Roger Partridge: What Freedom of Speech Is For - The case against silencing

In 1633, the Roman Inquisition condemned Galileo for heresy. His offence was to argue that the Earth moves around the Sun.

The Church was not acting out of malice. It was protecting a politically approved consensus against what was considered to be dangerous nonsense. The theologians and philosophers who condemned Galileo were not fools. They were defending what every educated person knew to be true.

They were also wrong. And being wrong with institutional authority behind you is far more dangerous than being wrong alone.

Bob Edlin: Fringe benefits in the dunnies at IRD raise questions.....

Fringe benefits in the dunnies at IRD raise questions about what staff can say without upsetting the rainbow bunch

Free speech is under threat in Britain because people feel they cannot speak out for fear of offending others over race, religion and immigration, according to research for the Commission for Countering Extremism, which advises the Government.

Moreover, almost half of Britons believe people are too easily offended.

David Farrar: Government moves to strengthen free speech on campus

Penny Simmonds announced:

Tertiary Education and Skills Minister Penny Simmonds and Associate Minister of Education David Seymour today announced legislation changes to strengthen freedom of speech obligations on universities.

“Freedom of speech is fundamental to the concept of academic freedom and there is concern that universities seem to be taking a more risk-averse approach,” Ms Simmonds says.

Simon O'Connor: Worlds Apart? - Part One

Events across the UK, and also more locally, highlight how fundamental rights are being consistently challenged. This is Part One of a two part Substack looking at the concerning dynamics in play.

There is a saying, attributed to a few people including Winston Churchill, about never letting a good crisis go to waste.

In recent weeks, there have been clear challenges to a cohesive society both in New Zealand and overseas in countries such as the United Kingdom. In each instance, instead of authorities and influencers seeking dialogue, debate, or a desire to understand underlying motivations – these same people have instead sought to stifle discussion, suppress dissent, and seek to limit fundamental rights such as freedom of speech.

Alex Penk: In defence of our right to say what we believe

Everyone has some controversial beliefs.

But how comfortable are we telling people about them? For many of us, the answer is: not very.

We commissioned new research asking New Zealanders whether they thought society should have more tolerance for people expressing differing beliefs even if they are unpopular or about sensitive issues like sex and gender identity, the Treaty of Waitangi, hate speech, or religion. The majority — 59% — agreed that we need to be more tolerant than we are; just 11% disagreed.

Karl du Fresne: My experience of censorship and what it tells us about the new culture of journalism

The Free Speech Union held its annual general meeting last weekend in Christchurch. I was part of a panel that discussed free speech and the media. The following were my introductory remarks, which refer to incidents previously covered on this blog.

Two years ago I was invited to write a regular opinion column for the National Business Review, a paper for which I had once worked in the distant past. A contract was signed and I duly submitted my first column.

Stuart Smith: The Creeping Loss of Our Freedoms

The fundamental human right of freedom of speech is being threatened in New Zealand, and, if we fail to resist, we risk losing it entirely. The recent shutdown of Posie Parker’s Let Women Speak tour by protestors serves as a clear illustration of this danger. Another instance is Julian Batchelor’s nationwide tour promoting his booklet Stop Co-Governance, where his public meeting in Dunedin was forcefully disrupted by protesters who disagreed with his perspectives.

John Robinson: A call for freedom of speech

To the leaders of the National, ACT and New Zealand First Parties

In 1940, as World War Two was raging, W H Auden voiced his despair and powerlessness: “While those whom we love are dying or in terrible danger, the overwhelming desire to do something this minute to stop it makes it hard to sit still and think.” 

This echoes my feelings (and yours surely) with the destruction of equality, democracy, and freedom of speech here in New Zealand:

While our freedoms that we love are in terrible danger, the overwhelming desire to do something this minute to stop it makes it hard to sit still and think.

Bob Jones: Well done Michael Wood

Congratulations to Immigration Minister Michael Wood for refusing to ban British anti-trans activist Posie Parker speaking in New Zealand. The utterly fraudulent argument proffered by diverse sexually confused groups for the ban was that Parker’s presence would cause riots. And the reason they would occur is these same groups say they plan to cause them.

Brendan O'Neill: The Caesars of the Information Age

I thought I would feel some relief when the social-media giants came to their senses and let Donald Trump back on their platforms. Yet now that it’s happened, now that Meta has decreed that Trump has served his time in the virtual wilderness and may once again post on Facebook and Instagram, I just feel unnerved. Unnerved by the extraordinary power these people wield over who may and who may not engage with the billions of souls who gather online. Unnerved by their supranational authority to grant or rescind a licence to speak in the global town square. Unnerved by the historically unprecedented dominion this small clique of the woke rich enjoys over the liberty to utter.

John Robinson: Where are we going? This is our country, our future to decide

We, the living, are not ruled from beyond the grave by those who lived before us in different times. It is for us to decide our way of life, our culture, our government, our laws.

Let go the shackles of the past

The Treaty of Waitangi was set down, agreed upon and signed in 1840, now (in 2022) 182 years in the past. In the last half-century, the text has been argued over, translated to and fro between English and Maori multiple times with massive changes in the meaning of many Maori words — such as taonga going from property taken at the point of a spear [Hongi Hika: tao, a spear] to “treasures” [Kawharu]), and given newly introduced add-ons (such as “partnership” and “principles”) so there are many and contradictory versions of what was meant and what should guide us today.

Point of Order: Ministers tackle various issues overseas....

.....while Kiri Allan extends the Human Rights Act to combat religious bigots in NZ

Two ministers are overseas, combating climate change (in the case of James Shaw) and Russian invaders (in the case of Defence Minister Peeni Henare).

Another minister is bound for Paris, to combat mental ill-health among other things, according to his press statement.

And back home, Justice Minister Kiri Allan is combating religious discrimination.

Karl du Fresne: A mixed week for freedom of speech

It’s been an interesting few days for anyone with an interest in free speech. There's been one positive development, one negative and one inconclusive.

First came the surprise announcement last Friday that Sir Robert Jones was abandoning his defamation case against film maker Renae Maihi.

To recap: Jones wrote a self-evidently satirical column for National Business Review* in which he suggested that Waitangi Day should be replaced with Maori Gratitude Day.

“I have in mind a public holiday where Maori bring us breakfast in bed or weed our gardens, wash and polish our cars and so on out of gratitude for existing,” he wrote.