> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://goodoil.news/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# And So the Blobudsman Resurfaces
- URL: https://goodoil.news/and-so-the-blobudsman-resurfaces/
- Published: 2026-09-30T19:30:20.000Z
- Updated: 2026-09-30T19:30:20.000Z
- Description: The buffoon creature from the public sector lagoon pops up (again).
- Author: Reproduced with permission
- Tags: NZ Politics, Culture Wars

[**John McLean**](https://mcleanj.substack.com/p/blobudsman-resurfaces)  
*Citizen typist patriot*

![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/31/f4/31f4e20a-0315-499e-83ff-139e8eab53bf/content/images/2026/09/image-30.png)

Last month, a woman named Dr Catherine Law was secretly videoed. Catherine is the principal of Avonside Girls’ High School. She has been seconded to the Ministry of Education to help produce the proposed new schools curricula.

In the video, Catherine tells staff involved in preparing the new curricula that they should not record in writing feedback coming from the Minister of Education’s office because “all of this is OIA-able”.

(“OIA” is the Official Information Act, New Zealand’s legislation with an express purpose “to increase progressively the availability of official information to the people of New Zealand in order…to enable their more effective participation in the making and administration of laws and policies and to promote the accountability of Ministers of the Crown and officials”.)

The sly videoer initially leaked the video to the ***Herald***, with ***Red Radio New Zealand*** and ***Stuffed*** quickly picking up the story. The videoer’s purpose was clearly to undermine Catherine Laws and the current government’s project, initiated by Minister of Education Erica Stanford, to replace the current schools curricula.

All indications are that Catherine’s motivation, in clearly trying to avoid new curricula staffers generating screeds of OIA-able written records of feedback, was to avoid the risk of rabid leftists’ swamping and derailing the curricula project with OIA requests; requests from the likes of Marxist President of the Post Primary Teachers’ Association, Chris Abercrombie, who claims that, “Moving away from a curriculum that is underpinned by Te Tiriti o Waitangi is a seriously backward move.”

![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!mf_I!,w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fcd4a35f7-4acd-49ab-b224-580e63afcca9_198x201.png)

Catherine was obviously not trying to ensure the new curricula are developed in secret, because in the same video she gladly and genuinely contemplates a “formal and public and transparent” process. (But then there’s the Pākehā Pounamu Pendant…??)

![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!3Jub!,w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fee821721-84f4-4bc6-9016-b7f2a28966e0_443x448.png)

In the wake of Catherine Law’s videoed “all of this is OIA-able” remark, Government Ombudsman John Allen sanctimoniously demanded an immediate meeting with Secretary for Education Ellen MacGregor-Reid, frothing in his own inimitable style:

> I have significant concerns about these allegations. Public trust and confidence in the Ministry and the OIA would be undermined if they were found to be true. I am taking this issue very seriously and am now considering what action I may take to provide some independent scrutiny of these matters through a broader investigation under the Ombudsmen Act 1975.

On 25 September 2026, after meeting MacGregor-Reid and Sir Brian Roche (NZ’s shifty Public Service Commissioner), Allen announced a formal ombudsman investigation into allegations that ministry officials had attempted to circumvent the OIA.

All this is predictably partisan from BlobudsAllen. His supposed conniptions about what Catherine Law did are simply because he’s personally antipathetic to the advent of schools curricula that are not mystically based on the Treaty of Waitangi. And, if you don’t believe me, check out this video of try-hard activist Allen calling for Race Revolution (“systemic change”) earlier this month, at the 2026 celebrations of the Kīngitanga movement at Tūrangawaewae Marae.

[Allen Activism](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/eSMQ0G9-Zao?ref=goodoil.news)

Allen’s very own Office of the Government Ombudsman proudly posted the video of Kaumatua Allen, on ***YouTube***.

It’s also wildly ironic that Allen is supposedly aggrieved at Catherine Law’s alleged undermining of the OIA when he and his Government Ombudsman Office are prime subverters of the very legislation they’re supposed to administer and enforce. I’ve addressed the Ombudsman Office’s leftie biases, unlawfulness and general undermining of confidence in the OIA in an earlier Substack:

[BLOBUDSMAN SHOWS HIS TRUE COLOURS](https://mcleanj.substack.com/p/blobudsman-shows-his-true-colours) [John McLean](https://substack.com/profile/150118186-john-mclean?ref=goodoil.news) 3 Mar

![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/31/f4/31f4e20a-0315-499e-83ff-139e8eab53bf/content/images/2026/09/image-29.png)

On 17 November 2025, Sean Plunket, Founder and CEO of media channel The Platform, complained to New Zealand’s Chief Ombudsman, John Allen.

[Read full story](https://mcleanj.substack.com/p/blobudsman-shows-his-true-colours)

Instead of advocating for tougher legal sanctions for breaching the OIA, Allen thinks New Zealanders can rely on his own asserted “mana”. Which says it all.

So, was John Allen encouraged to reflect on his crazed race ranting at Tūrangawaewae? ACT MP Todd Stephenson raised Allen’s spittle speech with Gerry Brownlee, as parliament’s speaker and chair of the Officers of Parliament Committee. Unfortunately, I can find no evidence that Brownlee has even spoken to John Allen, despite Allen being an officer of parliament who nevertheless wants to end New Zealand’s parliamentary democracy in favour of some sort of Māori Marxist Dystopia.

![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!0rZw!,w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fa0f423c2-f149-4657-9829-1d1f0dcacfd3_466x345.png)

Sean Plunket, Bigwig at media channel the ***Platform***, called for Activist Allen to be removed for his Tūrangawaewae twaddle. How, then, could that laudable goal be achieved? Under the Ombudsman Act 1975, the House of Representatives (being parliament, less the governor-general) can request the G-G to remove John Allen as ombudsman “for inability to perform the functions of the office, bankruptcy, neglect of duty, or misconduct”. Such a request would require a simple (>50 per cent) majority vote in our House of Reps.

One of New Zealand’s constitutional conventions is that the governor-general’s role is essentially ceremonial. This means that the G-G must, by convention, simply and without question act on formal requests from New Zealanders’ democratically elected representatives. The intriguing complexity, however, is that this constitutional convention is not expressly entrenched in New Zealand law, such that the G-G could technically refuse a House of Reps request for removal of Allen as ombudsman.

![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!ACdY!,w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F086d65bf-e7f4-46f2-a98f-dd66fd077a95_374x460.png)

New Zealand’s current governor-general is Cindy Kiro, an appointee of AuthoritarArdern.

John Allen’s repeated behaviour has clearly demonstrated that he is unable to impartially perform the functions of government ombudsman – he is neglecting his duties and is guilty of misconduct. He therefore satisfies the statutory test for his own removal, i.e., it is open to the House of Representatives, after a majority vote, to ask G-G Kiro to remove him. The National, NZ First and ACT political parties, acting in parliamentary concert, could clearly achieve this.

The virtue of going the whole hog to rid New Zealand of John Allen as ombudsman is that it would serve as a test of whether Cindy Kiro is indeed, as she appears to be, an antidemocratic plant of the leftists. If Kid Kiro failed to act on a House of Reps request to banish Allen from the lofty post he’s abusing, then at least New Zealanders would know that the neo-Marxists are asserting hegemony over the general democratic will of New Zealanders, as expressed through their elected representatives. There’d be a full blown constitutional crisis. Bring it on.

Alternatively, the incumbent government could simply express a view that Allen is untenable as ombudsman, the government has lost confidence in him and he should resign. Unfortunately, Allen’s colossal ego wouldn’t allow him to quit, no matter how demented he becomes, and his term doesn’t end until 30 March 2030\. No *Heart of Darkness* epiphany awaits Allen…no revelation for John of *The Horror! The Horror!* that he’s at the heart of.

![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!VY90!,w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fada64a1f-76f3-438a-b73a-374fa4087e2a_460x561.png)

While we’re at it, how could the government remove Sir Brian Roche as Public Service Commissioner? Cock Roche is the creepy-crawly who’s running interference for elite public servants – shielding them from political accountability for their misconduct. His latest major effort as the public servant elites’ Protector-in-Chief was to protect Nic Blakely, as chief executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment, from any punishment for deliberately lying to a parliamentary select committee about MBIE’s aborted biometric immigration project. Since then, on 23 September, Blakeley said the wasted cost has ballooned further to over $50 million. (He’s probably lying again.)

Under current legislation, only Governor-General Kiro can remove the Sir Rochemeister before his term expires on 30 June 2027 – for “misbehaviour or incompetence”. Parliament has no power to remove Roche and of course Cindy K would never remove him. She barely knows her own name.

But of course that’s not the end of the story because, in a democracy in which parliament is sovereign, New Zealander’s representative body can enact whatever legislation it damn well likes. The Roche Removal Act 2026 has a nice ring to it.

New Zealand is heading for a showdown between its House of Representatives and the general public, on one side, and – on the other - all the antidemocratic forces arraigned against the normal people. The Public Service. The Courts. The Waitangi Tribunal. Mainstream Media. Academia. Most of the Police and Defence Forces. It’s game on. Normies have the numbers, which is why the post-modernists hate New Zealand’s democracy. The war for constitutional supremacy is in full swing.

![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!qt89!,w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F8edd3f22-dcab-4a3b-bf27-7a96477dc8c7_730x407.png)

This article was originally published on the [author’s Substack](https://mcleanj.substack.com/p/blobudsman-resurfaces).