1
00:00:09,133 --> 00:00:12,013
Speaker 1: You're listening to a podcast from News Talks. It be

2
00:00:12,413 --> 00:00:16,213
Speaker 1: follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.

3
00:00:16,773 --> 00:00:19,813
Speaker 1: It's time for all the attitude, all the opinion, all

4
00:00:19,853 --> 00:00:22,493
Speaker 1: the information, all the debates.

5
00:00:21,973 --> 00:00:24,293
Speaker 2: Of theists, now.

6
00:00:24,293 --> 00:00:27,813
Speaker 1: The Layton Smith podcast Coward by news Talks.

7
00:00:27,493 --> 00:00:30,013
Speaker 3: It be Welcome to podcasts two hundred and sixty for

8
00:00:30,053 --> 00:00:34,133
Speaker 3: October sixteen, twenty twenty four. What do these subjects have

9
00:00:34,173 --> 00:00:39,933
Speaker 3: in common? Freedom of speech, censorship, rule of law, judicial activism, politics,

10
00:00:40,173 --> 00:00:44,733
Speaker 3: the administrative state, morality, and there's plenty more. They are

11
00:00:44,813 --> 00:00:48,413
Speaker 3: all part of an ongoing discussion, an important discussion over

12
00:00:48,453 --> 00:00:51,733
Speaker 3: where society is headed and what the social future of

13
00:00:51,773 --> 00:00:54,213
Speaker 3: the country, if not much of the world, will be like.

14
00:00:54,853 --> 00:00:58,413
Speaker 3: Politics has always been a scene of changing alliances. Law

15
00:00:58,493 --> 00:01:02,613
Speaker 3: and freedom have always gone together, but judicial activism now

16
00:01:02,733 --> 00:01:06,733
Speaker 3: casts a shadow over that connection. Rights have in the

17
00:01:06,773 --> 00:01:10,133
Speaker 3: past been a formulation of the essentials of freedom, but

18
00:01:10,373 --> 00:01:14,333
Speaker 3: utopians have learned to turn a vast range of rights

19
00:01:14,373 --> 00:01:19,373
Speaker 3: into the blueprint for some supposedly largest social perfection. That

20
00:01:19,493 --> 00:01:24,373
Speaker 3: is why vigilance and political connoisseurship are necessary in sustaining

21
00:01:24,413 --> 00:01:27,893
Speaker 3: the practices of our free world. The author of the

22
00:01:27,893 --> 00:01:33,013
Speaker 3: book was Kennethmanogue, Kywe born and bred, lived most of

23
00:01:33,013 --> 00:01:36,133
Speaker 3: his life in the Northern Hemisphere, specifically in London, where

24
00:01:36,133 --> 00:01:38,493
Speaker 3: he was a professor at the London School of Economics.

25
00:01:38,933 --> 00:01:41,853
Speaker 3: He was an economist, but he was also known very

26
00:01:41,853 --> 00:01:45,533
Speaker 3: widely as a philosopher, and a very good one. He

27
00:01:45,613 --> 00:01:48,813
Speaker 3: came back to New Zealand to do a speech. I

28
00:01:48,853 --> 00:01:50,973
Speaker 3: think it might have been a Sir John Graham's speech,

29
00:01:51,293 --> 00:01:54,653
Speaker 3: and that is where I met him, and memory serves

30
00:01:54,693 --> 00:01:57,973
Speaker 3: me correctly, I interviewed him. But that's beside the point.

31
00:01:58,213 --> 00:02:00,373
Speaker 3: The point is that we've reached the stage that men

32
00:02:00,533 --> 00:02:03,853
Speaker 3: like Kenneth Minogue, and there's a list of others could

33
00:02:03,853 --> 00:02:06,813
Speaker 3: see coming. The second quote I want I want to

34
00:02:06,893 --> 00:02:13,373
Speaker 3: utilize is by Robert Bork, a judge in America, and

35
00:02:13,693 --> 00:02:16,373
Speaker 3: he was a candidate for the Supreme Court, and he

36
00:02:16,453 --> 00:02:21,853
Speaker 3: was destroyed by the present President of the United States.

37
00:02:22,533 --> 00:02:26,813
Speaker 3: Robert Bork coercing virtue the worldwide rule of judges quick

38
00:02:26,893 --> 00:02:31,173
Speaker 3: quote judicial activism, the ordering of results not supported by

39
00:02:31,213 --> 00:02:36,453
Speaker 3: any reasonable interpretation of the constitution. They have their written constitution.

40
00:02:36,613 --> 00:02:41,333
Speaker 3: We have our unwritten constitution. May be rampant, but it

41
00:02:41,373 --> 00:02:45,893
Speaker 3: is completely unsupportable. Numerous attempts at justification have been made

42
00:02:45,933 --> 00:02:49,013
Speaker 3: by academic lawyers and by left wing activist groups such

43
00:02:49,053 --> 00:02:52,773
Speaker 3: as the American Civil Liberties Union, and more recently by

44
00:02:53,173 --> 00:02:56,453
Speaker 3: heated statements from the leaders of the American Bar Association

45
00:02:57,333 --> 00:03:01,093
Speaker 3: that swing should not be surprising. Some people will always

46
00:03:01,173 --> 00:03:04,093
Speaker 3: rally around the center of power, particularly if it is

47
00:03:04,213 --> 00:03:08,493
Speaker 3: the center most accessible to them and it produces the

48
00:03:08,533 --> 00:03:11,733
Speaker 3: results that they want. Now, as you would already be

49
00:03:11,773 --> 00:03:16,093
Speaker 3: aware because you've seen it in the notes or heard

50
00:03:16,133 --> 00:03:20,613
Speaker 3: it on the radio, this podcast centers around the New

51
00:03:20,653 --> 00:03:25,093
Speaker 3: Zealand Supreme Court. Tuesday afternoon, the fifteenth of October, which,

52
00:03:25,333 --> 00:03:28,933
Speaker 3: as this is being released on the sixteenth, was just yesterday,

53
00:03:29,613 --> 00:03:33,213
Speaker 3: the New Zealand Initiative add its chairman, released a paper

54
00:03:33,413 --> 00:03:38,093
Speaker 3: written by Roger Partridge, who is a lawyer and the

55
00:03:38,453 --> 00:03:42,173
Speaker 3: chairman of the New Zealand Institute. It's called Who Makes

56
00:03:42,213 --> 00:03:45,813
Speaker 3: the Law Reigning in the Supreme Court and the report

57
00:03:45,933 --> 00:03:49,853
Speaker 3: challenges the Supreme Court's recent decisions and their implications for

58
00:03:49,973 --> 00:03:54,093
Speaker 3: our constitutional balance. So, in the discussion that follows, how

59
00:03:54,133 --> 00:03:57,213
Speaker 3: the Supreme Court has adopted a loose approach to interpreting

60
00:03:57,253 --> 00:04:00,813
Speaker 3: laws passed by Parliament. The Court's reshaping of the common

61
00:04:00,893 --> 00:04:04,573
Speaker 3: law based on judge's perceptions of changing social values and

62
00:04:04,613 --> 00:04:10,013
Speaker 3: the consequences of judicial overreach for them, critic legitimacy and

63
00:04:10,053 --> 00:04:13,213
Speaker 3: the rule of law, and then provides some suggestions for

64
00:04:13,573 --> 00:04:16,293
Speaker 3: solutions to the above problems. So in just a moment

65
00:04:16,333 --> 00:04:19,453
Speaker 3: we'll talk with Roger Partridge. After which, of course there

66
00:04:19,533 --> 00:04:22,493
Speaker 3: is the mail room with Missus Producer, and there are

67
00:04:22,573 --> 00:04:25,813
Speaker 3: some advisories with regard to things that I think will

68
00:04:25,813 --> 00:04:43,853
Speaker 3: interest you which we have recently introduced. But next Roger Partridge.

69
00:04:46,293 --> 00:04:50,733
Speaker 3: Leverix is an antihistamine made in Switzerland to the highest quality.

70
00:04:50,933 --> 00:04:54,773
Speaker 3: Leverix relieves hay fever and skin allergies or itchy skin.

71
00:04:55,253 --> 00:04:59,573
Speaker 3: It's a dual action antihistamine and has a unique nasal

72
00:04:59,813 --> 00:05:04,413
Speaker 3: decongestant action. It's fast acting for fast relief and it

73
00:05:04,493 --> 00:05:07,613
Speaker 3: works in under an hour and lasts for over twenty

74
00:05:07,613 --> 00:05:11,453
Speaker 3: four hours. Leveris is a tiny tablet that unblocks the nose,

75
00:05:11,773 --> 00:05:15,653
Speaker 3: deals with itchy eyes, and stops sneezing. Levericks is an

76
00:05:15,653 --> 00:05:20,053
Speaker 3: antihistamine made in Switzerland to the highest quality. So next

77
00:05:20,053 --> 00:05:23,333
Speaker 3: time you are in need of an effective antihistamine, call

78
00:05:23,413 --> 00:05:26,733
Speaker 3: into the pharmacy and ask for Leverix l e v

79
00:05:27,333 --> 00:05:31,813
Speaker 3: Rix Leverix and always read the label, take as directed

80
00:05:32,053 --> 00:05:35,893
Speaker 3: and if symptoms persist, see your health professional. Farmer Broker

81
00:05:35,933 --> 00:05:40,373
Speaker 3: Auckland Layton Smith Roger Partridge was for twenty three years

82
00:05:40,413 --> 00:05:44,173
Speaker 3: a litigation partner at law firm Bell Gully. He is

83
00:05:44,293 --> 00:05:47,373
Speaker 3: now the chairman of the New Zealand Initiative and has

84
00:05:47,413 --> 00:05:52,093
Speaker 3: written numerous papers on matters of public importance. His most

85
00:05:52,133 --> 00:05:57,333
Speaker 3: recent was Prescription for Prosperity, a briefing to the incoming

86
00:05:57,373 --> 00:06:00,693
Speaker 3: government of twenty twenty three. He has now written and

87
00:06:01,093 --> 00:06:05,653
Speaker 3: released who Makes the Law reigning in the Supreme Court

88
00:06:06,613 --> 00:06:10,093
Speaker 3: While somebody needed to do it? Roger Partridge, great to

89
00:06:10,093 --> 00:06:14,133
Speaker 3: talk with you and I congratulate you on what you've done.

90
00:06:14,733 --> 00:06:19,173
Speaker 3: It's very impressive. What brought you to the point of

91
00:06:19,213 --> 00:06:22,293
Speaker 3: realizing you needed to do this well.

92
00:06:22,933 --> 00:06:26,293
Speaker 2: I've spent nearly nine years now working with the team

93
00:06:26,333 --> 00:06:30,493
Speaker 2: at the Initiatives as well as sharing the organization, and

94
00:06:31,413 --> 00:06:35,053
Speaker 2: most of those nine years I've tried to pretend I

95
00:06:35,173 --> 00:06:37,973
Speaker 2: wasn't formerly a lawyer, and I've written on a range

96
00:06:38,013 --> 00:06:43,773
Speaker 2: of public policy matters, monitoring fiscal policy, New Zealand's culture health, energy,

97
00:06:44,293 --> 00:06:49,693
Speaker 2: anything really the team lets me. I was drawn back

98
00:06:49,733 --> 00:06:53,133
Speaker 2: into writing on the law by what I saw as

99
00:06:53,493 --> 00:06:59,493
Speaker 2: increasingly erratic decisions from the Supreme Court. It started three

100
00:06:59,613 --> 00:07:02,813
Speaker 2: years ago with the Make It sixteen case, that's the

101
00:07:02,893 --> 00:07:07,093
Speaker 2: voting age case, where the Supreme Court weighed in on

102
00:07:07,173 --> 00:07:13,933
Speaker 2: something that's obviously a political issue and and and in

103
00:07:13,973 --> 00:07:17,853
Speaker 2: its enthusiasm it made a really very basic error in

104
00:07:17,853 --> 00:07:21,653
Speaker 2: interpreting the Bill of Rights Act. The Minority there was

105
00:07:21,693 --> 00:07:24,133
Speaker 2: a minority judgment of Stephen Kosch which got the law

106
00:07:24,253 --> 00:07:31,053
Speaker 2: right justice coach, but it was an obvious flaw and

107
00:07:31,493 --> 00:07:36,053
Speaker 2: it belied a court very keen to intervene on on

108
00:07:36,053 --> 00:07:38,493
Speaker 2: on political matters and matter is that really should be

109
00:07:38,533 --> 00:07:42,613
Speaker 2: left to Parliament and to voters. Earlier this year then

110
00:07:42,853 --> 00:07:47,293
Speaker 2: another extremely erratic cases I saw at the Climate change case,

111
00:07:47,333 --> 00:07:51,213
Speaker 2: where the Court of Appeal had said civil proceedings between

112
00:07:51,293 --> 00:07:54,053
Speaker 2: a plaint of and a defendant couldn't couldn't really hope

113
00:07:54,053 --> 00:07:56,453
Speaker 2: to address the challenge that is climate change in it

114
00:07:56,533 --> 00:08:01,293
Speaker 2: that it required a complex regulatory regime and international treaties.

115
00:08:01,333 --> 00:08:03,253
Speaker 2: But the Supreme Court was having none of that and

116
00:08:03,293 --> 00:08:09,333
Speaker 2: granted granted leave for the for the unsuccessful plaintiff to

117
00:08:09,533 --> 00:08:11,853
Speaker 2: appeal the decision from the Court of Appeal striking out

118
00:08:11,853 --> 00:08:14,253
Speaker 2: the claim. So we're now going to have the judges

119
00:08:14,453 --> 00:08:20,653
Speaker 2: inserting themselves into into a show trial on climate change,

120
00:08:20,653 --> 00:08:23,893
Speaker 2: on an issue which many will think is best left

121
00:08:23,893 --> 00:08:29,453
Speaker 2: to Parliament. And then in I think it was early March,

122
00:08:29,493 --> 00:08:33,733
Speaker 2: it might have been late February, the CAC Jack Hodd

123
00:08:34,413 --> 00:08:36,653
Speaker 2: sent me a draft of an article he was going

124
00:08:36,693 --> 00:08:39,533
Speaker 2: to deliver at a conference run by the Legal Research

125
00:08:39,573 --> 00:08:43,373
Speaker 2: Foundation marking twenty years of the Supreme Court's anniversary. It

126
00:08:43,453 --> 00:08:46,373
Speaker 2: was written in very polite language, but it was at

127
00:08:46,413 --> 00:08:51,093
Speaker 2: trenchant criticism of a court that's really straight outside its

128
00:08:51,093 --> 00:08:54,893
Speaker 2: bounds and misunderstood its role. I wrote it up in

129
00:08:54,933 --> 00:09:01,053
Speaker 2: my herald column that Jack's criticisms confirmed some of my

130
00:09:01,173 --> 00:09:04,373
Speaker 2: own thinking. I wrote a follow up column with some

131
00:09:04,893 --> 00:09:07,333
Speaker 2: a couple of thoughts on what Parliament might do to

132
00:09:07,413 --> 00:09:12,693
Speaker 2: reign in the Court and kept thinking about it and

133
00:09:12,693 --> 00:09:16,173
Speaker 2: that led to the project which is released today.

134
00:09:17,333 --> 00:09:20,973
Speaker 3: So the Supreme Court has adopted a loose approach to

135
00:09:21,053 --> 00:09:25,253
Speaker 3: interpreting laws passed by Parliament is one of the lead

136
00:09:25,333 --> 00:09:29,293
Speaker 3: lines of the email that I first received. Who decides

137
00:09:29,413 --> 00:09:32,453
Speaker 3: whether the Court is following what are perceived to be

138
00:09:32,493 --> 00:09:35,573
Speaker 3: the rules and what the rules are well.

139
00:09:36,093 --> 00:09:41,733
Speaker 2: It's a mix of jurisprudential analysis by academics and the

140
00:09:41,773 --> 00:09:46,453
Speaker 2: politicians themselves. It is, after all, Parliament that's supreme in

141
00:09:46,493 --> 00:09:50,613
Speaker 2: the legal hierarchy. Parliament makes the laws, Parliament created the

142
00:09:50,613 --> 00:09:55,013
Speaker 2: Supreme Court. Parliament has laid down the guidelines that the

143
00:09:55,013 --> 00:10:00,613
Speaker 2: courts must follow when interpreting Parliament's words. And what we're

144
00:10:00,693 --> 00:10:05,773
Speaker 2: seeing now is a radical departure from those guidelines by

145
00:10:05,933 --> 00:10:12,333
Speaker 2: a court that has becoming increasingly unconstrained and increasingly inserting

146
00:10:12,373 --> 00:10:16,733
Speaker 2: itself into the role of lawmaker, which is traditionally Parliament's

147
00:10:16,813 --> 00:10:23,173
Speaker 2: role rather than just adjudicator deciding disputes between parties. And

148
00:10:23,213 --> 00:10:27,053
Speaker 2: when you become a lawmaker, you're making policy decisions, and

149
00:10:27,093 --> 00:10:31,533
Speaker 2: that inevitably politicizes the judicial role. And I think we

150
00:10:31,573 --> 00:10:34,373
Speaker 2: can see from the US the cautionary tale of what

151
00:10:34,533 --> 00:10:39,093
Speaker 2: happens when a Supreme Court becomes too activist, and the

152
00:10:39,213 --> 00:10:43,533
Speaker 2: erosion of trust in the impartiality of the judiciary and

153
00:10:44,493 --> 00:10:47,613
Speaker 2: in a sense, the erosion of the democratic legitimacy of

154
00:10:47,653 --> 00:10:51,173
Speaker 2: the law if the laws are being made by unaccountable

155
00:10:51,973 --> 00:10:55,253
Speaker 2: not politically accountable judges rather than accountable politicians.

156
00:10:55,773 --> 00:10:59,693
Speaker 3: So you raise the US scenario, and I'm glad you did.

157
00:11:00,213 --> 00:11:03,493
Speaker 3: What are the similarities and what are the differences between

158
00:11:03,693 --> 00:11:06,373
Speaker 3: the Supreme Court of New Zealand and the Supreme Court

159
00:11:06,413 --> 00:11:08,733
Speaker 3: of the US and how they both operate.

160
00:11:09,773 --> 00:11:12,213
Speaker 2: Well, the big difference is that the Supreme Court in

161
00:11:12,253 --> 00:11:15,973
Speaker 2: the US can strike down legislation. Because the US has

162
00:11:16,013 --> 00:11:19,773
Speaker 2: a written constitution, the Supreme Court in the US can

163
00:11:20,773 --> 00:11:27,173
Speaker 2: declare legislation passed by Congress to be unconstitutional and therefore invalid.

164
00:11:27,773 --> 00:11:32,373
Speaker 2: New Zealand's Supreme Court can't do that. It's given itself

165
00:11:32,453 --> 00:11:37,213
Speaker 2: the right to declare legislation inconsistent with the Bill of Rights.

166
00:11:37,253 --> 00:11:39,333
Speaker 2: But the Bill of Rights is just an ordinary piece

167
00:11:39,373 --> 00:11:45,333
Speaker 2: of legislation, doesn't result in legislation being invalidated. That's the

168
00:11:45,333 --> 00:11:50,373
Speaker 2: biggest difference. The biggest similarity now is that we've got

169
00:11:50,653 --> 00:11:57,533
Speaker 2: a Supreme Court that is increasingly keen to get involved

170
00:11:57,693 --> 00:12:02,493
Speaker 2: in political contentious political issues. The voting age is a

171
00:12:02,533 --> 00:12:07,293
Speaker 2: good example. Climate change is another good example. The sentence

172
00:12:07,373 --> 00:12:10,133
Speaker 2: in case the three strikes legislation. Whether you like the

173
00:12:10,133 --> 00:12:12,813
Speaker 2: three strikes legislation or not, I was never a fan

174
00:12:12,893 --> 00:12:18,173
Speaker 2: of it. But it was undoubtedly within Parliament's reavemant to

175
00:12:18,213 --> 00:12:22,613
Speaker 2: pass it. But it's the court took a hostile approach

176
00:12:22,733 --> 00:12:27,693
Speaker 2: to three strikes. So we're seeing a court increasingly involved

177
00:12:27,933 --> 00:12:32,693
Speaker 2: in making policy, in inserting itself into important policy decisions

178
00:12:33,013 --> 00:12:36,013
Speaker 2: which traditionally the courts would have left to Parliament.

179
00:12:37,213 --> 00:12:43,533
Speaker 3: So it's referred to here mostly as judicial overreach. Is

180
00:12:43,533 --> 00:12:46,053
Speaker 3: there a difference in your to you? Is there a

181
00:12:46,053 --> 00:12:48,613
Speaker 3: difference between overreach and the activism?

182
00:12:50,453 --> 00:12:55,653
Speaker 2: No? I no, I think the terms are pretty much interchangeable.

183
00:12:56,493 --> 00:12:58,093
Speaker 3: So let me go, let me take you back to

184
00:12:58,133 --> 00:13:01,213
Speaker 3: the very beginning, if I can put it that way,

185
00:13:01,653 --> 00:13:05,173
Speaker 3: of how how a judge becomes a Justice of the

186
00:13:05,213 --> 00:13:09,093
Speaker 3: Supreme Court in this country.

187
00:13:09,333 --> 00:13:15,573
Speaker 2: Appointed appointed by the executive by the Prime minister. So

188
00:13:15,773 --> 00:13:20,373
Speaker 2: the judicial appointment process as either the either the Attorney

189
00:13:20,373 --> 00:13:22,493
Speaker 2: General or the Prime Minister in cabinet.

190
00:13:23,133 --> 00:13:23,773
Speaker 3: And that's it.

191
00:13:24,693 --> 00:13:25,213
Speaker 2: Yes, that's it.

192
00:13:25,373 --> 00:13:28,373
Speaker 3: There is no interrogation, there's no cross examination, there's no

193
00:13:28,453 --> 00:13:30,133
Speaker 3: hearings like they have in the Senate.

194
00:13:31,133 --> 00:13:33,973
Speaker 2: That's right. And I think we've got a pretty good

195
00:13:35,333 --> 00:13:42,573
Speaker 2: cross party track record of appointing judges based on on

196
00:13:42,773 --> 00:13:47,813
Speaker 2: quality and not based on their political leanings. But I

197
00:13:47,853 --> 00:13:51,053
Speaker 2: don't think what we haven't paid enough attention to is

198
00:13:52,173 --> 00:14:00,813
Speaker 2: whether judges are committed to parliamentary sovereignty, committed to judicial restraint,

199
00:14:01,773 --> 00:14:04,973
Speaker 2: and committed to ensuring and upholding the rule of law.

200
00:14:05,853 --> 00:14:08,973
Speaker 2: And it's probably worth dwelling from home on just what

201
00:14:09,013 --> 00:14:12,653
Speaker 2: the rule of law means. It's reasonably well understood by lawyers,

202
00:14:13,093 --> 00:14:16,733
Speaker 2: but most importantly, it means that laws are certain and predictable.

203
00:14:17,253 --> 00:14:21,253
Speaker 2: And if you've if you've got judges weighing in and

204
00:14:21,453 --> 00:14:27,293
Speaker 2: taking radical or perhaps even unreasonable views of what legislation means,

205
00:14:27,293 --> 00:14:29,733
Speaker 2: then the law becomes less certain and predictable. And that

206
00:14:29,853 --> 00:14:33,573
Speaker 2: challenge is the rule of law. So the report recommends

207
00:14:34,053 --> 00:14:37,693
Speaker 2: one of the five recommendations is that we sharpen up

208
00:14:37,773 --> 00:14:43,333
Speaker 2: judicial appointment processes to focus more on those qualities, the

209
00:14:43,373 --> 00:14:46,493
Speaker 2: qualities of judicial restraint, respect for the sovereignty of parliament,

210
00:14:46,573 --> 00:14:47,493
Speaker 2: and the rule of law.

211
00:14:47,973 --> 00:14:50,253
Speaker 3: How much of a part would track record play on that.

212
00:14:51,853 --> 00:14:52,493
Speaker 2: A huge part?

213
00:14:53,173 --> 00:14:56,773
Speaker 3: Okay. The reason I'm pushing this line a little bit

214
00:14:56,973 --> 00:15:02,853
Speaker 3: is because we've witnessed in the United States lawyers, sorry, judges,

215
00:15:02,893 --> 00:15:06,733
Speaker 3: who have been appointed to the Supreme Court who, particularly

216
00:15:06,933 --> 00:15:13,653
Speaker 3: by Republicans presidents, have not necessarily lived up to expectations.

217
00:15:13,773 --> 00:15:18,413
Speaker 3: In fact, there are suggestions, if not accusations, that one

218
00:15:18,533 --> 00:15:22,573
Speaker 3: or two of them I have been dishonest in their

219
00:15:23,133 --> 00:15:24,773
Speaker 3: interrogation period.

220
00:15:25,533 --> 00:15:30,013
Speaker 2: Well, sorry, I jump in. I don't think you'd find

221
00:15:30,053 --> 00:15:33,933
Speaker 2: the Democrats feeling that. We've had a long period where

222
00:15:33,933 --> 00:15:41,493
Speaker 2: the US Supreme Court was dominated by Democrat Democrat appointments,

223
00:15:41,773 --> 00:15:45,773
Speaker 2: the Democratic Party appointment so social democrats or socially liberals

224
00:15:45,853 --> 00:15:48,773
Speaker 2: or the Americans like to call them progressives. So we've

225
00:15:48,773 --> 00:15:52,613
Speaker 2: had a progressive dominated bench. We've now got it and

226
00:15:54,773 --> 00:15:59,333
Speaker 2: quite an activist Supreme Court, and the Conservatives have railed

227
00:15:59,333 --> 00:16:04,893
Speaker 2: against that. Now we've got a conservative dominated Supreme Court

228
00:16:04,973 --> 00:16:09,373
Speaker 2: bench and that's also activist, and the Democrats are railing

229
00:16:09,533 --> 00:16:12,573
Speaker 2: against it. And it's a cautionary tale for us. We

230
00:16:12,653 --> 00:16:19,013
Speaker 2: don't want a judiciary that's overtly or subject overtly to

231
00:16:21,053 --> 00:16:25,853
Speaker 2: the charge that it's politically partial, because that undermines trust

232
00:16:25,893 --> 00:16:30,653
Speaker 2: and the judiciary and the democratic legitimacy of the legal

233
00:16:30,653 --> 00:16:31,453
Speaker 2: system and the law.

234
00:16:32,453 --> 00:16:35,853
Speaker 3: So you're happy with the way that judges are appointed

235
00:16:35,893 --> 00:16:38,373
Speaker 3: here to the Supreme Court? Do you think there's not

236
00:16:39,293 --> 00:16:40,293
Speaker 3: advances we could make.

237
00:16:41,253 --> 00:16:44,533
Speaker 2: I don't I wouldn't want to change the process of appointment.

238
00:16:44,613 --> 00:16:51,373
Speaker 2: I'd like I'd like more focus on judges demonstrated respect

239
00:16:51,413 --> 00:16:53,733
Speaker 2: for the sovereignty of Parliament and the rule of law

240
00:16:54,013 --> 00:16:59,653
Speaker 2: and the doctrines of precedents, President and the other. The

241
00:16:59,693 --> 00:17:05,053
Speaker 2: other suggestion, though, and this is not as radical as

242
00:17:05,053 --> 00:17:09,093
Speaker 2: it sounds, is to introduce term limits for Supreme Court judges,

243
00:17:09,173 --> 00:17:10,853
Speaker 2: so they'd spend they'd come up out of the Court

244
00:17:10,853 --> 00:17:14,653
Speaker 2: of Appeal and spend five to seven years perhaps in

245
00:17:14,693 --> 00:17:16,373
Speaker 2: the Supreme Court and then go back to the Court

246
00:17:16,373 --> 00:17:19,693
Speaker 2: of Appeal or retire, and that way we'd I think

247
00:17:19,693 --> 00:17:25,413
Speaker 2: we'd counter an Ivory Tower concern that spending too long

248
00:17:25,653 --> 00:17:28,333
Speaker 2: at the top in the palace that we've built for

249
00:17:28,373 --> 00:17:33,493
Speaker 2: the Supreme Court in Wellington gives the risks giving Supreme

250
00:17:33,493 --> 00:17:38,533
Speaker 2: Court judges hears above their station. Their role is to

251
00:17:38,573 --> 00:17:43,053
Speaker 2: adjudicate on disputes, not to be not to take over

252
00:17:43,133 --> 00:17:46,893
Speaker 2: Parliament's role. So I think Supreme Court terms for Supreme

253
00:17:46,893 --> 00:17:49,693
Speaker 2: Court judges would be a good idea, and a greater

254
00:17:49,733 --> 00:17:53,413
Speaker 2: focus on judicial restraint in their track record.

255
00:17:53,533 --> 00:17:58,533
Speaker 3: The appointment to the superior courts, the retention of seventy

256
00:17:58,693 --> 00:18:04,533
Speaker 3: sorry that the tension of retirement at seventy Yes, retention

257
00:18:04,613 --> 00:18:07,773
Speaker 3: of that. Why is it that somebody who's had an

258
00:18:08,493 --> 00:18:15,293
Speaker 3: a lifelong experience in the legal system is necessarily useless

259
00:18:15,373 --> 00:18:21,133
Speaker 3: at Seventy's just a question that I've often pondered. Why

260
00:18:21,213 --> 00:18:23,853
Speaker 3: there isn't why there aren't other arrangements.

261
00:18:24,973 --> 00:18:29,333
Speaker 2: I think anything else becomes too hard. So it's a

262
00:18:29,373 --> 00:18:34,933
Speaker 2: blunt rule to avoid having to deal with judges with

263
00:18:34,973 --> 00:18:38,453
Speaker 2: cognitive decline. And you want to put the cut off

264
00:18:38,493 --> 00:18:41,253
Speaker 2: point early enough so that you're not you're not running

265
00:18:41,253 --> 00:18:43,893
Speaker 2: into the risk of it. We've seen that with some

266
00:18:43,933 --> 00:18:48,453
Speaker 2: Supreme Court judges in the US. Perhaps it could be

267
00:18:48,493 --> 00:18:51,533
Speaker 2: seventy five, but I think you need a blunt rule

268
00:18:51,853 --> 00:18:55,613
Speaker 2: rather than an evaluation of a particular judges cognitive performance.

269
00:18:56,573 --> 00:19:00,733
Speaker 3: You may mention of the Americans being a written constitution,

270
00:19:00,933 --> 00:19:08,253
Speaker 3: which of course is right. We don't our constitution is well,

271
00:19:08,853 --> 00:19:10,213
Speaker 3: is it a living constitution.

272
00:19:12,733 --> 00:19:18,413
Speaker 2: It's not a living constitution in the sense that progressive

273
00:19:18,493 --> 00:19:21,293
Speaker 2: or activist judges in the US would claim it to be.

274
00:19:21,853 --> 00:19:27,533
Speaker 2: And this idea of living law the meaning and just

275
00:19:27,573 --> 00:19:31,933
Speaker 2: to explain it, that's generally the idea that the meaning

276
00:19:32,133 --> 00:19:38,093
Speaker 2: of legislation changes as society's values. Change. I think that's

277
00:19:38,133 --> 00:19:41,773
Speaker 2: a very dangerous concept. I think it's inconsistent with the

278
00:19:41,853 --> 00:19:46,013
Speaker 2: rule of law. I think legislation means what it meant,

279
00:19:46,053 --> 00:19:49,453
Speaker 2: including a constitutional document, means what it was meant when

280
00:19:49,453 --> 00:19:54,853
Speaker 2: it was enacted. And if society of voters the electorate

281
00:19:54,933 --> 00:19:59,653
Speaker 2: wants changes to us, then that should go through the

282
00:19:59,693 --> 00:20:03,533
Speaker 2: democratic process and so and we've seen that with the

283
00:20:03,613 --> 00:20:08,933
Speaker 2: US Constitution with a series of amendments. That's the democratically

284
00:20:09,013 --> 00:20:14,533
Speaker 2: legitimate way of changing both your founding constitution and any

285
00:20:14,613 --> 00:20:19,533
Speaker 2: other law that needs updating. Not the courts saying well,

286
00:20:19,653 --> 00:20:22,453
Speaker 2: Parliament might have meant one thing in nineteen ninety, but

287
00:20:22,573 --> 00:20:26,413
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty four it would have decided something else

288
00:20:26,533 --> 00:20:30,813
Speaker 2: because we think society's values are changed. Therefore we'll interpret

289
00:20:30,853 --> 00:20:34,253
Speaker 2: it in a different way. That's not the job for

290
00:20:34,293 --> 00:20:37,973
Speaker 2: the courts. That's a job for our democratically elected parliament.

291
00:20:38,293 --> 00:20:41,453
Speaker 2: The courts are not equipped to make social policy decisions.

292
00:20:41,453 --> 00:20:44,013
Speaker 2: They don't have the process of decisions. They don't have

293
00:20:44,053 --> 00:20:48,253
Speaker 2: the submission making process that occurs in Parliament with select committees.

294
00:20:52,453 --> 00:20:55,213
Speaker 2: They are dealing with issues in a very constrained way.

295
00:20:55,613 --> 00:20:58,173
Speaker 2: The issues come before the courts in a dispute between

296
00:20:58,213 --> 00:21:01,613
Speaker 2: two parties, so not everybody with an interest is represented,

297
00:21:03,813 --> 00:21:06,933
Speaker 2: and so they're not equipped to make social policy decisions.

298
00:21:07,533 --> 00:21:11,173
Speaker 2: And then they're not but obviously obviously they think they are.

299
00:21:12,413 --> 00:21:15,333
Speaker 2: Well they think they are. And that's the problem that

300
00:21:14,693 --> 00:21:18,973
Speaker 2: the report primarily addresses. How to reign in a court

301
00:21:19,013 --> 00:21:24,093
Speaker 2: that thinks that it's got a function that's beyond its remit.

302
00:21:25,533 --> 00:21:30,173
Speaker 3: I know I'm retreading where we've already been, but the

303
00:21:30,213 --> 00:21:35,893
Speaker 3: suggestion that they are overreaching and the reasons that we've

304
00:21:35,973 --> 00:21:40,453
Speaker 3: discussed makes it makes it more difficult to accept the

305
00:21:41,373 --> 00:21:44,973
Speaker 3: appointment process. And I know that you've explained that. I'm

306
00:21:45,013 --> 00:21:48,413
Speaker 3: just expressing my frustration with it. Can I quote you something?

307
00:21:48,653 --> 00:21:53,893
Speaker 3: The living constitution argument usually proceeds from the observation of

308
00:21:54,053 --> 00:21:57,613
Speaker 3: that society's morality is involving and the Constitution should be

309
00:21:58,013 --> 00:22:02,173
Speaker 3: interpreted by the courts to reflect that. The argument is disingenuous.

310
00:22:02,253 --> 00:22:05,773
Speaker 3: When a court invalidates a statute, it invalidates the best

311
00:22:05,813 --> 00:22:11,453
Speaker 3: evidence available of what society's morality, and the evolving morality rationale,

312
00:22:11,493 --> 00:22:13,893
Speaker 3: which the Supreme Court has used a number of times,

313
00:22:14,013 --> 00:22:16,253
Speaker 3: is actually no more than a statement that the court

314
00:22:16,293 --> 00:22:20,813
Speaker 3: believes the morality it prefers should be enforced. The society

315
00:22:20,893 --> 00:22:28,213
Speaker 3: is not involving only the court is will. That summarizes here, well,

316
00:22:28,213 --> 00:22:31,213
Speaker 3: that's that is a central issue.

317
00:22:31,373 --> 00:22:35,133
Speaker 2: But the living constitution concept is not really taken hold

318
00:22:35,693 --> 00:22:41,333
Speaker 2: in New Zealand except in some specific instances, and one

319
00:22:41,333 --> 00:22:45,333
Speaker 2: of the recommendations in the report is that to nip

320
00:22:45,373 --> 00:22:48,013
Speaker 2: it in its court. That's described in the report as

321
00:22:48,053 --> 00:22:51,853
Speaker 2: the ambulatory approach, so that the meaning of legislation changes

322
00:22:51,933 --> 00:22:56,653
Speaker 2: over time, the ambulatory approach or the living the living

323
00:22:56,693 --> 00:23:02,573
Speaker 2: constitution approach. In the US, the Parliament gives guidelines to

324
00:23:02,613 --> 00:23:07,733
Speaker 2: the courts on how they interpret legislation. It provides that

325
00:23:07,853 --> 00:23:13,453
Speaker 2: legislation is to be the meaning is to be determined

326
00:23:14,013 --> 00:23:17,093
Speaker 2: from the text of the legislation and in light of

327
00:23:17,133 --> 00:23:22,733
Speaker 2: its purpose and context. So that's the purpose that Parliament

328
00:23:22,773 --> 00:23:26,813
Speaker 2: had when it passed the legislation. Those last three words

329
00:23:26,853 --> 00:23:31,133
Speaker 2: and the context and its context I think could be

330
00:23:31,173 --> 00:23:36,573
Speaker 2: sharpened up. It does not make clear that the context,

331
00:23:36,613 --> 00:23:39,533
Speaker 2: the relevant context is the context when the law was passed,

332
00:23:40,733 --> 00:23:43,533
Speaker 2: and there are some suggestions that the court can look

333
00:23:43,573 --> 00:23:50,893
Speaker 2: to later context, so changing values. I'm suggesting that Parliament

334
00:23:51,453 --> 00:23:55,573
Speaker 2: sharpen up that wording to introduce some guardrails to make

335
00:23:55,613 --> 00:23:58,013
Speaker 2: it clear that we're talking about the context when the

336
00:23:58,093 --> 00:24:02,773
Speaker 2: law was enacted, and so that's designed to stop the

337
00:24:04,293 --> 00:24:09,093
Speaker 2: mischief you've described in that quote of the courts updating

338
00:24:09,133 --> 00:24:14,173
Speaker 2: the meaning of legislation without it going through Parliament simply

339
00:24:14,213 --> 00:24:17,773
Speaker 2: by interpreting it differently based on their perceptions of changing

340
00:24:17,813 --> 00:24:18,933
Speaker 2: society's values.

341
00:24:20,413 --> 00:24:26,253
Speaker 3: The report runs forty six pages. It starts off with

342
00:24:26,733 --> 00:24:31,413
Speaker 3: the introduction Chapter one, which came from a New Zealander

343
00:24:31,453 --> 00:24:32,933
Speaker 3: I believe, originally.

344
00:24:33,533 --> 00:24:40,733
Speaker 2: The reference to the Ford from Richard, Professor Richard Eakins. Yes, yes, yes,

345
00:24:40,933 --> 00:24:45,533
Speaker 2: Richard's the graduate of That's right. Richard's a graduate of

346
00:24:45,573 --> 00:24:51,133
Speaker 2: Auckland Law School. He was for a period, he was

347
00:24:51,173 --> 00:24:56,573
Speaker 2: for a period on the elector at Auckland and during

348
00:24:56,573 --> 00:24:58,973
Speaker 2: that time he was a council member of the Legal

349
00:24:58,973 --> 00:25:01,613
Speaker 2: Research Foundation, of which I was the executive director for

350
00:25:01,693 --> 00:25:06,053
Speaker 2: nearly a decade. And he's gone on to a glittering

351
00:25:06,133 --> 00:25:09,493
Speaker 2: career for a man of such a young age. I

352
00:25:09,493 --> 00:25:11,253
Speaker 2: don't want to put a name a figure on it,

353
00:25:11,293 --> 00:25:13,773
Speaker 2: but he must be in his early forties at most.

354
00:25:13,933 --> 00:25:16,133
Speaker 2: He's a King's Council in the UK and a full

355
00:25:16,133 --> 00:25:21,373
Speaker 2: professor at Oxford of Law and Constitutional government. So he's

356
00:25:21,413 --> 00:25:24,173
Speaker 2: a bright star in constitutional law.

357
00:25:25,053 --> 00:25:29,573
Speaker 3: So chapter Chapter two is the problem and overreaching Supreme Court,

358
00:25:30,333 --> 00:25:34,213
Speaker 3: which we've covered of course, subverting Parliament the Supreme Court's

359
00:25:34,253 --> 00:25:38,973
Speaker 3: approach to statutes because there are two areas, statutes and

360
00:25:39,093 --> 00:25:43,613
Speaker 3: common law. That's right, and they are behaving the same

361
00:25:43,813 --> 00:25:46,893
Speaker 3: or tend to behave the same on both counts. Am

362
00:25:46,933 --> 00:25:47,213
Speaker 3: I right?

363
00:25:48,213 --> 00:25:50,293
Speaker 2: Well, the same in the sense that the approach they're

364
00:25:50,333 --> 00:25:56,013
Speaker 2: taking is radical. So when it comes to interpreting statutes,

365
00:25:56,813 --> 00:26:01,013
Speaker 2: for most just to finish off on the statutory interpretation

366
00:26:01,173 --> 00:26:04,653
Speaker 2: peace first before moving to the common law. For most

367
00:26:04,733 --> 00:26:10,933
Speaker 2: of the last twenty years they've been relatively constrained when

368
00:26:10,973 --> 00:26:14,773
Speaker 2: interpreting statutes. They'd accepted that the license given to them

369
00:26:15,733 --> 00:26:20,053
Speaker 2: by Parliament didn't allow them to adopt an unreasonable interpretation.

370
00:26:20,733 --> 00:26:23,973
Speaker 2: But the Chief Justice in the three Strikes case, Fitzgerald

371
00:26:24,013 --> 00:26:27,653
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty one, was quite splicit and casting off

372
00:26:28,173 --> 00:26:32,533
Speaker 2: those shackles and saying the word reasonable didn't exist when

373
00:26:32,573 --> 00:26:36,213
Speaker 2: they were looking at laws that conflicted with rights protected

374
00:26:36,213 --> 00:26:38,493
Speaker 2: by the Bill of Rights, and that they could that

375
00:26:38,573 --> 00:26:42,093
Speaker 2: they weren't constrained by a reasonable interpretation. It follows from

376
00:26:42,093 --> 00:26:45,213
Speaker 2: that that they were willing to adopt an unreasonable interpretation

377
00:26:45,293 --> 00:26:49,893
Speaker 2: which could never have been Parliament's intent. So they became

378
00:26:50,453 --> 00:26:56,333
Speaker 2: they've become increasingly unconstrained in relation to the interpretation of legislation.

379
00:26:56,813 --> 00:26:57,653
Speaker 3: Becawed.

380
00:26:58,973 --> 00:27:01,973
Speaker 2: No, but they've given themselves license, that's what I mean.

381
00:27:02,053 --> 00:27:05,853
Speaker 3: They've been allowed to make up their own rules.

382
00:27:06,893 --> 00:27:10,333
Speaker 2: That's right. And another one of the recommendations and the

383
00:27:10,373 --> 00:27:14,853
Speaker 2: report is that Parliament may clear ed its guidelines on

384
00:27:14,933 --> 00:27:19,093
Speaker 2: how the court's approach to interpreting statutes. Again, to titan

385
00:27:19,893 --> 00:27:23,333
Speaker 2: up the guidelines to make it clear or not guidelines,

386
00:27:23,333 --> 00:27:27,133
Speaker 2: they're rules, to make it clear that they can't adopt

387
00:27:27,213 --> 00:27:32,813
Speaker 2: meanings of legislation that's inconsistent with Parliament's intent, or interpretations

388
00:27:32,853 --> 00:27:39,253
Speaker 2: that are unreasonable. So the report recommends changes to the

389
00:27:39,373 --> 00:27:45,933
Speaker 2: rules Parliament sets for the courts when interpreting legislation. Of course,

390
00:27:46,133 --> 00:27:51,853
Speaker 2: Parliament is supreme and so it can overturn and if necessary,

391
00:27:51,893 --> 00:27:55,893
Speaker 2: pass legislation clarifying its intent, but it shouldn't have to

392
00:27:55,933 --> 00:27:59,413
Speaker 2: do that. Sometimes Parliament can be careless with the words

393
00:27:59,413 --> 00:28:01,893
Speaker 2: it used, and sometimes they do need to be fine tuned,

394
00:28:02,493 --> 00:28:06,453
Speaker 2: but they shouldn't be facing a court that is insisting

395
00:28:06,613 --> 00:28:10,893
Speaker 2: on a meaning that is different from what Parliament clearly intended,

396
00:28:11,453 --> 00:28:14,253
Speaker 2: and that's what we saw in the Fitzgerald Fitzgerald case.

397
00:28:15,293 --> 00:28:18,133
Speaker 2: So I've dwelt a little bit on the legislation side

398
00:28:18,173 --> 00:28:21,213
Speaker 2: of things. Shall we come to the common law side now? Yes?

399
00:28:22,773 --> 00:28:26,173
Speaker 2: And perhaps the best place to start as a description

400
00:28:26,533 --> 00:28:30,693
Speaker 2: for your listeners of what the common law is, because

401
00:28:31,093 --> 00:28:34,693
Speaker 2: it is judge made law. Our law is very largely

402
00:28:34,733 --> 00:28:39,173
Speaker 2: made up of statutes passed by Parliament, but there's a

403
00:28:39,213 --> 00:28:43,213
Speaker 2: body of common law that we inherited from England in

404
00:28:43,253 --> 00:28:47,773
Speaker 2: eighteen fifty two when the English Laws Act was passed,

405
00:28:48,613 --> 00:28:52,533
Speaker 2: and these are the sets of laws, many of which

406
00:28:52,533 --> 00:28:55,613
Speaker 2: have been codified subsequently in statute, but these are the

407
00:28:55,693 --> 00:28:58,653
Speaker 2: laws that were created by the courts over many centuries,

408
00:28:59,093 --> 00:29:03,093
Speaker 2: for example, determining what sorts of promises are enforceable in

409
00:29:03,133 --> 00:29:08,973
Speaker 2: the courts as contracts. The taughts or civil wrongs like

410
00:29:09,093 --> 00:29:14,013
Speaker 2: negligence and slander and trespass all are originally part of

411
00:29:14,013 --> 00:29:20,453
Speaker 2: the common law, equitable notions of trust. So there's a

412
00:29:20,453 --> 00:29:24,013
Speaker 2: whole body of law that is judge made, that's the

413
00:29:24,013 --> 00:29:27,893
Speaker 2: common law, and from that body of law you can

414
00:29:27,973 --> 00:29:33,573
Speaker 2: draw principles and the courts on a conventional or traditional

415
00:29:33,653 --> 00:29:37,013
Speaker 2: orthodox approach to common law method will fill the gaps

416
00:29:37,053 --> 00:29:41,213
Speaker 2: in it to deal with new circumstances, drawing on those principles,

417
00:29:42,213 --> 00:29:45,413
Speaker 2: or make corrections when it's clear that courts in the

418
00:29:45,453 --> 00:29:48,613
Speaker 2: past have earred and they've taken an approach in one

419
00:29:48,693 --> 00:29:51,173
Speaker 2: part of the common law that's clearly inconsistent with the

420
00:29:51,173 --> 00:29:53,653
Speaker 2: body of the common law, and so they'll iron out

421
00:29:53,733 --> 00:29:58,453
Speaker 2: any wrinkles. So that's the traditional common law method. What

422
00:29:58,613 --> 00:30:03,333
Speaker 2: our Supreme Court has said repeatedly in cases and in

423
00:30:04,253 --> 00:30:08,933
Speaker 2: it's the judge's extrajudicial writings and lectures and speeches, is

424
00:30:08,973 --> 00:30:14,773
Speaker 2: that their approach involves reshaping established legal principles to match

425
00:30:14,933 --> 00:30:18,973
Speaker 2: judge's views of today's social values. So rather than taking

426
00:30:19,013 --> 00:30:22,093
Speaker 2: the common law and filling gaps in it or ironing

427
00:30:22,133 --> 00:30:28,333
Speaker 2: out wrinkles, they are willing to change its fundamental values

428
00:30:28,373 --> 00:30:30,933
Speaker 2: and take it on a journey by developing it having

429
00:30:31,013 --> 00:30:34,093
Speaker 2: regard to their views of social values. Now that's an

430
00:30:34,293 --> 00:30:41,133
Speaker 2: unquestionably radical approach, and it's inconsistent with the rule of

431
00:30:41,213 --> 00:30:43,813
Speaker 2: law because it throws the law into a state of chaos.

432
00:30:45,013 --> 00:30:50,253
Speaker 2: We've seen that with the Elis decision and the quagma.

433
00:30:50,373 --> 00:30:52,933
Speaker 2: They've left that they've left us in relation to the

434
00:30:53,013 --> 00:30:59,013
Speaker 2: role of Teacungor and the law. So your question, if

435
00:30:59,053 --> 00:31:03,133
Speaker 2: I track back, was that they're taking the same approach

436
00:31:03,173 --> 00:31:06,013
Speaker 2: in relation to the common Law as in relation to

437
00:31:06,533 --> 00:31:12,133
Speaker 2: this statutes, a disruptive and radical approach. So it's the

438
00:31:12,173 --> 00:31:15,973
Speaker 2: same in that sense, and it's the same in the

439
00:31:16,053 --> 00:31:18,853
Speaker 2: sense that it undermines the rule of law because it

440
00:31:18,933 --> 00:31:26,333
Speaker 2: creates uncertainty and unpredictability. It also undermines the sovereignty of Parliament,

441
00:31:26,653 --> 00:31:32,053
Speaker 2: quite directly in the case when the Court ignores Parliament's

442
00:31:32,053 --> 00:31:35,533
Speaker 2: intended meaning, but also in relation to the common Law,

443
00:31:35,533 --> 00:31:40,333
Speaker 2: where it's making big social policy decisions which are properly

444
00:31:40,493 --> 00:31:43,293
Speaker 2: the role for our elected representatives.

445
00:31:43,973 --> 00:31:45,893
Speaker 3: Would you put this down to arrogance.

446
00:31:47,253 --> 00:31:53,813
Speaker 2: I think there is a degree of disdain in some

447
00:31:54,133 --> 00:32:00,053
Speaker 2: parts of our legal elites for the democratic process, and

448
00:32:00,133 --> 00:32:03,853
Speaker 2: I think there is a degree of hubris involved in

449
00:32:03,853 --> 00:32:08,053
Speaker 2: the court's approach that they know better. Perhaps I'm just

450
00:32:08,133 --> 00:32:10,493
Speaker 2: using synonyms for the word you used.

451
00:32:11,573 --> 00:32:15,653
Speaker 3: One way or the other. Some of them apply. Yeah, okay,

452
00:32:16,813 --> 00:32:19,213
Speaker 3: So with the common law, how is that? How is

453
00:32:19,253 --> 00:32:20,373
Speaker 3: that to be rectified?

454
00:32:22,213 --> 00:32:26,293
Speaker 2: There are a few things Parliament can do, one of

455
00:32:26,333 --> 00:32:33,613
Speaker 2: which is to give more guardrails. When the Supreme Court

456
00:32:33,733 --> 00:32:37,933
Speaker 2: was created in two thousand and three, the Act of

457
00:32:38,013 --> 00:32:42,973
Speaker 2: Parliament affirmed New Zealand's ongoing commitment to the sovereignty of

458
00:32:43,013 --> 00:32:46,893
Speaker 2: Parliament and to the rule of law. And the rule

459
00:32:46,933 --> 00:32:52,093
Speaker 2: of law traditionally has been regarded as the formal elements

460
00:32:52,533 --> 00:33:00,493
Speaker 2: of laws, so clearly accessible, impartially applied, easily understood, predictable,

461
00:33:00,653 --> 00:33:05,013
Speaker 2: consistently applied and so forth. Yes, so the formal aspects

462
00:33:05,293 --> 00:33:09,293
Speaker 2: of laws, not their substantive content stand of contents up

463
00:33:09,293 --> 00:33:14,973
Speaker 2: to Parliament. It's become increasingly fashionable over the last so

464
00:33:15,133 --> 00:33:20,653
Speaker 2: since the middle of the twentieth century to argue for

465
00:33:20,853 --> 00:33:24,213
Speaker 2: a thicker or a more substantive version of the rule

466
00:33:24,253 --> 00:33:27,533
Speaker 2: of law. So the rule of law then connotes ideas

467
00:33:27,533 --> 00:33:34,573
Speaker 2: of social justice and economic entitlements or rights. And at

468
00:33:34,653 --> 00:33:37,573
Speaker 2: least one member of the Supreme Court adheres to what's

469
00:33:37,653 --> 00:33:40,973
Speaker 2: called the thick version of the rule of law compared

470
00:33:40,973 --> 00:33:44,053
Speaker 2: with a thin formal version of the rule of law.

471
00:33:44,973 --> 00:33:48,013
Speaker 2: And it's unhelpful that the term the rule of law

472
00:33:48,213 --> 00:33:52,333
Speaker 2: is undefined in what's now the Senior Courts Act. And

473
00:33:52,373 --> 00:33:58,533
Speaker 2: so against the risk that the courts embark on a

474
00:33:58,733 --> 00:34:02,733
Speaker 2: journey of developing the common law in the name of

475
00:34:04,173 --> 00:34:07,293
Speaker 2: a thick version of the rule of law that requires

476
00:34:07,333 --> 00:34:14,533
Speaker 2: social justice and addressing disadvantage and so forth, all matters

477
00:34:14,573 --> 00:34:16,853
Speaker 2: which most of us will think were properly for our parliament.

478
00:34:18,253 --> 00:34:22,733
Speaker 2: The report recommends that Parliament legislate the meaning of the

479
00:34:22,813 --> 00:34:25,893
Speaker 2: rule of law and specify that it just means the

480
00:34:25,933 --> 00:34:29,293
Speaker 2: thin components, the formal aspects of the law, so that

481
00:34:29,373 --> 00:34:34,693
Speaker 2: the courts can't go on this reforming crusade in the

482
00:34:34,773 --> 00:34:37,213
Speaker 2: name of the rule of law. So that's one thing.

483
00:34:38,533 --> 00:34:47,053
Speaker 2: Greater attention to greater attention to who's appointed as superior

484
00:34:47,053 --> 00:34:49,213
Speaker 2: court judges and the Court of Appeal in the Supreme

485
00:34:49,253 --> 00:34:53,173
Speaker 2: Court is another. And then a third is for Parliament

486
00:34:53,173 --> 00:34:56,733
Speaker 2: to exercise its legislative power when it thinks that the

487
00:34:56,773 --> 00:35:00,773
Speaker 2: courts have taken the common law off in the wrong direction.

488
00:35:02,533 --> 00:35:06,813
Speaker 2: Parliament shouldn't hesitate to pass law to put it back

489
00:35:06,853 --> 00:35:11,373
Speaker 2: on track. That is Parliament's prerogative, and it shouldn't hesitate

490
00:35:11,453 --> 00:35:11,933
Speaker 2: to use.

491
00:35:11,813 --> 00:35:14,133
Speaker 3: It if it can.

492
00:35:16,013 --> 00:35:18,973
Speaker 2: Well, no, well, it absolutely well if it can. In

493
00:35:19,013 --> 00:35:22,573
Speaker 2: the sense of whether it's that there's a political majority

494
00:35:22,173 --> 00:35:29,893
Speaker 2: for law change, yes, but we've got a our unicameral

495
00:35:30,133 --> 00:35:35,013
Speaker 2: system of parliament means that we often don't get bog

496
00:35:35,133 --> 00:35:40,013
Speaker 2: too bog down within passes. M MP of course changes that,

497
00:35:41,093 --> 00:35:45,573
Speaker 2: and perhaps it requires the passage of time, a change

498
00:35:45,573 --> 00:35:47,773
Speaker 2: of government, whether it's the left or the right, to

499
00:35:47,813 --> 00:35:52,493
Speaker 2: put things straight. But Parliament shouldn't hesitate to use its

500
00:35:52,733 --> 00:35:57,573
Speaker 2: power as the supreme law maker to ensure that the

501
00:35:57,653 --> 00:36:00,653
Speaker 2: law stays on track.

502
00:36:00,933 --> 00:36:04,733
Speaker 3: What do then deal with an issue that is not

503
00:36:04,853 --> 00:36:09,293
Speaker 3: in the in the report, but to me it's a

504
00:36:09,373 --> 00:36:13,853
Speaker 3: very important one, and that is law legal education, in

505
00:36:13,893 --> 00:36:16,613
Speaker 3: other words, the law schools in this country and whether

506
00:36:16,693 --> 00:36:20,733
Speaker 3: or not they're doing an appropriate job. And I would

507
00:36:20,893 --> 00:36:23,973
Speaker 3: I would question, for instance, whether maybe the maybe the

508
00:36:24,053 --> 00:36:28,573
Speaker 3: time gap is too close, but whether the turnouts from

509
00:36:28,733 --> 00:36:34,133
Speaker 3: law schools are not not influencing the law as it is,

510
00:36:34,173 --> 00:36:38,453
Speaker 3: the common law, in particular because they want they want

511
00:36:38,533 --> 00:36:39,373
Speaker 3: social adjustment.

512
00:36:40,493 --> 00:36:47,213
Speaker 2: Well, our university's studies show, certainly international studies show overwhelmingly

513
00:36:47,853 --> 00:36:52,293
Speaker 2: progressive or liberal left leaning. I think that's probably true

514
00:36:52,413 --> 00:36:56,493
Speaker 2: of law schools here as well as overseas.

515
00:36:56,653 --> 00:36:59,093
Speaker 3: Can we can we can we can we accept that

516
00:36:59,813 --> 00:37:03,173
Speaker 3: left leaning means anti democratic.

517
00:37:04,173 --> 00:37:08,253
Speaker 2: I know, not necessarily, but it can not necessarily. I

518
00:37:08,533 --> 00:37:10,653
Speaker 2: think on the left and the right you've got anti

519
00:37:10,693 --> 00:37:18,493
Speaker 2: democratic tendencies. But I think the I think generally the

520
00:37:19,973 --> 00:37:25,973
Speaker 2: political mix of academics, especially in the social sciences, is

521
00:37:27,173 --> 00:37:30,933
Speaker 2: dangerously skewed. So I think that that that's a separate issue,

522
00:37:30,933 --> 00:37:35,333
Speaker 2: and we're we're we're seeing aspects of that in debates

523
00:37:35,373 --> 00:37:39,773
Speaker 2: currently over freedom of speech and academic freedom. And I'm

524
00:37:39,813 --> 00:37:44,133
Speaker 2: sure that has an influence on the product from law

525
00:37:44,173 --> 00:37:51,773
Speaker 2: schools in the sense of the the legal methods law

526
00:37:51,813 --> 00:37:55,253
Speaker 2: students are being imbued with being quite different than perhaps

527
00:37:55,253 --> 00:38:00,093
Speaker 2: it was even twenty years ago. So I think that's

528
00:38:00,253 --> 00:38:03,733
Speaker 2: I think that's that an issue. It just means those

529
00:38:03,813 --> 00:38:07,493
Speaker 2: with differing views need to have the courage to debate.

530
00:38:09,333 --> 00:38:13,173
Speaker 2: And that's that's perhaps another issue, and an even broader

531
00:38:13,213 --> 00:38:17,893
Speaker 2: issue affecting our country, and that is a combination of

532
00:38:17,933 --> 00:38:21,493
Speaker 2: the tall poppy syndrome and the small size of the

533
00:38:21,533 --> 00:38:25,613
Speaker 2: country often leads to people not standing up and challenging,

534
00:38:26,093 --> 00:38:27,573
Speaker 2: and we need to see much more of that.

535
00:38:27,933 --> 00:38:29,893
Speaker 3: I thought you were going to say freedom of speech.

536
00:38:30,773 --> 00:38:33,933
Speaker 2: Yes, well, there's the freedom of speech issue, but there's

537
00:38:33,973 --> 00:38:38,893
Speaker 2: an important job for those to do with the contrarians

538
00:38:38,933 --> 00:38:43,933
Speaker 2: to speak out and I think generally not enough contrarians

539
00:38:43,973 --> 00:38:47,933
Speaker 2: speak out here. It is quite distinctively different in New Zealand,

540
00:38:48,013 --> 00:38:52,813
Speaker 2: even from Australia. Yes, in the business environment which I'm

541
00:38:52,853 --> 00:38:57,493
Speaker 2: most familiar with, Australian business leaders are much more outspoken.

542
00:38:57,693 --> 00:39:00,173
Speaker 2: But I think that's just true of New Zealand society.

543
00:39:01,293 --> 00:39:05,533
Speaker 2: A difference between New Zealand and Australian society generally. But

544
00:39:05,813 --> 00:39:10,413
Speaker 2: debate is healthy and we must have contrarians. I know

545
00:39:10,493 --> 00:39:16,373
Speaker 2: you've interviewed one legal contrarian, Jim Allen. I enjoyed that discussion.

546
00:39:16,613 --> 00:39:18,173
Speaker 3: Yes, and you'll.

547
00:39:18,013 --> 00:39:20,493
Speaker 2: See I quote, I quote, I quote Jim and you

548
00:39:20,573 --> 00:39:23,333
Speaker 2: did in the introduction, in the introduction to the report.

549
00:39:23,533 --> 00:39:27,213
Speaker 3: Yes, he's he is. Here's a how can I put it?

550
00:39:27,333 --> 00:39:29,493
Speaker 3: He's a brilliant opinionist.

551
00:39:29,973 --> 00:39:35,013
Speaker 2: He is, indeed, and but he but he not and

552
00:39:35,093 --> 00:39:37,813
Speaker 2: not at all cautious with the opinions the expresses, which

553
00:39:37,893 --> 00:39:38,733
Speaker 2: is refreshing.

554
00:39:38,973 --> 00:39:42,453
Speaker 3: Absolutely so. I think that he and I may mention

555
00:39:42,573 --> 00:39:47,413
Speaker 3: of a Targo law school in our in our conversation,

556
00:39:48,133 --> 00:39:50,573
Speaker 3: but there is that is a law school for instance,

557
00:39:50,613 --> 00:39:53,693
Speaker 3: that at this point of time, I wouldn't I wouldn't

558
00:39:53,733 --> 00:39:57,933
Speaker 3: send my child, my son, Albeit that he went there

559
00:39:58,693 --> 00:40:04,373
Speaker 3: but got but escaped before the current spate of approaches

560
00:40:04,373 --> 00:40:05,773
Speaker 3: and attitudes set in.

561
00:40:06,973 --> 00:40:10,413
Speaker 2: Yes, well, I think we're seeing a dangerous politicization of

562
00:40:10,453 --> 00:40:16,373
Speaker 2: our universities and the pendulum hasn't yet started to swing back.

563
00:40:16,973 --> 00:40:22,493
Speaker 2: It must do. Universities should be politically neutral institutions, and

564
00:40:22,573 --> 00:40:22,853
Speaker 2: they're not.

565
00:40:24,373 --> 00:40:27,653
Speaker 3: They just jumped to politics for a moment. This is

566
00:40:28,133 --> 00:40:32,733
Speaker 3: a sidebar question, I suppose, But our Prime Minister has

567
00:40:33,533 --> 00:40:37,533
Speaker 3: in the last few days been been guarded with some

568
00:40:39,173 --> 00:40:47,533
Speaker 3: rather complementary opinions from across the Tasman from journalists, particularly

569
00:40:47,573 --> 00:40:52,813
Speaker 3: from the Australian journalists, and suggesting that New Zealand is

570
00:40:53,133 --> 00:40:57,493
Speaker 3: finally back on track and heading in the right direction successfully.

571
00:40:57,973 --> 00:41:01,853
Speaker 3: So the question I have is do you think that

572
00:41:01,893 --> 00:41:06,653
Speaker 3: our Prime minister has the capacity to approach these social

573
00:41:06,693 --> 00:41:11,613
Speaker 3: issues in the country in the with the appropriate attitude

574
00:41:11,773 --> 00:41:17,173
Speaker 3: to you and I are discussing, Yes.

575
00:41:19,213 --> 00:41:21,413
Speaker 2: I'm going to I'm going to give a qualified years

576
00:41:21,493 --> 00:41:24,973
Speaker 2: only because the task in front front of the government

577
00:41:25,013 --> 00:41:28,253
Speaker 2: is an enormous one. But I think they have This

578
00:41:28,373 --> 00:41:33,453
Speaker 2: is almost an entirely different conversation. The political challenges facing

579
00:41:33,453 --> 00:41:38,893
Speaker 2: the country, political and economic and social, and they're they're vast,

580
00:41:41,133 --> 00:41:43,413
Speaker 2: But I think we have a government with a very

581
00:41:43,493 --> 00:41:51,773
Speaker 2: ambitious reform agenda on education, housing, transport, infrastructure policy, a

582
00:41:51,893 --> 00:41:55,773
Speaker 2: range of issues that are critical and health to an extent.

583
00:41:56,293 --> 00:41:58,453
Speaker 2: A health system needs much more of a shakeup than

584
00:41:58,493 --> 00:42:01,173
Speaker 2: it's going to be given this, but you can understand

585
00:42:01,213 --> 00:42:06,573
Speaker 2: the reluctance to shake up an organization that's reeling already.

586
00:42:09,773 --> 00:42:15,453
Speaker 2: Those range of reforms in housing, education, and improvements to

587
00:42:15,493 --> 00:42:17,413
Speaker 2: the health system are all critical to the good life

588
00:42:17,453 --> 00:42:21,133
Speaker 2: in New Zealand. And I think there's an ambitious reform

589
00:42:21,133 --> 00:42:26,013
Speaker 2: agenda that the government set itself. A lot of it

590
00:42:26,093 --> 00:42:29,733
Speaker 2: builds on research and recommendations made by the Initiative over

591
00:42:29,773 --> 00:42:33,933
Speaker 2: the last decade. And I can see why in Australia

592
00:42:34,013 --> 00:42:39,573
Speaker 2: they look favorably towards the New Zealand the current coalition

593
00:42:39,653 --> 00:42:44,053
Speaker 2: government because of the ambition of its reform agenda. Australia

594
00:42:44,093 --> 00:42:47,333
Speaker 2: is the lucky country. It's much more prosperous than New Zealand,

595
00:42:47,653 --> 00:42:52,333
Speaker 2: but it's track record of political reform over the last

596
00:42:52,413 --> 00:42:57,293
Speaker 2: twenty years is dire. So yes are qualified, Yes, Okay.

597
00:42:58,373 --> 00:43:02,493
Speaker 3: I then am inspired to repeat to you something that

598
00:43:02,853 --> 00:43:07,013
Speaker 3: an Australian commentator said to me yesterday and this was

599
00:43:07,133 --> 00:43:12,453
Speaker 3: just in conversation, not for broadcast, but it will be

600
00:43:12,613 --> 00:43:18,373
Speaker 3: in the near future. Was that Australia is in very

601
00:43:18,613 --> 00:43:22,853
Speaker 3: deep trouble. And this is a guy who who is

602
00:43:23,293 --> 00:43:27,093
Speaker 3: very good at shall we say appropriate and you'll say

603
00:43:27,173 --> 00:43:28,293
Speaker 3: balanced comment.

604
00:43:29,133 --> 00:43:33,253
Speaker 2: Yes, Well, if Australia is in very deep trouble, then

605
00:43:33,293 --> 00:43:39,693
Speaker 2: we're in deeper trouble. Our housing is at least as unaffordable.

606
00:43:40,253 --> 00:43:45,613
Speaker 2: Our government's books are in much dire shape. We have

607
00:43:46,653 --> 00:43:52,213
Speaker 2: deep social divisions. Our health system is teetering on the

608
00:43:52,253 --> 00:43:56,613
Speaker 2: brink of collapse. Our educational standards have been slipping for

609
00:43:56,653 --> 00:44:00,653
Speaker 2: twenty years and haven't yet turned the corner. But there

610
00:44:00,653 --> 00:44:04,253
Speaker 2: are promising signs where the government's reform agenda. So I

611
00:44:05,573 --> 00:44:10,373
Speaker 2: think Australia's got its challenges, but I think we are

612
00:44:10,533 --> 00:44:13,093
Speaker 2: further down the precipice cloring our way up.

613
00:44:13,853 --> 00:44:18,253
Speaker 3: Then they are, well, maybe they're catching up. They made

614
00:44:18,373 --> 00:44:20,933
Speaker 3: his comment to be honest, His comment was basically to

615
00:44:20,973 --> 00:44:25,413
Speaker 3: do with the government of the day and specifically the

616
00:44:27,013 --> 00:44:29,933
Speaker 3: race scenario as it exists at the moment.

617
00:44:31,373 --> 00:44:36,813
Speaker 2: Yes, well, that they are dangerous issues creating expectations that

618
00:44:36,933 --> 00:44:41,333
Speaker 2: can't be fulfilled in liberal democracy is a is a

619
00:44:41,373 --> 00:44:46,293
Speaker 2: slippery slope and and they're going down the same track

620
00:44:46,373 --> 00:44:49,413
Speaker 2: as the second term of the Durn government. A better

621
00:44:49,453 --> 00:44:54,253
Speaker 2: approach is to focus on lifting up. So focus on

622
00:44:54,373 --> 00:45:02,413
Speaker 2: the social policy problems, unequal education outcomes, poor health outcomes,

623
00:45:02,773 --> 00:45:07,933
Speaker 2: housing outcomes. That's the solution to lifting the disadvantaged up.

624
00:45:08,893 --> 00:45:12,053
Speaker 2: Is there anything that is It's almost entirely been the

625
00:45:12,053 --> 00:45:14,333
Speaker 2: work of the New Zealand Initiative over the last decade.

626
00:45:14,333 --> 00:45:18,813
Speaker 3: Also, is there any particular reason why you haven't entered politics.

627
00:45:22,373 --> 00:45:26,173
Speaker 2: I may have left my run too late. In doesn't

628
00:45:26,213 --> 00:45:29,613
Speaker 2: sound a long time. It doesn't sound like spending a

629
00:45:29,613 --> 00:45:34,413
Speaker 2: long time in the law. And then I've I've found

630
00:45:34,413 --> 00:45:39,453
Speaker 2: my niche role as a critic, and not just not

631
00:45:39,533 --> 00:45:43,293
Speaker 2: just as a as a providing criticism, but also in

632
00:45:43,333 --> 00:45:49,533
Speaker 2: an organization that is coming up with ideas. Best decision

633
00:45:49,573 --> 00:45:52,613
Speaker 2: I ever made was to was to recruit our executive director,

634
00:45:52,693 --> 00:45:56,053
Speaker 2: Oliver Hartwitch and and he's built a great team of

635
00:45:56,093 --> 00:46:03,013
Speaker 2: the initiatives. So it's it's New Zealand lacks diversity of

636
00:46:03,053 --> 00:46:08,173
Speaker 2: thought and an organization like the One Eyed Chair is

637
00:46:08,173 --> 00:46:12,013
Speaker 2: is able to challenge the status quo. We're lucky to

638
00:46:12,053 --> 00:46:14,893
Speaker 2: have the independence to be able to speak out and

639
00:46:15,253 --> 00:46:19,013
Speaker 2: then to come up with ideas that may not be

640
00:46:19,013 --> 00:46:21,213
Speaker 2: coming out of either our universities or out of our

641
00:46:21,773 --> 00:46:22,933
Speaker 2: bureaucracy in Wellington.

642
00:46:23,213 --> 00:46:26,093
Speaker 3: And it's a shame that it has to be that way.

643
00:46:27,533 --> 00:46:30,293
Speaker 3: As in with reference to the universities, et cetera.

644
00:46:31,773 --> 00:46:36,973
Speaker 2: It is it is, but we can only hope for

645
00:46:37,053 --> 00:46:40,013
Speaker 2: the pendulum to swing back. It can't happen soon enough.

646
00:46:40,693 --> 00:46:46,453
Speaker 3: So in conclusion, or headed toward the exit door, shall we?

647
00:46:46,733 --> 00:46:51,453
Speaker 3: Shall we just recap on chapter three? How should Parliament

648
00:46:51,893 --> 00:46:53,573
Speaker 3: all the executive respond?

649
00:46:55,493 --> 00:47:01,813
Speaker 2: Yes, So five recommendations. The first is the most blunt one,

650
00:47:01,813 --> 00:47:07,333
Speaker 2: which is legislative intervention. When the court errs, Parliament should

651
00:47:07,333 --> 00:47:12,253
Speaker 2: step in and correct the course. And we're seeing that

652
00:47:12,733 --> 00:47:16,733
Speaker 2: currently with the Coalition government in relation to the Marine

653
00:47:16,773 --> 00:47:20,733
Speaker 2: and Coastal Areas Act, the Coalition commitment between National and

654
00:47:20,773 --> 00:47:25,893
Speaker 2: New Zealand. First, when Parliament used the words exclusive and

655
00:47:26,013 --> 00:47:30,693
Speaker 2: continuous in the legislation, the courts decided it could be

656
00:47:30,733 --> 00:47:34,213
Speaker 2: shared exclusive and didn't need to be continuous. Well, it's

657
00:47:34,253 --> 00:47:37,693
Speaker 2: no surprise that Parliament's now saying, well, we're going to

658
00:47:37,733 --> 00:47:41,973
Speaker 2: make clear that the courts enforce the law as we

659
00:47:42,053 --> 00:47:47,013
Speaker 2: intended it but that's something that Labor did as well

660
00:47:48,013 --> 00:47:51,213
Speaker 2: in twenty sixteen in a case called d in the Police,

661
00:47:51,253 --> 00:47:57,013
Speaker 2: when the courts clearly didn't follow what was in Labor

662
00:47:57,013 --> 00:48:02,453
Speaker 2: intended with the Sex Offenders Registration Act, they jumped in

663
00:48:02,613 --> 00:48:06,413
Speaker 2: immediately and passed legislation under urgency to overrule what the

664
00:48:06,413 --> 00:48:10,693
Speaker 2: court had found. I think on both sides of the

665
00:48:10,973 --> 00:48:15,813
Speaker 2: of the political divide, governments have struggled with the Supreme Court.

666
00:48:16,253 --> 00:48:20,173
Speaker 2: They should intervene, and they should intervene more frequently than

667
00:48:20,213 --> 00:48:24,573
Speaker 2: they do to to correct the course of the law.

668
00:48:25,333 --> 00:48:29,453
Speaker 2: So that's the first thing. Legislative intervention. It's been used

669
00:48:29,493 --> 00:48:33,133
Speaker 2: really in the past, but courts in the past haven't

670
00:48:33,173 --> 00:48:39,533
Speaker 2: been so consciously radicals as the Supreme Courts being now,

671
00:48:39,533 --> 00:48:42,733
Speaker 2: and it can expect to be corrected more frequently. So

672
00:48:42,813 --> 00:48:46,773
Speaker 2: that's the first thing. The second thing is defining the

673
00:48:46,813 --> 00:48:49,053
Speaker 2: rule of law so that it's not seen by the

674
00:48:49,093 --> 00:48:51,333
Speaker 2: courts as a license to go off on a social

675
00:48:51,453 --> 00:48:57,373
Speaker 2: justice crusade. The third thing are tightening up the legisla

676
00:48:57,373 --> 00:49:01,013
Speaker 2: that the instructions from Parliament of the approach the courts

677
00:49:01,013 --> 00:49:04,653
Speaker 2: that are take in relation to interpreting its Parliament's words.

678
00:49:05,453 --> 00:49:08,013
Speaker 2: So making clear that we don't have this living constitution

679
00:49:08,053 --> 00:49:11,333
Speaker 2: idea that the courts can update the meaning of legislation

680
00:49:11,413 --> 00:49:15,533
Speaker 2: based on their sense of changing social values. And also

681
00:49:15,613 --> 00:49:18,093
Speaker 2: tweaking Section six of the Bill of Rights Act, which

682
00:49:18,093 --> 00:49:22,133
Speaker 2: is particularly problematic now. Section we haven't talked about the

683
00:49:22,333 --> 00:49:26,413
Speaker 2: Bill of Rights Act, but Section six provides that wherever

684
00:49:26,573 --> 00:49:29,293
Speaker 2: an enactment can be given a meaning that is that

685
00:49:29,413 --> 00:49:31,813
Speaker 2: is consistent with the rights and freedoms contained and the

686
00:49:31,853 --> 00:49:34,253
Speaker 2: Bill of Rights, that meaning shall be preferred to any other.

687
00:49:35,373 --> 00:49:39,653
Speaker 2: Until the Fitzgerald case, the Supreme Court had said it

688
00:49:39,693 --> 00:49:43,093
Speaker 2: had to be a reasonable interpretation the Supreme Court and

689
00:49:43,133 --> 00:49:46,253
Speaker 2: Fitzgerald said, well, we don't see the word reasonable in there.

690
00:49:46,773 --> 00:49:49,413
Speaker 2: The corollery of that is that they're willing to adopt

691
00:49:49,413 --> 00:49:52,733
Speaker 2: an unreasonable interpretation. That's certainly not what Parliament meant in

692
00:49:52,853 --> 00:49:56,493
Speaker 2: Parliament should make that clear, either by removing Section six

693
00:49:56,613 --> 00:50:04,853
Speaker 2: or tweaking it, and then finally tightening up judicial appointment processes.

694
00:50:04,893 --> 00:50:09,973
Speaker 3: And that's obvious just talking the Bill of Rights. Jim

695
00:50:10,013 --> 00:50:11,293
Speaker 3: Allen's not in favor of it.

696
00:50:13,053 --> 00:50:21,933
Speaker 2: No, and I've got mixed views on it too. The

697
00:50:22,013 --> 00:50:26,893
Speaker 2: risk is it encourages our courts down the path of

698
00:50:26,933 --> 00:50:30,933
Speaker 2: the US Supreme Court. I think the better process is

699
00:50:31,493 --> 00:50:33,933
Speaker 2: the Section seven process and the Bill of Rights, which

700
00:50:35,133 --> 00:50:41,213
Speaker 2: ensures that the Attorney General, as the highest lawyer other

701
00:50:41,253 --> 00:50:45,573
Speaker 2: than judges, reviews legislation and gives independent advice from Crown

702
00:50:45,653 --> 00:50:51,053
Speaker 2: Law on whether any legislation before the House infringes the

703
00:50:51,093 --> 00:50:53,053
Speaker 2: Bill of Rights. So the Parliament at least is aware

704
00:50:53,133 --> 00:50:57,173
Speaker 2: of that. But the risk of the risk of Bills

705
00:50:57,213 --> 00:51:01,053
Speaker 2: of Rights and constitutions is that they're a license to

706
00:51:01,133 --> 00:51:04,973
Speaker 2: the courts to enter the political fray, and that's what

707
00:51:05,013 --> 00:51:08,053
Speaker 2: we've seen all around the world, with the US Supreme

708
00:51:08,093 --> 00:51:12,093
Speaker 2: Court ending with a Canadian Supreme Court as well.

709
00:51:12,373 --> 00:51:15,893
Speaker 3: So in conclusion, I want to quote you two paragraphs

710
00:51:15,933 --> 00:51:19,213
Speaker 3: of your own work, because well it'll be obvious why.

711
00:51:19,453 --> 00:51:23,453
Speaker 3: The most notorious instance of the Supreme Court's circumventing Parliament's

712
00:51:23,453 --> 00:51:28,773
Speaker 3: wishes is the Court's three strikes decision in Fitzgerald, discussed

713
00:51:28,813 --> 00:51:31,293
Speaker 3: in more detail in Chapter three. In a split decision

714
00:51:31,373 --> 00:51:35,853
Speaker 3: three judges to two, the Supreme Court allowed mister Fitzgerald's appeal.

715
00:51:35,933 --> 00:51:40,893
Speaker 3: The judges in the majority effectively rewrote the three strikes

716
00:51:40,973 --> 00:51:45,773
Speaker 3: maximum sentence provision in the Sentencing Act of two thousand

717
00:51:45,813 --> 00:51:50,413
Speaker 3: and two. The Fitzgerald decision, you write, may be remembered

718
00:51:50,493 --> 00:51:53,853
Speaker 3: as the high watermark of judicial activism. It suggests that

719
00:51:53,933 --> 00:51:56,853
Speaker 3: not even clear wording is enough to override what the

720
00:51:56,853 --> 00:52:02,493
Speaker 3: Court regards as basic rights. Instead, it seems the Court

721
00:52:02,533 --> 00:52:06,653
Speaker 3: will insist on clear evidence that Parliament has deliberately confronted

722
00:52:06,693 --> 00:52:09,893
Speaker 3: the possibility of these base rights being set aside before

723
00:52:09,933 --> 00:52:13,893
Speaker 3: it will follow Parliament's words. And I've written under that

724
00:52:14,053 --> 00:52:16,093
Speaker 3: my notation is unbelievable.

725
00:52:17,613 --> 00:52:23,653
Speaker 2: What yes, yes, now what yeah? It's even more unbelievable

726
00:52:23,653 --> 00:52:28,173
Speaker 2: than that to have the Chief Justice saying an interpretation

727
00:52:28,293 --> 00:52:30,933
Speaker 2: the Court's adopted doesn't have to be a reasonable one.

728
00:52:31,413 --> 00:52:36,853
Speaker 2: That's the that's the most unbelievable part of the case.

729
00:52:37,373 --> 00:52:39,613
Speaker 3: Is the Chief Justice fit for purpose?

730
00:52:41,493 --> 00:52:43,293
Speaker 2: I don't want to comment on that. I think the

731
00:52:43,493 --> 00:52:47,453
Speaker 2: Chief the Chief Justice, well at least until this report

732
00:52:47,533 --> 00:52:53,053
Speaker 2: comes out, has been a close personal friend for for

733
00:52:53,893 --> 00:52:59,093
Speaker 2: more than forty years. But I think the Court erred

734
00:52:59,773 --> 00:53:02,253
Speaker 2: in that in that decision.

735
00:53:02,373 --> 00:53:05,173
Speaker 3: Okay, well, I wouldn't want to be responsible for the

736
00:53:05,173 --> 00:53:08,293
Speaker 3: bust up of a forty year friendship, so on that.

737
00:53:08,653 --> 00:53:11,173
Speaker 3: On that note, I can suggest a good a good

738
00:53:11,173 --> 00:53:14,373
Speaker 3: wine to share. Why do you discuss these things?

739
00:53:15,373 --> 00:53:15,693
Speaker 2: It is.

740
00:53:16,453 --> 00:53:20,093
Speaker 3: It's with great appreciation that I thank you for your time.

741
00:53:20,893 --> 00:53:22,533
Speaker 3: You've been generous with it. It's going to be a

742
00:53:22,533 --> 00:53:26,653
Speaker 3: busy day for you and I look forward to further

743
00:53:27,133 --> 00:53:31,013
Speaker 3: work from you in well along the same lines are

744
00:53:31,013 --> 00:53:34,853
Speaker 3: in a similar manner. Thank you later, much appreciated, and

745
00:53:35,173 --> 00:53:36,973
Speaker 3: I wish you the very best of luck with the.

746
00:53:37,213 --> 00:53:40,333
Speaker 2: With the results. Many thanks, and I've enjoyed the discussion.

747
00:54:02,813 --> 00:54:04,813
Speaker 3: Now missus producer will be here in just a moment

748
00:54:04,893 --> 00:54:07,973
Speaker 3: for the mail room for podcast number two hundred and sixty,

749
00:54:08,013 --> 00:54:11,013
Speaker 3: So why don't I entertain you with a short email

750
00:54:11,693 --> 00:54:17,253
Speaker 3: from Grant from a long time listener. You mentioned Cuddle's costa, or,

751
00:54:17,293 --> 00:54:21,453
Speaker 3: as he's known by his colleagues, the lantern in brackets,

752
00:54:21,533 --> 00:54:24,773
Speaker 3: not very bright and has to be carried close bracketts.

753
00:54:25,213 --> 00:54:28,613
Speaker 3: Remember he was handpicked and directed by a Deern. He

754
00:54:28,693 --> 00:54:33,653
Speaker 3: spent time with the heavily politicized British Police, learning their ways,

755
00:54:34,213 --> 00:54:36,253
Speaker 3: then returning to New Zealand to take up the role

756
00:54:36,493 --> 00:54:41,013
Speaker 3: of Commissioner. I was very surprised the new government retained him.

757
00:54:41,213 --> 00:54:43,013
Speaker 3: I think it was a big mistake by the police

758
00:54:43,013 --> 00:54:47,293
Speaker 3: minister who criticized Caster when in opposition. Grant I agree

759
00:54:47,333 --> 00:54:50,773
Speaker 3: with you pretty much in all one, two, three, four

760
00:54:50,813 --> 00:54:53,773
Speaker 3: lines That was following a comment I made. I don't

761
00:54:53,813 --> 00:54:55,893
Speaker 3: know how he held his job under the under the

762
00:54:55,893 --> 00:54:59,893
Speaker 3: new regime, but thank you for the feedback, missus producer

763
00:55:00,093 --> 00:55:04,613
Speaker 3: las Let's go. How are you better than I look?

764
00:55:06,573 --> 00:55:10,133
Speaker 4: No, you look great as usual, Leyton Steve says, as

765
00:55:10,213 --> 00:55:14,653
Speaker 4: always an interesting discussion with Patrick Basham, it was particularly

766
00:55:14,813 --> 00:55:17,973
Speaker 4: enlightening to hear his comments of how the mainstream media

767
00:55:18,013 --> 00:55:22,213
Speaker 4: in the USA has ignored or at least downplayed the

768
00:55:22,253 --> 00:55:26,733
Speaker 4: impact of Hurricane Helene on the Southeast States, probably to

769
00:55:26,813 --> 00:55:29,853
Speaker 4: avoid having to expose the ineptitude of the current Biden

770
00:55:30,013 --> 00:55:34,533
Speaker 4: Harris government disaster response. It reminds me of one of

771
00:55:34,533 --> 00:55:38,333
Speaker 4: Oscar Wilde's quips, which, when asked about the newspapers in America,

772
00:55:38,373 --> 00:55:41,453
Speaker 4: declared that they were full of rubbish, that if people

773
00:55:41,493 --> 00:55:44,133
Speaker 4: read them and are satisfied with them, then this must

774
00:55:44,133 --> 00:55:47,693
Speaker 4: be a nation of lunatics. Personally, I would say the

775
00:55:47,733 --> 00:55:51,253
Speaker 4: same from a New Zealand perspective. We all know that

776
00:55:51,293 --> 00:55:54,413
Speaker 4: liberals in America are no longer liberal. They've been replaced

777
00:55:54,453 --> 00:55:57,693
Speaker 4: by the left, the hard left at that. So it

778
00:55:57,773 --> 00:56:00,293
Speaker 4: seemed to me that America is on a knife edge.

779
00:56:00,733 --> 00:56:03,293
Speaker 4: If Trump wins, there could well be a civil war

780
00:56:03,333 --> 00:56:06,573
Speaker 4: because the left will go ballistic. If Harris and the

781
00:56:06,613 --> 00:56:09,653
Speaker 4: deep State, when I believe we will, will almost certainly

782
00:56:09,693 --> 00:56:13,333
Speaker 4: see a catastrophic war in Europe, if not the entire world,

783
00:56:14,133 --> 00:56:18,853
Speaker 4: because the aforementioned Deep State, all sorts of historical reasons,

784
00:56:19,533 --> 00:56:22,813
Speaker 4: is determined to deal to Russia once and for all.

785
00:56:23,413 --> 00:56:26,493
Speaker 4: Fingers crossed for us all we must all keep going.

786
00:56:26,613 --> 00:56:29,453
Speaker 4: You too too, from Steve, Thank you, Steve.

787
00:56:29,213 --> 00:56:33,213
Speaker 3: Steve good, thank you. Grace writes. I take umbrage to

788
00:56:33,253 --> 00:56:38,333
Speaker 3: the comment by Chris in Brackett's Surgeon because I said

789
00:56:38,573 --> 00:56:42,053
Speaker 3: it was he was a surgeon in last week's mail room.

790
00:56:42,093 --> 00:56:44,973
Speaker 3: Actually it was the second of October last week's mail

791
00:56:45,053 --> 00:56:49,573
Speaker 3: room that common childhood vaccines should be mandated and parents

792
00:56:49,653 --> 00:56:52,373
Speaker 3: should not have the choice to withhold them from their children.

793
00:56:53,173 --> 00:56:56,293
Speaker 3: He has just had a revelation on the dangers of

794
00:56:56,333 --> 00:56:59,373
Speaker 3: the COVID shots. Has it occurred to him that some

795
00:56:59,613 --> 00:57:02,133
Speaker 3: parents have known there is more going on with the

796
00:57:02,213 --> 00:57:05,893
Speaker 3: vaccines than parents have been led to believe by information

797
00:57:06,133 --> 00:57:10,133
Speaker 3: put out by the Ministry of Health. Perhaps he should

798
00:57:10,133 --> 00:57:13,013
Speaker 3: do a bit more investigation himself into the history of

799
00:57:13,093 --> 00:57:16,733
Speaker 3: vaccines and follow the money. I suggest you might consider

800
00:57:16,773 --> 00:57:22,093
Speaker 3: interviewing a Roman Bizarinsky. No, that's not right, author of

801
00:57:22,173 --> 00:57:27,413
Speaker 3: the book Dissolving Illusions with Suzanne Humphrey's MD. It covers

802
00:57:27,493 --> 00:57:31,013
Speaker 3: the history of vaccines, including polio. If you have suffered

803
00:57:31,013 --> 00:57:34,013
Speaker 3: polio or are a child of someone who has, and

804
00:57:34,133 --> 00:57:36,973
Speaker 3: you are told that this is the vaccine that prevents it,

805
00:57:37,053 --> 00:57:39,613
Speaker 3: of course you would say that everyone should be getting

806
00:57:39,613 --> 00:57:44,253
Speaker 3: the vaccine, but what if this is not true? Thanks

807
00:57:44,253 --> 00:57:47,973
Speaker 3: for continuing your show. I look forward to it always, Grace.

808
00:57:48,253 --> 00:57:49,973
Speaker 3: I look forward to your company also.

809
00:57:50,213 --> 00:57:53,693
Speaker 4: And Laton Bronwin says thank you for reading Jeffrey Tucker's

810
00:57:53,693 --> 00:57:56,973
Speaker 4: piece about the cellist. I found it very moving. I

811
00:57:57,013 --> 00:57:59,413
Speaker 4: am thankful there was one in the audience who truly

812
00:57:59,453 --> 00:58:01,733
Speaker 4: appreciated the gift the cellist offered.

813
00:58:01,973 --> 00:58:05,093
Speaker 3: Who wrote that, Ronwin, I appreciate that because you're the

814
00:58:05,093 --> 00:58:07,013
Speaker 3: only one who I think responded to it, which really

815
00:58:07,013 --> 00:58:10,333
Speaker 3: surprised me. I was moved by that. I expected to

816
00:58:10,333 --> 00:58:14,253
Speaker 3: get floods of tears all over pages or something. Anyway,

817
00:58:14,413 --> 00:58:18,173
Speaker 3: appreciate it from Vincent. I can't believe the story I'm

818
00:58:18,173 --> 00:58:21,853
Speaker 3: reading this weekend of Kamala Harris calling for Donald Trump

819
00:58:21,973 --> 00:58:25,573
Speaker 3: to release his medical records for all to see. This

820
00:58:25,973 --> 00:58:29,013
Speaker 3: is the woman who blatantly ignored the state of health

821
00:58:29,053 --> 00:58:33,693
Speaker 3: of the current president and downright lied about his mental

822
00:58:33,773 --> 00:58:37,733
Speaker 3: state or that he was actually even breathing. Add to

823
00:58:37,773 --> 00:58:41,733
Speaker 3: the fact that the MSM even runs this story as

824
00:58:41,773 --> 00:58:44,973
Speaker 3: if everything is normal. I'm nervously waiting for the next

825
00:58:45,013 --> 00:58:47,413
Speaker 3: few weeks to be over and the US election to

826
00:58:47,493 --> 00:58:51,573
Speaker 3: have concluded. Really enjoyed your last podcast with Patrick Basham.

827
00:58:51,613 --> 00:58:53,573
Speaker 3: I hope we hear from him again soon. You will

828
00:58:53,693 --> 00:58:57,813
Speaker 3: on election date and keep up the great work. Latin

829
00:58:57,973 --> 00:58:59,293
Speaker 3: and Carolyn.

830
00:59:00,373 --> 00:59:05,653
Speaker 4: Leighton. Rod says, it's all later people, It's all lateron.

831
00:59:06,493 --> 00:59:11,133
Speaker 4: Rod says, I really enjoyed Dr Paul Marrick. I always

832
00:59:11,173 --> 00:59:16,733
Speaker 4: appreciate keeping the COVID genocide alive. I've been silent commentary wise, however,

833
00:59:16,893 --> 00:59:21,653
Speaker 4: still enjoying your Wednesday morning podcasts and Rod. Forgive me, Rod,

834
00:59:21,773 --> 00:59:24,333
Speaker 4: your email is lengthy, but you understand that we just

835
00:59:24,373 --> 00:59:27,413
Speaker 4: can't get through all of everybody, so I'll take bits

836
00:59:27,453 --> 00:59:30,973
Speaker 4: of it out. We both agree on having disdain for experts.

837
00:59:31,853 --> 00:59:33,813
Speaker 4: To me, an expert as a surgeon who can go

838
00:59:33,893 --> 00:59:37,333
Speaker 4: into an o R and put an accident patient back together,

839
00:59:37,773 --> 00:59:41,053
Speaker 4: a rescue lead hand who can rescue a stranded climber,

840
00:59:41,453 --> 00:59:43,973
Speaker 4: and a builder you can send to a stalled work

841
00:59:44,053 --> 00:59:48,493
Speaker 4: site to quick quickly solve a problem. Doctorates are a

842
00:59:48,493 --> 00:59:52,733
Speaker 4: good memory for secondhand information and a cozy relationship with

843
00:59:52,773 --> 00:59:58,693
Speaker 4: the granting professors. He says, I don't know about the

844
00:59:58,693 --> 01:00:01,293
Speaker 4: New Zealand medical system. Hope it's not the same as

845
01:00:01,373 --> 01:00:04,533
Speaker 4: here and so rod as the guy who lives in Kennedy.

846
01:00:04,573 --> 01:00:04,773
Speaker 3: Yes.

847
01:00:05,973 --> 01:00:08,293
Speaker 4: Since my wife and I returned back to the East

848
01:00:08,413 --> 01:00:11,613
Speaker 4: Coast fifteen years ago, we've gone through three family doctors

849
01:00:11,613 --> 01:00:15,333
Speaker 4: with two year gasps in between. Two years ago our

850
01:00:15,373 --> 01:00:18,893
Speaker 4: last physician escaped to Western Canada. What we have now

851
01:00:19,013 --> 01:00:22,413
Speaker 4: is blood test appointments by phone community clinics which are

852
01:00:22,413 --> 01:00:26,013
Speaker 4: all staffed by nurse practitioners. There's also a walk in

853
01:00:26,093 --> 01:00:28,573
Speaker 4: clinic in North Sydney three days a week where you

854
01:00:28,573 --> 01:00:31,333
Speaker 4: can see a doctor, which opens at seven am, but

855
01:00:31,413 --> 01:00:34,333
Speaker 4: you have to line up outside before six am to

856
01:00:34,413 --> 01:00:37,733
Speaker 4: get in line because they only take fourteen patients. They

857
01:00:37,813 --> 01:00:41,453
Speaker 4: start interviewing patients at eight thirty. This is the seniors

858
01:00:41,493 --> 01:00:46,533
Speaker 4: gift for paying taxes over a lifetime and it's pretty

859
01:00:46,573 --> 01:00:49,573
Speaker 4: ghastly here these days because we have a we have

860
01:00:49,613 --> 01:00:52,173
Speaker 4: a system paucity of doctors.

861
01:00:52,853 --> 01:00:57,613
Speaker 3: We have a system that is close to collapse. Now,

862
01:00:57,693 --> 01:01:00,573
Speaker 3: just on that note, it doesn't matter where you go

863
01:01:00,653 --> 01:01:06,133
Speaker 3: in the Western world, Written, Canada, Australia, America, New Zealand,

864
01:01:06,653 --> 01:01:11,293
Speaker 3: there's your five eyes, and everyone's complaining of the same.

865
01:01:11,733 --> 01:01:16,693
Speaker 3: Even the politicians themselves are saying that in some cases

866
01:01:16,693 --> 01:01:21,773
Speaker 3: we're close to collapse. You tell me. Ashley Rinsburg and

867
01:01:21,853 --> 01:01:26,333
Speaker 3: Patrick Masham were highly informative. They gave outside the square

868
01:01:26,373 --> 01:01:30,213
Speaker 3: observations and analysis that I'm sure the listeners benefited from

869
01:01:30,213 --> 01:01:34,573
Speaker 3: as much as I did. Ashley Rinsberg's big picture view

870
01:01:34,653 --> 01:01:38,973
Speaker 3: of the Arab Israeli conflict, dubbed dovetails very nicely into

871
01:01:39,053 --> 01:01:43,173
Speaker 3: what the analyst team at Geopolitical Futures has been documenting

872
01:01:43,173 --> 01:01:46,013
Speaker 3: since the start of the current phase of the Arab

873
01:01:46,093 --> 01:01:50,613
Speaker 3: Israeli conflict. On that awful day, he was outstanding in

874
01:01:50,693 --> 01:01:55,133
Speaker 3: his praise and endorsement of Benjamin Netanyahoo and was wonderfully

875
01:01:55,133 --> 01:01:59,973
Speaker 3: correct in emphasizing President Trump's bold and enormously consequential push

876
01:02:00,253 --> 01:02:03,853
Speaker 3: for the Abraham Accords. I have attached a piece that

877
01:02:03,933 --> 01:02:07,253
Speaker 3: I believe is profoundly important to all who value freedom

878
01:02:07,373 --> 01:02:10,333
Speaker 3: was posted on browns Stone Institute, a site that just

879
01:02:10,453 --> 01:02:14,533
Speaker 3: keeps getting better and better, and I'll add my better

880
01:02:14,573 --> 01:02:18,133
Speaker 3: on the end of that. Thank you, Paul. I might

881
01:02:18,213 --> 01:02:20,213
Speaker 3: dig that out and include it.

882
01:02:21,053 --> 01:02:26,373
Speaker 4: Layton Ross says interesting developments in exposing dreadful mRNA vaccines

883
01:02:26,413 --> 01:02:29,853
Speaker 4: in Australia. Who's going to lead the charge here? And

884
01:02:30,013 --> 01:02:36,813
Speaker 4: he cites thewdubthegatewaypundit dot com. So if anybody wants to

885
01:02:36,813 --> 01:02:40,333
Speaker 4: look into it, and you have.

886
01:02:40,413 --> 01:02:45,093
Speaker 3: I'm prepped. Port Headland Council votes to expose DNA contamination

887
01:02:45,373 --> 01:02:51,333
Speaker 3: in mRNA vaccines, demands immediate suspension of COVID nineteen shots nationwide.

888
01:02:51,973 --> 01:02:54,133
Speaker 3: A special meeting had been by the port Headland Council

889
01:02:54,173 --> 01:02:58,893
Speaker 3: on October eleventh, marked watershed moment in the ongoing national

890
01:02:58,893 --> 01:03:04,253
Speaker 3: debate surrounding DNA contamination in mRNA COVID nineteen vaccines, particularly

891
01:03:04,333 --> 01:03:09,773
Speaker 3: Pfizer and Maderna's products. This highly anticipated session was called

892
01:03:09,773 --> 01:03:14,173
Speaker 3: in response to mounting evidence of DNA contamination presented by

893
01:03:14,293 --> 01:03:19,173
Speaker 3: experts such as Dr David's Speecher, alongside a series of

894
01:03:19,253 --> 01:03:22,733
Speaker 3: letters from M P Russell Broadbend. The gravity of the

895
01:03:22,813 --> 01:03:27,133
Speaker 3: concerns raised, along with the Council's proactive stance, has drawn

896
01:03:27,173 --> 01:03:32,573
Speaker 3: attention not only within Western Australia but across the entire nation.

897
01:03:33,453 --> 01:03:38,493
Speaker 3: Now that is only the introductory paragraph, and i'll tell you.

898
01:03:38,853 --> 01:03:41,093
Speaker 3: I'll tell you after the mail room when I'm giving

899
01:03:41,133 --> 01:03:44,053
Speaker 3: you some other information where you can find it. This

900
01:03:44,213 --> 01:03:47,773
Speaker 3: is producer. I have a very long letter. You might

901
01:03:47,813 --> 01:03:50,013
Speaker 3: recall it. Last week. I put one aside, make mention

902
01:03:50,093 --> 01:03:52,893
Speaker 3: of it the author that that I would read it

903
01:03:52,933 --> 01:03:57,093
Speaker 3: thoroughly and then decide very long. So I'm going to

904
01:03:57,173 --> 01:04:01,613
Speaker 3: utilize it. But after you've gone, love, because I know

905
01:04:01,973 --> 01:04:05,493
Speaker 3: that you have another appointment this week in half an

906
01:04:05,493 --> 01:04:07,213
Speaker 3: hour and that's not even here.

907
01:04:07,533 --> 01:04:10,133
Speaker 4: And it's not even that's right. I'm off you are

908
01:04:10,333 --> 01:04:11,493
Speaker 4: all right later, and thank you.

909
01:04:11,453 --> 01:04:13,253
Speaker 3: So much, No, thank you even more.

910
01:04:13,493 --> 01:04:14,493
Speaker 4: Keep writing, guys.

911
01:04:15,173 --> 01:04:17,373
Speaker 3: And before I read it. This is the follow up

912
01:04:17,413 --> 01:04:20,213
Speaker 3: after what I said last week. Craig dropped the note

913
01:04:20,253 --> 01:04:23,253
Speaker 3: and said, I heard your comment on Wednesday. Your call,

914
01:04:23,653 --> 01:04:27,253
Speaker 3: your call if you choose not to use my email. Yes,

915
01:04:27,453 --> 01:04:30,453
Speaker 3: it is somewhat controversial, and I understand why you may

916
01:04:30,533 --> 01:04:33,493
Speaker 3: choose not to use it. That's totally your call, and

917
01:04:33,533 --> 01:04:36,413
Speaker 3: I am okay either way, but I'm going to read

918
01:04:36,413 --> 01:04:40,413
Speaker 3: it because there's no reason why I shouldn't now that

919
01:04:40,493 --> 01:04:43,813
Speaker 3: I have. Now that I've inspected it, shall we say

920
01:04:44,093 --> 01:04:49,013
Speaker 3: thoroughly great writes that when the madness erupted, my wife

921
01:04:49,053 --> 01:04:51,173
Speaker 3: and I I just completed a six weeks South Island

922
01:04:51,253 --> 01:04:55,053
Speaker 3: road trip, pretty much covering the whole island, enjoying brilliant

923
01:04:55,053 --> 01:04:59,053
Speaker 3: weather at a fantastic time of enjoying the beautiful scenery

924
01:04:59,653 --> 01:05:03,333
Speaker 3: which that island affords. We were in Picton for the

925
01:05:03,373 --> 01:05:05,693
Speaker 3: last couple of days before catching the ferry and driving

926
01:05:05,773 --> 01:05:10,093
Speaker 3: up the North Island heading home. Because of the number

927
01:05:10,093 --> 01:05:12,693
Speaker 3: of others doing the same, we struggled to get a booking.

928
01:05:12,933 --> 01:05:15,813
Speaker 3: Remember those days when everyone was racing to get back

929
01:05:15,853 --> 01:05:19,653
Speaker 3: to wherever they lived before lockdown. We struggled to get

930
01:05:19,653 --> 01:05:23,293
Speaker 3: a booking and meet the lockdown requirement and ended up

931
01:05:23,373 --> 01:05:27,133
Speaker 3: driving up the North Island on the extra day afforded

932
01:05:27,173 --> 01:05:31,373
Speaker 3: travelers heading to your home quite an amazing feeling with

933
01:05:31,573 --> 01:05:35,133
Speaker 3: very very few vehicles on the road. The early days

934
01:05:35,133 --> 01:05:39,053
Speaker 3: were somewhat surreal developing a new regime of living. Being

935
01:05:39,093 --> 01:05:42,853
Speaker 3: Boomers the target of the virus, we were fortunate in

936
01:05:43,013 --> 01:05:47,133
Speaker 3: having the support of immediate family for shopping, etc. Early on,

937
01:05:47,413 --> 01:05:50,813
Speaker 3: we as a family were interested in being safe and

938
01:05:50,893 --> 01:05:54,173
Speaker 3: following the rules and generally doing what was expected of us.

939
01:05:55,013 --> 01:05:57,933
Speaker 3: As time went on, we were starting to query the

940
01:05:57,933 --> 01:06:01,613
Speaker 3: information and data that was being spouted daily from the

941
01:06:01,933 --> 01:06:05,933
Speaker 3: podium of truths. We decided to adopt a weight in

942
01:06:06,013 --> 01:06:10,053
Speaker 3: sea regime around the vaccine development, particularly when there was

943
01:06:10,093 --> 01:06:15,013
Speaker 3: a pharmaceutical company planning on producing a conventional vaccine and

944
01:06:15,293 --> 01:06:20,973
Speaker 3: different to the mRNA JAB which was close to release. Also,

945
01:06:21,693 --> 01:06:27,213
Speaker 3: was the info becoming available and suggesting the likely vulnerable

946
01:06:27,253 --> 01:06:31,253
Speaker 3: group were older people with health issues. While Carol and

947
01:06:31,333 --> 01:06:34,693
Speaker 3: I were both in our seventies, we fortunately were in

948
01:06:34,853 --> 01:06:39,053
Speaker 3: very good health. One family member was Slash Is, a

949
01:06:39,133 --> 01:06:44,173
Speaker 3: journalist who has an investigated event started spending time looking

950
01:06:44,213 --> 01:06:47,013
Speaker 3: into the matter, and as time went on he started

951
01:06:47,013 --> 01:06:50,933
Speaker 3: looking into alternative thinking on the subject and eventually this

952
01:06:51,053 --> 01:06:56,453
Speaker 3: led to considering other treatment options as an alternative to

953
01:06:56,533 --> 01:07:03,293
Speaker 3: the proposed JAB introduction. Through the process, Mark which obviously

954
01:07:03,333 --> 01:07:06,253
Speaker 3: is not his real name, was introduced to people like

955
01:07:06,413 --> 01:07:12,213
Speaker 3: Robert Clancy, doctor Robert Malown, Peter McCulloch, Gert van Vandenbosch,

956
01:07:13,293 --> 01:07:18,133
Speaker 3: Brett Weinstein, David Bell, Pierre Corey and others, which led

957
01:07:18,173 --> 01:07:21,613
Speaker 3: him to develop a very open mind on the whole subject.

958
01:07:21,773 --> 01:07:25,213
Speaker 3: He became very skeptical about the MR and A technology.

959
01:07:25,253 --> 01:07:29,373
Speaker 3: Fortunately for our Hamley, early on in his investigation he

960
01:07:29,453 --> 01:07:32,853
Speaker 3: started to focus on finding treatments to help provide immunity

961
01:07:32,933 --> 01:07:37,813
Speaker 3: to the disease. The natural immune system featured high on

962
01:07:37,893 --> 01:07:41,173
Speaker 3: the radar and providing support to this system seemed to

963
01:07:41,173 --> 01:07:44,373
Speaker 3: be a no brainer. Remarkably, very early on he came

964
01:07:44,413 --> 01:07:48,533
Speaker 3: across ivermecton. This, along with zinc and vitamins D and C,

965
01:07:48,733 --> 01:07:52,133
Speaker 3: were seen as an alternative to the emerging JAB which

966
01:07:52,213 --> 01:07:56,613
Speaker 3: was being developed and close to being introduced. Sourcing was

967
01:07:56,653 --> 01:08:00,653
Speaker 3: a challenge and locally was virtually impossible. However, in the

968
01:08:00,693 --> 01:08:03,493
Speaker 3: early days it wasn't too bad to purchase from offshore.

969
01:08:04,253 --> 01:08:06,493
Speaker 3: As time went on, the source was starting to become

970
01:08:06,733 --> 01:08:14,773
Speaker 3: difficult and eventually impossis. Our last shipment was in alternative packaging. However,

971
01:08:14,893 --> 01:08:18,213
Speaker 3: unfortunately the shipment was picked up in customs and we

972
01:08:18,293 --> 01:08:20,853
Speaker 3: never saw it other which they stole it. The good

973
01:08:20,853 --> 01:08:24,093
Speaker 3: news is this shipment was for a rainy day and

974
01:08:24,133 --> 01:08:27,493
Speaker 3: we have managed to have enough to still today have

975
01:08:27,573 --> 01:08:31,333
Speaker 3: good supplies This was during the actual introduction of the JAB.

976
01:08:32,133 --> 01:08:36,533
Speaker 3: Like everyone, our daily lives were impacted by the continued

977
01:08:36,613 --> 01:08:42,613
Speaker 3: input of government politicians, bureaucrats and health experts. The government's

978
01:08:42,613 --> 01:08:45,853
Speaker 3: failure to use the numerous qualified professionals with expertise in

979
01:08:45,893 --> 01:08:50,533
Speaker 3: their fields was pathetic and spoke slash speaks to the

980
01:08:50,773 --> 01:08:54,653
Speaker 3: arrogance of those who chose to ignore that advice. I

981
01:08:54,693 --> 01:08:58,613
Speaker 3: could expand here, but suffice it to say the management

982
01:08:58,693 --> 01:09:01,813
Speaker 3: of the whole COVID issue by the Labor government, bureaucrats

983
01:09:01,853 --> 01:09:06,413
Speaker 3: and other government officials was pure and simply corrupt and criminal.

984
01:09:06,853 --> 01:09:10,573
Speaker 3: A particular frustration was the fact that the New Zealand

985
01:09:10,573 --> 01:09:13,653
Speaker 3: government were absolutely aware that the JAB did not prevent

986
01:09:13,693 --> 01:09:18,853
Speaker 3: transmission prior to the repeat. Prior his emphasis to the

987
01:09:18,933 --> 01:09:24,333
Speaker 3: New Zealand rollout, another government letdown. As things settled down

988
01:09:24,573 --> 01:09:27,413
Speaker 3: and the ability to move around became somewhat easier if

989
01:09:27,493 --> 01:09:31,493
Speaker 3: you were jabbed, we of course, were left stuck indoors

990
01:09:31,533 --> 01:09:34,933
Speaker 3: and isolated from the masses. We were prepared to accept

991
01:09:35,013 --> 01:09:39,733
Speaker 3: the restrictions, believing in our decision. The sideways glances from

992
01:09:39,773 --> 01:09:43,293
Speaker 3: extended family and friends not all were obvious, but we

993
01:09:43,573 --> 01:09:46,853
Speaker 3: as a family three generations but only six of us

994
01:09:47,253 --> 01:09:51,493
Speaker 3: stuck together and became a closer unit and aside I

995
01:09:51,573 --> 01:09:54,333
Speaker 3: decided to try and circumvent the system and managed with

996
01:09:54,413 --> 01:09:58,693
Speaker 3: some help, to replicate a COVID pass. The result was

997
01:09:58,933 --> 01:10:02,653
Speaker 3: two passes, one to view true details and one to

998
01:10:02,773 --> 01:10:07,133
Speaker 3: scan a copy. Managing to visit many places restaurants, cafes

999
01:10:07,173 --> 01:10:12,133
Speaker 3: and bars, etc. Just proved another flaw in the government's plan. Today,

1000
01:10:12,173 --> 01:10:14,493
Speaker 3: three to four years on, none of the family have

1001
01:10:14,613 --> 01:10:17,333
Speaker 3: had COVID. The daily dose of vitamin C and D,

1002
01:10:17,573 --> 01:10:21,453
Speaker 3: along with zinc supporting the immune system, has seemed to

1003
01:10:21,493 --> 01:10:25,253
Speaker 3: do the trick. We are still convinced of the decision

1004
01:10:25,293 --> 01:10:28,133
Speaker 3: we made back then and would certainly follow the same

1005
01:10:28,213 --> 01:10:31,253
Speaker 3: or a similar regime in the future. I enjoy your

1006
01:10:31,253 --> 01:10:34,213
Speaker 3: weekly podcasts and have developed a habit of listening every

1007
01:10:34,213 --> 01:10:37,573
Speaker 3: Saturday morning. Probably listened to around ninety five percent of

1008
01:10:37,573 --> 01:10:41,253
Speaker 3: the podcast. Your balanced approach to the subjects is refreshing

1009
01:10:41,733 --> 01:10:46,093
Speaker 3: given the woky, lefty narratives we are now constantly subjected to.

1010
01:10:46,373 --> 01:10:51,693
Speaker 3: Kind regards, Craig, I can't find anything wrong with what

1011
01:10:52,613 --> 01:10:55,293
Speaker 3: you've said. Some people would probably say that you were

1012
01:10:55,333 --> 01:11:00,733
Speaker 3: wrong in your replication of a COVID pass because at

1013
01:11:00,733 --> 01:11:05,013
Speaker 3: the time, Well, you knew, and a lot of people knew,

1014
01:11:05,053 --> 01:11:09,453
Speaker 3: but not everybody did. Apart from that little adventure, You're

1015
01:11:09,493 --> 01:11:12,853
Speaker 3: to be congratulated on your whole attitude and there were

1016
01:11:12,893 --> 01:11:16,693
Speaker 3: many many people who fell into a footstep with you.

1017
01:11:17,173 --> 01:11:18,773
Speaker 3: And let's hope we don't have to go through anything

1018
01:11:18,853 --> 01:11:22,853
Speaker 3: like that again in the foreseeable future or beyond.

1019
01:11:23,973 --> 01:11:24,133
Speaker 2: Right.

1020
01:11:24,213 --> 01:11:27,013
Speaker 3: So that's the mail room for this week, with the

1021
01:11:27,813 --> 01:11:31,213
Speaker 3: additional that was fairly long. If you want to write

1022
01:11:31,213 --> 01:11:33,933
Speaker 3: to us Latent at newstalksb dot co dot inz or

1023
01:11:34,013 --> 01:11:37,573
Speaker 3: Carolyn at newstalksb dot co dot in z. Now I

1024
01:11:37,573 --> 01:11:39,853
Speaker 3: have some recommendations and we'll get into that in just

1025
01:11:39,893 --> 01:11:53,013
Speaker 3: a second. Leighton Smith to what we might call the

1026
01:11:53,013 --> 01:11:57,773
Speaker 3: final segment of podcast two sixty and some references that

1027
01:11:58,653 --> 01:12:00,453
Speaker 3: I hope that some of you at least will find

1028
01:12:00,773 --> 01:12:04,133
Speaker 3: interesting in what to follow up on. Entirely up to you,

1029
01:12:04,453 --> 01:12:07,733
Speaker 3: I will never know. That is the better one, the

1030
01:12:07,853 --> 01:12:11,533
Speaker 3: main one. Put that aside for a moment. We tad

1031
01:12:11,613 --> 01:12:18,053
Speaker 3: about Hillary Clinton and her warning. Very quickly. This is

1032
01:12:18,093 --> 01:12:21,173
Speaker 3: from This is from zero Hedge. If you want to

1033
01:12:21,213 --> 01:12:27,453
Speaker 3: find it as Empire of Lies crumbles, Hillary Clinton warns,

1034
01:12:28,133 --> 01:12:31,333
Speaker 3: is all you need as empire. Do a search on

1035
01:12:31,413 --> 01:12:33,573
Speaker 3: it and you'll find it. I'm sure as empire of

1036
01:12:33,613 --> 01:12:38,213
Speaker 3: lies crumbles, Hillary Clinton warns will lose total control if

1037
01:12:38,333 --> 01:12:44,093
Speaker 3: social media stops censoring content. This is a woman that's

1038
01:12:44,133 --> 01:12:49,533
Speaker 3: been telling us for ages about how Donald Trump is

1039
01:12:49,573 --> 01:12:52,213
Speaker 3: going to ruin America. Donald Trump is going to be

1040
01:12:52,253 --> 01:12:57,853
Speaker 3: a totalitarian tyrant. I think he can be a totalitarian

1041
01:12:57,893 --> 01:13:03,733
Speaker 3: tyrant amongst other things, etc. I have not a word

1042
01:13:03,773 --> 01:13:06,893
Speaker 3: that I can use that describes Hillary Clinton, to be honest.

1043
01:13:07,453 --> 01:13:10,333
Speaker 3: About nine months ago, the Wall Street Journal editor in

1044
01:13:10,413 --> 01:13:15,453
Speaker 3: chief admitted to Davos Elites that the legacy media outlets

1045
01:13:15,493 --> 01:13:19,893
Speaker 3: no longer had a monopoly on information and narratives. In

1046
01:13:19,933 --> 01:13:24,573
Speaker 3: other words, misinformation and disinformation campaigns to brainwash the masses

1047
01:13:25,173 --> 01:13:30,453
Speaker 3: were no longer working. We owned the news, We were

1048
01:13:30,493 --> 01:13:35,133
Speaker 3: the gatekeepers, and we very much owned the facts as well. Nowadays,

1049
01:13:35,173 --> 01:13:37,213
Speaker 3: people can go to all sorts of different sources for

1050
01:13:37,253 --> 01:13:40,813
Speaker 3: the news, and they're much more questioning about what we're saying.

1051
01:13:41,813 --> 01:13:44,853
Speaker 3: This is according to the Wall Street Journal editor Emma Tucker,

1052
01:13:45,453 --> 01:13:48,293
Speaker 3: this is why the fake news media is attacking Elon

1053
01:13:48,493 --> 01:13:51,453
Speaker 3: and the X platform. They have lost control of the

1054
01:13:51,533 --> 01:13:54,773
Speaker 3: narrative they once had we owned the news. We were

1055
01:13:54,813 --> 01:13:57,653
Speaker 3: the gatekeepers and we were very much and we very

1056
01:13:57,693 --> 01:14:02,573
Speaker 3: much owned the facts as well. So there's six pages

1057
01:14:02,613 --> 01:14:08,253
Speaker 3: on that. If you're interisted next misinformation laws will feed

1058
01:14:08,493 --> 01:14:11,973
Speaker 3: attacks on Western history. Now this is from the Spectator

1059
01:14:12,013 --> 01:14:15,413
Speaker 3: Australia and it's not something that you can hunt down

1060
01:14:15,813 --> 01:14:19,533
Speaker 3: and read in its entirety unless you are a subscriber

1061
01:14:19,973 --> 01:14:22,573
Speaker 3: of which I am. So this is a little unfair,

1062
01:14:23,013 --> 01:14:26,453
Speaker 3: but it's to do with Tucker Carlson has a unique

1063
01:14:26,453 --> 01:14:29,053
Speaker 3: ability to blow up the Internet, and he did so

1064
01:14:29,093 --> 01:14:34,013
Speaker 3: again recently. When History podcast host Daryl Cooper appeared on

1065
01:14:34,053 --> 01:14:38,413
Speaker 3: his show, Cooper made some controversial comments, primarily about Winston

1066
01:14:38,493 --> 01:14:41,813
Speaker 3: Churchill on the Second World War. Throughout the episode, Cooper

1067
01:14:41,893 --> 01:14:45,853
Speaker 3: asserted that Churchill was the chief villain of the Second

1068
01:14:45,853 --> 01:14:49,373
Speaker 3: World War. He accused Churchill of wanting war with Germany

1069
01:14:49,413 --> 01:14:53,373
Speaker 3: when hit the only wanted piece with Britain. He suggested

1070
01:14:53,453 --> 01:14:56,733
Speaker 3: Churchill may have been influenced by his Zionist finances to

1071
01:14:56,813 --> 01:15:00,213
Speaker 3: wage war on Germany and that it was Churchill who

1072
01:15:00,293 --> 01:15:03,733
Speaker 3: was the first to start fire bombing cities. The culpability

1073
01:15:03,773 --> 01:15:07,453
Speaker 3: of the Germans, in contrast, was downplayed, with Cooper suggesting

1074
01:15:07,493 --> 01:15:11,133
Speaker 3: that the deaths of millions of Russian POWs on the

1075
01:15:11,173 --> 01:15:14,653
Speaker 3: Eastern Front resulted more from a lack of planning and

1076
01:15:14,733 --> 01:15:18,733
Speaker 3: logistics than a concerted effort to mass murder. There are

1077
01:15:18,733 --> 01:15:22,413
Speaker 3: some insane people in this world. You can't eliminate them.

1078
01:15:22,493 --> 01:15:25,253
Speaker 3: I don't know. I don't know what Carlson was doing

1079
01:15:25,293 --> 01:15:27,493
Speaker 3: with him on Maybe he was having fun at his expense.

1080
01:15:27,533 --> 01:15:31,333
Speaker 3: But for get a chance or have a look. Now.

1081
01:15:31,333 --> 01:15:35,293
Speaker 3: This is the no, it's not, yes, it is. This

1082
01:15:35,373 --> 01:15:39,413
Speaker 3: is the article that is the most important this week.

1083
01:15:40,333 --> 01:15:46,173
Speaker 3: I think it runs fourteen pages. Central Bank Digital Currencies

1084
01:15:46,733 --> 01:15:52,533
Speaker 3: Accelerating toward Dystopia, and you can find that simply by

1085
01:15:53,053 --> 01:15:57,173
Speaker 3: doing a search on Central bank Digital Currencies Accelerating toward

1086
01:15:57,413 --> 01:16:01,933
Speaker 3: Dystopia by Ronan Manly. In fact, you'd probably be better

1087
01:16:01,973 --> 01:16:06,693
Speaker 3: off looking up Ronan Manly, Rona m an l Y

1088
01:16:07,133 --> 01:16:11,973
Speaker 3: Ronan Manly fourteen pages of interest. When it comes to

1089
01:16:12,933 --> 01:16:18,573
Speaker 3: banking and the future, the dangers of CBDCs. All major

1090
01:16:18,613 --> 01:16:21,773
Speaker 3: banks are planning a CBDC. I've read most of this

1091
01:16:22,093 --> 01:16:25,813
Speaker 3: CBDC bridges for those who believe that their own countries

1092
01:16:25,893 --> 01:16:29,653
Speaker 3: CBDC could be a dangerous tool of surveillance and control.

1093
01:16:29,933 --> 01:16:33,053
Speaker 3: They must also stay aware of the fact that the

1094
01:16:33,093 --> 01:16:37,133
Speaker 3: global plans for these financial globalists are to link all

1095
01:16:37,213 --> 01:16:41,373
Speaker 3: of these national CBDCs together in a global network of

1096
01:16:41,493 --> 01:16:46,773
Speaker 3: tightly knit mesh that will envelop the human population trilling

1097
01:16:47,653 --> 01:16:55,133
Speaker 3: unelected elites, the vis unelected elites, the Atlantic Council, unelected elites,

1098
01:16:55,173 --> 01:17:00,733
Speaker 3: the International Monetary Fund, and US Republicans push back against

1099
01:17:00,893 --> 01:17:06,093
Speaker 3: cbdc's push harder. And then there is the conclusion, a

1100
01:17:06,213 --> 01:17:09,733
Speaker 3: touch of the conclusion. Whatever the outcome, it looks set

1101
01:17:09,853 --> 01:17:13,773
Speaker 3: that this CBDC issue will cause lots more debate and

1102
01:17:13,853 --> 01:17:16,813
Speaker 3: wrangling between Republicans and Democrats over the months and years

1103
01:17:16,813 --> 01:17:19,653
Speaker 3: to come, and could even be a major policy issue

1104
01:17:19,733 --> 01:17:23,893
Speaker 3: to debate if the mainstream media, the US mainstream media,

1105
01:17:24,253 --> 01:17:28,573
Speaker 3: bothered to ask the right questions. I think it's worthy

1106
01:17:28,813 --> 01:17:34,013
Speaker 3: of anybody who listens to this podcast should find it

1107
01:17:34,773 --> 01:17:38,293
Speaker 3: of some value. And then finally, I want to make

1108
01:17:38,373 --> 01:17:41,613
Speaker 3: mention of these two books that I have that I

1109
01:17:41,653 --> 01:17:45,093
Speaker 3: have discussed with one of the one of the authors,

1110
01:17:45,573 --> 01:17:50,493
Speaker 3: Andrew Hollis, Climate Actually Nothing to Fear. And then the

1111
01:17:50,533 --> 01:17:55,053
Speaker 3: second volume, which has now come out finally in its

1112
01:17:55,053 --> 01:17:58,893
Speaker 3: own right, Climate Actually the science behind it. So the

1113
01:17:58,933 --> 01:18:02,333
Speaker 3: difference Climate Actually nothing to fear is Volume one Climate

1114
01:18:02,413 --> 01:18:06,213
Speaker 3: actually the science behind it. Volume two speaks for itself,

1115
01:18:07,053 --> 01:18:10,413
Speaker 3: ordinary language explaining the science is associated with climate for

1116
01:18:10,453 --> 01:18:14,493
Speaker 3: everyone to understand by retired lawyer and the man who

1117
01:18:14,813 --> 01:18:18,453
Speaker 3: in his law degree did some climate stuff or associated

1118
01:18:19,133 --> 01:18:25,413
Speaker 3: Andrew Hollis and Mike sank And we've done an interview,

1119
01:18:25,493 --> 01:18:29,293
Speaker 3: as I say, and you've probably heard it. But now

1120
01:18:29,293 --> 01:18:34,053
Speaker 3: that I've got the books in their final form, let

1121
01:18:34,093 --> 01:18:38,773
Speaker 3: me just give you an idea of what caught my attention.

1122
01:18:39,813 --> 01:18:43,493
Speaker 3: These arrived last Saturday. The alleged harm from CO two.

1123
01:18:44,573 --> 01:18:48,693
Speaker 3: CO two is a pollutant question mark, Did you know

1124
01:18:48,813 --> 01:18:51,453
Speaker 3: that the Supreme Court of the United States legislated that

1125
01:18:51,533 --> 01:18:54,333
Speaker 3: CO two was a pollutant and needs to be eradicated.

1126
01:18:54,973 --> 01:18:58,053
Speaker 3: What part of the planet are you from? How delusional

1127
01:18:58,093 --> 01:19:01,293
Speaker 3: are you? It is not a plant destroying toxin. It

1128
01:19:01,373 --> 01:19:04,533
Speaker 3: is the food upon which they survive and thrive. Such

1129
01:19:04,653 --> 01:19:09,333
Speaker 3: is the madness of this climate alarmist hysteria that even

1130
01:19:09,373 --> 01:19:15,053
Speaker 3: the highest court in the United States has seemingly gone bonkers.

1131
01:19:15,133 --> 01:19:18,533
Speaker 3: There were the Democrat appointees that caused that. And you

1132
01:19:18,533 --> 01:19:21,333
Speaker 3: can get these two books from Amazon Australia and they're

1133
01:19:21,373 --> 01:19:24,173
Speaker 3: well priced, I might add, and they're worthy of being

1134
01:19:24,213 --> 01:19:28,013
Speaker 3: in your library, especially if you've got young people in

1135
01:19:28,053 --> 01:19:32,373
Speaker 3: your house, especially if you've got kids at school. Let

1136
01:19:32,373 --> 01:19:35,493
Speaker 3: them educate themselves and take on the teachers, because the

1137
01:19:35,533 --> 01:19:38,493
Speaker 3: teachers deserve to be taken on. And that will take

1138
01:19:38,613 --> 01:19:43,213
Speaker 3: us away for podcasts or from podcast two hundred and

1139
01:19:43,333 --> 01:19:45,973
Speaker 3: sixty later in that News Talks AB dot co dot

1140
01:19:46,053 --> 01:19:49,653
Speaker 3: NZ and Carolyn at Newstalks ADB dot co dot in Z.

1141
01:19:50,213 --> 01:19:52,653
Speaker 3: We shall return with podcasts two hundred and sixty one

1142
01:19:52,773 --> 01:19:55,533
Speaker 3: very shortly. Until then, as always, thank you for listening

1143
01:19:56,293 --> 01:19:57,293
Speaker 3: and we shall talk soon.

1144
01:20:05,173 --> 01:20:08,853
Speaker 1: Thank you for more from News Talks, there'd be listen

1145
01:20:08,933 --> 01:20:11,893
Speaker 1: live on air or online and keep our shows with

1146
01:20:12,013 --> 01:20:15,093
Speaker 1: you wherever you go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio