Labour can not dodge an independent inquiry into how Mallard incited Parliament Lawn protest

64
2026

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern backs Labour MPs who blocked Parliament protest hearing, saying police watchdog should review

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) should lead any investigation into an occupation and riot at Parliament, backing her Labour MPs who blocked a parliamentary hearing on the event.

Ardern on Monday said Government would only consider a possible review of the protest at Parliament after the IPCA announced its own review of the 23-day occupation, which ended earlier this month with police pushing rioting anti-vaccine and anti-mandate protesters out of their camp.

“For something as serious as this we want … an institution that has the direct legal authority to enquire directly into the police’s operational response. No-one has the basis to do that and in quite the same pre-established way as the IPCA does.

“The IPCA is independent, and I think it’s important that we have an independent voice in this, particularly because, of course, some of the complaints will be coming from those who were part of it.”

There is no way Labour or Jacinda want a real review of the madness of the Dumb Lives Matter Parliament Lawn protest.

They do not want any focus on their decision to refuse point blank to meet the protestors. While the Government could NEVER have negotiated with the feral lunatics occupying Parliament’s Lawns, (because you can’t negotiate with people making threats of violence), they SHOULD HAVE sent a representative to hear their concerns because they are politicians and they have an obligation to hear from citizens who have been negatively impacted by health mandates!

Labour want no reflection of that.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

Likewise Labour want no investigation of Trevor Mallard’s temper tantrum on the Thursday morning after the protest was imploding upon itself and was splintering. It was Trevor’s short man temper tantrum that saw the Police attempt to move everyone off the lawn which gave the protestors a common enemy and provided a 10 hour live stream recruitment video.

Labour want no reflection of that.

Equally Labour want no examination of how Mallard’s playing of loud music and spraying the protestors with water incited events. We taunted these protestors for 3 weeks and when they reacted we pointed to their actions and screamed ‘hate crime’.

Labour want no reflection of that.

Also, Labour hierarchy appreciate that their Wellington Middle Class Marxist supporters on social media screaming NAZI at poor brown protestors has damaged them badly and they don’t want their social media proxies reminding voters of their weird woke cult.

Labour want no reflection of that.

Look, we made broad stroke Social policy on the hoof in the face of a pandemic. OF COURSE there were going to be people caught up in that broad stroke policy who (through no fault of their own) couldn’t take the vaccination and lost their jobs. That doesn’t mean the mandates were wrong, I fully supported them, but people got hurt and the total refusal to give those protestors that acknowledgment so the tribal left could scream NAZI has ensured that the lumpenproletariat NEVER vote for the Left ever again.

The colossal fuck up by Labour in its handling of this abomination is not something they wish to be held accountable for so rather than a political inquiry, Labour have shoved this off to the IPCA who have no jurisdiction over the political blunders Labour made that incited this to the violence it became.

The Middle Class Marxists are damaging Labour’s ‘kindness’ brand by highlighting their privilege hypocrisy, it’s essential that Labour cauterise this investigation to stop their woke supporters screaming NAZI because every time Neale Jones, Clint Smith, Morgan Godfery and the rest of the woke Wellington twitteratti scream NAZI on Twitter, Labour lose 5 voters.

 

Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.

If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media

64 COMMENTS

  1. Yes, absolute bullshit from the PM down on this, it needs a thorough open review, not buried in the sands of time IPCA enquiry which can only relate to the police role anyway.

    I couldn’t stand the way National would avoid scrutiny in a similar way. Labour are no better, maybe worse.

    Transformational government. Not so much. The more this government goes on the more I can’t tell the difference between them and National!

      • Ngungukai Hmm. Act’s David Seymour went and spoke with the demonstrators too, as did a Real Housewife of Auckland, and some damn sailor- dutifully partaking in photo-ops before swanning back into the sunset.

        Remember that bottom- feeder Luxon supported the PM’s decision not to engage with the protestors, as did the leaders of the Purple Party. I still do not know why protestor persons could not have been courteously invited inside to parley with politicians, even if it had take a series of meetings to accommodate them. Had nothing been achieved, they would at least have tried – and it could have been much more cost-effective, and healthier, than what eventually panned out.

        • SW who do you ‘invite in to parley’? the antivax group, the anti mandate group. the literal foil hat brigade, the maori nationalist faction, the white supremacist faction(sit them to gether light blue touchpaper and retire)….as every single one of the amorphous mob had their own personal agendas how do you fit ALL the demonstrators into a committee room…who do you exclude to save space….will those excluded (or even those included) heed their ‘we have no leader, leaders’

          seriously man in strictly practical terms how would you go about it…not wooly phrases thank you an actual scheme you think would have worked

          • Gagarin. Note that I said “ a series of meetings”, and I did not propose, as you do, fitting them all into a committee room.

            Initially politicians rejected meeting with protestors because they said that the protestors had no identifiable leaders. You have now produced five different groups. Why not five meetings ? That’s not a big ask.

            As the demonstration progressed, more differing interest groups emerged, and if the various groups were incapable of selecting spokespersons, then that’s their problem. But they were not given the opportunity anyway.

            Politicians also refused to listen to the demonstrators because it was not a lawful demonstration. So what ? Lots of demos aren’t lawful, but nothing is a achieved by refusing to listen to problems and at least attempting to discuss them. Confrontation is last century, and it rarely works.

            • as I said each person had their own list of gripes and you admit their inability to be cohesive so again I say which non-leaders do you negotiate with? now I don’t belive for one minute they weren’t being directed but they chose the no leaders fiction.

              • Gagarin, just for once, try not to attribute mistruths to me.

                I did not “admit their inability to be cohesive”, your words not mine.

                I said “ if … groups were incapable of selecting spokespersons…that’s their problem “ . “If” is suppositional, that’s all. I have no idea of the dynamics of each and every protesting group.

                The straw men surfacing now make a pretty compelling argument for an independent inquiry into the whole affair down at Parliament to ascertain how and why bad things happened, and how disaffected persons can be better handled in future. Certainly, I don’t think that one person, the PM, should have the power to stifle an independent inquiry or encapsulate it to suit herself. When one person has this sort of executive power independent of the so-called government, then infinitely worse things can happen, viz Vladimir Putin’s terrible war on Ukraine.

                There are no good reasons for government not to be aware of what’s bugging people.

                • quote from sw previous post

                  As the demonstration progressed, more differing interest groups emerged, and if the various groups were incapable of selecting spokespersons, then that’s their problem. But they were not given the opportunity anyway.

                  sounds like cohesive inability to me…don’t try to wiggle out sw.

                  • Gag – You must be as infallible as the Pope, because there is not one iota of actual evidence to suggest that anyone was “ incapable “ , no matter how it “ sounds” to you.

                • If you want to know why there was no spokesperson either collectively or representing a particular faction, as Brian Tamaki.

                  I suspect a premeditated, and deliberate act by Coster to undermine and destabilise future protests. Perhaps I’m giving him too much credit?
                  Perhaps there was political influence, I really hope not.

                  I can’t stand Tamaki and what he stands for. But I’m more uncomfortable with the way he was targeted by police.

          • Gagarin, that is the whole point. It was a wide range of issues, united against the perceived oppression personified in Ardern and Mallard. It was a popular people movement that defied definition, excalty the kind of thing that traditionally would have been loved by the left.

    • It’s just another nail in Labours coffin, they’re goneburger and they know it.

      At least if they’d sent a team down to negotiate over the three weeks they could take the moral high ground, but they are too up their own arses to do that.

  2. “I can’t comment on that while it’s the subject of an official inquiry” will make a nice change from “I reject the premise of that question”.

  3. People with a marxist world view acknowledge we live in a class society, where a tiny elite with the assistance of the bourgeois state and armed forces subjugate the majority.

    Marxists want that majority to organise and fight for the overthrow of capitalism and their own emancipation from exploitation and oppression.

    Middle class scaredy cats freaked out about the Wellington occupation are hardly revolutionaries–so is it too much to ask that The Daily Blog stop slandering class left fighters by using “marxist” in the pejorative sense? Alt right and post modernists have misused “marxist” on purpose for years, TDB need not join such arseholes.

    • Ngungukai Yes, Mallard most certainly did inflame the situation and his lack of height is no excuse for his lack of commonsense or intelligence – he can’t help the latter, and commonsense may be an acquired skill he missed out on. He may still think that it’s ok to be confrontational and cost the taxpayer millions for no good reason, and this is just one reason why an independent inquiry must go ahead and government should not try and wriggle out of being accountable by indulging in meaningless waffle. Tossing this into the lap of the IPCA is is, as X-ray says, bullshit.

  4. Protest is yesterdays news and largely forgotten.
    No serious political party will be courting these people.
    Mallard acted disgracefully but no worse than an angry boomer with an ugly mob on their lawn in the suburbs.
    Mandates will be gone in the next few weeks so who cares.

  5. The real question is whether the halfwit with the skippers hat and the twatter booster tag (yes everyone’s favorite tobacco lobbyist) will have the balls to have an royal commission into our covid response including mandates post 2023.

    I don’t think the clown will somehow unless Act gets >15%

  6. Martyn
    Labour can not dodge? Hahaha but that’s what they do for a living. So your suggestion is futile. Consider it dodged.

  7. Oh Labour will refute, reject, not accept and dodge dodge dodge, like they do with the housing crisis, our poverty crisis, our hungry kids crisis, our mental health crisis, our standard health crisis, our lack of nurses crisis, blahblahblabh.
    Also they are not Marxists, they are neo liberals. Socialize the losses and privatize the gains.
    Labour, We have tried nothing and are out of ideas. Vote for us 2023.

    • on the subject of ‘dodging’ like a very dodgy thing, anyone see uncle fester failing abysmally to even attempt to describe how losing the brightline and bringing back tax concessions would help renters…..all I can say as ceo of airnz he must have had top notch assisstants, frankly he’s lackluster, the usual nat cheerleading squad here can big him up but he’d have to do a lot better to climb up to average…soz ladz

          • oh no, don’t project your fears onto others. As i have stated, i don’t believe in the binary that is NZ approved Politics of NA and LG, both are the two sides of the same coin of bullshittery. The difference really is that you believe the faux kindness makes LG a little more palatable. But essentially its the same thing. Just with some vaseline added to it so that it slides better.

            • no nope nein..find me a post where I give lino any credit other than initial lockdown….both sides are a shit sandwich it’s just that with the nats most kiwis will get less bread.

  8. No matter which way you look at it. No matter the names we call them. No matter the reasons why they did it, that’s not important. What’s important is they did it and we didn’t.
    We come here and make our comments and then those comments vanish into obscurity as the TDB narrative veers here and there like a drunk on a bike while achieving nothing yet that rowdy rabble made a proper job of getting noticed. We should take notes, not offense.
    Neoliberal capitalism has had our democracy in a stranglehold for nearly forty years and the best we can do is bow down and live with it. Think about that?
    I read this in this mornings The Guardian:
    “ I was thinking of the reality of young people: the lack of social cohesion; depression and disillusionment; school as a corporate entity- but also as a producer of a workforce ready to be exploited. Instead of cooperation, one is educated for competition; and instead of being, having is important. These are the implications of capitalism. “
    So our neoliberal capitalists can’t have a fierce protest growing by the day. Might up end the apple cart for you, Aye Boys? That might lead to the end of your sweet little money making scams.

  9. I thank Jacinda and her star wars bar collective of misfits with no skills just “types” for showing me that ALL politicians are working solely for the elites and do everything in their power to make the poor poorer. If you are able, leave the tragedy that NZ has become. Greed, masons and nepotism ensured that the class system wrapped its tentacles around the once great country. It is now just as tainted as the UK, if not more.

  10. I disagree, what Martyn characterises as middle-class marxists I think are fairly characterised, (with slightly more nuance?) as woke identitarianism (neo-marxist) within the economically privileged neo-liberal elite.

    I’ve mentioned this before but to reiterate:
    Woke is not the traditional socio-economic left. It typically ignores almost all critique of socio-economic politics unless it is downstream of identity. However it IS the contemporary cultural left.

    Woke philosophical roots are in Gramsci, the Frankfurt School and land in American academia through the likes of Herbert Marcuse. The current philosophical movement of Critical Theory (nothing to do with critical thinking and not a theory) is a version of neo-marxism that appropriates post-modernist theories and tools. The relegation of class politics and mis-application of post-modernism is partly why Woke is hated by marxists and some post-modernists. As it propagates from academia (rather than say worker unions) it is overwhelmingly middle class and a top-down revolution.

    Where Woke now manifests politically and appears to skew right is the marriage of convenience between neoliberal corporatists and woke activists. The Woke version of ‘conflict theory’ (male/female, black/white, gay/straight, cis/trans etc) leads to a narrowly defined identity based ‘equity’ politics, so it is incredibly easy to game the system. This leads to virtue theatre, a kind of anti-politics where advancing anyone who is not male/cis/white/heterosexual feels highly progressive while the actual systems of neoliberal power are not challenged but strengthened. Woke is the ideal cover for corporatists post-Occupy Wall Street.

    • Nicely explained Tui.
      Interested in your take on Critical Race Theory not being a theory though -which definition of “theory” are you arguing?

      • Thanks KCCO, I mean Critical Theory (CRT is just one of several schools) is not a ‘Theory’ in the scientific sense. It may appear similar as both attempt to describe and predict phenomena. However rather than principles or ideas that have been rigorously tested. Critical Theory is more like a philosophy, it is a ‘reflective discourse to find fault’. A subjective means to deconstruct and problematise as a critique of social phenomena.

        This has LIMITED usefulness as ONE tool among many and as part of a socratic dialogue. However in the modern Woke context it is applied to EVERY part of society as the ONLY tool and the one truth. Some of the old-school CRT scholars no longer recognise or approve of modern CRT.

        In modern CRT, racism exists a priori, across every interracial dynamic, from the law (reasonable to question) to intimate personal relationships (religious puritanism). So CRT does not ask DID racism occur?, it asks HOW did racism occur? The (modern) critical theorist succeeds when they determine ‘how’ and there is little prohibition on conclusions that are partial, bad faith or purely speculative at the highest levels of academia.

        As an example of perfectly circular logic, here is Kendi’s attempt to define ‘racism’. (Kendi is one of the top US intellectuals propagating modern CRT in a less academic form to the public discourse).
        https://youtu.be/GyNBEM9NXO0?t=116

    • Tui cracks it with “while the actual systems of neoliberal power are not challenged but strengthened” in relation to identarian type politics. All oppressed and exploited groups deserve support and emancipation re their particular issues, but, underlying capitalist appropriation affects every single other group. It is the one thing that potentially unites all bar the 0.1%ers.

      Anyone with a glimmer of a class analysis of politics and economics will have come to it from varying places. I was fortunate enough to have learnt about class struggle from people who had been there and done that. NZ Spanish Civil war veterans, ’51 Waterfront Lockout veterans, original NZCP members on through to younger ones like the TDB’s own Mike Treen when he was with Socialist Action. We went through strikes pickets and international solidarity actions on a regular basis rather than university lectures or twitter wars.

      Meaning of words is important. For example parking wardens and people particular about grammar say, are not Nazis! Rodney Hyde, architect of the SuperCity corporatist set up was not a fascist. Pinochet was a fascist, ACT MPs are not even if they do ultimately lean to authoritarianism.

      So for the love of something–drop the “cultural marxism” and all the rest, such terms really like the old “not PC” is just code for denigrating and undermining perfectly legitimate struggle and action on behalf of oppressed groups.

      • I agree that words are important and also share your and frustration that many terms become lazy pejoratives, (‘ammo’ as Gagarin says) to belittle and dismiss legitimate struggles.

        However I’m not sure that dropping ‘cultural marxism’ solves one problem as much as brushes another one under the rug. I hope I’ve articulated well enough that woke identitarianism IS cultural marxism, (although perhaps NOT well enough that not all cultural marxism or post-modernism is woke).

        My greater concern is that woke ideology itself is undermining legitimate struggles far more effectively than lazy pejoratives. As we’ve mentioned it’s a fantastic way to ignore or distract from class politics and provide a ‘virtue shield’ to corporations and ill thought out government policies. ‘Free speech’ has been given up to the right. Many young leftists regard it ‘problematic’ and see woke ideology as a continuation of, rather than antithesis to, earlier progressive eras. Queer Theory activists (who are absolutely not representative of trans people) are IMO reversing decades of LGBT progress (for example does ‘inclusion over fairness’ when MtF athletes take the podium, advance Trans respect and acceptance?). The list goes on and on and on.

        Wokeness will become unfashionable with neoliberals as as soon as the marriage of convenience is no longer convenient (think financial losses or a critical mass of lawsuits in the US/UK). However if the left does not take on and distance themselves from this ideology the public backlash against woke excesses could easily taint genuinely progressive politics for years if not a generation.

        So far as I can see most people cannot clearly distinguish the woke cuckoo from the progressive nest. So I think at a minimum we need the language to be able to articulate the difference as clearly as possible.

  11. There won’t be an official inquiry because it wasn’t just the Speaker of Parliament Trevor Mallard who created this shambolic and bitter division within the nation. The leader of government was just as much to blame. Finally, though a couple of months too late, she has seen sense.
    But we ourselves still need to ask “How did this happen?”
    The answer is “Because, as is her wont, Jacinda chose to follow her “traditional partners”, the Five Eyes, into the depths of the hell over vaccine mandates”.
    Even after “seeing sense” on the mandates (actually just following the new direction set by the Five Eyes), Labour is still following the same “traditional partner” strategy across the board, and the consequences will be catastrophic for New Zealand.

  12. I take it no-one in Parliament had heard from citizens who had been negatively impacted by health mandates. I assume that no-one in Parliament actually realised that some had been negatively impacted by health mandates.

  13. The whole COVID response needs to thoroughly reviewed including violation of human rights but it won’t be.
    In and ideal world, Adern would be jailed for life along with every MP in parliament, both left and right.

  14. Mallard may have inflamed them but did his actions did not incite the violence we saw on the last day nah! it was a disaster waiting to happen when you have people like some of those who were there primarily to cause social unrest and anarchy.

    • There were definitely some undesirables and thugs there towards the end I watched the footage, hopefully the Police are investigating and prosecutions will take place. Friends of mine who a staunch Anti-Vaxers did not witness those type of people in Wellington.

  15. Why would any rational human being give any oxygen to the moronic Wellington fiasco?

    Politicians refused to meet protesters because of threats of violence and the fact it was a hotch potch of different issues grouped together. It would have taken months.

    I support anybody’s right to protest but they overstayed their welcome by at least 2 weeks. We got the point – they don’t like to be told they can’t do what they previously could, but there was more to the protest than that. By the end of the ‘occupation’ on day 23, most rational people were well and truly over it.

    • Brain Tamake and Destiny Church were in the thick of it so I am informed. He doesn’t like anyone telling his disciples what to do, unless it is him doing the preaching, this is the way Evangelical Cults operate!!!

  16. Being human is not indictable. Asp er your ‘Woke’ criticisms.

    There are questions about mandates now but it’s perfectly soluble in elections. Dungaree brains are fine but I don’t want to put’m above reason. Except to note the latent dissatisfaction in NZ that has no way of communicating itself.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.