Sports missing from Race Relations Commissioner criteria

Just checked the Human Rights Act 1993 to see if being a celebrity sportsperson is a criterion for the Race Relations Commissioner, and you know what? It isn’t.

The criteria in fact are high falutin requirements that the minister making the appointment needs to consider.

They include that the person:

a)    Has an understanding of current race relations in New Zealand, and of the origins and development of those relations:

b)    Has an appreciation of issues or trends in race relations arising in other countries or internationally, and of the relevance of those issues or trends for New Zealand.

The criteria Justice Minister Judith Collins was working from appear to be quite different.

They include that the person:

a)     Is a famous sports person.

b)     See (a).

Basically to be in the running it would be an advantage to be a runner, or a rugby player or a netball player or a squash player.

One News reported last night that rugby great Michael Jones and netballer Irene van Dyk were shortlisted for the position before it was given to Dame Susan Devoy.

Apparently van Dyk made it to the interview stage, while Jones was offered the job but decided against it.

Those people sound like they might be quite talented and able and perhaps they should flick a CV off to Sport New Zealand.

Sure being well-known is an advantage and excelling at sports does show grit and determination. In fact the Human Rights Act does highlight leadership as a good characteristic to have. But it did also mention a couple of pesky little attributes about a depth of knowledge and understanding of race relations that these candidates have not demonstrated.

Were previous ministers wrong to think it would be good if candidates could bring their prior experience and knowledge to the job; could undertake inquiries, respond to complaints and report on race relations in New Zealand from a position of understanding?

Is it better to present a famous smiling face on race relations in New Zealand to create a cheery picture of race relations that doesn’t reflect the pain and suffering of those who face discrimination?

I hope Dame Susan seizes this challenge and learns what she needs to do the job. I hope too though that the Minister can reflect on this appointment and look hard at her motivation for scouring the country for sportspeople to take the lead role on race relations in Aotearoa.

94 thoughts on “Sports missing from Race Relations Commissioner criteria

  1. You could look at what Devoy has done in the last two decades like working on boards, her work for charities like muscular distrophy, walking the length of NZ to raise money for charities, and sticking up for people who are being discriminated against like those with mental illness.

    Or you could ignore her last 20 years and criticise her because she played sport 20 years ago.

    Catherine – prejudging someone because of who they are, while completely ignoring their obvious attributes and experience of the last twenty years, is exactly the type of discrimination that we need to stamp out.

  2. Wonder if the some biased rhetoric was voiced with the appointments of the prominent sportmen Hiwi Tauroa and Chris Laidlaw in times past.

    I have a feeling a certain Green party MP, who has strong feeling towards Maori, is agrieved she has been overlooked for the position?

    No doubt overlooked as the position has to consider ALL races not just Maori and the crown.

  3. So, should we determine your ability to be an MP solely by your sheep shearing past, Catherine?

    Why reduce Devoy to just sport when she has clearly been involved in a lot of charity work and spokesperson roles, too?

  4. 3 of the candidates were celebrity sports-people. What does that tell you? I remember when Key paraded Michael Jones around as a National icon (we’re like bros, eh!)in his sickening way (remember the young Maori girl Key ‘accompanied’ to Waitangi? Dodgy, bro!). This choosing sporting celebs is nothing more than pandering to the popular voter. National have done it since Key first began to hang about the place. It’s in their strategy book and works well for them, especially when shallow souls like Arana (photonz1 will be in soon, wafer-thin)bolster up the behaviour. nothing new about this stuff.

  5. @Gerrit 4:27 PM

    Wonder if the some biased rhetoric was voiced with the appointments of the prominent sportmen Hiwi Tauroa and Chris Laidlaw in times past.

    Tauroa had an outstanding career in education and was Principal of the multicultural Wesley College which was way ahead of its time in terms of race relations immediately prior to his appointment.

    Laidlaw had a brilliant academic career including being a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford and had served as Assistant to the Commonwealth Secretary-General prior to his appointment.

    They were both people eminently qualified for the positions they held, regardless of their sporting backgrounds.

    Sorry, can’t say the same for Devoy, Jones or van Dyk, all of whom seem to have got on the shortlist on the basis of their sporting celebrity status, rather than academic and career credentials.

  6. In the 1986 New Year Honours, Devoy was appointed a Member of the Order of the British Empire, and elevated to Commander of the Order of the British Empire in the 1993 Queen’s Birthday Honours.

    She is also noted for her charity work, being the New Zealand Patron on the Muscular Dystrophy Association. In 1988 she walked the entire length of New Zealand, over seven weeks, and raised $500,000 for that charity. Other achievements include being named New Zealand Sports Person and Sports Woman in 1985.

    In 1998, she became a Dame Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit, the youngest New Zealander since Sir Edmund Hillary to receive a knighthood.

    In between her charity work she is also a professional speaker in motivation and inspiration. In 2007, she appeared on Like Minds, Like Mine TV commercials in New Zealand to counter the stigma and discrimination associated with mental illness.

    She seems to have a history of good public works, standing up for those discriminated against, and motivational speaking.

    So, not just a squash player, then. Isn’t the real problem here is that she isn’t from the left?

  7. Eligible candidates should be given the responsible position because he’l be playing for the country and country should not take chances on the sports issue.

  8. Isn’t the real problem here is that she isn’t from the left?
    Tough question Arana. Let’s see:
    – a few gongs, mostly for batting a ball well.
    – once took a nice long walk
    – appeared in some advertisements
    – work as a motivational speaker! Gosh, has she had any self-help books ghost-written on her behalf too? That would really convince me. /sarc

    What’s conspicuous by its absence is anything to do with race relations, as Catherine pointed out in her post. Did you read that far into the post? And assuming you did, do you think that having some demonstrable experience in race relations might be a desirable thing for candidates for this position?

    In answer to your question is – the real problem is that Susan Devoy is not suitably experienced to do the job.

    However, I think you have a point. I am unsure whether Susan Devoy is “from the left” or not. But I know that, in general, people who identify as being “from the left” have a deeper understanding of racism and race relations than people “from the right”. That would explain why not being from the left could be a real problem in this instance.

  9. Armchair critic says “But I know that, in general, people who identify as being “from the left” have a deeper understanding of racism and race relations than people “from the right””

    And people with blond hair and blue eyes are superior too yada yada yada

    Armchair Critic – your comments are just another example of the type of discrimination and bigotry that needs to be stamped out.

  10. Be interesting in whom the Greens would like to see in the position.

    Toad,

    Problem I see is that racism is rearing its ugly head here.

    “multiculture” implies all cultures, unfortunately the Greens see it simply as Maori versus the rest.

    With all other people except Maori residing in the “rest” camp, it is racism to favour Maori.

    Hence the aggrieved attitude the the incumbent is “not qualified”.

    Well sorry, Susan Devoy is as qualified as Catherine Delahunty would be.

    And as qualified as any of her predecessors.

    Not much empathy being shown by the Greens towards the “rest” of us.

  11. Armchair Critic – your comments are just another example of the type of discrimination and bigotry that needs to be stamped out.
    Stamped out? By thugs with steel capped boots, or just someone in squash shoes? If I didn’t know better I’d think you were trying to be humorous.
    You seem to have confused a description of political preferences for a description of physical characteristics, and the inference that I am racist is inaccurate, unhelpful and unnecessary.
    Yours is a poor effort to derail the thread, photonz1. Can you explain why the post is wrong, how it is that out of 4 million people there was no one better suited to the position, and how, bizarrely, the other two candidates were also high profile sports people? Or is it the blue rosette the minister wears that somehow blocks your ability to think critically?

  12. Armchair says ” Can you explain why the post is wrong…”

    You need to ask?

    You comment that there could be real problems if a left wing person isn’t chosen, smacks of bigotry and ignorance.

  13. Gerrit says “Well sorry, Susan Devoy is as qualified as Catherine Delahunty would be.”

    You’d think Catherine would respect an organization like the Halburg Trust (now Halberg Disability Sport Foundation) whose one and only aim is to give young people, regardless of their background or ability, an equal opportunity to get into sport.

    Or at the very least acknowledge it exists, and that Devoy led it.

    For years Devoy has stood up for the disabled and those with mental illness.

    But apparently in Catherine’s view, spending two decades standing up for the rights of people who are discriminated against, doesn’t give you any experience in standing up for the rights of people who are discriminated against.

  14. Since when has it been political party policy to appoint someone qualified to do a job?

    When the Greens are in leadership will they always appoint on the basis of qualification not affiliation?

  15. I wonder how good Devoy’s reo is?
    That’s usually a sign that a person has genuine empathy toward another culture. Does she have a little ability with other Pacific island languages? Some Mandarin perhaps, now that Key’s sold off more of our forests to the Chinese (Communist) Government.
    I’m guessing that, being a Right Winger, the present Kaitakawaenga is only be able to speak Tory. I’m guessing Arana and photonz1 are similarly restricted to the Mother (England) tongue. Prove me wrong e hoariri ma.

  16. But I know that, in general, people who identify as being “from the left” have a deeper understanding of racism and race relations

    I see. Might it be fair to say some on the left see “race relations” as simply “Maori issues”?

    I don’t think Devoy suffers from this confusion. We have many races, and I’m sure she’s capable of developing her understanding further, as most of us surely would in such a role.

  17. Greenfly,

    You really need to get your facts straight. Neither Mr John Key nor the National party has sold any forests to the Chinese people.

    Was actually the trustees of your retirement funds, The New Zealand Super Fund who sold their assets.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10879544

    Last I heard the NZ Super Fund management was not directed by Mr John Key or the National party.

    Wonder if the Greens will “nationalise” the New Zealand Super Fund (after all it has $22B worth of assets, here and abroad).

    How dare they sell New Zealand assets! Shame on them. Nationalise them quick!

    One could read into the sale that the Trustees and investment managers don’t have much faith in New Zealand investments nor the future of the ETS that they would sell a “carbon sink”.

    Now that is a good tread jack topic!!!

    PS

    I speak three languages and have a smattering of reo, (hey bro) does that qualify me?

  18. There is a hell of a lot more to the job than “standing up for the rights of people who are discriminated against.” The Commissioner actually needs to have an understanding of the nature of ‘Race Relations’ not just in Aotearoa New Zealand but also Internationally. This understanding would be inherently very complex and would require many years of thinking to achieve, not just going walk about and making TV ads. Central to the role then is the ability to determine what IS discrimination.

    http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0082/latest/DLM304408.html

    In recommending a person for appointment as Race Relations Commissioner, the Minister must have regard not only to the criteria stated in section 11 but also to the person’s—

    (a) understanding of current race relations in New Zealand, and of the origins and development of those relations:

    (b) appreciation of issues or trends in race relations arising in other countries or internationally, and of the relevance of those issues or trends for New Zealand:

    (c) ability to perform the functions stated in section 16.

  19. Arana – no reo tuturu then? Figures. Bet Devoy doesn’t either. Nor photonz1.

    Gerrit – sounds as though you are better qualified that Devoy. You’re not a celebrity sportsman though, so you’re dis-qualified.

    Key’s not selling New Zealand to China?
    Toooooeeeeeee! (Mandarin for, “Yeah, right!”)

  20. greenfly、TE REO話しの前提条件ではありません。 そこには、話すことはありません多くの言語があります。

  21. Greenfly,

    you really must stop drinking that home made cider/apple wine.

    Clouding your thinking.

    John Key is not in charge of the NZ Super Fund.

    Cullen for all his faults at least had the smarts to place the fund out of reach of politicians.

    Something the Greens plan to change?

    ————————————-

    I go back to my original question, who would the Greens place in charge of the race relations commissioners office?

    Go on, for we want to discuss the qualifications of the Greens nomination.

    Probably someone who thinks it is OK to call other races members “white mofo’s”?

  22. Arana – your cut-and-paste job is your ploy to avoid the simple yes or no, as per usual.

    Gerrit – I’d look at the experience a candidate might have that relates to race relations conciliation and weigh those up against those of the other candidates. Lots of people are involved in race relations conciliation (with lower-case r, r & c). It might be okay to choose someone with no experience in the field, but I’d look at any previous positions or statements from the candidate to see how they have thought and behaved prior to putting themselves up for the job, at which time people can apply the gloss. I’d be looking past that, for claims that reveal suitability or otherwise. You?

  23. Arana – your cut-and-paste job is your ploy to avoid the simple yes or no, as per usual.

    I do apologise. I was certain most people would understand my point, but I will spell it out further to avoid confusion on your part.

    There are many races. There are many languages. If your criteria for appointment is knowing other languages, then which languages are acceptable as qualifications?

  24. That’s easy. The most useful language would be that of the majority of people under your ‘jurisdiction’. The second most useful, that of the second most populous, the third most useful…etc.
    How’s your Maori language, Arana? I can see what your English is like.

  25. That’s easy. The most useful language would be that of the majority of people under your ‘jurisdiction’.

    The most commonly spoken languages after English are Māori, Samoan, French, Cantonese, and German. Should a race relations conciliator speak them all? Or just Maori?

    I don’t speak Maori. I have no use for it.

  26. I knew you didn’t. It shows in your failure to grasp issues ki te taha Maori.
    “Should a race relations conciliator speak them all?”
    No one suggested they should, but I bet they’d be better for it, if they could!
    I’d never employ you for the position, Arana, given your ignorance of the second most commonly spoken language, for starters.
    Does Devoy have a second language, do you know?

  27. I’d never employ you for the position, Arana, given your ignorance of the second most commonly spoken language, for starters.

    I’d never employ anyone for the role who deemed it to be mostly about Maori.

    We have many races and it’s fair to say Maori are already very well spoken for at so many levels.

    Think of the Asian immigrants. We have some politicians constantly ranting on about the Chinese and “foreigners” owning land. How would that make Asian people feel?

    Every wonder about that, Greenfly?

  28. “I’d never employ anyone for the role who deemed it to be mostly about Maori.”

    Race relations in New Zealand is mostly about Maori and Pakeha (not a ‘race’, I know), I’d have thought. That doesn’t mean there is no need for application to the relationships between those two and others such as Tokolauns, Samoans, Indians etc, but mostly the conciliator would involve her/himself as I describe. Still, I might be wrong. Someone could provide some statistics perhaps. If I’m right, a knowledge of Maori language, closely intertwined as it is with other matters ‘tangata whenua’, would be a valuable taiaha to be able to wield.
    As to wondering how “Asian people” feel, Arana, I’ve two Chinese women staying with me just now. I’ll ask them.

  29. One of my concerns is that it was Minister of Justice, Judith Collins who had the privilege of deciding on the short-list – and for some obscure(?) reason they were all sportspeople whom she regarded as ideal role-models in inter-racial understanding, communication and progress in our country.
    Anyone who still has much to learn in these areas is not ideal; someone who already has a great deal of involvement, experience, empathy, co-operation and initiative, within the particular issues and needs concerned with racial matters in New Zealand – but with perhaps a little more to learn, WOULD be ideal. I really struggle to comprehend where Judith Collins gets her decisions on various matters, from..!

  30. I see:

    “How do you get a manifestly unqualified crony appointed to an important position? Simple: get manifestly unqualified people to interview them. And that’s exactly what happened in the case of Susan Devoy:
    New Zealand Post chief executive Brian Roche and Defence Secretary Helene Quilter were on the panel that interviewed Dame Susan Devoy for the job of Race Relations Commissioner.

    The disclosure follows a written Parliamentary question filed by the Green Party, which describes the make-up of the panel as extremely odd.

    Catherine Delahunty MP said the assessment panel did not have the background to do its job.

    The relevance of the defence and postal operations to human rights is left as an exercise for the reader.

    The SSC’s Board Appointment and Induction Guidelines [PDF] has some pretty clear guidance on interview panels:
    Where possible, the chair should be involved. Departments should assemble an interview panel that matches the requirements of the board or body and the particular board vacancy.

    That guidance appears to have been ignored. Instead, Devoy was interviewed by people unfamiliar with the role, and there was not even a representative from the Human Rights Commission the panel. Its hardly surprising then that they made such a poor decision which seemed to ignore the clear statutory requirements of the position.

    I’m still waiting for my documents on the appointments process, but judging by what’s been publicly revealed so far, it appears to have been a stitch-up from start to finish. I wonder if you can bring a judicial review of a Crown Entity appointment?”

    NoRightTurn

  31. Yes, Rimu. It’s a cheap trick that entertains the bored, for a while at least.
    Far better to learn a second or third language, kei te mohio au.

  32. CampbellLive tonight, John interviews a candidate for the role who did have suitable experience but didn’t make the cut. He’d like to know why. So would I.

  33. Phew! I’m sure we’ve had Ministers of Education who weren’t anywhere near the teaching profession, and Ministers for many things who could be deemed “unqualified ” for the job given the lack of either actual hands on experience or relevant background. I’ve yet to encounter a Minister for Health who knew a darn about nursing so really, what is the kerfuffle about Dame S?
    I’m amazed at how much response this post generates! And so far Greenfly has not yet NAMED a preferred candidate,despite having been asked. Neither has Catherine, for that matter so, out with it!

  34. As greenfly says, this gentleman was perfect for the job – all the necessary qualifications and experience. What WAS the reason for his not being appointed?? So much the loss for New Zealand, for all our races, and race- relations into the future….UNLESS the mistake could be rectified?!?? Would a petition help??!!

  35. Ministers who know squat about their portfolios, Robyn?
    That’s very true, but they are voted into the Party that assigns them the role. Devoy’s case is different. And incongruous. National’s shoulder-tapping habit is coming under public scrutiny and it’s making us uneasy. Key did it recently, and fudged answers to questions around it, so people are suspicious that even the craven Nats are not wanting their methods revealed.

  36. You need to ask?
    Yes, sadly, I do, because you seem to be using a lot of words and not saying very much. Catherine, as the author of the post, has made some reasonable points about Susan Devoy’s appointment, and the process used to make the appointment. Yet you seem determined to not talk about this at all and prefer to dance around the periphery of the subject.

    You comment that there could be real problems if a left wing person isn’t chosen, smacks of bigotry and ignorance.
    All that demonstrates is a lack of comprehension on your part, because that’s a poor interpretation of what I wrote.

  37. Armchairs says “Catherine, as the author of the post, has made some reasonable points about Susan Devoy’s appointment,…”

    It’s unbelievable that you think it is “reasonable” for Catherine to deliberately leave our the last TWENTY YEARS of someones life, just to make a personal attack on them, in the hope of seriously damaging Devoy, to somehow score political brownie points against someone else.

  38. ““How do you get a manifestly unqualified crony appointed to an important position? Simple: get manifestly unqualified people to interview them. And that’s exactly what happened in the case of Susan Devoy:””

    Who does Michael Jones vote for or what party does he belong to, he was offered the job, then turned it down after he initially applied. Why go through all that effort just to say ‘no thanks I don’t want it?’

  39. Greenfly – I have to reject the notion that a linguistic ability is an indication of empathy and understanding. It indicates a linguistic ability. That’s it. Catherine is right enough.. it does not appear that the process was being followed well, but the linguistic thing is I think, a bit of a distraction and not that relevant.

    respectfully
    BJ

  40. As DPF points out:

    “Over the last 20 years Brian Roche has been appointed by both Labour and National Governments to numerous roles in the areas of education, transport, health and Treaty Settlements. Specifically he has played a significant role in four Treaty settlements:

    Ngai Tahu – 1997 ($170m)
    Port Nicholson Block – 2008 (part of a $45m settlement)
    Ngati Awa – 2003 ($43m)
    Waikato River settlement – 2008 (part of the same $45m settlement package as Port Nicholson)

    So dismissing him as just being about postal communications is trite and unworthy. I’d suggest someone who has been involved in four major Treaty settlements knows a hell of a lot about race relations in New Zealand, and is more than suitable to be on an appointment panel for the role.”

  41. Bjchip – It’s not ‘linguistic ability’ I’m lauding, it’s the empathy that comes from learning the language of people you are interacting with. Someone who, for example, applies himself to learning Samoan, is more likely, in my opinion, to gain an insight into Samoan culture, than someone who ‘hasn’t bothered’. They would therefore be better armed to adjudicate over matters that involve Samoans living in Aotearoa.
    This could even apply in a marriage, for example, where say, an American might have married a Russian. He would benefit greatly from some knowledge of his wife’s Mother tongue, in terms of harmonious relations :-)

  42. Then the fact you and Catherine “haven’t bothered” learning most languages means you lack insight?

    There is no requirement for a RRC to speak multiple languages.

  43. You are dribbling, Arana. My interest in promoting language-familiarity as a useful tool for a RRC has expired. I laugh, your ‘There is no requirement for…” is hilarious, given the way the requirements for RRC were totally ignored in the appointment of Devoy. We pick and choose, eh!

  44. It’s time the RRC position was disbanded. It’s a waste of taxpayers money and makes no measurable difference to life in New Zealand.

  45. Judith Collins has been invited to offer – on Radio Live, by 12 mid-day – her reasoning behind the choice of Susan Devoy over Mr Lovegrove, for example. I have my fingers crossed!
    Was it because she’s a woman? (“she has a spine I admire” said Judith earlier.) Wow! Really? Great reason!
    Or because she was a sportsperson?
    Or because she’s a right-wing choice?
    What other reason could there BE??!

  46. Why should Collins have to explain her actions to the peasants people of New Zealand?
    Her boss doesn’t bother. Why should she?

  47. Wouldn’t matter if Crusty The Clown was RRC. The position is pointless.

    Arguing about who is in the role is like dancing about architecture.

  48. Never mind. I think “peasants” might have their own significant wisdom regarding real life and what is most important – including genuine JUSTICE.

  49. So why are you doing just that?

    Arana said: “In the 1986 New Year Honours, Devoy was appointed a Member of the Order of the British Empire, and elevated to Commander of the Order of the British Empire in the 1993 Queen’s Birthday Honours.
    She is also noted for her charity work…”

  50. I’d rather not have the position.

    If we are to have the position, then Devoy seems suitable, given her background.

    I’m commenting on the initial blog post, which reduces Devoy to a sports caricature, which is clearly unfair, given her extensive work in the community.

  51. I wonder is there would be any fuss if someone who was part-Maori, who was a sportsperson, didn’t have any University qualifications, and once said they approved of windmills was appointed to the role.

    I’m guessing “nope”.

  52. I wonder is there would be any fuss if the Green had realised Devoy is a staunch environmentalist before they started the personal attacks on her.

  53. The ‘attacks’ are on the rationale for choosing a relatively unqalified person by a process that seems not to follow requirements, not on Devoy herself. Framing the discussion that way makes you seem a bit stupid, photonz1.

  54. Arana, I think there’d be just as much ‘fuss’! the problem is the ignoring of the principles involved, and the denial of the correct procedures – the criteria formally required in order to do justice to the job, which is, or should be, a vital component within matters of race-relations now and into the future…

  55. ….”if the Greens had realised she’s a staunch environmentalist…”

    What difference would THAT make to her ability as a Race Relations Commissioner? (or is it Conciliator!) Just wondering..

  56. Greenfly thinks that when Delahunty deliberately leaves out the last twenty years of Devoy’s life to put her down, it is not a personal attack.

    Greenfly quotes people saying Devoy is a “manifestly unqualified crony” and thinks this is not a personal attack.

  57. photonz1

    I wonder is there would be any fuss if the Green had realised Devoy is a staunch environmentalist before they started the personal attacks on her.

    What has environmentalism got to do with running the Human Rights Commission photonz1? It might be relevant for a RWNJ like yourself to choose who they criticize based on shared beliefs, but it isn’t why most people have chosen to criticize Susan Devoy.

    Personally I have no idea about Devoy’s political beliefs or who she supports, but I’m not going to allow that to get in the way of criticizing her for being unqualified to run the HRC.

    Claiming that Devoy has environmental ideals and that should bias people against criticizing her for being unqualified and incompetent says more about your corrupted values system than anything else photonz1.

  58. Hang on, Jackal, photonz1 wasn’t saying HE considered environmentalism would justify appointing Susan Devoy. I believe he was inferring that that is the biased way the Greens would think…?! Which it isn’t, I think!

  59. Jackal says “..but I’m not going to allow that to get in the way of criticizing her for being unqualified to run the HRC.”

    You’re so eager to criticise you don’t even know what job she has.

    It’s laughable that you think you only criticise people on their merits and not whether they are from the left or right.

    In fact it’s totally delusional considering you have a website specifically for attacking right wing people.

  60. “Greenfly quotes people saying Devoy is a “manifestly unqualified crony” and thinks this is not a personal attack.”
    Now photonz1 has used the same damning quote saying Devoy is a “manifestly unqualified crony”!
    Will these attacks on Susan ever cease???

  61. Greenfly – presumably you have the intelligence to tell the difference between a personal attack, and someone criticising it.

    Even if you pretend not to.

  62. For God’s sake, photonz1, leave poor Susan alone! Her job’s difficult enough without the likes of you quoting negative comments all over the show. Give the woman a chance to show what she’s got (if anything) and stop hounding her for being a mono-lingual sportswoman.

  63. photonz1

    You’re so eager to criticise you don’t even know what job she has.

    Clearly I’m not critisizing her for endorsing a range of spa pools photonz1… It’s pretty obvious that I’m talking about her role as Race Relations Commissioner, unless you’re a deluded RWNJ that is.

    Basically you’re argument amounts to quack again photonz1… But what else is new?

  64. Jackal says ‘It’s pretty obvious that I’m talking about her role as Race Relations Commissioner,”

    Yes – that’s why you said she’d be running the Human Rights Commission.

    It that a profit or expense you’re talking about?

    Kiwisaver or the NZ Super Fund?

    It’s so easy to get things mixed up all the time – isn’t it?

  65. PhotoNZ1 was wrong when he stuck up for the child sex abuser on this site .

    Just as he’s wrong when he sticks up for every piece of crap the National Government serves up to our country …..

  66. daddy o – still crawling in the sewer I see.

    Was that the pinnacle of your intellectual ability to debate sensitive issues?

  67. People who support child abusers getting discharged without conviction are the sewer dwellers PhotoNz …. and thats you, or would you like to have a John Key brain fade and pretend it never happened?

    The fact that this sites national troll supported a child sex abuser is not ironic …… its apt.

    Your an expert at defending the indefensible

  68. daddy o – grow up. You’ve shown time and time again you haven’t got half the intellect needed to debate sensitive issues – the best you can come up with is being disgustingly abusive.

    That shows people a lot about your character.

    This board is about Susan Devoy’s appointment and you continually try to hijack it and to drag it down into your sewer.

  69. Ha! I support photonz1 – Jackal got it wrong and daddyO shouldn’t push that line.

  70. Im just showing your consistency in supporting things which are plainly wrong and sometimes immoral.

    Judith Collins was a bad police minister and shes just as cynical and rotten as justice minister.

    Devoys a hack appointment and she’s not up to the highly paid and responsible job.

    Typical national party stuff ……

  71. daddy o – if your concern about someone getting away with child abuse was actually genuine, you would be complaining to the courts who made the decision – not some anonymous person on the internet who has nothing to do with the justice system.

    However it looks very much that you interest in this is not genuine – you are using it as an excuse to be highly abusive and offensive as you can be.

    Which is pretty obvious to everyone here.

    Which still has nothing to do with the Susan Devoy appointment.

  72. Photonz1

    It that a profit or expense you’re talking about?

    Kiwisaver or the NZ Super Fund?

    The argument Gerrit put forward was that NZ power would cause a failure of investment in New Zealand. As I recall, both you and Arana agreed with him/her. However very little of what Kiwisaver or NZ Super invests is in New Zealand.

    Around 9% of our savings are invested here with the remaining 91% foreign investments. My contention is that the bulk of investments are returning less than could be obtained here in New Zealand. You can ignore the context of the debate if you like photonz1, but your argument then becomes largely irrelevant.

    It appears that you have no actual argument as to why Susan Devoy should have been appointed Race Relations Commissioner of the HRC. Why then are you comenting on this thread photonz1?

  73. Jackals says “It appears that you have no actual argument as to why Susan Devoy should have been appointed Race Relations Commissioner of the HRC.”

    That’s an incredibly dumb thing to say, considering my arguements starting from the very first post……

    You think spending twenty years standing up for people who are being discriminated against doesn’t give her any experience to stand up for people who are being discriminated against

  74. photonz1

    You think spending twenty years standing up for people who are being discriminated against doesn’t give her any experience to stand up for people who are being discriminated against.

    Name one example from twenty years ago of Susan Devoy standing up for people who are being discriminated against photonz1?

  75. Jackal asks “Name one example from twenty years ago of Susan Devoy standing up for people who are being discriminated against photonz1?”

    If you don’t know what Devoy has done, that shows you’re mainly interested in personal attacks rather than spending five minutes to do a google search.

    How about standing up for those that are being picked on because of mental illness.

    Or fighting for equal rights for disabled when she headed the Halberg Trust.

    Or fighting for those with muscular distrophy.

    Oh – you only wanted one.

    If you did just 1% of what Devoy has done, you’d be a much better person than you are now.

    That’s why when someone like you makes personal attacks on someone like Devoy, it’s really just a sad reflection on your own miserable life.

  76. photonz1

    How about standing up for those that are being picked on because of mental illness.

    Or fighting for equal rights for disabled when she headed the Halberg Trust.

    Or fighting for those with muscular distrophy.

    These aren’t actual examples of Susan Devoy standing up for people who are being discriminated against photonz1. It’s good that she’s done some charity work, been a patron and a trustee etc, but those things shouldn’t automatically qualify her for an appointment as Race Relations Commissioner, especially when there were other more qualified candidates.

    If you did just 1% of what Devoy has done, you’d be a much better person than you are now.

    That’s why when someone like you makes personal attacks on someone like Devoy, it’s really just a sad reflection on your own miserable life.

    You don’t know what I do or what I’ve done in my own personal life photonz1.

Comments are closed.