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.[…]