Curriculum Tweaks Won't Solve Learning Slump

New Zealand’s education system is in a slow-motion crisis, with student achievement sliding relentlessly. PISA 2022 results reveal a grim picture: mathematics scores plummeted to 479 (down 15 points from 2018), reading to 501 (down 4), and science to 504 (down 5), marking a 20-year decline equivalent to a year of lost schooling. The National-led government, in power since late 2023, points fingers at cell-phones, curriculum woes and truancy, but these are sideshows. The real culprit, child poverty, is being ignored, and National’s policies are once again making things worse.
 

On Tuesday, RNZ reported:

 

Education Minister Erica Stanford on raising writing achievement

Education Minister Eric Stanford is announcing the government's new Writing Action Plan to supercharge writing achievement and better set Kiwi kids up for success

The announcement comes the same day as a new study shows only a quarter of children at the end of intermediate school were writing and doing maths last year at the level expected by new curriculums introduced this year.

The Curriculum Insights study tested children in Years 3, 6 and 8 last year and results were released on Tuesday.

The study found children were doing about as well as in previous years.

But it found few were performing at the level expected by the incoming maths and English curriculums.

Just 22 percent of Year 3 children, 30 percent of Year 6 children and 23 percent of Year 8s were doing maths at the expected level.

And in writing 41 percent of Year 3s, 33 percent of Year 6 children and 24 percent of Year 8s were at the level expected of their age group.

 

Until poverty is tackled head-on, our kids will continue to struggle, no matter how many curriculum tweaks or attendance crackdowns we see. Poverty’s impact on learning is undeniable. Hungry children can’t focus; insecure housing breeds stress and illness. Research shows 14% of students skip meals weekly due to financial hardship, leading to score drops of 42–76 points across subjects, equivalent to 2–4 years of lost learning.

In 2024, child poverty metrics worsened: material hardship rose to 13.2% (152,000 children), up from 12.5% in 2022/23, with Māori and Pasifika children hit hardest. National’s austerity measures, slashing minimum wage growth and freezing welfare adjustments, have deepened this crisis.

Real-term cuts to benefits amid rising costs have left many families scrambling, with 20% of households with school-age kids unable to afford healthy food. The government’s policies, significantly skewed toward high earners, and cuts to school lunches, that have largely become inedible, offer no relief to struggling families, ensuring more children are hungry, unable to learn.

🚂 In today’s gift that keeps on giving, otherwise known as the train wreck that is the school lunches programme, Minister in charge David Seymour continues to minimise the ongoing problems, Minister of Education Erica Standford enters the fray demanding answers and instead gets… pic.twitter.com/Yzir0aGXYa

— Kelvin Morgan 🇳🇿 (@kelvin_morganNZ) March 4, 2025

Poor housing is another anchor dragging down children's achievement. Overcrowded, damp homes, common across New Zealand, lead to health issues like respiratory problems, with hospitalisation rates for poor children 2–3 times higher than their peers. These conditions lead to students missing school, disrupt sleep and study, compounding stress and reducing focus. Limited access to resources, like internet or school supplies and uniforms, further isolate low-income students.

The current neoliberal government in New Zealand has also made housing for anyone who rents less secure, scaled back social housing investment and made it harder to attain emergency housing. This retreat from housing support entrenches instability, leaving many thousands of kids in environments hostile to learning.

National’s apparent indifference, prioritising landlord tax breaks over beneficial housing reforms or housing programmes, signals a disregard for the conditions that shape educational success. In particular, the National-led government's archaic policies appear to be largely targeted at Māori children, with a return to the bad old days of banning te reo Māori from school literature, even though it's a proven effective tool for learning.

 

Yesterday, The Guardian reported:

Why is the New Zealand government cutting Māori words from some school books?

A shake-up of New Zealand’s curriculum has resulted in Māori words being scrapped from a selection of books used to teach five-year-olds and a decision not to reprint a well-loved book for young readers because it contained too many Māori words.

The changes have sparked widespread criticism from academics, teachers and authors, who have called it “an assault” on Māori identity and the latest in the coalition government’s efforts to prioritise English over the Indigenous language – criticisms the education minister has strongly rejected.

...

Why have the changes sparked criticism?

Principles, academics and authors have criticised the decision, saying it undermines the place of the Indigenous language and children’s ability to learn both English and Māori.

“It’s not only harmful from a cultural identity perspective, but it also gives very little faith in our children that they can grasp these very few, simple words,” said Dr Awanui Te Huia, associate professor at Victoria University of Wellington’s Māori studies department, Te Kawa a Māui.

Curriculum reform and attendance policies, while not irrelevant, are secondary to the social conditions required to provide effective learning. The current curriculum’s lack of clarity in subjects like science and outdated literacy approaches do need fixing, and low attendance (only 58% of students attended school more than 90% of the time in 2024) is a concern. But National’s obsession with structured literacy mandates and penalising poor families with truancy fines entirely misses the point.

A child who’s hungry or sick won’t learn, no matter how rigorous the curriculum or how often they’re dragged to class by parents afraid of further financial penalties. These measures distract from the root issue: poverty inhibiting children's potential to learn.

The coalition of chaos’ policies betray a wilful blindness to what matters. Instead of investing in things that work, like school lunch programmes, proven to boost engagement and achievement, they’ve slashed funding for Ka Ora, Ka Ako by $107 million annually, reducing per-student lunch budgets from $6.99–$8.90 to as low as $3, compromising meal quality for over 244,000 students in 2025.

Instead of expanding health services or social housing, they’ve cut social housing investment and restricted access to numerous social services, while funnelling $153 million to charter schools with no proven benefit. This isn’t just neglect; it’s a deliberate choice to let inequality fester while wasting taxpayer money on pet projects already proven to be failures.

Following the appalling results of his school lunch cuts, his ineffective school attendance strategy & his hated Treaty Principles Bill, charter schools are set to be yet another significant failure for David Seymour.

To date only 6 schools have expressed interest in converting. pic.twitter.com/fSES3xiHp5

— Nick (@StrayDogNZ) April 26, 2025

In 2024, Stuff reported:

Charter school agency staff paid average salary of $158,889

The new charter school agency is paying its staff an average salary of $158,889 - much higher than Ministry of Education staff and more than 50% higher than the public service average salary.

The agency has 18 staff members and sits within the Ministry of Education. But it pays more than staff there, where the average salary is $112,300, according to the public service commission. Charter school agency staff are also paid 56% more than the average public service salary, which is $101,700. 

 

In April, Stuff reported:

Charter schools: David Seymour defends $10 million for 215 students

David Seymour is defending the $10 million budget for charter schools when seven have been operating since February this year with only 215 students enrolled in them.

By averaging the cost across the 215 students, it equates to roughly $46,500 per student and is significantly higher than the core funding per student at a state school, which is just above $9000.

The evidence is clear: poverty drives educational decline, and the coalition of chaos' austerity policies are only making the situation worse. If we want kids to thrive, we need a government that ensures they’re fed, housed, and able to be healthy, not one that punishes them for their circumstances. Until then, no amount of classroom tinkering will close the gap.

National's Education Failures and Assault on Māori Language

In a move that's akin to cultural erasure, Education Minister Erica Stanford’s Ministry of Education has banned a Māori book, At the Marae, from classroom use for the absurd reason that it contains “too many Māori words.” This book, designed specifically to support the teaching of te reo Māori, is a vital tool for fostering bilingualism in Aotearoa’s classrooms. To deem it unsuitable because it embraces the very language it seeks to teach isn't just ludicrous, it’s a deliberate attack on Māori identity in an attempt to undermine the revitalisation of an official language of New Zealand.
 

On Friday, 1 News reported:

 

Fury as ministry cans kids book for too many Māori words

The Education Ministry has canned a reader for junior children because it has too many Māori words, infuriating Te Akatea, the Māori Principals' Association.

The association's president Bruce Jepsen said the decision not to reprint At the Marae was racist and white supremacist.

The ministry told schools At the Marae, did not fit the sequence that young children were now taught to decode words using the structured literacy approach.

Te Akatea, the Māori Principals’ Association, rightly called this decision “an act of racism,” with president Bruce Jepsen decrying it as a step toward recolonising education. Unfortunately, this isn't an isolated incident but part of a broader, insidious pattern under an authoritative government to strip Māori language and culture from public view. The removal of “Aotearoa” from passports, the planned erasure of Māori names from road signs, and the renaming of government agencies to exclude te reo Māori are all symptomatic of a racist agenda, which is costing taxpayer's millions of dollars with no quantifiable benefit, to diminish Māori presence in our literature and shared spaces.

These are the seven words in the Māori book that was removed by Erica Stanford's Ministry of Education for having "too many Māori words"#nzpol pic.twitter.com/v3UdB0dnsj

— Mountain_Tui (@Mountain_Tui) August 8, 2025

Take the Electoral Commission's renaming of the Rongotai electorate to Wellington Bays, an act devoid of any rationale beyond a clear intent to erase Māori nomenclature. No consultation, no justification, just a blunt rejection of a name tied to Māori heritage obviously undertaken at the behest of the current racially motivated government. The coalition’s track record on Māori language extends to other shameful decisions. The redirection of $30 million from the Te Ahu o te Reo Māori programme, which trained teachers to deliver te reo Māori, to fund a maths curriculum refresh plagued with problems is a stark example.

Experts have debunked Stanford’s claim that the programme failed to improve student outcomes, labelling it misleading and a pretext for defunding Māori education. Sadly, government ministers aren't adverse to lying in order to further their racist agenda. This follows the coalition’s decision to review Treaty of Waitangi clauses in education and other legislation, a move critics argue is designed to undermine Māori rights and co-governance. However, Stanford’s leadership has been equally disastrous when looking at her broader education policy direction.
 

On Friday, RNZ reported:

'Wouldn't overblow it' - Education Minister on maths book errors

The Education Minister has thanked "keen bean" students for picking up errors in Ministry of Education-funded maths resources.

Eighteen errors were spotted and fixed in new maths resources, including incorrect sums, a wrong number labelled in te reo Māori, and incorrectly saying "triangles" instead of "rectangles" in an answer.

In one case, an answer to a problem in a Year 4 workbook was listed as 1024, and had to be changed to the correct answer of 19,875.

Standford's casual dismissal of 18 errors in Ministry of Education-funded maths resources, errors as egregious as incorrect sums and mistranslations of te reo Māori (e.g., “rua” written instead of “whā” for the number four) is emblematic of a government prioritising haste over quality resources that teachers can actually use. Stanford’s flippant “I wouldn’t overblow it” response, thanking “keen bean” students for spotting mistakes, downplays a systemic failure likely exacerbated by an overbearing racist agenda and over-reliance on artificial intelligence in resource development.

In July, RNZ reported:

School curriculum rewrite had serious problems, managers considered using AI to help

Internal Education Ministry documents sighted by RNZ reveal serious problems plagued the rewrite of the school curriculum earlier this year and managers were considering using AI to help with the work.

The latest leak from the organisation shows only a few months ago it lacked a clear definition of the core concept underpinning the entire rewrite - "knowledge rich" - even though it had already published primary school maths and English curriculums by that time and had nearly completed draft secondary school English and maths curriculums.

It was also struggling with repeated requests for changes.

...

The latest leak followed a series of disclosures of internal documents that prompted the ministry to hire a KC to investigate where they were coming from.

A "programme status report" sighted by RNZ said the introduction of a new process for developing the curriculum posed an "extreme" issue to the work.

"The new delivery process is adding complexity to both internal and external delivery and review procedures as we do not have a clear definition of a knowledge rich curriculum and what it looks like in a NZ context," it said.

"There is no international comparison we can pick up and use."

The hasty rewrite of the school curriculum, driven by a ministerial advisory group appointed in late 2023 by Erica Standford, has been marred by inadequate due diligence, resulting in a litany of errors that undermine student learning. In fact the coalition of chaos has failed the education litmus test spectacularly. Since taking office, student attendance has plummeted, with only 67% of schools engaging in the government’s Stepped Attendance Response (STAR) programme by April 2025.

NCEA literacy and numeracy pass rates also expose the National-led coalition’s abject failure, with Māori students achieving a dismal 22% pass rate in 2024, compared to 67% for non-Māori, leaving 78% of Māori learners without equitable outcomes. But instead of helping the 45,000 Māori students struggling under a system starved of resources, the government instead plans to get rid of  NCEA to try and hide their systemic education failures. Worse yet, they are undermining education for Māori students further by cutting $30 million from Te Ahu o te Reo Māori programmes, which previously supported 1,200 teachers annually, and a $15 million reduction in culturally responsive education initiatives, deepening the systemic neglect that perpetuates Māori underachievement.

The National-led coalition government’s systematic erasure of Māori words from public spaces, such as road signs, passports, and government agencies, coupled with new financial burdens like the doubled $100 International Visitor Conservation and Tourism Levy (IVL) for some visa categories in 2024 and additional charges of up to $35 per person for access to popular walking tracks like the Tongariro Alpine Crossing, threatens to derail New Zealand’s tourism industry, which generated $37.7 billion and supported 318,000 jobs (14.4% of the workforce) in 2023.

The truth of the matter is that nobody wants to visit a racist country. Māori culture, including te reo Māori, is a cornerstone of the tourism appeal, with 68% of international visitors citing cultural experiences as a primary draw. The government's openly racist policies and suppression of Māori language risks alienating this market, especially as competitors like Australia and Canada bolster Indigenous tourism programs.

The IVL hike and new track fees, impacting 1.9 million annual visitors and 200,000 track users respectively, have already contributed to a 7% decline in arrivals from key markets like the UK and USA in 2024 compared to pre-COVID levels. Together, these policies could stall tourism’s recovery, with long-term economic losses projected at $20-$30 billion over the next decade, as New Zealand’s unique Māori cultural identity, a global brand asset, is undermined by ignorant government policies.

Education Minister Erica Stanford’s tenure has been a cascade of blunders, exposing her incompetence and disregard for accountability. In May 2025, Official Information Act releases revealed she used her personal Gmail account to handle sensitive government business, including pre-Budget documents and visa policy changes, breaching the Cabinet Manual’s explicit rules against such practices. This “untidy” conduct, as Stanford admitted, risked cybersecurity breaches, with Labour’s Willow-Jean Prime slamming it as a “welcome sign to threats to national security” affecting millions in taxpayer-funded decisions.

“I’m very relaxed about it”

⚠️ Another day, another demonstration of weak, ineffective leadership from Prime Minister Christopher Luxon as he gets grilled by 1News Maiki Sherman over Education & Immigration Minister Erica Standford using her personal email to carry out official… pic.twitter.com/Sp8i9E2JTW

— Kelvin Morgan 🇳🇿 (@kelvin_morganNZ) May 5, 2025

Standford's failure to properly oversee Associate Minister David Seymour’s free school lunches programme has been equally disastrous, with 124,000 daily meals from subcontractor Libelle Group (liquidated in March 2025) marred by delays, nutritional shortfalls, contaminated and inedible food. Stanford only learned of Libelle’s collapse through media reports, further highlighting her detachment from critical oversight. Her apparent inability to grasp NCEA’s complexities has also drawn scorn, particularly in regards to her rushed six-week consultation for sweeping NCEA changes, which critics called inadequate for reforms affecting generations of learners. Stanford’s downplaying of 18 errors in Ministry-funded maths resources and her defense of a hasty curriculum rewrite riddled with inaccuracies, further erode confidence in her ability to get things right. These numerous missteps, alongside her dismissal of Māori education concerns, cement Stanford’s record as one of reckless negligence and cultural insensitivity, failing New Zealand’s students and taxpayers at every turn.

Despite all the evidence, the coalition of chaos' actions betray a deep-seated aversion to Māori culture and a reckless approach to education. Banning a book like At the Marae for embracing te reo Māori isn't just an administrative blunder, it’s a calculated nod to the government's never ending war on indiginous rights and another step toward cultural erasure. The National-led coalition’s legacy is one of division, incompetence, and a shameful disregard for the Treaty of Waitangi. Aotearoa deserves better than a government that fails its children and disrespects its indigenous heritage. New Zealand therefore deserves a change of government.

A Four-Year Term Would Further Erode Public Oversight

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

In February, 1 News reported:

Govt announces four-year parliamentary term legislation to be introduced

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

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

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

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

On Wednesday, the NZ Herald reported:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

— Scott Nickerson (@totaraforest) August 6, 2025

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

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

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

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

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

They're Distracting You From Their Policy Failures

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

 

On Friday, the NZ Herald reported:

 

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

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

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

 

...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

National is Trying to Steal the Election

Democracy in New Zealand, as in many nations, was hard-won through struggle, sacrifice, and relentless advocacy. From the suffragists of the 1890s, who fought tirelessly for women’s right to vote, to Māori activists who challenged colonial exclusion to secure representation, the journey to universal suffrage was marked by petitions, protests, and unwavering resolve. The 1893 Electoral Act, granting women the vote, was a world-first, but it followed decades of campaigning by figures like Kate Sheppard, who galvanised thousands to demand change.

Māori, denied equal voting rights under early colonial systems, faced even greater barriers, with the Māori seats, established in 1867, emerging only after fierce resistance to land confiscation and marginalisation. These hard-fought victories remind us of the saying, “The vote is a right, not a privilege, and it must be guarded fiercely.” Yet, as we face the National-led coalition’s electoral reforms ahead of the 2026 election, that right is under increasing threat, with changes that could disenfranchise hundreds of thousands from participating in democracy.

The National-led coalition government has introduced electoral law changes that appear designed to undermine our democratic process. The Electoral Amendment Bill, currently under scrutiny, ends same-day voter enrolment, a practice that has allowed New Zealanders to register and vote on election day or during advance voting since 1993. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith claims this addresses delays in vote counting, pointing to the three weeks it took to finalise the 2023 election results. But this justification holds little water. Electoral officials have noted that coalition negotiations, not vote counting, caused the bulk of delays before the coalition of chaos government could be formed.
 

On Monday, Newsroom reported:

 

Attorney-General rules her own Govt’s voting crackdown breaches human rights

Electoral law restrictions announced last week are in breach of the Bill of Rights Act, Attorney-General Judith Collins KC says in a report belatedly disclosed to Parliament.

She indicates more than 100,000 people may be directly or indirectly disenfranchised by rules banning enrolment in the final 13 days before an elections. Young people, and areas with larger Māori, Asian and Pasifika communities, are likely to be worst affected.

Denying voters the political franchise is a heavy price to pay, she says, when there are alternative, less restrictive measures that could have addressed the same problem of speeding up the vote count.

However, the impact of scrapping same-day enrolment could be even more profound. In 2023, an estimated 300,000 to 350,000 special votes were cast by those who enrolled late or needed to update their details. These voters are disproportionately young, Māori, Asian, and Pasifika...groups that tend to support Labour, the Greens, and Te Pāti Māori. By closing enrolment 12 days before election day, the coalition of chaos has deliberately tried to lock these voters out, a move that even Judith Collins in her role as Attorney-General has warned may breach human rights law and disproportionately affect Māori communities.

But that's not all. Reports have surfaced of numerous individuals being inexplicably removed from the Māori electoral roll, prompting Te Pāti Māori to launch court proceedings to challenge what they see as systemic voter suppression. This follows the coalition’s reversal of Labour’s 2022 reforms, which allowed Māori to switch between the Māori and general rolls outside pre-election periods. These changes threaten to alienate Māori voters, who already contend with longer wait times at polling booths and limited access in remote areas. Te Pāti Māori’s legal action reflects a broader fear that the government is targeting Māori political power, especially after their strong 2023 performance, securing six electorate seats.


Yesterday, RNZ reported:

Te Pāti Māori files urgent High Court proceeding over electoral roll concerns

Te Pāti Māori says it has filed urgent proceedings in the High Court over reports people have been removed from electoral roll or shifted off the Māori roll.

...

RNZ has spoken to several affected people, including Taryn Utiger, who could not find herself on the Māori roll despite switching to it last year.

She said she updated her details a month ago and called the Electoral Commission to double check she was all set to vote.

"They were like, yup ka pai you're on the Māori electorate roll, everything's good to go you will be able to vote in the local body elections and the referendum. I was like cool, thought that was the end of it, everything confirmed. Then I logged in last night and nothing."

Compounding this assault on democracy, numerous reports have also emerged of New Zealanders on the general electoral roll being inexplicably removed without notification or justification. These cases, spanning urban and rural electorates, occurring just before the end date for registrations, August 1, 2025, for local body elections, suggest a troubling pattern that undermines the integrity of the electoral system. The removal of eligible voters from the general roll, much like the issues plaguing the Māori roll, raises serious questions about administrative incompetence, or worse, deliberate manipulation.

Such actions are profoundly undemocratic, eroding trust in the electoral process and fuelling suspicions of a coordinated effort to suppress participation, particularly among demographics less likely to support the coalition. The lack of transparency around these removals only deepens the sense of unease, as voters are left wondering whether their right to vote is being systematically eroded.

Further compounding the issue, the coalition has reinstated a blanket ban on prisoner voting, ignoring the Electoral Commission’s recommendation to expand voting rights to all prisoners. This move disproportionately impacts Māori, who are overrepresented in the justice system, further eroding their democratic voice. ACT leader David Seymour’s dismissive rhetoric, labelling late enrolees as “dropkicks,” reveals a contempt for democratic participation that betrays the coalition’s motives. The right wing doesn't like democracy, as evidenced by their numerous policies that weren't canvased prior to the election.

These reforms aren't about efficiency; they're about engineering an electoral advantage. Special votes have historically favoured left-leaning parties, often shifting final results in their favour. By restricting access, the coalition is banking on suppressing turnout among groups less likely to support them. This echoes tactics seen in other democracies, where voter suppression has been used to skew outcomes. 

Worse still, reports on social media suggest the Electoral Commission has recently removed thousands of voters from the electoral roll without notification, which will leave many to discover on election day that they’re ineligible, with no recourse under the coalition’s plan to end same-day enrolment. While it’s unclear if these removals deliberately target left-leaning voters, the National-led government’s unjustifiable policies disproportionately affect communities more likely to support Labour, the Greens, or Te Pāti Māori. This pattern of disenfranchisement raises alarming questions about the integrity of our electoral system.

The fight to protect New Zealand’s democracy must be swift and unified. Te Pāti Māori’s court challenge is a vital step, but opposition parties, civil society, and voters must rally to safeguard the right to vote. Public pressure and scrutiny at the select committee stage of the Electoral Amendment Bill are essential. The sacrifices of those who fought for the right to vote demand that we act. New Zealand’s democracy deserves to amplify every voice, not silence those who seek change. The 2026 election hangs in the balance, and with it, the soul of our nation.

National's Pathetic Nanny-State Policy Tweaks

Many politicians within the current National-led coalition government have spent much of their careers railing against the supposed "Nanny State" excesses of Labour’s past, particularly of the Helen Clark era. They used to accuse Clark’s Fifth Labour Government of suffocating New Zealanders with overbearing regulations and paternalistic policies, such as requiring power saving light bulbs and water saving shower heads. Yet, in a twist of irony sharper than a shearing blade, this self-proclaimed coalition of freedom has unveiled a raft of petty and pointless rules that would make even the most zealous bureaucrat blush.

From dictating when school kids can use cellphones or protest against climate inaction to taking control of beneficiaries payments to meddling in farmyard chores to tightening the screws on election booth treats to banning transgender people from using toilets, and now dictating how businesses handle pay-wave surcharges, the coalition of chaos is proving itself the true practitioners of the Nanny Statism they once decried.


On Wednesday, RNZ reported:

Chores young people can do on a farm changing

The agriculture sector will be consulted on proposed changes to risk regulations on what chores young people can safely carry out on the family farm.

Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Brooke van Velden said it will consult on these thresholds, like collecting eggs or feeding small animals, while ensuring safety is not compromised.

Minister van Velden said children will be able to do more complex tasks with supervision and training as they get older - but expects higher-risk activities like being near heavy machinery to remain off-limits.

Labour’s Chris Hipkins rightly criticised the coalition’s bizarre consultation on what chores children can do on family farms, calling it a solution in search of a problem. The National-led government, in its infinite wisdom, has decided that the age-old tradition of kids mucking in on the family farm requires a regulatory overhaul. Apparently, the coalition believes that rural parents need Wellington’s guiding hand to decide whether their teenager can feed the chooks.

This is the same National Party that once lambasted Helen Clark’s government for its "Helengrad" type controlling tendencies, accusing Labour of infantilising New Zealanders with rules like the "anti-smacking law" However here they are, drafting a rulebook for farmyard tasks that’s as patronising as it is pointless. The irony is thicker than a mud patch: National, the party of personal responsibility, now wants to nanny rural families into compliance.

Then there’s the coalition’s obsession with election booth "treating." The Electoral Act 1993 already bans providing free food, drink, or entertainment to sway voters, but apparently that wasn’t nanny state enough for National. They've now doubled down with a new rule slapping a 100-meter buffer zone around polling stations, again outlawing sausage sizzles or lolly scrambles on election day as if a free Raspberry Drop could topple democracy. It’s a petty tweak to an existing law, dressed up as a bold stand against voter bribery, yet it’s exactly the kind of bureaucratic meddling National once sneered at Labour for. One can only imagine the scandal: a hangi or a lolly scramble swaying the vote in a marginal electorate! This is particularly ridiculous when you consider how the coalition of chaos is desperately trying to tilt the next election in their favour by taking away people's right to register to vote on election day, which will disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders from participating in democracy.

This is the same coalition of political parties that once sneered at Labour’s supposed overreach, accusing Clark’s government of stifling free expression and community spirit. The hypocrisy is staggering. National once decried Labour’s "nanny state" for restricting individual freedoms, but apparently, a cuppa or sticker at the polling booth is a threat to democracy itself.

And then there’s the pathetic pay-wave surcharge saga, an exercise in futility dressed up as cost-of-living relief. The National-led government proudly announced a ban on surcharges for contactless payments, trumpeting it as a win for struggling consumers. They claimed it would save Kiwis money at the checkout, painting it as a bold strike against sneaky fees. But in a classic bait-and-switch, the coalition later quietly advised businesses to simply bake these fees into their overall prices. So, instead of reducing costs, the ban just shifts the burden to people who bother to punch in their numbers, potentially increasing prices across the board for everyone, whether they pay by card or cash. This isn’t relief; it’s a sleight of hand. Just like their promises of tax relief, National’s latest “solution” to the cost-of-living crisis looks more like a bureaucratic shuffle, forcing businesses to navigate new pricing rules while consumers foot the bill.

Retailers & hospitality have said they will add the surcharge to the price of the goods & services. Without capping what the credit card companies (banks) can charge the business, Luxon's claims are duplicitous. All people will in fact pay more, not just those using a credit card https://t.co/TVXXSNDGW8

— Maxine Gay (@GayMaxine) July 29, 2025

This coalition of chaos, as it’s been aptly dubbed, seems determined to outdo by a country mile the very "Helengrad" caricature it once created and weaponised. The National-led government’s fixation on micro-managing everyday life, whether it’s kids doing chores, people using toilets or paywave surcharges, reveals a governing philosophy that’s less about liberty and more about grabbing headlines with pointless gimmicks.

However, their micromanaging isn't always trivial. They’ve also axed Labour’s world-leading smokefree legislation, a policy designed to shield future generations from tobacco’s deadly grip, all while claiming it’s about slashing red tape. This reckless repeal, scrapping measures like denicotinisation and limits on cigarette sales, hands Big Tobacco hundreds of millions in taxpayer-funded profits, betraying Kiwis’ health for corporate gain. National’s pious rants against Labour’s “nanny state” ring hollow when they’re selling out young people's future to the tobacco giants, one puff at a time.
 

On Wednesday, the NZ Herald reported:

 

Government extends tax break for Philip Morris heated tobacco products

Verrall said the onus should be on Philip Morris to prove its product was safe.

“There is no reason why the government should be running a study for Philip Morris to help get its products used,” she said. “This product is not a health product. It is a harmful product.”

Verrall said the latest update from the Treasury showed the HTP tax cut was forecast to cost up to $293m if continued until 2029.

“It’s deeply worrying when our health system is underfunded that the Government is giving away $300m to the benefit of a single company with links to one of the coalition partners,” Verrall said.

The previous Labour government's, for all their flaws, sought to balance social progress with pragmatic governance, introducing measures like KiwiSaver and Working for Families to empower New Zealanders. National’s relentless criticism of the Clark and Ardern administrations as overbearing now looks like complete and utter projection. Luxon's coalition of chaos is by far the worst micromanagers New Zealand has ever seen.

This coalition, with its scattergun approach to policy and penchant for meddling in the minutiae of daily life, has taken the nanny state baton and run with it, straight into the farmyard, the polling booth, and the checkout counter. If this is National’s vision of "getting New Zealand back on track," then New Zealanders might wonder if the track leads to a bureaucracy more stifling than anything Helengrad could ever dream of.

The Coalition of Chaos' Assault on Electoral Fairness

The National-led government, propped up by its coalition partners ACT and New Zealand First, has embarked on a brazen assault on New Zealand’s democratic fabric. Their latest electoral law overhaul, set to decline hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders the right to vote by scrapping same-day enrolments, is a calculated move to tilt the electoral playing field in their favour. This is'nt just a bureaucratic tweak; it’s a deliberate act of voter suppression that threatens the very principles of fair representation.
 

Today, RNZ reported:

Enrolment changes could have 'significant' impact on democratic participation - Ministry of Justice

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says comments made by the deputy prime minister - calling voters who enrol late "dropkicks" - are "unhelpful", as changes to voter enrolment are rolled out.

Justice officials say closing enrolments ahead of advance voting could result in lower turnout and reduce confidence in the electoral system. And electoral law experts are also questioning why the changes need to stretch for the whole advanced voting period.

...

On Thursday, Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour backed the changes, insulting the hundreds of thousands of people who enrolled or updated their address, and voted, during the advance voting period and on election day itself.

"Frankly, I'm a bit sick of dropkicks that can't get themselves organised to follow the law," he said. "It's actually made so easy to do, they even have a little orange cartoon running around telling people to do it. And if you're too disorganised to do that over a thousand days between two elections, then maybe you don't care that much."

The coalition of chaos, as this shaky alliance has been correctly titled, is engineering a system where fewer voices, particularly those who've not enrolled in their local electorate, are heard at the ballot box. The decision to end same-day enrolment, a measure that allowed 110,000 New Zealanders to enrol or update details on election day in 2023, is nothing short of undemocratic. These voters, often young, Māori, Pasifika, or in unstable housing, are disproportionately likely to support progressive parties like Labour, the Greens, or Te Pāti Māori.

Constitutional law expert Andrew Geddis has noted that special votes, which include late enrolments, have historically favoured left-leaning parties. The government is effectively silencing people who don't agree with their neoliberal dogma, prioritising administrative convenience over democratic participation. Even the Ministry of Justice warned that these changes could lower turnout and erode confidence in the electoral system, a damning indictment of the coalition’s priorities.

ACT leader David Seymour’s contempt for our democracy is palpable. His dismissal of late enrolees as “dropkicks” who “can’t get themselves organised” reveals a deeper disdain for the very people democracy exists to serve. This isn't an isolated incident, but a window into the right-wing’s broader attitude: a belief that only the “deserving” should have a say. Seymour’s rhetoric, dripping with elitism, belies a worldview that sees voting as a privilege for the wealthy and sorted few, not a universal right. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith’s feeble rebuke of Seymour’s comments as “unhelpful” does little to mask the coalition’s complicity in this socially ignorant narrative.

Adding to this litany of anti-democratic measures is the government’s failure to address the unfairness that allows property owners with multiple homes to vote in each district where they own property. This archaic rule grants wealthier New Zealanders disproportionate influence in local elections, as their multiple votes amplify their voice over those who rent or own a single home. It’s a stark injustice that undermines the principle of equal representation. Compounding this, the coalition’s discussions about abolishing regional councils threaten to further erode local democracy. These councils, vital for environmental and community governance, ensure regional voices are heard. Dismantling them would centralise power and silence communities, reflecting the government’s broader pattern of prioritising control over democratic fairness.

The government’s anti-democratic streak doesn’t stop there. Their plan to reinstate a blanket ban on prisoner voting, reversing Labour’s 2020 reform that restored rights to those serving less than three years, is a shameful regression. This move will strip voting rights from an estimated 2,000–3,000 inmates, including those on remand who may later be acquitted, a clear violation of fundamental rights.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s response to concerns about this breaching the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act, as ruled by the High Court in 2015, was a chilling “I do not care.” This flippant disregard for judicial rulings and human rights underscores a government more interested in populist posturing than upholding democratic principles.
 

Last year, RNZ reported:

 

Government rejects four voting changes as review lands

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has ruled out several recommendations from the Independent Electoral Review set up by the previous government.

The minister on Tuesday released the final report, which makes more than 117 recommendations, after it was delivered to him at the end of November 2023.

• Goldsmith ruled out action on some recommendations, including:
• Lowering the voting age to 16
• Allowing all prisoners to vote and stand for Parliament
• Freezing the ratio of electorate to list seats, which would lead to an increase in the number of MPs over time
• Repealing the offence of 'treating' voters with refreshments and entertainment.

Equally troubling is the coalition’s refusal to lower the voting age to 16. Despite a Supreme Court ruling affirming that 16 and 17-year-olds have the cognitive capacity for “cold decisions” like voting, and a 2024 Independent Electoral Review supporting the change, the government has stonewalled progress. They clearly don't want young people to get into the habit of voting throughout their lives. Their 2023 withdrawal of a bill that would have allowed 16 and 17-year-olds to vote in local body elections, with Local Government Minister Simeon Brown halting Justice Committee deliberations, snuffed out public consultation and silenced a generation eager to engage on issues that effect them directly.

This move, coupled with the coalition’s broader agenda, paints a picture of a government allergic to inclusive democracy. From voter suppression to disenfranchising prisoners and stifling youth voices, the National-led government’s actions betray a cynical and destructive agenda and won't do anything for our declining participation rates. By rigging the electoral system to mute progressive voters, they’re not just undermining democracy...they’re gambling with the trust that holds it together. Voters deserve better than a coalition of chaos that prioritises power over principle.

Luxon Doesn't Think the Proud Boys are Terrorists

In a highly questionable move, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has allowed the Proud Boys, a far-right group with a track record of extreme violence, to slip off the New Zealand terrorist watch list. Despite advice from the NZ Police and other government agencies, Luxon’s administration opted not to renew the designation under the Terrorism Suppression Act 2002, effectively decriminalising support for a group linked to the January 6 US Capitol riot that caused nine deaths, including the deaths of five police officers.

Earlier this month, RNZ reported:

It's no longer illegal to be a proudly violent Proud Boy

It started as a fringe movement in the United States - a group of self-described "Western chauvinists" known as the Proud Boys.

A bunch of them were jailed after the 6 January US election riots, and they have now been pardoned by President Trump.

Their legacy of far-right extremism, violent rhetoric, and polarising influence has raised questions not just in American courtrooms but on Kiwi shores too.

"They have been organising in New Zealand, although they deny that is the case," Stuff investigative journalist Paula Penfold tells The Detail.

"Now, the terrorist designation that they were given [in New Zealand] in 2022 has been allowed to expire, and we don't yet know the reasons for that to have been allowed to happen, we don't yet know whether the Proud Boys are still active in New Zealand, but we think it's pretty important that our authorities should find out."

Founded in 2016 by Gavin McInnes, the Proud Boys quickly gained notoriety for their involvement in violent street clashes, their role in the 6 January Capitol riots, and their unwavering embrace of conspiracy theories.

This decision, shrouded in secrecy, raises serious questions about the National-led government’s priorities and its troubling alignment with extremist ideologies. As we dissect this choice, we must also confront broader patterns of complicity, from ACT’s flirtations with white supremacists to National’s cosy relationship with Trumpian politics, and the urgent need to curb the influence of fascists in Aotearoa.

The Proud Boys’ designation, established in 2022, was a response to their role in the Capitol riot and their crypto-fascist tactics. Yet, Luxon’s inaction suggests a troubling dismissal of his own agencies expert advice and previous decisions made by the Jacinda Ardern administration.

Why would he take such a risk? Evidence points to political expediency. National’s coalition with ACT and NZ First, the most right-wing New Zealand government in decades, may be reluctant to alienate conservative voters by targeting far-right groups. 

But questions remain. Why would, for instance, the National coalition of chaos fail to designate the Proud Boys, a group who murders police officers, as terrorists while putting other white supremacist groups on the list?

Last week, the NZ Herald reported:

Extremist white supremacist group behind race war plots remains on NZ terrorism watchlist

A violent neo-Nazi hate group with international reach has been relisted as a terrorist entity by the New Zealand Government, amid ongoing efforts to prevent extremist ideologies from taking root or operating within the country.

The Base is a white supremacist “militant accelerationist paramilitary group” that advocates for the violent overthrow of existing governments to establish white “ethnostates”.

The group’s ideology is said to be “rooted in extreme racism, antisemitism, and the belief in an impending race war”.

It is active in the US and Canada, with reports of training cells in Europe, South Africa and Australia.

The group, also known as TB, was first designated as a terrorist entity in New Zealand in June 2022 alongside another US group, the Proud Boys.

The decision also appears to align with diplomatic pressures from the Trump administration, which has pardoned Proud Boys members, even those who murdered police, and downplayed their threat. Many Proud Boys are reportedly linked to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), engaging in human rights abuses by abducting law abiding migrants and detaining them in concentration camps without due process. Allowing such individuals, some convicted of killing police, freedom to travel to New Zealand is reckless and indefensible. Clearly, fascists with blood on their hands should be barred from our shores, full stop.

This isn’t an isolated incident. The National-led government’s flirtation with extremism is part of a broader and uglier pattern. ACT leader David Seymour, for instance, has accepted donations from individuals openly advocating for violence against Muslims, including those boasting about bombing mosques. Such associations aren't mere oversights; they signal a willingness to court extremist support for political gain.

Similarly, the recent invitation of James Lindsay, a US commentator who peddles debunked “white genocide” conspiracies, to speak at ACT’s 2025 Rally underscores how far-right ideologies are being promoted and platformed by our right-wing politicians. Lindsay’s rhetoric, cloaked in free speech dogma, fuels division and emboldens white supremacists to hate on minority groups.

 

In 2022, Salon reported:

Meet James Lindsay, the far right’s “world-level expert” on CRT and “Race Marxism”

In a Feb. 5 appearance on Glenn Beck’s talk show — which Beck called “probably the most important podcast perhaps that we’ve ever done” — self-proclaimed critical race theory expert James Lindsay issued a dire warning. While discussing dark right-wing theories about “The Great Reset” and Democratic-run reeducation camps for the unvaccinated, Lindsay warned that a severe reckoning was at hand for the world’s elites: “It’s coming for them. They’re going to lose all of their power. They’re going to be exposed for crimes the likes of which we’ve never seen in human history.”

...

In 2018, as a math PhD running a business that fused massage therapy with martial arts, and a supporting character in the foundering New Atheism movement, Lindsay became a national name by pulling off a deft hoax that made liberal academics look dumb. Along with two co-conspirators, Helen Pluckrose and Peter Boghossian, Lindsay drafted 20 fake research papers with outlandish premises — to research canine “rape culture” at dog parks, or a proposition that men use dildos on themselves to overcome transphobia — and submitted them to a series of often obscure scholarly journals.

Around a third of the papers were accepted, and in 2018, the hoaxers, all of whom then called themselves liberals — although Boghossian was closely associated with accused white supremacist and “race realist” Stefan Molyneux, who has argued that Black people are “collectively less intelligent” than other races — revealed the experiment as an exposé on the terminal wokeness of academia, particularly the identity-oriented fields that the three called “grievance studies.”

 

When government-aligned parties amplify such divisive voices, they legitimise hate, undermining the social cohesion Aotearoa prides itself on.

Luxon’s government also helps to promote extremist views while also mirroring the Trump administration’s playbook, particularly in its erosion of indigenous rights. National’s coalition has pushed unpopular policies like the review of the Treaty of Waitangi, which undermines Māori sovereignty and echoes Trump’s marginalisation of Native American communities. This alignment isn’t coincidental.

As Trump pardons Proud Boys and weakens democratic norms, National’s soft stance on far-right groups suggests a shared ideological drift. Both governments prioritise appeasing conservative bases over protecting marginalised communities, whether it’s Māori here or migrants in US detention (concentration) camps. This convergence is a stark warning: when leaders downplay extremism, they pave the way for its normalisation.

The need to reduce white supremacist influence in New Zealand has never been more urgent. The Proud Boys, with their history of violence and ties to authoritarian regimes, are not a theoretical threat. Their lapsed designation risks emboldening local white supremacist sympathiser.

Aotearoa must not become a haven for fascists or a stage for their propaganda. Luxon’s government must reverse course, heed the advice of their security experts, and reinstate the Proud Boys’ designation as terrorists without further delay. Beyond that, it must reject the influence of extremists, whether through donations to ACT or invitations to divisive figures.

New Zealanders deserve a government that stands firm against hate, not one that cuddles it for political points. This is a moment for vigilance. The National-led government’s actions, ignoring advice, platforming extremists, and aligning with Trump’s racist agenda, threaten the values of inclusivity and justice that define Aotearoa. We must demand accountability, reject fascism in all its forms, and protect our communities from those who would divide us. The Proud Boys belong on the terrorist watch list, and white supremacists belong nowhere near our politics.

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.