‘Constitutionally concerning’: Govt accused of ‘defunding’ Parliament

In a rare, albeit private, criticism of the Government of the day, the Clerk of the House David Wilson told staff in an email last week that new budget cuts would limit the work of Parliament.

The message, obtained by Newsroom, said Wilson received an email from Finance Minister Nicola Willis at the end of last year instructing his office “to make savings of 6.5 percent from the 2024/25 financial year. Vote Office of the Clerk is to be reduced by $1.6 million at the next Budget. All departments [are] required to make similar savings, proportional to their size.”

Newsroom has confirmed the authenticity of the email.

After revealing the scale of the proposed cuts in his email, Wilson wrote that the office had already “been under significant budget pressure for years”.

In response, the management team had been reduced, radio broadcasts of Parliament were defunded, refreshments for MPs in select committee were removed and no additional functions would be undertaken unless they had specific funding.

“These changes enabled us to manage within our budget. However, the Government’s new requirement will require us to reduce some services and cease others,” Wilson wrote.

“The proposed budget reduction will diminish the service we can provide in support of our Parliament. I remain very concerned that the executive can effectively limit the work of the legislature by reducing its funding.”

Dean Knight, a public law professor at Victoria University of Wellington, called the move “deeply worrying.”

“It’s constitutionally concerning that executive government is cutting funding for an institution whose job it is to hold government to account. Democracies like ours cherish the independence of Parliament, especially as our Westminster systems sees some personnel shared between the executive and legislature. The impacts of funding cuts on the separation of powers is obvious,” he said.

Duncan Webb, Labour’s deputy shadow leader of the House, told Newsroom the budget cuts were “a matter of constitutional significance, because the separation of powers is a fundamental concept of our democracy. The glue that holds it together is these unspoken conventions and one of them is that the Clerk acts responsibly in asking for the funding he or she needs and the Minister of Finance doesn’t quibble.”

Staff at the Office of the Clerk undertake a range of functions for Parliament, including providing specialist advice on select committees.

“Every time a Member of Parliament asks a question of the Government, it is monitored in quality by the Office of the Clerk. I’m not suggesting these cuts are going to affect that, but that’s what they do,” Webb said.

“When Parliamentarians try to bend the rules in the legislative process – and they do – it’s the clerk that pulls them into line. The clerk is the last check on how our democracy works and so to defund the clerk is genuinely to defund our democracy and it must have an effect on the quality of our legislation and government.”

“The cuts, which are significant, will inevitably mean that the work of Parliament will suffer,” Knight said. “Poorer quality legislation, because it’s parliamentary clerks who help MPs appraise draft Bills and translate their wishes into amendments. Weaker scrutiny of government, because it’s parliamentary clerks who staff the mechanisms through which MPs ask questions of ministers and officials when holding the government to account. A less accessible Parliament, because it’s parliamentary clerks who help folk make submissions to select committees and help open the doors of Parliament to the people, whether physically or virtually.”

Wilson said in the email that he planned to raise the importance of the office with Speaker of the House Gerry Brownlee and Willis and advocate for an exemption from the cuts.

When the National Party first proposed 6.5 percent cuts to agency spending during the election campaign, it was for 24 specific departments. The Office of the Clerk was not on that list.

The Office of the Clerk declined to comment, citing Budget sensitivity. A request for comment to the Finance Minister was redirected to Brownlee, who confirmed he had received a letter from Willis last year but that the contents were Budget-sensitive.

The Speaker said he would be having discussions with the office next week to discuss Budget 2024 proposals. He added there was always a need to consider the propriety of government expenditure, particularly given budget priorities would change as policy priorities did.

Knight said the funding cuts “risk upsetting an important and delicate constitutional balance. Our democracy will be poorer for it if these cuts proceed.”