Act leader David Seymour and Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick join Ryan Bridge on the political panel.
Chlöe Swarbrick is not backing down from fiery comments towards fellow MPs during a debate on Palestine that ended with the Green Party co-leader booted from Parliament for the rest of the week – unless she says sorry.
“I don’t really know what I have to apologise for,” Swarbrick toldRyan Bridge on Herald NOW this morning.
She also claimed she’d be back in Parliament today and was “engaging directly with the Speaker’s office” to help Gerry Brownlee “understand that the punishment that he’s dished out is completely contrary to the reality”.
Green Party co-leader Chloe Swarbrick speaks in Parliament's debating chamber during a debate on Palestine. Swarbrick was ejected from the chamber and banned for the rest of the week over comments she made about Government MPs being "spineless" over the situation in Israel-Gaza. Photo / Screengrab via Parliament TV
Innocent people were being “mercilessly carpet bombed and slaughtered” and governments and their leaders could take meaningful action, Swarbrick told Bridge.
“That can look like recognising the statehood of Palestine, but more than that, it can look like sanctioning Israel for its war crimes.”
The Government had been saying it was doing everything it could while issuing “empty statement after empty statement”, Swarbrick said,
“New Zealanders deserve to have statements followed up with substance. And substance looks like sanctioning Israel for its war crimes.”
Palestinians wait to receive hot meals with their pots and pans in Deir Al Balah, Gaza. Photo / Anadolu via Getty Images
Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour, standing at Swarbrick’s side as part of their regular political panel with Bridge, said Swarbrick’s claim Israel was carpet bombing Gaza wasn’t true.
“Carpet bombing has a definition ... once you start to unpack the other things that Chloe’s saying, there’s a lot of inaccuracy in there.
“But the reason why she should apologize is very simple. Our Parliament ... over hundreds of years has evolved a set of rules that are designed to make sure that you are actually debating the issue, not questioning the character or the motivations of the other people in Parliament.”
Swarbrick asked if Seymour was “really offended by ‘spineless’?”
He was offended by people who said they want an international rules-based order, but couldn’t “uphold the basic rules of their own workplace”.
She’d be back in Parliament today, Swarbrick told Bridge, prompting him to again ask if she’d apologise.
“I don’t know what I have to apologise for,” Swarbrick said.
Seymour replied: “Well, because you can’t go back without apologising.”
