Former Green MP Darleen Tana has responded to the party co-leaders' formal request they resign, saying they have no intention of doing so - and that they dispute the Greens' arguments around proportionality.
Last month, Chlöe Swarbrick and Marama Davidson formally wrote to Tana (who uses they/them pronouns) to inform them that by refusing to resign from Parliament, Tana's continued presence in Parliament distorted its proportionality.
On September 1, Green Party delegates will hold a Special General Meeting to decide whether to use the so-called party hopping legislation to remove Tana from Parliament entirely.
Writing to Tana is one of the requirements of the legislation, but the co-leaders have made it clear they will not take the final step of writing to the Speaker without the backing of the party membership.
At the time, Swarbrick said members would be able to consider Tana's response, if they decided to write one.
Now, writing in response to the co-leaders' letter, Tana has argued they are not distorting Parliament's proportionality, and that the legislation can not reasonably be invoked.
"I was fairly elected as a List MP during the 2023 General Election. I have done nothing which would require the Speaker to expel me from the House and I have mahi to do, so I will not be resigning," Tana wrote.
Tana said the "high standard" for determining disproportionally had not been met.
They said that since resigning from the Greens, they had instructed Te Pāti Māori to submit their proxy vote in alignment with the Greens' vote, so the Greens' voting strength was not affected. They said the Greens would lose one primary question every 47 days of Parliament sitting.
Tana also argued the Green Party had significantly overestimated the cost to the party's budget by not having 15 Green MPs.
"It is at the very least contestable that cessation in membership is in and of itself sufficient to meet the requirement as the distorting condition. The fact that the Green Party needs to invoke the legislation to remove me from Parliament shows that this is a moot point," Tana wrote.
Tana said Green Party members and non-members had encouraged them to stay on as an independent MP.
They observed that the existence of the Green Party would have been at risk if the legislation existed at the time of its creation, as the first Green MPs split from the Alliance.
"The Green Party going against its longstanding position to invoke the Act once means that you could invoke it again. Thus invoking in this particular case will lead to a chilling of possible dissent across the Party," Tana wrote.
