Latest news with #CabinetManual
Scoop
4 days ago
- Politics
- Scoop
Rights Aotearoa: Seymour Weaponise Office To Harass Academics, Luxon Must Act
In a letter sent to the Prime Minister today, Rights Aotearoa condemns Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour for weaponising his office to launch a vicious online harassment campaign against academics. This is not free speech; it is a state-sanctioned pile-on designed to silence dissent and intimidate experts, representing a dangerous breach of the Cabinet Manual's code of conduct. Prime Minister Luxon must stop making excuses for his ministers, enforce his own government's rules, and immediately sanction his deputy to prove that no one is above accountability.
Scoop
4 days ago
- Politics
- Scoop
SociaLink Opposes Regulatory Standards Bill
SociaLink Tūhono Pāpori, the peak body for the community and social sector in the Western Bay of Plenty, has submitted strong opposition to the proposed Regulatory Standards Bill, urging Parliament to reject the Bill in full. 'This Bill is unnecessary, undermines democracy, erodes the Crown's obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi and prioritises individuals and property over the public good,' says Liz Davies, Chief Executive of SociaLink. The Bill proposes introducing a set of principles to evaluate all new and existing legislation, with a heavy focus on protecting individual liberties and property rights. However, SociaLink argues this would undermine public good legislation and exclude core values central to Aotearoa's identity — particularly the omission of any reference to Te Tiriti o Waitangi. 'There are already strong democratic systems in place to evaluate legislation,' she adds. 'Rather than overlaying an ideologically driven framework, we should be improving mechanisms like select committees, public consultation, and Treaty-based processes that reflect the diverse values of our society.' 'If for no other reason, the huge amount of work — and therefore money and time — this Bill would create to require all new and existing legislation to be reviewed is enough reason to reject the Bill,' Davies continues. 'Creating so much unnecessary work would seem to contradict the intention of the Minister of Regulation to encourage greater efficiency.' Davies also expressed concern over comments made by the Deputy Prime Minister, who has been publicly disparaging widely respected academics — including a New Zealander of the Year — because of differing views. 'I would expect any Minister of the Crown that disagrees with someone else's opinions to respond respectfully and professionally, as required by the Cabinet Manual,' she said. 'The Bill fails to achieve what it purports to achieve and does not protect communities, collective rights and the environment. This Bill should not proceed,' concludes Davies.
1News
4 days ago
- Politics
- 1News
David Seymour's posts raise questions about what's OK to say online
Deputy Prime Minister and ACT Party leader David Seymour says he is being "playful" and having "fun" with his "Victim of the Day" social media posts, targeting opponents of his Regulatory Standards Bill. Massey University lecturer Kevin Veale takes a look at when a joke isn't a joke. But the posts – which have singled out academics and MPs who have criticised or made select committee submissions against the bill, accusing them of suffering from "Regulatory Standards Derangement Syndrome" – have now led to at least two official complaints to Cabinet. Wellington City mayor Tory Whanau has alleged they amounted to "online harassment and intimidation" against academics and were in breach of the Cabinet Manual rules for ministers. According to the manual, ministers should behave in a way that upholds, and is seen to uphold, the highest ethical and behavioural standards. This includes exercising a professional approach and good judgement in their interactions with the public, staff, and officials, and in all their communications, personal and professional. Academic Anne Salmond, one of those targeted by the posts, has also alleged Seymour breached the behaviour standards set out by the manual. According to Salmond: ADVERTISEMENT This "Victim of the Day" campaign does not match this description. It is unethical, unprofessional and potentially dangerous to those targeted. Debate is fine, online incitements are not. When is a joke not a joke? Seymour's claim he was being "playful" while using his platform to criticise individuals follows a pattern of targeting critics while deflecting criticism of his own behaviour. For example, in 2022 Seymour demanded an apology from Māori Party co-leader Rawiri Waititi, after Waititi earlier joked about poisoning Seymour with karaka berries. At the time, Seymour said: "I'm genuinely concerned that the next step is that some slightly more radical person doesn't think it's a joke." Te Pāti Māori co-leaders Rawiri Waititi and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer. (Source: 1News) But the same year, Seymour defended Tauranga by-election candidate Cameron Luxton's joke that the city's commission chair Anne Tolley was like Marie Antoinette and should be beheaded. ADVERTISEMENT In 2023, Seymour joked about abolishing the Ministry of Pacific Peoples: In my fantasy, we'd send a guy called Guy Fawkes in there and it'd be all over, but we'll probably have to have a more formal approach than that. Māori researcher and advocate Tina Ngata criticised Seymour's argument that he was joking: Calling it a joke does not make it any less white-supremacist. What it does is point to the fact that in David Seymour's mind, violence against Pacific peoples is so normalised, that he can make a joke out of it […] but he's not any person is he? He is a politician, a leader of a political party, with a significant platform and the means and opportunities to advance that normalised violence into policy and legislation. Designed to silence An analysis of Seymour's recent social media posts by researcher Sanjana Hattotuwa at the Disinformation Project has argued they have the potential to lead to online harassment, saying they are: "Designed to silence opposition to the controversial Regulatory Standards Bill whilst maintaining plausible deniability about the resulting harassment, harms and hate." The "Victims of the Day" posts about Anne Salmond and former Green leader Metiria Turei were textbook examples of "technology-facilitated gender-based violence and online misogyny", Hattotuwa argued. And the use of the term "derangement" framed academic criticism as a mental disorder – undermining expertise. As my own research shows, online harassment and violent rhetoric can raise the chances of real-world violence. ADVERTISEMENT Since the early 2000s, researchers have used the term "stochastic terrorism" to describe a way of indirectly threatening people. Nobody is specifically told "harm these people", so the person putting them at risk has plausible deniability. Seymour is already aware of these dynamics, as shown by his demand for an apology from Waititi over the karaka berry poisoning "joke". Free speech for who? Seymour and ACT have long presented themselves as champions of free speech: Freedom of expression is one of the most important values our society has. We can only solve our most pressing problems in an open society in which free thought and open enquiry are encouraged. By going after critics of the Regulatory Standards Bill, Seymour may only be ridiculing speech he does not like. But he has taken things further in the past. In 2023, he criticised poet Tusiata Avia for her poem "Savage Coloniser Pantoum", which Seymour said was racist and would incite racially motivated violence. He made demands that the government withdraw NZ$107,280 in taxpayer money from the 2023 Auckland Arts Festival in response. ADVERTISEMENT ACT list MP Todd Stephenson also threatened to remove Creative NZ funding after Avia received a Prime Minister's Award for Literary Achievement. Avia said she received death threats after ACT's criticism of her work. ACT MP Todd Stephenson. (Source: Q and A) The more serious purpose of saying something contentious is "just a joke" is to portray those who disagree as humourless and not deserving to be taken seriously. ACT's "Victim of the Day" campaign does something similar in attempting to discredit serious critics of the Regulatory Standards Bill by mocking them. But in the end, we have to be alert to the potential political double standard: harmless jokes for me, but not for you. Dangerous threats from you, but not from me. Author: Kevin Veale is a Senior Lecturer in Media Studies, part of the Digital Cultures Laboratory in the School of Humanities, Media, and Creative Communication at Massey University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. ADVERTISEMENT
1News
5 days ago
- Politics
- 1News
Seymour defends posts accusing opponents of 'derangement syndrome'
The Deputy Prime Minister is rubbishing claims that social media posts he has made about opponents of the Regulatory Standards Bill are a breach of the Cabinet Manual. In recent days, David Seymour made a series of social media posts singling out prominent opponents of the Bill, and accusing them of suffering from "Regulatory Standards Derangement Syndrome". Wellington's mayor, Tory Whanau, accused Seymour of setting a "dangerous precedent" for how dissenting voices were treated, and laid a formal complaint with the Prime Minister over the posts. The Regulatory Standards Bill aimed to ensure regulatory decisions were "based on principles of good law-making and economic efficiency", according to Seymour, who had introduced the Bill as Minister of Regulation. Opponents criticised it as advancing corporate interests and an attack on nature and Te Tiriti. ADVERTISEMENT Seymour's targets included academics such as Dame Anne Salmond, Dr George Laking, and Metiria Turei, as well as Labour MP Willie Jackson. Dame Anne Salmond was referred to as the "victim of the day" by Seymour. (Source: Newsroom published an opinion column by Dame Anne, in which she called the bill a "dangerous piece of legislation" and said its principles were "largely inspired by libertarian ideals". In the posts, Seymour called the figures the "Victim of the Day" and set out why he believed their arguments against the Bill were wrong. In Dame Anne's case, Seymour said her "real objection seems to be that the Bill sets limits on arbitrary power". "That it dares to elevate individual rights, due process, and cost-benefit analysis over ideology. That's not a weakness, it's the point." He said Turei was "spinning conspiracies" and that Jackson had a "wild imagination". ADVERTISEMENT The posts prompted Whanau to write to the Prime Minister, accusing Seymour of orchestrating a "campaign of online harassment and intimidation." Whanau's letter said the posts were a "blatant attempt to stifle academic opinion and any dissenting opinion", and a breach of Sections 2.53 and 2.56 of the Cabinet Manual. Wellington Mayor Tory Whanau. (Source: 1News) Section 2.53 called on ministers to "conduct themselves in a manner appropriate to the office", while Section 2.56 said ministers were expected to behave in a way that upheld the highest ethical and behavioural standards. "This includes exercising a professional approach and good judgement in their interactions with the public, staff, and officials, and in all their communications, personal and professional," it says. Whanau, who at this stage has not been the subject of one of Seymour's posts, called on Christopher Luxon to investigate the matter. "For the Deputy Prime Minister to lead this online harassment campaign is quite concerning, as such actions could incite behaviour that spills into real-world violence. ADVERTISEMENT "This is irresponsible and a clear breach of public trust. We expect our leaders to keep us safe, not throw us into harm's way," she wrote. On Monday, standing in for Luxon at the post-Cabinet press conference, Seymour dismissed the criticism and accused the opponents of the bill of making incorrect statements. "There's no such breach. If people want to go out and make completely incorrect statements, then I'm going to get a bit playful and have some fun with them." He argued that pointing out there was a "curious syndrome that is causing people to say untrue things" was different to outright calling them deranged. "I could say that their incorrect statements are deliberate, and therefore they're lying. I could say they're incapable of understanding what they're saying. "I'm not saying that, I'm being a bit playful saying the only reason I can think of for all these totally factually incorrect statements about the Regulatory Standards Bill is that there's some sort of sinister syndrome out there." Labour leader Chris Hipkins said Seymour's behaviour was "inconsistent" with what was expected of MPs, particularly Ministers of the Crown. ADVERTISEMENT Labour leader Chris Hipkins. (Source: "When you're putting photos of people up with the derogatory sorts of claims that David Seymour is, that is online harassment and I don't think it's acceptable," he said. Hipkins said singling out members of the public was different to the cut and thrust of political debate between politicians. "Attacking other politicians is one thing. Attacking members of the public is something entirely different." In a follow-up column, also on Newsroom, Dame Anne said Seymour's campaign was "lame, even laughable" but also an abuse of high office, and she would formally lodge a complaint with the Cabinet Office. The Regulatory Standards Bill passed its first reading in May. Submissions on the Bill closed on Monday. ADVERTISEMENT The Finance and Expenditure Committee will consider the submissions, with its final report due by November 22nd. Labour has pledged to repeal the Regulatory Standards Bill in its first 100 days in office, should it return to government next year.
Scoop
5 days ago
- Politics
- Scoop
David Seymour Defends Social Media Posts Accusing Regulatory Standards Opponents Of 'Derangement Syndrome'
The Deputy Prime Minister is rubbishing claims that social media posts he has made about opponents of the Regulatory Standards Bill are a breach of the Cabinet Manual. In recent days, David Seymour made a series of social media posts singling out prominent opponents of the Bill, and accusing them of suffering from "Regulatory Standards Derangement Syndrome." Wellington's mayor, Tory Whanau, accused Seymour of setting a "dangerous precedent" for how dissenting voices were treated, and laid a formal complaint with the Prime Minister over the posts. The Regulatory Standards Bill aimed to ensure regulatory decisions were "based on principles of good law-making and economic efficiency," according to Seymour, who had introduced the Bill as Minister of Regulation. Opponents criticised it as advancing corporate interests, and an attack on nature and Te Tiriti. Seymour's targets included academics such as Dame Anne Salmond, Dr George Laking, and Metiria Turei, as well as Labour MP Willie Jackson. Newsroom published an opinion column by Dame Anne, in which she called the bill a "dangerous piece of legislation" and said its principles were "largely inspired by libertarian ideals." In the posts, Seymour called the figures the "Victim of the Day" and set out why he believed their arguments against the Bill were wrong. In Dame Anne's case, Seymour said her "real objection seems to be that the Bill sets limits on arbitrary power. That it dares to elevate individual rights, due process, and cost-benefit analysis over ideology. That's not a weakness, it's the point." He said Turei was "spinning conspiracies" and that Jackson had a "wild imagination." The posts prompted Whanau to write to the Prime Minister, accusing Seymour of orchestrating a "campaign of online harassment and intimidation." Whanau's letter said the posts were a "blatant attempt to stifle academic opinion and any dissenting opinion," and a breach of Sections 2.53 and 2.56 of the Cabinet Manual. Section 2.53 called on ministers to "conduct themselves in a manner appropriate to the office," while Section 2.56 said ministers were expected to behave in a way that upheld the highest ethical and behavioural standards. "This includes exercising a professional approach and good judgement in their interactions with the public, staff, and officials, and in all their communications, personal and professional," it says. Whanau, who at this stage has not been the subject of one of Seymour's posts, called on Christopher Luxon to investigate the matter. "For the Deputy Prime Minister to lead this online harassment campaign is quite concerning, as such actions could incite behaviour that spills into real-world violence. "This is irresponsible and a clear breach of public trust. We expect our leaders to keep us safe, not throw us into harm's way," she wrote. On Monday, standing in for Luxon at the post-Cabinet press conference, Seymour dismissed the criticism, and accused the opponents of the bill of making incorrect statements. "There's no such breach. If people want to go out and make completely incorrect statements, then I'm going to get a bit playful and have some fun with them." He argued that pointing out there was a "curious syndrome that is causing people to say untrue things" was different to outright calling them deranged. "I could say that their incorrect statements are deliberate, and therefore they're lying. I could say they're incapable of understanding what they're saying. "I'm not saying that, I'm being a bit playful saying the only reason I can think of for all these totally factually incorrect statements about the Regulatory Standards Bill is that there's some sort of sinister syndrome out there." Labour leader Chris Hipkins said Seymour's behaviour was "inconsistent" with what was expected of MPs, particularly Ministers of the Crown. "When you're putting photos of people up with the derogatory sorts of claims that David Seymour is, that is online harassment and I don't think it's acceptable," he said. Hipkins said singling out members of the public was different to the cut and thrust of political debate between politicians. "Attacking other politicians is one thing. Attacking members of the public is something entirely different." In a follow-up column, also on Newsroom, Dame Anne said Seymour's campaign was "lame, even laughable" but also an abuse of high office, and she would formally lodge a complaint with the Cabinet Office. The Regulatory Standards Bill passed its first reading in May. Submissions on the Bill closed on Monday. The Finance and Expenditure Committee will consider the submissions, with its final report due by November 22nd. Labour has pledged to repeal the Regulatory Standards Bill in its first 100 days in office, should it return to government next year.
