Mallard v Bishop stoush reflects badly on House

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says an extraordinary parliamentary debate about Trevor Mallard’s defamation saga was ‘‘poorly managed and inappropriately politicised’’.

In a statement, Ardern lashed both Mallard and National MPs, saying the tone of the debate didn’t reflect well on Parliament as a whole. But she said she retained ‘‘overall confidence’’ in the Speaker.

‘‘He did not meet my expectations, nor did he meet his own. Any investigation of claims of sexual assault should be in a manner that takes a victimcentric approach. It also needs to include principles of natural justice for the person allegations are made against,’’ Ardern said.

‘‘I have spoken with the Speaker this morning. He retains my overall confidence, however I have expressed serious concerns to him about the manner in which he conducted himself in the House last night. It did not meet the standards I expect. Nor do I consider it to have met the needs of the victim in this situation. The Speaker acknowledges he did not meet his own standards either.’’

Mallard used parliamentary privilege on Tuesday night to respond to repeated attacks on him by National MPs over his use of the word ‘‘rape’’ to describe an allegation of misconduct in Parliament.

Mallard said that, while the word was rape had been inappropriate, the man was actually guilty of sexual assault.

Ardern also criticised the behaviour of Opposition MPs, calling it inappropriate. ‘‘Issues of this serious nature should not be litigated in Parliament in such a manner. It was wrong.’’

Speaking to media yesterday afternoon, she said no-one involved in Tuesday’s debate ‘‘covered themselves in glory’’, and added that calling for

resignations wouldn’t resolve any issues. She confirmed she is not calling for anyone’s resignation following the debate.

The prime minister said Parliament needed to set a standard for others to follow, and will be writing to the Speaker and deputy and assistant speakers asking them to reconvene the cross-party working group to consider how the behavioural standards could be put into practice when MPs deal with sensitive staff conduct matters. Leader of the House Chris Hipkins said earlier yesterday that nobody came out from the debate looking good.

After an 18-month legal battle, Mallard negotiated a $333,000 settlement with the complainant. However, when speaking in the House, Mallard has absolute legal privilege.

‘‘I have apologised for a mistake which I made. I shook the man’s hand in September. The paperwork was completed in December. But my mistake doesn’t erase the fact that there were serious allegations from staff members that had to be taken seriously. I have a duty of care to make sure that staff are safe,’’ Mallard told the House.

‘‘There are actually, as far as that individual is concerned, two complainants and there are at least three separate incidents involving three separate women, and at least two perpetrators, of serious sexual assault.’’

In apologising again for his mistaken comments, the Speaker mounted a defence of his actions as a necessary part of cleaning up Parliament, taking aim at Opposition probing of the issue.

‘‘I believe in taking a victimcentred approach, and I want to be really careful about causing further distress for the three or more women who have suffered serious sexual assaults as a result of working here.’’

The debate became particularly fierce with National MPs Chris Bishop and Michael Woodhouse repeatedly calling Mallard a bully.