one headline says, “New era of Treaty politics looms”. Luxon vehemently opposed to referendum: it would be too divisive, goes the writer’s fearful narrative.
This hot-potato issue has apparently been holding up negotiations for the new government. It is this and other emotive social issues, that NZ First campaigned on to get their foot in the door this election. Issues that National was too afraid to discuss in depth and, let’s be honest, Christopher Luxon found too distasteful to discuss. It might frighten the horses (aka the media, Maori elite, academia and public servants).
Paul Goldsmith attempted to explain the more-complicated three-party result as “the public has given us this result” as if it were completely out of their hands, a bit like a woman ‘falling pregnant’, the immaculate conception peut-être?
Refusing to discuss more gnarly issues and failing to even listen to people’s concerns, constantly deflecting and responding with ‘party vote National’ had a ‘Polly wants a cracker’ monotony to it and gives credibility to (I can’t believe I am saying this) Matthew Hooton’s assertion that Luxon talks a lot, but doesn’t listen.
That really resonated with me when I remember Luxon’s arrogant, derisive response to media questions about girls’ concerns about school toilets and transgenders. The expert in mergers and acquisitions responded by asking if we think he should be concerned about toilets when we have an economic crisis to deal with? He failed to listen to our young women. And probably contributed to National’s lower than expected party vote.
I have said it before and I will say it again, Luxon needs to learn the value of…The Pause! He is not as quick on his feet with witty responses like Seymour, Jones and Peters. However he can improve his responses by slowing down, being more precise, using pauses to gather his thoughts rather than repetitively rambling on.
ACT’s win in Tamaki, where Brooke van Velden cannibalised the conservative vote, seemed like a hollow victory when they failed to reach double digits of MPs with their party vote. A victory in Auckland Central would have been more impressive.
Seymour’s tone deaf and arrogant responses during an interview with Family First saw the more unpleasant side of his personality emerge. Viewed by over 80,000 people, he omitted to disagree without being disagreeable. Most of the viewers’ comments were negative and vowing not to vote for him.
However I didn’t write the ACT leader off as his work ethic and policy development were second to none during the campaign. He continues to show courage and refuses to be intimidated by the left, who are out in force threatening the new government over proposed changes to te reo in the public service and clarification of the Treaty. He and NZ First will provide a much needed spine to our new government.
And let’s take the issue of our country’s name. Where in the world do you have citizens arguing over their country’s name with the public service and media coercively forcing their preference on us? Peters was hammering this on the campaign trail and it did him no harm.
It looks like our country has an identity crisis!
I would have advised Luxon to use this on the campaign trail to highlight the issue, making it quite clear he preferred New Zealand, as he has said publicly, referring to the fact we are a trading nation and so it makes sense to use our name, New Zealand.
The media chose to ignore his statement as it did not fit their and Labour’s agenda to change the name of our country by coercion and brainwashing rather than consulting with the people.
Luxon could have threatened a referendum (or withdrawal of bribe money) if the media did not stop using Aotearoa in their reporting; like the Treaty issue, breathing fire and brimstone over taking the issue to referendum will do the trick, as they know what the outcome would be.
There is nothing complicated about the Treaty. However the elite believe they have ownership of their radical, embroidered interpretation and anything else is ‘dangerous’ and ‘divisive’. Hear Luxon repeating their fears?
Discussing it and taking it to a referendum terrifies them as they don’t want a discussion. Seymour’s logical, reasoned, unembroidered clarification tears their version apart. Better to keep muddying the waters and keep us all in the dark and keep reaping the rewards.
A certain amount of self interest is involved in Chris Finalyson’s ‘divisive’ belief: he benefits from current judicial interference in legal outcomes that favour his Maori clients. Tell us that is not so, Mr Finlayson.
However making changes, one of which Shane Jones explained recently is to prevent activist judges changing outcomes of a trial to suit their own ‘Maori Treaty obligation’ agenda, could defer a referendum and go some way to returning to a New Zealand judicial system based on the rule of law.
Other changes to the public service, which has gone feral on this issue, will be changing all department names back to English, with written branding showing Maori names underneath, maybe in italics. That is simply for practicality. Everyone reads and understands English.
Examples of this already (not the public service) are the Post and the Press, which have creatively and practically achieved a good rebranding balance.
Race-based health delivery will come to a halt when the Maori Health Authority goes, replaced with one system based on ‘need’, and I have emailed our new minister stating my preference for banning the term ‘pregnant people’ that Health NZ is using in its communications. It is an insult to women. But that’s a whole other can of worms, which NZ First are happy to open.
Discriminatory advertising for staff should also come to a screaming halt. Dr Reti is going to have his work cut out, but I do not doubt his ability and determination.
We wait with anticipation for our new government to be formed.