The Jackal


19 Aug 2025

National's Health Cuts Leave NZ Exposed

New Zealand finds itself woefully unprepared for another Covid-19 outbreak, with the coalition government's systematic dismantling of healthcare capacity, cavalier approach to public health messaging, and ideological opposition to evidence-based policy leaving the nation vulnerable to future health crisis.

The warning signs are unmistakable. While the incidence of Covid-19 decreased in 2024 compared with the previous two years, partly driven by the lack of an expected wave over the 2024-25 summer, experts caution this pattern may not continue. But rather than using this respite to strengthen our defences, the current administration has pursued policies that actively undermine public health preparedness.

Perhaps most concerning is the government's abdication of responsibility for coherent public health messaging. Where previous administrations maintained clear communication strategies, the coalition of chaos has offered a vacuum of leadership that has been filled by misinformation and conspiracy theories, conspiracy theories that are sometimes promoted by government MPs and their associates. This messaging crisis has precipitated a dangerous decline in vaccination rates, leaving vulnerable people exposed as new variants emerge.
 

Today, Stuff reported:

 
Five deaths a week and dozens of hospitalisations show Covid hasn’t gone away

A new strain of Covid-19 is making itself known in New Zealand.

XFG, or Stratus as it is nicknamed, was classified by the World Health Organisation as a “variant under monitoring” in June, one month after first showing up in wastewater testing here.

According to wastewater analysis from PHF Science (formerly ESR), Stratus has been on the rise for the past two months. In the week ending August 3, it was the second-most detected strain of Covid, after NB.1.8.1, or Nimbus.

“I've seen in other countries that XFG has out-competed the NB.1.8.1 variant and sort of taken over,” said University of Canterbury professor and expert modeller Michael Plank.

“We haven’t seen that happen in New Zealand so far, which is maybe a little bit surprising. And it could happen, you know, in the months ahead. But at the moment, it's the NB.1.8.1 that appears to be dominating.”

 

The human cost of this negligence extends far beyond acute infections. Risk of long COVID remains high, yet the government has no coherent policy framework to address this growing health burden. Long COVID sufferers, already marginalised by a healthcare system struggling to understand their condition amidst chronic staff shortages, face an uncertain future with diminishing support and recognition.

However, most damaging is the government's systematic defunding of healthcare infrastructure, with the health sector underfunded by approximately NZ$1.5–1.9 billion annually. Nearly 10,000 public sector jobs have been axed as Finance Minister Nicola Willis imposes annual spending cuts as part of the government’s 6.5–7.5% cost-saving mandate, which has had a significant impact on our health sector.

Approximately 2,165 health sector roles have been eliminated, particularly in data, digital, and public health teams. Critics, including the Public Service Association, argue these cuts weaken COVID-19 preparedness and health system resilience.

The coalition's health policies, or lack thereof, demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of pandemic preparedness. Funding has been woefully inadequate creating or worsening conditions of severe under-staffing. In fact Budget 2024 committed more new money to funding security guards for A&E departments compared to training new medical staff. This speaks volumes about a neoliberal government who are more concerned with managing system failure rather than addressing its root causes.

Furthermore, the dysfunction within the coalition itself raises serious questions about its capacity to manage health crisis. Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters's inflammatory rhetoric and apparent sympathy for anti-vaccination sentiment, reflected in his choice of press secretary, sends dangerous mixed messages at a time when clear, science-based communication is still essential. It doesn't bode well when government minister's are consistently undermining public health measures that actually worked and whose offices often struggle with basic media relations.

The current coalition of chaos campaign against the previous Labour led government for its Covid response is also endemic of an administration with no clear plan for the future. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, flanked by his sanctimonious coalition cronies, have unleashed a venomous tirade against former Labour leaders Jacinda Ardern, Chris Hipkins, and Grant Robertson for opting out of the second, non-mandatory phase of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into New Zealand’s COVID-19 response, smugly accusing them of shirking accountability.

Luxon, in a blatant display of political grandstanding, even falsely claimed the Labour leaders defied a summons to appear in person, a lie swiftly debunked by the inquiry chair, Grant Illingworth KC, who confirmed that no such requirement existed and that private testimony, like Ardern’s three-hour interview, was entirely sufficient.

This disingenuous attack by the Prime Minister and others, with Seymour sneering at Labour’s absence, reeks of a calculated campaign to vilify the previous administration’s world-leading response, which saved an estimated 20,000 lives. The National-led government’s relentless and expensive pursuit of political point-scoring undermines the inquiry’s purpose and makes a mockery of their claim that the second Covid inquiry wouldn't be used as a political weapon.

The coalition government's retrospective criticism of Labour's pandemic spending, which was recently misrepresented by Treasury, reveals another profound misunderstanding of both epidemiology and economics. Those early investments in health infrastructure, wage subsidies, and public health measures prevented a catastrophic loss of life and economic collapse, economic collapse that the current government's archaic policies appear to be trying to initiate.

Despite the success of New Zealand's Covid response and recovery, the coalition has fervently criticised the previous administration while systematically dismantling the capacity within our health system, which is currently struggling to even deal with things like the current flu season, while offering no alternative strategy for future outbreaks.

The healthcare system is already under severe strain, with thousands of New Zealanders still waiting unreasonable amounts of time for treatment. When the next pandemic arrives, these same hospitals will be expected to manage surge capacity while operating with reduced staff and constrained budgets, potentially reducing the effectiveness of whatever response measures the National-led government can cobble together.

New Zealand's COVID response was once the envy of the world, built on scientific rigour, clear communication, and decisive action. Today, we face the prospect of another wave with a fragmented government that seems ideologically opposed to the very measures that once protected us. The question isn't whether we will face another COVID surge, but whether the current government will make that surge far more devastating than it needed to be.

The coalition's approach represents not just policy failure, but a fundamental abandonment of the government's duty to protect public health. As epidemiologists keep watch, New Zealanders deserve leaders who will listen to science rather than pander to conspiracy theorists, invest in healthcare rather than cut it, and prepare for the challenges ahead rather than pretend they don't exist.

Published by the Jackal



17 Aug 2025

We Must Keep The Cookers out of Government

New Zealand politics has reached a dangerous tipping point. What was once a reasonably sensible political landscape has become infested with conspiracy theorists, anti-vaccine zealots, and assorted cranks who wouldn't recognise evidence-based policy if it slapped them in the face with a peer-reviewed journal.

Perhaps you've heard that the founder of Counterspin Media, Kelvyn Alp, is running in the upcoming Tāmaki Makaurau by-election, and trying to bring his particular brand of conspiracy-fuelled nonsense to a wider audience. This is the same individual who has spent years spreading misinformation and conspiracy theories through his discredited media platform, Counterspin Media.

That such a figure feels emboldened to seek elected office speaks volumes about how far democracy has fallen in New Zealand.


Today, The Post reported:

 
The ‘ghost party’ at the centre of a bitter political feud

A candidate in the Tāmaki Makaurau by-election has revived the name and identity of a defunct political party, drawing accusations of “theft” from its founder.

Kelvyn Alp, a fringe media figure best known as the co-founder of the conspiracy-driven outlet Counterspin Media, is one of five candidates vying for the seat left vacant after the death of Te Pāti Māori’s Takutai Moana ‘Tarsh’ Kemp.

He is running under the banner of New Zealand Loyal, the political party launched by former broadcaster Liz Gunn ahead of the 2023 general election. The party won 1.2% of the vote and was de-registered shortly afterwards.


Meanwhile, the appointment of Jaap Knegtmans within Peters' ministerial office is particularly troubling. This individual has promoted various conspiracy theories, including references to "clot shots" and "globalists" exhibiting the kind of poisonous rhetoric that has no place in serious governance.

When the Foreign Affairs Minister's office becomes a breeding ground for conspiracy theorists, we've crossed a line that threatens the very fabric of democracy and our international relationships.

Today, Andrea Vance also reported:

 
Globalists, ‘clot shots’ and the ‘evil witch’: How a conspiracy poster landed a job at the heart of government

A NZ First staffer who cheered on the Parliament occupation is still posting conspiracy theories and far-right content while working in the office of Winston Peters. Andrea Vance investigates.

In February 2022, Jaap Knegtmans was on Parliament’s lawn, attending the anti-mandate occupation.

Three and a half years later, he is inside the Beehive, employed as a ministerial press secretary and adviser in the office of NZ First leader and foreign affairs minister Winston Peters.

Telegram posts and videos reviewed by the Sunday Star-Times reveal a long record of Knegtmans promoting conspiracy theories, vaccine misinformation, and far-right talking points – and he has continued to post similar material while working in government.


However, the problem of cookers trying to infiltrate our local and central governments extends far beyond these two recent developments. Cast your mind back in time to Sue Grey, a lawyer turned conspiracy theorist, who promoted anti-vaccine misinformation during COVID-19 which attempted to undermine the very foundations of our public health system. Grey may have deregistered her Freedoms New Zealand political party, formed alongside co-leader and cultist Brian Tamaki, but her demise, like Leighton Baker and his New Conservative Party, showcases the journey from respected professional to outright conspiracy theorist, illustrating how these toxic ideas can capture even educated individuals and cause their downfall.

Then there's Hannah Tamaki, leader of another conspiracy driven political party, Vision NZ, who is again contesting the Tāmaki Makaurau seat, having received 829 votes in 2023.

Like her husband, Brian Tamaki, Hannah's political career, or lack thereof, has been built on a foundation of religious fanaticism mixed with conspiracy theories, representing the dangerous fusion of religious fundamentalism and political extremism that threatens our delicate democratic institutions.

Which brings us to Jami-Lee Ross, whose fall from National Party MP to conspiracy theorist and convicted criminal represents the absolute nadir of political degradation. Ross, after being ousted from the National Party, formed Advance New Zealand and allied with Billy Te Kahika’s nutty New Zealand Public Party, which was explicitly driven by conspiracy theories. His transformation from parliamentarian to what can only be described as a thoroughly discredited pimp shows how conspiracy thinking can completely destroy political careers and personal credibility.
 

On 1 August, RNZ reported:

Ex-National MP Jami-Lee Ross seeks political comeback

Former National MP Jami-Lee Ross says he may not be a perfect person, but he would get things done.

Ross is seeking a comeback in politics at a local level and is putting his hat in the ring to serve on the Howick Local Board in Auckland.

"I spent six years on the Manukau City Council before a decade spent in Parliament. I understand council and government processes well and I can put those skills to good use working at a local board level," he said in a statement.


The common thread connecting all these figures is their complete abandonment of evidence-based reasoning. Whether discussing vaccination policy, climate change, international relations, or basic public health measures, they consistently choose conspiracy theories over scientific evidence. This disillusionment represents a fundamental threat to democratic governance, which should in theory depend on informed debate based on factual information to make decisions that benefit all New Zealanders.

What makes this situation particularly dangerous is how these grifters have managed to gain platforms and influence within established political parties. When Winston Peters' office employs publicly vociferous conspiracy theorists, when fringe candidates with criminal convictions feel confident enough to run for Parliament, and when established politicians embrace conspiracy thinking, we're witnessing the systematic corruption of our democratic institutions.

The solution requires vigilance from voters, mainstream media, and established political parties. We must refuse to normalise deluded conspiracy thinking, challenge misinformation wherever it appears, and ensure that evidence-based policy-making becomes a fundamental foundation of democratic governance. The alternative, a political system dominated by conspiracy theorists who reject evidence in favour of paranoid fantasy, which represents an existential threat to effective governance and social cohesion.

New Zealand deserves better than government by conspiracy theory. The time has come to draw clear lines and keep the cookers out of serious political discourse before they poison our democracy entirely.

Published by the Jackal



15 Aug 2025

Under Pressure Luxon Resorts to Lying

The art of political spin has always existed in the corridors of power, but what we're witnessing from Prime Minister Christopher Luxon represents something far more concerning, a systematic abandonment of factual discourse in favour of outright fabrication. When a leader begins peddling untruths with the casual confidence of someone ordering their morning flat white, we must ask ourselves: what does this say about the state of our democracy?

The most egregious recent example came during a media standup after parliamentary question time, where Luxon falsely claimed that former Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern had been summonsed to appear before the Covid-19 Royal Commission of Inquiry. This wasn't a slip of the tongue or a misunderstanding, it was a deliberate mischaracterisation designed to paint Ardern as somehow legally compelled to participate in person.

 

On Thursday, Stuff reported:

Luxon claims Ardern was ‘summonsed’ to Covid Inquiry. She wasn’t

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has claimed Jacinda Ardern and three other former ministers were summonsed to appear at public hearings for the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Covid-19.

“To be clear, they summonsed them,” Luxon told reporters today. “They refused to show and I think that's not right”.

Problem is, he’s wrong. Those running the inquiry chose not to use powers under the Inquiries Act to force the former Prime Minister as well as former Covid Minister Chris Hipkins, former Health Minister Ayesha Verrall, and former Finance Minster Grant Robertson to appear at public hearings.

Inquiry chair Grant Illingworth explicitly said yesterday that he chose not to use the summons powers.


 

The reality is that Ardern was invited to provide evidence, a standard practice for such inquiries. She accepted willingly, as one would expect from someone with nothing to hide.

This fabrication serves a dual purpose for Luxon: it attempts to weaponise the inquiry process against his predecessor whilst simultaneously creating the false impression that there's something sinister about Ardern not attending in person. It's textbook deflection from a Prime Minister whose own government is struggling with credibility issues across multiple portfolios.

The pattern continues with Luxon's bizarre claim about his mountaintop meeting with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. According to the Prime Minister, their $27,000 helicopter-assisted pavlova photo-op was well received across the Tasman.

Yet a curious thing happened, or rather, didn't happen. Australian media outlets, typically eager to cover bilateral meetings between leaders, remained conspicuously silent. No photographs emerged in Australia of this supposed diplomatic triumph, no video footage of the Prime Ministers atop New Zealand's scenic peaks.

One might charitably suggest that perhaps the Australian press simply missed this momentous occasion, but in an era where every political gesture is photographed, tweeted, and analysed to death, such an oversight seems improbable.

The more likely explanation is that Luxon's definition of well received bears little resemblance to observable reality. When your diplomatic achievements require you to speak for foreign media outlets that didn't report them, perhaps it's time to reconsider your communications strategy.

 

On Thursday, Stuff also reported:

Two helicopters, two prime ministers and a pavlova. Was this $27,000 lunch worth it?

Assuming they were charged the normal amount, a ballpark cost of a trip like this would be at least $27,000 for the two helicopters. Stuff asked Luxon’s office and Department of Internal Affairs to confirm if that was the bill. They did not respond.

Luxon told Stuff he didn’t know the details. But he hailed the visit as a success.

“I just say to you, I think my feedback I got from that Sunday night from people in Australia was like, ‘Man, what a fantastic trip. New Zealand looked fantastic.’ And it played really well back into the Australian media,” he told Stuff, after he returned to the capital.

But in Australia, almost none of the news websites and television bulletins used photos or video from the mountaintop.


These lies might seem inconsequential to some. However, it's Luxon's recent fear-mongering about a capital gains tax that reveals the most troubling aspect of his relationship with truth. The Prime Minister has repeatedly claimed that implementing such a tax would trigger an exodus of wealthy New Zealanders, leaving the country economically bereft. This tired trope has been wheeled out by opponents of progressive taxation for decades, and it remains as factually bankrupt today as it was then.

Research consistently demonstrates that concerns about "capital flight" are grossly overstated. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities in the United States has extensively documented how "millionaire tax flight" is a myth with no evidence to support it. Similarly, research by Stanford sociologist Cristobal Young found that claims about wealthy individuals fleeing high-tax states amount to "searching for a crisis that does not really exist".
The OECD's own research on capital gains taxation shows that most OECD countries successfully tax capital gains upon realisation, often with exemptions for housing and small businesses. These nations haven't experienced the economic apocalypse that Luxon suggests would befall New Zealand should we dare to ask wealthy people, like himself, to contribute their fair share.

The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy notes that tax-related migration is "grossly exaggerated", while the Centre on Budget and Policy Priorities has demonstrated that claims about tax hikes driving rich households away are "unproven". The pattern is clear: countries that have implemented capital gains taxes haven't witnessed mass defections by the wealthy, and those that have moved their wealth have often done so for administrative reasons rather than due to capital flight.

What makes Luxon's fearmongering particularly galling is that it represents a betrayal of the evidence-based policy approach that New Zealand has traditionally championed. We're a nation that once prided ourselves on pragmatic governance, on looking at what works rather than what sounds good in a focus group. Yet here we have a Prime Minister who appears more comfortable trafficking in discredited talking points rather than telling the truth.
The concerning trajectory of Luxon's relationship with truth raises profound questions about the health of our political discourse. When leaders feel they need to make demonstrably false claims without consequence, when they substitute their own alternative facts for reality, we edge closer to the kind of post-truth politics that has poisoned democratic institutions elsewhere.

New Zealanders deserve better than a Prime Minister who treats truth as an inconvenient obstacle to his political messaging. We deserve leaders who understand that governance requires grappling with complexity, not retreating into comfortable fictions. The mounting evidence of Luxon's casual relationship with factual accuracy isn't just concerning, it's a warning sign that our democracy's immune system against misinformation may be weaker than we thought.

The question now is whether New Zealanders will hold their Prime Minister accountable for his numerous falsehoods, or whether we'll allow the normalisation of political dishonesty to continue its corrosive work on our democratic institutions?
Published by the Jackal



14 Aug 2025

A Parliamentary Travesty: Brownlee's Authoritarian Overreach

The spectacle that unfolded in Parliament this week, Where Gerry Brownleee, the Speaker of the House, bumbled his way through Standing Orders, represents nothing short of a constitutional crisis wrapped in the Speaker's robes.

Chlöe Swarbrick, the Green Party co-leader, was unceremoniously booted from the House for the remainder of the week for the grievous sin of suggesting that "If we find six of 68 Government MPs with a spine, we can stand on the right side of history" regarding Israel's ongoing war crimes in Gaza.

This isn't just parliamentary theatre; it's a damning indictment of Speaker Gerry Brownlee's authoritarian tendencies and his fundamental inability to apply standing orders with even a semblance of consistency or fairness.
 

Yesterday, 1 News reported:


Swarbrick kicked out of Parliament after refusing to apologise

Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick has again been kicked out of Parliament after refusing to apologise for a comment she made yesterday in the House.

Yesterday, Swarbrick was kicked out of Parliament during an urgent debate on recognising Palestine as a state.

The debate was called after Foreign Minister Winston Peters said the Government was weighing up its position on the issue.

In recent times, the UK, Canada, France and Australia have announced plans to recognise Palestine as a state.

During the debate on Tuesday, Swarbrick said MPs could "grow a spine" and support her bill which would impose sanctions on Israel.

In response, Speaker of the House Gerry Brownlee said: "That is completely unacceptable to make that statement. Withdraw it and apologise." When she refused, Brownlee said she would have to leave for the rest of the week and removed her from the House.

 

The hypocrisy here is so brazen it would be laughable if it weren't so deeply concerning for our democratic institutions. When John Key famously roared at the entire Labour Party to "get some guts" during his tenure as Prime Minister, did we see Brownlee, then in opposition, calling for suspensions? Quite the contrary. Brownlee himself applauded most vociferously, treating Key's insulting outburst with admiration. Brownlee was similarly accepting of Brooke van Velden's use of the word "Cunt". However, when Swarbrick uses less insulting language, calling for government MPs to show some "spine," suddenly we're dealing with language that's "completely unacceptable" to parliamentary standards.

This selective enforcement isn't just inconsistent, it reveals Brownlee's fundamental bias as Speaker, a bias that has been exhibited throughout his tenure. As Speaker of the House, his role demands impartiality, yet time and again we witness him wielding the Speaker's power like a partisan cudgel, particularly against opposition MPs who dare challenge the government's moral failings.

Brownlee's authoritarian streak isn't new. Earlier this year, his handling of the Te Pāti Māori MPs who performed a haka in Parliament demonstrated the same heavy-handed approach. Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke and co-leaders Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi have been hit with sanctions for what was fundamentally an expression of cultural protest against legislation threatening Treaty rights.

Rather than recognising the profound cultural and constitutional significance of their protest, Brownlee chose punishment over understanding. The parallel is striking: whether it's Māori MPs defending indigenous rights or Swarbrick calling for international law enforcement, Brownlee consistently sides with unfair authoritarian silencing over justified democratic debate.

Most concerning is Brownlee's apparent disregard for parliamentary procedure itself. Standing Orders clearly state that following an MP's suspension for one sitting day, "the matter is at an end." Yet Brownlee has attempted to extend Swarbrick's punishment across an entire week, a ruling that fundamentally contradicts established parliamentary practice.

This isn't just procedural pedantry; it's the difference between rule of law and rule of the whims of a deluded right winger who doesn't understand the correct proceedures that govern his position, or even remember what he himself has said in the past.

In 2008, Gerry Brownlee accused Michael Cullen of not having a backbone. So how can he now say in all honesty that a Green's MP essentially saying the same thing is misconduct?

Here is Brownlee using the exact same language:

Does he agree with Trevor Mallard when he stated in the same speech: “any decent leader would have had the backbone to turn round, go the other way, and not greet Tame Iti,”; if so, does his trio of hongi with Tame Iti last week indicate that he is not a decent leader and has no backbone, because he did not take the strongly worded advice of his wise colleague?

 

When Speakers start making things up as they go along, particularly to silence opposition voices, we're witnessing the erosion of democratic norms that took centuries to establish.

This pattern of believing rules don't apply to him isn't new territory for Brownlee. In 2014, while serving as Transport Minister, he offered to resign after deliberately bypassing airport security in Christchurch, leading two staff members through an exit door to avoid security screening because he was apparently running late for a flight. The Civil Aviation Authority investigation revealed that the dishonest Brownlee had "plenty of time" to go through security correctly and still catch the flight, as a review of screening times that day showed the process took less than two minutes per passenger.

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised by this display of authoritarian overreach from a man whose ministerial career is marked by catastrophic failure. As Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery, Brownlee presided over one of the most bungled reconstruction efforts in New Zealand's history. The Christchurch rebuild became synonymous with delay, cost overruns, and bureaucratic incompetence under his watch. Communities waited years for basic infrastructure while Brownlee's ministry shuffled papers and shifted blame.

Then there's Brownlee's budget bungling, most notably his increases to the petrol excise duty and user charges because Bill English couldn't balance the budget properly. Not to mention Brownlee's press secretary, Nick Bryant, involvement in Cameron Slater's attack campaign against a public servant which resulted in death threats. Throughout his parliamentary career, Brownlee has demonstrated a particular talent for inflammatory and often racist rhetoric and campaigning when it suits him, yet now he demands standards of discourse he never applied to himself. His history of intemperate outbursts and partisan attacks sits poorly with his current position as supposed guardian of parliamentary decorum.

Swarbrick's comments weren't frivolous parliamentary point-scoring, they addressed New Zealand's immoral position regarding Israel's documented war crimes in Gaza. International courts have established clear evidence of violations of international humanitarian law, but our government appears to be paralysed by political calculation rather than moral clarity.

When an MP calls for basic adherence to international law and human rights obligations, the appropriate response isn't suspension, particularly in a country that prides itself for it's leadership on democratic principles. Instead, we have a Speaker who treats legitimate criticism of government inaction as grounds for silencing robust debate. This isn't protecting parliamentary standards; it's protecting the government from accountability.

Brownlee's ruling represents a dangerous precedent where Speakers can essentially manufacture extended punishments beyond established procedures. If this stands unchallenged, we're accepting that parliamentary rules can be bent to suit political convenience, a path that leads inevitably to the erosion of democratic safeguards. The real travesty isn't Swarbrick's call for moral courage; it's Brownlee's attempt to silence it through procedural authoritarianism.

Published by the Jackal



13 Aug 2025

Butter Should Be Cheaper in New Zealand

In New Zealand, the land of dairy abundance, the price of butter has become a bitter pill for Kiwis to swallow. A 500g block now costs an arm and a leg, a staggering 46.5% increase in the year to June 2025 and a jaw-dropping 120% higher than a decade ago. The stats are even worse when you compare the April 2024 with April 2025 prices, a 65.3% increase. For a nation that produces a third of the world’s trade in dairy products, this is nothing short of scandalous.

The National-led coalition, under Chris Luxon and Finance Minister Nicola Willis, has failed to address the cost of living crisis, with the price of butter in particular an affront to household budgets, instead offering hollow platitudes and tax tricks while the ability of voters to purchase basic necessities worsens. It’s time to demand real relief, starting with making butter affordable again.


On August 6, Stuff reported:

 
Global butter prices have dropped by 3.7%, this is what it means for us

The Global Dairy Trade (GDT) revealed that butter prices had dropped 3.8%, but what does that mean for shoppers?

Butter prices are up around 47% annually in the past year according to Stats NZ, with the average price of 500g sitting upwards of $8.

A tub of butter worth a whopping $18.29 was even spotted at an Auckland supermarket in early July.

Brad Olsen, Chief Executive and Principal Economist of Infometrics, said butter prices dropped or held steady during the last three GDT auctions, declining around 8.6% since the second half of June.

So if global prices have fallen, will we start to see cheaper butter?

Nowhere, not immediately at least.


New Zealand’s dairy industry, led by Fonterra, is a global powerhouse, yet ordinary Kiwis are paying international prices or higher for a staple produced in their own backyard. Export parity pricing means we’re hostage to global market rates, driven by demand from China and the Middle East, despite our five million dairy cows grazing local pastures and polluting local rivers. We're paying a premium to ship our own dairy products abroad.

This system prioritises Fonterra’s yearly NZ$22.82 billion revenue over the needs of New Zealanders struggling to afford the basics.

Nicola Willis, whose past ties to Fonterra as a senior manager raises questions, has become conspicuously silent on challenging this dishonest pricing model. Her refusal to consider a fairer two-tiered system, where domestic consumers pay less than export markets, smacks of loyalty to corporate interests over constituents, and flies in the face of their pre-election promises.

Willis’ claim that supermarkets, not Fonterra, set retail prices dodges the core issue: a lack of competition in the grocery sector, dominated by Foodstuffs and Woolworths, allows unchecked margins to inflate costs further. But all we get from the coalition of chaos is promises of doing something, not any real quantifiable action.

The National-led coalition’s broader economic mismanagement has only worsened the cost-of-living crisis. Luxon’s repetitive mantra, “people are doing it tough,” rings hollow when paired with policies that fail to deliver any tangible relief. Two-thirds of New Zealanders, according to ConsumerNZ, have low confidence in this government’s ability to tackle the affordability of basic necessities...and they're not wrong.

Removing GST from dairy, as some have suggested, was dismissed by Willis due to a supposed $3.3bn–$3.9bn revenue hit, an excuse that prioritises fiscal optics over struggling families, struggling families that will still spend any savings from cheaper butter on other basic necessities. In effect there's no net loss for the government in making butter prices cheaper for consumers, raising a valid question about whom exactly Nicola Willis serves?

The coalition’s tax cuts, touted as relief, have done nothing for low-income households facing skyrocketing prices for essentials like butter, which isn't just a spread but a cultural staple in Kiwi baking and cooking.

In a country that produces enough food to feed 40 million people, no one should be going hungry. Yet 500,000 New Zealanders are accessing food banks or food support services each month, indicating a complete failure by the current system to distribute the nations wealth equitably. Impoverished kids, people the Prime Minister views as "bottom feeders," cannot simply make a Marmite sandwich when their school lunches are inedible if there's no butter in the house, Mr Luxon.

Small businesses, like Kayes Bakery in Southland, are being crushed, forced to import cheaper Australian butter or raise prices, risking declining revenues and closure. This irony, importing butter into a dairy nation, highlights the absurdity of the status quo, and the absurdity of National's neoliberal policies that ensure many New Zealanders miss out.

Consumers are resorting to desperate measures, from driving hours to Costco to churning butter at home, reflecting a deep frustration with a system that feels entirely rigged.

Then there's the environmental cost of intensive dairy farming (polluted rivers, cancer causing aquifers and increased climate emissions) adding insult to injury, as Kiwis pay a premium while bearing the ecological fallout and costs.

The high butter prices aren't helping to pay for the cleanup. Instead, they're effectively subsidising the dairy industry’s massive profits and increased farmer payouts, which aren’t being spent in the struggling economy. Instead, much of these profits service debt, which only enriches foreign-owned banks.

Luxon’s rhetoric and Willis’s inaction are emblematic of a government out of touch with ordinary New Zealanders. We need bold action: regulate supermarket margins, explore domestic price controls, remove GST off of essential items and challenge Fonterra’s export-driven model that is turning New Zealand into a wasteland, all while providing dairy products only the wealthy and sorted can afford.

Willis’s Fonterra connections demand scrutiny...her reluctance to confront the dairy giant suggests a conflict of interest that undermines public trust. But the crux of the matter is that butter should be cheaper in New Zealand, not just for affordability but as a matter of fairness in a dairy-rich nation.

Published by the Jackal



10 Aug 2025

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.

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.

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.

Published by the Jackal