All of the party’s 185 delegates voted to invoke the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Act 2018. This involves the party leaders writing to Speaker Gerry Brownlee advising Ms Tana’s resignation from the party but not from Parliament has affected, and will continue to affect, the proportionality of the House.
Ms Tana was elected as a Green list member of Parliament a year ago, but soon fell from grace when news emerged of allegations of migrant exploitation at her husband’s bicycle business.
An investigation instigated by the party found Ms Tana likely knew about the allegations but was not upfront about them to the Greens.
She resigned from the party but has been determined to continue as an independent MP. In the High Court she lost a challenge over the way the party had dealt with her and has an appeal pending before the Court of Appeal.
Before last week’s vote, there were months of speculation about whether the party would use the legislation they voted for through gritted teeth in the Labour-led coalition in 2018, despite years of vehement opposition to such laws.
Questions have understandably been raised about the strength of the party’s commitment to principles if it can abandon such a long-held position to become the first party to use this law in its current iteration.
This newspaper was among those to oppose this legislation because of concerns about how MPs, who might have good reason to stray from a party line, could follow their conscience when threatened with removal.
In this case, however, Ms Tana did not jump ship because she disagreed with some contentious part of Green policy.
It can be argued that since she is a list MP, she was there for her Green credentials not her independent stance on anything.
Old hands, former co-leader Metiria Turei and former MP Kevin Hague, had input into the delegates’ hui, credited by current co-leader Chloe Swarbrick with bringing much nuance and different perspectives to the issue.
However, the question remains, as law professor Andrew Geddis pointed out, about whether the party would vote to repeal the law if that opportunity arose in future. Not that this is on the cards this parliamentary term, given New Zealand First’s presence in the coalition.
The Greens will be hoping Mr Brownlee will act quickly and Ms Tana will go without further incident. The spotlight can then move from the party’s various internal woes, where it has been focused most of this year, to the big societal and environmental issues facing the country.
They would also be wise to use the remaining part of this term to improve their candidate selection process in the hope of reducing the risk of a Tana-style quandary in the future.
More drama to come
As one drama may be drawing to a close, another could have some time to run.
There are many unanswered questions around allegations of Commerce Minister Andrew Bayly’s insulting behaviour at an unnamed business event earlier this month, an issue the minister aired on Friday apparently because of concerns the complainant was going public.
Although he keeps saying he has unreservedly apologised, he has also indicated his view of the incident differs from that of the complainant.
Saying he is sorry because he has offended someone does not seem particularly unreserved.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, who may have learned about the event rather late in the piece, has shown his political inexperience by slapping Mr Bayly with a wet bus ticket and rushing to express his confidence in him.
A more prudent approach might have been to reserve judgement long enough to find out more about what happened from others present at the event.
