National Has Increased The Child Suicide Rate

The latest UNICEF Innocenti Report Card 19, Fragile Gains - Child Wellbeing at Risk in an Unpredictable World, should be a wake up call for the New Zealand government. Ranking us 32nd out of 36 OECD and EU countries for child wellbeing, it lays bare a shameful truth: our kids are struggling, and the National-led government’s obsession with austerity is making their lives even harder. With the highest child suicide rate among wealthy nations, nearly three times the OECD average, Aotearoa is failing its youngest citizens. But instead of owning their role in this crisis, National is pointing fingers, dodging the real culprit: their own socially destructive policies.


On Thursday, RNZ reported:

 

New Zealand has highest child suicide rate, a survey of wealthy countries shows

Chief Children's Commissioner Dr Claire Achmad said the rankings showed that meaningful investment in children and young people was urgently needed to support child and youth mental health, including suicide prevention measures, and better support for the prevention of bullying in schools and communities.

"I've been clear that we need to see a central focus on children in Budget 2025," she said. "This is necessary to deliver on the government's own Child and Youth Strategy to 'make New Zealand the best place in the world to be a child'.

"It's devastating that among other high-income countries, we reported the highest youth suicide rate. We also know that attempted suicide rates for rangatahi Māori, Rainbow children and young people and disabled children are higher."

Dr Achmad said she wanted the government to collect and publish good-quality data on child mortality.

"Significantly reducing childhood poverty must be a core investment area for the government, given the ripple effects it has on children's lives. The data in the government's own recent Annual Report on Children and Young People's wellbeing shows that we are going backwards when it comes to providing enough safe housing, healthy food and primary health and dental care." she said.

"I want to see all children in our country flourish to their full potential. As this international comparison shows, we can and must do much, much better for children. These are their basic rights that we are talking about, and as a small, relatively rich country, it shouldn't be like this."

Let’s talk about the grinding poverty that’s effecting too many Kiwi kids. The report highlights how economic inequality, worsened by National’s cuts to social services, is driving child poverty rates in the wrong direction. Statistics NZ data shows no improvement in poverty metrics since 2022, with food insecurity and material hardship on the rise. Kids are going hungry in a country that prides itself on abundance.

National’s answer? Slash welfare support, remove emergency housing and prioritise tax cuts for the wealthy. The ripple effects are clear: poverty fuels mental health crises, and hungry kids can’t thrive. The government’s own Annual Report on Child and Youth Wellbeing confirms we’re failing on basics like safe housing and healthy food. Yet, National’s Budget ignores these cries for help, doubling down on austerity that strips away any hope for a brighter future.

Housing insecurity is another dagger in the heart of child wellbeing. The report underscores how unstable, overcrowded homes, exacerbated by a housing crisis National refuses to tackle, erode mental and physical health. Kids in transient, mouldy rentals or living on the streets aren’t just uncomfortable; they’re traumatised.

UNICEF Aotearoa’s CEO, Michelle Sharp, says the upcoming Budget is an opportunity for the government to create positive change, but National’s asleep at the wheel, ignoring recommendations from reports like Under One Umbrella that demand action on housing and poverty. Instead, they’ve dismantled initiatives like Te Aka Whai Ora, which could’ve addressed inequities for Māori and Pacific youth, who face disproportionate levels of youth suicide.

And then there’s the cost-of-living crisis, squeezing families until they break. With energy and food prices soaring, parents are forced to choose between rent and groceries. Kids bear the brunt, with 40% of Kiwi children overweight, a symptom of food insecurity driving reliance on cheap, unhealthy options. National’s response? Blame anybody but themselves.

But what else is new? Historical data shows youth suicide rates always climb under National’s watch. You only have to look at the 2010-2017 period, when rates hit 15.6 per 100,000, the worst in the OECD. Coincidence? Hardly. The right-wings’ austerity breeds hopelessness and increases suicides.

But all the Minister for Social Development and Employment, Luise Upston, can do is say there’s “more work to do”. Here’s a list of some of the “work” that the National coalition of chaos government has done to increase the child suicide rate.

• Lowered Ambition for Targets: In June 2024, the National-led government set new three-year targets for 2024/25–2026/27, which critics argue are less ambitious than those set by Labour. For instance, the material hardship target was adjusted to 10% by 2026/27, acknowledging economic challenges but aiming to merely maintain current rates rather than significantly reduce them. The persistent poverty target for 2028 was set at 10%, with a long-term goal of 8% by 2035, reflecting a cautious approach that anticipates short-term increases due to economic conditions.

• Missed Existing Targets: Statistics NZ data released in February 2025 showed the government missed all three primary child poverty targets for 2023/24. Material hardship rose to 13.4% (156,600 children) against a target of 9%, with no significant progress on low-income measures either. Māori and Pacific children faced even higher rates (23.9% and 28.7%, respectively), highlighting persistent inequities.

• Shift in Policy Focus: National’s Budget 2024 emphasized work incentives over direct poverty alleviation, tying child poverty reduction to reducing Jobseeker Support recipients by 50,000 over six years. Initiatives like FamilyBoost and increased In-Work Tax Credits aim to support working families, but critics, including UNICEF NZ, argue these measures fail to address immediate needs like housing affordability and food insecurity. Policies such as extending Best Start payments or introducing universal child payments were suggested but not adopted.

• Changing Funding Allocation and Blame-Shifting: National has prioritised tax breaks for landlords and other fiscal measures over child poverty reduction, effectively reducing targets instead of poverty. The government is also deflecting blame to social media and bullying rather than addressing systemic issues like poverty and housing insecurity, which exacerbate child wellbeing challenges.

• Changes to the school lunches programme: Reduced funding and a shift to less nutritious, inedible, cost-saving options, have worsened food insecurity for Kiwi kids. Disadvantaged children, particularly Māori and Pacific youth, suffer most, with 13.4% facing material hardship. The UNICEF’s Innocenti Report Card 19 highlights how these cuts strip away a vital lifeline, deepening poverty and undermining wellbeing for the most vulnerable.

• Legislating limits on gender rights: The Human Rights Commissioner warned that by restricting gender recognition and support, the government's policies alienate transgender youth, which will exacerbate mental health struggles for an already marginalised group. With New Zealand’s youth suicide rate already the highest in the OECD, this rollback threatens even more lives.

The government has also tried to limit reporting on child well-being, with the Office of the Auditor-General noting in April 2025 that governance and reporting arrangements for suicide remain complex, limiting public understanding and accountability. Clearly the government, knowing their policies are worsening the situation, have attempted to restrict the public from learning of their numerous social policy failures. In effect they have breached the social contract.

 

It's still patently obvious however that National’s policies are a wrecking ball for child wellbeing. Yet they’re scapegoating kids’ phones and playground spats. What we don’t need is a government who points the finger while ignoring their own role in causing these shameful and preventable results. Instead. we need investment in housing, poverty reduction, and mental health support without any further delay. Our kids deserve better than a government that sacrifices their future just to make some landlords and themselves wealthier.

Why Hasn’t Nicole McKee Registered Her Firearms?

In a stunning display of hypocrisy, Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee, who also oversees firearms policy, has admitted she hasn’t registered her own firearms on New Zealand’s Firearms Registry, despite the legal requirement for all licensed firearms owners to do so.

This isn’t just a minor oversight; it’s a slap in the face to the rule of law and public safety. As someone tasked with upholding justice and shaping firearms policy, McKee’s failure to comply with the Arms Act 1983, as amended in 2020, raises serious questions about her suitability for her role and the government’s commitment to accountability.

The Arms Act mandates that all firearms owned by licensed holders must be registered with the Firearms Registry by 2028, with the process already underway since June 2023. Section 94 of the Act clearly requires licence holders to provide details of their firearms to ensure traceability and prevent illegal use. However, McKee, a gun lobbyist with deep ties to the Council of Licensed Firearms Owners (Colfo), has placed herself above the law she’s meant to enforce. Her excuse that she has until 2028 reeks of privilege and undermines the leadership expected of a minister.

In September, RNZ reported:

Firearms Minister Nicole McKee won't rule out trying to bring back banned guns

Cabinet has agreed - but not yet finalised - a law change that would give Nicole McKee the power to propose what guns should or should not be prohibited.

McKee, a former gun lobbyist, said the change was administrative, though she would not rule out trying to liberalise access to high-powered semi-automatics.

The Firearms Registry was introduced after the Christchurch mosque killings to enhance public safety by tracking firearms and ensuring accountability. If McKee can flout this requirement while bringing back the very same semi-automatics that inflicted so much carnage, without consequence, what message does that send to ordinary New Zealanders?

The Police Association has already raised concerns about McKee’s exclusion of police from firearms reform consultations, which along with her rushed review process, suggests a troubling pattern of prioritizing pro-gun interests over public safety. Police Minister Mark Mitchell’s unwavering support for police oversight contrasts sharply with McKee’s apparent disdain for it, creating a dangerous rift in the coalition government’s approach.

#BHN Nicole McKee is adorable that she is so grumpy about the gun registry review not going the way she wanted it to...it's almost like she set it up to give her a response she wanted...rather than the actual findings #nzpol pic.twitter.com/IMYPPDpHC9

— Pat Brittenden (@patbrittenden) May 13, 2025

McKee’s background as a pro-gun lobbyist is the crux of the issue. Her appointment as Associate Justice Minister and Minister for Courts is a clear conflict of interest. Her history with Colfo and her firearms safety business raises doubts about her impartiality, as evidenced by her push to ease regulations for gun clubs and ranges, often at the expense of police oversight.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s insistence that McKee hasn’t breached Cabinet rules does little to quell public distrust when her actions, like comparing gun registries to toaster registries, trivialise serious safety measures. This isn’t just about one minister’s negligence; it’s about a government allowing a pro-gun advocate to steer justice policy while ignoring legal and social obligations.

McKee’s refusal to register her firearms isn’t just a personal failing...it’s a betrayal of public trust and a mockery of the laws designed to keep us safe. Luxon must reconsider whether a minister so entangled with gun lobby interests, who has ignored due process, can credibly serve the interests of the public. If he had a backbone or any common sense, Nicole McKee would be stood down. Anything less will mean a government minister continues to erode the integrity of our justice system.

Brownlee’s Bias: Māori MPs Punished, van Velden Spared

In a Parliament that’s supposed to uphold fairness, the recent punishments meted out to Te Pāti Māori MPs for their haka protest compared to Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden for her use of the C-word expose a glaring double standard. Speaker Gerry Brownlee and the Privileges Committee have once again shown that when it comes to enforcing parliamentary decorum, the rules bend depending on who’s in the dock.

Let’s start with Te Pāti Māori. On November 14, 2024, MPs Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke, Rawiri Waititi, and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer performed a haka during the first reading of the divisive Treaty Principles Bill, a protest against legislation that erodes Māori rights. The haka, a profound expression of cultural identity and resistance, often used by the New Zealand All Blacks, disrupted the vote, prompting Brownlee to suspend the House and dock Maipi-Clarke’s pay for 24 hours.

The Privileges Committee, chaired by National’s Judith Collins, went even further, recommending unprecedented suspensions: 21 days for Waititi and Ngarewa-Packer, and seven days for Maipi-Clarke, the harshest penalties in New Zealand’s parliamentary history. The committee claimed the issue wasn’t the haka itself but its “intimidatory” nature. Te Pāti Māori called the process “grossly unjust,” arguing it dismissed tikanga Māori and silenced their voices.

Yesterday, RNZ reported:
 

Te Pāti Māori MPs to be temporarily suspended from Parliament over haka

Te Pāti Māori MPs will be temporarily suspended from Parliament for "acting in a manner that could have the effect of intimidating a member of the House" after performing a haka during the first reading of the Treaty Principles Bill.

Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke will be suspended for seven days, while co-leaders Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi will be "severely censured" and suspended for 21 days.

The three MPs - along with Labour's Peeni Henare - were referred to the Privileges Committee for their involvement in a haka and protests in the House in November, at the first reading of the contentious Treaty Principles Bill.

The suspension means the three Te Pāti Māori MPs will not be present at next week's Budget debate.

Contrast this extreme punishment with Brooke van Velden’s slap on the wrist for her recent disruptive profanity. In a heated debate, van Velden repeatedly used the C-word to criticize Labour’s Jan Tinetti, who had simply asked what the government thought about an opinion piece written by Andrea Vance, who had used the C-word to describe government Ministers. Brownlee’s response? A mild reprimand, requiring van Velden to withdraw and apologise, with no further action. No suspension, no pay docking, no Privileges Committee referral. This leniency for a coalition MP, whose deliberate use of a vulgar slur was undeniably disruptive, stands in stark contrast to the draconian measures employed against Te Pāti Māori to try and silence their concerns about the government's anti-Māori agenda.

Brownlee’s track record as Speaker raises questions about his impartiality. His rulings often favour the coalition of chaos government, as seen when he overruled the Clerk of the House and his assistant speaker on a fast-track bill amendment, prioritising coalition interests, which caused the Labour party to lose confidence in him as speaker. The haka incident further exposes this bias. While Brownlee claimed the haka’s disruption of a vote was a “cardinal sin,” he downplayed van Velden’s vulgar outburst as a mere breach of decorum. The Privileges Committee’s recommendation amplifies this disparity, punishing a culturally significant act of protest far more harshly than a crude verbal attack.

My overseas friends keep telling me the scenes they saw in parliament yesterday were sickening & I've had to explain to them his name is Gerry Brownlee & he has always looked like this pic.twitter.com/9g7pxQG73c

— Liquid Times (@Liquid_Times) November 15, 2024

This isn’t just about inconsistent rulings; it’s about whose voices are being valued in Parliament. Te Pāti Māori’s haka was a response to a bill threatening the Treaty of Waitangi, a cornerstone of New Zealand’s constitutional framework. Van Velden’s C-word, however, was the government trying to blame Labour for an article written by a reporter...a personal jab, lacking any cultural or political weight whatsoever. Yet, the Māori MPs face prolonged suspensions at the exact time the government is announcing another austerity budget, a budget that is set to once again disproportionately and adversely impact Māori. The message is clear: colonial norms trump tikanga, and coalition MPs get a free pass while Brownlee stacks the decks against opposition MPs.

The Privileges Committee’s decision sets a dangerous precedent, signaling that Māori expressions of resistance in the house (which are now a part of New Zealand's everyday culture) will be met with maximum government force. Brownlee and Collins must answer: why is a haka deemed more “intimidatory” than a minister’s unwarranted and disrespectful profanities? Until Parliament reconciles its rules with tikanga Māori, such injustices will persist, eroding trust in our democratic institutions. And once that trust has gone, it's nearly impossible to get back.

Government Blames Labour For Andrea Vance’s Article

The National-led government, flailing like a fish out of water, is now pointing fingers at Labour for Andrea Vance’s critical column in The Post. Finance Minister Nicola Willis, in a display that can only be described as unhinged, has tried to pin the blame for Vance’s blistering critique on the opposition, as if Labour somehow coerced a veteran journalist into calling her Pay Equity debacle out.

Everybody knows that it’s not Labour’s job to police the mainstream media when, on the odd occasion, they dare to hold the government to account. Vance’s piece, which deployed the C-word to describe Willis and her coalition harpies, was a critique of a government that’s betrayed women with its pay equity changes.

Many New Zealanders would agree with Vance, although most probably wouldn’t have used her language. And National’s response? A pathetic attempt to dodge accountability by crying “it’s all Labours fault!”


On Saturday, The Post reported:

The girl-math budget that will cut deep, especially for women

Turns out you can have it all. So long as you’re prepared to be a c… to the women who birth your kids, school your offspring and wipe the arse of your elderly parents while you stand on their shoulders to earn your six-figure, taxpayer-funded pay packet.

Let’s talk about the real issue: National’s desperate spin to deflect from their unfair pay equity changes. Rushed through under urgency with no select committee scrutiny, the government gutted 33 active pay equity claims, making it harder for women to seek justice for systemic underpayment. Willis and her coalition cronies (ACT’s Brooke van Velden in particular) have the gall to claim this isn’t a pay cut, when it clearly is.

By raising the threshold for claims from 60% to 70% female-dominated sectors and narrowing comparator jobs, they’ve ensured fewer women will succeed in future claims, effectively pinching billions of dollars from their pockets. David Seymour himself admitted it’s about “saving billions,” yet Willis denies it’s about budget cuts. Who do they think they’re fooling?

Even after the Speaker of the House, Gerry Brownlee, had already warned Brook van Velden, she chose to continue raising the issue of Andrea Vance’s article. van Velden then use the C word in Parliament (without being thrown out), rounding her accusations of sexism onto former Labour Minister, Jan Tinetti, like it is her fault that Andrea Vance wrote the article. It's clearly not the oppositions fault that the government is copping flack from all corners for gutting the pay equity claims process.

Today, 1 News reported:

Minister drops C-bomb in Parliament while quoting controversial column

Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden has become the first MP to use the word c*** in the House of Representatives when she repeated it after former minister for women Jan Tinetti asked about a controversial opinion column in relation to the Government's changes to the pay equity process.

You can understand why government Ministers are losing their cool at the moment. The backlash to their Equity Pay Amendment Bill has been brutal, and not just from the usual left wing commentators. National’s own right-wing allies are turning on them. From Shane Te Pou to Janet Wilson, many conservatives have felt compelled to comment, warning that National’s betrayal of women voters will haunt them, especially with women under 50 already abandoning the party in droves, per Roy Morgan polls. These aren’t lefty activists; they’re National’s own base, clearly stating that this policy should’ve gone to a select committee for proper scrutiny, not rammed through like a midnight mugging.

Brooke van Velden foaming at the mouth about Vances' article, and Nicola Willis whining about “sexist slurs” and Labour’s “weaponising” of the issue, shows that these ministers are out of her depth, clutching at straws to avoid responsibility. The truth is, National’s pay equity debacle is a self-inflicted wound, a cynical move to balance the books on the backs of underpaid women. No amount of calling Labour liars is going to change that fact.

Vance’s column didn’t need Labour’s prompting; it practically wrote itself by channeling the sentiment of a nation fed up with a government that prioritises tax cuts for the wealthy over fairness for workers. National’s attempt to spin the fallout as somehow Labour’s doing is as laughable as it is desperate. The real scandal? A government so arrogant it thinks it can lie its way out of betraying half the population.

National’s Law and Order Fiasco

The National-led coalition, which came to power in 2023 with grand promises of restoring law and order, has entirely failed to deliver. Along with help from the mainstream media, they painted a grim picture of a crime-ridden New Zealand, vowing to crack down on gangs, bolster police numbers, and make our streets safer.

However, as we hit mid-2025, the evidence of their law and order letdowns is mounting: this government has failed spectacularly on its core pledge, leaving New Zealanders feeling less safe and the police force stretched thinner than ever before.

The coalition of chaos’ pledge to recruit 500 additional front-line police officers by November 2025 is dead in the water. Police Commissioner Richard Chambers admitted on Q+A that the target is “ambitious,” with any increase in recruitment likely delayed until early 2026. This isn’t just a backtrack…it’s a broken promise. National and NZ First’s coalition agreement was crystal clear: 500 new officers in two years. Just over one year in, officer numbers have dropped by over 50. Attrition is bleeding the force dry, with around 540 officers leaving annually (based on a 5.4% attrition rate in 2025, up from 2.5% in 2021) for retirement or better opportunities abroad in places like Australia. The government’s response? A pathetic 180 recruits graduated in 2024, nowhere near enough to plug the gap.

Yesterday, RNZ reported:

 

Govt concedes it'll likely miss November target for 500 new police

Mitchell said: "We will deliver our 500 police officers this term, without a doubt ... what we've said is that we're not going to get hung up on a date."

…

Mitchell earlier rejected the characterisation that the promise to deliver on the 500 new officers had been a "failure" on Sunday, despite being previously committed to it.

"We set a date of November 25 for the police to do that. We remain committed to delivering our 500 police officers, however, obviously, there have been a few things happen since then," he said, in response to media questions.

 

No surprises there really.

The public perception of police is also getting worse. The New Zealand Crime and Victims Survey (NZCVS) shows trust in police plummeting, with only two-thirds of Kiwis expressing confidence in 2024, down from previous years. Violent crime, which Mark Mitchell claimed was dipping, is questioned for dodgy datasets. Does anybody actually believe that violent crime is declining while methamphetamine use has more than doubled since National gained power?

 

National claims that their tough-on-crime rhetoric is working, while using statistics for violent crime from when Labour was in government, which is a gross manipulation of official data that deserves much more media attention than it received. If left wing political parties did something like that, we’d never hear the end of it. Sexual assaults are also increasing, with reports showing that sexual violence in New Zealand against teenagers is amongst the worst in the developed world.

While Chris Luxon was bragging about crime coming down in Auckland CBD he was sitting on the latest data from the crime victimisation survey which showed a 30,000 increase in crime across the country.

National had set itself a 20,000 reduction target in this area. pic.twitter.com/lxsumUyyZc

— Nick (@StrayDogNZ) September 16, 2024

Gangs are flourishing, with the National Gang List growing exponentially in an environment of government austerity. Yet, Mitchell’s anti-gang laws, like the public patch ban, lack evidence of effectiveness and may even worsen the situation. The government’s youth boot camps, which were already a proven failure, will likely only worsen outcomes as well. According to New Zealand Defence Force documents, military-style training does not work for complex participants and has previously resulted in serious mental and physical harm of defence personnel. But has that given the government pause for thought? No! They have continued with their socially destructive law and order agenda that even includes cutting rehabilitation services that were proven to be effective.

Then there are the government's stupid changes to sentencing laws. The coalition’s tough-on-crime policies such as capping sentence discounts and re-initiating three-strikes, hasn’t translated to safer streets. Justice Ministry officials warned harsher penalties don’t boost public confidence, citing a 25% imprisonment rise from 2003–2016 that failed to increase public perceptions of crime or trust in police. Meanwhile, frontline officers are overburdened, redeployed to Auckland’s CBD to save the government face while other areas go without and grow ever more vulnerable.

The public’s perception is clear: polling shows New Zealanders don’t feel safer at all, which should result in Mark Mitchell's resignation.

This government’s law and order agenda is a house of cards. They’ve overpromised and underdelivered, leaving police understaffed and communities exposed. National’s flip-flopping (extending then retracting the recruitment timeline) shows a coalition in chaos, more focused on sound bites and penny pinching than saving lives through effective law and order policies. They are more concerned with massaging crime stats rather than increasing police numbers and providing proper rehabilitation services. None of this is forgivable, especially to all those victims of crime who are still being silenced and ignored by the system. Thankfully, they will have a chance to vote this utter failure of a National led government out next year.

Government Shouldn't Ignore Courts Over Voting Rights

Under Chris Luxon’s "leadership", the coalition of chaos government is doubling down on policies that undermine democratic principles, particularly on prisoner voting rights and the voting age. The kicker here is that these issues should have already been settled.

Two landmark cases that have already gone through the courts expose the governments hypocrisy, yet Luxon’s dubious crew seems content to shrug off judicial rulings like they’re mere suggestions. This isn’t just disingenuous; it’s a deliberate erosion of the people's rights that should worry every Kiwi who values democracy.


Yesterday, RNZ reported:

A prisoner voting ban shows again how few checks there are on Parliamentary power

…

When Parliament considers a bill that is potentially inconsistent with "the human rights and fundamental freedoms" set out in the Bill of Rights, the Attorney-General delivers a report explaining the inconsistencies.

This is supposed to be a deterrent, and one might think it would be the end of the matter. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Adverse attorney-general reports have appeared regularly (there have been 15 since 2021) without blocking legislation.

Let’s start with Attorney-General v Taylor. In 2015, the High Court, upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018, declared the Electoral (Disqualification of Sentenced Prisoners) Amendment Act 2010 inconsistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. The blanket ban on prisoner voting was ruled an unjustified limit on the fundamental right to vote, with Justice Heath slamming its arbitrary nature. It meant petty offenders lost their vote if jailed during an election, while serious criminals free between elections didn’t. The Attorney-General at the time, Christopher Finlayson, admitted the law’s flaws before it even passed, yet it went ahead. 

Fast forward to 2025, and Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith is pushing to reinstate this ban, defying the courts and expert advice. This isn’t about principle; it’s about pandering to a rabid “tough on crime” base, consequences be damned. Then there’s Make It 16 Incorporated v Attorney-General. In 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that setting the voting age at 18 unjustifiably discriminates against 16- and 17-year-olds, breaching their Bill of Rights protections against age discrimination. The court’s message was clear: young people deserve a say in their future.

Yet Luxon, then Opposition Leader, dismissed the ruling with a flippant “18’s just fine,” and his government has since killed a bill that would’ve lowered the voting age for local elections. Then there's the government's argument about prisoner voting rights. Luxon simply doesn't care what the courts ruled. This isn’t reasoned policy-making; it’s a refusal to engage with a constitutional dialogue the courts have demanded. Parliament is legally obligated to respond to such declarations, but Luxon’s crew acts like the law doesn’t apply to them.

Watch on TikTok

The government’s dismissal of these rulings reeks of bad faith. On one hand, they claim to champion democracy, yet they’re happy to strip voting rights from prisoners and deny young people a voice, ignoring judicial checks designed to protect our rights. Luxon’s rhetoric about “drawing a line” is hollow when it’s drawn to exclude the vulnerable and the young. The courts have spoken: these laws are inconsistent with our democratic values.

By ignoring Taylor and Make It 16, the government isn’t just inconsistent…it’s actively undermining the rule of law. Kiwis deserve a government that respects court rulings, not one that picks and chooses when to care about people’s rights. New Zealand therefore deserves a change in government.