper Eddie the Eagle and the Jamaican bobsleigh team. Hague also has the All Whites showing the same indomitable spirit as the Anzacs at Gallipoli and the activists who forged New Zealand's anti-nuclear policy.

Act Party leader Rodney Hide seems to be under the illusion that the All Whites actually beat Italy, until he corrects himself by saying that as far as Act is concerned the result was a victory.

What was this all about? The shortest answer a minister can give to a question in Parliament is obviously "no".

But then such an answer is always followed by one or more a supplementary questions from the backbencher asking the primary question. Well, not quite always.

National MP Katrina Shanks asks Energy Minister Gerry Brownlee how much electricity generated in the March quarter this year came from renewable sources. "Seventy-three per cent," replies Brownlee, offering no explanation as to whether that is good or bad. Shanks, meanwhile, forgoes her right to ask a supplementary question. The House moves on to the next question.

WEDNESDAY

And while we're on the subject of parliamentary questions ... what about this pearler from the Greens' Kennedy Graham: "Is the Government committed to ratifying promptly the amendment to the Rome Statute reflecting the resolution adopted by the States parties to the International Criminal Court at their review conference in Kampala on 11 June 2010, incorporating aggression as a justiciable crime?" And yes, he does mean justiciable, rather than justifiable.

In case you are wondering, the answer is the Government does support the resolution adopted by the review conference. The Government says the aggression amendment itself provides that the court's exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression is subject to a decision to be taken by the States parties some time after the beginning of 2017.

The Government does not intend to ratify the amendment until after that decision has been taken. Given that is more than six years away, we won't be holding our breath in anticipation.

Graham later says the Government's stance "reflects a timidity to quaint excess." New Zealand, he says, needs to worry less about American neuroses over aggression as a leadership crime and take a cue from European nations, African nations, Latin American nations.

FRIDAY

The Greens are starting a "name and shame" campaign to stem personal abuse in the House.

Irritated and occasionally sickened by the abuse allowed by the system in the name of 'robust debate', the party has decided to out offenders using a "tweet exposé system".

Their MPs won't be tweeting about juvenile and slightly funny repartee or the loud and rude chanting, but about incidents of genuinely offensive personal attacks, for example, on members' bodies, personalities, mental health, gender, sexuality, age, disability or culture.

"So any MP who thinks they can say whatever, just because their comments won't be recorded in Hansard, had better think twice," the Greens say. Watch this space.