In All Honesty
David Seymour attacks his critics and cries victim.
Nobody's got the heart to tell you where to go
But in all honesty
Fuck off
Fuck off
Just F-U-C-K O-F-F, fuck off
Song: Billie Joe Armstrong, Mike Dirnt & Tré Cool.
A disclaimer: Please be aware that this newsletter is about David Seymour and therefore contains swear words; however, not the one that is forever associated with his deputy, Brooke “don’t overestimate the value of a life” van Velden.
Transparency.
To be fair, some of the swearing isn’t even mine. It appears that individuals who engage with ACT, particularly their leader, often experience late-onset Tourette syndrome. Even those who are usually very polite find it hard not to release the odd expletive when conversing with Seymour.
This week is Scrutiny Week in parliament, during which Select Committees can scrutinise the Government’s spending plans for the following year. You’re probably thinking, 'That sounds reasonable, but surely there should be scrutiny every week, not just once or twice a year?' But therein lies the rub.
While this government may have come to power with promises of unprecedented transparency, they loathe being questioned, and none more so than the incredibly thin-skinned David Seymour.
Reporters, opposition politicians, or even independent experts, the ACT man rejects questioning wherever possible. What possible benefit could he gain from being open with his intentions? If his opponents become frustrated as a result, all the better, because then it’s all about them, and not him.
So it was yesterday…
Double Standards.
Seymour fronted the finance and expenditure select committee so members could scrutinise his new Ministry of Regulation. While he was making his opening remarks, Labour MPs Deborah Russell and Megan Woods were conversing.
Overhearing this, National MP Ryan Hamilton ran to the teacher, chairman, and National MP Cameron Brewer, a man who must be grateful the public associated weasels with Simeon Brown before they got to know him, and snitched, saying Deborah had used a bad word.
Brown was happy to let things carry on, however, sensing the opportunity for martyrdom and distraction, Seymour demanded she share with the class, and she did:
Instantly, Seymour went from defending the dismalness of his Ministry of removing common-sense protections to claim the moral high-ground, grinning as he trumpeted, “That’s the standard of the Labour Party, they’re swearing already.”
Not even the semblance of irony at the fact that his deputy decided to shout the most offensive of terms in parliament, live before the nation, whereas this was a conversation that only a few people had overheard with a reasonably mild, some might say understandable, expletive in frustration.
Duncan Webb also fell short of the standards of decorum by accurately, if inappropriately, describing Seymour’s answers as “Making s*** up.”
Minor misdemeanours in the scheme of things, and thus far, no call from ACT to lock up Deborah or Duncan, but it has meant that rather than focus on Seymour’s Regulation Ministry, which seems to wastefully fly in the face of the belt-tightening expected by every other government department, we’re talking about this.
Seymour gleefully stated, “We're going to make a great video of the behaviour of Labour MPs on this committee. And I think people are going to decide, whatever happens next year, we don't want them back over here.”
Because why would you want the public discussing your plans and competence when they can talk about how badly behaved the opposition is?
Unfortunately, this wasn’t the worst thing that ACT did yesterday.
Tedious Trumpisms.
Trump Derangement Syndrome is a term used in the US to belittle critics of the US President and discredit those challenging him, painting them as obsessed lunatics rather than people raising valid concerns.
David Seymour, like Trump, will not accept criticism. This is quite possibly a side effect of his god-complex, although many have suggested other personality defects and disorders that might explain his behaviour.
Seymour is an eager follower of the Trump playbook, meaning his first reaction when asked perfectly reasonable questions is to attack the person asking the question. If they work for a public broadcaster, all the better, because then the attack can be backed by the threat of funding cuts.
Perversely, the more our public broadcasters do their job, the angrier their bosses in the government become, encouraging them to adopt the challenge-nothing, praise-everything approach of commercial radio.
Yesterday’s attack from ACT was in response to Auckland University associate Professor George Laking, who dared to question their Regulatory Standards Bill. Rather than address the issues raised, they responded in the same manner as Trump.
Seeing ACT’s tweet on the matter, I commented, “This is how the party of free speech reacts to an academic telling the truth about their bill that gives our country away to corporate interests without so much as a handful of beans: by mocking them like schoolyard bullies. What a pack of assholes.”
From RNZ:
Dr Laking joined other public health and legal experts, who have criticised the bill (in its current form) as allowing tobacco, alcohol industries or environmental polluters to seek compensation if future legislation costs them profit.
“You wouldn't want your surgeon to operate with a blunt instrument, but that's exactly the approach the Regulatory Standards Bill takes to the health needs of our society,” Laking said.
“I acknowledge ACT's faith in market-based solutions, but it is well known that markets fail. That's why the government should be very careful about market deregulation when human health is at stake.”
An ACT spokesperson responded, “I think people are a bit sick of the fear-mongering and misinformation being spread and just want to know what the bill means for them. The Regulatory Standards Bill will help New Zealand get its mojo back.”
So there you go, New Zealand. How can you argue with that? Don’t you want your mojo back?
We have the acting Prime Minister and architect of a bill that has been opposed by nearly everyone outside of the coalition, calling an esteemed academic a loser and deranged, for speaking the truth.
Hinemoa replied to my post, saying, “Ad hominem attacks such as this are a form of abuse. How can we complain about this unacceptable behaviour from a party in the coalition government?”
Moana: “That's disgusting—one of the most loveliest, kindest people around.”
Chris noted this wasn’t the first such attack, pointing to another on Michael Baker, who many of us regard highly for his mahi during the pandemic:
Huhana: “Seymour does this all the time, when I opposed him, he told everyone I was nuts, he did the same to Mihingarangi, he does it all the time, it’s his way of trying to counter them by dismissing and demeaning them from the get go.”
Heather: “This is disgusting behaviour by the ACT party. Shows their total ignorance in mocking someone who is telling the truth about this dangerous bill.”
What is going on in this country?
How is Brooke van Velden able to shout the word she did in parliament, while more minor expletives uttered practically inaudibly are held up as outrageous behaviour?
How does Christopher Luxon ignore his deputy, the man who leads in his absence, attacking highly respected experts with the sort of tactics we see from Trump? I posted the following:
I get that Seymour behaves like a jerk to get attention from people who like that.
But why does National let him run the country?
Graeme said, “Because Luxon is ACT in a blue suit”
Maureen: “Because they agree with everything he is doing, and this way they can say they are not to blame.”
The consensus was that it suits National to have David Seymour promoting policies they agree with without having to front them. However, they’ll have to perform quite some gymnastics to avoid culpability for the Regulatory Standards Bill.
Hopefully, it will be clear to people next time, even though some will still opt for it, that a vote for National is a vote for ACT’s policies and for David Seymour to run amok, calling his critics childish names and acting the victim whenever questioned.
How’s that working out for you?
Have a great Wednesday, everyone.
Ngā mihi,
Nick.
I write Nick’s Kōrero five or six times a week. This edition is open to everyone, so you’re most welcome to share it, and if you’d like to read more from me and receive all my newsletters in your inbox, I have the following options to consider:
Until the end of June, you can subscribe to Nick's Kōrero for my original price of $8 per month, or $80 per year. This price will remain unchanged as long as you’re subscribed. Click here:
If you're a Gold Card holder, the cost is $7 per month or $70 for the year, which can be accessed by clicking below. Again, this won’t change:
To end today, it’s not Lily Allen, but it might as well be. Here’s Green Day with the ever-so-subtle 'F*ck Off'. If you’re not so keen on swear words, you might want to give this one a miss, as there aren’t a lot of other ones.
Seymour is a walking gas lamp. If he reckons the truth about his RS Bill is alarming, his lies and utter bullshit for the sake of power and control are 10 times more so.
Did you see Duncan Webb’s questioning of Seymour at the select committee where he blatantly lied about what he had expressed back to Guyon in his 30mins interview? It’s worth a listen!