So, Parliament's "powerful" Privileges Committee has found Labour Education Minister Jan Tinetti innocent of deliberately misleading Parliament. Tinetti had given a false answer to a question in question time, been told it was false by her staff, refused to correct it, and then stood by her lie and gave a deliberately misleading answer later. Some of the Committee found her explanation - that it was all a dreadful mistake, which just coincidentally covered up her own control-freakery and lies - "unconvincing". But the Committee's report ultimately found that Tinetti's repeated refusal to correct her answer was not intentional, but merely the result of "a high degree of negligence" and "a significant error of judgement". Tinetti has now been forced to apologise to Parliament - a perfect example of a "powerful" slap on the wrist by a wet bus ticket.
...which is what happens when the government, which holds four of eight places on the committee, is allowed to judge itself. Meanwhile, the public can draw its own conclusions about Tinetti's honesty, competence, and the integrity of Parliamentary "justice".
Meanwhile, there's an obvious question: should someone who displays "a high degree of negligence" and makes "significant error[s] of judgement" even fit to be a Minister?
