Gary Moller: Digital ID and Its Impact on Free Speech and the Future of Our Children

Today, we are wrapping our children up in digital cotton wool! What are the implications?

Freedom and privacy are cornerstones of any democratic society. In New Zealand, recent discussions led by the Taxpayers Union and the Free Speech Union have brought urgent attention to two critical issues: the rise of digital ID systems and the increasing control over children's exposure to the digital world. Both developments raise serious questions about the direction our country is heading and the kind of future we want for our children.

John Raine: Closing the Stable Door?

Do we want our children educated or indoctrinated? There has been widespread capture of universities in the Western world, not least in New Zealand, by identity politics and undermining of academic excellence by authoritarian diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) agendas. There is now increasing public distrust in the culture of universities and the quality of the graduates that emerge from what were once highly respected institutions.

David Farrar: Collins on why hate speech should be condemned not criminalised

An excellent address by Attorney-General Judith Collins to the University of Western Sydney (which has also made her an Adjunct Professor of Law).

David Farrar: Goldsmith gets it

NewstalkZB reports:

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has said he won't re-appoint Chief Human Rights Commissioner Paul Hunt.

Goldsmith told Heather du Plessis-Allan that he wants to see a Human Rights Commissioner “who's really focused on fundamental human rights such as free speech, freedom of expression and equal voting.

John MacDonald: When did ram raid bragging become free speech?

I know David Parker’s got a job to do. As Attorney-General, he’s got a job to do and part of that job is to run a fine-tooth comb through new laws to see if they stack up and won’t be more trouble than they’re worth.

What I mean by that, is making sure they don't have so many holes in them that anyone who wants to could get all legal on it and either get away with whatever the law is designed to stop, or haul the government off to the likes of the Supreme Court.

Clive Bibby: A real and serious threat to our democracy.

A recent piece by my good friend Karl du Fresne, published on this blog, talked about the need for anonymity for some folk expressing views that may be considered controversial by people who have power over employment opportunities.

As usual it was a well written commentary by someone who is regarded by his enemies as being untouchable given he has earned a reputation for accuracy and well researched investigative journalism but it was also a sobering account of the state “free expression in New Zealand.

Unfortunately, there are few other individuals still writing opinion pieces in this country who command the respect that allows them to say what they like and we, as a nation of highly interested bystanders, are the worse for it.

Karl du Fresne: We are no better than Putin's Russia or Xi's China

Someone using the name Jordan Heathcote has submitted provocative comments on my two most recent posts. I doubt that the name is genuine but I’ve published the comments because I welcome alternative perspectives and because I think there’s some truth in what the commenter says, although he (I assume it’s a "he") over-eggs the pudding somewhat – for example, by treating all journalists as liars. I worked in the media for more than half a century and can’t recall any instance when a colleague knowingly reported something untruthful. (Bias and distortion are another matter.)

Should I have published comments from someone I suspect is hiding behind a pseudonym? That question forces me to revisit the vexed question of anonymity. But it also raises a far bigger and more disturbing issue – namely, the climate of fear that obviously deters many people from exercising their democratic right to say what they think, using their own names.

Chris Trotter: The Most Pertinent Question.

The Labour Government's wholesale retreat from its dangerously exposed positions on “Hate Speech” should be applauded. Had it remained committed to the hardline definitions it trailed before the public a year or so ago, Jacinda Ardern’s ministry would have been condemning itself to a battle it did not need to fight – and could not win. The truth of the matter is that Labour’s dangerous dalliance with the Woke variant of Hate Speech has served no one but the Act Party, whose staunch defence of Freedom of Expression accounts for much of its impressive increase in electoral support.

One of the most pertinent questions put to Kiritapu Allan, the Cabinet Minister in whose name the watered-down legislation will be introduced, came from Newshub Nation’s Rebecca Wright. What was it, she wanted to know, that prevented the Labour Government from implementing these measures when they were originally recommended by the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch Mosque Shootings almost exactly two years ago?

Point of Order: Simon said something sad and unfortunate (or so it seems) but we must be patient to learn from Dr Sharma what it was

Point of Order looks forward to hearing from Dr Gaurav Sharma, MP for Hamilton West.

Our interest in him and his sensibilities was whetted by a recent Parliamentary debate in which he indicated he had been upset by something National’s Simon O’Connor had said on the subject of academic freedom.

The occasion was the first reading of the Education and Training (Freedom of Expression) Amendment Bill, a private member’s bill promoted by ACT MP James McDowall.

The bill required tertiary institutions to protect freedom of expression and enabled them to issue codes of practice that set out procedures for students and staff to follow to uphold freedom of expression.

ACT and Nats supported the Bill. Labour, the Greens and the Māori Party had the numbers to sink it before it went any further.

Sharma followed O’Connor in contributing the debate:

Guy Steward: The Dangers of Misinformation and Disinformation

How precious of the mainstream news media to lecture us about the dangers of disinformation and misinformation when their whole modus operandi is along exactly those lines.

I remember when reading the daily newspaper was a pleasure and I’d look forward to it in work breaks, often getting something of interest and keeping articles to read later or do further research on. Over the years the time spent became less and less until in the last six years it went from fifteen minutes to five, then a quick flick through, then a glance at the first page headlines, now barely that. It was both the content and the literary quality that seemed, to me at least, to decrease over time until it just discredited itself or provoked a cringe.

Ross Meurant: Rights Denied - Denied By Whom?

Leighton Baker (1), a hard-core Christian, is reported as being opposed to gender theory, prostitution, decriminalisation of abortion, marijuana and euthanasia.

When an MP I voted for gay rights, against hanging, pro-abortion and have made a case to legalize dope. (2)  And I’m a pagan.

Baker had his Twitter page taken down a month out from the last election. NZ Herald no longer publish me.

Eminent historian, former MP, Hon Dr Michael Bassett, who clinically debunks interpretations by some Maori of the Treaty of Waitangi and who condemns the concomitant power grabs by Maori; (3) from water rights to preferential treatment and control of New Zealand’s health industry, is now blacklisted (excuse the pun) from Main Stream Media. (4)

Karl du Fresne: On freedom of expression and that $55 million media handout

It seems I’ve achieved the great distinction of being deleted from Reddit. A friend emailed me recently to advise that my Spectator Australia article – ‘NewZealand is being transformed, but not in a good way’ – had been uploaded to Reddit several days previously, but had then been taken down. A notice explained: “Sorry, this post has been removed by the moderators”. This was followed by what appeared to be a standard explanatory note: “Moderators remove posts from feeds for a variety of reasons, including keeping communities safe, civil and true to their purpose”.

Who are these moderators? They’re not identified. Neither did the weasel-word explanatory note say exactly what the problem was with my article. I’m left to conclude that the anonymous moderators deemed it “unsafe” – but in what way?

We should be very suspicious of the word “safety” when used in this type of context. It has become another cover for the Stalinist authoritarianism that infects public discourse and seeks to silence and marginalise dissenters.

Gerry Eckhoff: Freedom of expression

It is a privilege and a pleasure to read the erudite columnist Gina Barreca – the American humourist, academic and distinguished professor of English literature.  Her writings just percolate that most elusive of all human conditions -common sense – which is far removed from being, well, common. She writes of the essential role of newspapers upholding the freedoms and traditions of a free press with special reference to cartoons, especially of a political nature. The brilliance of a particularly insightful cartoon can help defuse a smoldering issue or the rage of the righteous.

This past decade has seen, as never before in peace time, a continuous attempt to sanitize the media on whom we rely to offer freedom of speech, if this essential element in a democracy is to mean anything. That is why the opinion pages of a newspaper are so important to those who “only stand and wait”. The Australian PM Scott Morrison calls such people the “quiet Australians.” Here in NZ, the clatter and the cry of the few demand futile declarations of a “Climate Emergency” which shows just how simple it is to cry wolf and be heard -  if you are against something – anything.

NZCPR Weekly: Muzzling Free Expression

Dear NZCPR Reader,   

This week we reaffirm the crucial importance of the freedom of expression to a society and we reflect on the actions of Australian Rugby in sacking Israel Folau; our NZCPR Guest Commentator Dave Witherow examines press freedom and how the media is increasingly restricting the free expression of readers; and our poll asks whether you believe Australian Rugby should have sacked Israel Folau.

*To read the newsletter click HERE.
*To register for the NZCPR Weekly mailing list, click HERE.  

Lindsay Perigo: New Zealand is a Police State

There is now apparently a police-compiled Enemies List circulating among New Zealand's totalitarian Globalist elite, such as Comrade Ardern, Comrade Andrew Little, Comrade Winston Peters and new Human Wrongs Commissar Comrade Paul Hunt, a lackey of raving anti-Semite and hard-core socialist Comrade Jeremy Corbyn, all advancing the agenda of the most evil man on the planet, George Soros. (Why was this Islamo-Marxist fascist Paul Hunt brought over to destroy our Bill of Rights?! At whose expense?!) 

From many accounts police are actively harassing people on this list.

Barend Vlaardingerbroek: The Charlie Hebdo massacre and the red herring of ‘freedom of expression’

Within hours of the bloodshed in Paris, large numbers of people had gathered in major cities across Europe in protest at what they saw as being an attack on a fundamental European human right: freedom of expression, a pillar of democracy. This theme was eclipsed by the theme of ‘unity’ in the course of mass marches attended by leaders from across the continent a few days later.

I had some difficulty in seeing what the point of the protests targeting freedom of expression in the immediate aftermath of the killings was. Who was the intended recipient of the message – al-Qaida in Yemen? If so, the protesters would be well advised to save their breath to cool their broth.