Founder / Director

Dr Muriel Newman

Dr Muriel Newman



View our latest NZCPR Weekly Newsletter …               

Register newsletter– to receive this free newsletter each week by email click the button and register


Newsletter logo


Dear NZCPR Reader,


This week…

In this NZCPR newsletter we discuss a Labour Party leadership change and look into ACT’s call for the closure of Demographic Ministries, our NZCPR Guest Commentator Dr Greg Clydesdale explains why the Ministry for Women should be disbanded, and our poll asks whether you agree that the Ministry for Maori Development, the Office for Maori-Crown Relations, the Ministry for Pacific Peoples, the Ministry for Ethnic Communities, the Ministry of Women’s Affairs, and the Human Rights Commission should all be abolished.

Last week…

In case you missed it, in our last newsletter we investigated the discriminatory effect of co-governance and outlined the Government’s plan for public consultation over He Puapua – a project being jointly led by the Minister of Maori Development Willie Jackson and the iwi leader Professor Margaret Mutu HERE, and our NZCPR Guest Commentator Mike Butler shared his analysis of the latest round of “engagement” with Maori over their plan to implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples HERE.

Plain English Petition…

If you were looking to sign our “Plain English Petition” – to prevent Maori language words being used in official English communications without the courtesy of a translation – it can be found HERE.

Will you support the NZCPR?

The New Zealand Centre for Political Research is a public policy think tank that provides research and commentary on matters of national interest. To protect our independence, we reject all forms of State assistance. Since we don’t run ads, have a paywall or offer subscriptions, it is only through the wonderful generosity of our readers that we can produce these newsletters and run our important campaigns. Your support is crucial – please help us keep the flame of freedom and liberty alive, as we battle against socialism, the undermining of democracy, and the on-going attempts to divide us by race, by clicking HERE.  
[If you don’t like website forms, direct donation details are NZCPR ASB Bank account 12-3099-0833814-00 (please include your first name and email if possible).]

Thank you for your on-going interest and for your wonderful support – and please help spread the message by sharing our newsletters as widely as you can.

Warmest regards,





Dr Muriel Newman
NZCPR Founding Director


NZCPR Weekly:

By Dr Muriel Newman

In politics, things are often not what they seem. That’s why an opinion piece published in the Herald last week by the Minister for the Public Service Chris Hipkins, defending the expansion of the public service, raises some interesting questions.

Since it is unusual for Cabinet Ministers to publish newspaper articles at this stage in an election cycle, one has to wonder whether Labour’s internal polling shows opposition criticism is too damaging to be left unanswered – or whether this is the start of a positioning campaign ahead of a leadership pitch?

Is Chris Hipkins anticipating that Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern is planning to step down – and perhaps move onto higher office at the United Nations? If so, is he now signalling he’s a serious challenger for the top job?

It’s important to remember that late last year, the Labour Party streamlined the way they elect their leader by removing the right for the unions and party members to have a say, which in the past had led to disruptive and divisive leadership contests. Now, if two-thirds of Caucus agree, the decision is theirs alone.

Labour’s rule change was most likely influenced by the experience of the previous National Government, which had been blindsided by the surprise resignation of Prime Minister John Key midway through his third term. He moved on, while the party still had plenty of popular support, and in time for the new leadership team to settle in and find their feet before the next election.

While Jacinda Ardern is only midway through her second term, the mood of the nation has turned against her. As the pandemic death toll approaches 1,000, with more than a million Kiwis infected, not only can she no longer claim Covid success, but breaking her promise not to impose vaccine mandates, and blocking New Zealanders from returning home, has undermined trust.

Furthermore, the cost-of-living crisis – which is being exacerbated by Labour’s reckless spending – is hitting families hard, with all areas of Government incompetence and waste now coming under scrutiny. With inflation on the run, these are issues that will not go away quickly, and not without a certain amount of pain to homeowners – especially those with high debt.

In addition, the Prime Minister is having to deal with a belligerent Maori caucus which, by continuing to push their extremist tribal rule agenda – despite mounting public opposition – is undermining public support for the Party and threatening their future prospects.

For Jacinda Ardern, the bottom line is that she is likely to be defeated at the next election. The alternative would be to take a leaf out of the John Key playbook and leave before suffering the humiliation of being tossed out.

So, who would succeed Jacinda Ardern as leader of the Labour Party? Chris Hipkins and Grant Robertson stand out as the leading contenders.

While Deputy Prime Minister Grant Robertson appears the obvious choice, it’s important to remember that he has attempted to become Party leader a number of times in the past. He lost out to David Cunliffe in a formal contest in 2013, and again to Andrew Little in 2014 – along with a failed informal leadership bid in 2013, with Jacinda Ardern as his deputy.

After the loss to Andrew Little, Grant Robertson is reported as saying, that he would not be putting his name forward again for leader: “I am taking the idea of me running off the table. I am not going to do it.” Whether that still stands remains to be seen.

Chris Hipkins holds the fifth ranked spot in the Party, with the Covid, Education, and Public Service Cabinet portfolios and the Leader of the House position. He also won his electorate seat of Remutaka with over 17,000 more votes than his nearest rival – the biggest margin of any MP in the country, even greater than the Prime Minister in Mt Albert.

Minister Hipkins is now also taking a lead role in defending the Government’s record, including a massive expansion of the Public Service which has seen the number of full-time employees grow by almost 30 percent in just over four years: “The number of permanent employees has grown between 2017 and 2021 from 47,252 in 2017 to 61,100 in 2021.”

He claims the growth of the bureaucracy by 14,000 additional employees at a cost of over $2 billion a year is “a positive story, one of innovation, flexibility and better services.”

Claiming innovation within the Public Service is surely a joke. Does Chris Hipkins not realise that bigger bureaucracies destroy wealth and stifle innovation?

The reality is that expanding the size and scope of government is what socialist politicians do. With their ‘the State knows best’ worldview, they ignore the debilitating effect their bureaucratic red tape has on private sector wealth creators. Not only do governments consume wealth – the total cost of just paying Government workers has ballooned 30 percent under Labour from $22 billion in 2017 to almost $30 billion a year in 2021 – but much of their excessive spending provides little public benefit.

Just look at the dismal failure of Labour’s ‘flagship’ KiwiBuild policy. Or the $1.9 billion “invested” in mental health with no appreciable benefits. Or the Ministry of Transport’s spending of $145 million on consultants and only $200 million on construction!

Or what about the  $500 million on restructuring costs to create the Maori Health Authority and abolish the District Health Boards, which medical professionals are now warning is going to create deadly chaos that will worsen health care instead of benefiting it – and will ultimately cost many New Zealanders their lives.

Without a doubt, National’s criticism of Labour’s wasteful spending is resonating in the community. So too is ACT’s alternative budget, which suggests a multitude of ways to save money for tax cuts, including abolishing the woke “Demographic Ministries” – the Ministry for Maori Development, the Office for Crown-Maori Relations, the Ministry for Pacific Peoples, the Ministry for Ethnic Communities, and the Ministry for Women.   

These government agencies are not “colourblind” and working for the good of all New Zealanders – but instead are politically correct taxpayer-funded lobby groups pushing an identity politics agenda to advance the rights of one group of New Zealanders above all others.

This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator is former University lecturer and author Dr Greg Clydesdale, who has long argued that these agencies have outlived their useful life. He shares with us an extract from his book “The Politically Correct Economy”, that outlines why the Ministry for Women should be abolished:

“One crusade pursued by the Ministry for Women, using taxpayer resources, was to get more women on corporate boards. This is part of a global movement that has seen the introduction of quotas in some nations. The Ministry justified their position by saying that having more women on corporate boards is ‘good for business’. By that, they mean having women on the board improves a company’s effectiveness, and they cited a number of international reports to back their position.

“But the biggest problem with the Ministry’s use of these reports is that there is much more research available on this topic, and a lot of it has different results to the reports they used. In other words, the Ministry have not objectively reviewed the literature. They have only cited the literature that supports their case. Sadly, they are perfectly entitled to do this, as their mandate is to progress the position of women. They have no obligation to be provide a balanced perspective. Herein lies the problem with taxpayer funded lobbying groups. Their obligation is only to one group in society, not society as a whole.” 

Dr Clydesdale concludes, “The early feminists have achieved so much, not just for women, but for men in that they have liberated us from forced roles. Time has moved on but many feminists remain political with an explicit desire to juxtapose women with men. It is time to stop focusing on power and… disband the Ministry for Women.”

Briefing Papers prepared in 2020 for the Incoming Government, provide useful information on the size and scope of these Demographic agencies identified by ACT for abolition.

The Ministry for Women, which had 39 full-time staff and over $7 million in funding, works across government and non-government agencies pressuring organisations to adopt pro-women policy positions.

The radical nature of this strategy was highlighted only too clearly, by the former Minister, Green Party MP Julie Anne Genter, who issued a stinging criticism of “old white men in their 60s”, who make up around 85 percent of the country’s board members: “If we’re going to improve the diversity of boards, then we will need some of the current positions vacated so there can be room for new diversity and talent.”

The ideological call for “diversity” is now undermining the traditional objective of hiring ‘the best person for the job’, which has long been the foundation of success.  

Once the Ministry achieved their target of 50 percent of women on state sector boards and committees, they began collaborating with other Demographic agencies, including the Ministry for Ethnic Communities – which had 39 staff and an annual budget of $13 million – to push for greater ethnic representation in positions of influence.

The other Demographic agencies include the Ministry for Pacific Peoples, which has clearly  become a priority for Labour, growing from 45 staff and a $10 million budget in 2017, to 75 staff and $118 million in funding by 2020. The Ministry for Maori Development (Te Puni Kokiri), which had 350 staff and $77 million budget to deliver a radical race-based agenda, which includes He Puapua and the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. And the Office of Maori-Crown Relations (Te Arawhiti), which, with 233 staff and a budget of $12 million, is responsible for embedding the Treaty partnership concept across the whole of Government “to achieve true cultural change” by ‘re-training’ “50,000 people in the core public service, and a further 350,000-plus in the wider state sector.”

Where this is all leading can be seen in the reported comments of the Western Bay of Plenty District Council chief executive John Holyoake, who is calling for greater diversity, not only around the council table but within the organisation itself: “We need to look like, sound like, be like, the people that we’re representing – the people we’re making decisions for. We need diversity of age, culture, experience, and skillsets. We need more Maori at the table so that we can ‘hand on heart’ work in partnership with Tangata Whenua. We have a very clear demographic sitting around our council table and we need diversity. We need to recognise other things besides the traditional privileges around being wealthy and white.”

Is this really the sort of New Zealand we want, where race and ethnicity become more important than talent? Don’t Western Bay of Plenty ratepayers – and New Zealanders across the country who are now victims of agencies where this progressive agenda has taken hold – want good services delivered by the best and most effective people for the job, rather than woke employees hired to make bosses feel more “inclusive”?

In their alternative budget, ACT also identified the Human Rights Commission with its staff of 42 and budget of $14 million for the axe, claiming they have become a hard-left organisation masquerading as a government department. Established in 1977 to defend human rights – including our right to free speech – the Commission has now become a radical advocate for hate speech and divisive minority causes, including the creation of a Treaty of Waitangi constitution, promoting the Treaty partnership fiction, and enacting the UN Indigenous Rights Declaration, that are now fracturing society and harming our Kiwi way of life.

Please note: To register for our free weekly newsletter please click HERE.


*Do you agree that the Ministry for Maori Development, the Office for Maori-Crown Relations, the Ministry for Pacific Peoples, the Ministry for Ethnic Communities, the Ministry of Women’s Affairs, and the Human Rights Commission should all be abolished?

*Poll comments are posted at the end of the main article.


*All NZCPR poll results can be seen in the Archive.



NZCPR Guest Commentary:

By Dr Greg Clydesdale

“A large number of studies have revealed no link between gender, diversity and the success of the business.  A number of studies actually show a negative effect. For example, a study by Chapple and Humphrey found having multiple women on the board and performance actually correlated with poorer performance (depending on the industry). Similarly, Dobbin and Jung studied 400 leading U.S. corporations between 1997 and 2005 and found that stock values actually decreased with gender diversity. Another US study, published in 2009 also showed the effect of diversity on firm performance was negative.  This study came to the conclusion that ‘mandating gender quotas in the boardroom may harm well-governed firms where additional monitoring is counterproductive…’

“The sad thing is, a number of academics have performed thorough reviews of this subject and the Ministry could have referred to them. The general conclusion in these reports is that the research is inconclusive, some studies find positive results, some negative; and the results can vary depending on the methodology used.

“People like to adhere to superior moral qualities, but the process may merely be one of legitimisation, and there are a large number of academics that argue diversity enhances firm performance.  It is a particularly fashionable view to hold. This view argues that women think differently and thereby expand the range of expertise and thinking styles on corporate boards. Women offer more social sensitivity, show greater concern with equity and are more collaborative and cooperative. 

“The question is not whether these claims are true, nor whether these attributes have value. The question is, are these attributes important for the role of company director?  And to answer that question you need to understand what a director does…”

*To read the full commentary please visit the website.


What’s new on our Breaking Views blog…

Breaking Views is administered by the NZCPR – the views are those of the authors. Here is a selection of this week’s articles…   

  • Ian Powell: I’m sorry I haven’t a clue parody in action
    I’m Sorry I Haven’t a Clue is a famous BBC show, featuring two teams of comedians each being given “silly things to do” by a compere. The show is now being replicated in the restructure of primary and community care in New Zealand…
  • Guy Steward: Reflections on Education
    I recently retired from school teaching. It started thirty-five years ago, when, in my late twenties, I got a job in South Auckland taking after-hours music classes. You didn’t need to be trained, just able to play the guitar…
  • Caleb Anderson: An Educational Imperative
    I attended a meeting of principals recently where it was suggested that schools should focus on climate change – now that covid appears to be on the wane – as this is the greatest challenge this generation of students will face…  
  • Derek Mackie: The Manchurian Candidate
    X: Premier Xi of China; T: Chris Trotskyer – a left-wing journalist. X: Please, take a seat Mr Trotskyer. T: This is a great honour, sir…your excellency…your magnificence. X: Premier Xi is quite sufficient. T: Thank you…
  • John Franklin: “I am not Pakeha, I am a Kiwi”
    Have you ever filled in a form and the closest ethnic definition that you can select is Pakeha or European, yet you identify with neither? Regrettably, I have been coerced into selecting Pakeha or European rather than writing in “New Zealander” or “Kiwi”…
  • Clive Bibby: Is reparation enough or is there another way
    I find it hard to work out what is fair compensation for misdeeds suffered by Maori at the hands of my ancestors. Given that New Zealand appears to be the only country in the world taking its colonial history seriously enough…

Spreading the message:


Anyone who would like to receive our free NZCPR Weekly newsletter is more than welcome to register for the mailing list HERE.

Please help us spread the message by sharing our newsletters…

Please help us spread the message about our newsletters by sharing them as widely as possible. This can be done by forwarding the newsletter itself, or, if there are problems with spam filters, by sharing the newsletter link: Content from the newsletter can also be copied into your own email. To share individual articles on social media, please visit the website and click on the article in question – the Facebook and Twitter “share” buttons can be found on the top right, along with buttons to “share by email”, and “Print”.    

Have Your Say…

Speaking out in a democracy is crucial – please find all MP email addresses, local authority councillor email addresses, contact details for newspaper letters to the editor, social media links, and other useful contacts on our “Have Your Say” page HERE.

Ensuring you receive our newsletter…

To ensure you receive our newsletters, please whitelist our newsletter mailing address – or add it to your ‘safe senders’ list. The address to whitelist is: … If your newsletter fails to arrive, it can be viewed at the ‘Newsletter’ link on our website.


New Zealand Centre for Political Research
Ph: 09-434-3836, Fax: 09 434-4224, Mob: 021-800-111

To unsubscribe from the newsletter, send this email – but don’t forget to reply to the confirmation message.
If you need help unsubscribing, please email with “REMOVE” in the subject line.
Please note it’s important that you contact us over unsubscribing problems because
it’s often caused by the fact that it was an older address that was registered,
not your current one, and we will need to search for that. 

To change your address please email with “ADDRESS CHANGE” in the
subject line, advising the new address to be added and the old one to be removed.