Former American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) President Nadine Strossen’s tour of New Zealand with us was a smash hit! We had over 20 meetings with media, Government officials, politicians, and most importantly our members and supporters, getting the word out that free speech is more important than ever.

Nadine is a compelling speaker and lead powerful discussions on free speech and why hate must be beaten with counter-speech and not censorship. Hosting someone of her caliber in New Zealand and having these conversations is exactly what we need to move the dial on free speech, and ensure a strong culture of free speech in the long term.

We’ll be in touch again soon with more details on how her tour went, but in the meantime check out some of the other free speech issues we’ve been working on.

Pushing back against mob violence: our work since Posie Parker’s “Let Women Speak” event

Its been a few weeks now since the open mob violence against Posie Parker at her “Let Women Speak” event at Albert Park. The utter lack of a police presence left Parker and her supporters as victims of assault for their views, with their speech rights not trampled on by the Government, but by their fellow Kiwis. Since then our public letter calling on the Police Minister and Police Commissioner to acknowledge their mismanagement received over 23,000 signatures! We will be delivering the public letter to them  shortly. But in the meantime we have been working in other ways to make sure such open political violence doesn’t occur again:

• After the event, we wrote to the Police Commissioner and Police Minister separately from our public letter expressing our deep concern over the events that transpired without any police presence, and seeking to meet with them.
• The Police Commissioner accepted our request, and we had the opportunity to meet with him in person, seeking answers as to the lack of a police presence and impressing upon him the need for the police to prevent mob violence from overriding Kiwis’ free speech rights.
• We’ve made a complaint to the Independent Police Conduct Authority, ensuring that the speech rights of Posie Parker, and the need to protect them, are included in whatever investigations are carried out about the events at Albert Park.
• We’ve filed several OIAs on various aspects of Parker’s trip to New Zealand, particularly around the decision making of key agencies regarding her trip and security.
• We’re also approaching the Ombudsman concerning her alleged treatment by Immigration New Zealand when she arrived at Auckland Airport and was apparently held for over 2 hours of questioning. 

Such open violence and intimidation to suppress a person’s right to speak, which was all caught on film, must not be allowed to happen again.

The state doesn’t only have a duty to respect speech rights, but when they are threatened by mob violence it is the state’s duty to step in to protect them. The Free Speech Union will continue to work to ensure that duty is upheld.

Te Pukenga’s Orwellian Style Guide

A few weeks ago we let you know about the latest instance of New Zealand’s academic freedom facing a ‘death by 1000 cuts’, this time at Te Pukenga, the new nationwide Polytech, through the CEO’s instruction to staff to ensure political neutrality ahead of this year’s election, and with its ‘style guide’ limiting what language Te Pukenga staff are expected to use. We’ve received a copy of this style guide through the OIA and let me tell you- its egregious.

From telling staff to say “machine made” rather than “man-made”, to requiring staff not to use “Treaty of Waitangi”, but “Te Tiriti”, Te Pukenga appears to be keeping an iron grip over the kind of language its staff may employ. In speaking, the kind of language that one chooses to use is often as important to the speaker as the message itself. When someone dictates the language that may be used in a debate, one is effectively deciding its outcome. The teaching staff of Te Pukenga are explicitly given academic freedom in the Education and Training Act, with protections along the same lines as New Zealand’s universities, and such a style guide, even if Te Pukenga claims it is not enforced, still acts in creating a “chilling effect” on the language its staff feel comfortable and free to use.

I hate to get into free speech stereotypes, but the worst part of this ‘style guide’ struck me as downright Orwellian. The guide has a section titled ‘Plain English synonyms’ instructing staff on using simpler language. Such examples include the use of “build” instead of “construct”, “wish” instead of “desire”, or “find” instead of “locate”. I can’t tell you for sure to what esteem Te Pukenga holds its staff or students in, but if they’re trying to ‘dumb down’ the language used on campus in such a way, it can’t be particularly high.

For any institution to think it can have such a tight grip on what its staff should be saying is egregious, but when the institution is one of higher learning, its downright disgraceful.

AUT research centre publishes fourth annual ‘Trust in media’ report

The media, as the “fourth estate”, plays an important role in our democracy, reporting on important events and providing accountability for various organisations and individuals, especially those in the political sphere. This important role is why we believe so strongly in freedom of the press. Media shouldn’t have to contend with Government influence on editorial matters. For this role to be fully played out, it is crucial that the public are able to trust those providing such reporting.

Auckland University of Technology’s research centre for Journalism, Media and Democracy have released their fourth Trust in News in Aotearoa New Zealand report on Kiwis’ trust in our media. Unsurprisingly, trust in our media continues to decline, down to 42% from 53% in 2020.

For there to be trust in our media, it must be free of Government control, and be seen as such. A public media merger that would have increased Ministerial influence, and a Public Interest Journalism fund that includes editorial requirements on such contentious issues as the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi certainly does not create a perception of free media.

The report also highlighted the increase in threats against journalists. For press freedom to be upheld, Journalists must be free not only from Government influence, but also free to speak safely. If we expect to be safe in holding our own views, we must ensure others are kept safe to hold theirs.

Stop Co-Governance events: Supreme Court’s affirmation of the ‘thugs’ veto’ reaching its inevitable conclusion

When the Supreme Court released its judgement on our first case, Moncrieff-Spittle v Regional Facilities Auckland Ltd, allowing for RFAL to cancel the booking of two controversial speakers on spurious ‘health and safety’ grounds, we predicted it would lead to other invocations of the ‘thugs’ veto’, whereby any group who opposes an event can threaten violent protest and get it cancelled. The other affirmations of the right to free speech by the Supreme Court have helped us win other cases, but its glaring hole is now reaching its inevitable conclusion.

The ‘Stop Co-Governance’ tour, whose right to use public facilities we defended earlier this year in Northland, are having their other events cancelled left, right, and center on trumped-up ‘health and safety’ grounds, owing to the previous events where Police were present to keep the peace between the tour and counter-protestors. The Police presence at the previous events meant they were able to occur safely, but despite this various councils and council-run organisations are choosing to deny Kiwis the ability to meet and discuss a significant, contemporary, debate.

These cancellations are not only denying the “Stop Co-Governance” group a voice, but the voice of counter-protestors, too. The activist group Aotearoa Liberation League had booked the same venue as ‘Stop Co-Governance’, to hold an event to peacefully protest and speak in favour of co-governance. They too had their booking denied, and so any constructive discussion that night was denied by Auckland Council.

With issues of such constitutional and democratic importance as co-governance and the future of Crown-Māori relations, it is vitally important that New Zealand are able to have free, open conversations. The cowardice in our local councils is once again stifling such important debates.

The Free Speech Union is pushing back where we can, but with Supreme Court precedent that affirms the ‘thugs’ veto’, it is an uphill battle.

Unfortunately the “thugs’ veto” is rapidly becoming the standard tactic of Leftists in Jacindaland, which has shades of the Nazis’ behaviour in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s: