The BSA has announced it is stepping outside its legally defined lane to widen its remit to online media networks and has chosen outspoken Sean Plunket of The Platform as their first victim around a complaint regarding his 'racist' tarnishing of the word 'tikanga' by calling it, 'mumbo jumbo'.
This comes against a background of dissent within the Coalition around its agreed decision to remove Treaty of Waitangi references from public services clashing with National's continued advocacy for them to remain. And indeed widen its inclusion to make it mandatory in such services as education and even as far as parliamentary services, where no doubt the likes of Eru Kapa-Kingi would be quick to justify his grossly disrespectful behaviour towards a staff member, as 'tikanga'.
Earlier this year in an attempt to shoot himself in the foot, Luxon sent MP and qualified lawyer, Joseph Mooney, in what turned out to be a fool's errand to convince Sean Plunket's audience on the Platform that Tikanga should be taught at Law School. When Plunket repeatedly insisted on him defining 'Tikanga', he failed. This embarrassing interview came not long after a liberal judge ruled against the new gang patch law after being convinced by the gang member's sob story, and returned it rather than confiscating it.
Paul Goldsmith's outrage at this is hypocritical and farcical, when at the same time his party is advocating for the teaching of the indeterminate 'tikanga' at law school. What would be the point of this if law students were not going to refer to it some day when practising law which would inevitably result in an embedded two tier legal system, which some say already exists today and appears to manifest itself in the above decision.
Although all of this is a moot point given the term is so difficult to define and the making of law is fundamentally dependent on factual evidence to ensure it is just, effective and practical.
Given this fact, one wonders why on earth Gerry Brownlee is considering including 'tikanga' in parliamentary services when all it would do is create division which is already happening in public services and private companies who prefer a DEI to a merit based approach destined to end in disaster.
I wrote to him recently to implore him to reconsider, reminding him:
“You are the Speaker of the NZ House of Representatives which represents all cultures and religions.The idea of introducing Tikanga into parliamentary services will create further division and is one of the reasons the Coalition is losing popularity. Your voters did not ask for this”
Back to Plunket's humorous description of Tikanga as mumbo jumbo. It is not racist. There are many examples of covert racism on line, but this is not one of them. In his defence, his guest's inability to precisely define it does beg the question what definition of the word was the aggrieved Richard Fonselaw from Action Station referring to when he laid the complaint? Like the netball players complaining about coach Noeline Taurua, did the words make him feel unsafe? Not much evidence to build a case on, but the left have succeeded before on less.
When he used the word mumbo jumbo Plunkett was referring to Brooke Van Velden's decision to include Tikanga in the Fire Service, which Plunkett disagreed with. If she was true to the government's policy of 'need not race' the issue of many maraes needing smoke alarms can easily be addressed by prioritising and providing more resources.
And, no they do not need a Maori to visit a marae (that's racist Mr Fonselaw) as everyone speaks English. We are all human and the purpose of the fire service is to 'protect property by responding to fires and other emergencies', with no mention of a special ethnic component.
David Seymour's flawless and tireless advocacy for 'freedom and equality under the law' to avoid division in our society has been tarnished by not insisting the removal of the clause as it just opens the door for more DEI/Tikanga madness and separatism. And weakens his argument with his flakey National mates, who can refer to this when they wish to push their two tier agenda.
Had Mr Potaka been successfully working his powers of persuasion on Ms van Veldon or did polite David not wish to disagree with his determined, female deputy. Pity.
When Judith Collins' 'hiring on merit' legisation, likely a virtue signaling exercise, passes quietly through parliament with barely a mention from the media, will it be ignored by the Marxists leading the public service? Sadly I believe so.
The failure of National to get behind the removal of Treaty references and instead retain many committees and officials of the former government full of activists shows their true goal. Including a treaty clause in a local government code of conduct jarrs with their core services demand.
The code of conduct needs to be dumped along with the left wing activist decision makers appointed by Labour, which should have been done two years ago. Along with the many others.
Like the fire service there is no need to consult with Maori on delivery of essential services in local government. We are all humans and require clean drinking water, waste water removed and storm water managed, along with rubbish removed, good roads, infrastructure and community services.
Local councils whose customers have voted out Maori wards and have crowed about still consulting with Maori, need to be called out and audited to ensure money is not being wasted on this unnecessary 'racist' exercise.
Wendy Geus is a former speechwriter and generalist communications advisor in local government. She now writes for the pure love of it.
5 comments:
Yes, National voters need to be aware that many National MPs are pro-Maorification. I have heard from a family member(a prominent National Party campaigner last election) that there are two factions within National. Luckily, one faction is pro-ACT. Unluckily, the other faction holds sway.
The next election will be decided on the issue - KIWI or Iwi.
Mr Luxons popularity is significantly dented by a series of attacks on right wing voters by cozying up to rascist rhetoric and demands . The Party Vote will favour ACT /and NZFirst because the voters will leave no stone unturned advertising the neccessity of dumping party vote National.
We the public need to ensure that PM Luxon's membership of the iwi chairs is terminated immediately. Both Labour and National have been infiltrated and a clean out is required.
Go to The Platform and check out Richard Fanselow's complaint to the BSA. Out of curiosity, I Googled him. Imagine my surprise to find an attention-seeking wheelchair-bound 'victim.' And he's not even Maori...
Wendy’s piece on National’s self-inflicted wounds over tikanga cuts to the heart of what many centre-right voters have been feeling for months: this government has lost its ideological bearings. Her warning that “the Coalition is losing popularity” is no longer a matter of intuition.
The latest Post–Freshwater poll, reported by Andrea Vance, confirms it in hard numbers. Winston Peters’ New Zealand First has climbed to 11 percent — its highest since the election — while National has slipped by almost exactly the same margin.
Vance writes that “the veteran leader is attracting disaffected National voters frustrated by the Government’s handling of the economy and internal tensions over leadership.” Those internal tensions are shorthand for one thing: Christopher Luxon. Almost a third of New Zealand First voters said they would consider returning to National if Luxon were replaced. That’s not a passing grumble; it’s a warning light on the dashboard. The problem isn’t the Coalition or the policy detail. It’s the Prime Minister himself.
Geus is right to focus on the cultural incoherence at the centre of National’s brand, the mumbo jumbo.
She points to the absurdity of MPs promoting tikanga in law and parliamentary services while claiming to stand for one law for all. When Luxon’s own MP, Joseph Mooney, failed to define tikanga in an interview intended to justify teaching it in law school, it wasn’t just a bad moment — it was symbolic. A party unsure of its own principles cannot defend them.
“The failure of National to get behind the removal of Treaty references and instead retain many committees and officials of the former government full of activists shows their true goal,” Geus wrote. That goal increasingly appears to be keeping everyone calm rather than standing for anything concrete. Yet politics punishes hesitation. The voters who backed National in the hope of ending race-based policy now see a government maintaining it, only with different language and fewer apologies.
Luxon’s triangulation once looked pragmatic. Now it looks hollow. Peters has reclaimed the mantle of conservative conviction; Seymour holds the liberal reformist ground; and Luxon sits uncomfortably in the middle, managerial rather than moral. Vance’s numbers bear this out. Peters’ rise mirrors National’s fall, and Seymour’s dip shows ACT voters losing faith in the Coalition’s direction. The migration isn’t to the Left — it’s to the remnants of what National used to sound like.
Geus warned that importing tikanga into parliamentary services “will create further division and is one of the reasons the Coalition is losing popularity.” The polling now quantifies that division. Voters who expected a government of merit and fairness are instead seeing a government of confusion and appeasement. They want one clear standard of law, efficient administration, and a prime minister who sounds certain about both.
Vance concludes that “Peters’ resurgence is driven more by disaffection with Luxon than a long-term shift in voter loyalty.” That should chill every National strategist. Disaffection can be reversed — but only with leadership that looks decisive and principled. Luxon has little time to prove he can be that leader. If he continues to outsource conviction, or hides behind managerial platitudes while embedding the same policy DNA as Labour, his credibility will keep draining away, point by polling point.
Wendy Geus has described the rot. Andrea Vance has measured it. Together they show a government losing both definition and authority. The next move is Luxon’s — and time, like his mandate, is slipping fast.
—PB
Post a Comment