Table of Contents
Judy Gill
Something has become increasingly difficult to ignore in New Zealand’s public debates.
Across social media, opinion columns, institutional submissions and parliamentary discourse, the same small group of people appears again and again. They are quoted as ‘experts’, elevated as moral authorities, consulted by institutions and, in some cases, elected to office.
This group is not large. Once activists, commentators, NGO leaders, union officials, media figures and aligned politicians are combined, it may amount to only a few dozen people nationwide.
Yet their influence is disproportionate.
I do not allege conspiracy or coordination. Rather, I examine how influence naturally concentrates in a small, centralised country and how repetition, access, and narrative framing can substitute for broad democratic participation.
The Influence Pipeline
Influence in New Zealand tends to flow through a compact and repeatable pipeline:
Activist commentary → Media normalisation → Institutional embedding → Parliamentary translation
Only a handful of actors are required at each stage for the process to function effectively.
Activist-commentary writers and social-media influencers generate values-driven narratives, often framed through personal experience and moral urgency. These narratives are then amplified and normalised by mainstream media as ‘the conversation’ or ‘the debate’.
Unions and NGOs translate these framings into formal submissions, policy positions and consultation responses. Finally, a small group of Green Party and Te Pāti Māori politicians translate the same language into legislative and parliamentary action.
Because the country is small, repetition can easily be mistaken for consensus.
Activist-Commentary Writers and Social-Media Influencers
These figures are neither elected nor represent constituencies. Their influence lies in narrative formation, emotional framing and online amplification.
Examples include:
Brie Elliott
Jessie Moss
Jordan Rivers
Kōrero with Sammi
Emily Writes
Verity Johnson (the Spinoff columnist)
Michelle Duff
Martyn Bradbury
Eru Kapa-Kingi
Their work is typically values-led rather than evidentiary and is often treated as representative of wider public sentiment, despite originating in a narrow social and professional milieu.
Institutional and Union Power Nodes
Institutions multiply influence.
When unions or NGOs speak, they are often treated as representing thousands, even when positions originate with a small leadership cohort. These bodies provide formal access to policymakers and are routinely consulted during legislative and regulatory processes.
Key examples include:
NZEI Te Riu Roa (primary teachers’ union), led by Ripeka Lessels and Raewyn Himona
PPTA (secondary teachers’ union)
Amnesty International Aotearoa New Zealand, led by Anna Cusack
Institutional authority amplifies activist framings and confers legitimacy.
Media Gatekeepers
Journalists and editors are not activists, but they play a decisive role in agenda-setting.
By selecting which voices are platformed, which frames are repeated and which perspectives are treated as reasonable or marginal, media figures shape the boundaries of acceptable debate.
Prominent examples include:
Jack Tame
Mike McRoberts
Toby Manhire
Andrea Vance
Marc Daalder
Reliance on familiar, articulate, and ‘safe’ sources creates a feedback loop in which the same names recur, reinforcing the appearance of ‘consensus’.
Parliamentary Translation
A small number of politicians consistently translate activist and institutional framings into parliament, particularly within the Green Party and Te Pāti Māori.
Examples include:
Chlöe Swarbrick
Marama Davidson
Ricardo Menéndez March
Tamatha Paul
Rawiri Waititi
Debbie Ngarewa-Packer
Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke
Tania Waikato
While elected, these figures often draw on the same activist narratives and institutional language already circulating upstream.
Why the Group Is So Small
Several structural factors explain why this circle remains compact:
Centralisation
New Zealand’s media, political institutions and advocacy organisations are highly centralised, allowing a small number of voices to dominate national discourse.
Availability over representation
Activists, NGO leaders and union officials are consistently available to write submissions, appear in media and attend consultations. Most citizens are not. Absence is often treated as acquiescence.
Narrative power
Personal stories and moral framing travel faster than technical policy analysis. Those skilled in emotive narrative gain disproportionate reach.
Institutional reinforcement
Once embedded within institutions, narratives are repeated with added authority and scale.
The group is small because the country is small and centralised. Its influence derives not from mass participation, but from repetition, access and narrative framing.
Democratic debate does not end under such conditions — but it does narrow.
And, once the pattern becomes visible, it is difficult to unsee.
