Winston Peters is calling for Speaker Trevor Mallard to face a vote of no confidence.
The former deputy Prime Minister has taken issue with a comment made by Mallard in his press statement released on Wednesday afternoon. In it, the Speaker confirmed he was withdrawing five trespass notices. One of those had been issued to Peters, who visited the protest at Parliament one day in February.
"Five trespass notices have since been withdrawn as the persons are now thought unlikely to seriously offend or incite others to commit serious offences," Mallard said.
He also said it has been "relatively easy to identify those persons issued with trespass notices who no longer are regarded as being a risk to the safety and security of others at Parliament".
Peters said those statements implied the individuals who had formerly been trespassed "were originally considered likely to 'seriously offend or incite others to' and to be a 'risk to the safety and security of Parliament'."
He said the trespass notices had been withdrawn from five former Members of Parliament who attended the protest site.
"It is an outrageous insult that Mallard, in the role of Speaker of the House, would hold this view of myself and my former parliamentary colleagues. This is evidence of how out of control and power-drunk he has now become," the New Zealand First leader said.
He wants Mallard to be subject to a motion of no confidence.
"Surely a current Member of Parliament can stand up and do their duty and move a motion of no confidence."
In his statement earlier on Wednesday, Mallard said of 151 trespass notices issued in relation to the protest at Parliament earlier this year, 144 were for people arrested during the occupaton. Seven were issued to "persons of interest", and five of those have been withdrawn.
He said he had been working with police and parliamentary security to assess threats to Parliament. The withdrawals came after MPs met to discuss the issue on Tuesday.
"A meeting last night of the Parliamentary Service Commission established a general consensus that former Members of Parliament should be treated on the same basis as other members of the public," Mallard said.
“Having dealt with that issue, the question then is what is a proportionate response in light of the time since the occupation and serious criminal offending.
"The behaviour of some individuals was clearly more egregious than others, and on that basis it has been relatively easy to identify those persons issued with trespass notices who no longer are regarded as being a risk to the safety and security of others at Parliament."
Peters said on Wednesday afternoon that it shouldn't have taken the threat of a judicial review for Mallard "to come to his senses and an understanding of the law that he wanted to enforce".
"This whole issue from the start to finish has been an absolute shambles, and has caused a number of people unnecessary anguish and expense."
The Speaker on Tuesday said he had delegated authority to parliamentary security to make decisions over trespass notices. He said in his Wednesday statement that such notices "are not generally issued by the Speaker personally", but by the security team.
But Ardern on Tuesday said the decision was ultimately one for the Speaker.
"I think it is useful for all parties to be able to hear him out on how he came to the decision and make a joint decision, as much as they are able to, on whether or not MPs should be treated differently from everyone else. That's, at the heart of it, the issue."
The anti-vaccine mandate protest took over Parliament's grounds and surrounding streets throughout February and early March. They stayed for weeks despite police, the Speaker and MPs telling them to leave.
