I attended two sessions at the Featherston Booktown Festival on Saturday. One, on the state of the news media, was almost totally useless. I walked out before it had finished. The other, however, was not only entertaining but produced one of those “Did he just say what I thought he said?” moments from former Speaker and Labour Party minister Sir Trevor Mallard.
In the panel discussion on the media, Duncan Greive from The Spinoff was the only speaker who brought any insight to bear. The contributions of the other participants – Mike McRoberts from NBR, TVNZ’s Te Aniwa Hurihanganui and moderator Michelle Duff – were shallow, predictable and carefully modulated to elicit murmurs of sympathy and agreement from the full hall.
It would have been a whole lot livelier if Sean Plunket, Michael Laws, Heather du Plessis-Allan, Peter Williams or even Barry Soper had been invited to speak, but that was never going to happen. Book festivals are not noted for their openness to ideas and opinions that challenge prevailing orthodoxies. There are audience sensibilities to be considered.
The preceding session on politics was a lot more rewarding. The subject was the turbulent politics of 2017-2023: the Ardern years. And while there was the same non-threatening quality about the speakers, two of them – Chris Finlayson and Trevor Mallard – at least spoke with the advantage of first-hand, close-up experience. Two journalists, Stuff’s Henry Cooke and the aforementioned Hurihanganui, seemed to be there to make up the numbers and didn’t have a great deal to contribute.
It was a crowd-pleasing session, deftly chaired by Toby Manhire from the Spinoff. Finlayson, nominally the right-wing voice on the panel, was never likely to upset anyone and was presumably invited for exactly that reason. He’s the Left’s favourite conservative: an old-school National Party liberal who quickly earned the crowd’s favour by making it clear he doesn’t have much, if anything, in common with the “Muppet” government (his term) that’s now in power. He remarked that because of the coalition government’s “blowback” on Maori issues, he now feels more like the opposition.
The fact that Finlayson has long been out of politics not only renders him acceptable to left-leaning book festival audiences - since he's no longer in a position of power - but frees him to be frank, all of which makes him ideal for the festival circuit. He’s an engaging raconteur and can be tartly humorous, as when he talked about the many “WTF moments” when National was chaotically in opposition, drolly referring to one former party leader as “Muller the Brief” and to another, Simon Bridges, as a shit.
It wasn’t the first time I’d heard Finlayson say that if he had won the then Labour-held Rongotai electorate, which he contested for National with no expectation of winning and plainly no desire to do so, he would have demanded a recount. It’s a good self-deprecating joke that bears repeating.
For his part, Mallard, having been Speaker during the anti-vax occupation of Parliament's grounds, was plainly concerned with putting a favourable spin on his involvement in that unprecedented brouhaha. He told the audience that a lot of “marginal people” were involved in the protest camp – people who had “gone down rabbit holes”, including mentally ill individuals he knew from his Hutt South electorate; in other words, nut cases and no-hopers.
I wonder if anyone else in the hall felt, as I did, that this was a less than empathetic way for a Labour MP – one who makes much of the fact that he represented the battlers from working-class Wainuiomata – to brush aside the concerns of people who are social casualties. Henry Cooke pointed out that many of the protesters had lost their jobs because of the vaccination mandate (although I don’t recall Stuff taking the trouble to make that clear at the time) and Te Aniwa Hurihanganui acknowledged that they were a “real mix of people”. Mallard justifiably copped a lot of flak for his arrogance and indifference to the protesters’ grievances during the occupation of Parliament’s grounds and I wondered on Saturday whether he had learned anything from the experience. Perhaps not.
He also criticised the police for taking too long to deal with the protest encampment (oh, so it was their fault, to paraphrase Basil Fawlty) and he defended the use of water sprinklers – which were seen, along with the notorious Mallard-instigated Barry Manilow broadcasts, as an attempt to dislodge the occupants – as being necessary to wash away human waste. That was a new one on me and I wondered whether it was a convenient justification post-event.
But the big surprise – one that even had the stranger next to me turning to me with a look of disbelief – was Mallard’s claim that the protest camp was funded by Russia. Yep, that’s right: Mallard reckoned someone paid for millions of dollars – yes, millions – worth of camping equipment that mysteriously turned up in Parliament’s grounds. Protesters suddenly had money to spend and he had no doubt that money came from offshore – Russia, he said.
Whoa! That came completely out of left field. My astonishment was shared by my fellow journalist David McLoughlin, who was also at the session and like me, thought Mallard’s claim was bizarre. No explanation was offered as to why Vladimir Putin should spend millions paying for anti-vax protesters to camp in comfort in the most distant capital in the world. Payback for New Zealand supporting sanctions against Russia following the Ukraine invasion, perhaps? Not totally implausible, but it's the sort of far-fetched scenario that only an over-active imagination might come up with. Neither was it clear why the allegation had never emerged before.
Certainly there was feverish talk in 2022, some of it from the excitable, conspiracy-obsessed Sanjana Hattotuwa of the Disinformation Project (remember them?), about alleged Russian-sourced disinformation. Canada too was identified as a source of malevolent anti-vax propaganda, Jacinda Ardern noting the supposedly incriminating evidence that Canadian flags were being flown in the protest camp. But Russia spending millions on tents and sleeping bags? That was a new one.
Surprisingly, despite two political journalists being on stage with Mallard when he made the allegation, nothing has been reported, at least to my knowledge. Here was a former senior government politician – the Speaker of the House of Representatives and subsequently ambassador to Ireland – alleging malign foreign interference in our domestic affairs. I would have thought there was a story in it (“Russia funded Wellington protest camp, says Mallard”), but apparently not. Perhaps Cooke and Hurihanganui decided it was just Mallard running off at the mouth and not worth taking any further. But previous generations of political reporters, their news antennae twitching furiously, would have been pursuing him for elaboration.
What, if anything, should we make of it? For me it had echoes of former Waitakere mayor and Labour grandee Bob Harvey’s startling allegation in 2000 – similarly unsubstantiated – that the CIA was involved in the death of Norman Kirk, which had even his friend Helen Clark looking sideways at him. Mallard’s claim has the same slightly loony, off-the-wall quality. If he has evidence, he should front up with it. Otherwise people will be justified in concluding it was a case of Mallard in Fantasyland.
Is this another Maiki moment?
ReplyDeleteIt's arrogant Mallard trying to justify his appaĺling arrogance. Truth and reality remember little to this rogue. Remember his absurd desire to bring back the Moas in the hills round Wainui. Just a clown forever on the public gravvy train and knighted for it. Thankfully now he is a complete irrelevance as is the slimy Finlayson.
ReplyDeleteWell said, Karl. To expand on your points about Trevor Mallard's claims about the protest camp at Parliament, like you I found them bizarre. He not only said Russia had funded the camp by providing the money for buying all the tents there, he said he turned on the sprinklers (one night early in the occupation) because the campers were defecating on the lawns and the sprinklers were needed to clean up the grass.
ReplyDeleteUnlike Trevor and most journalists, I walked through the protesters multiple times from the start of the protest to near its end, using my journalistic eye and my camera. My workplace was in Hill Street next to Parliament and I walked between my work and the railway station twice daily, passing through Parliament grounds on the way. At no time did I feel threatened by anyone; I was left totally alone even when taking my many photos.
I found the protesters an interesting mix of ordinary people with a variety of causes. Some were oddball conspiracy theorists who believed Bill Gates had put microchips in the Covid 19 vaccine, but they seemed a smallish minority Many people there were opposed to the compulsory vaccinations that by refusing they had lost their jobs. At least half the protesters were women, many with young children. I loved the "my body my choice" slogans worn by some of the women, as the origin of that slogan was the pro-abortion movement of the 1970s many of the media and other critics of the protesters would have supported. Many were Māori, with the Tino Rangatiratanga and 1834 United Tribes flags flying all over the grounds.
But had they defecated on the lawns? Looking back at my many photos and what I wrote at the time, I doubt many had, if any. I marvelled in writing on the second day of the protest that rows of portaloos had been set up for the occupiers. Why crap in a public space in full view of Trevor looking down from his window high above if you had a private loo to use? The sprinkler night (accompanied by Trevor playing Baby Shark and Barry Manilow over the loudspeakers) was some days after the portaloos arrived. However, I accept Trevor wouldn't have made it up, so he presumably saw at least one person crap in public.
But millions of dollars in Russian-funded brand-new tents from local stores? I think that's highly improbable. I've got dozens of photos of the camp and its dozens and dozens of tents. Looking at them again now, no two tents seem alike. They appear to be a variety of ages, colours and styles, most of them two-person types or slightly bigger. They do not look as if they had come new from a few camping stores. I suspect the campers brought them from their homes, which were all about the country. They would also not have cost anything like a million dollars or more in total. I looked up the prices of such tents yesterday. You can buy them for as little as $58, with $200 to $300 each being common.
Let me close with a paragraph I wrote on Day 18 of the 23-day protest, to give the typical flavour of what I observed:
"The front lawns are occupied almost totally by tents. Food stalls, portaloos, mobile-phone charging stations and more suggest many people here are prepared for a long occupation. But there seem fewer people there now; there are also fewer cars, trucks, campervans and so on blocking the immediate streets. It's what I'd imagine a hippy festival was like (they were before my time really). It is a festive place in the bright sunshine, with singers and music. Strikingly, women (often with young children) are dominant. The causes remain a wide variety from anti-vax to global conspiracies. Meanwhile, in the real world beyond, Russia invaded Ukraine overnight."
Thank you 🫂
DeleteA bit of true history from that era to, minutely, counteract the carefully crafted and utterly false narrative.
Minute beats nada!!
I agree, the session by the media on the media was awful. They had no self awareness at all. I wouldn't be in any hurry to discard the foreign money and interference line that Mallard put forward though, it happens.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMallard saying the sprinklers were to wash away human waste is his historical revisionism of their "rivers of filth" comment at the time.
ReplyDelete"Objectors to these totalitarian methods were publicly branded as hysterical conspiracy theorists and reviled by Ministers of the Crown as ‘rivers of filth’."
https://www.nzcpr.com/a-dangerous-legacy/#:~:text=Objectors%20to%20these%20totalitarian%20methods%20were%20publicly%20branded%20as%20hysterical%20conspiracy%20theorists%20and%20reviled%20by%20Ministers%20of%20the%20Crown%20as%20%E2%80%98rivers%20of%20filth%E2%80%99.
I saw you there before the panel discussion on the State of the Fourth Estate. I was going to say hello, as I had read some of your columns, but you looked miserable. Then, seated from the back of the room, I saw you get up and leave (twice) well before the panel had finished. So I'm not sure how you could make an assessment at all. Afterwards, out of interest, I googled "Karl du Fresne" "Featherston" only to see a blog post from LAST year's festival, slagging off the hard working festival team, the audiences, and the invited guests/panel members. Small tip Karl: if you don't like it, maybe don't turn up? There are enough grey heads at Booktown; nobody would miss yours I'm sure.
ReplyDeleteTo Anonymous at 9.42am: People tell me I always look miserable. It's my default expression. In the days then I played in bands, women would say to me: "Why don't you ever smile?" I can't help it and I'm not aware of it; it's just the way I'm made. My father always frowned in photos and I'm the same. But I'm sure people who know me will say that doesn't reflect my personality. As to why I attended Featherston Booktown, I try to stay open to the possibility that I might hear something that will change my mind on an issue, or at least see it from a different angle. On this occasion I was disappointed, at least in the media session. But I did enjoy the one on politics and if you'd looked at me then, you would have seen me laughing along with everyone else. (Incidentally, I don't believe I ever "slagged off" the volunteers, and wouldn't.) Finally, a personal disclosure: I have a medical condition that makes it very difficult to sit through anything lasting more than an hour or so, if I'm lucky. That explains the first of my two exits. And by the time I made my second, I think I'd heard more than enough to form a judgment.
ReplyDeleteI owe you an apology Karl re: your entering and exiting. I am sorry.
DeleteI wasn't seeking an apology, but thank you anyway.
DeleteI should have added that you weren't to know, so no apology was necessary.
DeleteMore: https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/12-05-2026/trevor-mallard-on-where-labour-went-wrong
ReplyDeleteThe Right Honorable ( as in His Royal Highness Andrew Duke of York) Trevor Mallard was not the only turd in the punchbowl. No one, except ( to my knowledge) Winston Peters came out to speak to any of the protestors. This was the most shameful thing done.
ReplyDeletePresident Richard Nixon visited protestors against the Cambodian incursion, on foot.
The cowards and fools who would not talk to the protestors are the unfolded shits, Mr Mallard the gilded.
The irony of it all. Mallard (and others) entered Politics as a reaction to Muldoon, who would often categorise opponents as Communists, Reds, funded by the shadowy Soviets.
ReplyDeleteNow here he is, in his dotage, categorising those who protested his tyranny as 'funded by Russia'.
Does he ever reflect on his own actions ? Probably not.
So it’s an explain of Trevor Mallard’s strange assertions you’ll be wanting’, is it? (In a southern Irish brogue).
ReplyDeleteAh begorrah, sure ‘n Mr Mallard’s been seen leavin’ (insert name of your favourite Dublin pub, or default to Ward’s Irish House, Piccadilly) at two in the morrrnin’ and pissing against the wall alongside Mrs Cadogan’s coal cellar hatch.
Sure ‘n wasn’t he arrested by the garda and claim’n he’d been shot in the leg by a Russian agent out to poison him….
So he was….
(Anyone interested in the brogue refer to character Mrs Cadagon — prn. Kay-da-Gawn — in “The Irish RM” TV series.)
Jesus of Nazareth changed the course of history with just such a bunch of chappies as villified by Hon Trevor Mallard.
ReplyDeleteFascinating thanks Karl & also the comments, as per usual.
ReplyDeleteI was once told 'cheer up, it might never happen' in a workplace & I concluded I can have that 'resting bitch-face' when thoughts are elsewhere. I think it gets bitchier with age, haha.