The farce of government consultation – dishonest and condescending


Constitution consultation? Parliamentary select committee submissions?  All are masquerading as democratic.

Ask most busy people what they would most like from government, local government, quangos, all kinds of officialdom and all sorts of officially established consultative bodies. Most would answer that they just want to be left alone. 

However, there has never been into our civic lives a greater bombardment of information, new legislation, rulings, edicts, proposals, requirements… intrusions  of one sort or another for individuals to have to assimilate, consider, respond to or  ignore. The barrage is relentless. It is no wonder that so many have simply switched off.

And yet, as the inimitable GK Chesterton reminds us, a tired democracy becomes a dictatorship. It is very little of an exaggeration to claim that this is what we have virtually arrived at.

When we now have a representative MP such as Nick Smith claiming no doubt truthfully that when his leader tells him to jump he simply asks how high… and when Smith admits that anyone who knows anything about politics also knows that the real decisions are made in caucus…it’s high time we abandoned the naïve belief that we have a democracy.  The contrast with what the Swiss people contrived for themselves, where a John Key’s or Helen Clark’s autocratic rulings would not be tolerated, because it is the Swiss people themselves, not the government, who decide what laws will or won’t be implemented, could not be more striking.

In effect, we are being infantilised by big government. And until New Zealanders as a whole decide to come of age, to grow up mentally and politically, we are going to be stuck in the same groove, where one strong-willed politician, apparently full of self-esteem, can do what he likes – because none of his Cabinet have the spine to stand up to him – or are prepared to take a moral stand on important issues. Far from such consultation being genuinely welcomed and considered by the National Party hierarchy, the result would be demotion, loss of income, perks and privileges.  So jump they do.

The contrast is striking with what the brave Ai  Weiwei is telling us, the artist and Chinese dissident now virtually imprisoned within China, detained and so beaten by the communist Chinese government’s brutal police stooges that he suffered a haemorrhage and required emergency surgery. He reminds us that courage is the pre-requisite for one’s well-being… that “a person without the freedom to have courage is like a flower withering away”.

We never, ever hear our leaders publicly denounce the criminally intolerant and essentially murderous current Communist Chinese régime. We must not raise such issues: they might affect our trade. Yet would we continue to trade today with a Nazi government, knowing of the death camps, the torture and imprisonment of their own people? 

Apparently yes, judging by the fact that our political world has largely abandoned all standards of morality in favour of a heads-down, only-money-counts policy. Asset sales, removing from New Zealanders what all we have long owned, to sell them, ensures a future loss of dividends which undoubtedly going to rebound on us in years to come. Bankrupt financial thinking espoused by a mis-directed government is trading considerable long-term loss for short-term gain. Moreover, those protesting and trying to provide as of right a democratic input into so much poor decision-making are now readily ridiculed, mocked, and verbally abused, as with the politicised gay movement’s baying that its worried opponents are “intolerant” – when the boot is well and truly on the other foot. Reacting to objections to the divisiveness of his apartheid-like, ill-thought policies, Minister Chris Finlayson’s offensive and condescending “nutters”…and “clowns” insult  well-informed New Zealanders exercising their democratic right to hold him (and others) to account for the damaging directions in which they are sending the country.

We are now well aware that basically one man virtually rules us, an apparently ignorant man at that – a pragmatist who basically decides for the National government – i.e. for New Zealand as a whole – what will or will not happen to the country. Given that three or four of Prime Minister John Key’s closest circle will be privy to his thinking, it is still a fact that very many National Party members have completely disagreed with Key on fundamental socio-political issues which were rammed through Parliament…but are highly unpopular with the public.  However, the public obviously doesn’t count to this self-willed man, with the surety of an individual confidently deciding that he is going to have his own way and arrogantly dismissing the 85% of the country against him. We have little option but to conclude that this is by no means a well-educated individual, but a highly blinkered thinker with so little knowledge of history that he has not demonstrated any awareness at all of the consequences of some of his self-willed advocacies.

The fact that there is no help either to be had through the Labour Party should not blind us to the fact that we have been long reminded that the most dangerous man of all is the charismatic man. John Key’s charisma, charming a subservient media for so long, is only now being questioned. His Pinocchio-like responses to questions he would prefer not to answer is beginning to prove a problem for National. He is nonchalantly presiding over growing social destabilisation. Good, conservative, but demoralised parents are now frightened of the neighbour over the fence; the watchful eye in the street;  the inappropriate intrusion of the politically correct, social welfare officials now in a virtually adversarial position to traditional family values. Add in the arrogance of the hugely costly Maori supremacy movement intruding into every area of our National life  – and the dictatorial edicts with regard to the highly subversive, quite shocking sex “education” programmes now forced upon vulnerable and innocent children and their parents through a long hijacked, now basically Marxist education system.  No wonder so many families now feel at bay.

And how many feel-good-think-bad individuals who were conned into supporting the farcical and destructive gay “marriage” legislation have any awareness of its consequences?

For example, gay indoctrination is now mandatory for British schools. The Daily Telegraph recently reported that the British government is powerless to stop teachers getting sacked if they refuse to endorse same-sex marriage. The UK is not in control: European judges have the final say. Moreover, a legal opinion from a leading QC confirms that one of the major impacts of “Conservative” Prime Minister David Cameron’s new law will be requiring that children are forced to listen to propaganda about gay marriage in the now long-time utterly pernicious “sex education” lessons.

Parents will have little prospect of success in claiming a legal right to withdraw children from such lessons, designed to engineer and reshape children’s values. As the excellent Australian News Weekly points out, the taxpayer-funded Training and Development Agency for schools advocates that pupils must become “resilient“to the values of their parents and grandparents. In 2009, both Muslim and Christian parents in east London “were threatened with prosecution for withdrawing their children from primary school lessons that used the gay marriage story book King and King. “The council said the withdrawals were unauthorised absences and that action would be taken against parents”.

When are New Zealanders as a whole going to wake up – and to support those who have shown that courage that Ai Weiwei has called for? The people of this country who have been renowned for their courage in war are being demoralised, outwitted and intimidated when it comes to important areas of intellectual and moral courage.

This has by no means been accidental – given the attack on our young long mounted by the subversive activism of those inveigling themselves into positions of control over decisions involving the schools curricula; the attack  on family values;  and the  removing of the requirements for genuine parental consultation – replaced by weasel-worded impositions and politicised edicts. It has been long recognised that whoever controls the thinking of our young controls the future of our country.

The walking lie that it is the majority of New Zealanders who are intolerant and bullying on socio-political and moral issues needs to be far more courageously challenged. We are all very familiar with how deliberately intimidating words like “racist” and “homophobic” – and the very silly claim of loose-minded liberals that their opponents are on “the wrong side of history”. These are designed to stigmatise courageous individuals, and to inhibit debate. The fact that they have been only too successful should be a reality call for New Zealanders at large to face up to bullies with an agenda – and minority groups can very successfully bully the majority.

Moreover, polls can be rigged to claim majority support – and we should question whether or not this happened in connection with the reported  poll results supposedly indicating that New Zealanders as a whole favoured gay marriage. This was so obviously untrue, but so misled our mass media commentators with their only too predictable group-thinking that the shock registered by TV3 front-man John Campbell, when this station’s own polling overwhelmingly rejected gay marriage as  legitimate, was plain to see. But then, today’s predominately left-liberal media tend to think their role is to enlighten an ignorant public and persuade the country at large of the rightness of their own so obvious prejudices. Politicians locked into a symbiotic relationship with a condescending, culpably ignorant media are patronising a well-informed public.

 The veneer of respectability cloaking the hijacking of the country and obfuscating the fact that both National and Labour governments have been making spectacularly bad political and economic decisions these recent years, has been a supposedly democratic consultation process. Lawyer Geoffrey Palmer, for example, has been wheeled out for years as an expert on these issues, although it can be argued that in overruling the objections of the Labour Party of the time to impose upon the country ill-thought and problematic legislation, this former (briefly) Prime Minister left us with a highly damaging legacy. The now arguably corrupt practices of the Waitangi Tribunal appear to have eventuated from Palmer’s shortfalls in thinking, as did his problematic, highly questionable decision to open the can of worms enabling constantly squabbling Maori tribes to mount contradictory claims to ownership of land, back to the signing of the treaty of Waitangi.

Apparently not deterred, Palmer is supportive of what is now widely regarded as a distinctly unrepresentative Constitutional Advisory Panel and even claims that it is an independent group. Not so the public at large, rightly regarding it as overwhelmingly  stacked with activist representatives with a distinct agenda, whom it would take a great deal of naivété to regard as having  any real intention of listening to the public.

Once again out of step with the thinking of so many, this determined individual, advancing with a typical insouciance that “it is inevitable that New Zealand will eventually become a republic” – (an assertion also parroted by a Helen Clark and a John Key, but unjustified by public support) – adds that “there is little cause to worry about giving the courts power to interpret the bill”. Palmer seems very unaware that this conclusion is very much at odds with an informed public’s concern about an activist judiciary.  So, too, as his contention that there should be more MPs, not fewer, and that about 150 would be about right, a highly challengeable assertion, given that the genuinely democratic Switzerland, with almost double our population, has only 200 members in their House of Representatives. Proportionately, we would have only 100. Moreover, far from being  a busy-bodying government such as ours, the Swiss government meets only four times a year, its members only once weekly…otherwise getting on with their own lives, their occupations, trades and professions.

The public regards the supposed impartiality of this carefully hand-picked panel as not only deliberately stacked, but farcical. It contains well-known radicalised Maori individuals – and Deborah Coddington, for example, labelling as “rednecks” those who legitimately question the moves to divide the country into Maori and non-Maori (with preferential advantages for the former). Coddington boasted that Bill English, Treaty Minister Chris Finlayson’s very close friend, personally rang her to bring her on board. Quite.

The hope of at least one individual being prepared to withstand an unsolicited push towards a written constitution (the original intention of Maori activists undoubtedly being to further diminish the democratic ideal of genuine equality…equal rights for everybody, irrespective of colour, race, gender, or creed by…by centre-staging a reinvented Treaty of Waitangi) has descended upon Professor John Burrows, formerly of the University of Canterbury School of Law.

However, to expect a well-meaning constitutional lawyer to avoid the temptation of dreaming up a supposedly ideal constitution can be regarded as problematic – even more so given the overwhelmingly radicalised nature of the majority of the panel, and its unrepresentative composition. Moreover, Burrow’s reported comments:  “What is the best law to govern us?” And “Why would we not review something as important as that?” does not show a reluctance to press forward with a written constitution. However, the majority of New Zealanders, well aware that the dice being played are well and truly loaded in favour of those who want a now reinvented treaty do not want a bar of having this damagingly  incorporated into a written constitution – as part of the now familiar vote-buying trade-offs, with minor parties controlling the majority.

The whole consultation mantra right across the field of socio-political activity has now become little more than a charade, the public’s legitimate views basically dismissed.

The select committee process is now a waste of time for those submitting their thinking in good faith, if they do not reflect what have become more and more obviously the radicalised views of members determined to push their own agenda, through an under-informed parliament.  Under the chairmanship of National MP Tau Henare, the proceedings of the Maori Affairs Select Committee were strongly criticised by submitters critiquing highly contestable iwi  claims, and encountering  aggressive tactics and downright rudeness…while part-Maori members of the panel contrastingly supplied warmly welcoming greetings to their own relatives and friends submitting on behalf of their or related iwi. 

Similarly, the select committee established to consider the farcical  and socially damaging gay “marriage “ bill was so unwelcoming  to submitters challenging the bill that its bias was flagrantly obvious.

In almost every area now of our national life, the intrusion of a radicalised propaganda is changing the face of the country. Within the area of what is being taught in schools, things are getting worse not better – as a forthcoming Investigate column will detail.

Moreover, our country’s name is not Aotearoa, and it is essentially buying into radicalised propaganda to use this name, even unwittingly.

Similarly, the flagrant politicisation of everything and anything remotely connected with those of part -Maori descent is deeply dividing the country. The sheer waste of time, let alone the flag-waving of what is now basically promoted as Maori supremacy (as with our national anthem first sung in Maori, taking precedence over the language of the majority of New Zealanders) is dividing us.

Nationwide, the patience of sensible people of good intent, who long valued the relationship between the descendants of the early Maori and those of the colonists, and have been disinclined to any sort of racial discrimination, has now worn very thin.  Right across the country it is being said that enough is enough. There had previously been a hope that with the last of the settlements concluded, the ongoing drain on the taxpayer would stop, and the constant racist promotion and requirement upon the country for things Maori requiring to be given precedence would come to a halt. It has not done so, and is demonstrably getting worse. Furthermore the fact that some of the recent settlement claims were provably false; that parliament has been misled as to their validity; and that historians whose research can indeed demonstrate this have been ignored and rejected, is deeply undemocratic.

It never stops…The unreasonableness of insisting that teachers now learn a pidgin Maori to communicate with and inflict on overwhelmingly Euro-Asian New Zealand children –  given the now white-flight syndrome from poorly performing Maori schools; the equally unreasonable requirement that all  children now be forced into an involvement in Maori-first activities that have nothing to do with their actual parental background – including little boys and girls from the age of five onwards being required now to learn the haka;  having every learning subject imbued with and geared towards the primacy of “Maori” relevance: all need to be challenged. Whole periods are devoted to what many regard as inappropriate potentially damaging activities that mythologise Polynesian culture – while inappropriately encouraging young Maori towards the warlike posturing, inordinate self-esteem  (mana) and aggression which we see reflected when they are older – as with the higher rate of violence in Maori crime statistics.  Should we be surprised?

The evidence all points to the agenda of radically-driven groups now being inflicted on a majority who do not agree with them, but many of whom have been intimidated, virtually bullied into silence.

 Our 100 Days – Claiming back New Zealand…what has gone wrong and how to control our politicians offers the best possible and very real chance to win back this country, and to hold politicized institutions to account.

Join us at www.100days.co.nz  – and do help by telling everybody !

The 100 Days – Claiming Back New Zealand…what has gone wrong and how we can control our politicians, published by the HATM imprint, is now available though all good bookshops.

©  Amy Brooke