Was MethaneSAT Deliberately Compromised?

New Zealand’s MethaneSAT, launched with fanfare in March 2024 to tackle methane emissions, has become a troubling case study in corporate overreach and government opacity. The satellite’s abrupt failure in June 2025, attributed to a mysterious loss of power, raises serious questions about the role of Blue Canyon Technologies (BCT), a subsidiary of the controversial RTX Corporation (formerly Raytheon), which took control of the satellite in March 2025. This move, shrouded in secrecy, reeks of a deliberate attempt to undermine a mission that threatened the fossil fuel industry’s interests, with our National-led government seemingly complicit in the affair.
 

Today, RNZ reported:

 

Space Minister Judith Collins goes to ground over alleged government failures managing NZ's first space mission

Space Minister Judith Collins has gone to ground over alleged government failures managing New Zealand's first official, taxpayer-funded satellite mission.

Last year, Collins welcomed the launch of MethaneSAT as "a milestone in the development of New Zealand's space sector".

However, since the methane-hunting satellite lost communication with its owners, she has refused to answer questions on whether there would be any form of review of New Zealand's involvement in the mission.

...

Several experts RNZ has spoken to in the space industry lamented the choice to spend tens of millions being involved in a third party project, rather than making the country's first space mission something designed and launched from New Zealand.

Political leaders declined to front on calls for a thorough review.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has blamed Labour for overseeing the initial investment and referred follow-up questions to Collins. That's despite the launch and orbit happening under the current government.

Collins has repeatedly refused to comment and referred all questions, including questions abut whether the government would hold a review, to the Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE), which houses the country's Space Agency.

MethaneSAT was designed to deliver precise, high-resolution data on methane emissions, a potent greenhouse gas, with a focus on exposing leaks from oil and gas operations. The satellite could have also potentially tracked the release of the potent greenhouse gas from agriculture. Such transparency is anathema to industries that thrive on obfuscation, preferring to downplay their environmental impact while lobbying for deregulation.

The National government, under Christopher Luxon, has shown a troubling alignment with these interests, delaying accountability, rolling back climate policies and championing fossil fuel exploration. This cosy relationship casts a shadow over the decision to hand control of MethaneSAT to BCT, a company with no stake in New Zealand’s environmental goals but a clear lineage in RTX’s defence empire, notorious for its ethical and legal transgressions.

The transfer of control to BCT in March 2025, ostensibly to address “operational challenges,” was a baffling move. Why entrust a critical climate mission to a subsidiary of RTX, a corporation mired in scandals? RTX has a rap sheet that includes a $950 million settlement in 2024 for defrauding the U.S. Department of Defense with defective pricing, bribing Qatari officials to secure contracts, and violating export controls by leaking sensitive technology to China, Russia, and Iran.

Their environmental record is equally grim, with toxic waste contamination in Florida and Arizona. RTX’s weapons, including cluster munitions and missiles used in Yemen and Gaza, have fuelled civilian suffering, while their “pain ray” systems used on civilians raise further ethical alarms. BCT, as part of this conglomerate, inherits a legacy of untrustworthiness, making the initial contracts and their control of MethaneSAT deeply suspicious.

Equally troubling is the lack of transparency from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) and Defence Minister Judith Collins. MBIE’s refusal to answer questions about the transfer or the satellite’s persistent issues, frequent safe mode entries, thruster malfunctions, and a paltry data output, smacks of a cover-up. Collins, typically forthright, has been conspicuously silent, leaving New Zealanders in the dark about a $29 million taxpayer investment. This opacity fuels speculation that the government prioritised corporate interests over accountability, especially given Raytheon's questionable history and National’s fossil fuel-friendly stance.

The satellite’s “problems” before its planned handover to the University of Auckland’s Te Pūnaha Ātea Space Institute in June 2025 are equally perplexing. Reports of issues due to Solar Cycle 25’s peak in 2024–2025 seem convenient excuses. MethaneSAT is the only reported satellite to fail due to solar activity during this period, despite thousands of others navigating the same conditions. This singularity raises red flags: were these issues genuine, or a pretext for BCT to assume control?

The apparent absence of any proper mechanism for NZ authorities to oversea systems during these transfers or robust checks and balances during the satellite’s construction by BCT is glaring. Manufacturing faults are now cited as a cause of failure, yet no independent oversight ensured the satellite’s integrity. This smells of negligence, or worse, deliberate sabotage to protect oil and gas industry interests from MethaneSAT’s data, that would have highlighted methane emissions with pinpoint accuracy.

Rocket Lab, which operated MethaneSAT’s mission control until March 2025, adds another layer of intrigue. Their current PR campaign, which even includes promotional propaganda from Auckland's Mayor, Wayne Brown, consisting of founder and CEO Peter Beck insisting that they avoid military entanglements, is patently false. Rocket Lab’s Electron rocket, HASTE suborbital vehicle, and Photon spacecraft bus support U.S. and U.K. defence contracts, including hypersonic weapons testing (HASTE), military communications satellites (SDA’s Tranche 1 and 2), and rapid cargo delivery for conflict zones (Rocket Cargo). These technologies clearly bolster U.S. operations, contradicting Rocket Lab’s claims of neutrality. Their ties to Lockheed Martin, a weapons giant, further undermines their credibility.

The MethaneSAT debacle is a stark reminder of how corporate and government interests can converge to undermine public good. The farming and oil and gas industry’s aversion to accurate methane data, National’s fossil fuel bias, and RTX’s chequered history suggest a troubling narrative: a satellite designed to hold polluters accountable may have been deliberately compromised. Until Collins and MBIE provide answers, New Zealanders are left to wonder whether our climate ambitions were sacrificed on the altar of geopolitical games and corporate greed.

Health NZ Caught Faking Wait Times

In a nation that prides itself on fairness and transparency, the National-led coalition’s handling of New Zealand’s health system is nothing short of a scandalous betrayal. Reports emerging from Nelson Hospital suggest Health New Zealand (Te Whatu Ora) may have instructed hospitals to concoct “ghost appointments”, non-existent bookings designed to artificially deflate wait time statistics.

This grubby tactic is a desperate attempt to prop up the coalition’s pre-election promise of slashing hospital wait times, a pledge now crumbling under the weight of their own incompetence, uncovered manipulations and chronic under-funding.

Yesterday, 1 News reported:

 

Nelson Hospital accused of making 'ghost' appointments for patients

Documents released to 1News by the senior doctors union and Nurses Union show an email exchange between a clinician at Nelson Hospital and a manager.

In late June the clinician wrote that they had noticed some "unusual activity" with patient bookings. "It looks like there are 23 long wait patients listed as booked for a clinic scheduled for tomorrow under (redacted). However, the clinic doesn't exist as she is on leave."

A copy of the booking system for June 24, with the patient's details redacted, shows the patients were booked in for five minute slots with the note "DO NOT CONTACT PATIENT".

After the clinician again raised concerns, the manager emailed back: "We have received clear messaging from the commissioner that no patients are to be waiting longer than two years for an FSA by [June 30] and need to have a plan to be seen".

"So by creating the virtual clinic I was able to create a space for those patients to be held until booked." The email ends with: "please be assured as clumsy as this may seem, I am trying to do the right thing by everyone".

The public deserves better than such patronising deceit. The allegations are as insidious as they are unsurprising. Senior doctors and the Nurses Union have sounded the alarm, reporting “unusual activity” in Nelson Hospital’s booking system, where patients were “parked” in fictitious clinics only to be shuffled to real appointments later.

Health NZ’s Dr Derek Sherwood had the gall to call this a mere “administrative workaround,” as if fudging data to make wait times appear shorter is just another day at the office. Unfortunately for him, this is clearly a manipulation and cynical ploy to mask the coalition’s failure to deliver on their grandiose health promises. The Health and Disability Commissioner is now watching, but one wonders if Simeon Brown and his cronies will wriggle free with their usual bluster, particularly as there's very little mainstream media attention being given to this issue.

However, it's not hard to see the government’s fingerprints all over this scandal. While overseeing a health system in crisis, their obsession with optics over outcomes is painfully clear. The coalition’s outsourcing of 10,579 elective procedures to private hospitals by June 2025, at a cost of $50 million, is another sleight of hand. As RNZ reported, senior doctors slammed this move for creating a “false impression” of reduced wait times. Private providers cherry-pick straightforward cases, leaving complex patients languishing in under-resourced public hospitals.

On March 25, RNZ reported:

 

Outsourcing being used to pretend hospital wait times are being fixed - doctor

According to Health NZ Te Whatu Ora, there were 222 patients waiting for gynaecology surgery in Northland, of whom nearly half (101) had waited longer than the target of 120 days, 64 more than six months and eight more than a year.

Bailey said the backlog had been building for several years, partly driven by population increases - Northland is one of the fastest growing regions in the country - workforce shortages, industrial action by nurses, junior doctors and anaesthetic technicians, and then finally the Covid-19 pandemic.

"We've never caught up since."

He and his team had offered to do extra surgery sessions to help clear the backlog - but Health NZ would not pay for it.

"We can't actually run weekend lists because they are nitpicking about pay for theatre nurses."

When surgery was outsourced, those most in need of treatment tended to miss out, he said.

The last time Northland referred patients to a private hospital in Auckland - about a year ago - many were declined because they were "too complex".

It’s a numbers game, not a solution, and it reeks of the same dishonesty as the “ghost appointments” fiasco. Meanwhile, over 74,000 patients wait beyond four months for specialist assessments, and 37,000 for treatment. These figures expose the coalition’s hollow rhetoric for what it is: a cruel mirage that is impacting New Zealanders lives.

The government's refusal to properly fund Health, while funnelling millions to private providers, ensures overall wait times will only worsen, no matter how many “ghost appointments” they conjure up.

At the heart of this mess is the coalition’s belief in austerity and deliberate underfunding of public health. Hospitals are stretched to breaking point, with staffing shortages so dire that nurses, driven by desperation, are once again striking. The Nurses Union has been unequivocal: underfunding has created unsafe working conditions, compromising patient care. But instead of addressing this crisis, Brown and Reti prattle on about “steady progress” and “health targets,” as if words alone can bandage a haemorrhaging system.

This isn’t the first time the National-led government has played fast and loose with the truth when it comes to wait times. Historical data, like the 2012 study on elective surgery booking systems, points to “gaming” practices under previous National governments, such as raising clinical thresholds to exclude eligible patients from wait lists. Sound familiar? The coalition’s current tactics are just a rehash of this playbook, dressed up in new jargon but no less dishonest.

Kiwis deserve a health system that prioritises patients, not political point-scoring. The coalition’s reliance on data manipulation and privatisation by stealth is an insult to every New Zealander waiting in pain. Minister Brown, it’s time to stop hiding behind “workarounds” and face the music: your underfunded, mismanaged health system is failing us yet again.

The Moral Abyss of Concentration Camps

The concept of detention centres and concentration camps is a grim spectre in human history, a mechanism of dehumanisation and control that has no place in a civilised world. These camps, defined as large-scale detention sites where civilians are imprisoned without due process based on ethnicity, religion, or political beliefs, are an affront to the principles of justice, dignity, and human rights.

From the Nazi atrocities to contemporary proposals that echo their chilling intent, concentration camps represent a deliberate stripping away of humanity, a policy rooted in fear, supremacy, and exclusion.

On Monday, the Guardian reported:

Israeli plan for forced transfer of Gaza’s population ‘a blueprint for crimes against humanity’

Military ordered to turn ruins of Rafah into ‘humanitarian city’ but experts call the plan an internment camp for all Palestinians in Gaza


Israel’s defence minister has laid out plans to force all Palestinians in Gaza into a camp on the ruins of Rafah, in a scheme that legal experts and academics described as a blueprint for crimes against humanity.

Israel Katz said he has ordered Israel’s military to prepare for establishing a camp, which he called a “humanitarian city”, on the ruins of the city of Rafah, Haaretz newspaper reported.

Palestinians would go through “security screening” before entering, and once inside would not be allowed to leave, Katz said at a briefing for Israeli journalists.

Israeli forces would control the perimeter of the site and initially “move” 600,000 Palestinians into the area – mostly people currently displaced in the al-Mawasi area.

Eventually the entire population of Gaza would be housed there, and Israel aims to implement “the emigration plan, which will happen”, Haaretz quoted him saying.

Since Donald Trump suggested at the start of the year that large numbers of Palestinians should leave Gaza to “clean out” the strip, Israeli politicians including the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, have enthusiastically promoted forced deportation, often presenting it as a US project.

Katz’s scheme breaks international law, said Michael Sfard, one of Israel’s leading human rights lawyers. It also directly contradicted claims made hours earlier by the office of Israel’s military chief, which said in a letter that Palestinians were only displaced inside Gaza for their own protection.

Israel and the United States’ use of detention centres for genocide and mass deportations demand a fierce and unflinching critique. Historically, Nazi Germany’s concentration camps stand as a horrifying benchmark. Between 1933 and 1945, the Nazi regime operated over 44,000 camps and incarceration sites, imprisoning millions, including Jews, Romani people, political dissidents, and others deemed “undesirable.”

Approximately 1.65 million people were registered prisoners, with around one million perishing in camps like Auschwitz, Dachau, and Treblinka through starvation, forced labour, and gas chambers. These camps were not mere prisons but industrial-scale machines of death and oppression, designed to eradicate entire communities. Their legacy is a stark warning: when a state targets a group as “other,” the descent into barbarity is swift and catastrophic.

In 2025, Israel’s proposed “humanitarian city” in Gaza, as outlined by Defence Minister Israel Katz, bears a chilling resemblance to this dark history. The plan, reported by Haaretz and The Guardian, aims to confine 600,000 displaced Palestinians, eventually the entire 2.1 million population of Gaza, into a sealed-off area built on Rafah’s ruins. Palestinians would face “security screenings” and be barred from leaving, with the stated goal of “voluntary emigration” that critics, including former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, label as ethnic cleansing.

Legal scholars like Michael Sfard argue this violates international humanitarian law, specifically the Fourth Geneva Convention’s prohibition on forced transfers. The plan’s language of “humanitarian” aid masks a reality of mass detention and starvation, with 758 Palestinians already murdered and over 5,000 injured at aid distribution centres since May 2025. Such policies echo the Nazi tactic of disguising genocidal intent as “resettlement,” a comparison that, while sensitive, is grounded in the mechanics of control and displacement.

So, anyone who doesn’t go to the concentration camp will be “eliminated.”

Doesn’t sound genocidal at all… pic.twitter.com/mvuLIENeRm

— Assal Rad (@AssalRad) July 10, 2025

However, the scourge of detention centres is not confined to Israel's genocide in Palestine, but festers globally, exposing a troubling trend of state-sanctioned oppression. In China, over one million Uyghur Muslims and other minorities are detained in Xinjiang’s “re-education” camps, where forced labour, cultural erasure, and torture are documented by Human Rights Watch. Australia’s offshore detention centres on Nauru and the now closed Manus Island detention centres held approximately 1,200 refugees in conditions described by the UN as “inhumane,” with 14 deaths reported since 2013.

In Libya, UN reports estimate 20,000 migrants are held in detention centres, often subjected to torture and extortion, with 3,000 deaths recorded in 2024 alone. These global examples mirror the dehumanising logic of historical concentration camps, using euphemisms like “processing” or “re-education” to sanitise systemic cruelty.

Across the Atlantic, the United States under the Trump administration is reviving its own form of detention horror. Reports from Reuters and the New York Times reveal plans to use military bases like Fort Bliss to detain up to 10,000 migrants, with ambitions to scale this to hundreds of thousands as part of the largest deportation operation in U.S. history. Currently, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) holds 41,000 people in for-profit facilities, with Guantánamo Bay recently reactivated for indefinite detention.

These centres, often compared to concentration camps by scholars and activists like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, mirror the internment of 120,000 Japanese Americans during World War II. The rhetoric of “invasion” and dehumanising terms like “animals” used by Trump is no laughing matter, and recalls Nazi propaganda, fostering indifference to the suffering of detained families, including children who are routinely separated from their parents.

People are comparing Trump's Alligator Alcatraz detention centre to Hitler's concentration camps. But they're wrong! Just look, the roofs are a completely different colour. #uspoli #fascism pic.twitter.com/nBdwFlezf9

— Peter Murphy (@PeterWMurphy1) July 13, 2025

The moral bankruptcy of concentration camps lies in their denial of individual rights and their reliance on collective punishment. Whether it’s the 27 Palestinian detainees tortured at Israel’s Sde Teiman camp, as documented by Amnesty International, or the 2.5 million deportations under U.S. policies since 2020, these systems thrive on dehumanisation. They're not solutions but atrocities, breeding cycles of violence and causing untold damage.

Israel’s occupation, America’s xenophobia, and the global detention regimes around the world must end, not through war but through political pressure,  justice and a recognition of our shared humanity. To ignore this is to court the same indifference that enabled the Holocaust’s horrors. We must resist these atrosities, for history shows what results if nothing is done.

Shane Jones’ Sky News Lies

In a cringe-worthy spectacle, Shane Jones, New Zealand First’s shameless spruiker for the oil and gas industry, slithered onto Sky News Australia on Friday, peddling lies so brazen that they would have collapsed under even a whiff of scrutiny.

By blaming renewable energy like solar and wind for New Zealand’s exorbitant electricity prices, Jones swapped truth for fiction, serving his mining cronies while continuing to shaft Kiwi consumers.

Without a shred of skepticism, the hosts, Andrew Bolt, Peta Credlin, and Rowan Dean, fawned over Shane Jones pathetic promotion of polluting industries, swallowing his lies about renewables inflating power bills without any hesitation. Their sycophantic nods peaked when Jones smeared Jacinda Ardern, falsely tying her policies to price hikes, with zero pushback, amplifying the deceit Jones served up on a silver platter.


Today, Sky News reported:

 

‘A 180-degree turn and buried Jacinda’s thinking’: NZ try to recover from high energy prices

New Zealand Associate Energy Minister Shane Jones says the increase in electricity bills is due to a “hatred of fossil fuels” and a “false belief” of thinking you can run an economy without “peaking power”.

“The real problem is we were a low-cost energy system … the reality is, the power prices have not come down as a consequence of wind and solar,” Mr Jones said.

“Last winter, I believe we had the highest spiking prices for electricity in the entire OECD.

“We went through a 180-degree turn and basically buried Jacinda’s thinking.”

 

Since the neoliberal reforms of the 1980s, New Zealand’s electricity prices have surged, mainly driven by partial privatization. Economist Geoff Bertram’s 2020 study, “Weak Regulation, Rising Margins, and Asset Revaluations,” shows residential prices soared from 4.84 cents per kilowatt-hour in 1985 to 26.85 cents by 2018, doubling in real terms against an inflation-adjusted 14.08 cents. By 2024, the Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment reported prices at 33.06 cents per kWh, a 75% jump from 18.87 cents in 2006. This isn’t due to solar or wind; it’s a market rigged for profit over people.

The last National government (2008-2017) under John Key partially privatised Mighty River Power (now Mercury), Meridian, and Genesis, promising competition would cut costs. Utter nonsense. Bertram notes retail markups spiked, with the energy component up 70% from 2004 to 2018, while gentailers’ asset revaluations drained $10-12 billion from consumers after the reforms.

Contrast this with Jones’ baseless claim that renewables are the villain. New Zealand’s electricity mix is already over 80% renewable, with hydro dominating at over 50% of capacity. Solar and wind, while growing, remain small contributors, hardly enough to move the price needle.

The Electricity Authority’s 2024 reports highlight that price spikes, like those exceeding $800/MWh in August 2024, stem from low hydro storage and reliance on costly gas-fired thermal plants, not renewables. Rising gas prices, driven by depleting domestic fields, add further pressure. If anything, expanding solar and wind could reduce dependence on volatile fossil fuels, stabilising prices in the long run.

So why does Jones peddle this drivel? Follow the money. His cozy ties to mining interests, evident in his advocacy for numerous extractive projects, suggest a vested interest in fossil fuels. Renewables threaten the profits of his cronies in extractive industries, so he spins a narrative to discredit them. It’s a tired old tactic from a politician who seems more comfortable shilling for corporate mates than serving the people he's meant to represent.

The real scandal is the $10.8 billion in dividends gentailers paid out from 2010 to 2020, while generation capacity grew by a measly 1%, as reported by Newsroom in 2024, causing companies to fail. That’s money that could have bolstered infrastructure or eased consumer prices, especially for low-income households facing energy hardship. Instead, it lined shareholders’ pockets. Jones’ refusal to acknowledge this while scapegoating renewables isn't just ignorant...it’s insulting to every Kiwi currently struggling to pay the bills.

David Seymour Can't Handle the United Nations Jandal

David Seymour, who is unfortunately the current Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand, despite only receiving 8% of the party vote, is having another whinge about people disagreeing with him. This time it's the UN’s Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, Albert K. Barume, who recently issued a scathing letter condemning the coalition government’s policies, particularly those championed by Seymour’s ACT Party, for eroding Māori rights.

This international rebuke, which was highly deserved, exposes not only the flaws in Seymour’s political reasoning but also the insidious racism embedded in his divisive policy agenda, which prioritises individualist dogma over collective indigenous rights and obligations under our founding document, the Treaty of Waitangi.

Seymour’s response to the UN was predictably dismissive, branding their intervention an “affront to New Zealand’s sovereignty” and a product of “profound misunderstanding or deliberate misrepresentation.” This retort, which in no way resolves the issues raised, reveals a fundamental flaw in his reasoning: an unwillingness to engage with substantive criticism. The UN’s concerns, rooted in reports of Māori land rights violations and the potential impact of Seymour’s Regulatory Standards Bill, are entirely valid and reiterate those already made by many New Zealand commentators.


Last month, Newsroom reported:

Anne Salmond: What’s wrong with the Regulatory Standards Bill

The Regulatory Standards Bill (RSB) is a dangerous piece of legislation, inspired by libertarian ideas that seek to free the flow of capital from democratic constraints.

In a number of respects, it expresses a contempt for collective rights and responsibilities, public goals and values, and liberal democracy.

First, it lacks a strong democratic mandate.

At the last election, Act was the only party to put forward such a proposal, and it won only 8.6 percent of the vote; 91.4 percent of voters did not support that party. This bill cannot remotely be taken to express ‘the will of the people.’

Second, the majority party, National, agreed behind doors – despite its prior opposition for almost two decades – to support this proposal from a fringe party during coalition negotiations.

Like the Treaty Principles Bill, this undermines the principles of proportionality and accountability to the electorate on which the MMP electoral system is based. That, in turn, corrodes trust in democratic arrangements in New Zealand.

 

It's sad to see old David Seymour resorting to personal attacks instead of honestly debating the valid issues these esteemed people raise. And whether he likes it or not, New Zealand has a moral and political commitment to uphold the principles outlined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). He cannot simply worm his way out of that contract with insults and claims of absolute state sovereignty.

Seymour may have openly disavowed UNDRIP, but it's still a valid agreement that cannot be so easily dismissed by liberal talking points. By framing the UN’s recommendations as external meddling, he sidesteps the reality that New Zealand’s sovereignty includes accountability to international human rights standards, particularly for historically marginalised Māori communities.

The Regulatory Standards Bill, a cornerstone of Seymour’s agenda, exemplifies the latent racism in his approach. By prioritising individual property rights and economic efficiency, the bill threatens to undermine collective rights enshrined in the Treaty of Waitangi. Seymour’s claim that critics, including Māori leaders and legal experts, are peddling “misinformation” is not only deluded but so obviously a tactic, in the absence of any valid argument, to silence critics.

His assertion that 99.5% of submissions against the bill were bot-generated lacks evidence and insults the thousands of New Zealanders, including prominent figures like Sir Geoffrey Palmer, who voiced genuine concerns. This dismissal of opposition as inauthentic reeks of arrogance and also highlights Seymour's totalitarian tendencies.

Seymour’s broader policy record, including the failed Treaty Principles Bill, further exposes the racial undercurrents of his ideology. By seeking to redefine Treaty principles to emphasise individual rights over collective Māori rights, the ACT Party attempts to undermine the foundational agreement that shapes New Zealand’s constitutional framework.

This move aligns with ACT’s libertarian ethos but ignores the historical context of colonisation, where Māori were systematically dispossessed of land and autonomy. Seymour’s rhetoric, cloaked in calls for “equality,” perpetuates a narrative that erases the unique status of Māori as tangata whenua, effectively normalising the structural racism embedded in New Zealand’s past and present.

His social media antics, mocking opponents with terms like “Derangement Syndrome,” reveal another fault: a selective commitment to free speech. While Seymour demands apologies from other people for their perceived inflammatory remarks, he defends his own as “playful,” even as they fuel online harassment. This hypocrisy not only undermines his credibility but also disproportionately targets Māori voices, reinforcing a chilling effect on indigenous advocacy.


Last month, RNZ reported:

David Seymour defends social media posts accusing Regulatory Standards opponents of 'derangement syndrome'

The Deputy Prime Minister is rubbishing claims that social media posts he has made about opponents of the Regulatory Standards Bill are a breach of the Cabinet Manual.

In recent days, David Seymour made a series of social media posts singling out prominent opponents of the Bill, and accusing them of suffering from "Regulatory Standards Derangement Syndrome."

Wellington's mayor, Tory Whanau, accused Seymour of setting a "dangerous precedent" for how dissenting voices were treated, and laid a formal complaint with the Prime Minister over the posts.

The UN’s criticism of the coalitions divisive policies is a wake-up call for New Zealanders. Seymour’s advocacy, draped in the guise of fairness, threatens to roll back decades of progress on Māori rights. His refusal to engage with international scrutiny, dismissal of legitimate criticism, and pursuit of policies that prioritise individual gain over collective justice reflect a worldview that isn't only flawed but fundamentally discriminatory. 

New Zealand deserves better than a Deputy Prime Minister whose agenda dismisses the Treaty and attempts to further marginalise Māori people under the pretext of progress.

Managed Retreat gets Mentioned in the News

The Nelson Tasman region, battered by relentless storms, stands as a stark reminder of New Zealand’s vulnerability to climate-driven disasters. The floods of June and July 2025, which inundated homes, crippled infrastructure, and forced evacuations in areas like Tapawera and Motueka Valley, have exposed the government’s woeful inaction on flood risk management.

Despite the growing threat of climate change, with over 400,000 buildings at risk nationwide and property assets worth more than NZ$135 billion exposed, the current administration’s response remains a patchwork of half-measures. This failure to confront the crisis head-on, particularly in Nelson-Tasman, risks not only livelihoods but also a looming collapse in property values.


On Thursday, RNZ reported:

 

Almost 15,000 properties could be damaged by floods in next 35 years - report

A report prepared for the government says 14,500 properties worth $12.9 billion could be expected to experience at least one damaging flood by 2060.

The country should expect the equivalent of last month's Tasman District floods "basically every year", according to the author, with between 300 and 400 homes a year seeing "significant damage" from water reaching at least 30cm above the floorboards.

...


An independent expert panel has recommended that homeowners whose houses are flooded or damaged by weather events should not expect buy-outs, and individuals should be responsible for knowing the risks and making their own decisions about whether to move away from high-risk areas.

The panel suggested a transition period of 20 years before people are on their own when it comes to property losses, to provide people with time to make decisions and spread any cost.

The panel did not recommend any coordinated retreat from at-risk areas and critics called the recommendations "unworkable".

The science is unequivocal. NIWA’s coastal flood maps project that 72,065 New Zealanders live in areas susceptible to so-called once-in-a-century floods, which are currently occurring on a monthly basis, with 675,500 in broader flood-prone zones also at risk. Nelson Tasman’s recent deluge, causing millions in damages, underscores its place among high-risk regions like Gisborne and Porirua. Height maps reveal low-lying areas near rivers like the Motueka are especially vulnerable to inundation, exacerbated by rising sea levels. 

Unfortunately, the government’s approach to managed retreat, relocating communities from flood-prone areas, is essentially non-existent, with only lip service being provided to the idea of ensuring people's safety through relocation. The absence of a national strategy leaves local councils scrambling, with Nelson Tasman residents facing uncertainty and inadequate support.

Managed retreat is not a novel concept; it’s a necessity acknowledged globally as climate impacts intensify. In New Zealand, research suggests towns like Gisborne may need retreat within 10–15 years, with other areas in the Nelson Tasman region potentially following by 2040–2050. However, the current government, led by a coalition seemingly allergic to proactive policy, has failed to advance meaningful legislation or funding frameworks.

Climate Change Minister Simon Watts has dodged calls for clear directives, leaving communities to fend for themselves. This inertia is not just negligent, it’s a betrayal of those bearing the brunt of increasingly frequent storms.

The economic fallout of this inaction is already looming. Nelson Tasman’s property market, once buoyant, faces a grim future as flood risks deter buyers. With hundreds of thousands of buildings across the country at risk, a potential market crash is likely in vulnerable regions. In Nelson Tasman, where recent floods highlighted systemic vulnerabilities, property values are likely to plummet as insurance premiums soar and buyer confidence erodes. 

The government’s refusal to prioritise managed retreat only amplifies this risk, leaving homeowners to face financial ruin without a clear path to safety.

The social cost is equally dire. Families displaced by floods in Nelson Tasman have received little more than temporary aid, with no long-term plan for relocation or adaptation. The government’s failure to engage with communities concerning managed retreat, despite recommendations from expert groups, reveals a callous disregard for those most affected. The 2023 weather events, costing up to $15 billion, should have been a wake-up call. Instead, the right-wing administration clings to short-term fixes, ignoring the need for systemic change to protect vulnerable populations.

This is not governance; it’s abdication. The National-led government’s reluctance to confront the reality of climate-driven flooding, particularly in regions like Nelson Tasman, is a policy failure of staggering proportions. Managed retreat, though complex and costly, demands national leadership, not the current patchwork of local efforts. Without swift action, the economic and social toll will only grow. The government must act now, legislate, fund, and plan for managed retreat, or condemn communities to a future of uncertainty and loss. The clock is ticking, and New Zealanders are waiting.