About that Speech from the Throne

About that Speech from the Throne

What a snooze fest! It was boringly predictable and even mentioned the strong and stable government again, as an affirmative note from the speechwriters to themselves.

The only two Ministers who get a specific mention are the Minister for Regulation (Seymour) and the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Peters). The speech is carefully crafted and edited to reflect the views and interests of the coalition partners and to counter any doubts over how much consensus or coherence there is among them – smug & cocky comes to mind.

Obviously, the speech reflects the political agenda and ideology of NACTF. It implicitly criticises the previous government’s policies and praises the new government’s plans, without acknowledging any potential drawbacks or challenges. It also ignores the views and interests of many others who may not agree with this government’s direction.

As expected, the speech leans heavily to the Right and focuses on economic growth, productivity, and efficiency as the main goals and measures of success for the country. It advocates for tax relief, spending cuts, deregulation, and private sector involvement in various sectors and services, all straight from the RW Manual. Suffice to say, it doesn’t address the possible social, environmental, or cultural impacts or trade-offs of these policies, nor the distributional effects or equity issues that may arise from them.

Where the speech really becomes unhinged is in & by its cultural bias. The speech starts & finishes with a token Māori greeting, but otherwise doesn’t acknowledge or respect the diversity and identity of New Zealand’s people and cultures. For example, it proposes to disestablish the Māori Health Authority, repeal the Three Waters legislation, and remove references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi from other legislation. It also implies that different rights and responsibilities based on race or ancestry are undesirable or divisive, rather than a recognition of historical and contemporary realities and aspirations.

The Māori Health Authority was created to address the health inequities and disparities faced by Māori, who have poorer health outcomes and lower life expectancy than non-Māori. The abolishment shows a lack of understanding and empathy for the historical and contemporary factors that affect Māori health, such as colonisation, discrimination, poverty, and trauma. It also undermines the principle of self-determination and autonomy, which are paramount in fully consented health care, which is enshrined in the Treaty of Waitangi.

The repeal of the Three Waters legislation, which aimed to improve the management and delivery of drinking water, wastewater, and storm water services, while ensuring the protection of Māori rights and interests in water, shows a disregard and disrespect for the cultural and spiritual significance of water for Māori, who view water as a taonga and a source of life. It also violates the principle of participation and consultation that is required by the Treaty of Waitangi, as well as the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), which New Zealand has endorsed under the previous National government.

In the speech, the new Government proposes to remove references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi from other legislation. This shows a denial and rejection of the relevance and importance of the Treaty of Waitangi as the constitutional foundation of New Zealand and the extensive supportive existing legal framework, and the basis for a fair and just relationship between Māori and the Crown. It also contradicts the principle of protection and redress that is expected by the Treaty of Waitangi, e.g., through the Waitangi Tribunal, as well as the international human rights standards and obligations to which New Zealand has committed.

The speech indicates that the Government will restrict the use of land for carbon sequestration, which may affect the economic and environmental opportunities for Māori landowners and iwi, who have significant interests in forestry and climate change mitigation.

Taken together, these proposals reflect a cultural bias that is rooted in a narrow and exclusive vision of NZ that prioritises the interests and values of the dominant group, and marginalises and silences the voices and perspectives of the diverse and multicultural communities that make up Aotearoa New Zealand. Such a cultural bias isn’t only unfair and unjust, but also harmful and dangerous, as it erodes the social cohesion and unity, and fuels resentment and conflict that could threaten stability and security. This is in direct contrast to the rhetoric elsewhere in & of the speech and illustrates that people read what they want to read, as is known full-well by the speechwriters.

This isn’t a time for cynicism but instead for laser-sharp criticism of this Government, and to pull them up at every occasion on transparency & accountability and pin them down at every opportunity on specific evidence & relevant facts – they will be weakest at the start of this term and this is the time to rattle them and shake their smugness confidence.

Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress