David Seymour Wants More People to Die From Cancer

It’s a grim day for Aotearoa when a politician like David Seymour, leader of the ACT Party, can stand up and effectively cheer for New Zealanders smoking themselves into an early grave. As I'm sure you're aware, the National-led coalition government gutted our world-leading smokefree laws when they first came to power in October 2023, and the consequences are already piling up. This isn’t just a policy misstep, it’s a betrayal of public health, driven by dodgy deals and corporate cash, with Seymour and other corrupt politicians pulling the governments strings for their tobacco industry mates.

In 2022, New Zealand passed pioneering legislation under Labour to create a smokefree generation, slashing tobacco retailers from 6,000 to 600, reducing nicotine levels in cigarettes, and banning sales to anyone born after 2008. The evidence was clear: these measures were projected to save 5,000 lives annually and $1.3 billion in health costs over 20 years, while slashing smoking rates, particularly for Māori from 19.9% to under 5% by 2025.

But the National-led government, with Seymour and NZ First’s Winston Peters pulling the strings, repealed these laws in February 2024 to fund tax cuts for the wealthy. Finance Minister Nicola Willis admitted the repeal would rake in $1 billion in tobacco tax revenue, blood money paid for with the lives of more New Zealanders dying from tobacco related diseases like cancer.

And now we have the prized fool himself, David Seymour, openly stating that it would be good if more New Zealanders died from smoking related diseases.

Today, Newsroom reported:

 

Seymour’s ‘light up’ message alarms tobacco researchers

‘Lots of excise tax, no pension – I mean, you’re a hero,’ Act leader says of smokers – a line health experts say is no laughing matter

Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour’s comments to a London audience calling smokers “fiscal heroes” – and declaring people should “light up” to save their government’s balance sheet – are reprehensible and make light of addiction, tobacco researchers say.

Seymour largely stands by his remarks, arguing smokers are a net economic positive through tobacco tax and reduced superannuation from early deaths – but has conceded he was wrong to describe as “quite evil” the Labour government’s plan to create a smokefree generation.

...

Seymour spoke about the decision following a speech to the Adam Smith Institute, a neoliberal think tank based in London, during a visit to the UK this month.

Asked about the smokefree generation concept, which has been taken up by the British government, Seymour said the New Zealand policy had been “quite evil, in a way” and described smokers as “fiscal heroes”.

“If you want to save your country’s balance sheet, light up, because … lots of excise tax, no pension – I mean, you’re a hero,” he said to laughter from the audience.

...

“As far as I can tell, that condition is well and truly satisfied: I mean, the Government gets $2 billion of tax revenue from about, what is it now, 8 percent of the population?” (The Customs Service collected $1.5b in tobacco excise and equivalent duties in 2023/24, while that year’s NZ Health Survey reported a daily smoking rate of 6.9 percent.)

Seymour said it was “just a sad fact” that smokers were also likely to die younger, reducing the amount of superannuation they collected, while he was unconvinced their healthcare costs would be markedly higher than those who died of other illnesses.

“If anything, smokers are probably saving other citizens money.”

When the coalition of chaos made their stupid decision to increase the number of New Zealanders who die from tobacco related diseases like cancer, many Health experts sounded the alarm. Modelling from the University of Otago estimates the repeal could lead to thousands of additional smoking-related deaths, with Māori and Pasifika communities hit hardest, exacerbating existing health inequities. 

Māori life expectancy is already 7.5 years shorter than Pākehā, and smoking is a leading cause of this gap. The coalition’s decision to scrap the smokefree laws was a “major win for the tobacco industry,” as Health Coalition Aotearoa’s Boyd Swinburn put it, boosting Big Tobacco’s profits at the expense of Kiwi lives.

And who’s cashing in? Tobacco giants like Philip Morris, the sole supplier of heated tobacco products (HTPs) in New Zealand, are laughing all the way to the bank. Documents reveal Philip Morris lobbied hard for tax cuts on HTPs, a move Associate Health Minister Casey Costello delivered in July 2024, slashing excise tax by 50% despite research showing that HTPs are just as harmful as cigarettes.


Last year, Newsroom reported:

Minister left $46b benefit of smokefree reforms out of Cabinet paper

In a section outlining the “financial implications” of repealing the reforms, Costello’s Cabinet paper only discussed the costs of reimbursing retailers who had applied for special permits under the old regime and the potential for $1.5 billion in additional revenue from tobacco excise over four years. However, the December 6 briefing contained more information about the economic benefits of the scheme in its own “financial implications” section.

Early estimates had suggested New Zealand might save $5.25b in health costs and $5.88b in increased productivity over the lifetime of the population alive in 2020, officials told Costello.

More recent independent analysis, published in November 2023, found a $17b loss to government out to 2050 from reduced excise revenue and increased superannuation costs from people living longer would be more than offset by a $46b economic benefit over the same period, the briefing said. “The new estimates find the smoked tobacco measures are likely to result in large economic benefits for the total population.”

Verrall said it was up to ministers on what they wanted to include in Cabinet papers. However, she said, Costello appeared to have withheld information from Cabinet that was unfavourable to her position.

The stench of tobacco money lingers over this corrupt coalition. RNZ uncovered that Philip Morris’s external relations team includes former NZ First staffers, raising questions about cosy relationships and dirty deals. Public health researchers have demanded ministers like Costello and Seymour disclose any tobacco industry links, noting their rhetoric mirrors Big Tobacco’s talking points.

Costello’s claim of “independent” advice to justify her policies was debunked when she couldn’t explain the source of a document pushing tobacco tax cuts, suspiciously aligned with tobacco industry goals. Imagine what would happen if a left wing politician fabricated research to prop up a predetermined anti-health agenda. The mainstream media would be apoplectic until they were forced to resign.

ACT and NZ First, the tail wagging the National dog, have shown their true colours. Seymour’s libertarian posturing and NZ First’s populist rhetoric mask a willingness to sacrifice public health for corporate interests. National, desperate to attain power, caved to their demands despite earlier supporting some smokefree measures. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s weak excuse, that the laws would fuel black markets, has been contradicted by evidence showing the illicit tobacco trade was already declining.

David Seymour’s claim that smoking is a “freedom of choice” is a grotesque insult when 5,000 Kiwis die each year from tobacco related diseases, trapped by addiction, not choice. This National-led coalition, with ACT and NZ First yanking the leash, has sold out New Zealand's health for tobacco profits and tax cuts that fatten the wallets of the wealthy while robbing tamariki of a smokefree future. The blood of future victims will stain this government’s dubious legacy forever. New Zealanders must demand transparency, and hold these corrupt politicians accountable before Big Tobacco’s shadow claims even more lives.

Israel’s Pretext for War With Iran Isn't Achievable

Benjamin Netanyahu’s pretax for war with Iran, their supposed nuclear program, is an exercise in hubris wrapped up in flimsy excuses. The Israeli PM claims his military’s recent strikes, launched 13 June 2025, were a pre-emptive blow to stop Iran from building a nuclear bomb. But this pretext for war isn't achievable by Israel.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and US intelligence, including a March 2025 statement from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, have consistently reported Iran isn’t pushing uranium enrichment beyond 60%, well short of the 90% needed for weapons-grade material. 

So why’s Netanyahu rattling sabres over a threat that doesn’t exist? It’s a distraction, a geopolitical tantrum, and a bloody stupid way to start a war Israel and its allies are unlikely to win.

 

Yesterday, Aljazeera reported:

Iran war gives Netanyahu political breathing room in Israel

Israeli PM faced uncertain future last week amid no-confidence vote, but confrontation with Iran unites Israel’s politicians.

Two confidence votes, each fewer than seven days apart, tell much of the story of Israel’s political transformation since it launched attacks on longstanding regional nemesis Iran on Friday.

Early on Thursday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right government narrowly survived a vote that ensured its continuation after an 11th-hour deal was reached with ultra-Orthodox parties who are a key force within it. Had a deal not been found, then parliament would have been dissolved and new elections called, leaving Netanyahu vulnerable as opposition against him grew.

But then on Monday, a similar attempt to dissolve parliament failed miserably after no confidence motions brought forward by parties led by Palestinian citizens of Israel failed to attract any support from the centre and the right.

Of course, in between, Israel had launched its attacks on Iran, upending domestic Israeli politics as well as regional geopolitics.

We've heard it all before from the consummate liar, Netanyahu. For over four decades, Israel has peddled the same tired narrative: Iran is on the cusp of a nuclear bomb, and only pre-emptive strikes can save the world. From Yitzhak Rabin’s warnings in 1984 to Benjamin Netanyahu’s latest claim on 13 June 2025, where he tried to justify his unprovoked attacks, the script hasn’t changed.

Despite IAEA and U.S. intelligence reports, most recently in March 2025, confirming Iran isn’t enriching uranium beyond 60% or pursuing weaponisation, Israel persists with its fearmongering. Netanyahu’s timeline, from “3–5 years” in 1992 to “days away” in February 2025, is a broken record. This reckless war, sold on a lie, risks catastrophic escalation for a goal Israel cannot achieve.

• 1984: Israeli Defence Minister Yitzhak Rabin warns Iran’s nuclear programme could threaten Israel, urging U.S. action (no specific timeline given).
• 1992: Netanyahu, as a Knesset member, claims Iran is 3–5 years from a nuclear bomb.
• 1995: In Fighting Terrorism, Netanyahu repeats Iran is 3–5 years away from nuclear capability.
• 1996: Netanyahu tells U.S. Congress Iran’s nuclear bomb is “extremely close.”
• 2002: Before a U.S. committee, Netanyahu links Iran and Iraq, saying Iran is advancing toward nuclear weapons.
• 2009: In The Atlantic, Netanyahu calls Iran a “messianic cult” nearing nuclear bomb capability.
• 2012: At the UN, Netanyahu uses a bomb diagram, claiming Iran is months from completing medium enrichment, nearing a bomb by 2013. Leaked Israeli intelligence later shows Iran wasn’t weaponizing.
• 2015: Netanyahu tells U.S. Congress the JCPOA will let Iran build a bomb in under a year.
• 2018: At the UN, Netanyahu alleges Iran has a “secret atomic warehouse” in Tehran, proving bomb intent.
• 2019: Netanyahu claims Iran is close to nuclear weapons, urging IAEA action.
• 2023: In interviews, Netanyahu warns of “horrible nuclear war” if Iran gets a bomb, claiming it’s imminent.
• February 2025: On Newsmax, Netanyahu says Iran is “days away” from bomb-grade uranium.
• June 2025: Post-strikes, Netanyahu claims Iran has uranium for nine bombs and could weaponize in “weeks or months.”

The crown jewel of Iran’s nuclear programme, the Fordow enrichment facility, is buried 80–90 metres into the side of a mountain near Qom. It’s a fortress, purpose-built to shrug off airstrikes. Israel’s arsenal, even with its shiny F-35s and bunker-busting munitions, lacks the firepower to penetrate Fordow’s depths.

The IAEA’s Rafael Grossi confirmed on 17 June 2025 that Fordow sustained “little or no visible damage” from Israel’s attacks. Without taking out Fordow, where Iran houses advanced centrifuges and a chunk of its 60% enriched uranium, Israel’s goal of crippling Iran’s nuclear capability is a pipe dream.

Jerusalem Post editorial board is calling for Iran to be partitioned and broken apart. Then talks about “Khamenei’s genocidal rhetoric” while Israel is actually committing genocide.

You still think this was ever about nuclear weapons? pic.twitter.com/bP5Btn6R0D

— Assal Rad (@AssalRad) June 18, 2025

And here’s the kicker: Israel can’t do it alone. The only weapon with a shot at Fordow is the US’s GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, a 30,000-pound beast carried exclusively by B-2 stealth bombers. But even this isn’t a sure bet, Fordow’s depth and reinforced structure pose technical challenges, and a strike risks releasing toxic chemicals like hydrofluoric acid or radiological contamination. 

Coordinating such an attack with Israel would be a logistical nightmare, fraught with classified hurdles and international blowback. A US strike could be seen as an illegal attack on Iran’s sovereignty, potentially dragging America into a wider regional war, something even Trump, with his non-interventionist base, should be wary of.

Tump leaving G7 after warning civilians to leave Teheran … why?

The major nuclear sites are in Fordow and Natanz nuclear development facilities.

He is mimicking Israeli Defence Minister Katz warning but not for any rational reason.

— Malcolm Nance (@MalcolmNance) June 16, 2025

Israel’s goal of destroying Fordow is a technical pipe dream. Buried 80–90 metres into the granite or basalt Qom mountainside, Fordow’s rocky overburden and reinforced concrete would likely defy even the U.S.’s GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, which penetrates up to 60–100 metres of earth but only 8–10 metres of reinforced concrete. The bomb’s vertical trajectory would struggle against Fordow’s fortified depth. Multiple strikes may also fail, and a ground offensive is unthinkable. Iran’s 600,000-strong army and 200,000 reservists, entrenched in rugged terrain, dwarf Israel’s 170,000 troops, making invasion a non-starter.

Israel’s strikes, however, have done more than miss military targets, they’ve hardened Iran’s resolve. By bombing non-military sites, including Iran’s state-run Press TV headquarters in Tehran on 13 June 2025, Israel has turned a strategic blunder into a propaganda gift for the Islamic Republic. The attack, which killed three journalists and disrupted broadcasts, was condemned by Iran’s Foreign Ministry as a “war crime” aimed at silencing reporting of Israel's unjustified attacks. 

Far from weakening Iran, these strikes have rallied its people against a foreign aggressor, framing Israel as a bully flouting international law. Social media posts from Iranians show surging national unity, and with Israel's defences like the Iron Dome failing, that unity could translate into a defeat for Israel that most of the world wouldn't lament. Recent developments in Gaza, whereby Israel forces are luring starving Palestinians with promises of food aid and then murdering them has ensured that Israel has entirely lost the propaganda war.

Starting a war on a false pretext, knowing you lack the tools to finish the job, is peak idiocy. Netanyahu’s strikes have killed Iranian scientists and damaged Natanz and Isfahan, but Fordow stands untouched, and Iran’s nuclear know-how is irreversible. This isn’t strategy; it’s posturing, gambling with lives to prop up Benjamin Netanyahu’s strongman image. Without US help, Israel’s campaign is a loud but impotent gesture. And even with Uncle Sam’s bombers, success is a long shot. The real cost? Escalation, civilian deaths, a region teetering on chaos and an Iran without a reason to negotiate or reign in their nuclear developments, all for a goal that was never achievable.

Treasury’s Austerity Advice Should Be Ignored

The National-led government, under Christopher Luxon’s watch, is steering New Zealand toward a grim horizon, guided by Treasury’s cold, austerity-obsessed hand. It’s a betrayal of ordinary Kiwis, workers, families, small businesses, who are being financially crushed to pad the pockets of the ultra-wealthy.

The 2025 NBR Rich List exposes the stark divide: 119 individuals, including 18 billionaires, hoard $102.1 billion, over 40% of our GDP, while Treasury’s advice slashes vital infrastructure, health, education, climate initiatives, and public services.

This isn’t fiscal discipline; it’s a rigged game funnelling taxpayer money to the elite, leaving Aotearoa’s future in tatters. Worse, these brutal cuts, totalling roughly $6.1 billion, coexist with rising government debt, raising the question: how can Luxon’s government gut services while borrowing even more?


On Monday, the NZ Herald reported:

 

Simeon Brown challenges Treasury over plans to cut health spending

Health Minister Simeon Brown has attacked Treasury officials over their analysis of his Health Delivery Plan, which said Health New Zealand Te Whatu Ora will need to double its spending-cut target in the coming year and limit health workforce pay increases to an “unprecedented” degree.

Health cuts, another Treasury-driven disaster, spell misery for the vulnerable. Treasury’s insistence that Health NZ scrape by within its 2025/26 baselines, with Budget 2025’s $1.3 billion operating allowance the leanest in a decade, will mean longer waitlists, burnt-out staff, and worse outcomes, hitting Māori, Pacific, and rural communities hardest.

The NZ Herald reports $5.3 billion in total savings, including $2.7 billion from pay equity cuts, reflecting Treasury’s fixation on a 2028/29 surplus. These cuts aren’t savings—they’re a death sentence for equity, forcing the poorest to suffer without access to private care while future costs pile up from untreated illnesses and emergency care. It’s cruel and economically shortsighted, betraying those who need the system most.

The cancellation of the iRex project, meant to replace ageing Interislander ferries with modern, rail-enabled vessels, a short-sighted decision driven by Treasury’s idiotic advice. Citing cost blowouts to $3 billion, Treasury pushed for its scrapping, leaving KiwiRail with a $500 million write-off and 60 jobs lost. Smaller likely non-rail enabled ferries will clog supply chains, spike freight costs, and hammer exporters, farmers, and consumers with higher prices. Treasury’s own documents admit this avoids immediate costs but risks billions in future fixes for the Cook Strait link, strangling regions like the South Island. It’s a gut-punch to the working Kiwis who keep our economy humming, sacrificing long-term stability for budget optics.

 

In May, RNZ reported:

Kiwirail reveals $500 million spent on axed Cook Strait ferry project

Labour Party transport spokesperson Tangi Utikere told RNZ additional costs associated with the cancellation of iReX would cost $1.16b when including the cancellation of the deal and ongoing maintenance of the current ferries.

Education has also been bled dry under the secretive Treasury’s fiscal knife. Budget 2025 saw $614 million reprioritised from “underperforming” initiatives, with total education spending set to drop from $19.85 billion in 2025/26 to $19 billion by 2026/27. The Kāhui Ako scheme, costing $118 million annually, faces disestablishment, a move Treasury championed to trim fat. These cuts, totalling $732 million, threaten teacher support, student outcomes, and equity in schools, particularly for disadvantaged communities. Starving education to meet fiscal targets undermines the next generation’s potential, leaving schools scrambling and kids short-changed.

Climate and conservation initiatives haven’t escaped the chopping block. Treasury’s push for baseline savings led to $3 million annually cut from the Department of Conservation, gutting funds like the Mātauranga Kura Taiao and Nature Heritage Fund. Budget 2024’s $35.5 million cut over four years from climate schemes, like the Climate Change Development Fund, persists into 2025, equating to roughly $8.9 million annually. Total climate and conservation cuts for 2025 hit $11.9 million, weakening our response to the climate crisis and biodiversity loss. Treasury’s penny-pinching here risks our environment and global commitments, leaving future generations to clean up the mess.

Public sector budgets have also been gutted, with Treasury’s 2024 advice to slash $1.5 billion carrying into Budget 2025’s broader $5.3 billion savings push. Beyond health’s $2.7 billion, I estimate $2 billion in additional public sector cuts, covering areas like social services and infrastructure, are tied to Treasury’s fiscal restraint. The Auckland Light Rail project, axed with $131 million cut (including $98 million in capital funding), exemplifies this approach. These cuts, totalling roughly $6.1 billion across sectors, reflect Treasury’s obsession with short-term savings, even as they erode the public services Kiwis rely on.

However, while Treasury’s advice drives these $6.1 billion in cuts, government debt is climbing. Treasury’s May 2025 Economic and Fiscal Update projects net core Crown debt at $180.8 billion (40.7% of GDP) for 2024/25, rising to $196.9 billion by 2028/29. Operating balance deficits, excluding gains and losses (OBEGAL), hit $8.7 billion in 2024/25, with surpluses not expected until 2028/29. 

Always worth posting this for me rnthe history too. Ruth and her fellow ghouls reduced the debt side of the Govt balance sheet by underinvesting in the country and liberating private credit so that we could furiously bid up the price of land and houses. pic.twitter.com/bEUtfpR0OO

— Musical Chairs (@MusicalChairs14) June 15, 2025

How can Luxon’s government justify slashing services while borrowing more? The answer lies in National’s $3.7 billion annual tax cuts that mainly benefited the wealthy and $2.9 billion landlord interest deductibility restoration, costing $13.3 billion over the forecast period. These handouts, backed by Treasury’s models, drain revenue, forcing borrowing to plug the gap. The Council of Trade Unions notes “mega-landlords” could pocket $1.3 million each, while workers face suppressed wages and higher costs. It’s a grotesque transfer of wealth to the elite, funded by debt that future Kiwis will repay.

The real scandal is the wealth hoarding. The top 10% hold over 51% of the nation’s wealth. Graeme Hart ($12.1 billion) and the Mowbray family ($20 billion) exemplify a system rigged for the few. This inequality tanks consumer spending, starves businesses, and fuels resentment, risking social unrest. Treasury’s failure to address the long-term costs, delayed infrastructure, sicker populations, underfunded schools, and a degraded environment, is negligence. Their forecasts admit tax cuts restrain revenue, delaying the surplus and strangling services. A fairer Aotearoa demands investment in public goods, not even more handouts to the Rich. Luxon must reject this elitist scam. The government must ignore Treasury's advice for even more austerity.

Chris Luxon's Numerous Comms Disasters

Christopher Luxon’s neoliberal government is lurching from one communications disaster to another, making a complete mockery of their promise to govern with transparency and competence. The PM’s incessant bleating about “turbocharging the economy” is laughably detached from reality, while Ministers such as Brooke van Velden and Tama Potaka trip over their own rhetoric, trying to ignore the damage done by their regressive policies. From Auckland to Invercargill, this government’s ineptitude is on full display.

Let’s start with Luxon, the self-anointed economic guru, banging on about his coalition’s supposed turbocharge of New Zealand’s economy. Whether he’s in Wellington or Waikato, the man’s spruiking growth like a used-car salesman flogging a lemon. Yet Business NZ’s latest stats, covering regions from Canterbury to Northland, paint a grim picture: business confidence is in the gutter, activity’s stagnating, and employers are again bracing for tougher times.

Last Friday, Business NZ reported: 

 

Back in the red

New Zealand’s manufacturing sector fell back into contraction during May, according to the latest BNZ – BusinessNZ Performance of Manufacturing Index (PMI).

The seasonally adjusted PMI for May was 47.5 (a PMI reading above 50.0 indicates that manufacturing is generally expanding; below 50.0 that it is declining). This was down from 53.3 in April and a return to contraction after four consecutive months of expansion. The survey was also well below the average of 52.5 since it began.

On Monday, Business NZ also reported:

Service with a slump

New Zealand’s services sector continued to show further decline in activity during May, according to the BNZ – BusinessNZ Performance of Services Index (PSI).

The PSI for May was 44.0 (A PSI reading above 50.0 indicates that the service sector is generally expanding; below 50.0 that it is declining). This was down 4.1 points from April and well below the average of 53.0 over the history of the survey.

…

BNZ’s Senior Economist Doug Steel said that “the fall in the PSI follows the sharp decline in the Performance of Manufacturing Index (PMI) from 53.3 to 47.5. Together, they are consistent with the economy returning to recession. We’re a long way from forecasting this, but the data are a reminder of just how vulnerable the economy currently is”.

Even babbling fools like right-wing propagandists Duncan Garner, Ryan Bridge and Mike Hosking have noticed and are starting to grumble. Luxon’s rhetoric isn’t anywhere near the reality of what people are seeing on the ground.

Luxon’s either willfully blind or genuinely out of his depth, and neither bodes well for a bloke who sold himself as New Zealand's corporate saviour. This isn’t just spin; it’s a delusion that insults every Kiwi who is currently struggling to pay the bills.

literally four days ago, he was saying the economy is booming https://t.co/xvPZIrciD2 pic.twitter.com/ZVPwSdJRuH

— Clint Smith (@ClintVSmith) June 16, 2025

Then there’s the sick leave debacle. Luxon, shooting himself in the foot, claimed that the government was looking at halving sick leave from 10 days to five, an optically terrible move given they'd just gutted Pay Equity Claims, which will disproportionately effect women's pay packets.

After some fallout, enter Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden, stage left, frantically insisting there’s “no intention” to do any such thing. So, Brooke, is your boss making it up, or are you papering over a policy that’d impact low income women workers again?

Brooke van Velden's attempt to pivot to “pro-rated sick leave” for part-timers only muddies the waters further, leaving businesses equally baffled at the government’s mixed messages. This isn’t leadership; it’s a comedy sketch, and the punchline’s on us.

On Monday, 1 News reported:

No plan to halve sick leave, minister says after Luxon's comments

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon was asked during an interview with Morning Report whether his Government was looking at reducing the number of leave days from 10 to five.

"That's something that I know [Workplace Relations and Safety Minister] Brooke van Velden is looking into. She looks at a whole raft of workplace relations," Luxon replied.

"It's a bit premature for now."

But van Velden told RNZ it was not something she was looking into.

Over in housing, it's another comms mess, as Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka peddles denialism so brazen it’d make an oil executive blush. Homelessness is surging, RNZ reporting a 58% spike in Auckland, with similar trends in Rotorua and Nelson. But the deluded Potaka claims his government’s policies aren’t to blame. Really? Slashing emergency housing access and tightening eligibility criteria for state houses have left frontline providers in Christchurch and Gisborne struggling to cope, with even domestic violence survivors being turned away from safe and secure emergency housing.

The increased number of homeless people in New Zealand isn’t easy for the public to ignore, and the government is desperate to blame anything other than their socially destructive policies.

Taking over from Chris Bishop, whose credibility is currently in the gutter after his drunken and racist outburst at the AMA, Tama Potaka is dodging responsibility by pointing to “market pressures” and lying about “rental shortages” as if National’s austerity obsession hasn’t caused the housing crises to considerably worsen. Potaka’s refusal to own this crisis is a gut-punch to the vulnerable, and will not be easily ignored by voters come election time.

 

Yesterday, RNZ reported:

Homelessness increase not necessarily due to government policy changes - minister

The minister in charge of emergency housing has been unable to say whether homelessness has increased under this government, saying frontline providers have made "a variety" of comments to him.

Providers and advocates have told RNZ they have been seeing a spike in homelessness, with some blaming changes the government has made to emergency housing access.

But Tama Potaka told a committee of MPs there were "a lot of other contributing factors," such as the state of the economy and the supply of rentals.

How is a Minister of the Crown even able to be completely ignorant of the fact that the number of rental listings is up 25% nationwide, largely due to overpricing and everybody moving to Australia?

The government has dismissed concerns that stricter emergency housing criteria has led to an increase in homelessness.

However, Auckland Council's Community Committee recorded a 53 percent rise in people sleeping rough, from 426 people last September to 653 people in January, while data from Wellington's Downtown Community Ministry showed an increase in the number of people rough sleeping from October to December 2024, by about a third in comparison to the year before.

…

As part of the gateway changes, MSD staff have been assessing whether an applicant has "unreasonably contributed" to their situation, or whether they had taken "reasonable efforts" to find other options.

Some advocates have told RNZ it has led to survivors of sexual or domestic violence being turned away from emergency housing because their decision to leave their situation was seen as "contributing" to their homelessness.

National’s emergency and state housing charade is a disgrace! Potaka crowing about new builds in Rotorua, Hamilton, and Porirua, conveniently forgetting these were funded by Labour’s budget, isn't just stupid, it's so opaque it's practically glass.

Potaka’s press releases might dupe the odd brainless punter, but anyone with a pulse knows this is Labour’s legacy, not National’s largesse, especially as homelessness climbs under their watch.

On Sunday, 1 News reported:

Nearly 200 new homes for Rotorua in affordable housing push

Nearly 200 new affordable homes will be developed in Rotorua by mid-2027 under a community-led housing initiative backed by the Government, Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka announced.

Of the 189 homes, up to 150 would be social housing to be delivered by June 2027 by the Rotorua Lakes Council, the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, and community housing providers.

…

The 150 social homes would be funded through $140 million allocated in Budget 2024 for 1500 new homes across the country.

Please correct your propaganda, @1NewsNZ. It’s 1,500 new social housing PLACES (paid for by @nzlabour) nationwide over four years, not 1500 new state houses. National has cancelled 1019, demolished 700 and sold 800. Another 672 are under review. #nzpolhttps://t.co/PKZXJQzpy5

— Jackal (@Jackalblog) June 15, 2025

This government’s communications strategy, if you can call a trainwreck a strategy, is a complete disaster. Luxon, van Velden, and Potaka aren’t just failing to communicate; they’re failing to govern by any stretch of the imagination. Contradictions, lies, and denial are eroding trust. Kiwis, from Kaitaia to Bluff, deserve better than this shambolic circus. Chris Luxon’s government needs to shape up, or ship out.

Israel is Lying About Iran's Nuclear Weapons Capability

Israel’s unprovoked airstrikes on Iran, justified by baseless claims of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, expose a glaring double standard in global politics. While Israel, an undeclared nuclear power, operates beyond international scrutiny, Iran faces relentless pressure, even as a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), despite no evidence of weapons-grade plutonium enrichment.

This hypocrisy, compounded by Western silence and Donald Trump’s deceptive “peace” rhetoric, sets a dangerous precedent. The following post unravel the facts behind Iran’s nuclear program, Israel’s unchecked arsenal, and the West’s complicity in a skewed system that undermines global peace.


Yesterday, RNZ reported:

Benjamin Netanyahu says Israeli attacked Iran to prevent 'nuclear holocaust'

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Fox News that he launched airstrikes against Iran to prevent "a nuclear holocaust," claiming his government had intelligence that Iran was months away from developing an initial nuclear weapon.

"We had to act," Netanyahu told Fox's Bret Baier on Sunday (local time). "It was the 12th hour, and we did act. To save ourselves but also … to protect the world from this incendiary regime."

"The intel we got and we shared with the United States was absolutely clear: That they were working in a secret plan to weaponize the uranium, they were marching very quickly, they would achieve a test device and possibly an initial device within months, and certainly less than a year," he said.

Israel’s claims that Iran was racing toward a nuke are pure fiction. The IAEA’s May 2025 report confirms Iran’s uranium enrichment was still only at 60% purity, a far cry from the 90% needed for weapons-grade material. The IAEA’s real-time sensors and rigorous sampling would catch any leap to 90%, a process requiring distinct, detectable technology. There’s zero evidence showing Iran’s crossed that line.

Meanwhile, Israel, sitting on an estimated 400 nuclear warheads (thanks to the Federation of American Scientists), operates with impunity, its Dimona reactor a black box beyond IAEA reach. Why? Because Israel’s snubbed the NPT, dodging the scrutiny Iran endures as a signatory. It’s a scandalous double standard that must end for there to be any hope of peace in the Middle East.

Iran gets hammered for every gram of uranium they have. The June 2025 IAEA censure, orchestrated by the U.S., U.K., France, and Germany, roasted Iran for “non-cooperation” over historical uranium traces and limited access. Fair call, Iran’s not playing straight, but this is no smoking gun showing Iran is working on nuclear weapons.

Compare that to Israel, whose nuclear arsenal faces no inspections, no questions, no censure. The West’s silence on this is deafening, especially after Israel’s unprovoked October 2024 airstrikes on Iran’s Taleghan 2 site, a supposed “nuclear threat” with no IAEA corroboration. Where’s the outrage? The U.S. and Europe muttered weak platitudes about “restraint,” letting Israel’s aggression slide while putting even more pressure on Iran. It’s cowardice dressed up as diplomacy.

Yesterday, RNZ also reported:

NZ 'surprised but not totally surprised' by Israeli attack on Iran, Winston Peters says

"We want peace and we want balance and calm, and the fact to be acknowledged that the problems in the Middle East don't come from one bad actor alone.

"We don't want New Zealanders in harm's way, we don't want a nuclear Iran, we don't want civilians starving or dying in military conflict and we don't want Hamas holding hostages and terrorising Palestinians, and we don't want Israel occupying Palestinian lands."

He said the current state of global affairs was probably the worst he remembered in his lifetime since the Cuban Missile Crisis.

You can only hope Winston Peters is including Donald Trump in his list of "bad actors". Trump might preach “peace” like a dodgy televangelist, but his “maximum pressure” on Iran, rebooted after the 2024 election, fuels conflict. He trashed the JCPOA in 2018, and then killed an Iranian major general, Qasem Soleimani, on 3 January 2020, by an American drone strike.

Trump then cheered Israel’s 2024 strikes while peddling his peacemaker fantasy. And now he's got his "weapons of mass destruction" moment. It’s a lie so blatant it’d make Pinocchio blush. Trump’s war-hungry posturing, pandering to MAGA and Israel’s hawks, risks dragging the Middle East and Europe into a firestorm, all while the West shrugs.

This is Donald Trump response to the Israel attack on Iran

Admitting in clear terms that Israel attacked with the full participation of America

So all those idiots who have thus far spent hours saying America was not involved need to admit they were wrong

And then STFU pic.twitter.com/CROYBFwbSB

— Stop The Bollocks with Mirabel (@MirabelTweets1) June 13, 2025

Like Donald Trump, Benjamin Netanyahu's credibility is in the gutter. Israel's Gaza campaign, with over 45,000 Palestinian deaths since October 2023, is a stain on humanity, with the International Court of Justice correctly ruling it a genocide. Yet Netanyahu, propped up by Trump’s deceit and Western apathy, dares to paint Iran as the villain? It’s obscene.

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is largely a farce when non-signatories like Israel can proliferate nuclear weapons without any restraint. The West’s limp response to Israel’s unprovoked attacks on Palestine and Iran and nuclear secrecy is complicity in a conflict that could escalate into WW3.

90% of NZ Lawyers Linked to Panama Papers Still Practicing

Back in 2016, the Panama Papers ripped the veil off New Zealand’s squeaky-clean image, exposing our foreign trust regime as a playground for tax dodgers and money launderers. The leak of 11.5 million documents from Mossack Fonseca, a Panamanian law firm, revealed how Kiwi lawyers facilitated secretive trusts for the global elite, some linked to fraud, corruption, and tax evasion.

Fast forward to 2025, and an estimated 45 of the 50 NZ lawyers implicated in the Panama Papers are still practicing, thumbing their noses at accountability. It’s a bloody disgrace, and these legal enablers should be struck off without further delay.

The Panama Papers showed NZ’s foreign trusts, numbering at the time around 11,500 before the leaks, were a magnet for shady characters. From Maltese ministers to Malaysian 1MDB crooks, trusts like the Rotorua Trust and Abbotsford Trust hid assets from tax authorities and accountability.

Lawyers from firms like Cone Marshall, Anchor Trustees, Asiaciti Trust, Bentleys New Zealand, and Staples Rodway were knee-deep in this muck. Named individuals such as Roger Thompson, Karen Marshall, John W. Hart, Michael Reynolds, Nicholas Shepherd, and Geoffrey Cone, played starring roles, setting up trusts or advising Mossack Fonseca on NZ’s lax rules.

Roger Thompson

In fact Named individuals like Roger Thompson, Karen Marshall, John W. Hart, Michael Reynolds, and Nicholas Shepherd, and those implicated like John Key's lawyer Geoffrey Cone, played starring roles, setting up trusts or advising Mossack Fonseca on NZ’s lax rules.

Thompson, Bentleys’ bigwig, appeared in over 4,500 documents, while Marshall’s Cone Marshall managed trusts for dodgy players like Brazilian politician Eduardo Cunha. Hart vouched for Reynolds and Shepherd, who ran Anchor Trustees’ dealings with Mossack Fonseca. These weren’t bit players; they were architects of the widespread laundering of dirty money.

Karen Marshall

The Shewan Inquiry in 2016 admitted some trusts likely enabled tax abuse, though it found no “direct evidence” of illicit funds. They obviously didn’t dig very deeply. The inquiry’s soft touch ignored cases like the 1MDB scandal, where NZ trusts held assets from a billion-dollar fraud, or the Maltese trusts shielding ministers’ wealth.

The problem; NZ’s pre-2017 rules let them hide "settlors and beneficiaries" cash, no questions asked. Staples Rodway even bragged to Mossack Fonseca about NZ’s loose “beneficial owner” definitions, making trust setups a breeze for tax evaders.

 

In 2016, RNZ reported:

Key responds to Panama Papers source

The anonymous leaker of the Panama Papers is confused about the New Zealand Prime Minister's responsibilities, John Key says.

Mr Key has responded to a claim by the leaker of the Panama Papers that he had been "curiously quiet" about New Zealand's role in enabling the "financial fraud Mecca" of the Cook Islands.

Watch John Key respond to claims made about him by the leaker of the Panama Papers.

The source of the leak, "John Doe", has made an 1800-word statement in which he was critical of official reactions to the leak, calling on Britain, the United States and the European Community to take "swift action" - though their leaders are not named.

Speaking in Auckland this afternoon, Mr Key said he had no responsibilities for tax jurisdiction in the Cook Islands.

"I have as much responsibility for tax in the Cook Islands as I do for Russia," said Mr Key.

Mr Key said New Zealand did try to support best tax practice by the Cook Islands government, and had sent officials to help, but the government there ultimately made its own decisions.

Mr Key said the leaker may be confused about the extent of New Zealand involvement because the Cook Islands use New Zealand dollars. But he said in the international media, New Zealand's involvement in the Panama Papers was barely a footnote.

John W. Hart

Post-Panama, John Key attempted and failed to downplay New Zealand’s roll in the extensive tax evasion outlined in the Panama Papers. It took a change of government before anything was done, with Labour mandating trust registration in 2017 and extending AML/CFT rules to lawyers in 2018.

Foreign trusts plummeted by 75–80% to under 3,000, proving many were extremely dodgy. Yet, no lawyers faced the chop.

The NZ Law Society (NZLS) and Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal (LCDT) sat on their hands, hoping the scandal would blow over and letting Thompson, Marshall, Hart, and others escape any fallout.

Ken Whitney

Their actions were supposedly “legal” under New Zealand’s old rules. But that’s a complete cop-out. The UN Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime prohibits the type of money laundering outlined in the Panama Papers. These lawyers clearly profited from a system slammed globally as a tax haven, which hid ill-gotten gains and undermined NZ’s integrity.

Today, an estimated 45 of these 50 lawyers are still practicing without any proper oversight. Firms like Cone Marshall and Staples Rodway hum along, while Thompson’s Bentleys remains Mossack Fonseca’s NZ office. No suspensions, no strike-offs, no accountability.

Geoffrey Cone

The NZLS’s continued silence is deafening, and the public’s left largely in the dark wondering why legal ethics seem optional for lawyers? These dishonest people enabled global fraudsters, from Cunha to 1MDB looters, and their continued practice mocks our political and justice systems.

It’s time to clean house. The NZLS must properly investigate Panama Papers-linked lawyers, starting with Thompson, Marshall, Hart, Reynolds, and Shepherd, whose ties to Mossack Fonseca are undeniable.

In my opinion, Parliament should further tighten the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act to bar enablers of financial crime. NZ’s reputation took a hit; but we shouldn’t let 45 lawyers waltz free after they have spit in the face of good practice and undermined the integrity of our great country.

Ruth Richardson Is Wrong on NZ Super

As we all know, New Zealand Superannuation (NZ Super) faces a looming fiscal challenge, with costs projected to soar from $19 billion in 2025 (5% of GDP) to $45.3 billion by 2037 (~7% GDP) and 8% by 2060, driven by an ageing population (20% over 65 by 2036). As debates intensify over its affordability, former Finance Minister Ruth Richardson’s opposition to means-testing, voiced on Q+A today, has reignited scrutiny.

Her stance of favouring a higher eligibility age over means-testing, would disproportionately harm Māori and low-income labourers. This post explores how means-testing could cover NZ Super’s minimum costs, drawing on OECD examples and addressing structural inequalities, while questioning Richardson’s ignorant and evidence-free position.

I spoke to Ruth Richardson about NZ’s fiscal position, her role with the Taxpayers’ Union, and the impact of the ‘91 Budget. https://t.co/gEh6i9LgU9

— Jack Tame (@jacktame) June 15, 2025

The Case for Means-Testing

NZ Super’s universal model, paying ~900,000 pensioners (e.g., $1,076.84 fortnightly for singles in 2025), is a pay-as-you-go system with no dedicated fund, thanks to National, unlike Australia’s Future Fund or Denmark’s reserves. By 2037, costs will hit $45.3 billion for ~1.2 million pensioners, straining taxpayers’ ability to meet costs, particularly as consecutive government’s increase debt levels. Moderate levels of means-testing, used by 34 of 38 OECD countries, could save 11–15% ($5–$7 billion in 2037), maintaining costs at ~6% GDP. 

Australia’s Age Pension, for instance, means-tests 2.7 million pensioners, and costs only 2.5% of GDP, while Canada’s Guaranteed Income Supplement targets low-income seniors, keeping costs at 2.7% GDP. These systems prove means-testing is scalable, and would work by leveraging tax data like New Zealand’s Inland Revenue (IRD) does for Working for Families (300,000 families).

Estimating Income and Asset Thresholds

To cover NZ Super’s minimum costs, means-testing could exclude the wealthiest 10–15% of pensioners (120,000–180,000 by 2037) from receiving super, who hold ~70% of household wealth. Based on New Zealand’s wealth distribution, where the top 10–15% of households earn above ~$70,000/year and hold assets (excluding homes) above ~$750,000, thresholds could be fairly set as follows:

Income Threshold: ~$50,000/year for singles ($962/fortnight) and ~$70,000/year for couples ($1,346/fortnight), above which NZ Super is reduced (e.g., 50 cents per dollar, as in Australia). This targets pensioners with significant investment or private pension income, phasing out payments for the top 10–15%.

Asset Threshold: $400,000 for single homeowners, ~$600,000 for couple homeowners; ~$600,000 for single non-homeowners, ~$900,000 for couple non-homeowners (excluding primary residences, as in Australia). This captures high-wealth pensioners with substantial savings or trusts.

These thresholds align with Australia’s ($180/fortnight income, $301,750 assets for singles) but are higher to reflect NZ’s higher cost-of-living. Inland Revenue could administer this, as with Childcare Subsidy, though trusts and asset-hiding require transparency reforms. Administrative costs ($100 million/year) are minimal compared to savings.

Equity and Māori Disparities

Means-testing addresses structural inequalities, a key concern raised in debates over Richardson’s policies. Her 1991 budget doubled extreme poverty (4% to 8%), hitting Māori hardest due to lower incomes (78.9% of median), lower homeownership (48% vs. 58% non-Māori), and lower incomes.

Today’s universal NZ Super favours wealthier non-Māori with longer lifespans, who receive payments for more years. Means-testing at these thresholds targets high-income/asset pensioners, ensuring low-income Māori (40% of over-65s rely heavily on NZ Super) retain full benefits. Raising the eligibility age, as Richardson supports, would harm Māori, particularly labourers in physically demanding jobs (18% of Māori vs. 11% non-Māori), who face health barriers to working past the age of 65.

OECD Lessons and Feasibility

Among 20 relevant OECD countries, 18 means-test pensions, with Denmark, Netherlands, Australia, and Sweden leading in fiscal sustainability due to funded systems and low costs (2.5–7% GDP). New Zealand and Greece, the only non-means-tested systems, rank weakest, with NZ Super’s $45.3 billion by 2037 threatening future budgets. Australia’s model of means-testing 2.7 million pensioners shows NZ’s IRD could easily handle ~900,000 pensioners, despite complexity concerns ($100 million admin costs). Canada’s hybrid (universal OAS with means-tested GIS) offers a balanced approach NZ could easily adopt.

Critiquing Richardson’s Stance

Richardson’s opposition to means-testing, favouring a higher eligibility age, ignores equity and fiscal realities. Her 1991 policies exacerbated Māori poverty, and her 2025 stance, advocating for even more neoliberal policies, perpetuates inequities by preserving a universal system that benefits only wealthier non-Māori New Zealanders.

Of course the deluded Ruth Richardson’s ideology prioritises simplicity over fairness. However there really is no good argument against means-testing superannuation, as proven by OECD peers and NZ’s parental means-testing programs, showing that such changes are feasible and could save billions while supporting vulnerable groups of people working in physically demanding jobs.

Conclusion

Means-testing NZ Super at ~$50,000–$70,000 income and $400,000–$900,000 assets could save $5–$7 billion by 2037, keeping costs at ~6% GDP. This aligns with OECD best practices, leverages IRD systems, and addresses Māori inequities, countering Richardson’s racist stance. As NZ’s population ages, means-testing offers a sustainable, equitable path forward and is the only real option to ensure super continues to be affordable for New Zealand.

Chantelle Baker Gets a $100,000 Reality Check

It’s a rare day when the New Zealand courts deliver a sharp reminder to the right-wing that actions have consequences, even for those who’ve built a career on peddling disinformation. 

Chantelle Baker, the self-styled “citizen journalist” and darling of New Zealand’s anti-vax, anti-government fringe, has been ordered to pay a whopping $100,000 bond ahead of her defamation proceedings against Stuff, likely because the Judge anticipates that she will lose the case.

This isn’t just a legal slap on the wrist, it’s a moment to reflect on the toxic ecosystem of misinformation Baker has cultivated, and what it means for accountability in New Zealand's fractured political landscape.

Unfortunately for the deluded grifter, there's a Reddit post doing exactly that. But it's not as embarrassing for her as what's being published on mainstream media websites at the moment.

Yesterday, Stuff reported:

Chantelle Baker ordered to pay $100k bond ahead of defamation case against Stuff

An independent journalist who claims she was defamed by Stuff’s Fire and Fury documentary has been ordered to pay a $100,000 bond to cover potential court costs before her case can proceed. The High Court decision on October 29 followed an application by Stuff’s parent company, Trans-Tasman Resources, which argued the bond was necessary due to the financial risks posed by the case.

Chantelle Baker, who describes herself as an independent journalist, filed the defamation lawsuit against Stuff, claiming the 2022 documentary falsely portrayed her as a far-right extremist. The documentary explored the rise of disinformation in New Zealand during the Covid-19 pandemic and the 2022 Parliament protest. Baker alleges the documentary’s portrayal caused significant harm to her reputation.

Justice Palmer, in his ruling, said Baker’s claim was not utterly hopeless but faced significant hurdles. He noted that proving defamation would require demonstrating that the statements in Fire and Fury were false and had caused serious reputational damage. The judge considered the complexity of the case and the potential for high legal costs in ordering the bond, which must be paid within 10 working days.

 

Let’s not mince words: Baker’s rise to prominence during the 2022 Wellington protests wasn’t about truth or journalism. It was about capitalising on fear, distrust, and a global pandemic to amass a large number of social media followers, that she can grift from.

Her live streams, filled with baseless claims about COVID-19 vaccines, police conspiracies, and even claims that the fires at Parliament were started by “agent provocateurs,” weren’t just reckless disinformation, they were intentionally dangerous.

The Disinformation Project rightly labelled her a “super spreader” of false narratives, with her posts often outpacing mainstream media in engagement during those chaotic weeks. This wasn’t reporting; it was performance art for the paranoid, designed to inflame and divide.

The Platforms Sean Plunket with Chantelle Baker this morning discussing the details of her recent out of court settlement with the NZ Herald along with her upcoming case against Stuff & second respondent The Disinformation Project’s Kate Hannah in which she alleges defamation… pic.twitter.com/MlGStDW69n

— Kelvin Morgan 🇳🇿 (@kelvin_morganNZ) September 26, 2024

 

Now, Baker’s defamation suit against Stuff, tied to their excellent documentary Fire and Fury, has hit a wall. The $100,000 bond, a court-ordered security to ensure she can cover costs if she loses, speaks volumes.

Defamation cases are costly, and courts don’t impose such bonds lightly. It’s a signal that Baker’s claims may be as flimsy as her “journalistic” credentials. Her previous win against the NZ Herald, where she secured an undisclosed settlement and an apology, seems to have emboldened her. But that case, centred on Kate Hannah’s comments about Baker’s role in the “NZ Disinformation Dozen,” was more about legal technicalities than vindicating for her incendiary narrative. The Herald’s retraction was a pragmatic move, not an admission of Baker’s innocence.

What’s galling is how Baker has monetised her disinformation crusade. From her Operation People fundraiser for Hawke’s Bay flood relief, where only a fraction of the $13,565 raised went to actually helping people in need, to her ongoing crowdfunding for legal battles, she’s mastered the art of the grift.

These aren’t the actions of a truth-seeker but of someone who’s turned distrust in institutions into a personal ATM. Her supporters, egged on by cries of “media bias” and “censorship,” keep the cash flowing, blind to the fact that their hero’s “alternative media” is less about accountability and more about self-enrichment.

The $100,000 bond order exposes the fragility of Chantelle Baker’s vexatious litigation, casting doubt on her self-styled image as a “citizen journalist.” This case raises questions about who’s really behind this politically driven circus? Could it be her daddy, Leighton Baker, the former New Conservative Party leader also known for his anti-mandate activism during the 2022 Wellington protests? Is Chantelle a principled crusader or a front for deeper-pocketed interests, perhaps tied to her father’s right-wing, conspiracist agenda? Either way, the courts aren’t buying her victim act, and that’s a win for those who value evidence over faux outrage.

This case matters because disinformation isn’t just words, it’s a weapon that was used against New Zealand to try and illegally oust the duly elected government. Baker’s narratives have eroded trust in public health, media, and democracy itself. As Aotearoa grapples with declining institutional confidence, her grift thrives on that chaos. The $100,000 bond isn’t the end of her story, but it’s a crack in the facade. If she loses, which is likely, the financial hit could curb her type of dishonest campaigning, which is something that can only be a good thing for our great country.

Gaza’s Rising Death Toll Demands More Diplomatic Action

The recent sanctions placed on just two Israeli ministers, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, by New Zealand, alongside Australia, Canada, Norway, and the United Kingdom, mark a timid but critical step toward halting Israel’s relentless genocide.

However, targeting these two for their vile incitement of violence against Palestinians is the bare minimum Aotearoa could muster. Given the staggering scale of Israel’s atrocities, bolder action is urgently needed to try and stop this blood-soaked crisis. 

 

Yesterday, 1 News reported:

Two 'extremist' Israeli politicians banned from travelling to NZ

New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters said the pair have used their leadership positions to advocate for the annexation of Palestinian land and the expansion of illegal settlements, undermining the two state solution supported by New Zealand.

The pair are banned from travelling to New Zealand.

“Our action today is not against the Israeli people, who suffered immeasurably on October 7 and who have continued to suffer through Hamas’ ongoing refusal to release all hostages," Peters said in a statement.

"Nor is it designed to sanction the wider Israeli government.

“Rather, the travel bans are targeted at two individuals who are using their leadership positions to actively undermine peace and security and remove prospects for a two-state solution."

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio condemned the sanctions, and said they did not advance US-led efforts to achieve a ceasefire, bring hostages home and end the war.

Let's get real. These two monsters were never going to travel to New Zealand. So the sanctions from Winston Peters are completely performative. The unhinged reactions from Israel and the United States, coupled with the pitifully narrow scope of these measures, expose a gutless global response to a government hell-bent on entrenching apartheid and settler-colonialism. If the western world is serious about justice, sanctions on all Israeli politicians are long overdue.

Let’s not kid ourselves: Ben-Gvir and Smotrich aren’t rogue players, they’re the ugly face of an Israeli government that thrives on violence and displacement. Smotrich, as Finance Minister, has bankrolled the expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank, while Ben-Gvir, National Security Minister, has egged on settler attacks and regularly calls for Palestinian expulsion.

Their actions aren’t anomalies; they’re the blueprint of a state that’s killed over 53,000 Palestinians in Gaza since October 2023, mostly women and children, and displaced 8,000 in the West Bank while murdering 700, according to UN figures. This is state-sponsored terror, not a few bad apples.

Here are just a few of Itamar Ben-Gvir's violence inciting statements:

• June 2023: “In this government, we have killed 120 Palestinians in the last six months, and there will be more in the future. The public expects us to do more, and we have the capacity to meet those expectations.”
• August 2023: “A Jew who defends himself and others from murder by Palestinians is not a murder suspect, but a hero who will get full backing from me.”
• February 2024: “We cannot have women and children getting close to the border... anyone who gets near must get a bullet in the head.”
• April 2024: “Why are there so many arrests? Can’t you kill some? Do you want to tell me they all surrender? What are we to do with so many arrested? It’s dangerous for the soldiers.”
• April 2024: Applying the death penalty to Palestinian detainees who are “terrorists” is the “right” solution to tackle the problem of prison overcrowding.
• July 2024: “Prisoners should be shot in the head instead of being given more food. Until then, we will give them minimal food to survive. I do not care about this.”
• March 2025: “Annihilate, smash, eradicate, erase, crush, shatter, burn, be cruel, punish, ruin, crush. Annihilate!”
  

Israel’s response to the sanctions was predictable. Foreign Minister Gideon Saar called them “outrageous” and “scandalous,” while Smotrich bragged about sabotaging Palestinian statehood. The US, ever the loyal enabler, had Secretary of State Marco Rubio decry the sanctions as “extremely unhelpful,” whining that they derail ceasefire talks.

This is rich coming from a nation that’s funnelled billions in military "aid" to Israel while it bombs Gaza to dust. The United State’s blind defence, fixating on Hamas as the sole villain, conveniently sidesteps Israel’s systematic violations of international law, as confirmed by the International Court of Justice’s July 2024 ruling.


Here are a few of Bezalel Smotrich's disgusting statements as well:

• March 2023: “The Palestinian people are an invention from the past century. There is no such thing as Palestinians because there’s no such thing as the Palestinian people.”
• June 2023: “We must kill thousands of Palestinians.”
• November 2023: “When they say that Hamas needs to be eliminated, it also means those who sing, those who support and those who distribute candy, all of these are terrorists.”
• January 2024: “The war with Hamas presented an opportunity to concentrate on encouraging the migration of the residents of Gaza.”
• January 2025: “Sooner or later, we will erase the smile on their [Palestinian] faces and turn it into screaming for the breakdown of those who remained alive. The Palestinians are animals who love death and dance for the destruction of their life.”
• February 2025: “Removing Palestinians from Gaza is the only solution that will bring peace and security to Israel.”

For New Zealand, these sanctions are the bare minimum…a token gesture when we should be throwing our weight behind real accountability. The UN General Assembly’s November 2024 vote for sanctions against Israel, the first in 42 years, shows the world’s patience is wearing thin. It also shows that Israel’s propaganda about antisemitism is no longer working. 

Targeting just two ministers is like putting a plaster on a gaping wound. The entire Israeli cabinet, led by the butcher Benjamin Netanyahu, is complicit in policies that the UN and ICJ have deemed illegal. Sanctioning only Ben-Gvir and Smotrich largely lets the rest off the hook to carry on with their systemic human rights abuses.

Aotearoa needs to step up. If we’re serious about stopping the conflict escalating, we must push for comprehensive sanctions on all Israeli politicians enabling the fascist Israeli regime. A military embargo, as demanded by 52 states at the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation and Arab League summit, would hit where it hurts. Freezing assets, banning travel, and severing economic ties with Israel’s government. This would send a clear signal that Israel and the United States would have difficulty ignoring.

New Zealand has a moral duty to lead, not just tag along dragging its heels. Recognising Palestine, expelling Israel’s ambassador and backing the International Criminal Court are steps we should’ve taken yesterday.

The tantrums from a few politicians mean nothing when Israel has continued to murder innocent Palestinians, around more since the sanctions were announced. These sanctions might sting, but they’re a pinprick when a sledgehammer is needed. The free world needs to sanction the whole rotten apparatus. New Zealand’s current move is the least we could do…now it’s time to do more.

Adrian Orr Resigned Because of Nicola Willis’ Austerity

The abrupt resignation of Reserve Bank Governor Adrian Orr is a blaring siren that New Zealand’s economic foundations are being relentlessly jackhammered by Nicola Willis’ unyielding austerity obsession. 

Orr was effectively ousted after a fierce funding dispute with the Finance Minister, who appears determined to gut budgets left, right, and centre while cloaking it as “responsible” governance. 

Willis' relentless cost-cutting zeal risks destabilising the Reserve Bank’s independence, raising alarms about whether her agenda prioritises fiscal optics over the nation’s long-term economic resilience.

 

In April, RNZ reported:

Reserve Bank's budget to be slashed by 25%

The Reserve Bank's operating budget for the coming year has been slashed by about 25 per cent.

The reduction in spending, which appears to be driven by increased staffing levels, has been agreed to by both the central bank and the government.

It follows Adrian Orr's abrupt resignation as the Reserve Bank's governor last month.

Unlike most other agencies, which receive annual funding through the Budget process, the Reserve Bank's board negotiates five-year funding agreements with the Minister of Finance, who receives advice from the Treasury.

 

Documents released under the Official Information Act lay bare the truth: Orr wanted $1.031 billion to keep the Reserve Bank humming; Willis offered a measly $775.6 million, a 25% cut to operating expenses over five years.

 

Yesterday, RNZ reported:

Documents reveal why Adrian Orr suddenly quit as Reserve Bank Governor

The Reserve Bank has revealed a dispute over funding was behind Adrian Orr's abrupt resignation as governor.

A raft of documents - released by the central bank under the Official Information Act - reveal an "impasse" as Orr argued Finance Minister Nicola Willis was not providing enough funding for the next five years.

In an accompanying statement, an RBNZ spokesperson said it became clear in late February that the board - chaired by Neil Quigley - was willing to agree to a "considerably" smaller sum that Orr thought was needed.

"This caused distress to Mr Orr and the impasse risked damaging necessary working relationships, and led to Mr Orr's personal decision that he had achieved all he could as Governor of the Reserve Bank and could not continue in that role with sufficiently less funding than he thought was viable for the organisation."

 

Willis’ austerity isn’t just a numbers game; it’s a deliberate assault on New Zealand’s future. The coalition’s 2025 Budget, dressed up as a “Growth Budget,” is full of sleight of hand and doublespeak. While Willis and Luxon crow about fiscal prudence, their cuts are gutting essential services and much needed infrastructure projects. Health funding for Māori providers? Flatlined, forcing providers to “just keep going” with no new money. Education? Starved, with schools scrambling to cover basics. Public transport and infrastructure? Slashed.

Stats NZ data paints a grim picture: real per-capita health spending has dropped 3.2% since 2022, and infrastructure investment as a share of GDP is at its lowest in a decade, down to 2.1% in 2024. Meanwhile, 61,000 families are $43 worse off per fortnight thanks to cuts like the halving of KiwiSaver contributions.

The coalition’s propaganda machine is working overtime to paper over this mess. Luxon parrots the same “tight but responsible” line, claiming the Budget “gets the basics right.” But it’s a lie as transparent as gladwrap. $11 billion has been stripped from women’s pay equity, $66,000 shaved off young people’s retirement savings, with NZ$51 billion borrowed in 2025/26, all to funnel more tax cuts to landlords and corporates. The coalition’s spin is straight out of the Tory playbook. Slash public services, widen inequality, then blame the victims.

This isn’t just financial mismanagement and bad policy; it’s economic vandalism. Austerity has a track record of failure. Just look at the UK, where a decade of cuts led to 330,000 avoidable deaths and stagnant growth. New Zealand’s productivity needs investment in education, health, and resilient infrastructure, not penny pinching or another fire sale of public goods. Willis’ approach risks a death spiral: underfunded services collapse, inequality spikes, and the economy stalls. The Reserve Bank’s own forecasts warn of sluggish 1.2% GDP growth in 2025, hampered by these cuts.

Orr’s exit should be viewed as a canary in the coal mine. He stood up for a properly funded central bank, knowing its role was required in shielding New Zealand from global shocks. Willis’ refusal to budge wasn’t just a snub…it appears to be a power play to bend the bank to the government's and Treasury's agenda. Nikki No Boats is playing hardball, leaning on the Reserve Bank to soften those capital rules that have the big Australian-owned banks, who extracted $7.22 billion from Kiwis in 2024, grumbling. Her push smells like a calculated move to cozy up to these financial giants.

The coalition’s priorities are clear: corporates over people, spin over substance. New Zealanders deserve better than the National-led governments misleading propaganda. It’s time to call out Willis’ austerity for what it is…a wrecking ball that is destroying New Zealand’s future.

Another Bunch of Rightwing Propagandists

In New Zealand’s murky right-wing scene, a cast of propagandists peddles fear and division. From anti-vax crusaders to culture war stirrers, these figures exploit distrust, offering noise over solutions. Here’s another rundown of some key and bit players, exposing their tactics and selective outrage in New Zealand's polarised political landscape.

 

Alia Bland

Alia Bland, a small-time player in New Zealand’s right-wing echo chamber, flogs anti-mandate and “freedom” rhetoric online with the zeal of a true believer. Her posts swing between earnest hand-wringing and full-on conspiracy yarns, banging on about government overreach or vaccine evils.

She claims to speak for the “ordinary Kiwi” seeking truth, yet her selective outrage, ignoring science while amplifying fear, betrays a knack for cherry-picking facts to suit her narrative. Bland’s no Chantelle Baker, but she’s part of the same choir, dishing up distrust with a side of moral superiority.

Her niche following laps it up, and in the algorithm-driven outrage economy, even minor voices like hers can spark a blaze. While she bangs on about personal freedom, her silence on systemic inequities faced by Māori or other marginalised groups reveals a convenient blind spot in her “every Kiwi matters” mantra. It’s less rebellion than recycled resentment, repackaged for the digital age.

Alistair Harding

Alistair Harding lurks in the murky corners of New Zealand’s conspiracy scene, peddling fringe media and anti-government rants like a dodgy street vendor. From 5G paranoia to vaccine skepticism, his content’s a smorgasbord of tinfoil-hat theories, all dressed up as “hidden truth.”

He claims to champion critical thinking, yet his posts lean on flimsy evidence and recycled global tropes, shunning the rigour he demands of “mainstream” media. Harding’s influence is confined to the already-converted, but his relentless churning of divisive yarns keeps the misinformation bonfire burning.

He’s no mastermind, just a cog in the outrage machine, tilling the same tired dirt with a smug nod to “waking people up.” While preaching about government tyranny, he’s curiously quiet on corporate power or historical injustices that don’t fit his opaque narrative. It’s a classic case of shouting “freedom” while picking and choosing whose freedom counts.

Chantelle Baker

Chantelle Baker reckons she’s a fearless journo, but her “reporting” is more a megaphone for conspiracy-laden rants than anything resembling news. A fixture in NZ’s anti-mandate scene, her social media thrives on stirring the pot, whether it’s hating Jacinda Ardern, questioning vaccine safety or whipping up distrust in institutions.

She claims to stand for truth and transparency, yet her pivot from reality TV to right-wing rabble-rouser reeks of a grift, peddling outrage to punters spoiling for a scrap. Facts and nuance get the boot as Baker sticks to her disinformation narrative, bugger the evidence.

While she crows about protecting Kiwi freedoms, her silence on issues like Māori rights or social equity exposes a selective sense of justice. Her posts fuel division, not solutions, and her cult following eats it up like the idiots they are, proving that in the digital age, a loud voice and a shaky grip on reality can still pull a crowd.

Don Nicolson

Don Nicolson, former Federated Farmers boss, is a diehard champion of rural conservatism, painting himself as the voice of the heartland. His rants slag off environmental rules, Māori co-governance, and “city elites” meddling in farmers’ lives.

He claims to stand for fairness, yet his selective outrage skips over climate change realities or historical land disputes that don’t suit his bigoted narrative. Nicolson’s rhetoric paints farmers as victims of a woke conspiracy, but his push for deregulation often ignores the environmental fallout that hits rural communities hardest.

While he goes on about protecting the “backbone of NZ,” his racist dismissal of Māori rights and Treaty obligations reveals a narrow view of who counts as Kiwi. It’s less a principled stand than a megaphone for grievances, dressed up as folksy wisdom, keeping the rural right fired up without offering any real solutions.

Matt Shelton

Matt Shelton, the now suspended doc turned anti-vax crusader, is a martyr for NZ’s “freedom” mob, wielding his medical credentials like a badge of rebellion. His loud rejection of COVID mandates and vaccine safety landed him in strife with medical authorities, but it’s only fueled his cult status among the anti-vax crowd.

He claims to champion science and patient choice, yet his cherry-picked “evidence” and scaremongering lean more on fear than facts, undermining the public health he once swore to protect. Shelton’s rants about government overreach conveniently ignore the societal cost of misinformation, like strained hospitals or vulnerable communities hit hardest by pandemics.

While preaching about truth, he’s cozy with fringe groups pushing 5G conspiracies. It’s a textbook case of expertise gone rogue, where a doctor’s title becomes a prop for headlines, not healing, leaving Kiwis to navigate through the disinformation.

Samantha Bailey

Samantha Bailey, a Christchurch ex-doctor turned YouTube star, swapped stethoscope for anti-vax spotlight, peddling videos that trash PCR testing and COVID vaccine safety to her global audience. She claims to seek scientific truth, yet her 300,000-subscriber platform leans on debunked conspiracies, ignoring peer-reviewed evidence while touting her “family doctor” cred despite no practicing certificate since 2020.

Investigated by the Medical Council for misinformation, she cried foul about her free speech, but her “truth-telling” sidesteps the harm of scaring punters off life-saving jabs. Bailey’s rants about government overreach also ignore systemic issues like Māori health gaps, revealing a narrow view of what “health” really is.

Her pivot from medicine to media grift keeps the anti-vax crowd hooked, but it’s less about facts and more about trying to get headlines. In NZ’s misinformation wars, Bailey’s proof a white coat and a webcam can amplify bunkum, even when the stakes are deadly.

Sue Grey

Sue Grey, the self-styled champion of “freedom” and co-leader of NZ Outdoors & Freedom Party, has carved out a niche peddling anti-vaccine conspiracies and pseudoscientific nonsense. With a law degree of dubious provenance from a now-defunct institution, Grey’s crusade against public health measures reeks of opportunism, exploiting public fear for political gain.

Her relentless spruiking of unproven treatments and baseless claims about government overreach has emboldened a fringe following, while her legal stunts, often dismissed by courts, waste public resources. Her posts expose her as a figure entrenching divisive rhetoric, with some accusing her of aligning with globalist agendas she claims to oppose.

Grey’s antics aren’t just misguided; they’re a dangerous distraction from genuine issues, undermining trust in institutions while offering nothing but noise and no solutions.

Hannah Spierer

Hannah Spierer, co-host of the far-right Counterspin Media, peddles anti-government rhetoric alongside partner Kelvyn Alp, with charges for sharing the banned Christchurch mosque attack livestream cementing her notoriety. Her rants frame her as a “freedom” fighter, railing against censorship and “woke” agendas, yet her anti-feminist tirades, like calling women back to traditional roles, clash with her push for personal liberty.

A former Green activist, she now spins conspiracies about vaccines and Māori rights, claiming to protect New Zealanders while stoking division with debunked narratives. Her “truth-seeking” bravado, seen in fiery speeches at protests, ignores the harm of spreading objectionable material, as noted by the Chief Censor.

Spierer’s pivot from lefty roots to right-wing rabble-rouser reveals a selective sense of justice, loud on government tyranny but silent on historical inequities or communities social inequalities. She’s not exposing truth, she’s fueling outrage, banking on chaos to keep her fringe platform humming.

Kelvyn Alp

Kelvyn Alp, NZ’s conspiracy poster boy, runs Counterspin Media like a one-man propaganda outfit, dishing up a smorgasbord of tinfoil-hat theories from anti-vax tirades to 5G paranoia. He claims to expose “hidden truths,” yet his blend of half-truths and outright fiction leans on fear, not facts, earning him a cult following among the distrustful.

Alp’s knack for playing the rebel journo is undermined by his shaky grip on evidence, peddling narratives that crumble under scrutiny. While he shouts like a madman about government tyranny, he’s curiously quiet on corporate power or historical injustices like Māori land loss, which don’t fit his “freedom” spiel.

It’s less a form of journalism and more a type of dog barking at a carnival, flogging fear to punters who are too stupid to find out the truth for themselves. In New Zealand's outrage economy, Kelvyn Alp is proof that a loud voice and a dodgy webcam can still pull a crowd, even if the message is complete rubbish!

Leah Panapa

Leah Panapa, the radio host with a knack for stirring the cultural pot, has carved a niche as the voice of NZ’s “silent majority.” Her on-air musings flirt with right-wing talking points, from whingeing about cancel culture to questioning Māori co-governance, all served with a smile that masks the divisive nature of her propaganda.

She claims to foster open debate, yet her “just asking questions” excuse has worn thin, barely covering up her bigoted viewpoint. Panapa’s less in-your-face than some, but her platform amplifies resentment, giving airtime to callers who see “woke” conspiracies everywhere. 

While she bangs on about fairness and free speech, her silence on systemic issues like Māori inequality or colonial legacies reveals a selective lens. It’s a masterclass in dog-whistling, where a matey tone and a knack for dodging accountability keep the talkback crowd nodding along, no questions asked.

Martin Devlin

Martin Devlin, the sports broadcaster with a gob that runs faster than a rugby winger, loves playing the everyman hero on NZ’s airwaves. His rants often veer from rugby scores into culture war territory, slagging off political correctness or “snowflakes” with all the subtlety of a bulldozer. 

He claims to champion fairness and straight talk, yet his verbal grenades at marginalised groups, like Māori or trans people, reveal a selective sense of who deserves a fair go. Devlin’s blokey charm pulls in the punters, but his playbook is predictable: amplify outrage, dodge accountability, and repeat ad infinitum.

While he bangs on about keeping sports pure, his willingness to wade into divisive social issues with half-baked takes undermines his “just a sports guy” persona. It’s a classic case of a broadcaster using his platform to fuel culture wars, all while pretending he’s just calling it like he sees it.

Maurice Williamson

Maurice Williamson, a former National Party MP and self-styled libertarian maverick, has long been a polarising figure in New Zealand’s political landscape, known for his theatrical flair and unapologetic push for free-market policies. 

From his early days as “Mr. Pakuranga” to his ministerial roles under John Key, Williamson’s championed deregulation and individual liberty. But now he's more comfortable attacking the very political parties who uphold these values. His selective outrage, railing against government overreach while sidestepping issues like Māori land rights or systemic inequities, reveals a narrow view of “freedom” that prioritises the privileged. 

Now a pundit and occasional provocateur, he keeps the conservative base buzzing with disinformation columns and talks that blend wit with a staunch defence of the status quo, proving he’s still a showman, even if the script feels dated.

Michael Laws

Michael Laws, NZ’s eternal stirrer, has spent decades perfecting the art of being loudly wrong, from shock-jock radio to his stint as Whanganui mayor. His columns and commentaries drip with scorn for “woke” culture, Māori rights, or anything smelling remotely progressive, all cloaked in proclimations of “common sense.”

He also claims to speak for the “ordinary Kiwi,” yet his divisive rhetoric often targets the marginalised, ignoring systemic issues like Māori dispossession that don’t fit his bigoted narrative. Laws’ knack for turning outrage into a personal brand is almost admirable, if it weren’t so transparently racist.

While banging on about free speech and fairness, his selective silence on historical injustices or social inequities reveals a conveniently narrow view of justice. He often mistakes being offensive for being insightful, keeping the culture wars simmering with his smug, recycled conservatism.

Paul Brennan

Paul Brennan, a talkback radio stalwart, has built a career giving airtime to NZ’s perpetually deluded. His shows are a safe space for callers to vent about “woke” policies, them Maorees, or government mandates, with Brennan nodding along like a sympathetic barman whose on the bottle. 

He claims to foster open debate, yet his questions rarely challenge assumptions, instead teeing up the next rant for the talkback faithful. While he pontificates about giving “ordinary Kiwis” a voice, his platform amplifies divisive narratives that sideline marginalised groups, like Māori or trans communities, without a second thought. 

Brennan’s not the loudest in the room, but his quiet enabling keeps the outrage spinning, giving air to gripes that fuel division over solutions. It’s a classic case of a broadcaster playing neutral while stoking the fires of culture wars, all under the guise of “just listening” to the punters.

Peter Williams

Peter Williams, the retired broadcaster turned conservative talkback darling, wields his matey demeanor like a weapon in NZ’s culture wars. His rants slag off “woke” culture, Māori co-governance, and climate policies, sounding like they’re ripped from the racist MAGA playbook. 

He claims to represent “ordinary New Zealanders,” yet his selective outrage ignores systemic issues like Māori inequality or colonial legacies that don’t suit his narrative. Williams’ avuncular charm sells divisive ideas as common sense, keeping the conservative faithful cheering along in ignorance.

While blathering on about free speech and fairness, his silence on historical injustices or marginalised communities’ struggles reveals a narrow view of who counts as “ordinary.” It’s a tired act, using his platform to fuel division while pretending it’s just straight talk. In Aotearoa’s conservative drenched airwaves, Williams proves you can sound like everyone’s mate while picking fights that keep the culture wars alive.

Rodney Hide

Rodney Hide, the openly racist former ACT Party leader, has reinvented himself as NZ’s libertarian loudmouth, banging on about government overreach with born-again zeal. His columns and social media are a love letter to deregulation, individualism, and, surprise, anti-Māori sentiment, all framed as “economic logic.” 

He claims to champion freedom for all, yet his dismissal of Treaty rights and Māori grievances reveals a selective sense of who deserves that freedom. Hide’s knack for dressing up bias and prejudice as principle is admirable, but only for those who are equally as racist.

While he preaches about cutting red tape to save the economy, his silence on corporate greed or environmental costs shows a conveniently narrow lens. The bloke who once danced on TV now tap-dances around accountability, keeping the right-wing faithful fired up with recycled rhetoric that ignores complexities in favour of a simplistic “every man for himself” mantra.

Steven Joyce

Steven Joyce, the ex-National Party bigwig, new chair for New Zealand Media and Entertainment, a media company overseeing numerous newspapers, radio stations and digital platforms, and self-styled economic guru, has reinvented himself as a pundit who can’t resist a dig at anything remotely progressive in Aotearoa. 

Once the brains behind National’s “rock star economy” spin, he now flogs free-market dogma through columns and consultancy gigs, slagging off government spending, Māori co-governance, and “woke” red tape. 

He claims to champion prosperity for all Kiwis, yet his push for deregulation often ignores the environmental and social costs that hit vulnerable communities hardest. Joyce’s polished dogma masks a predictable playbook: frame every issue as a threat to business, sprinkle in dog-whistle populism, and call it analysis. 

While talking rubbish about economic fairness, his silence on Māori land rights or systemic inequities reveals a selective bias. His post-political career is less about insight than keeping the old boys’ club cheering, proving some pollies never stop campaigning, even when they should.

Wayne Wright Junior

Wayne Wright Junior, a fringe figure in NZ’s “freedom” movement, thrives on being the contrarian yelling into Aotearoa’s digital void. His protests against vaccine mandates and 5G conspiracies are a cocktail of distrust and defiance, claiming to defend Kiwi rights against tyranny.

His arguments, heavy on passion but light on evidence, rarely hold up, ignoring the science that protects the communities he claims to champion. His small but vocal following laps up his rants, but his rhetoric fuels chaos over solutions. 

While promoting personal freedom, he’s silent on systemic issues like Māori inequality or historical land theft, revealing a selective sense of justice. Wright’s less a thought leader than a cheerleader for division, shouting about revolution while offering little beyond recycled tropes. In NZ’s political outrage economy, he’s proof a loud voice can still stir the pot, even if it’s empty.