[THREAD] I would like to take this opportunity to clarify recent coverage of the rules surrounding what MPs wear in the chamber of the House of Representatives. This thread includes the information that was distributed to MPs and staff at Parliament. [1/]
The dress code at Parliament in the chamber actually has a long history. If you want to learn more here are a few interesting notes (by no means comprehensive): [2/]
This thread from @NZParliament about hats (which are allowed – and in fact used to be required at certain times) https://twitter.com/NZParliament/status/1310739241928806400 [3/]
MPs have on occasion used the chambers dress code to protest issues that were of significance to them. Another example when I was first elected to Parliament the Speaker wore the wig every day. The only people who wear them now are visitors to my office. [4/]
MPs have been consulted on the dress code before. One example is that in 2002 Speaker Hunt surveyed male MPs on whether jackets should be continue to be worn by male members. https://www.parliament.nz/en/visit-and-learn/how-parliament-works/office-of-the-speaker/press-releases/mps-surveyed-on-dress-code/ [5/]
At the end of last year after it was raised with me by a member, I invited members to express their views on whether ties should remain compulsory as part of ‘appropriate business attire’. The vast majority of respondents supported ties remaining as part of this. [6/]
Last week I announced that due to the feedback from respondents in favour of keeping ties, ties would remain part of the dress code as ‘appropriate business attire’ at Parliament. [7/]
The phrase ‘appropriate business attire’ is in the 2003 Standing Orders committee report https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/47DBSCH_SCR2639_1/cc0af3fb47ba43aab6ba79ff6b3ddb5639b72b11 and is also referenced in a passage from the 2017 report of the committee https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/47DBSCH_SCR2639_1/cc0af3fb47ba43aab6ba79ff6b3ddb5639b72b11: [8/]
“The standard of dress required of members is determined by the Speaker, in line with the stipulation made by Standing Orders Committee in 2003 that ‘appropriate business attire’ is expected in the Chamber.” [9/]
In practice this means it is the Speaker’s decision but there is a relevant statement from the Standing Orders committee to guide the Speaker. As a result the Speaker should be guided by the House and by extension, the Standing Orders committee, on this matter. [10/]
A meeting of the committee held tonight discussed this and heard a submission from Te Paati Māori. The committee did not reach a consensus but the majority of the committee was in favour of removing a requirement for ties to be part of ‘appropriate business attire’ for males[11/]
As Speaker, I am guided by the committee’s discussion and decision, and therefore ties will no longer be considered required as part of ‘appropriate business attire’. I acknowledge those who felt this was an important issue worthy of further consideration. [/thread]