ACT's David Seymour and the Greens' Chlöe Swarbrick have clashed over what the latter called race-baiting politics in a fiery interview on AM.
On Monday, National leader Christopher Luxon officially declared he would work with New Zealand First if he had to, in a National, ACT and New Zealand First coalition.
Swarbrick believed ACT and NZ First had many similarities when speaking on the topic, including what she described as "interesting" policies, which she claimed to be "race baiting" and "divisive".
Seymour was quick to ask Swarbrick to provide examples where ACT has race baited. Swarbrick fired back with ACT's proposal of a referendum on the Treaty of Waitangi, which she said will "absolutely drag up some of the most unfortunate types of discussions in this country".
"I mean, you only need to look across the ditch at what occurred with the plebiscite in Australia around Rainbow rights and same-sex [marriage]," she said.
"There was massive collateral damage with regard to the Rainbow community because of the platforming of mis and disinformation. And secondly, if you are to look at imposing something like that on the rights of minorities within this country, then it should be evidence-informed and there is a role of those within government to provide that."
Seymour suggested that Swarbrick was "essentially saying that the New Zealand people cannot have a say on the constitutional future of their country because somebody might say something stupid".
"That's not what I've said," Swarbrick hit back.
Seymour pushed Swarbrick for more examples of race baiting, telling her she must have better examples than his referendum proposal.
Though Swarbrick couldn't specifically detail examples, she said Parliament's Hansard would show members of the ACT party race baiting.
"You only need to look at some of commentary from the ACT Party in our Parliament on Hansard, such as what's been coming out of Chris Baillie your education spokesperson, such as what's been coming of Simon Court, your environment spokesperson," she said.
"I could take you to multiple times in which they have sought to make absolutely ludicrous statements to the point of reductive abstraction."
When asked by AM's Ryan Bridge if Swarbrick could give one specific example, she said she'd have to get back to him.
Before the debate continued, Bridge moved on to the other topics.
A spokesperson for Swarbrick responded to Newshub's request for examples of the ACT Party race-baiting. They provided an oral question in the House from Court to Local Government Minister Nanaia Mahuta.
"Are spiritual beliefs, such as the existence of a taniwha on a bend in the river, permissible subject matter for Te Mana o te Wai statements, and, if so, why should taxpayer-funded entities be required to give effect to spiritual beliefs? asked Court.
Minister Mahuta responded saying Court "sadly mischaracterises the intent of Te Mana o te Wai statements".
"I would faithfully hope that the member has sighted a Te Mana o te Wai fact sheet—that has been long held and put up on the website by the Ministry for the Environment. He chooses to ignore that information at his peril."
The spokesperson said Swarbrick has requested more examples from Parliamentary library from the Hansard.
Watch the full video above for more.
