How low can our politicians go? There was a time when politicians understood that holding public office carried responsibilities extending beyond simply winning votes. Robust political debate has always been part of New Zealand’s democracy, and politicians should be free to express unpopular opinions and challenge prevailing thinking. However, there is a considerable difference between robust political debate and using derogatory language about someone's race, ethnicity or gender – all prohibited grounds of discrimination under the Human Rights Act and Employment Relations Act.

Over the past three years, we have seen a disturbing number of examples of politicians crossing that line, with the response from their political leaders raising questions about where accountability now sits.

In January 2025 NZ First Deputy Leader and senior minister in the coalition government Shane Jones shouted "send the Mexicans home" during a parliamentary debate. NZ First leader Winston Peters (also having served as Deputy Prime Minister in the coalition government) subsequently told Green MPs Lawrence Xu-Nan and Francisco Hernandez to "show some gratitude" for being in New Zealand. The comments prompted accusations of racism and xenophobia and diplomatic concern from the Mexican Embassy. Mr Peters eventually acknowledged that the comments could have been expressed differently.

In July 2026, Mr Peters told Green Party MP Lawrence Xu-Nan to "go back to your own country" during a parliamentary exchange. Mr Xu-Nan was born in China but grew up in Auckland. The comments attracted criticism from the Chinese Ambassador and opposition politicians.

Earlier this year, recidivist offender Shane Jones, said in an online video he would never agree with a "butter chicken tsunami" coming to New Zealand as a result of the India Free Trade agreement. Last year, after an immigration announcement at the NZ First party conference, the minister said the most common baby names had become "Singh, Patel" but "no one campaigned on it".

NZ First hopeful, Stuart Nash, attracted criticism in September 2025 after describing a woman in particularly derogatory sexual terms during a radio interview. More recently, in July 2026, he described National MP Katie Nimon as the "laziest MP" he had encountered, apparently because of her maternity leave.

It is not only confined to national politics. A local government politician, Auckland mayor Wayne Brown, recently referred to an RNZ staff member of Indian descent as "a Muslim terrorist" and commented on his beard while being escorted into the building for an interview.

Most recently, NZ First candidate Michael Laws made sexually suggestive comments about female political candidates, including Opportunity's Kayla Kingdon-Bebb. The comments attracted widespread criticism. Mr Peters, prior to election night, described them as unacceptable and reprimanded Mr Laws, who subsequently apologised.

There is an uncomfortable pattern here. Political leaders are generally quick to condemn inappropriate comments made by opponents. However, when the comments come from within their own political ranks, the response can be less than meaningful.

In the private sector where leaders and other commentators have a larger audience, the consequences in the employment context are more meaningful. In 2003 broadcaster Paul Holmes repeatedly referred to the then United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan as a "cheeky darkie" during his breakfast radio show on Newstalk ZB. The comments triggered widespread public outrage, international condemnation, a bomb scare at TVNZ headquarters, and calls for his dismissal from politicians (including then Prime Minister Helen Clark) and listeners. A television producer on his show resigned over the remarks. However, Mr Holmes apologised, and his employer, The Radio Network (Newstalk ZB), disciplined him internally, issued public apologies, but kept him in his job rather than firing him.

Another broadcaster, Paul Henry, resigned from TVNZ's Breakfast show in 2010 following a similar controversy. Mr Henry was initially suspended by TVNZ, and he subsequently resigned after making two major on-air blunders in quick succession; he questioned whether the then Governor-General, Sir Anand Satyanand, was "even a New Zealander" and asked if the Prime Minister would choose someone who "looks and sounds like a New Zealander", and he deliberately mispronounced and ridiculed the surname of Indian politician Sheila Dikshit.

Party leaders, like employers, have a responsibility to establish the standards expected. That responsibility becomes particularly important when they are leaders and their words carry considerable influence.

This is becoming increasingly obvious for coalition governments. New Zealand's MMP system increasingly requires parties with quite different philosophies and political constituencies to work together. Those differences should be respected, but surely there should at least be some minimum Code of Conduct that all coalition partners are prepared to uphold.

This is not about restricting freedom of speech or preventing politicians from expressing controversial views. It is about distinguishing legitimate political debate from language that demeans others because of who they are - whether it is gender, race or ethnicity. Do we really expect better standards of our employers and workers in New Zealand’s workplaces than we do from the leaders of our country? For all leaders, in “management speak”, principles and values should be a “bottom-line” not a “nice to have”. Read more....