“Not all of us represent the suit and tie regions or electorates,” he says. In other words, it’s about politicians quite literally walking in the shoes of their constituents. “Urban streetwear was part of my upbringing,” he says.īeyond what they mean to him personally, he sees sneakers as a way to make parliamentary politics more reflective of those he represents. ![]() He credits his passion for sneakers to the years he spent studying and living in Auckland. “But for some reason somebody took offence to me wearing them that day.” “I’ve worn my Jordans for a little while now in the house,” says Waititi. Waititi remains surprised by what he describes as an “unusual interaction”. Mallard also expressed discomfort at the accusations of racism: “What makes me very uncomfortable with this is the racist assumption that appears to sit behind some of the comments.” Trevor Mallard’s response to Rawiri Waititi’s tweet. But, he said he “couldn’t afford them” and that “only professional basketballers, rich people, drug dealers and gangs had them then”. Mallard responded to the controversy in tweets saying he “really liked” the sneakers in the 1980s “when they first came out”. The tweet led to numerous comments condemning Mallard, with many of those expressing concern about what they saw as the stereotyping and racism implied by his remarks. The day after the interaction he tweeted: “What you didn’t see yesterday was on my way out of the chamber, the Speaker said to me ‘Jordans are usually worn by drug dealers and gangsters!’” Waititi says subsequent conversations with Mallard outside the house and over the phone confirmed the type of business the speaker was alluding to that of basketball players but also drug dealers and gang members. The speaker Trevor Mallard responded: “I’d tend to say it would depend on the business you’re in.” He followed jovially with: “The business which Air Jordans are normally associated with in my interpretation is not quite the business we expect to take part on these precincts.” Mallard decided not to make any official ruling on whether sneakers were or were not acceptable attire in the house. “But are Air Jordans an example of business attire?” “I know you may not be used to being asked for sartorial advice,” Seymour said. ![]() On that Thursday afternoon, a point of order was brought to the speaker by a grey-suited Act leader David Seymour, who sits next to Waititi in the house. When Te Paati Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi delivered his maiden speech in the house in December 2020, he warned he would act like a pebble in the shoe of parliament – an unapologetically Māori voice in the halls of power.Įleven months later, in a curious exchange during question time on October 21, it was Waititi’s shoe choice (Nike Air Jordan 1 mids in gym red) that became that pebble in the shoes of some of his parliamentary colleagues. But why would a pair of shoes that are relatively commonplace spark such a reaction – and what does it say about where we’re at politically? A pair of Jordan sneakers worn by Te Paati Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi led to some contentious comments in parliament last month.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |