Anne Salmond: The ‘war' on NZ values

Newsroom

6 days ago

For some time now, various environmental non-governmental organisations have been talking about a 'war on nature' in New Zealand.
Many initiatives highlight the gravity of what's at stake – the 'Fast Track' Act, the Regulatory Standards bill; proposed amendments to the Overseas Investment Act, the National Environmental Standards for Commercial Forestry, and National Directions under the Resource Management Act affecting forests, fresh water and soils; the radical rewriting of the Resource Management Act, the removal of regulatory powers from local councils and talk about the abolition of regional councils; and the defunding of environmental groups and initiatives.
The way these measures work is often deliberately opaque. Most New Zealanders do not realise that under the Regulatory Standards Bill, for instance, the oft-touted appeal to freedom for 'persons' under this bill is as much (or even more) about freedom for corporations as it is for individuals, since under the law, corporations are treated as legal 'persons.'
Under the tangled weave of amendments to the Overseas Investment Act, international corporations are given relatively unfettered access to exploit natural resources in New Zealand, whether in mining, forestry or building infrastructure, even in our most prized and/or vulnerable landscapes and seascapes.
These amendments work together with the 'Fast-track Approvals' Act, the Regulatory Standards Bill, proposed amendments to national directions under the Resource Management Act, the radical rewriting of the Resource Management Act and many other measures to reduce restraints on harmful extractive activities.
At the same time, many international corporations use the infrastructure paid for by taxpayers and ratepayers, pay little or no tax, expatriate their profits, exit when their activities cease to be profitable and too often leave behind costly and lasting damage (e.g. oil exploration, mining and industrial forestry) for ratepayers and taxpayers to pay for.
How is that supposed to generate long-term prosperity for New Zealand, and New Zealanders?
These and other new legislative and regulatory measures give local corporations similar, relatively unfettered rights, even if they inflict lasting damage on local communities and the environments they live in.
How does that square with the PM's launch last month of a new '100% Pure New Zealand' tourism campaign?
An insistence on economic calculation is a two-edged sword. If Fonterra, for instance, insists on charging international prices for butter and other produce to other New Zealanders, then by the same logic, other New Zealanders should have the right to charge Fonterra for the damage they cause to rivers, lakes and aquifers; the harm to citizens' health, safety and enjoyment; and their contributions to New Zealand's carbon and biodiversity global debts.
That's not happening, though. So wealth flows out of the country, or into the pockets of relatively limited number of local shareholders, directors and chief executives, while waterways, landscapes and the climate are wrecked, and other citizens experience a reduced quality of life and an increased cost of living.
In order to achieve these one-way flows of wealth, there's been a barrage of measures that diminish accountability to the electorate. Not surprisingly, some are now also talking about a 'war on democracy' in New Zealand.
This is epitomised by the way the proportional principle that underpins MMP has been undermined during coalition negotiations, with large numbers of measures with little or no electoral support signed off without public scrutiny, followed by a blitzkrieg of legislation aimed at exhausting parliamentary and public opposition.
This 'war on democracy' includes the overuse of urgency in Parliament to enact measures with as little debate as possible; the undue influence of lobby groups and party funders; the debasement of select committee processes; the silencing of public servants and attempts to harness them to ideological agendas instead of the public interest; the use of Parliamentary Service-employed political staff to attack individual critics; attacks on universities and the rule of law; the undermining of local government while centralising executive power; and to cap it all, unheralded and unwanted changes to electoral processes that are likely to disenfranchise large numbers of voters.
Many MPs seem to have forgotten who pays their salaries, and the job they've been hired to do in Parliament – i.e, to serve the interests of all New Zealanders, faithfully and well.
That applies to all MPs, whether in government or opposition. At times, the fight against a barrage of harmful legislation is left to voluntary organisations and individual citizens with limited resources, when that is the primary responsibility of opposition MPs. Democracy in New Zealand is staggering under these assaults.
This begs the question, does this add up to a 'war on New Zealand' and New Zealanders? Whose interests are being served by the current legislative agenda?
Unheralded amendments to the Pay Equity Act, passed under urgency and aimed at constraining the incomes of low paid (mostly) female workers; a host of measures that reduce incomes, increase precarity and worsen working conditions for many; the loss of access to affordable housing, reliable and affordable childcare and healthcare, and the ability to put food on the table; increases in unemployment, homelessness and child poverty; the failure to give citizens the assurance that if they are disabled, ill, out of work or hit by disaster through no fault of their own, they will be supported, and that they can afford a reasonable retirement – all raise questions about how New Zealand is being governed at present.
No wonder so many New Zealanders are leaving the country to look for a brighter future. There can be no worse indictment against any government.
These are heartland issues, I think, that cut across the political spectrum. A love of our country, its heritage and landscapes, a belief in democracy and a fair deal for all, and a desire for a good future for our children and grandchildren is not the preserve of any one political party in New Zealand.
A widespread sense of frustration and helplessness is not helped by the fragmentation of the debate, with those who want a healthy environment, a vibrant local democracy, a more equitable society and a Parliament that's dedicated to the public interest heading in slightly different directions.
The loss of journalistic depth and independence in public media, and the use of algorithms and bots in social media to alienate and divide people make matters worse. A 'war on reality,' truth and evidence uses misinformation, slurs and 'double speak' to confuse attempts at resistance that are already uncoordinated and siloed.
Yet at the same time, huge, spontaneous surges of opposition to the Treaty Principles Bill and the Regulatory Standards Bill, both provoking unprecedented numbers of submissions, suggest that many New Zealanders are eager to reclaim democracy in this country. Very few are willing to see fringe political parties, lobby groups and think tanks decide their future.
There are some brilliant younger leaders waiting in the wings, and some are already in Parliament. If some of them reached across the aisles and agreed to tackle these challenges together, that might make a difference. One thing's for sure – party politics is not working well for New Zealand at present.
Outside Parliament, there are also impressive younger leaders. What's needed is a banner under which Kiwis can come together to restore the accountability of the executive to Parliament, and to the people of this country.
Perhaps a non-partisan Civic Assembly would be useful, with leaders and attendees from the wider community coming together to address key challenges to democracy in New Zealand, and devise strategies to tackle them.
These challenges might include democracy and Parliament; democracy and the media; democracy and Te Tiriti; democracy and the environment; and democracy and inequality, for instance.
Or a series of such meetings, in different locations? Any other ideas? In any case, something must happen, and soon.
Democracy in this country is at a turning point. New Zealanders who value their democratic freedoms need to come together across different spheres of influence to talk, think and plan; step away from the abyss; and act to make a positive difference.