Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics

[wizard of Tauranga]

When are the many right wing commentators on here going to speak up about the fascism, disinformation, authoritarianism and corruption on the right around the world, and here?

Nothing we’re seen meets the criteria for fascism and authoritarianism as I’ve already posted.

There is no evidence of corruption, NZ is ranked one of the least corrupt countries in the world. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t make it corrupt.

And most of the disinformation comes from you as we frequently backed up with stats, data; articles and even university research which you still just ignore

 

[MaybeTop8]

Nothing we’re seen meets the criteria for fascism and authoritarianism as I’ve already posted.

There is no evidence of corruption, NZ is ranked one of the least corrupt countries in the world. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t make it corrupt.

And most of the disinformation comes from you as we frequently backed up with stats, data; articles and even university research which you still just ignore

I rest my case

 

[Bay39er]

Youre in India?

Yes
Jodphur at moment

 

[juju]

You've been pretty quiet about the rising threat from the violent atheist left.

New Zealand: Seven churches targeted in suspected arson spree

Four churches were burned while evidence suggests three more were targeted but did not catch fire.

bbc.com

How exactly have you ascertained a connection with left wing ideally and how exactly is it rising?

Are you frightened & concerned about it?

 

[juju]

When is @MaybeTop8 going to call out the radicalization by TPM , Labor and the far left? Straight from Mao's playbook.

Enlighten us - how are they radicalised straight from Mao's play book?


Talking about radicalised - You're showing more signs of being radicalised by Goggins and David Duke buddy,

 

[juju]

When are the many right wing commentators on here going to speak up about the fascism, disinformation, authoritarianism and corruption on the right around the world, and here?

They seem totally incapable of that sort of self reflection.

 

[miket12]

While I disagree with going after sports clubs and trade/professional associations, it's about time that businesses masquerading as "not-for-profits" and charities are made to pay tax. While I wouldn't want to see donations to charities taxed, profit making arms from their business arms of their organisations should be taxed. For example, why should a landlord who sets up a "charity" to provide "social housing" be free from paying tax.... especially when the intention is to dissolve the charity and sell the houses transferring the funds from the sale to themselves. Or churches making extensive un-taxed profits through leasehold properties (i.e. the extensive properties owned by the Anglican Church's Melanesian Trust in East Auckland). Destiny church makes a huge untaxed profit through their gym and "school fees" at their Wiri facility.

Inland Revenue sets sights on taxing 9000 clubs, societies and other not-for-profits​

Around 9000 clubs, societies, trade associations, professional and regulatory bodies and industry councils are in line to possibly be slapped with a tax bill.

Inland Revenue has changed its interpretation of the law, and now believes the subscriptions and levies members pay to some not-for-profit organisations should be taxed.

It flagged its new view in a just-released paper on the tax treatment of charities.

It said it would release its full draft guidance for feedback once any broader policy or law changes related to charities were ironed out.

Finance Minister Nicola Willis is keen to crack down on businesses masquerading as charities to reduce their tax bills, and is expected to unveil how she intends to do so at the Budget on May 22.

In the meantime, there’s a question mark over whether Inland Revenue’s new position on the tax treatment of transactions not-for-profits have with their members will become operative.

Independent tax specialist Geof Nightingale believed it wouldn’t, and Inland Revenue would want subscriptions and levies to continue to be treated as non-taxable membership transactions.

He feared its updated position would see smaller community organisations, rather than the bigger mutuals, stung by larger tax bills and compliance costs.

If Inland Revenue adopted its new draft guidance, not-for-profits that operate under the common law would be stung, whereas ones that distribute profits on member transactions back to members as rebates, wouldn’t be.

Nightingale believed many bigger not-for-profits would’ve organised themselves in such a way that they would be in the latter camp.

Nonetheless, with Inland Revenue estimating 9000 organisations would be impacted if it adopted its new guidance, Nightingale said this would be a big deal.

He worried the admin could be more burdensome for many of the clubs, etc than the tax itself.

Inland Revenue didn’t put a figure on the amount of additional tax revenue it believed its new position would generate.

It said it wanted to keep compliance costs low for small not-for-profits and for the tax rules to be clear.

Nightingale suspected Inland Revenue might have come up with new guidance after an issue emerged from its audit or investigation team, or someone externally couldn’t figure out how to apply the law.

Members of the public have until March 31 to provide feedback on the broader charities tax review under way, which is delaying the release of Inland Revenue’s new draft guidance.

Commenting on the broader review, Willis said she wanted to support a strong charity and not-for-profit sector, while ensuring there were high levels of fairness and integrity in New Zealand’s tax rules.

“New Zealand not-for-profits make a significant contribution to the community, and the Government provides tax relief for not-for-profit organisations that meet certain requirements,” she said.

“It’s important the public has confidence they are getting value for money from these tax concessions.”

IRD sets sights on taxing 9000 clubs, societies and other not-for-profits

Tax expert worried about administrative nightmare.

www.nzherald.co.nz

 

[FormerlyJamesW]

Tell the dead dairy owner to stop being ridiculous and that you don’t need to defend yourself.

I like the idea of removing red tape for self defence.

The reality is a little different.

Since this article I've had a chat to a few of the diary owners that I see on a weekly basis. None of them were moved by this as none of them would be prepared to confront a theif, due to the uncertainty of them being armed.

They're just regular dudes who want to go to work, without putting their lives on the line for the sake of a box of shapes.

However, I also believe that this law is more aimed at allowing businesses that can afford security guards (presumably trained proffesionals) to be more effective at loss prevention.

I'm pro this, purely in this context, as this decreases the lack of consequences for theft, by accommodating more points of risk for the action.

It's well known that theft is predominantly opportunistic, so taking away opportunities for theft makes sense to me.

Food for thought, I guess.

 

[MrFrankWhite]

Yes
Jodphur at moment

How are you finding it?

 

[Inruin]

Principals' Federation says 'time has now come' to revert to previous school lunches arrangement​

February 27, 2025 •09:31am

The Principals’ Federation (NZPF) has called for a return to the previous school lunches system with local funding, saying the new cost-saving system pushed by ACT leader David Seymour has resulted in a “huge increase in wastage”.

In a letter to Seymour, who is associate education minister, NZPF president Leanne Otene said the “global company” brought in to provide the lunches “has not delivered on your expectations, nor on ours”.

It was nearly halfway through the first term, and the school lunch system was not improving with time, Otene said.

Increasingly teachers and support staff were being distracted from classroom teaching time to find alternative lunches for large numbers of students, she said.

The federation had previously said it would call on Seymour to reverse the decision that had brought in the new supplier and revert to the local delivery option that had been used before.

“That time has now come,” Otene said.

A vegetarian lunch delivered to Papatoetoe High School on a Friday in February contained a few chickpeas.Erin Johnson

“NZPF now asks you to cancel the current contract and fund schools to deliver school lunches locally.”

In late January, Seymour acknowledged there would be “teething problems” with the new system.

Where lunches had cost between $5.97 and $8.90 to supply, Seymour has attempted to slash the cost to $3 where possible (some internal models receive an extra $1), saying it would still be a “like for like” experience for students.

The efficiency drive meant 140 delivery suppliers like Nourish Ōraka were impacted, according to Seymour’s estimations in a September Cabinet paper.

Currently, 69 suppliers provide school lunches in addition to schools where lunches are made on site. Of those, the biggest are Compass Group NZ and Libelle Group, who form part of The School Lunch Collective.

The collective’s bulk meals are prepared and cooked in Hamilton and distributed frozen to 22 kitchens around New Zealand to be thawed, heated and delivered.

The letter the federation sent to the minister.
- Stuff

Stuff

www.stuff.co.nz

 

[Inruin]

I wonder if there is a cost to breaking any contract with the main providers of these school lunches.

Would probably be wise to see out the remainder of the term and reintroduce the original lunch providers from term two IMO

 

[MrFrankWhite]

Enlighten us - how are they radicalised straight from Mao's play book?


Talking about radicalised - You're showing more signs of being radicalised by Goggins and David Duke buddy,

got emmmmm

 

[juju]

got emmmmm

David Goggin's would be so disappointed in you right now.

 

[MrFrankWhite]

I wonder if there is a cost to breaking any contract with the main providers of these school lunches.

Would probably be wise to see out the remainder of the term and reintroduce the original lunch providers from term two IMO

Meh claim they are in breach via tortious negligence

 

[Inruin]

got emmmmm

 

[Inruin]

Sovereign citizens challenge NZ courts with fringe legal claims
RNZ
27 Feb, 2025 09:05 AM

Sovereign citizens believe they are exempt from the laws of New Zealand. But that doesn’t stop the law from coming after them.

Another hiccup for New Zealand’s court processes – and this one’s a strange one.

In early February, a couple in Raglan was fined $20,000 for unconsented works to their house, following a long court case in which they claimed to be exempt from council rules.

A few days later, at the other end of the country, a man accused of stealing equipment from a rescue helicopter appeared in the Dunedin District Court, arguing that the judge did not have jurisdiction over him. The judge told him: “I’m starting to think you might be wasting my time.”

It is an increasingly common story of so-called sovereign citizens – or “SovCits” – whose legal arguments are based on a fringe belief system that says they are not subject to New Zealand laws.

“It’s just a waste of time for the most part, because if you think about it, a court or a government agency, if they get a request, it doesn’t really matter how absurd it is, they still have to deal with it,” says Charlie Mitchell, a journalist at The Press who started covering conspiracy theories during the Covid-19 pandemic.

“I don’t think we’ve reached the point where this is having a material impact on the courts necessarily, but it is clear that these sorts of arguments are more common.”

The phrase “sovereign citizen” refers to people who are anti-government and believe that they are not bound by the laws of the country where they live.

“I think probably the easiest way to understand it is that they are underpinned by this concept called pseudo-law, and pseudo-law is a parallel legal system that sort of vaguely resembles the real legal system but it doesn’t have the legal validity,” says Mitchell.

“So pseudo-law can sound plausible to the lay person, it will cite statutes and it will reference the common law and things like that, but as soon as it comes into contact with the real legal system, it dissolves.”

“A common thread you’ll find in the SovCit world is citation of these kind of obscure or arcane legal theories that really just do not have any relevance in modern society.”

Over the past few years, these stories have been popping up in the headlines.

In Thames, a case involving a woolshed converted into a house without consent is before the courts; a man cited the Bible and Shakespeare in his efforts to have himself and his five children declared dead; and another man driving without registration or a licence claimed in court that as a “living man” he was free from New Zealand’s legal system.

Many of these stories involve petty infringements. But some are more serious.

“I think it’s fair to say that most of this is just rhetoric online, but you can never discount that this rhetoric could make its way into the real world,” says Mitchell.

And we do have examples of that happening in New Zealand.

“I’ve reported previously on a sovereign citizen who snuck into a council building and assaulted a staff member, seemingly over Covid policies.”

Another stark example was a year ago, when former Nelson mayor Rachel Reese came home to find a stranger in her house. He “launched” himself at her, yelling “why are you in my house, this is my house – it’s been decreed this is my house”. He was citing the Magna Carta – a common tactic of sovereign citizens.

The movement has crossover with other far-right movements, including Q-Anon. Byron Clark, an independent researcher looking into conspiracy theories and the far-right, says the movement seemed to pick up steam during the pandemic.

“I noticed sovereign citizen ideas really being adopted by more people during the pandemic as people were looking for a way to try to opt out of the public health measures that were being introduced.

“Also people were spending a lot more time online, going down some conspiracy theory rabbit holes, and these different ideas were cross-pollinating with each other.”

Clark wrote a book called Fear: New Zealand’s hostile underworld of extremists, which included a chapter about the sovereign citizen movement.

“We have one sovereign citizen going through the courts at the moment, Richard Sivell, who is charged with threatening to kill former Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and also with sharing objectionable material, particularly the livestream footage of the Christchurch mosque shooting in 2019,” says Clark.

“He has been using sovereign citizen arguments in court. So he is somebody who not just engaged in paper terrorism, but making these more violent threats and sharing what is classified as terrorist material.”

In the United States, the FBI has recognised sovereign citizens as a domestic terror threat for 15 years. The New South Wales police have done the same for about a decade, and here, a 2021 report from the police and intelligence community said that sovereign citizens present a “realistically possibility” of committing extremist violence.

But navigating the line between petty “paper terrorism” and a threat to security can be complicated.

“I don’t think we should necessarily think of them all as the same group. I think for some of them they might not even self-identify as sovereign citizens yet,” says Clark.

“They’ll adopt some of these ideas like ‘well here’s the legal loophole that you need to exploit to not register your dog’ or whatever, and that’s quite different than people who have decided they are going to be completely independent from the state and they have found a pseudo-legal framework that will allow them to do that.

“I do think we should be aware though that these two different groups and sort of everyone in between are likely to be communicating with each other in the same online spaces and that’s something we should be aware of, the potential of people who are deeper into this world to radicalise those who are perhaps just starting to get interested or just looking for legal loopholes and trying this out.”

The Detail is a daily news podcast produced for RNZ by Newsroom and is published on NZ Herald with permission. Click on this link to subscribe to the podcast.

- RNZ

The growing number of ‘sovereign citizens’ clogging up courts

A man in Dunedin argued a judge lacked jurisdiction over his theft case.

www.nzherald.co.nz

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

I like the idea of removing red tape for self defence.

The reality is a little different.

Since this article I've had a chat to a few of the diary owners that I see on a weekly basis. None of them were moved by this as none of them would be prepared to confront a theif, due to the uncertainty of them being armed.

They're just regular dudes who want to go to work, without putting their lives on the line for the sake of a box of shapes.

However, I also believe that this law is more aimed at allowing businesses that can afford security guards (presumably trained proffesionals) to be more effective at loss prevention.

I'm pro this, purely in this context, as this decreases the lack of consequences for theft, by accommodating more points of risk for the action.

It's well known that theft is predominantly opportunistic, so taking away opportunities for theft makes sense to me.

Food for thought, I guess.

As I understand it this idea came from a grassroots small business dairy association.

Soon they will all have baseball bats behind the counter. Whack a few teenagers and the youth crime will go back to how it used to be in the good old days when there were consequences.

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

Sovereign citizens challenge NZ courts with fringe legal claims
RNZ
27 Feb, 2025 09:05 AM

Sovereign citizens believe they are exempt from the laws of New Zealand. But that doesn’t stop the law from coming after them.

Another hiccup for New Zealand’s court processes – and this one’s a strange one.

In early February, a couple in Raglan was fined $20,000 for unconsented works to their house, following a long court case in which they claimed to be exempt from council rules.

A few days later, at the other end of the country, a man accused of stealing equipment from a rescue helicopter appeared in the Dunedin District Court, arguing that the judge did not have jurisdiction over him. The judge told him: “I’m starting to think you might be wasting my time.”

It is an increasingly common story of so-called sovereign citizens – or “SovCits” – whose legal arguments are based on a fringe belief system that says they are not subject to New Zealand laws.

“It’s just a waste of time for the most part, because if you think about it, a court or a government agency, if they get a request, it doesn’t really matter how absurd it is, they still have to deal with it,” says Charlie Mitchell, a journalist at The Press who started covering conspiracy theories during the Covid-19 pandemic.

“I don’t think we’ve reached the point where this is having a material impact on the courts necessarily, but it is clear that these sorts of arguments are more common.”

The phrase “sovereign citizen” refers to people who are anti-government and believe that they are not bound by the laws of the country where they live.

“I think probably the easiest way to understand it is that they are underpinned by this concept called pseudo-law, and pseudo-law is a parallel legal system that sort of vaguely resembles the real legal system but it doesn’t have the legal validity,” says Mitchell.

“So pseudo-law can sound plausible to the lay person, it will cite statutes and it will reference the common law and things like that, but as soon as it comes into contact with the real legal system, it dissolves.”

“A common thread you’ll find in the SovCit world is citation of these kind of obscure or arcane legal theories that really just do not have any relevance in modern society.”

Over the past few years, these stories have been popping up in the headlines.

In Thames, a case involving a woolshed converted into a house without consent is before the courts; a man cited the Bible and Shakespeare in his efforts to have himself and his five children declared dead; and another man driving without registration or a licence claimed in court that as a “living man” he was free from New Zealand’s legal system.

Many of these stories involve petty infringements. But some are more serious.

“I think it’s fair to say that most of this is just rhetoric online, but you can never discount that this rhetoric could make its way into the real world,” says Mitchell.

And we do have examples of that happening in New Zealand.

“I’ve reported previously on a sovereign citizen who snuck into a council building and assaulted a staff member, seemingly over Covid policies.”

Another stark example was a year ago, when former Nelson mayor Rachel Reese came home to find a stranger in her house. He “launched” himself at her, yelling “why are you in my house, this is my house – it’s been decreed this is my house”. He was citing the Magna Carta – a common tactic of sovereign citizens.

The movement has crossover with other far-right movements, including Q-Anon. Byron Clark, an independent researcher looking into conspiracy theories and the far-right, says the movement seemed to pick up steam during the pandemic.

“I noticed sovereign citizen ideas really being adopted by more people during the pandemic as people were looking for a way to try to opt out of the public health measures that were being introduced.

“Also people were spending a lot more time online, going down some conspiracy theory rabbit holes, and these different ideas were cross-pollinating with each other.”

Clark wrote a book called Fear: New Zealand’s hostile underworld of extremists, which included a chapter about the sovereign citizen movement.

“We have one sovereign citizen going through the courts at the moment, Richard Sivell, who is charged with threatening to kill former Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and also with sharing objectionable material, particularly the livestream footage of the Christchurch mosque shooting in 2019,” says Clark.

“He has been using sovereign citizen arguments in court. So he is somebody who not just engaged in paper terrorism, but making these more violent threats and sharing what is classified as terrorist material.”

In the United States, the FBI has recognised sovereign citizens as a domestic terror threat for 15 years. The New South Wales police have done the same for about a decade, and here, a 2021 report from the police and intelligence community said that sovereign citizens present a “realistically possibility” of committing extremist violence.

But navigating the line between petty “paper terrorism” and a threat to security can be complicated.

“I don’t think we should necessarily think of them all as the same group. I think for some of them they might not even self-identify as sovereign citizens yet,” says Clark.

“They’ll adopt some of these ideas like ‘well here’s the legal loophole that you need to exploit to not register your dog’ or whatever, and that’s quite different than people who have decided they are going to be completely independent from the state and they have found a pseudo-legal framework that will allow them to do that.

“I do think we should be aware though that these two different groups and sort of everyone in between are likely to be communicating with each other in the same online spaces and that’s something we should be aware of, the potential of people who are deeper into this world to radicalise those who are perhaps just starting to get interested or just looking for legal loopholes and trying this out.”

The Detail is a daily news podcast produced for RNZ by Newsroom and is published on NZ Herald with permission. Click on this link to subscribe to the podcast.

- RNZ

The growing number of ‘sovereign citizens’ clogging up courts

A man in Dunedin argued a judge lacked jurisdiction over his theft case.

www.nzherald.co.nz

As society becomes more complex and regimented, while not enabling people who follow the rules to get ahead, we will have more and more people turning to this sort of stuff.

Things like making drivers licensing impossible to pass without 100 hours of driving lessons so people don’t bother. labour recognised this making driving tests free.

We have excessive dog licensing fees; excessive safety standards for houses and cars. Ok when you can afford it but those that can’t just turn their back on the rules.

Best practice and making the public pay for it works well until people can’t afford it and turn against the system.

 

[MrFrankWhite]

As society becomes more complex and regimented, while not enabling people who follow the rules to get ahead, we will have more and more people turning to this sort of stuff.

Things like making drivers licensing impossible to pass without 100 hours of driving lessons so people don’t bother. labour recognised this making driving tests free.

We have excessive dog licensing fees; excessive safety standards for houses and cars. Ok when you can afford it but those that can’t just turn their back on the rules.

Agree with most apart from driving. Getting a license should be free but difficult asf.

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

Agree with most apart from driving. Getting a license should be free but difficult asf.

All good if you have someone to teach you or you can afford driving lessons. 100+ hours driving experience before your restricted is unaffordable if you have to pay through driving lessons and have no one to to teach you.

There was a massive increase in unlicensed drivers with budgeting service saying learning to drive in poor families was unaffordable. Free tests helps but it’s the lessons that’s the killer.

Failing good drivers that have gone without to learn on pedantic stuff like currently happens just turns people away. Our tests don’t reward driving skill it’s based on how prepared you are at knowing all their technical issues they are looking for.

Back in the day we just had to drive around the block and learned with experience.

Rather have committed drivers that are helped financially to pass than people that give up and are a menace in the road.