A new NZ First member’s bill seeking to define the meaning of a “man” and “woman” in law is a “distraction” from other issues, two MPs from National and Labour say.
The proposed legislation, submitted by NZ First MP Jenny Marcroft, would “ensure the biological definition of a woman and man are defined in law,” according to the party.
NZ First leader Winston Peters said the bill would “fight back against the cancerous social engineering” and what he called creeping “woke ideology”.
While the bill was not Government policy, and would only be debated if pulled from the ballot, it has seen intense scrutiny from opposition parties.
National MP and minister Chris Bishop has also weighed in, calling the legislation a “distraction” during Breakfast’s weekly political panel.
The senior minister, who is the Leader of the House, was speaking next to his Labour opposite number, Kieran McAnulty, who called the legislation a “distraction”.
Bishop responded: “I actually agree with Kieran, to an extent. This is a distraction.
“Look, this country’s got big challenges, right? … We are deep in debt. We are just coming out of recession. We’ve got to go for growth. We’ve got to lift living standards. We’ve got a housing crisis, got an infrastructure deficit. We’ve got big climate change obligations.
“You know, is this the biggest thing on the planet?
“Talking about the definition of a woman? I would argue, no.”
Bishop’s comments on the bill were less diplomatic than those made by PM Christopher Luxon, who said National would consider the bill if it were drawn from the ballot.
Luxon noted, however, he had already made his views clear that pregnant people “frankly, are women”.
“Let’s have some common sense about it, and let’s use some common sense language,” he said, RNZ reported.
Asked if he supported the bill himself, Bishop said he hadn’t read it yet and would need to consider it with his party. He said this would only happen if the bill was pulled.
“That’s not an individual decision for me. We collectively make a decision. It’s just in the ballot. It could sit there for 10 years, you know, or could get pulled tomorrow.”
McAnulty, who also called the bill a distraction, labelled it a “tactic” by NZ First and, “to some degree, the Government” to “try and get us having debates about these sorts of things,” instead of looking to the cost of living, unemployment or homelessness.
He said the bill would have to go through the Labour caucus if pulled from the ballot, but he would be “very, very surprised” if his party supported it.
Peters has previously said his party’s bill would be “a win for common sense”.
“This bill would ensure our country moves away from the woke ideology that has crept in over the last few years, undermining the protection, progression, and safety of women.”
NZ First wants to see “women” defined in law as an “adult human biological female” and “man” defined as an “adult human biological male”.
Peters added: “These definitions in law fight back against the cancerous social engineering we’ve seen being pushed in society by a woke minority.
“The need for legislation like this shows how far the deluded left has taken us as a society. But we are fighting back.”
Bishop and McAnulty on Peters’ RNZ interview
Comments like the ones made by Bishop and McAnulty caused a fiery exchange during an appearance by NZ First leader Winston Peters on RNZ’s morning report, where he threatened to cut the state broadcaster’s funding.
Winston Peters spoke with the Morning Report programme and objected to the line of questioning. (Source: 1News)
Presenter Corin Dann had raised criticism by Labour and the Greens that Peters was importing a culture war to distract from issues at home.
Peters said the line of questioning was “so typical” of RNZ, and accused the broadcaster of “not hearing both sides of the story” and “putting the argument of the woke left”.
He threatened to cut RNZ’s funding, calling it an “abuse on the taxpayer”.
A move like this would require Cabinet approval.
Bishop and McAnulty were asked if Peter’s conduct in the interview crossed the line.
“Well, it’s not the way I would have put things,” Bishop said.
“I think the parlance [of the interview] is robust, as sometimes interviews with Mr Peters are and can be over the years. It’s not the way I would have put things. But I don’t think he directed them or broke the law or anything like that.
“I think he was complaining about the conduct of an interview. And I would say that would be a near-daily occurrence for MPs, some or most of the time. They don’t complain on air. But, you know that’s an interesting approach.”
McAnulty called Peters’ conduct in the interview “totally inappropriate”.
“Look, this bloke (Peters) basically threatened RNZ to cut their funding if they don’t pull into line. And what does in line mean? Exactly what Winston Peters wants them to do.
“There were two instances in the last government where ministers expressed opinions on a digital broadcaster and were made to apologise. This is far worse than that.
“At the very least, he should acknowledge that he shouldn’t have said it.”
After the interview, Labour leader Chris Hipkins called on the Prime Minister to step in, but Luxon said he believed people would understand Peters’ true meaning.
“Probably words that I wouldn’t use, but frankly, I think Winston Peters, after 40 years in public service, and his mode of communication is well understood,” he said.
“I just don’t think it would be any surprise … he has a rather Winston way of communicating with media where he’s going to push back on journalists, as is his right to do so.
“With respect to the funding of RNZ, that is a decision taken by Cabinet as part of a Budget process each and every year, and it’s the same process here.”
Responding to Peter’s criticisms, an RNZ spokesperson said the organisation had a rigorous editorial policy that demanded, underpinned by fairness, accuracy, independence, respect and decency.
“This was a robust political interview where our interviewer conducted himself in a professional manner,” the spokesperson said.
“RNZ was recently recognised as New Zealand’s most trusted news brand. A result that is consistent with our own research that shows trust in RNZ has increased over the last year and a result that demonstrates our strategic focus on improving trust.”