“Prime Minister, the country is running out of time — and you are running out of excuses.”
Dear Prime Minister,
Before anything else, you need to be reminded of something every farmer, every pilot, and every leader worth the title already knows: a flock only survives when the lead goose takes the wind. In a V‑formation, the bird at the front absorbs the full force of the headwind so the others can fly. But when that lead goose tires, it does not pretend. It does not hide behind rehearsed lines or staged videos. It moves aside — because the survival of the flock matters more than the pride of the leader.
New Zealand is flying into a headwind of debt, declining productivity, rising costs, and collapsing public confidence. The flock is tired. The wind is strengthening. And right now, Prime Minister, you are not taking the wind.
The country is tightening its belt while Wellington expands its own.
Producers are struggling while bureaucracy grows. We are borrowing money just to meet interest payments — the financial position of a nation drifting toward crisis.
This is not leadership. This is avoidance. Avoidance is something no flock can survive.
You have seven months to prove you understand the scale of the storm we are flying into.
Not with slogans. Not with photo opportunities. With action.
Below are the issues New Zealanders are shouting about — and the ones your government keeps avoiding.
1. THE TREATY & CO‑GOVERNANCE — THE DRIFT MUST STOP
Public unrest is rising because the Treaty is being interpreted far beyond what Parliament ever defined.
Councils are being forced into consultation layers and governance structures that cost millions and deliver nothing. This is not cultural.
This is constitutional and financial. New Zealanders want: Clear, lawful limits.
Democratic control. An end to administrative invention. The Treaty must operate within the law, not beyond it.
Co‑governance cannot continue expanding without public mandate or fiscal justification.
2. CLIMATE POLICY — WE CANNOT PAY FOR SYMBOLISM
New Zealand produces less than 0.2% of global emissions, yet we are imposing costs on ourselves that larger nations are stepping back from.
Other countries are reassessing their commitments. We must do the same.A full review of our Paris obligations is not radical. It is responsible.
3. IMMIGRATION & THE INDIA DEAL — TRANSPARENCY IS NON‑NEGOTIABLE
New Zealanders have not been told the truth about the immigration components of the India trade deal. Release the full details.
Pause the immigration provisions until the public has seen them. Trust cannot survive secrecy.
4. THE PUBLIC SERVICE — THE COUNTRY CANNOT CARRY THIS WEIGHT
The bureaucracy has grown beyond what the economy can sustain.
Advisory teams — especially in Education — are massively over‑staffed relative to output.
A government cannot keep borrowing to fund administration while the productive economy shrinks.
Conduct a full audit. Cut what does not deliver.
5. THE ECONOMY — STOP FUNDING WHAT PRODUCES NO RETURN
We are borrowing money to pay interest.
That is the financial position of a country in decline.
Meanwhile, spending continues on programs that produce no measurable economic benefit.
Introduce a Public Value Test:
If it doesn’t produce economic return, social return, or meet statutory necessity — stop funding it.
6. ENERGY — BUILD REAL GENERATION
Wind and solar operate at 20–35% efficiency and consume productive land.
They cannot power a modern economy.
New Zealand needs large‑scale hydro or pumped‑hydro.
Name the project. Commit to it. Start building.
7. SUPERMARKET COMPETITION — PRODUCERS ARE BEING CRUSHED
The duopoly is extracting margins that would be unacceptable anywhere else.
Producers are being squeezed while retail prices stay high.
Consider tax mechanisms that reward fair margins and penalize excessive ones.
This is not anti‑business. It is pro‑New Zealand.
8. LAW & ORDER — RESPONSIBILITY STARTS IN THE HOME, NOT THE COURTROOM
Crime does not begin with the police.
It begins in the home, in the family, and in the absence of responsibility.
New Zealand has drifted into a culture where discipline is optional, consequences are negotiable, and accountability is someone else’s problem.
Many cultures maintain strong family discipline — expectations, boundaries, respect.
Our modern culture has drifted toward permissiveness, and we are paying the price.
Children must learn responsibility long before they meet a police officer.
Schools must teach it. Parents must model it. Communities must reinforce it.
Parenting styles matter:
Authoritarian (the rock): firm but rigid
Authoritative (the tree): strong roots, clear boundaries, supportive but uncompromising.
Permissive (the paper): bends to everything, stands for nothing.
We have become a paper society — and paper societies tear easily.
Meanwhile, police are drowning in paperwork that does nothing to improve public safety.
Communities want visible policing and consistent sentencing.
Review the administrative load. Return officers to the front line.
And rebuild a culture where responsibility is taught before crime becomes a career.
Prime Minister, the flock is tired — and the headwind is getting stronger.
New Zealand cannot survive more soft leadership.
The country needs strength, clarity, and economic discipline — not political theatre.
Choose three of these actions. Commit to them. Deliver them.
The flock will follow a leader who takes the wind.
Right now, they are not sure you are that leader.
Yours sincerely,
Ivan Barnett
Pee Kay writes he is from a generation where common sense, standards, integrity and honesty are fundamental attributes. This article was first published HERE
New Zealand cannot survive more soft leadership.
The country needs strength, clarity, and economic discipline — not political theatre.
Choose three of these actions. Commit to them. Deliver them.
The flock will follow a leader who takes the wind.
Right now, they are not sure you are that leader.
Yours sincerely,
Ivan Barnett
Pee Kay writes he is from a generation where common sense, standards, integrity and honesty are fundamental attributes. This article was first published HERE
14 comments:
All true. But, as in the UK, there would be even worse - in fact, horrendous - candidates as replacements. Cynical politicians play on this fear with voters. Further proof of their dismally low calibre.
NZ would be in a much better financial state if we stopped handing out money for Treaty Settlements that may or may not be legitimate-certainly the claimants need not be legitimate MÄori.
I agree with mining done sensitively with the environment, but be very careful that NZ First isn’t pushing the issue hard so MÄori receive royalties that should in fact be used to the benefit of all NZers’. Luxon and the coalition Government aren’t being upfront on how far down the co-governance road they are leading the country and at what cost.
Bravo PK. You have absolutely nailed it by clearly describing the difference between a Symbolic Head of State and Active Political Authority. Ceremonial ribbon cutting and cameos with foreign dignitaries will never repair the damage created by the Ardern/Hipkin years.
Even with a blue print of courageous leadership on full display, fails to register with those that hold licence to save our country’s spiralling demise.
The treaty is a signed contract. Signed by powerful chiefs and the powers of the British Empire. Reneging on a masculine powerful contract is the opposite of strong leadership, it is a soft and feckless action. Luxon knows this, and kiwis (brown, white or other) know this. I’ve never read such an off-base article from someone who purports to be speaking from a place of principles.
Who wrote this? PK, JC, or Ivan Barnett?
Point No1 above is the pre-eminent and most pressing one to my mind as it is proving to be the biggest drain on our Country's economy and future well being in many of the other points made. Further, certain elements are proposing a grand coalition between Liebour and National. If Luxflakes were to veer towards such an option it would guarantee two things: 1. He Puapua would return on steroids. 2. National would be subsumed by Liebour by the end of that term and cease to exist. The net result would be a Country that is completely beggared.
Pity that Luxon will never read this, and his staff are too scared to bring it to his attention.
Interesting comparison - The Treaty and Luxon's FTA with India.
He doesn't respect or believe that the Treaty should be honored, but his India FTA should be .
More than somewhat hypocritical !
The Article under PK's name is Commonsense. If you cannot see that you are a lost cause.
As for the Treaty, it was a signed agreement between the Crown (not the Empire) and Native Chiefs: one peoples from Great Britain -- as it was, and the other peoples who had settled in New Zealand around 1250 +/-.
Today we have in New Zealand peoples from around 160 countries. Are they considered to be subject to the Treaty without ever having had a say in its writing ?
Are we going to be forever arguing over continually re-interpreted Treaty Principles that were never included in the Treaty when written, but are an invention of Maori supported by Activist Judges ?
I am firmly of the opinion that the Treaty (and all versions of it) should be confined to history, and all 160 ethnicities should from now on be treated equally before the one Westminster-based law. Tikanga should be confined to the storytellers who are able to vary it at will.
We don't need the Treaty, we don't need activist judges, we don't need the Waitangi Tribunal, we don't need special seats reserved for Maori, and we don't need a racist Maori Party.
“New Zealand produces less than 0.2% of global emissions”
By this logic, any industry or polluter anywhere in NZ or across the globe can opt out of responsibility, because they aren’t as bad as someone else. This is toddler logic, not leadership! Oh for the days of Lange and NZ forging the path for the world. Small minded thinking is taking this country backwards, and Luxon is a small minded specialist middle manager. And some so-called political commentators are even more small minded than Luxon.
“Today we have in New Zealand peoples from around 160 countries. Are they considered to be subject to the Treaty without ever having had a say in its writing ?”
Tell me you don’t understand the treaty without telling me you don’t understand the treaty. I yearn for the days of educated debate, now we get this uninformed reckoning from people. There should be some kind of qualification process for commenting on BV
Anon 5.39
Can you tell me of any Treaty, anywhere in the world that is nearly 200 years old that still exists in the spirit of which it was agreed ?
The world has moved on and we need to recognize that in due course of time, Maori blood will continue to dilute to the point that the ToW is even more dysfunctional and obsolete.
Face it, slavery was perfectly legal up until 5 February 1840 - do you want to go back to those days ?
Is there any politician in NZ who has the temerity to state that this Treaty which is over ruling democracy, is obsolete and start removing the 96 items of legislation that give preference to people with any drop of Maori blood.
However..... if, as alleged, The Herald is reporting that the NZ European pop. will fall to 45% and below in the coming years - the only side of the Treaty to matter will be the Maori interpretation.
Yes Anon 7-22. You are correct; The Treaty was a signed document and it has long ago done what it intended. The original Treaty is nothing like what has been conjured up and touted around today. The original signatories have long passed on and been buried. Just like the Treaty should have been by now. But some losers think there is money to be made by continually digging it up and giving it CPR
To Anon at 7.56: The Herald reportedly said the European pop. would fall to 45% and below in the coming years.
Is this not the ideal outcome for Iwi and trace Maori? Or, do they want a permanent serf class to pay tax for their expensive projects and NZ's ballooning beneficiary bill? What young person with aspiration and a brain would accept this?
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.