top of page

Subscribe Form

Thanks for submitting!

Search

DAVID ROUND: Forest and Bird Drift Left

1 hour ago
3 min read

As you may know, I resigned as a member of the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society a couple of years ago, dismayed that its enthusiasm for undefined but radical ‘Treaty principles’ was actually harming the conservation cause. F&B’s complete refusal to respond to any of my letters did not help.



Further evidence of F&B’s capture by the woke Left is offered by an article in Kiwiblog on the 22nd of this month. Under the heading ‘Questions media didn’t ask’, Kiwiblog describes a ‘newly-launched ‘campaign’ involving a ‘coalition’ of ‘Climate Club Aotearoa’, the ‘Social Change Collective’ and ‘Forest and Bird Youth’. The coalition’s aim is ‘to increase youth voter turnout by 15% ...especially among rural, Maori and Pasifika rangatahi’.



None of us object, of course, to the enrolment of eligible voters ~ although I would be very surprised if that object is mentioned in the Forest and Bird constitution! But there is a very obvious political slant to this campaign. It is one thing for an interest group to review the policies of political parties, and to say to voters that this or that policy is good or bad for the interests which that interest group promotes. That is entirely legitimate, and in fact desirable. But this is something else. It is an outright attempt to change the government. The ‘Social Change Collective’ is obviously in favour of social change, and no prizes will be awarded for guessing in what direction their desired social changes will take us. A change of government is obviously the first step, and only the first. The ‘co-convenor’ of this coalition is one Ethan Reille, a Labour Party candidate at the last election and also an organiser for the PSA, which is running its own ‘Change the Government’ campaign. He and the other organisers clearly believe that it is parties of the ‘left’ ~ the Maori Party, the Greens, even Labour at a pinch ~ who will benefit from this voter enrolment campaign. Our own commonsense observations lead us to the same conclusion. It will not be difficult to guess for whom young ‘Maori and Pasifika rangatahi’ will be voting.



So it boils down to this ~ that, under an extremely flimsy and unconvincing disguise, ‘Forest and Bird Youth’ is actively participating in a campaign to defeat the current coalition at the election and have it replaced by a more left-wing one. With everything that that might involve...



It is impossible to believe, by the way, that their involvement has not been approved and supported by F&B central office. The F&B high command keeps a very tight rein on the activities of all its branches.



Many conservationists have spent a long time emphasising, quite correctly, that the environment is an issue beyond politics; that regardless of our politics we all need fresh air, clean water and refreshment in Nature for the spirit, and that the laws of Nature operate inexorably regardless of our political opinions. But here is Forest and Bird announcing, in effect, that ‘leftwing’ parties are conservation’s natural allies, and parties of the ‘right’ its natural enemies. This is nonsense. But by announcing this, F&B is creating the very situation it professes to deplore. If the centre-right wins this election ~ a surely possible outcome! ~ then why would our new government have any sympathy for an organisation which has already renounced political neutrality and declared itself the government’s enemy? Why would any centre-right politician support any conservation initiative? F&B has made it clear that it believes that there are no votes for the centre-right in such support. Why, for that matter, would any conservation-minded and conservatively-inclined citizen choose to belong to an organisation dedicated to left-wing political activism? F&B’s stupidity does a grave disservice to the very cause which F&B once existed to promote.



For Forest and Bird to claim that it is politically neutral is an outright lie. Poor old Captain Sanderson, who founded the organisation over a century ago, will be turning in his grave to see what his organisation has become. Perhaps it is time for someone to speak to the Charities Commission about the political activism of this ‘charity’. Given the disgraceful political activism of our judges, though ~ who will strike down Family First’s charitable status, but maintain that of Greenpeace ~ that may be an uphill job.



David Round, a sixth generation South Islander and committed conservationist, is an author, a constitutional and Treaty expert, and a former law lecturer at the University of Canterbury. This article was first published at Breaking Views

 
 
 

11 Comments


david tranter
david tranter
9 minutes ago

I compliment David Round on his consistent commonsense approach over so many years.

Regarding Forest and Bird's political machinations, I feel similarly about the Green Party's similar straying from the principles which guided them in the 1990s when I was, for a few years, a health issues campaigner for them.

Their then co-leaders, Jeanette Fitzsimons and Rod Donald will also be turning in their graves.

Is the descent into the dark regions of wokeness an inevitable decline ? I hope not.


Like

Fortyonesouth
12 minutes ago

Drift? Serious listing of the ship once Smith left(?) and Hague came in (2000's?) with an anti-development focus.

They have lost the plot long ago. They even oppose activities out at sea where there are no forests and the range of the birds either can't reach or are a massive multiple greater than the relevant activity so as to make it irrelevant.

Like

john
21 minutes ago

I was a member once upon a time.....................................

Like

roger
roger
42 minutes ago

My wife and I left many years ago mainly because of the political angle Forest & Bird took but I guess also because of people like Tracy who as well as lacking much logic are also nasty with it. Over the last few years I feel that they have been even less effective and that seems to be why.

Like

johnlaurent
an hour ago

I have opposed conservationists who used the political power of Maori activists. The way they worked was to make concessions in democratic governance to iwi in order to get iwi support for conservation gains. An example is the Legacy recreational fishing lobby group which supports cogoverned coastal marine protection zones. They are so zealous democracy is an easy concession for them to make.


Luckily the same lack of guts the conservationists have in standing up to radical Maori demands can be used when you confront them with the reality of what they are doing. Faced with determined opposition the cave and end up in the invidious position, of their own making, of pissing off everyone.

Like

©2021 by Bassett, Brash & Hide. Proudly created with Wix.com

bottom of page