Don Brash
Hobson’s Pledge
For those who have been following Janet’s case, and Hobson’s Pledge support of her, you will know she has been an exemplary real estate agent. For over 30 years she has poured her heart and soul into this work, but recently, the Real Estate Agents Disciplinary Tribunal rubber-stamped the real estate registrar’s refusal to grant her an exemption, forcing the cancellation of her licence.
Not because of incompetence, or dishonesty, or any disregard of her client’s interests. Quite the opposite, she’s been highly successful selling homes!
Not even for failing to keep up with the compulsory training on law and approved practice within real estate. She routinely did all that kind of training, as all agents are required to do.
Instead, the Real Estate Agent’s Disciplinary Tribunal rejected her appeal that it was against her conscience to sit through something called Te Kākano, a mandatory course on Māori culture that even the Associate Minister of Justice, Nicole McKee, publicly announced lacks relevance to the real estate industry.
The minister knows it, Janet knows it, most real estate agents know it, we at Hobson’s Pledge know it, and I would suggest most New Zealanders know it, but it seems the Real Estate Authority does not. No professional should be forced to undertake training that has little or nothing to do with their work.
Te Kākano is an act of compulsion to force all those in real estate to listen to political propaganda on the Treaty of Waitangi. A singular view of history and where our country should go. It is akin to the ‘struggle sessions’ the left were more than happy to inflict on those opposing their views in the decades past.
It is outrageous that the authority considered such a programme appropriate, let alone made an example of a hardworking woman because of her deeply held beliefs.
While we feel for Janet today, the tribunal’s justification is a dangerous wake-up call for every professional in New Zealand. The tribunal actually agreed that Janet’s moral and religious objections constituted an “exceptional circumstance”. However, the tribunal also told Janet that this “exceptional circumstance” around her conscience did not prevent her from participating, because she could have just sat through and not accepted the learning internally. She could have spent the necessary hours without renouncing her own beliefs.
Yes, you’ve read that right – the tribunal believes Kiwis should be compelled to listen to things that go directly against your deeply held beliefs. I think most of us would agree it is good to hear other views, but that is a choice you exercise. What the Tribunal is saying is that people can be compelled to listen to views they find irrelevant or wrong. It is totally unacceptable in a liberal democracy to compel anyone to attend lectures and absorb information they disagree with.
Furthermore, the tribunal is explicitly saying people should simply pretend – turn up, listen, but ignore. This is an insult to both the participants and those delivering the course. It is a total and utter waste of time and money. What a joke!
Naturally, this would never cut the other way. Could you imagine forcing the head of the Real Estate Authority or the co-leaders of Te Pāti Māori to sit through hours of Hobson’s Pledge lectures? Of course we are not advocating for this, but it illustrates the point.
The tribunal has effectively chosen to say you can be forced to pretend respectful attendance at ceremonies, courses and proceedings that offend your conscience, even when they have nothing to do with the performance of your professional duties.
Throughout history, freedom of speech, religion, and belief has been defended by people who’ve refused to submit to compelled belief or worship. People professed their beliefs by refusing to sign on to what they believed to be false statements.
The tribunal had no interest in the effect on freedom of opinion generally among land agents, from punishment for failure to comply with forced ‘learning’ about one iwi’s views on spirituality, history, and race relations. Instead, internal dissent is to be punished, and so Janet is being made an example and scapegoat.
Throughout all of this, we here at Hobson’s Pledge and our lawyers had hoped that the High Court and tribunal would act to protect Janet’s individual rights. Sadly, this has proven completely fruitless and yet again highlights the need for urgent law reform.
Janet is a former REINZ Salesperson of the Year, who has recently lost her husband and is nearing the end of her working life. To strip her of her livelihood over a 90-minute ideological mandate, while agents guilty of ‘seriously negligent’ real estate work are allowed to keep their licences, is not consumer protection. It is bureaucratic spite.
In recent days we have shared with you the harassment of Far North District Councillor, Davina Smolders, kicked off a council committee because she asked hard questions and stood her ground. We’ve stood by Davina as we have stood by Janet since her saga began, crowdsourcing funding from supporters like you to help us fund her fight.
We ask again for your support so that we can continue to stand with Janet, including considering whether we take this to the High Court. And it is not just Janet and Davina, but a growing need for Hobson’s Pledge to stand up, fight, and advocate for those who believe in equality before the law and a fair go.
It is also why we have been supporting the adoption of a Regulated Professions Neutrality Bill via our Professionals Not Politicians campaign.
| Support the campaign here |
Professional regulators need to stay in their lane, and end the forced compliance of political or cultural mandates that have zero bearing on a professional's ability to do their job.
Today is a deeply heartbreaking day for Janet. If a regulator can destroy a stellar 30-year career over an irrelevant course, no hard-working professional in this country is safe.
Janet’s fight is our fight.
This article was originally published by Hobson’s Pledge.
