Hobson’s Pledge Steals Kuia’s Image to Promote Racism

In a move that exhibits their complete disregard for basic human dignity, Hobson’s Pledge, the divisive lobby group led by Don Brash, has once again stirred outrage. Their latest billboard campaign, which opposes Māori wards, used the image of Rotorua kuia Ellen Tamati without her consent. The billboard featured Tamati’s striking portrait alongside the slogan, “My mana doesn’t need a mandate. Vote no to Māori wards.” For Tamati, a respected elder, the shock of seeing her image co-opted to push a message she fundamentally opposes has been deeply distressing. Her whānau are furious and exploring legal options.

 

On Wednesday, the NZ Herald reported:

Rotorua kuia’s image used in Hobson’s Pledge billboard without consent, family outraged

The family of a Rotorua kuia whose image was used on a Hobson’s Pledge billboard without her permission say the political lobby group has trampled on her mana.

Ellen Tamati’s photograph showing her moko kauae appeared on the Hobson Pledge’s billboards with the words: “My mana doesn’t need a mandate, vote no to Māori wards”.

The widow’s family said their nan “fundamentally disagrees” with the billboard’s message and Hobson’s Pledge never asked her permission.

This shameful act wasn’t a solo effort. Ani O’Brien, former advisor to Judith Collins, and Jordan Williams, co-founder of the New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union, orchestrated this stunt through their Campaign Company for Hobson’s Pledge. Their involvement ties this incident to a broader network of right-wing activism that thrives on stoking race-based division while cloaking it in calls for “equality.” The Campaign Company, also tied to other Hobson’s Pledge ventures like the “We Belong Aotearoa” website, seems all too comfortable peddling narratives that undermine Māori rights while hiding behind a veneer of inclusivity.

So Ani O'Brien led the anti-Maori ward campaign for Jordan William's Campaign Company - using a photo prohibited from ad use.

Ani also appears to try to steer the conversation from her stuff up yesterday

BTW Not the first time J Williams has helped Hobsons Pledge#nzpol pic.twitter.com/uYUbIRukuc

— Mountain_Tui (@Mountain_Tui) August 7, 2025

Don Brash, the figurehead of this debacle, is no stranger to controversy. His track record includes the infamous “Iwi versus Kiwi” campaign from his National Party days in 2005, a divisive tactic that pitted Māori against non-Māori in a crude appeal to Pākehā anxieties. That campaign, much like Hobson’s Pledge’s current efforts, framed Māori rights as a threat to national unity, conveniently ignoring the Treaty of Waitangi’s guarantees of tino rangatiratanga and equal partnership. Brash’s obsession with dismantling Māori electorates, the Waitangi Tribunal, and any semblance of Treaty-based governance has been a consistent thread, widely condemned as racist by figures like Andrew Little, Willie Jackson, and the New Zealand Māori Council.

It turns out Jordan Williams from the Taxpayers’ Union purchased the Shutterstock image used for Don Brash and Hobson’s Pledge Billboard— exactly the kind of evidence that confirms Hobson’s Pledge is tied to the Atlas Network.

This connection links the New Zealand Initiative,… pic.twitter.com/y3qbH6buaR

— Joe Trinder (@Joe_Trinder) August 7, 2025

The use of Ellen Tamati’s image, taken by photographer Rafael Ben Ari at Waitangi Day 2025 and licensed for editorial use only, isn't just a legal misstep, it’s a profound violation of her mana. Tamati, who wears her moko kauae with pride, was horrified to learn her face was plastered across billboards in Rotorua, Hamilton, Whangārei, and Christchurch, falsely suggesting her endorsement of a racist campaign she categorically rejects. Her granddaughter, Anahera Parata, spoke of the emotional toll, with Tamati isolating herself, “devastated” and “emotionally drained” by the betrayal.
 

On Wednesday, RNZ reported:

Rotorua kuia caught up in Hobson's Pledge's anti-Māori ward campaign

Anahera Parata is mamae that her Nan is the main feature.

"All my life, I have only ever known Nan to be pro Māori, a very staunch supporter of Te Paati Māori, everything Māori. Even at her age she's still giving back to her iwi.

"To me that's damaging, not just to Nan but to our whole iwi - I can't imagine being Nan having to face our iwi when her face is being plastered over billboards supporting a message that none of us believe in.

"I'm very hurt and angry. I don't know how they think it's right... it's illegal. You picked the wrong whānau," Parata said.

The Advertising Standards Authority received over 30 complaints about Hobson Pledge's billboards, and legal experts suggest the misuse may even breach the Fair Trading Act, given the image’s restricted licensing. Yet Brash and O'Brien's response, while the cowardly William's remains silent, is a half-hearted apology and hollow claim of ignorance about the image’s copyright limitations.

This incident lays bare the callousness of Hobson’s Pledge’s tactics. By exploiting a kuia’s image, they’ve not only trampled on her dignity but reinforced their pattern of fearmongering and division. Their campaigns, from opposing Māori wards to pushing for the “restoration” of public ownership of the foreshore and seabed, consistently misrepresent Māori rights as a zero-sum threat to others. The backlash, including from Te Pāti Māori and the Māori Journalists Association, underscores the harm caused.

It’s time to call out Brash, O’Brien, Williams, and their ilk for what they are: architects of a divisive agenda that seeks to erode Māori rights. It's time to call out Hobson's Pledge for the racists they actually are.

Karen Chhour Claims Failed Boot Camp was a Success

The New Zealand Government’s military-style youth boot camp pilot, trumpeted as a cornerstone of their “tough on crime” agenda, has collapsed into a predictable quagmire of failure. Despite clear evidence of past boot camp failures and explicit warnings from various experts, Children’s Minister Karen Chhour and her coalition partners have persisted, touting success in a programme where seven of ten participants reoffended, one died, and three were incarcerated youth justice facilities. This is more than a policy blunder, it’s a glaring example of a government so disconnected from reality that it portrays calamity as achievement.

Yesterday, Stuff reported:

Bootcamp re-offending rate revealed: 80% allegedly offended within the year

Most of the teenagers who took part in the military-style bootcamp pilot went on to allegedly re-offend within the year, the ministry has confirmed. But that doesn’t mean the Government views this as a failed experiment.

The Government had, for months, refused to confirm how many of the bootcamp participants had gone on to allegedly re-offend. But on Friday, a week after the pilot finished, Oranga Tamariki deputy chief executive Iain Chapman confirmed the alleged re-offending rate sat at about 80%.

...

Children’s Minister Karen Chhour has since introduced a bill to continue the MSA programme, including giving the Youth Court power to force young people to participate in it.

“Zero re-offending was never going to be realistic, but the goal of this programme has always been to provide meaningful supports and an opportunity for these young people to make better choices,” she said.

That bill was expected to pass in time for a new cohort to start next year.

Yesterday, RNZ also reported:

Minister, OT hail boot camp success despite majority reoffending

Seven of the 10 young men involved in the controversial military-style academy (MSA) boot camp pilot reoffended, according to Oranga Tamariki.

But the agency and its Minister is calling the programme a success, after eight of the original 10 participants successfully completed the first 12-month pilot.

During the pilot, which has just concluded, participants ran away, one was kicked out of the programme and another was killed in a three-vehicle crash.

 

Let’s rewind. The Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care laid bare the horrors of earlier boot camp iterations, like the Te Whakapakari Youth Programme, where young people endured physical, psychological, and sexual abuse under the guise of rehabilitation. Research from as early as 1983 showed a 71% reoffending rate within a year, climbing to a staggering 92% by 1988. The 2010 Military Activity Camp (MAC) was no better, over 80% of participants reoffended within 12 months.

Experts, from Victoria University’s forensic psychologists to the Children’s Commissioner, screamed from the rooftops that these programmes don’t work. They exacerbate trauma, entrench anti-social attitudes, and fail to address the root causes of youth offending: poverty, family harm, and systemic inequity. Yet, the coalition of chaos government ignored these numerous warnings, resurrecting a failed model with a glossy new name: Military-Style Academies.

The results? Predictably dire. Seven of the ten young men in the pilot reoffended, two landed back in youth justice residences, and one tragically died in a car crash. Another absconded during a funeral, only to be arrested for attempted armed carjacking. Karen Chhour, with breathtaking audacity, somehow calls this a success.

Her crocodile tears over the death of a participant, just like her tears over ‘unsafe workplaces’ and ‘bullying behaviour’ in Parliament, ring hollow when she refuses to pause the programme or acknowledge its systemic failures. To claim, as she does, that “zero reoffending” was never the goal is a pathetic sidestep. What, then, if not to rehabilitate, is the point of a rehabilitation programme that funnels vulnerable youth back into crime or, worse, to their graves? What is the point of a boot camp that results in higher reoffending rates than would be seen by doing nothing?

Chhour’s assertion that families are “overwhelmingly positive” about the programme is laughable when weighed against the reality: participants running away, reoffending, and facing incarceration. Her defence, that these young men, mostly Māori, are too complex to expect better outcomes, smacks of defeatism and cultural insensitivity. It’s a convenient excuse for a minister who has consistently failed to deliver, on anything.

Chhour’s tenure as Minister for Children has been marred by serial incompetence, nowhere more evident than in her mishandling of Oranga Tamariki’s communication breakdowns. Her failure to be informed of a second abscondee from the boot camp pilot, described by her own words as “unacceptable” exposes a staggering lack of oversight. Oranga Tamariki’s acting chief executive, Andrew Bridgman, dismissed this as a “simple mistake” within a “big bureaucracy of 4000 people,” but Chhour’s inability to ensure basic communication channels function properly reflects her broader inadequacy. She was left in the dark about critical incidents, including absconding participants, until media scrutiny forced the issue into the open, undermining her claims of accountability.

This isn’t an isolated lapse, Oranga Tamariki’s systemic failure to communicate effectively with providers, as highlighted by the Public Service Association, saw long-standing services blindsided by funding cuts, with Chhour callously labelling them as “abusing funds” without any evidence to substantiate her claims. Her refusal to engage with the Children’s Commissioner on use-of-force powers in boot camps further underscores her aversion to scrutiny and collaborative governance.

Chhour’s failures extend beyond Oranga Tamariki to her role as Associate Minister of Police, where her oversight of firearms reform has been equally dismal. Charged with strengthening gun control in the wake of the 2019 Christchurch mosque attacks, Chhour has failed to register her own weapons while presiding over a stalled Firearms Registry she wants to get rid off, with only 30% of licensed firearms owners registered by mid-2024, despite a five-year deadline. Her inability to drive compliance or address loopholes in the Arms Act has left communities vulnerable, with illegal firearms still circulating among criminals. This mirrors her approach to youth justice: loud promises, minimal delivery, and a refusal to heed expert warnings or accept her own limitations.

Luxon on bringing back boot camps:

"We're going to do things differently, we're going to try things. And some things may work, and some things may not work but we're going to do things differently."

That's cool, it's only the most vulnerable kids lives you're experimenting with https://t.co/J1pAGljZlv pic.twitter.com/N7TsCZgzOq

— Nick (@StrayDogNZ) July 4, 2024

However, this government’s disconnect extends well beyond beyond boot camps. Their obsession with punitive measures, extending Young Serious Offender designations to younger teens, slashing community support funding, and ignoring evidence-based interventions, shows a callous disregard for what actually reduces youth crime: early intervention, whānau support, and trauma-informed care...not to mention worthwhile employment, social cohesion and secure housing.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s “try something different” mantra is a hollow soundbite when the “something” is a recycled failure that costs $51 million over four years while Māori youth, who make up 80-85% of the cohort, bear the brunt. The coalition’s claim of success isn't just ludicrous, it’s a betrayal of vulnerable young people and a slap in the face to survivors of past boot camp abuses. Chhour and her government are not just out of touch; they’re wilfully blind, peddling a failed experiment as progress while the evidence, and the human cost, shows otherwise.

A Four-Year Term Would Further Erode Public Oversight

In a move that reeks of further disdain for democratic accountability, New Zealand’s National-led government is making moves to implement a four-year parliamentary term, a proposal that would further erode the public’s ability to hold governments to account. This audacious bid, championed by Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, comes at a time when the coalition is railroading through a slew of socially destructive policies that no one voted for.

In February, 1 News reported:

Govt announces four-year parliamentary term legislation to be introduced

The Government has agreed to introduce legislation that would allow the parliamentary term to be extended to four years - subject to a referendum - Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says.

Previously, coalition partners New Zealand First and ACT have both voiced support for four-year political terms, and the proposed Bill was modelled on the ACT Party's draft Constitution (Enabling a 4-Year Term) Amendment Bill.

The current three-year limit is entrenched — meaning it can only be overturned through a supermajority in Parliament or a referendum.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has previously indicated the Government planned to propose a referendum for four-year Parliamentary terms at the next election, and has been critical of the current three-year term which he said pushed governments into short-term decision-making.

On Wednesday, the NZ Herald reported:

NZ Government allocates $25m for referendum on four-year parliamentary terms

The Government has set aside $25 million for a referendum on four-year parliamentary terms, pencilled in to run alongside next year’s election.

The three-year term is a vital check on power, allowing voters to reverse course before ill-conceived policies wreak havoc. It’s a mechanism that can keep governments honest, or at least, as honest as they can be. Extending the term to four years would not only shield government's from scrutiny but also entrench their reckless agenda, leaving Kiwis to bear the consequences of decisions made without any mandate.

Why the rush to reduce oversight? Perhaps because this coalition knows their policies lack legitimacy. From tax breaks for tobacco companies to slashing essential services, the National-led government is implementing measures that were conspicuously absent from their campaign promises. The electorate didn’t vote for this economically damaging agenda, they voted for vague assurances of “getting back on track,” not a wrecking ball through our social fabric.

Take the tax breaks for tobacco companies, extended to three years in a move that blindsided health advocates and the public alike. This wasn’t a policy National, ACT, or NZ First campaigned on; it was a backroom deal that prioritises corporate profits over public health. The repeal of smokefree legislation and $300 million worth of tax breaks to increase cancer rates is a stark example of this government’s priorities.

Meanwhile, essential services like healthcare, education, and social housing are being gutted. The 2025 Budget saw $11 billion redirected from pay equity, KiwiSaver, and Best Start to fund tax cuts that disproportionately benefit landlords and multinationals. These cuts hit the most vulnerable hardest, with low-income earners, Māori, women, and the self-employed bearing the brunt, as highlighted by Retirement Commissioner Jane Wrightson.

The coalition’s disdain for voters is palpable, and further highlighted by their often negative rhetoric. Luxon’s infamous quip referring to New Zealanders as “bottom feeders” betrays a corporate arrogance that views the public as mere “customers” rather than citizens with rights. ACT leader David Seymour’s dismissal of those who missed voter registration as “drop kicks” further reveals the coalition’s contempt for the electorate and people's right to vote.

Finance Minister Nicola Willis had the gall to even suggest Kiwis should be grateful that unemployment, now at 5.2%, hasn’t climbed higher. This patronising rhetoric underscores a government that sees itself as above the people it serves, pushing policies that serve narrow interests while ignoring the broader public good.

She’s arrived at the ‘bitching about the ungrateful punters’ stage already, and that doesn’t usually appear until the third term. https://t.co/TRGJglEuRl

— Scott Nickerson (@totaraforest) August 6, 2025

The coalition’s socially destructive agenda extends beyond tobacco and tax cuts. The dismantling of the Māori Health Authority, the minimisation of te reo Māori in public services, and the push to reinterpret the Treaty of Waitangi through ACT’s controversial bills are moves that inflame division and undermine decades of progress. These policies, driven by David Seymour and Winston Peters, were not endorsed by voters but are being foisted upon the nation under the guise of coalition necessity. Talk about the tail waging the dog.

The result? A deepening recession, rising unemployment, higher inflation (CPI 2.7% compared to 1.8% forecast), and growing public discontent, with polls showing National’s support plummeting. A four-year term would only embolden this type of neoliberal government to double down on its unmandated agenda, with the passage of time and lolly scrambles towards election time somewhat shielding them from the electoral consequences of their negative policy decisions.

Adding insult to injury, the proposed referendum on a four-year term is itself a waste of taxpayer money, a waste of taxpayers money that only a paywalled article is reporting on. Talk about a complete failure of the fourth estate. Nobody asked for this vote; it’s a pet project of a government already haemorrhaging public trust and money. At a time when essential services are being significantly cut and cost-of-living pressures are squeezing households and closing businesses, funnelling resources into an unrequested referendum is yet another example of this coalition’s skewed priorities.

The three-year term ensures that voters can relatively swiftly correct course when governments veer into chaos. Luxon’s coalition is banking on an extra year to entrench policies that prioritise corporate mates over ordinary Kiwis, all while dismissing public discontent as the grumblings of “bottom feeders” and "drop kicks". If this government truly believed in its vision, it wouldn’t fear facing the electorate every three years.

The push for a four-year term isn’t about stability, it’s about evading accountability. New Zealanders deserve better: a democracy that listens, not one that lectures.

John Key Set to Benefit from National Gutting NCEA

Like so many of their policies, the National government’s plan to scrap the National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) for "new" qualifications smacks of ideological overreach and corporate influence. At the heart of this upheaval lies a troubling coincidence: the rhetoric of Crimson Education, a for-profit tutoring empire, mirrors the government’s propaganda against NCEA with eerie precision. Former Prime Minister Sir John Key, a senior adviser to Crimson since 2019, stands to gain from a policy shift that could funnel desperate students and parents into his company’s coffers. This smells like a stitch-up, and New Zealanders deserve better than a recycled neoliberal playbook that prioritises profit over pedagogy.

Crimson Education’s co-founder, Jamie Beaton, couldn't contain himself on Q+A (3 August 2025), slamming NCEA as a “rough” curriculum that leaves students “two years behind in core subjects like maths, science.” He bemoaned its lack of international recognition and rigour, pushing for systems like Cambridge or the International Baccalaureate (IB). Just a day later, Education Minister Erica Stanford and Prime Minister Christopher Luxon echoed these sentiments, decrying NCEA’s “inconsistency” and “complexity” while unveiling plans to replace it with the New Zealand Certificate of Education (NZCE) and Advanced Certificate (NZACE).

One day after Crimson Education's Beaton appears on Q&A to denounce NCEA, Erica Stanford announces she is cancelling it, ignoring expert advice.

The next day John Key, business partner to Beaton, flog off their new course How corrupt are the National Party?#nzpol #nzpolitics pic.twitter.com/RD2WgVj8eV

— Mountain_Tui (@Mountain_Tui) August 5, 2025

Both Crimson and the government paint NCEA as a barrier to global competitiveness, advocating for a rigid, exam-heavy model that aligns with Crimson’s expertise in tutoring for elite, international qualifications. The synchronicity is uncanny, almost as if the script was written in the same boardroom.

However, this overhaul, announced by Erica Standford and Chris Luxon, with the National Party's usual blame Labour rhetoric, lacks the robust research and consultation such a seismic shift demands. Principals like Simon Craggs of Papakura High School have slammed the proposal as a “step backwards in time,” warning it could marginalise Māori and Pacific students who’ve benefited from NCEA’s flexibility.

Labour’s Willow-Jean Prime has rightly called out the rushed timeline, consultation from 4 August to 15 September 2025 is a mere six weeks for a policy that won’t fully roll out until 2030.

This isn’t consultation; it’s window dressing, reminiscent of the 1990s neoliberal reforms where “consultation” meant ticking boxes while decisions were already made. The government’s reliance on a damning NZQA briefing feels cherry-picked, ignoring years of refinements that made NCEA inclusive and adaptable. Where’s the evidence that a return to A–E grades and mandatory subjects will lift outcomes for all, not just the academic elite?

 

On August 3, 1 News reported:

NCEA leaves Kiwi kids unprepared for future - Crimson head

The NCEA qualification lacks the rigour needed to prepare New Zealand students for competitive universities and workplaces, the chief executive of Crimson Education says.

It comes as an announcement from the Government and Education Minister Erica Stanford is expected imminently on the future of the NCEA system.

Speaking to Q+A, Crimson Education co-founder Jamie Beaton said NCEA wasn't setting students up well for future success, and lacks international recognition.

“To be honest, it’s rough. NCEA is basically not a rigorous curriculum at all, and students graduating with it are often two years behind in core subjects like maths, science as well,” said Beaton. 

 

On August 4, 1 News reported:

Government proposes axing NCEA, introducing new qualifications

The Government is proposing to replace the current NCEA with new national qualifications, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Education Minister Erica Stanford announced this morning.

The pair made the announcement in Auckland this morning, saying the current system "doesn’t always deliver what students and employers need".

"We want every New Zealander to reach their full potential and contribute to a thriving economy — and that starts with our students," Luxon said.

 

Jamie Beaton

Jamie Beaton of Crimson Education and Stanford share a strikingly aligned critique of NCEA, asserting its lack of rigour, limited international recognition, inadequate preparation for future pathways, and flawed flexibility that prioritises credit accumulation over meaningful learning. However, these claims can be challenged. The assertion that NCEA lacks rigour ignores its adaptability, which has enabled diverse learners to achieve qualifications, with schools like Papakura High reporting high pass rates. The claim of limited international recognition overstates the issue, as NCEA is accepted by many global universities, and its flexibility allows tailored pathways that rigid systems like Cambridge may not offer.

The argument that NCEA fails to prepare students for future success overlooks its vocational and academic pathways, which have supported students into trades and tertiary study, as evidenced by NZQA’s data on qualification attainment. Finally, criticising NCEA’s flexibility as a flaw disregards its strength in catering to varied learning needs, unlike exam-heavy models that risk marginalising non-academic students, as principals like Simon Craggs warn, potentially exacerbating inequities in a rushed, under-consulted reform.

The costs, both financial and social, will be significant. Redesigning curricula, retraining teachers, and transitioning students over five years will demand millions, yet no clear budget has been outlined. Schools, already stretched by the National Party's austerity, face disruption as they juggle dual assessment systems during the 2028–2030 transition period. Students, particularly from lower-decile schools, risk falling through the cracks in a system that prioritises exam performance over diverse pathways. Craggs warns this could exacerbate inequities, leaving Māori and Pacific students, who make up half our future population, further behind.

Cancel NCEA! NZ education is so poor! AI has to do it instead!

But does anyone know why and when things turned poorly?

2009 - 2012 after significant cuts to education by NZ Prime Minister John Key, the same man advising Jamie Beaton from Crimson Education#nzpol #nzpolitics pic.twitter.com/xsTlwNevmw

— Mountain_Tui (@Mountain_Tui) August 5, 2025

Mainstream media has largely failed to probe the potential conflicts of interest here. While some outlets report on criticism of the reforms, they’ve sidestepped the glaring connection between John Key, Crimson Education, and the government’s anti-evidence based agenda. Key’s advisory role at Crimson, a company poised to profit from heightened demand for tutoring in a more competitive system, raises red flags. Beaton’s Q+A appearance, perfectly timed with Stanford’s announcement, suggests a coordinated push, yet media silence on this link is deafening.

Are we to believe it’s coincidence that a former National PM and his corporate allies are cheerleading a policy that could drive families to Crimson’s pricey services? This isn’t about improving education; it’s about reshaping it to benefit a select few. The government’s haste, lack of consultation, and unbudgeted costs betray a policy driven by ideology, not evidence. New Zealand deserves an education system that uplifts all students, not one that hands the reins to corporate players like Crimson Education. It’s time to call this what it is: a betrayal of our kids’ futures.

They're Distracting You From Their Policy Failures

In a political landscape increasingly defined by distraction and dysfunction, the National-led coalition has descended into a quagmire of trivial pursuits and economic neglect. The latest offerings from Winston Peters and David Seymour exemplify this trend: Peters’ pointless push to legislate the countries name as, well, New Zealand, and Seymour’s obsession with deregulating the placement of backyard sheds. These aren't the actions of a government focused on the pressing issues facing Aotearoa; they're the desperate ploys of government MPs scrambling to stay in the headlines while the economy teeters and ordinary Kiwis bear the brunt.

 

On Friday, the NZ Herald reported:

 

Making ‘New Zealand’ country’s official name added to NZ First’s ever-changing list of bills

New Zealand First’s stack of publicly announced Member’s Bills has grown yet again, with the party today proposing legislation to make “New Zealand” the official name of the country in law.

The legislation – which still needs to be picked from the ballot of Member’s Bills – comes in response to the party’s unease over the use of “Aotearoa”, including in Parliament. 

 

...

It’s the eighth Member’s Bill the party has announced this year, but due to the rules of Parliament, NZ First is only able to have four in the ballot at any one time.

Only MPs who aren’t ministers – NZ First has four backbenchers – can have Member’s Bills and they can only have one in the ballot at a time.

This has meant the party has had to shuffle out several of the bills it has previously announced, but which remain on NZ First’s website as “Our Member’s Bills”.

For example, the “Conscience Acts Referendums Bill”, which was revealed in March to remove conscience votes in Parliament and instead require some particular legislation to go to a national public referendum, no longer appears on Parliament’s website.

Let’s start with Winston Peters' bungling, whose proposal to enshrine “New Zealand” as the country’s official name is another play for the bigoted vote. The name is already codified in law, used globally, and etched into our national identity. This legislative stunt serves no practical purpose and diverts parliamentary resources, which could be better utilised to try and fix the countries more pressing issues, such as homelessness and the cost of living crisis. It reeks of Peters’ trademark populism, a distraction from the coalition’s inability to address substantive issues it appears to have no intention of actually solving.

Similarly, David Seymour has championed easing rules on shed placement, arguing that shrinking section sizes justifies this change. While Seymour frames this as a win for homeowners, it’s a policy so niche it barely registers against the backdrop of people's economic hardship. There's no record of any New Zealander ever being fined for having a garden shed in the wrong place, leading one to wonder: is this really the best use of ministerial time when 112,496 people face severe housing deprivation? These trivial policies are part of a broader pattern of headline-grabbing stunts designed to mask the coalition’s lethargy on substantive issues such as Gaza. They're trying to distract you from their economic mismanagement as well.

Furthermore, the government’s decision to overhaul the National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) is another knee-jerk reaction, rushed through without robust research or consultation in an attempt to take the focus off of the consequences of their policies, such as declining achievement rates, a decline that's largely the result of our reduced living standards. But instead of actually doing anything to make sure children and young people are in a position to actually learn and reach their full potential, the coalition is more concerned with saving money by providing inedible school lunches.

Education Minister Erica Stanford’s plan to replace NCEA, a system in place for over 20 years, with a new framework lacks evidence of its efficacy. Only 56% of students passed NCEA literacy and numeracy writing tests in June 2023, and 64% passed reading, yet the coalition offers no data to suggest their overhaul will improve these figures. They're again using the opportunity to blame Labour for unworkable NCEA changes brought in by the John Key led National government. This move appears less about educational reform and more about diverting attention from the cost-of-living crisis, where consumer inflation remains stubbornly high and domestic price pressures show no signs of easing, which is having a detrimental effect on young people's ability to learn.

The coalition’s economic mismanagement is also starkly evident in the escalating wave of business liquidations and mounting mortgage stress. Since the National-led government took office in November 2023, business liquidations have surged, with 2,976 companies entering liquidation in 2024 alone, a 27% increase year-on-year, driven heavily by the downturn in construction, hospitality, and our retail sectors. Non-performing loans have also risen, with 485,000 consumers in arrears as of May 2025, including 21,900 mortgage holders behind by over 30 days. With New Zealand’s GDP contracting by 2.1% in the year to September 2024, despite a population growth of 1.2%, and net core Crown debt reaching $175.5 billion (42.5% of GDP) in June 2024, the economic outlook is grim. Treasury forecasts debt to climb to $192 billion by mid-2026, and economists warn that ongoing austerity and global trade shocks, such as Trump's 15% tariffs, could push liquidation rates higher, with small-to-medium enterprises (97% of New Zealand’s businesses) particularly vulnerable to further closures.

Meanwhile, mortgage holders face mounting pressure as interest rates, which rose sharply from 2.58% in August 2021 to a peak of 7.5% by January 2024 under the previous Labour government’s tenure, have only modestly declined under the National-led coalition. As of July 2025, the average one-year fixed mortgage rate sits at 4.97%, a drop of about 170 basis points since the Reserve Bank began cutting the Official Cash Rate (OCR) from 5.5% to 3.25% since August 2024. It's little wonder that the major banks are making record breaking profits ($7.22 billion in 2024) given they aren't always passing on the Reserve Bank's monetary stimulus. This relief is marginal for many, as debt-servicing costs remain elevated.

The National-led government’s trickle down economics and tax cuts, which disproportionately benefit higher earners, have failed to stimulate any meaningful economic recovery. Wage growth, slowing to 3.7% in June 2025 from 6.9% in June 2023, lags behind living costs, with inflation at 2.7% in June 2025 (up from 2.1% estimates) and essentials like rent, food, and utilities consuming 62–98% of disposable income for many low-income households. This mismatch exacerbates financial strain, as the coalition’s focus on fiscal restraint over investment stifles demand and deepens hardship for ordinary Kiwis.

David Seymour’s rhetoric about “saving” even more money (read less money in your back pocket), through further cuts and policy tinkering, such as his Regulatory Standards Bill, is a hollow promise that threatens to deepen New Zealand’s economic woes. Far from delivering efficiency, the bill imposes $50–60 million annually in administrative costs, as estimated by MBIE, due to mandatory Consistency Accountability Statements and a new Regulatory Standards Board that duplicates existing oversight mechanisms. Seymour and other coalition MPs have falsely claimed that the holy grail of artificial intelligence will somehow magically streamline these processes to reduce costs, yet experts like Victoria University’s Andrew Lensen has categorically debunk this claim, noting AI’s need for human oversight limits cost savings. Even if AI had the ability to streamline the government's processes, their failure to adapt is in stark contrast to their dishonest rhetoric, especially in respect to the National led government slashing $1.5 billion from public sector budgets, including innovation and digital transformation programmes. There's no question that since taking office in November 2023, the coalition has stifled AI development critical for economic resilience. By cutting and deregulating without researching long-term impacts, Seymour’s latest iteration of an already defeated bill undermines worker protections and environmental standards, standards that are there to ensure that taxpayers don't always foot the bill for things like the extractive industries environmental pollution. This reckless approach pulls money from an already struggling economy, money that could be going towards more productive sectors such as business innovation and housing security.

Westpac’s senior economist Satish Ranchhod warns that domestic inflation pressures will persist, yet Seymour’s policies seem poised to deepen hardship for the 120,000 already deprived children struggling to get by amid the cost-of-living crisis. It's becoming more aparent with every press release that this “Coalition of Chaos” government thrives on distraction, not delivery.

From Peters’ name game to Seymour’s shed obsession, their policies are an excercise in irrelevance. Meanwhile, the real issues, rising homelessness, the cost of living crisis, hungry children, business failures, and mortgage stress, go unaddressed. With 65% of New Zealanders believing the economy is rigged for the rich, the coalition’s focus on trivialities only fuels discontent. Aotearoa deserves better: a government that tackles the cost-of-living crisis head-on, not one that rearranges the deck chairs while the economy continues to burn.

Israel Continues to Lie About Gaza’s Starvation Crisis

In the grim shadow of Gaza’s humanitarian catastrophe, a sinister disinformation campaign, orchestrated by Israel and amplified by right-wing politicians and propagandists, seeks to obscure the deliberate starvation of Palestinians. This grotesque manipulation of truth, peddled by figures like New Zealand’s Cameron Slater, Juliet Moses, Ani O’Brien, and Rachel Stewart, attempts to whitewash a genocide by blaming Palestinian suffering on medical conditions or external failures, while Israel’s blockade strangles even more innocent civilians to death.
 

On Monday, the Las Angeles Times reported:

Israelis rebuff Trump, insisting images of starvation in Gaza are ‘fake’

The Israeli government is defending a top military officer who dismissed images of starving Palestinians as “fake” over the weekend, despite President Trump stating Monday that he believes the pictures are real.

The rupture comes amid growing international pressure on Israel over dire circumstances in the Palestinian enclave, and as two Israeli human rights groups, in a first, characterized the Israeli operation in Gaza as a genocide.


In recent days, photographs and videos of desperate Palestinians crowding aid stations and of emaciated children have spread across the globe. Even so, Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, said Sunday that “there is no starvation in Gaza.”

And on Sunday, during a press tour of a small area of the Gaza Strip, Effie Defrin, a commanding officer and Israel Defense Forces spokesman, told reporters that visuals emerging from Gaza were “breaking our hearts.”

“But most of it is fake, fake distributed by Hamas,” Defrin said. “It’s a campaign. Unfortunately, some of the Israeli media, including some of the international media, is distributing this information and those false pictures, and creating an image of starvation which doesn’t exist.”

Much of the mainstream media, too often weak in the face of Israel's propaganda machine, has often been complicit in amplifying these lies, failing to challenge the narrative with the rigour it demands. As the United Nations, aid agencies, and even starving Hamas prisoners bear witness to this engineered famine, the world must confront the moral bankruptcy of those who excuse Israel’s actions while children waste away in front of our eyes.

Israel’s campaign hinges on a cruel distortion: that images of emaciated Palestinian children, like one-year-old Muhammad Zakariya al-Matouq, reflect pre-existing medical conditions rather than widespread starvation. Right-wing propagandists in New Zealand have eagerly echoed this disgusting lie. Rachel Stewart, in a venomous X post on 1 August 2025, criticised Stuff for supposedly using a photo of a “malnourished” Gazan child, falsely claiming the New York Times retracted its use due to the child’s cerebral palsy.

Juliet Moses, Cameron Slater, and Ani O’Brien have similarly been cited for pushing this narrative, alleging media exaggerate starvation to vilify Israel. These claims, rooted in selective truths, ignore the undeniable: Muhammad’s condition worsened due to Israel’s blockade, which denies food and medical supplies, as confirmed by his doctor. This tactic, highlighting medical issues to dismiss intentional starvation, is a hallmark of Israel’s “Pallywood” propaganda, designed to dehumanise Palestinians and deflect blame.

The mainstream media’s susceptibility to this disinformation is a scandal in itself. Outlets like the New York Times and BBC have faced criticism for initially omitting medical context in stories about children like Muhammad, but their clarifications, such as the Times’ note on 23 July 2025, affirm that starvation compounds these conditions. However, when propagandists like Moses and Slater seize on these oversights, they distort the narrative to suggest no famine exists, a claim contradicted by overwhelming documented evidence.
 

On 23 July, PBS reported:

More than 100 aid groups sign open letter warning of starvation in Gaza

Experts say Gaza is at risk of famine because of Israel’s blockade and offensive, launched in response to Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack. The head of the World Health Organization said Gaza is “witnessing a deadly surge” in malnutrition and related diseases, and that a “large proportion” of its roughly 2 million people are starving.

Israel says it allows enough aid into the territory and faults delivery efforts by U.N. agencies, which say they are hindered by Israeli restrictions and the breakdown of security.

...

In an open letter, 115 organizations, including major international aid groups such as Doctors Without Borders, Mercy Corps and Save the Children, said they were watching their own colleagues, as well as the Palestinians they serve, “waste away.”

The letter blamed Israeli restrictions and “massacres” at aid distribution points. Witnesses, health officials and the U.N. human rights office say Israeli forces have repeatedly fired on crowds seeking aid, killing more than 1,000 people. Israel says its forces have only fired warning shots and that the death toll is exaggerated.

The Israeli government’s “restrictions, delays, and fragmentation under its total siege have created chaos, starvation, and death,” the letter said.

The World Health Organisation reported 63 malnutrition deaths in July alone, and one in five children under five facing acute malnutrition. But the true picture will be much worse. The media’s failure to consistently challenge Israel's disinformation about the cause of these deaths and mass starvation, often due to fear of being labelled antisemitic, allows these disgusting lies to fester, undermining the truth of Gaza’s man-made famine.

Israel’s blockade, intensified from March through to July 2025, slashed aid to a trickle, compared to the 500–600 trucks required each and every day, as per UN estimates. The Gaza Health Ministry reports 127 hunger-related deaths since October 2023, including 85 children. Of course, given the difficulties in locating people who have starved to death in a "war" zone, this will be an underestimation. Even Hamas prisoners, held in dire conditions, are starving, not because of Hamas’s actions, but because Israel’s restrictions ensure there’s not enough food to go around.

The claim that Hamas diverts aid lacks evidence; USAID and UN reviews, who have no reason to counter the Israeli narrative other than to tell the truth, found no systematic theft. Yet, Israeli officials like David Mencer and Benjamin Netanyahu shamelessly blame Hamas and the UN, accusing them of engineering shortages while ignoring Israel’s role in blocking aid. This is a grotesque inversion of responsibility: Israel, not Hamas, is starving both civilians and prisoners. They are doing this with the help of many western leaders, including Donald Trump, whose propaganda concerning the genocide is often just as dishonest as Israel's. The atrocities we are witnessing would end tomorrow if Western leaders truly wanted them to.

The disinformation campaign also targets the United Nations and surrounding countries, falsely claiming they fail to distribute aid. Israel’s ambassador Danny Danon accused UN aid chief Tom Fletcher of colluding with Hamas, offering no evidence at all to back up his false claims. COGAT, Israel’s aid coordination body, claimed 4,500 trucks entered since May 2025, but the UN notes these are insufficient and face military restrictions, rendering distribution nearly impossible.

Airdrops, lauded by Israel and the US as major humanitarian gestures, are a farcical distraction. UNRWA’s Philippe Lazzarini called them “expensive, inefficient, and dangerous,” with many landing in the sea or without parachutes, killing desperate civilians. The US and Israel’s Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), supposedly replacing UN systems, has been a complete disaster, with over 1,000 Palestinians killed at its militarised aid sites so far. Many of these civilians are being murdered by Western soldiers who then return to their home countries without any consequences.

The United States and Israel's theatrics of providing aid mask the reality that aid volumes are a fraction of what’s required. The World Food Programme warns of famine-like conditions for 470,000 people, making a joke of the promise that this type of genocide would never happen again.

The right-wing's lack of action to curb this crisis, enabled by a disinformation campaign and amplified by discredited muckrakers like Slater, Moses, O’Brien, and Stewart, isn't just dishonest, it’s complicity in genocide. The blood of these starved children is on their hands. By parroting Israel’s lies, they obscure a crisis where women and children die daily from hunger, their bodies “eating themselves” in a slow, cruel death, as Dr Omar Abdel-Mannan described. The UN’s Michael Fakhri calls this “the fastest starvation campaign in modern history,” preventable yet enabled by international inaction and impunity.

Two Israeli human rights groups, B’tselem and Physicians for Human Rights, have labelled it a genocide, citing deliberate starvation tactics, which is clearly another war crime perpetrated by Israel and its accomplices. The mainstream media must reject their propaganda, amplify the voices of the besieged and starving, and hold Israel accountable. New Zealanders, too, must see through the lies of local propagandists and demand justice for Gaza’s rightful inhabitants. Because if we don't stop this type of genocide, aided and abetted by right-wing propagandists, it will continue into other countries, perhaps even your own.