Dear Editor
This election, one of the most critical issues facing our country is the government’s response to COVID-19. It is this response that is crippling the country’s economy, and also destroying our freedoms in many ways. Freedom is becoming a crucial issue for many voters, as evidenced by ACT’s rise in the polls (also boosted by their good position on firearms). When voting for freedom, ACT is usually the obvious choice, based on their historical values.
Unfortunately, the COVID debacle has caused ACT to turn against their fundamental principles of personal freedom. Certainly, they still stand for personal freedom in other areas (such as firearms). However, there is a serious problem at the heart of their policies this election.
ACT has accepted Jacinda Ardern’s unworkable plan to “eliminate” COVID-19.
Their fundamental difference with Labour, on this matter, is simply that they wish to make elimination “affordable”.
To do this, ACT is proposing emulating Taiwan. The below is all straight from ACT’s own online policy document:
“ACT would augment our Covid response with better technology. Taiwan used GPS locatable cell phones to track those in isolation, allowing it to isolate cases much more quickly. […] With electronic contact tracing, it is unlikely we would have needed to extend the August lockdown beyond three days.”
[…] “Sam Morgan’s Covid Card has great potential. It should be implemented. At $100 million, it would only need to save two days of lockdown to pay for itself. Similarly, Datamine’s ëlarm is being rolled out internationally before our Government gave it a chance.”
These policies are not classical liberalism. They are totalitarianism. And they ignore the clear fact that over time COVID-19 has proven to be less serious a disease than initially feared, and the response can adjust to this improved information.
The proposal to “eliminate” COVID-19 was a political decision by the Labour Party – it was never a scientifically based response. Labour chose to lock down the country to “flatten the curve”, and when there was no curve to flatten as the anticipated flood of cases never eventuated, they quietly changed the goalposts to “elimination”.
This was a PR move, made in order to keep the “team of 5 million” still feeling that their job losses and other hardship were worth it because they were working together towards a common goal – and to perpetuate a fear that gave them an excuse to seize power in unprecedented ways. It was never the scientific or medical recommendation, it was Labour party politics. It can only be achieved through totalitarianism. For ACT to accept this goal, they then are forced to support totalitarian measures to achieve it. This is a betrayal of the fundamental principles of the party.
National’s policies are basically similar to ACT’s.
New Conservative is sidestepping this issue entirely and has no official policy on it at all. Their official COVID-19 policy is entirely economic. Their candidates have made various statements on this issue, but they are doing nothing obvious officially to push back on this totalitarianism.
The ONE Party actually has a very sensible COVID policy, that focusses on treatment rather than prevention, and would repeal the COVID response act due to how it impinges on individual freedoms. This makes it far more freedom-supporting than ACT’s. It’s well worth reading.
Advance NZ likewise rejects the notion of elimination, and would repeal the COVID response act for the same reasons. They have a pragmatic COVID policy focussed on treating it like any other disease is treated in the health system. They directly challenge the faulty modelling behind lockdowns and have a strong stance against mandatory vaccines.
So the only two parties supporting a rational, freedom-defending, science-based COVID response are the ONE Party and Advance NZ.
Out of these two, Advance NZ has the greatest electoral chances. They are a secular party so can appeal to a wider number of people in the population, not just conservative Christians. They were represented in the minor party leaders debate, have had a lot more media exposure (mostly negative), and their billboards are a common sight throughout the country, meaning far more people know they exist.
So for anybody supporting freedom, and a rational, medical-based response to COVID-19, the clearest party to vote for is Advance NZ.
It is extremely disappointing to see ACT moving away from their principles at the very moment their public support is climbing and they finally have a chance to make a real difference in the country. Unfortunately, we cannot vote based on nostalgia for the old ACT of Rodney Hide but must base our votes on the real policy positions held by parties today. ACT has dropped the ball on this issue of such great importance, and we must, unfortunately, look elsewhere to defend our fundamental freedoms.
There are two key ways we can defend freedom politically:
1) Lobbying major parties from within, to support freedom.
2) Voting for parties that have already chosen to support freedom.
We can do point 1 all of the time, and people who can must continue to work within National, ACT — and even Labour and the Greens — to encourage them to support freedom rather than totalitarianism and fear. We can do that both before and after this election, and it is of crucial importance.
But an election is the time to do point 2 — bring in those who we know have already chosen to support freedom. This election, that choice appears to be Advance.
Samuel Dennis
Send your letters to the Editor to sb at thebfd.co.nz
Please put Letter to the Editor in the subject line.
