I HAVE BEEN ON LUXON’S CASE ALL YEAR
An interesting article from John Allen Oldfield who I became to know through the FB Group I Founded & Administrated ( Kiwis Protecting Our Freedom of Expression ) which was disabled last December. I remain in contact with John. Sue Reyland
I have been on Luxon’s case all year. I post on his site that he is dancing on the head of a pin, not coming out and telling the electorate that National opposes co-governance, the destruction of our democracy, and He Puapua. I’ve told him it will be his downfall.
I invite you to read Muriel Newman’s column, just out today. Here is a piece form it –
“But there’s a much deeper reason for National’s decline in the polls. The honeymoon of hope and expectation around the new leader has subsided. Some will be disappointed with Christopher Luxon’s impassive stance on a number of issues – but particularly Labour’s attack on democracy through co-governance.
New Zealanders had hoped National’s new leader would take a firm position defending our values and our record of being one of the longest standing and most successful democracies in the world.
Instead, he has tip-toed around the issues, seemingly afraid of creating controversy and negative press.
This is a key reason National is losing voter support to parties not afraid to confront this issue: ACT rose 4 percent and New Zealand First 2 percent in that 1 News poll – their support coming at the expense of Labour, National and the Greens.
This is also the conclusion reached by former ACT leader Richard Prebble in his latest Herald article when he says: “Unlike Luxon, David Seymour used his party’s annual conference to clearly state ACT’s rejection of co-government and support for liberal democracy’s one person, one vote. It is why ACT is rising in the polls.”
He predicts that if National steps up and defends our democracy and values from Labour’s attack, he will win the next election by a “landslide.”
If National does not step up the question is, how much support will they lose?”
She is absolutely right. If Luxon came out this afternoon and opposed He Puapua, co-governance, unequivocally and committed to the repeal of race-based legislation, the Sam issue would disappear over night. The Nats would soar in the polls.
Ask yourself (and read Muriel’s column) why is Act doing so well? The answer is very simple. Act has done its own polling. It has determined the issue most important to the people, it has developed an appropriate policy. Thgey identify with New Zealanders and not an ideology, especially one predicated on a fabricated lie around the treaty. They are rocketing upwards. They have stolen a march on National.
So Luxon, don’t tell us about your wonderful morning in Te Puke or whereever. That may stroke those locals but it does nothing for me. You have to come out and tell us you’re on our side or you won’t be PM next year, Seymour will be. This election is yours to lose. Identify with the one issue concerning New Zealanders and do something about it NOW.
NZCPR WEEKLY:
MESSAGE TO NATIONAL
By Dr Muriel Newman
Two recent public opinion polls had some good and bad news for National. The bad news is their support has softened.
Monday night’s 1 NEWS Kantar Public Poll showed National sliding two points to 37 percent, and Christopher Luxon falling 3 points to 22 percent in the preferred prime minister ratings.
The good news is that National could form a government with the support of ACT, thanks to their jump of 4 points to 11 percent.
With Labour losing 2 to 35 percent – its lowest level for five years – and the Greens losing 1 to 9 percent, along with the Maori Party steady on 2 percent, Jacinda Ardern’s potential coalition sits on 44 percent, while National’s moves ahead to 48 percent.
The bad news gets worse for Labour. Jacinda Ardern’s ranking as preferred Prime Minister is continuing to fall, down 3 points to 30 percent – her lowest rating since before becoming PM.
Apart from ACT, the other big winner in the poll was New Zealand First which increased 2 points to 3 percent.
The 1 News poll is consistent with the Roy Morgan poll published a week earlier. It had National falling 4 points to 35 percent – its lowest rating on that poll since January. This put their chances of winning an election with ACT behind an alliance of Labour, the Greens, and the Maori Party.
The biggest gain in that poll came from the Maori Party, which increased 2.5 points to 4 percent – its highest support since April 2010. The analysis suggests some of Labour’s strong support from younger women has moved across to the Maori Party, lifting their support amongst 18-49-year-old women from 3.5 percent to 9 percent.
Could it be that Jacinda Ardern’s agenda to empower the iwi elite has ended up building support for the Maori Party, instead of Labour? How ironic that would be if her sacrificing of our democracy ended up harming not only New Zealand, but Labour itself?
National also lost support from women, with some of the older women they had won back from Labour after the 2020 election, returning to Labour.
When searching for a reason behind the fall in National’s support the pollsters pointed out that, “Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has built her leadership on being the person New Zealanders can trust to deal with challenges as varied as the COVID-19 pandemic and the Christchurch shooting. If Christopher Luxon’s missteps in recent weeks result in people distrusting the National Leader and questioning his honesty, or the honesty of the team around him, he will come under renewed scrutiny as an alternative Prime Minister heading towards next year’s election.”
But there’s a much deeper reason for National’s decline in the polls. The honeymoon of hope and expectation around the new leader has subsided. Some will be disappointed with Christopher Luxon’s impassive stance on a number of issues – but particularly Labour’s attack on democracy through co-governance.
New Zealanders had hoped National’s new leader would take a firm position defending our values and our record of being one of the longest standing and most successful democracies in the world.
Instead, he has tip-toed around the issues, seemingly afraid of creating controversy and negative press.
This is a key reason National is losing voter support to parties not afraid to confront this issue: ACT rose 4 percent and New Zealand First 2 percent in that 1 News poll – their support coming at the expense of Labour, National and the Greens.
This is also the conclusion reached by former ACT leader Richard Prebble in his latest Herald article when he says: “Unlike Luxon, David Seymour used his party’s annual conference to clearly state ACT’s rejection of co-government and support for liberal democracy’s one person, one vote. It is why ACT is rising in the polls.”
He predicts that if National steps up and defends our democracy and values from Labour’s attack, he will win the next election by a “landslide.”
If National does not step up the question is, how much support will they lose?
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters is strongly opposed to co-governance and is scathing about the self-interest of Labour’s Maori Caucus in promoting this elitist agenda: “The push is coming from the increasingly out of touch Labour Maori Caucus and only serves their own self-interest, trying to compete with the Maori Party in a race to see who can produce the most separatist policies to appease a certain Maori elite. They do not represent the views of Maoridom – the majority of whom are not even on the Maori roll, and for good reason.”
ACT leader David Seymour is also clear on the need to defend democracy: “The idea of co-governance is incompatible with democracy. No society where people have different political rights based on birth has ever succeeded… The Labour Party is obsessed with the Partnership State, putting the Treaty at the heart of everything. We will need to remove the constant references to the Treaty from the law and replace it with a commitment to liberal democracy. One person, one vote, and equality for all in a multi-ethnic nation state.”
Labour’s latest attack on democracy came in the form of the Canterbury Regional Council (Ngai Tahu) Representation Bill, which allows Ngai Tahu to appoint an additional two members with full voting rights onto a council that already has two existing Ngai Tahu advisors.
In the Third Reading debate on the Bill, Labour not only boasted about trashing ‘one person, one vote’ democracy, but Tamati Coffey signalled the law change could open the floodgates for other tribal groups around the country: “Ngai Tahu have opened the door… all of those iwi out there that are struggling with how representation works for them, I hope that they’re understanding that this is a potential pathway.”
The bill’s sponsor, Te Tai Tonga MP Rino Tirikatene, claimed the Treaty entitled Ngai Tahu to the seats: “This bill is about the evolution of our Treaty partnership and representation of iwi at the local government level. Ngai Tahu are entitled to this representation because that is the promise of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, and this is a modern-day expression of that promise.”
But he’s wrong.
This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator Gary Judd QC explains how proponents of the Treaty ‘partnership’ deception – that underpins the whole co-governance agenda – are deliberately misconstruing a Court of Appeal decision:
“They put up the smokescreen of Treaty obligation, and distort the Court of Appeal’s 1987 ‘lands’ case where the Court, having been forced by Parliamentarians who would not do it themselves, to determine what was meant by ‘principles of the Treaty’ drew on principles of partnership law to hold that Treaty principles required the Crown and Maori to act toward each other with good faith, fairly, reasonably and honourably when dealing with known or foreseeable Treaty claims.
“Ideas of constitutional partnership or co-governance never featured in the case. Nor could they, for the Treaty is perfectly clear, in both the Maori and English texts. Governance was given to the Crown alone, and in exchange, the tribal leaders and the ordinary people of New Zealand were assured continuing ownership of their property and were guaranteed protection and equal status with the British settlers under British law.
“The Court of Appeal would not suggest an absurd departure from the words of the Treaty, and did not do so.”
Retired Judge and Canterbury University law lecturer Anthony Willy concurs: “In no legal sense does this ‘lands’ case decide that that there is a partnership between Maori and non-Maori and any later case which purports to rely on the dicta of Cook J is to misconstrue the reasoning on which the case is founded.”
He is categorical: “Maori and the Crown are not partners in any sense of the word. It is constitutionally impossible for the Crown to enter into a partnership with any of its subjects. The true position is that the Crown is sovereign but owes duties of justice and good faith to the Maori descendants of those who signed the Treaty.”
He also reminds us that not only did the ‘Treaty of Waitangi’ not qualify as a ‘true’ treaty at international law, but that, like all historic agreements, it has expired.
As former Chief Justice Prendergast found in the case of Wi Parata v Bishop of Wellington, the Treaty was already considered a “constitutional nullity” in 1877.
Isn’t it time all political leaders recognised that truth, so New Zealand can finally move on?
Labour is attacking our democracy using a well-orchestrated public propaganda campaign.
Jacinda Ardern has used taxpayer funding to ‘buy’ media silence. One of the key requirements for those receiving funding from her $55 million Public Interest Journalism Fund, is that recipients not only acknowledge the partnership lie, but ‘actively’ promote it: “Actively promote the principles of Partnership, Participation and Active Protection under Te Tiriti o Waitangi acknowledging Maori as a Te Tiriti partner.”
When Austria’s Chancellor Sebastian Kurz allegedly used public money to buy favourable media coverage for his party’s policies, he was forced to resign. Surely that’s not too different from what’s happening here.
The point is that a fabricated treaty ‘partnership’ is being used to justify the transfer of control of major public resources and services from the Crown to private sector multi-million-dollar business development corporations run by iwi.
The financial rewards for the tribal elite running these organisations are eye watering.
In the case of Three Waters, neither the Minister of Local Government Nanaia Mahuta nor the Prime Minister has ruled out iwi being able to charge royalties for the use of water. That would result in untold millions of dollars pouring into tribal coffers on an on-going basis.
And when it comes to further local government reforms, Labour is considering giving iwi co-governance control of all district and regional planning, along with resource management consenting – no doubt creating lucrative tribal income streams, even though the vested interest conflicts would be significant.
It’s no wonder that Labour has engineered as little media scrutiny as possible over its co-governance deception. But it remains an appalling situation to have New Zealand’s Fourth Estate effectively gagged by the Government over matters of such crucial public importance to our country’s future.
However, even if the media are not digging into the details, to his great credit, the Auditor General is. He pointed out the glaring lack of financial accountability in the model proposed for the Maori Health Authority, and now he has discovered that financial accountability for the proposed new Three Waters structures is virtually non-existent.
In his Bruce Jesson Memorial Lecture in 2000, former Prime Minister David Lange was not only dismissive of partnership claims, but he warned the government of the need to “draw back” from where the Treaty industry was taking the county – or lose the chance ‘to build a more cohesive society and a more productive economy’: “The result will be a fractured society in which political power will be contested in ways beyond the limits of our democratic experience.”
Sadly, this is exactly the situation New Zealand is now facing.
As our main opposition party, National needs to not only step up, but to also consider decisive action along the lines of that taken by leaders in many other countries, including Sweden, Austria, France, Germany, Belgium, Holland, and Fiji, when faced with similar escalating division within their societies – namely, removing all references to ‘race’ from their Statute books.
The reality is that under the cover of the Covid pandemic, Jacinda Ardern is dismantling our democracy, one law at a time – without any mandate from New Zealand voters.
And the bottom line is this: if National truly believes in democracy, in the principle of democratic representation – one person, one vote, they must take the lead and fight for our future. If they don’t, it will be to their own – and our country’s – detriment.
John added :
Author
He’s doing a “raise his profile” job just now. Being seen. Shaking hands. He has set his agenda to get to the election. However, he should set an agenda according to the issues and urgency thereof identified by the electorate. It not about his dynamics, it’s about our dynamics.
The electorate is beside itself with anxiety about its future. Luxon has to tell the electorate that he opposes He Puapua and all it proposes, in particular, co-governance. they want security, peace of mind, they want it now. They will swear allegiance to which ever party aligns with their view. That’s why Act is doing so well. This not a game. It’s not about him. Nits about us and it’s time is now.
Interesting Input :
Agreed. The longer he goes on without clearly supporting democracy, the more ominous it seems. There is something to be said for keeping plans undercover as a pre-election strategy, but in this case National simply looks lame, and incapable of reading or hearing the demands of their potential supporters or the electorate in general. The clear signal is that they are actually on-board with the lies and deceit of the current regime. Their silence during the Protest at Parliament cannot be erased from history.
Totally agree, if Luxon & the Nats continue to ‘sit on the fence’, they will get more than splinters in their bum. It’s really disapointing that they have not seized the opportunity to drive this message & shout from the rooftops that these measures are dividing the country & state ‘very clearly’ they would repeal if they were the next govt.
Luxon needs to respond to the core issues a vast majority of the NEW ZEALAND public are scared $#!tless (witless) about.
For example, he needs to start railing against the systematic racism permeating NZ government, bureaucracies and now our laws. If he’s on the offensive against this scourge how can he be tarred with the same brush? Not even the pathetic, woke media hacks would dare.
He also needs to stop listening to his hand-wringing PR advisors and start leading!
Author
He’s not innovative. He’s not strategic. He’s not leading us to a better place. He doesn’t identify with the concerns of the people. Oh, yes, he talked about the rise in cost of living, but we won’t be living if cogovernance goes ahead, not to mention 3-waters, apartheid health, local bodies, He Puapua. He has to stand up and lead us away from this crap into a new vision: where’s the vision
Voters don’t want to hear about what you are going to do about unemployed youths, they want hear about the major issues facing them.
Cost of living.
Crime
Co governance
3 waters
This is what you need to tell them your policy on these issues.
You may also have lost some potential voter among the unemployed.
Man up or move over and let one of the stronger female members take the reigns.
Have all ways been a National voter, but now considering Act, as have definite policies in place to counter
these issues.
I have heard him answer the question on 3 occasions. His reply has always been all New Zealanders will be treated the same equal right one vote. How much clearer does he need to get.
Author
Thats what I call dancing on the head of a pin. Its not unequivocal. There’s heaps of wriggle room. If you think that he is committed to our democracy’s stability by those statements, then why not come out and say in simple unequivocal plain language, National does not support He Puapua, national will never support co-governance, National will repeal all race-based legislation: 3-waters, local bodies, apartheid health, and so on. National is committed to our traditional democracy and the Westminster convention, one nation, one people, all equal, one law, one vote.
How difficult is that?
Another Member of the FB Grp Kiwis Protecting Our Freedom of Expression :
Dave Diack >>>>>
John Allen Oldfield Farm Damn right John. Plain speaking no longer a political attribute across the board. But its even worse when it fails to materialise from the leader. I had hope for this guy but it didn’t last long. His trouble is he doesn’t appreciate or understand his voter base and spends too much taking advice of his political advisors. The so called experts!
Author
The MMP rules allowed a very minority party to be the king maker which was not what the majority of the electorate wanted. Secondly, in 2020, MMP allowed an FPP outcome. MMP was specifically set up to stop FPP outcomes. So, in my view, MMP has a lot to answer for.
I believe that the incoming government has to address that. MMP has to be changed in order to protect our democracy into the future.
Rob Mac >>>>
John Allen Oldfield Farm firstly, the majority of the elctorate didn’t vote for national in 2017. They got less than 50% of the vote.
Secondly, no matter the system you can’t make voters vote a certain way. MMP is a joke as are list mp’s. Thirdly, imho no currently elected, or list, mp has the motivation to alter the current electoral system they all benefit from. For that to happen anarchists and revolutionaries would need to be about expounding a new system. And it would need to work. There was talk of electing mp’s on their merit and record of community work along with a specific skill set that they would be able to use with their portfolio. That these people wouldn’t hold allegence to any particular party, so ridding ourselves of idealogues. That they would hold a secret ballot to elect a leader, not being able to vote for themselves, and that they would form a government. And that they would hold regular referenda and that the people could force referenda. And that a constitution, including the rights of the people, be part of that referenda and added as our official constitution. I know it’s a dream, but there are those of us that dream it.
Weird how so many dont follow his media interviews he has said for mths he’ll repeal all the co govt/3 waters even the new centralising of health and the Maori health if he got in! Also posted on his pgs throughout, really weird people believe hes on the fence its been clear all year.
Author
Mandy Merrylees He has never made an unequivocal statement about the fabricated treaty lie, it’s manifestation in He Puapua, and his opposition to the destruction of our democracy. He has never said one people, all equal, one law, one vote. All he has said is “there’s a special place for Maori”. I have a feeling that is contradictory to the actuality of our democracy.
However, if he truly subscribes to stopping this co-governance crap and I’ve missed the email, I’m sure his minders monitor these posts, so how simple would it be to remove all doubt and just publish an unequivocal statement that the Nats oppose the race based legislation, He Puapua and all its implementations including co-governance and will repeal it all, and that he supports our democracy of one people, all equal, one law, one vote.
What could be simpler? His poll rating wld go up over night. His landslide victory would be assured.
It’s not going to happen. Nicola, you might have to.
When are we going to realise we dont need either Party. No one has total confidence in either, few believe we are heading in the right direct, even fewer believe in the integrity of those representing us (joke). But we dont appear to have anyone with the nuts and raisins to know that the times we are in need a completely fresh approach – or are we too far down the rabbit hole ?
Author
Sandy Urwin I agree, however, to change attritudes and traditional behaviour in the next 15 months is like trying to turn the Q Mary around on a sixpence. It just doesn’t happen. Its called momentum.
I think that the electorate will look to the right and in partic, will unthinkingly expect the Nats to be their saviour. Its historical behaviour of the electorate. There’s no way we can totally changeout the politicians and parties.
Now having said that, the electorate is not stupid. Intelligence and form will play a huge part and I believe we’re seeing that in the polls. Act is reading the electorate correctly, the Nats aren’t; it could be, tho, that the nats also want to pursue an ideology. Luxon has committed to repealing 3-water, the apartheid health system and the local body race-based stuff. He has not denied He Puapua and col-governance. He has said thats an argument for next year and he has said there IS a special place for maori. Rem a 10th generation maori may be 1/512 maori DNA as a result of intermarriage which makes them 99.8% of european descent; they are us. So what is the special places for 15% of us?
Unless he unequivocally commits to one people, all equal, one law, one vote, then he will NOT get my (traditional) vote. Im picking that Seymour is on the verge of gaining huge traction. The electorate is becoming more and more informed every day. There will not tolerate co-governance no matter what it takes. Seymour is identifying with our democracy and is guaranties our return to it.
National and Labour are two sides of the same coin – they will both push the WHO & WEF narratives.
As Matt King Northland is waiting on the formal registration of DemocracyNZ the MSM do not include him in articles.
He is the only politician that has always stood against the mandates and for our ‘Bill of Rights’
I will be voting Matt after years of National 
Neil Mayes all those soldiers who died defending our democracy must be turning in their graves at this co governance nonsense. Come on National get a backbone. This is the most important policy facing NZ this century.
KIWIS PROTECTING OUR FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION 