When Government does not want to listen to the people

Written By: - Date published: 10:56 am, March 29th, 2025 - 27 comments
Categories: Abuse of power, accountability, Brooke van Velden, Christopher Luxon, david seymour, democracy under attack, democratic participation, Parliament, patriarchy, Politics - Tags: , ,

When governments stop listening and talking to the people there is a big problem. We have this problem in Aotearoa (aka New Zealand). The latest example of this is the exclusion of thousands of submissions to the Treaty Principles Bill. We can be proud that we broke records for public engagement and participation in the democratic legislative process; this is how things ought to work, right?

Prime Minister-for-now Christopher Luxon wants to move on. Clearly, he is fed up with giving soon-to-be-Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour and his ACT Manifesto too much oxygen.

I think the select committee’s done the very best it can to make sure it hears the sentiments expressed on all sides of that debate, but you know – now is the time to move on… It’s up to the committee and it’s frankly up to Labour and the Greens as to whether they want to extend the process and play politics or whether they actually want to end the bill. And we’re ready to vote the bill down.

This is a self-inflicted head wound, Mr Luxon, and you know it. The people have spoken, or rather, they have submitted and you refuse them to be heard and documented because you screwed up big time. Tough – time for you to move on.

Speaking of turning a deaf ear to the people of Aotearoa, the epitome of non-engagement is the Deputy Leader of the ACT Party who is continuously ex-communicado as if she is on a permanent holiday in Te Puke. Has she run out of pink suits because her dry-cleaners went bust or has she gone terminally shy?

Dear members of the Coalition, stop ignoring us, the people of Aotearoa, some of who voted for you last time, and stop patronising us and treating us and our democracy with contempt. Thank you for your attention and consideration.

27 comments on “When Government does not want to listen to the people ”

  1. tc 1
    29 March 2025 at 12:02 pm

    Why risk being held accountable when you can have your shills that dominate our media pushing the atlas narrative.

    Reply
    • Incognito 1.1
      29 March 2025 at 12:33 pm

      Which is exactly why we need a strong and independent media that truly is the Fourth Estate that holds the other branches of government accountable and gives the people a voice of reason. When the media become partisan shills that are literally owned by the elite ruling class then the Fourth Estate ceases to exist with dire consequences the worst of all is both the fall in trust and increase in distrust.

      Reply
      • tc 1.1.1
        29 March 2025 at 1:08 pm

        Opportunity was there with the RNZ/TVNZ merger however inaction Jackson appeared clueless how to achieve that.

        Reply
        • Ad 1.1.1.1
          29 March 2025 at 2:53 pm

          TVNZ execs preferred to wage war against Jackson in a classic pretend-and-extend strategy straight out of coal industry.

          So they will be privatized and none but the over-70s will miss their professional burial.

          Reply
          • tc 1.1.1.1.1
            29 March 2025 at 3:11 pm

            So he got owned instead of driving through change. Bought knives to gun fight, very familiar story with labour.

            Reply
        • Patricia Bremner 1.1.1.2
          29 March 2025 at 4:13 pm

          Vested interests did not want it, and currently they have the upper hand.

          Reply
          • Incognito 1.1.1.2.1
            29 March 2025 at 6:54 pm

            Vested interests always have the upper hand because they wield [the] economic power. To maintain a balance, we elect governments to ensure fair and just distribution of resources, i.e., we hand over political power to act in our best interests, as citizens. The goals of neoliberal governments generally oppose these balancing influences on large powerful corporations at the expense of many citizens and SMEs alike.

            When a neoliberal government stops listening to (and talking with!) the people in favour of prioritising economic efficiency and growth it becomes a neo-authoritarian government and it no longer represents the interests of all people but only of a few/fewer (e.g., landlords).

            The Socialist/Labour answer/response to the weakening power if workers/employees has traditionally been unionisation and collective agreements, for example, but this is no longer sufficient and effective and, by default, excludes many citizens who are equally or worse affected.

            As Anne Salmond and George Monbiot have argued, the appropriate (and hopefully adequate) response is to strengthen the democratic framework and process.

            https://newsroom.co.nz/2025/03/24/anne-salmond-the-emperors-clothes/

            In my view, decentralising political power and encouraging more direct or participatory democracy would align well with the neoliberal principle of reducing central government control and giving people more economic and political control of and over their own lives. NB, the Coalition is not taking this approach and, in fact, resisting it, because the Troika is serving too many inconsistent and opposing agendas, none of which are truly serving the people of NZ.

            Reply
            • thinker 1.1.1.2.1.1
              30 March 2025 at 9:38 am

              IMHO, calling it a neo-authoritarian doesn't do it justice… It's just authoritarian.

              And to put that in context, here's wikipedias list of current authoritarian governments (guess they forgot about us)…

              "Countries commonly referred to as being authoritarian capitalist states include China since the economic reforms, Hungary under Viktor Orbán, Russia under Vladimir Putin, Chile under Augusto Pinochet, Peru under Alberto Fujimori, Singapore under Lee Kuan Yew, United States under Donald Trump[6] and Turkey under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan as well as military dictatorships during the Cold War which were backed by the United States."

              Reply
              • Incognito …
                30 March 2025 at 12:44 pm

                I agree that the distinction between authoritarian and neo-authoritarian can be hard to define and explain and is in many ways quite subtle. I refer to it as an excessive outcome of neoliberalism in which a select group/grouping wields inordinate power over [the] people in overt ‘pretty legal’ (i.e., without or with limited and/or diminishing authority) rather than explicit ways. It’s the embedding and formalising of neoliberal principles into the political and democratic framework. The best exhibit for this accusatory label is, in my opinion, the Regulatory Standards Bill, but there are (too) many more examples, unfortunately.

                Are you suggesting or implying that NZ fits in that list?

                Reply
                • thinker …
                  30 March 2025 at 1:00 pm

                  No criticism.

                  I just think, inch by inch, we are heading towards an authoritarian world.

                  At the moment, the only thing keeping places like China and Russia as moderate as they are is the existence of democracies.

                  As democracies become more authoritarian, the world moves closer to how places like India, Africa and the Confederate states of America used to be, only this time wealth and connections will be the difference and working class blacks, whites, what-have-you will be serfs for the top 10%.

                  Reply
                  • Incognito …
                    30 March 2025 at 1:41 pm

                    All good, I didn’t take it as criticism in a negative sense.

                    When democracies become more authoritarian, I think they cease to be democracies – an authoritarian democracy is an oxymoron.

                    I don’t think NZ is in danger of becoming an authoritarian state in the classic sense but the Coalition is definitely neo-authoritarian and another term will change this country beyond recognition similar to the major and radical changes of the 80s.

                    Reply
        • tWig 1.1.1.3
          30 March 2025 at 2:08 pm

          As s far as I am concerned, plurality of media sources provides a gamut of ideas far better than having a single State Broadcaster monolith. Keep RNZ and TVNZ separate, and you maintain multiple perspectives on NZ politics and society.

          Reply
          • Incognito 1.1.1.3.1
            30 March 2025 at 2:18 pm

            This Post is not about a state broadcaster as such, least of all about an RNZ/TVNZ merger, but about holding Government, i.e., the Executive branch, to account.

            Reply
  2. roblogic 2
    29 March 2025 at 5:59 pm

    Luxon is the TikTok PM

    DGAF about democracy

    His fscken hologram pal has caused a constitutional crisis and now he wants to stymie the most massive public outcry in our history

    He’s like King Canute, trying to command the tide to retreat

    Seymour’s piece of shit bill will burn, by hook or by crook

    Reply
    • thinker 2.1
      30 March 2025 at 9:48 am

      We of the left shouldn't want Luxon to be rolled, but rather to lead the CoC to defeat in 2026.

      Like the man with the radioactive teeth on the Trivago ad, "Luxons our secret tactic"

      Reply
      • Incognito 2.1.1
        30 March 2025 at 12:52 pm

        I disagree.

        In my opinion, Luxon keeps the Coalition together and gives the Coalition a good chance of getting re-elected in 2026. National would be stupid to replace him [with a ‘stronger’ leader] and upset the Coalition equilibrium if it aims to improve National’s numbers but lose the chance to re-from a coalition in 2026.

        Just about the best thing that the Opposition could hope for, and possibly lend a helping hand in, is to roll Luxon before GE-2026, IMO.

        Reply
        • weka 2.1.1.1
          30 March 2025 at 1:23 pm

          this. Because all it will take for NACTF to get another term is a big enough emergency for people to vote for safety/the incumbent. I think that's less likely if Labour presented a compelling alternative, but I'm not sure they will.

          Reply
        • thinker 2.1.1.2
          30 March 2025 at 9:58 pm

          But if you replace Luxon don't you give his replacement the opportunity for a honeymoon period?

          Reply
          • Incognito 2.1.1.2.1
            31 March 2025 at 9:23 am

            Yes, that might indeed happen and possibly lift the numbers for National a wee bit for a short period. It’ll depend on how they’d roll Luxon, or if he steps away in an ‘orderly’ fashion, and how they push themselves forward. Remember that the Leader of National is also the PM.

            Reply
          • roblogic 2.1.1.2.2
            2 April 2025 at 9:44 pm

            Possibly but Luxon is the only one with a smidgeon of charisma, and rolling him makes the Gov look unstable, and fractures in the coalition more likely

            Reply
  3. mickysavage 3
    29 March 2025 at 8:09 pm

    Dang I was going to write about this. And here we have a perfectly weighted and expressed view.

    Good writing Incog.

    Reply
    • Incognito 3.1
      29 March 2025 at 8:48 pm

      Thanks!

      Please add your thoughts in a Post too; this is an important issue and there’s a lot more to cover and say than I did in just over 300 words (one of my shortest Posts ever!).

      Unsurprisingly, No Right Turn picked up on it too: https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/03/this-is-not-democracy.html.

      Reply
    • Dennis Frank 3.2
      29 March 2025 at 8:50 pm

      As with NRT: https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2025/03/this-is-not-democracy.html

      I haven't commented simply because it was so obvious the entire thing was a sham from the start but I will credit Luxon/Seymour for getting 5% of kiwis to become political activists. I wonder if ditching all those unread submissions will piss them off enough to maintain their activism.

      Complaining that the govt can't afford to read them all seems contemptible. I hope the media maintains a focus on the govt's democracy sham – Labour & the Greens & TMP ought to demand a public apology from them for such abuse of democratic process!

      Reply
      • Incognito 3.2.1
        30 March 2025 at 12:19 pm

        You’re using the term ‘political activist’ way too loosely, IMO; engaging with the democratic process doesn’t make an ‘activist’ but a ‘good citizen’, IMHO.

        What good will an apology do if it’s not backed up with genuine meaningful change?

        Reply
  4. thinker 4
    30 March 2025 at 9:28 am

    Oddly, I guess there are no rules about this, because no-one could have envisaged a government calling for submissions and their submission then being ignored.

    But, I think the opposition should call for two things:

    First, that all submissions be included in a count of support/rejection and that statistic made public; and

    Second, for those submissions that didn't make the cut, the submitters receiving an email to say so.

    Reply
  5. tWig 5
    30 March 2025 at 2:23 pm

    The government have picked up on the UK approach to citizens: ignore them, muzzle your state broadcaster, and rely on the rw press also to ignore the events.

    In the UK, hundreds of thousands can turn up in London time after time to protest (7 of the top 8 protests of 500k-1Mi+ have happened since 2010), and those protests almost sink without a trace on the political and social landscape, due to media coverage, or lack of it; while the government laws to repress valid protest has made the UK drop in the list of open societies. In the UK, protesters can be pre-emptively be arrested as 52 were at Charles’s coronation.

    Note that following the 2022 Parliament protests the NZ Police recommend we bring police powers regarding protest laws in line with those of the UK, Canada and Australia, all of which are significantly more repressive that what we have currently. Pre-emptive arrests, good one.

    Reply
  6. Anthony 6
    1 April 2025 at 8:32 am

    Countries all over the world are becoming patriarchal. A classic example is the POTUS who believes the United Stated of America is his personal property. Now he wants more land and a gulf.

    Reply

Leave a Comment