To Be a Compliant Citizen

Keri Molloy
Artist and concerned citizen of New Zealand with 40 years’ experience as a journalist.

Australian researchers fitted five magpies with GPS devices to track their movements, but the birds skillfully removed the harnesses from each other. The first removal took less than an hour. The devices had been designed to stay attached for weeks.

Another Australian bird experiment will see 5,000 little penguins rounded up, injected twice with an avian-influenza vaccine, developed for poultry. The mission will involve 10,000 injections and 5,000 implanted microchips in the penguin colony.

It’s reasonable to ask how many penguins will have to die to save just one.

At home in NZ, the Department of Conservation is working with the Ministry for Primary Industries, the Ministry of Health and Health New Zealand, as part of a One Health approach, to prepare for the possible arrival of the H5N1 virus.

Endangered kākāpō, takahē, shore plover, black stilt and orange-fronted parakeet are targeted.

About 300 core breeding birds from the five species will be vaccinated.

MPI has approved a second stage of the programme, which will allow DOC to extend vaccination to a further 23 priority species, starting with six pāteke at a captive facility in Christchurch.

Safe and effective? What could go wrong?

NZ wild birds and the little penguins are less likely than their clever avian cousins to engage in non-complying activity.

And we, the global flock of humans, will also find it difficult to escape surveillance and coercion as we become trackable and controlled under the auspices of One Health.

Regulation of opinion and coercion

What happened to the medical profession during Covid is a prime example of how regulators can coerce, censor and slap down challenge to their authority.

During the pandemic the Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal disciplined dissenting practitioners and they can do it again.

The Medical Council of New Zealand infamously warned doctors:

It is our view that there is no place for anti-vaccination messages in professional health practice, nor any promotion of anti-vaccination claims including on social media and advertising by health practitioners.

Practitioners were disciplined on the grounds of professional misconduct for making statements that ‘undermined public safety and brought discredit to the profession’.

So doctors were disciplined if they warned of risks associated with the Covid shots. Astonishingly, the High Court found that they were not censored – although they faced professional disciplinary action for things they said.

Read that again.

Down the track, it’s clear that doctors were right to warn their patients about side effects from the Covid vaccines.

As of mid-2025, New Zealand’s Accident Compensation Corporation has officially accepted 1,769 treatment injury claims related to the Covid-19 vaccine.

It has paid out more than $12.6 million to support individuals with accepted injury claims.

The primary categories for these accepted injury claims (lodged between 2021 and 2025) include:

Allergic reactions: 232 claims
Injection site injuries: 214 claims
Cardiac injuries (including myocarditis/pericarditis): 187 claims
Contusions: 172 claims
Adverse drug reactions: 130 claims
Anaphylactic reactions: 96 claims
Shoulder damage (SIRVA): 66 claims
Fatal injuries: 5 claims

In the US, a former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, now admits, “I think it was a mistake to vaccinate pregnant women.”

You’d think that doctors, following their oath to do no harm, would have been remiss not to discuss vaccine risks with their patients.

Reality Check Radio recently carried a story showing that 311,257 teenagers received a second Covid vaccine dose after officials and government ministers had been advised of an increased risk of myocarditis in young people.

Ayesha Verrall, who served as minister for Covid-19 Response, is reported to have dismissed the investigation as “fake news”. She’s seeking election as number six on Labour’s 2026 list.

Position of power

Parliament has supreme authority to pass laws affecting personal liberties, property rights, and conduct. This power is executed by regulators.

A ‘compliant citizen’ follows those laws and rules. Non-compliance refers to actions that go against laws, regulations, or official public health directives.

The justification for enforcing them is that compliant behavior helps society stay safe, fair, and organised for everyone.

Regulators clearly hold the aces and they can force citizens to act against their own judgment.

The question is who chooses the regulators and who regulates them?

There’s the example of forced fluoridation of community water supplies – a perfect illustration of coercion, dollied up as public good.

People oppose fluoridation of water supplies, due to ethical concerns about mass medication without consent and potential health risks, including neuro-developmental impacts and dental fluorosis.

The regulators still rely on a 12-year-old review by the prime minister’s chief science advisor and the Royal Society of New Zealand.

The appointed advisor has a wide range of responsibilities, including advising on ways to leverage science, innovation, and technology to drive economic growth.

Meet John Roche, the current prime minister’s chief science advisor, an expert in agricultural science.

The man who holds the highest position reserved for science in the government has an honours degree in animal science, a master’s in farm systems and pasture management, and a PhD in animal nutrition.

He has focussed on biological platform technologies for agricultural applications, such as exploring gene-editing, synthetic biology, and potential livestock biotech solutions such as a methane vaccine for cattle and sheep.

He is reported to have described anti-fluoride stances as part of broader science-denial challenges. He is on record warning about ‘emboldened anti-science sentiment’.

On a global scale

What is underway globally is the transfer of authority from the community toward the state and unelected bureaucrats.

We are going to be funnelled into centralised systems, overseen by regulators.

The World Health Organisation’s mission is to act as a coordinating authority on international public health. With its programmes ‘Regulatory Systems Strengthening’ and ‘Global Benchmarking Tools’, it aims to improve regulatory systems and build confidence in regulatory decisions. Member states will be rated based on their level of regulatory ‘maturity’.
The World Economic Forum, based in Switzerland, argues that regulators are needed to enable globally coordinated rules. It wants to avoid what it calls ‘fragmentation’, which it says undermines effectiveness.
A Global Digital Collaboration Conference 2026 will bring together government, international organisations, technical experts and private-sector partners to advance collaboration on digital cross-border systems and solutions. A key focus will be the development of digital health wallets,‘including the governance, technology, standards and partnerships needed to enable verified health information to move securely with individuals across health facilities and borders.’

You know what that means.

As a co-organiser of the conference, WHO will ‘contribute its expertise on digital health standards, interoperability and trust frameworks, and share country experiences and practical approaches to building a global digital health ecosystem’.

New Zealand now boasts a ‘Ministry for Regulation’.

Established in March 2024, the ministry promises to improve the quality of regulation and the performance of regulatory systems. It boasts a ‘think big’ approach and it hopes to build public trust.

Relevant regulators include the Ministry of Health and Medsafe.

This new system aims to streamline approval processes and support innovation and ensure access to new therapies.

More than 260 organisations have been identified as performing regulatory functions across New Zealand. They include 95 organisations in central government, 79 in local government and 57 statutory bodies, committees and tribunals.

The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act affirms individual rights and freedoms but public health mandates and police powers cut across individual autonomy.

Take the new roadside drug test, for example, where police wipe a device across the driver’s tongue. If you refuse you are deemed to be a non-compliant citizen. you will get a $400 infringement fine, 75 demerit points and you will be forbidden to drive for 12 hours. You may even lose your gun licence as a non-compliant citizen.

Enforcers are also victims

A new Canadian study examines experiences of moral injury among healthcare workers under Covid-19 vaccine mandates.

The study showed that moral injury can arise from employment-based policy enforcement when healthcare workers perceive themselves as compelled to comply with, enact, or remain silent about a policy they regard as inconsistent with informed consent, professional ethics, patient care, or evidentiary integrity.

The study concluded that preventing moral injury in the health sector requires policy design that preserves ethical and institutional integrity before harm is produced.