UPDATE: I’m not sure handing the Right more culture war ammunition is the smartest move by Labour right now


I’m not sure handing the Right more culture war ammunition is the smartest move by Labour right now.

Just as National’s toxically venal tax plan starts to collapse under searing criticism, just as ACTs extremism becomes more apparent and as Winston flirts with antivaxers – just as there is a glimmer of hope that Labour + Greens + MP could just edge the Far Right from winning power, just as the reality of what voters might be getting from a far right Government starts to set in, Ginny Anderson steps up and says, ‘Fuck it, let’s go culture war’, and announces a change in consent laws that can easily be construed as an attack on the presumption of innocence…

Election 2023: Labour to campaign on overhauling consent laws, put onus to prove victim said ‘yes’ to alleged perpetrator

Newshub can reveal Labour will campaign on a promise to overhaul sexual consent laws so it would be up to alleged offenders to prove their victim said “yes”.

…why the Christ Labour think making changes to sexual assault law that can be construed as an attack on the presumption of innocence is smart 4 weeks out from an election is anyones guess at this stage.

- Sponsor Promotion -

The second Tenet of woke dogma is ‘B-E-L-I-E-V-E ALL women that ALL men are rapists’, and when you consider the gerrymandering to Sexual Assault Law already passed by Labour and the Greens, moving towards guilty until proven innocent is a natural progression of woke orthodoxy but what flies with the woke tends to go broke with everyone else.

National can’t touch the issue because they are too wet but ACT and NZ First can certainly go into a death spiral over the presumption of innocence.

ACT just announced bashing drug addicts and the mentally ill while NZ First are pushing W.H.O. conspiracy theories.

They’ll just wave around copies of ‘How to Kill a Mockingbird‘, (which is these days less a literary celebration of the values of a liberal progressive justice and is now a hate crime on women’s lived experience by heteronormative white cis male privilege).

Parents will stop fearing their daughters of being attacked and fear their sons being accused of attack.

To launch a change that redefines consent and challenges the presumption of innocence in the hope of winning back Green Party voters seems like blind panic rather than a principled position on Justice.

There is no time limit on sexual assault cases in NZ, so I’m assuming this new definition of the law will be retrospective?

Labour have just handed Winston and David an enormous amount of ammunition for very questionable gain.

The Amber Heard and Johnny Depp case showed how huge the cultural backlash to the ‘believe all women’ mantra had become.

Ginny Anderson and the Labour Party have strapped bombs to themselves with targets on each bomb and it’s not really clear why they would green light this if it is just a minimalist redefinition of consent when it can be construed as a challenge to the presumption of innocence.

Free Speech and the presumption of innocence are rights that people get very, very, very angry over.

Has someone informed the Minister that there is an election in 4 weeks?

UPDATE: Turns out Labour have panicked and realised what the fuck they are doing here and have backtracked as quickly as Kiri Allan did when she was Justice Minister right after she told media she was going to ram Hate Speech legislation through and then the next day said she wouldn’t…

Labour clarifies consent law proposals won’t shift burden of proof

Labour has clarified its plan to change consent laws to better protect survivors of sexual assault would not shift the burden of proof to defendants, after a headline shared on the party’s social media platforms caused confusion.


You muppets! This isn’t 2016 anymore, bullshit woke brain farts as policy ain’t gonna cut it any longer kids.

This isn’t Wellington Twitter, it’s the real world!



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


  1. So we completely turn our criminal justice system on its head and have it so the accused is guilty until THEY prove their innocence? Holy fuck, that only comes second to McAnulty’s abandonment of 1 person 1 vote for constitutional vandalism.

    Ginny Anderson is a pathetic police minister coming from a long line of muppets in this government but even then, this shit just puts her on the top of the podium in the stupidity race! What an idiot!

    I’m praying she gets booted out of parliament in the next month!

  2. This is a switch to presumption of innocence to presumption of guilt.
    You’re right , any parent or grandparent will see this as painting a great big target on their sons and grandsons
    Labour for 22%?

  3. Example of puritanical women who shoot themselves in the foot. They are so self-righteous, so sure of their own rightness that they cannot be questioned or halted.

  4. Another nail in the coffin that is already half way down the grave hole.
    Unsure who they think will suddenly vote en mass with this policy, all women? (With no sons of course)

  5. Labour is so naive it’s dangerous the basic rights they think should go. No fucking clue of unintended consequences.

  6. Law-abiding firearms owners have already lost the right to assumption of innocence, and must prove they are not guilty if a Police error suggests otherwise, and it can be hard to prove you haven’t got a firearm you’ve never owned, when a registry error says you do.

Comments are closed.