(Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)

Grant Robertson is a complete twat. He’s spent nine years complaining about National’s economic management, constantly issuing press releases criticising rising public debt.

Then, yesterday, he decided that we actually have low public debt:

Low public debt and a strong labour market will buffer the economy from current turmoil, Finance Minister Grant Robertson claims.

Treasury officials were recalled from their day off on Waitangi Day to brief Robertson on the global turmoil, but indicated they believed the economy was resilient.

Robertson told RNZ on Wednesday that while there may be some turmoil on the sharemarket this week, that he was confident the wider economy would cope.

​”When you look at the fundamentals of global economic growth, and indeed of the New Zealand economy, I’m reasonably reassured by that,” Robertson said.

Essentially the low level of public debt is a really important part of it,” Robertson said.

Just two months ago in parliament Robbo was saying:

This from a man who said that under National debt had “skyrocketed”. Barely two months ago he told Parliament he “will not be lectured” by his predecessor Steven Joyce about debt levels.

“If there is anyone in this House who needs to take responsibility for debt levels, it’s that member,” Robertson said of Joyce, which presumably now means he is in awe of his arch-rival.

And he said this on 23 May 2016:

Long term the economy should be able to generate solid operating surpluses on a consistent basis, and certainly that should be our goal. But there will be times when it is not reached, when the need is greater to give people some hope and opportunity and make the long term investments in our future well-being. The same applies to reducing debt. We are fortunate, in part due to the excellent work of Dr Michael Cullen, that we survived the Global Financial Crisis with relatively low levels of government debt. The failure of the Government to put much of a dent into that debt is concerning, even bearing in mind the Canterbury earthquakes.

And on 23 May 2015:

We’ve got a government that will not be paying down any debt until 2019, and the consequence of that – no money for the Super Fund, either.

And on 22 November 2016 he said:

Don’t believe the hype – debt has skyrocketed under National

The reckless dangling of tax cuts by the National Government is all the more irresponsible when it is put alongside the failure to pay down debt or put money aside for future superannuation costs, says Labour’s Finance Spokesperson Grant Robertson.

And:

“Debt has actually risen by more than $50 billion on National’s watch. In Parliament on the 11th of October, Bill English acknowledged in response to a question from me that they have not paid down any net debt in dollar terms.

And on 14 October 2015 he said:

First surplus a blip on radar screen of debt

Bill English’s first surplus is just one black drop in a sea of red, with New Zealanders still paying over $10m a day in interest payments, Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson says.

“The Finance Minister has finally found a surplus needle in his haystack of debt. Despite promising a ‘significant’ surplus, it’s just $414m. That’s less than 0.2 per cent of GDP – a rounding error, not a surplus.

“Gross debt is more than $86 billion – the highest since Rob Muldoon stalked the corridors of the power. Interest payments alone are now $13 million a day and rise to $15m a day in three years.

And on 1 March 2016 he said:

NZ’s $60b debt big concern for possible recession

New warnings of a global recession places the spotlight on New Zealand’s $67b net debt, leaving the economy in a much worse state than before the 2008 downturn when net debt was zero, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson.

“Despite claiming the figleaf of fiscal responsibility the latest government accounts show that National has racked up over $67b in net debt. With Citigroup warning of a global recession that level of debt will be an albatross around the neck of the government if the downturn occurs.

“Bill English likes to pretend New Zealand will be insulated from any international downturn, saying we came through the previous one better than other countries. That’s because Michael Cullen had reduced net debt to zero – for the primary purpose of preparing New Zealand for a ‘rainy day’.

“After seven years of National, the finances are in a much worse state to deal with any recession.

As you can see, Grant Robertson is someone who says one thing in opposition and once he is the Finance Minister it turns out that the apparently parlous state of the country’s finances is actually not bad at all.

There are plenty more examples; those are just the first few I found when searching.

What amazes me is how the media fail to hold blatant rubbish like this to account. What is even worse is that the muppets in National aren’t holding the fool to account either.

Labour has been claiming they’ve achieved a pile of things in their 100 days.

Lloyd Burr has busted those claims:

An email arrived into my inbox a few days ago with the subject line “We did this!”. It was from Labour, about its 100-day plan.

It was a nice line. From ‘Let’s do this!’ to ‘We did this!’. Clever. Hats off to the spin doctor who came up with it.

But there’s a problem.

The email claimed the plan had been completed. And it mostly has. Mostly.

But the subject line didn’t read ‘We mostly did this!’. It shouted from the rooftop how Labour had proven itself in government.

It talked about how it had done what it had promised to do. It used words like “delivered”, “achieved” and “commitment”.

That’s called spin. It has massaged the truth. Massaged its promises. Embellished what has really happened in 100 days.

Spin is a beltway term for lies.

And that annoys me. Not just from a journalistic point of view, but because this Labour-led Government has promised to be open, honest and transparent.

Snort. They waited the full 20 days for my OIA to DPMC, then kicked it to Winston’s office. That is hardly open, honest, or transparent.

So let me clear things up.

What Labour Has Not Achieved

1. “Ban overseas speculators from buying existing houses”

It hasn’t banned them yet. It has just introduced a Bill that will ban them, but that Bill is months off from becoming law.

2. “Introduce legislation to make medicinal cannabis available for people with terminal illnesses or in chronic pain”

It has introduced changes to the law regarding medicinal cannabis, but those changes are minor and conservative. It won’t make products available to terminally ill and chronically ill patients. It will just prevent them from being prosecuted. The Prime Minister admits she would’ve liked more changes – but New Zealand First’s conservatism meant she couldn’t change the law properly.

3. “Hold a Clean Waters Summit on cleaning up our rivers and lakes”

This never happened. Winston Peters vetoed it.

4. “Set the zero carbon emissions goal and begin setting up the independent Climate Commission”

The target has not been set and it hasn’t begun setting up the independent Climate Commission. All that’s been announced is a period of public consultation on what the target should be and how the commission would be structured.

Booking meetings, consultations and forming committees isn’t achieving anything. Unless of course your benchmark is just having “conversations”.

The idea of a 100-day plan is completely arbitrary. It’s a line in the sand that has no true significance.

It’s just a marketing tool by Labour to make it look like it is working hard to quickly implement the changes it promised to Kiwis.

Now that the deadline has passed and Labour’s claimed its victory, it’s fair to say it’s no longer a new Government.

Its ministers have got their feet under the desk and their teeth into stuff. They have their offices sorted and changes to roll out.

My hope is that there are no more XXX-day SPAM Plans that see rushed changes rolled out to reach a fake deadline for the sake of claiming to be progressive.

Still not a single tree planted, not a single affordable house built…can’t wait for the excuses to start flowing on those two promises.

Lloyd Burr will be getting the pointy finger next.

Here they come again.

Jacinda Ardern is certainly doing wonders for the trans-Tasman relationship. Her government got the ball rolling with Chris Hipkins sparking off a diplomatic row. Now Jacinda’s virtue-signalling antics are undoing all the hard work Australia put in to end the flood of illegal immigrants that saw boats arriving daily in Australia by 2013.

When the Abbott government put its policy of boat turnbacks and zero tolerance for illegal arrivals into action, the boats quickly stopped. The overflowing refugee camps were gradually drained. Except for a handful of holdouts who refused to leave Manus Island.

Enter Jacinda.

New Zealand asylum offer fuels smuggle trade

New Zealand’s offer to resettle 150 asylum-seekers from Manus ­Island late last year is believed to have prompted an escalation in people-­smuggling operations, with intelligence officials claiming at least three boats had recently sought to test the shift in policy and use the country as a “back door” to Australia.

Like any good lefty, Ardern appeared more concerned with trumpeting her “compassionate” credentials than with the likely consequences of her soapboxing.

A source said there was ­evidence that the apparent rise in people-smuggling activity marketing New Zealand had followed the Ardern government’s offer to take asylum-seekers from Australian offshore detention centres.

At least one boat has been intercepted in Australian waters, and more people-smuggling ventures headed this way have been busted in Sri Lanka.

Ardern was specifically warned that her virtue-signalling would act as a pull-factor for boats. The people-smugglers are alert to any sign of wavering, and have flagged Ardern’s interference as a sign that Australia’s tough stance is wavering.

“it is clear that they are using publicity around New Zealand’s ­resettlement offer to market their services to vulnerable people in Sri Lanka and elsewhere”

The target for these people is ultimately Australia. The smuggling boats are unlikely to ever reach New Zealand. Even those who do, as experience has shown, will use New Zealand as a back-door to Australia.

So, while tilted-head “compassion” might play well to Ardern’s base, the reality is that others – especially Australia – are going to have to deal with the consequences.

Credit-Luke

My readers picked it months ago, Jacinda Ardern is pregnant.

The offical announcement was this morning.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has announced that she is pregnant, with the baby due in June.

Ms Ardern made the announcement on her Instagram feed this morning.

She said her partner Clarke Gayford would be a “stay at home” dad.

“I think it’s fair to say that this will be a wee one that a village will raise, but we couldn’t be more excited. I know there will be lots of questions, and we’ll answer all of them (I can assure you we have a plan all ready to go!)”

In a statement, Ms Ardern confirmed deputy prime minister Winston Peters will take on the role of Acting Prime Minister for six weeks after the baby is born.

“Mr Peters and I have a great relationship, and I know that together we’ll make this period work. I will make arrangements for appropriate Ministers to act in my other portfolios over the six weeks I am away from Parliament.

“At the end of my leave I will resume all Prime Ministerial duties.”

Ms Ardern said she intended to be fully contactable and available throughout the six-week period.

Ms Ardern said they first knew of the pregancy in mid-October, “but as many couples do in the early stages, we kept it to ourselves”.

She said the news was a “fantastic surprise”.

This is where the secret 33 page document becomes really important.

Be interesting to see what happens in July.

Meanwhile get ready for media gushing, lots of Woman’s Day features and general over the top silliness from all and sundry.

A note from Blog owner:

Bad look for the country, unmarried having a baby (bastard child to be correct) and leader of the country.

[…] while golliwogs were once regarded simply as much-loved and slightly mischievous dolls, they are now portrayed by activists as symbols of abuse that they say humiliate and intimidate black people.

That’s also the view being taken by the Human Rights Commission, which has become a key driver of political correctness in New Zealand. In response to the fracas over the golliwogs in the Waiheke store, a spokeswoman claimed that they are “racist caricatures that dehumanise black people”. She said that New Zealanders who think selling golliwogs is OK “need a wake-up call”.

In spite of what she says, the sale or public display of golliwogs in New Zealand is not against the law. While the Human Rights Act does outlaw ‘inciting racial disharmony’, the threshold is high and selling golliwogs – or golly dolls, as some are now calling them – does not breach the threshold.

The NZ Human Rights Commission, in fact, wades into every single artificially created outrage incident of raaaaaacism. They pronounced sentence on the Waiheke store, they decried the restaurant with the funny menu and…

they have highlighted the latest ” racism” incident of a man flying a confederate flag at Elvis in the park.

The golliwog debacle serves to demonstrate just how politicised and sensitive society has become. Nowadays it appears that everyone feels they have to be extremely careful about what they say or do, lest they offend the sensitivities of others, and are victimised by activists promoting a cause.

To most people, the prospect of attracting unwanted attention from the media or sharp-tongued radicals is so intimidating that what should be a fundamental right to free speech is now severely compromised.

That is why it is so important that we stand up in support of the targets of the thought police. The Waiheke store has sold out of Golliwogs thanks to an outpouring of support and orders coming in from overseas and the restaurant has been packed with supporters. Hopefully, the Elvis on the park guy who has been flying the Confederate flag for years will also stand his ground and will gain not lose business because of it. It gives me hope that New Zealand will not as easily go down the Social Justice Bully route where loud-mouthed activists on social media can create a storm in a tea cup and ruin people’s livelihoods.

This was a point made by this week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator, Dr Don Brash in a speech to the Liberty Conference late last year. The former leader of the National Party said that in spite of free speech being protected in law, there is now a massive intolerance towards free expression in New Zealand:

“In New Zealand, freedom of speech is enshrined as one of our fundamental rights in the Bill of Rights Act of 1990.  Section 14 of that law, headed ‘Freedom of expression’, notes that ‘everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form’.

“But despite that, there are insidious pressures to discourage the expression of certain opinions…

“You dare not suggest that the Enlightenment civilization brought to New Zealand by the early British settlers was significantly more advanced than the Maori culture of the early nineteenth century, even though early nineteenth century Maori had no written language, had not yet invented the wheel, and were still practising cannibalism.

“It is regarded as racist to suggest that all New Zealanders should have equal political rights, despite that being the clear meaning of Article III of the Treaty of Waitangi and the only basis for a peaceful society in the long-term.”

Dr Brash is right. There are now many issues that people will speak freely about with their family or close friends, but are now regarded as taboo with a wider audience.

It’s even got to the point where some people are afraid to sign their names and addresses on petition forms – if they deem them to be too controversial – just in case there are ‘repercussions’.

This is presently an issue for those living in areas where their local councils have voted unilaterally to create Maori wards.[…]

It now appears that in some local government areas, where the pro-Maori ward lobby has become very aggressive, many who oppose Maori wards feel intimidated and are now too afraid to sign the petitions for a referendum for fear of reprisal.

[…] The decision to introduce Maori wards in each of the areas is now being challenged, with petitions underway to collect signatures from 5 percent of local electors to force the councils to hold referenda on the issue.

The Auckland Council also voted in favour of Maori wards – with nine councillors plus the Mayor in favour and five opposed (six were absent) – but only if the Government changes the law so they don’t lose any existing seats. In other words, they want a Maori ward as long as none of the sitting members loses their seat!

[…] Unfortunately, there are some in our community who want to remove the public’s right of veto over the creation of Maori wards from the Electoral Act.

Leading this attack on local body democracy is the former Mayor of New Plymouth, Andrew Judd […]  rather than accepting that local democracy is about letting people have their say, and respecting their views, he arrogantly called his constituents ‘racists’, stated that half of all local authority councillors should be Maori, and demanded a law change to remove the right of locals to hold a poll.

[..] With Labour and the Greens now in Government, there remains an on-going concern that they might be planning another attempt to try to change the law, despite most New Zealanders not wanting to be defined by race – not even those of Maori descent.

The only people wanting to divide the country by race are a small but vocal minority of tribal activists and their supporters, who will stop at nothing less than Maori sovereignty at all levels of government. It is this racist agenda that we all need to stand against.[…]

Chris Hipkins

The Labour party opposes charter schools. One of the reasons (a false one) is that they are allowed to recruit teachers who aren’t registered.

Their rationale is that teacher registration keeps kids safe.

I’m so glad teacher registration is keeping kids safe…oh wait:

Drunk drivers, fraudsters and child pornography offenders are among 627 New Zealand teachers who received a criminal conviction in the past five years.

Only 26 of those teachers were struck off the register between 2013 and 2015 while none were struck off in the past two years.

Right there is the outrage. Only 26 teachers were struck off despite 627 of them sporting criminal convictions. Can anyone smell a bad case of patch protection?

In total, the Education Council (EC) received 2794 complaints, mandatory reports and notifications of convictions over the five-year period. 

However, the EC said it was unable to provide statistics on how many of the 127,426 registered teachers across the country had a criminal conviction on their record, they could only provide the details of those who had received a conviction in the past five years.

The EC added that the only convictions that were required to be reported were those which had a possible penalty of three months or more imprisonment.

Yeah, teacher registration is keeping kids nice and safe. If we accept that 5% of the population are complete ratbags, then it stands to reason that at least 5% of teachers are likewise ratbags.  That means that 6371 ratbags are sliding under the radar despite teacher registration.

In the past few months several teachers made news headlines for criminal behaviour such as former school principal Paul Roger Herrick who sexually assaulted his pupils and was released on parole in January, and a former Waikato teacher who had sex with a student in his classroom after school that was sent to jail for two years.

From January to November 2017, 104 teachers received convictions. There were 114 in 2016, 107 in 2015, 136 in 2014 and 166 in 2013.

The criminal convictions range from drug and alcohol offences to fraud, violence and sex offences. The majority were for alcohol and drugs (409), followed by dishonesty (46) and violence (31).

Drug, alcohol and violence convictions should result in automatic disqualification.

Minister of Education Chris Hipkins said teaching was the largest profession in New Zealand and the proportion of deregistrations was very small.

“That said, teaching is a special job because it involves interaction with and influence on young children, and so the profession needs to take a safety-first approach, depending on the type and severity of conviction,” he said.

Hipkins said getting the balance right between teachers’ rights and children’s safety was important to maintain the public’s confidence.

He thinks that is great – that deregistrations are very few. I think that is alarming.

Like everyone else teachers had a right to expect natural justice and a degree of privacy, he said.

Hipkins said whether a teacher without a clean record should be allowed to teach depended on the type and severity of the offence.

Crim hugging to maintain union numbers.

Auckland University professor of Education Peter O’Connor said the notion of self-disclosure was a tricky one.

“It is an honesty system, with any honesty system there can be issues, but there is no evidence to suggest this honesty system doesn’t work,” he said.

O’Connor said teachers deserved a level of privacy and the disclosure of a criminal offence should be the employer’s decision.

“If a criminal conviction relates to a teacher’s personal life, it is an issue between the employee and the employer – it is not the business of parents,” he said.

“Do we then start making a teacher’s sexual orientation or political beliefs a public issue?” he said.

Oh, I am sure that the SJWs will make sexual orientation and political beliefs a public issue. Let’s put that to the test. I wonder how loud the outcry would be if I decided to take up teaching. But can anyone else see the problem with running an “honesty system” when dealing with people with criminal convictions?

As for the claim that there is no evidence the honesty system doesn’t work: really? Only 26 teachers were struck off despite 627 convictions for, amongst other things, dishonesty offences, sexual offences and drug and alcohol offences.

NZEI Te Riu Roa president Lynda Stuart said there are very strict protocols in place in schools and services to ensure child safety and the quality of teachers’ professional practice.

“In some cases, the EC has deemed name suppression is appropriate to assist a teacher’s rehabilitation. We have confidence that the Education Council protocols ensure that the safety of children is paramount in the small number of cases where this occurs.”

The NZEI probably insists the union get involved to save the various ratbags.

These statistics aren’t encouraging.

-Fairfax

via 3 news

The new government has promised to plant a billion new trees. Not a single one has yet been planted and already the promises look doomed.

The Government could be about to fell its own tree-planting plans.

Sources say Treasury has drafted legislation that it will put to Cabinet at the end of the month which will bring forestry cutting rights into the Overseas Investment Act framework.

That would mean foreign purchasers would have to be vetted by the Overseas Investment Office before they bought the right to forest trees in New Zealand. 

Forestry consultant Pete Clark said it would be unfair and have a significant impact on New Zealand’s forestry sector, which is reliant on foreign investment.

“It’s like saying if you want to invest in cows, you need to go through the Overseas Investment Office. Forests are a crop on the land. I would have thought Kiwis would be concerned about the land itself, which is already clearly captured.”

He estimated $15 billion to $20b of forests were already in foreign ownership. “If foreigners are restricted from purchasing tree crops across the board, who’s going to own that?”

New Zealanders’ capital would be better spent on more high-growth, productive investments, he said.

Foreign ownership was needed in some sectors of the economy, and it made sense for that to be areas such as forestry that were good for the environment and non-threatening to New Zealand businesses.

A restriction on cutting rights purchases would create a problem with the liquidity of New Zealanders’ forest investments, including iwi. They would not be able to sell their investments for the same return.

“If you restrict the sale of forestry rights, you raise the hurdle rate for investing in the asset,” Clark said.

The government has a goal to plant one billion trees over the next 10 years. Forests on Department of Conservation land will act as carbon sinks to boost anti-climate change efforts. Trees are also to be planted on Maori land, with an emphasis on creating jobs.

Don Carson, spokesman for the Forest Owners Association, said any move to make it more difficult to make money from felling trees would be inconsistent with that goal.

“It would require capital to be invested in planting these trees from a domestic source that would be better used elsewhere,” he said. “It’s a good idea to put more trees in. If people overseas are prepared to help us do that, that’s worthwhile.”

Yet again it looks like the left hand doesn’t know what the far left hand is doing. I can’t wait for parliament to start and questions to be asked about precisely how many trees have been planted under this policy, and how many affordable homes have been built.

-Fairfax

Kelvin Davis crusaded on behalf of Kiwi ratbags in Australia…while in opposition.

Since being made a minister his grandstanding has stopped and now he is caught out with his actions not reflecting his opposition rhetoric.

A pressure group is slamming the New Zealand Government, saying it has abandoned Kiwi-born detainees who face being deported from Australia.

Pressure group Iwi N Aus co-ordinator Filipa Payne spoke to RadioLIVE on Tuesday about the heartbreak and despair as they face being separated from their Australian families.

She demands to know where the New Zealand voice is for our citizens – and calls out the lack of action from Labour’s deputy leader Kelvin Davis.

Ms Payne says there are approximately 175 people currently being detained in “horrific” conditions, which has included Kiwis being “put in cages”. Many of them, she says, haven’t done anything to deserve it.

“I’ve personally spoken to people who’ve been in detention centres for graffiti. This person I spoke to had an intellectual handicap,” she says.

“I’ve spoken to people who’ve been in detention centres for various amount of crimes. I’ve also spoken to people and visited people who’ve been in detention centres in Australia for no crimes.”

Ms Payne says that when Labour’s Corrections Minister Kelvin Davis was in Opposition he was vocal in criticising the situation. However since he’s gained power he’s gone quiet.

“What he’s doing now, on the other hand, I myself have been disappointed,” she says.

“I’ve lived and hoped that he would stand up and back what he’s said in front of people – but at the moment he’s actually absent. He’s quiet, he’s in the shadows.”

Once deported back here, away from their jobs, families and support networks the deportees are reduced to “living in cars”. It’s their children that suffer the most, Ms Payne says, separated from their fathers.

She’s calling for urgent action to protect the rights of New Zealand citizens.

“The current situation at the moment is we have people sitting in detention centres who are New Zealand citizens who are not being represented in any political statement by our Government,” she argues.

“So I’d like to ask the New Zealand Government to stand by what they stood up for, for the last two years in Opposition and actually back and support the hope and the promises that they gave to people.”

Mr Davis has been contacted for comment.

He was available for comment all the time on this issue when in opposition…now he is nowhere to be seen.

Another minister finding out that opposition is easy compared to the reality of government.

Too bad, he made his bed, now he can lie in it. This is what happens when you promote criminal friendly policies.

-Newshub

Why is this a surprise?

Stupid Jacinda Ardern said that capitalism was a failure, and yet here is capitalism working perfectly as intended.

The country’s student union is blasting Wellington landlords for allegedly taking advantage of desperate students.

The Union of Students’ Association has had reports of rents being hiked in Wellington after the Government boosted the living costs allowance.

“We have heard reports particularly here in Wellington that some landlords are taking the opportunity to increase rents because of that $50 increase,” says president Jonathan Gee.

Mr Gee says some students are returning to Wellington almost a month early in a bid to find a flat.

“We’re at the whim of landlords at this stage because of the housing crisis, because there’s limited supply and because there’s so many people looking for rental properties,” he says.

Mr Gee says the Government needs to urgently tighten rental laws to give tenants greater rights.

Yeah, a housing crisis, exacerbated by a stupid government telling students they can have a year of free tuition…putting even more demand into a market that has a short supply and a high demand.

Why is this fool surprised rents are going up?

Jacinda Ardern will call it greed, because its easier to understand than market economics for types like her.

-Newshub

Our PM and her Foreign Minister Winston Peters both supported the decision to go against President Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital despite the fact that past American Presidents have also recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. Jacinda Ardern attempted to spin New Zealand’s betrayal of both America and Israel as her standing up to bullies but closer examination will show that it was nothing of the sort.

There are eight inconvenient questions that she and her Foreign Minister need to answer if we are to get to the real reasons behind their actions.

1) How does recognition of the location of Israel’s Parliament, Supreme Court and national institutions damage negotiations for a two-state solution?

Mr Peters said “The resolution reflects New Zealand’s long-held support for a two-state solution to the conflict”. […] unlike previous presidents, Trump’s statement on the recognition was clear that the final status of disputed territories and borders still needed to be negotiated. The recognition, therefore, does nothing to harm prospects of a two-state solution if the Arab Palestinians ultimately agree to negotiate for their independence. The territory to which the United States will move its embassy is clearly west of the 1949 armistice line (commonly referred to as the “Green line”). It is unclear how acknowledging this land, which has been part of Israel since 1948, as Israel’s capital, should hinder negotiations any more than if Israel declared Tel Aviv its capital.

2) Why did NZ not speak out against Russia earlier this year for a similar statement or condemn Iran for claiming Jerusalem as the ‘capital of Palestine’?

In April this year, Russia said it considers West Jerusalem to be Israel’s capital […] Furthermore, following the UN resolution, Iran has voted to recognise Jerusalem as the ‘capital of Palestine’. Why is the New Zealand government critical of the United States announcement but has been silent on that of Russia and Iran?

3) Why is it acceptable to call the Old City and East Jerusalem “Palestinian territory” but unacceptable to call parts of Israel West of the Green Line “Israel”?

If we accept that calling West Jerusalem the capital of Israel is damaging to prospects of a two-state solution, we must also accept that calling the Old City and East Jerusalem “Palestinian territory” and labeling any Israeli presence “illegal” is at least equally damaging. That is exactly what UNSC 2334 did and New Zealand co-sponsored that resolution with Malaysia, Senegal, and Venezuela.

4) Why does the NZ government no longer condemn Palestinian terrorism?

Leaders who call for “days of rage”, incite violence, pay terrorists, promote suicide bombers, and teach children to hate Jews do not have peaceful intent. The New Zealand government used to condemn Palestinian terrorism but has not done so in recent years.

5) Does the NZ government condemn Obama for saying “undivided Jerusalem…”? If so, why did it not do so at the time?

Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama have all made statements that Jerusalem must remain the “undivided” capital of Israel. This phrasing, which was not used by Trump, indicates their intent that the Old City and East Jerusalem belong to Israel and could be considered to be prejudging negotiations. However, there was no condemnation from the New Zealand government when these leaders made their comments.

6) Did the resolution go to cabinet?

After New Zealand co-sponsored UNSC resolution 2334 with Malaysia, Senegal, and Venezuela, MP Peters was outraged that Minister McCully had not consulted cabinet with regard to the controversial resolution – even asking questions in parliament and submitting an OIA request. The Labour-NZ First coalition agreement also recorded a Cabinet minute “regarding the lack of process followed prior to the National-led government sponsorship of UNSC 2334”. Surely, the government would have followed due process and approached cabinet with this latest controversial resolution which condemns another sovereign nation and traditional ally.

7) Does New Zealand oppose the special US consulate in East Jerusalem?

The United States has a consulate in East Jerusalem that handles relations with the West Bank and Gaza. However, this consulate is more like an embassy, being one of only two US consulates that reports directly to the State Department rather than the local embassy. If New Zealand is happy for the United States to have this arrangement, there should be no problem with the United States having an Embassy in West Jerusalem, as they intend.

8) Will the New Zealand government acknowledge anti-Israel bias at the United Nations?

There were 21 resolutions that singled out Israel for condemnation at the United Nations this year. There were only 6 other resolutions that specifically singled out a nation and no country was targeted more than once, except Israel. There was not a single UNGA resolution on the human rights situation in China, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Belarus, Cuba, Turkey, Pakistan, Vietnam, Algeria, or any of 175 other countries.

Turkey and Yemen called the emergency session of the UN general assembly to vote on what all other sovereign nations can do without controversy, yet there hasn’t been even one resolution on the 8.5m people starving in Yemen or the lack of freedoms in Turkey. Furthermore, 83 of the 97 UN resolutions targeting a single country from 2012 to 2015 targeted Israel and between 2009-2014, UNESCO adopted 46 resolutions against Israel; one on Syria; and none on Iran, Sudan, North Korea, or any other country in the world. UNESCO has also denied Jewish and Christian ties to Jerusalem. By continuing to vote for the anti-Israel resolutions and remaining silent in the face of discrimination, New Zealand encourages the anti-Israel bias.

-israelinstitute.nz