Goff intervenes, Auckland venue banned, speaking tour canned

Two Canadians reported to be promoters of controversial far right views planned on visiting and speaking in New Zealand, but after mayor Phil Goff banned them from an Auckland city venue they canned the tour.

I haven’t heard of them or seen or heard anything they’ve said, so can’t judge them on their views.

NZH: Mayor bans controversial Canadian pair from talking in Auckland Council venues

The promoter of a controversial Canadian pair accused of hate speech has cancelled their tour of New Zealand after Auckland Mayor Phil Goff denied them access to city venues.

Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux hold far-right views on topics ranging from feminism and immigration to Islam.

The Canadian couple had been due to speak next month at the council-owned Bruce Mason centre on Auckland’s North Shore.

Pressure had been mounting on Immigration NZ to deny the pair entry with members of New Zealand’s Muslim community and the Auckland Peace Action publicly among those expressing concern.

This seems to be a growing problem around the world – campaigns to block non-liked views or peoeple with particular reputations.

This could well be a slippery slope against free speech.

But promoter David Pellowe said the tour was instead cancelled when Goff moved to bar the pair access to Auckland Council venues.

So Goff decides who should not be able to speak at Council venues?

Free speech isn’t an absolute right. Private venues can choose who hire their facilities and speak at them.

It’s a bit different with publicly owned and managed facilities. And especially with mayors deciding who can’t use them.

This makes them too vulnerable to speech bans by pressure group and adverse publicity – politicians too often do what they think is best for themselves, rather than for the greater good and fundamental speech rights..

Leave a comment

61 Comments

  1. Kitty Catkin

     /  July 6, 2018

    I see a difference between denying free speech and not giving platforms to bigoted and antisocial people who incite hatred and unrest, even though the people who go to them are likely to hold similar views. The venues are publicly owned, from the sound of it, and would imply council approval of the speakers’ extreme. There is enough hatred and bile in the world without our encouraging it.

    I cannot see that people like these are doing anything at all for the public good.

    Reply
    • Corky

       /  July 6, 2018

      ”I see a difference between denying free speech and not giving platforms to bigoted and antisocial people who incite hatred and unrest.”

      You have a problem with that. You are differentiating free speech from people who incite hatred and unrest based on your opinion. So, by inference, you are anti free speech. In my world people like you who acted on such opinions would be jailed.

      ”The venues are publicly owned, from the sound of it, and would imply council approval of the speakers’ ”

      The keywords are ”publicly owned”. Apparently the council had given the OK, but backed out suddenly leaving the promoters high and dry.

      ”I cannot see that people like these are doing anything at all for the public good.”

      I can. But only for a limited number of people who can think. People would can check what these speakers say against the facts.

      Reply
      • Griff

         /  July 7, 2018

        The fact is they represent extremist view that the council rejects.
        I would guess the same peploe who are supporting these far right agitators would be against an ISIS recruiter speaking in council venues.

        Reply
        • sorethumb

           /  July 7, 2018

          Anti-immigration and anti-multiculturalism is not the same as Isis

          Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  July 7, 2018

          The ISIS recruiter would be jailed for what he does, not what he says.

          Reply
    • Gezza

       /  July 6, 2018

      Repeating what I said on Open Forum.

      Personally I think they should be allowed to visit & speak, Kitty.

      We don’t stop people who argue against climate change science from being allowed to visit.

      We shouldn’t stop people who argue against religions being allowed to visit & speak here either.

      The 3 Abrahamic ones are full of myths, contradictions & obvious nonsense & are, in my opinion, patently untrue – personally I think it’s a shame none of them get publicly debated as often as possible.

      Reply
    • PDB

       /  July 6, 2018

      A bit surprised of your stance Kitty – personally I think you leave it to the punters to decide whether they want to attend and if they do we allow them to form their own opinions on what is being said, not have someone else decide who can speak and what can be heard.

      Reply
    • sorethumb

       /  July 7, 2018

      Paul Spoonley – Mr Multiculturalism
      They are part of a broad coalition who at their top end would be pro trump but at their hard end (which I regard both of these as being) are very (sort of)[1] white supremacist or believe in the racial superiority of white people. They believe [2]immigration undermines countries, they’re very anti-immigrant, [3] anti-refugee and they’re [4] anti-feminist!
      https://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018652432/far-right-speakers-may-be-banned-from-entering-nz

      Which one of those do you want to discuss so we can all see what constitutes hate speech?

      Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  July 7, 2018

        Anyone who wants to hear this sort of thing can hear these bigots spouting online and elsewhere.

        There is a difference between free speech and abuse of this. Not many people would find hate speech acceptable, except those like Corky to whom this is’ for the public good’, for the ‘small number who can think’. If white supremacy (neoNaziism under a different name), the rejection of refugees and immigrants ( what were their own families ?) and the rest are for the public good, one must wonder what Corky would consider NOT to be for the public good.

        The small number who can think are, I hope, a very small number if what they think is like this.

        Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  July 7, 2018

          People who deny climate change (or, more likely, the causes of it) are not spouting hatred, dissension, racism and white supremacy.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  July 7, 2018

            I haven’t personally seen anything where Southern is promoting hatred or white supremacy. I’ve seen her being provacative. Like contrasting the tolerance of Christians with their religion being mocked vs the tolerance of Muslims with theirs being mocked. Both religions & Holy Books don’t stand up to sny scrutiny. She overdoes it, but there’s a fair point behind it.

            Reply
        • PartisanZ

           /  July 7, 2018

          @Miss Kitty – “Anyone who wants to hear this sort of thing can hear these bigots spouting online and elsewhere.”

          You’ve missed the point Miss Kitty. What these people love to do is RALLY …

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  July 7, 2018

            From what I’ve seen Lauren likes to go to others’ rallies rather than create her own.

            Reply
  2. Gezza

     /  July 6, 2018

    “The Australian-based promoter, David Pellowe of Axiomatic Events, said the pair would now not visit New Zealand, but would webcast an event free-of-charge on the internet.

    Pellowe said Lauren Southern had been denied an automatic entry visa to New Zealand because she had been denied entry to the United Kingdom, but lawyers had been working on securing one.

    “The extreme fundamentalist and organised left have a deliberate and evidently successful strategy,” Pellowe said of the opposition to the pair’s visit. ” – Stuff.co

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/105302179/Controversial-Canadian-speaker-denied-visa-as-Auckland-agency-cancels-booking
    ….
    This featured as a brief item one on 7 Sharp tonite. There seemed to be some confusion at Immigration NZ over whether Southern had been automatically denied a visa.

    Reply
  3. duperez

     /  July 6, 2018

    “The Canadian couple had been due to speak next month at the council-owned Bruce Mason centre on Auckland’s North Shore.”

    Auckland’s quite a big place. Organisers for the visit seemingly had weeks to find a new venue in Auckland. All venues in Auckland which are suitable for meetings are owned by the council?

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  July 6, 2018

      I was thinking the same thing. But there’s this Lauren visa ban claim that needs to be clarified.

      Reply
    • artcroft

       /  July 6, 2018

      Still, following the adverse promotion of this event I have spent the evening trawling through some of videos that debated the topics Molyneux covers. Very interesting.
      Heres the best that I found. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Murray_(political_scientist)

      Reply
      • sorethumb

         /  July 7, 2018

        You should watch videos of him. He is wise.

        Reply
        • PartisanZ

           /  July 7, 2018

          … You SHALL watch videos of him … He is wise …

          You’re eyelids are becoming heavy … You will awaken, and still be asleep …

          You WILL watch videos of him … He is wise.

          Reply
  4. PDB

     /  July 6, 2018

    Freedom of speech banned in Auckland Council venues but rooting is all good to go.

    Reply
    • Patzcuaro

       /  July 6, 2018

      They could always get on their soap boxes at a cold windy and wet street corner and enjoy the freedom of speech.

      Reply
    • PartisanZ

       /  July 7, 2018

      Or charge to watch the rooting …?

      Reply
  5. Griff

     /  July 6, 2018

    Reply
    • PDB

       /  July 6, 2018

      Your (re)post makes no sense as there was obviously people that wanted to listen to these speakers but there was a minority group that doesn’t represent the majority that were trying to stop them doing so.

      Reply
      • Patzcuaro

         /  July 7, 2018

        Maybe the silent majority doesn’t want to listen and it is just a noisy really small minority who want to hear it. A soap box might have been more than sufficient.

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  July 7, 2018

          That’s pathetic. The organisers hire the venue and pay the cost. They take the risk they have misjudged the interest, not the venue owners.

          Reply
          • Patzcuaro

             /  July 7, 2018

            I’ve got money so I can do what I want?

            Reply
            • PDB

               /  July 7, 2018

              The majority wouldn’t have even been aware these two speakers were coming to this country (and couldn’t care less) except for a small vocal group trying to stop them doing so made a big issue out of it.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  July 7, 2018

              I’ve got money so I can do what I want?

              Only in a free country. Socialists hate that idea.

  6. PDB

     /  July 6, 2018

    “Goff minutes earlier tweeted that council venues shouldn’t be used to stir up ethnic or religious tensions in a city that’s multicultural, inclusive and embraces people from all faiths and ethnicities.”

    Goff was part of a political party that publically tried to blame people with ‘Chinese-sounding names’ for high house prices in Auckland.

    Reply
    • Corky

       /  July 6, 2018

      Let’s not go there…or South Auckland if you are white…Remmers if you are brown..or Howick if you aren’t Asian. Yep, old Auckland is one big melting pot.

      Reply
    • Blazer

       /  July 7, 2018

      ‘Literally millions of new millionaires with chinese sounding surnames have been created since the new millenium.

      Couple this with the effects of massive QE, compliments of the GFC,and stable western nations with very lax criteria for property investment’ by foreigners and …voila!

      What other asset class is safer for a world awash with ‘printed’ money’

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  July 7, 2018

        Millions of millionaires without Chinese sounding names created via property inflation here. Thank Labour.

        Reply
  7. Patzcuaro

     /  July 6, 2018
    Reply
  8. Reply
  9. Alan Wilkinson

     /  July 7, 2018

    When Goff’s principles are a problem he has others. The UK no longer tolerates free speech and neither does he. That is the real meaning of multiculturalism.

    Reply
  10. Healthy, robust debate is as essential to our democracy as the right to vote, possibly more so.

    The same tolerance that allows that freedom – even if it comes with some abuse – also recognises people’s rights to pursue their own religious practices and cultural values in a diverse, dynamic society.

    It includes the right to protest and petition, as these groups have done.

    But banning these people actually undermines the foundation of those rights. It assumes that the system is not robust enough to tolerate that breadth of views or the populace sophisticated enough to respond rationally.

    It also plays into the hands of those seeking publicity and profile.

    Reply
    • PartisanZ

       /  July 7, 2018

      Well, I reckon it really has to do with what everything else has become about since Rogerednomics ….

      It’s about risk analysis …

      Reply
  11. sorethumb

     /  July 7, 2018

    What does it mean to live in a rapidly growing, super-diverse city where 40 per cent of residents were born overseas while others are more at home with the time when diversity was negligible?
    Weighing up the value of ethnic diversity alongside the volume of immigration to Auckland’s character and its future prosperity is a vexed and complex issue – one that is top of mind for many who dwell in the country’s sprawling metropolis, according to a new report by Massey University sociologists.

    A public forum, hosted by an ethnically diverse panel with a breadth of experience in this area, aims to broaden and shed light on the debate about immigration numbers, as well as how both recent arrivals and born-and-bred residents cultivate a sense of belonging.

    The June 6 public discussion,Talking ethnic diversity and immigration in Tamaki Makaurau, is being hosted by the Auckland Knowledge Exchange Hub and RIMU (Auckland Council’s Research and Evaluation Unit) – a joint venture between Massey University and Auckland Council.
    http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/about-massey/news/article.cfm?mnarticle_uuid=695C079B-DE0C-2FCD-EF64-534079743DA4

    That’s how we [manage] it?

    Reply
  12. I for one am very pleased they have been banned from the venue. They should be banned from every single country for the harm that they do breaking up families and communities with their warped ideologies. I speak from experience with a son who has gotten himself sucked into their mindless hateful mysogynistic racial rhetoric. Its a shame we can’t shut them down permanently.

    Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  July 7, 2018

      Theirs is not free speech, it’s hate speech.

      It’s basically neo Nazi from rhe sound of it.

      White Aryans are the Master Race, anyone else is part of the untermenchen.

      Their own people were immigrants, but they don’t want others to share their new country.

      Refugees should not expect more humane treatment from the privileged of other countries than they have in their own.

      Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  July 7, 2018

        Then there’s ‘Kinder, Kuche, Kirke.’

        Need we be so tolerant that we make publicly owned venues open for people whose views are so deliberately divisive and racist, trying to increase INtolerance ?

        Would this be acceptable if the speakers were Isis and trying to stir up that sort of divisiveness and hatred of anyone who wasn’t one of the minority of Muslims who are fanatics ?

        These people have other forums for this, thanks to modern technology. Let them use those.

        Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  July 7, 2018

        Nothing like what you assume is mentioned here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux

        It seems mostly Southern who campaigns against Muslim immigration. No doubt it is the fear that a lot of people support that cause which caused her to be banned.

        Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  July 7, 2018

          She has not the right to come here and tell us what to do, any more that I would have the right to go to Canada and do it.

          Our Muslims are overwhelmingly decent, hardworking people whose main concern is earning a crust for the family. If they like to wear trad clothes, that’s their business. Why should some overseas bigot come here and try to cause dissension because she can’t tell the difference between ordinary Muslims and fanatical terrorists ? It’s none of her damned business.

          Reply
        • Griff

           /  July 7, 2018

          Banned Alan ?
          As usual straw man argument from the illogical cohort of confused righties.
          They were told that they could not use council venues for their racist sexist crap.
          Plenty of private venues available from sky city to rassa’s.
          Most business would not want to be linked to a bunch of far right loons either.
          See the xkcd carton above .

          Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  July 7, 2018

            She was banned from entering the UK and refused an automatic visa here. Then she was banned from all Council venues in Auckland despite having been booked into one. You are the confused one. Or simply misrepresenting.

            Reply
            • Gezza

               /  July 7, 2018

              It appears she is automatically denied a visa for entry here only BECAUSE she is now denied a visa for the UK. It’s an automatic ban because of the way our legislation is written. 2 days ago:

              “As Ms Southern has already been denied entry to the United Kingdom, she is not eligible for a New Zealand visa unless she is granted permission specifically.

              Immigation Minister Iain Lees-Galloway said Immigration NZ [INZ] is looking into the matter.

              “I am advised that INZ is aware of the two Canadian nationals referred to and is assessing whether any action needs to be taken under the Immigration Act and Immigration Instructions.””
              RNZ

              Obviously since then the promoter has decided it’s not worth it and they can make their point by showing Phil Goff as an example of what they say they are protesting against.

      • sorethumb

         /  July 7, 2018

        It’s basically neo Nazi from rhe sound of it.

        White Aryans are the Master Race, anyone else is part of the untermenchen.
        ===================
        Pure ignorance

        Their own people were immigrants, but they don’t want others to share their new country.
        ……..

        Reply
    • PDB

       /  July 7, 2018

      Julie: “They should be banned from every single country for the harm that they do breaking up families and communities with their warped ideologies.”

      Examples of these two particular speakers doing this?

      Kitty: “It’s basically neo Nazi from the sound of it.”

      So essentially Kitty you have formed an opinion without actually researching whether or not they are what some people make them out to be?

      Personally I’ve no desire to go and see these people BUT from what I’ve seen they are far from ‘Neo-Nazi’ or ‘white supremacists’ and unless they are doing something illegal should be allowed to speak freely in this country. Ironically having to cancel their tour plays right into their hands in terms of showcasing some of what they talk about: liberal intolerance & demonizing of anybody who dares to provide an alternative world view.

      Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  July 7, 2018

      Julie, if you look at what you wrote you might get an insight into why your son thinks the behaviour you object to is ok.

      Reply
      • Joe Bloggs

         /  July 7, 2018

        Julie, if you look at what Alan writes, you’ll get a better insight into why your son thinks the behaviour you object to is ok.

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  July 7, 2018

          I don’t ask for people to be banned, Joe. If Julie’s son was brought up believing people should be shut down permanently I suggest she has sown the seeds of her own problem.

          Reply
    • Blazer

       /  July 7, 2018

      you could say the same re people peddling…religion.

      Reply
  13. wooden goat

     /  July 7, 2018

    Apologies for double-posting. This is from my post on the “we will only accept and tolerate leftists” thread –

    Here are a few facts (with sources) about Islam –

    * Followers of Islam have killed an estimated 270 million people (and counting) in the last 1400 years
    https://www.politicalislam.com/tears-of-jihad/

    * Pedophilia is permitted in Islam. Mohammed himself married his wife Aisha when she was six, and consummated the marriage when she was nine. See here – “A complete guide to pedophilia in Islam (WRITTEN BY EX-MUSLIMS) –
    https://gloria.tv/article/L4x4aHUixC8j2ewQbWy6nd9mF

    – and here –
    https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Pedophilia

    * Slavery is permitted in Islam.
    https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Slavery
    https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islamic_Law#Slavery
    https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/slavery.aspx

    I could go on (and I could prove that Islam is in fact an ideology and political system, not a religion), but you get the idea.
    So gee – being against that stuff makes one an “extremist” and a “hate speaker”? I think not!

    Why would anyone be *for* an ideology that sanctions those behaviours (and many more evil things)?

    That is ALL that Southern and Molyneux would have said here, and yet they get banned for being “extremists”!

    Can someone point out to me what is “wrong” with Southern and Molyneux speaking about what I have said above?

    How can *facts* be “hate speech”? Facts are facts, are they not?

    – wooden goat

    Reply
    • It depends on how facts are packaged.

      It is possible to package facts in ways that are designed to provoke, to demean, to prejudice, to bully as well as to inform or debate a point.

      There’s a lot of facts about Christians in history that could be packaged as an attack on modern Christians who are very different from ancient Christians.

      Reply
  14. wooden goat

     /  July 7, 2018

    Fair comment, P.G. Thanks for your reply.

    I guess all I’m saying is that I’ve followed Southern and Molyneux for a long time and neither of them is the rabid, nasty, baby-eating “extremist” that many on the Left like to portray them as.
    They are good people who are justifiably concerned about a very nasty ideology.

    I have no doubt at all that had they been allowed to speak here, their speeches would have been very heavily fact-based, using the kind of facts that I’ve mentioned. I also have no doubt that their visit would have been hugely beneficial to the country, given that the vast majority of people here know next to nothing about Islam.

    – cheers –
    wooden goat

    Reply
    • “the vast majority of people here know next to nothing about Islam.”

      It is high time they did learn something. Even the dim Europeans are finally waking up to this monstrous cuckoo in their nest. Note it is always some ‘Muslim Association’ (and there is no shortage of them) that demands Free Speech be banned if it dares to question Islam. The efficacy of Asian Martial Art comes from its ability to turn the strength of the opponent against himself. Islam does exactly this, using the West’s tolerance to trick fools into tolerating its own intolerance.

      It took the UK Police about 20 minutes to bang up Tommy Robinson for the ‘hate crime’ of exposing the country-wide gang-raping of vulnerable little girls by packs of Muslims, while the Police, Social Services, Local Councils and Government all pretended it was not happening. Yet it took them 20 years to lock up the Muslim Hate Preacher Choudary, despite him publicly calling daily for the depraved, violent destruction of all Infidels. This level of ‘tolerance’ is not only beyond parody, it is chargeable treachery.

      There is a darkness descending on The West, and its name is Islam. It is impossible to exaggerate the danger it poses to all of Humanity. Muslims, brainwashed by it from birth, are arguably even greater victims than Infidels. We, at least, have the capacity to see it for what it is. Yet, to paraphrase Pastor Niemoller’s poem about the Nazis: “First they came for Southern and Molyneux, and I did nothing … Then they came for me, but by then there was no-one left to do anything.”

      Read, read, read about it as widely as you can, before you are imprisoned for doing so, as you now can be in my dear, sad England, currently swamped in a savage crime wave because the Police are too busy hunting anyone who reads criticism of Islam. Is that the sort of society that the likes of Oscar Kightly of Stuff, who naively call for restrictions on Free Speech, really want?

      Islam is at war with Humanity, and has been for 1400 years. It is now winning, because witless ‘Liberals’, in the smug certainty of their ‘inclusiveness’, have opened the gates to its Trojan Horse. Islam is not here to integrate; it is here to subjugate. The very word means “Submission”.

      http://raymondibrahim.com/ – a specialist historian who understands the background of this whole vile mess
      https://gatesofvienna.net/ – has a huge blogroll and a regular newsfeed on Islamic activities in the West.

      Reply
  15. sorethumb

     /  July 7, 2018

    They would be happy to apply hate speech to a drunk Maori yelling at Muslims. These two are too smart for that. The message is controversial but that isn’t hate speech. They just want to control the narrative.
    http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/about-massey/news/article.cfm?mnarticle_uuid=695C079B-DE0C-2FCD-EF64-534079743DA4

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s