Government Faith Initiative Misaligned, Say Groups Who Declined To Join
On Tuesday July 22, a government-sponsored 'harmony initiative' will be signed by some Muslim and Jewish groups. The initiative originated with government recognition that the consequences of Israel's actions in Gaza are impacting Jewish and Muslim communities in Aotearoa, as well as the wider community.
While agreeing with that statement of purpose, other Muslim and Jewish groups have chosen to decline the invitation. They believe that the council, as formulated, is misaligned with its aims.
'Gaza is not a religious issue, and this has never been a conflict between our faiths,' Dr. Abdul Monem, a co-founder of ICONZ explains. 'In Gaza we see a massive violation of international law with horrifying humanitarian consequences. We place Israel's annihilating campaign against Gaza, the complicity of states and economies at the centre of our understanding—not religion. The first action to address the suffering in Gaza and ameliorate its effects here in Aotearoa must be government action. Our government needs to comply with international courts and act on this humanitarian calamity. That does not require a new council.'
The impetus for this initiative clearly linked international events with their local impacts, but the document does not mention Gaza among the council's priorities. Signatories are not required to acknowledge universal human rights, nor the courts which have ruled so decisively and created obligations for the New Zealand government. Social distress is disconnected from its immediate cause.
The council is therefore open to parties who do not recognise the role of international humanitarian law in Palestine, nor the full human and political rights of their fellow New Zealanders.
Marilyn Garson, co-founder of Alternative Jewish Voices elaborates, 'It has broad implications to overlook our rights and international humanitarian law. As currently formulated, the council includes no direct Palestinian representation. That's not good enough. How can there be credible discussion of Aotearoa's ethnic safety—let alone advocacy for international action— without Palestinians?
'Law, human rights and the dignity of every person's life are not opinions. They are human entitlements and global agreements to which Aotearoa has bound itself. No person in Aotearoa should have to enter a room—especially a council created under government auspices—knowing that their fundamental rights will not be upheld. No one should have to begin by asking for that which is theirs.'
The groups outside this new council wholeheartedly wish to live in a harmonious society, but for them it is unclear why a new council of Jews and Muslims should represent the path to harmony.
'Advocacy that comes from faith can be a powerful force. We already work with numerous interfaith community initiatives, some formed at government initiative and waiting to really find their purpose,' says Dr Muhammad Sajjad Naqvi, President of ICONZ. 'Those existing channels include more of the parties needed to address local threats, including Christian nationalism like that of Destiny Church. Perhaps government should resource those rather than starting something new.'
The groups who declined to join the council have warm and enduring relationships with FIANZ and Dayenu, who will take seats at this council table. All of the groups share common goals, but not this path.
More information about the organisations:
ICONZ is a National Umbrella Organization for Kiwi Shia Muslims for their unified voice. It is an organisation that unites all Muslims who are living in New Zealand and follow the school of the Ahlulbayt (PBUT) under ONE umbrella. ICONZ was established by Kiwi Muslims who have been born in New Zealand or born to migrants who chose New Zealand to be their home. For more, see www.iconz.org
Alternative Jewish Voices is a collective of Aotearoa Jews. It works for Jewish pluralism and anti-racism, and supports the work of Palestinians who seek liberation grounded in law and our equal human rights. For more, see www.ajv.org.nz
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
an hour ago
- Otago Daily Times
A prescription for dismay, disbelief
Everything is going up. The costs of butter, milk and cheese, fruit and vegetables, rents, rates and electricity are rising, some of them faster than belief. Annual inflation has lifted to 2.7%, according to the consumer price index. There can be no doubt New Zealanders are grappling with the escalating cost of living. The government says it is all about cutting costs for Kiwis, something we have seen with its policies and its energetic drive to cut the public service and put thousands of skilled workers out of jobs. However, despite its much-vaunted approach to trim things, some of which didn't need much pruning, the coalition is still releasing big pots of money for projects which have its favour and tickle its fancy, or the fancies of its cadres. As a consequence of that favouritism, something else is going up. Advice be blowed, let's have a third medical school in New Zealand at a time when the government has been doing everything it can to minimise the importance of, and squeeze the life out of, Dunedin's desperately needed new hospital. Until Monday afternoon's announcement that the University of Waikato's persistent and somewhat personal bid for a medical school had been approved, there had been perhaps a hope that surely common sense might prevail and the government wouldn't, after all, go along with the proposal. Such sanguine thinking, however, was always held in check by the knowledge that this government has already shown several times that logic, facts and evidence to the contrary will not stop it supporting something which it is hell-bent on delivering for its followers. At the heart of Waikato's proposal was something few could disagree with — that the country urgently needs to do something about the state and delivery of rural healthcare. Access to timely and effective medical services for those communities has been a big concern for many years, one which has only continued to grow. But does it take a spanking new medical school costing several hundred million dollars, and growing, to ensure rural targets will be met? No. There is no reason why the medical schools at the University of Otago and the University of Auckland could not have been funded to train more doctors at a significantly lower cost than launching a new school, a point they clearly made to the government. Even the Treasury advised against the wisdom of proceeding with this pet project, as did the Ministry of Education and the Tertiary Education Commission, warning that the expense, the duplication and the logistical challenges raised red flags for them. In spite of that, the government and Waikato University forged on regardless. Health Minister Simeon Brown announced a development with costs which have changed significantly from those pledged by the National Party before the last election. Then, National said it would provide $280 million for the new school and the university would need to find $100m. Now, the government will disburse $82.85m towards it, and Waikato will have to stump up more than $150m. The final cost, of course, is bound to be higher than current expectations. A lot has been written about links between National and the university and its vice-chancellor Neil Quigley, and also with consultant Steven Joyce, a former National government minister. Without getting too deeply into that, we are concerned that this is little more than an overt example of pork-barrel politics. We are also troubled and disappointed, yet again, at the lack of transparency around the government's decision-making, particularly over health matters. Whenever it makes pronouncements which it knows are likely to be contentious, the accompanying documents seem to take ages to surface — if they ever do. That in itself probably speaks volumes about the consideration of the evidence. It's difficult to stay calm and reasoned and attempt to rise above the feeling this government cares not a jot for the South. When one sees what a charmed life this Waikato proposal has apparently had through the coalition's approval process, and compare that with the absolute shambles it has promulgated with the new Dunedin hospital and its obvious level of disinterest in the project, it is hard to remain philosophical. Once again, this government has let us down.
1News
6 hours ago
- 1News
Healthworkers want MPs to waive private healthcare while in office
A group of healthworkers — including specialists, GPs, nurses and paramedics — have signed an open letter to MPs asking them to waive private healthcare during their time in office. Politicians making critical decisions about the public health system system — to cut funding, defer maintenance, or implement restructures — should not be allowed to "insulate" themselves against the consequences, they write. Their prescription? All MPs — and the families of Cabinet ministers — should rely on the public system. The group's spokesperson, Northland cardiologist Marcus Lee, said the public deserved leaders who were so committed to public healthcare that they were willing to stake their family's wellbeing on it. ADVERTISEMENT "Essentially, we want fair and transparent leadership with integrity. We want people who have skin in the game." The test was whether politicians were "comfortable and confident" enough to rely on the public health system for their families, he said. "If it's good for them, it's good for us. If it's not good enough for them, it shouldn't be good enough for anyone." Nicola Willis and Simeon Brown in 2020 (Source: Getty) The letter asks MPs to consider questions including: Would I be comfortable with my child waiting six months for this procedure? Is this emergency department adequate for my elderly parent? Are these staffing levels sufficient for my family's safety? Prime Minister Christopher Luxon did not believe having private health insurance meant he was out of touch with the problems besetting the public system. ADVERTISEMENT "I think we're well aware of the challenges in the healthcare system, which is why we've put a record amount of investment in," he said. "We inherited again a botched merger that just created a layer of bureaucracy and we've put the money in, we're hiring more people, we've got clarity on the targets. "We're starting to see some stabilisation of those targets and in some cases improvements on those health targets. "But we now need a high performing Health NZ, and that's what we're fixated on." Labour's health spokesperson Dr Ayesha Verrall said MPs with private health insurance were "betting their own money against the public system". "Ministers of Health should place a bet on the public health system succeeding and meeting New Zealanders' needs. Having private health insurance is a sign that you're not willing to place that bet." Labour health spokesperson Ayesha Verrall. (Source: 1News) ADVERTISEMENT Labour Party leader Chris Hipkins — a former health minister — took a less hard-line approach. "I got health insurance 20 or 30 years ago as a union membership benefit and I've kept it since then, although I'm fortunate I haven't really had to use it. "I'm not going to begrudge people who have it. But I want to make sure that, if you haven't, you still get the standard of care you deserve." Health Minister Simeon Brown said he did not have private health insurance but he would not impose that choice on anyone else. "Ultimately there's a large number of New Zealanders who use health insurance, that's a fantastic part of our health system, and ultimately people make individual choices." Brown said his focus was on timely access to quality healthcare for New Zealanders, which included making better use of the private sector. "We will work with private hospitals to unlock capacity, publicly funded [patients] but in private hospitals to speed up access." ADVERTISEMENT Finance Minister Nicola Willis and Education Minister Erica Stanford both had private health insurance. Mental Health Minister Matt Doocey did not, saying he is "happy using the public health system". Other National MPs were more coy. Minister of Climate Change, Energy, Local Government and Revenue, Simon Watts: "I won't answer that, it's a personal question." Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector, Disability Issues, Social Development and Employment, Louise Upston: "That's not a question in the public interest." Bay of Plenty MP Tom Rutherford: "I'm not interested in talking about that. It's not necessary for people to know — I don't go out into the general street and ask people about their health insurance." Green MP Ricardo Menéndez March said it was "quite rich" to see politicians not being worried about the state of the public healthcare system, when they had the means to pay for private insurance or private care. ADVERTISEMENT "That is why we are really concerned with the Government's flirtation with privatising more of our public healthcare system, which will ultimately see our poorest less able to access basic healthcare." For some Labour MPs, it was a matter of principle. Kelston MP Carmel Sepuloni: "I believe, as politicians, if we're going to be working to ensure the healthcare system works for everyone, we should be reliant on it too." Nelson MP Rachel Boyack: "My father was a public health chief executive so I've always had a strong belief in the public health system, and that the health system should be available to all New Zealanders, and that includes me as an MP." Mt Albert MP Helen White could understand why some people opted to have it, but it was not for her: "I just think that I should live by my principles. Also I probably couldn't afford it. I know I'm on a decent salary, but it's a lot of money." Mt Albert MP Helen White says she probably couldn't afford health insurance. (Source: 1News) Labour MP Ginny Andersen said health insurance was not in her budget: "By the time I pay my mortgage and my insurance and my rates and feed my children." ADVERTISEMENT ACT Party leader David Seymour, who is also the Associate Health Minister, said the healthworkers made "an interesting argument" — but, in his view, MPs should come from a broad range of backgrounds. "I don't think you should have to fit into a sort of ideological straight-jacket to do that." The healthworkers behind the letter said MPs who refused to give up their private safety net would be revealing "exactly what they really think about our healthcare system". "We'll be watching to see who has the courage to put their family where their policies are."
Scoop
11 hours ago
- Scoop
Almost A Third Of NZ Households Face Energy Hardship – Reform Has To Go Beyond Cheaper Off-Peak Power
The spotlight is again on New Zealand's energy sector, with a group of industry bodies and independent retailers pushing for a market overhaul, saying the sector was 'broken' and 'driving up the cost of living'. The Commerce Commission and the Electricity Authority has already established a joint task force, after prices peaked in 2024, to investigate ways to improve the performance of the electricity market. The Authority recently announced new rules requiring larger electricity retailers to offer lower off-peak power prices from next year. The government is also expected to make further announcements on the sector. But the question is whether these changes will do enough to help New Zealanders live affordably in dry and warm homes. Some 30% of households face energy hardship. This means they struggle to afford or access sufficient energy to meet their daily needs. Caused by a combination of poor housing quality, high energy costs and the specific needs of vulnerable residents, energy hardship can lead to serious health issues and high hospital admission costs. We know from our own research over the past 18 years that having power disconnected can negatively affect health and wellbeing. People have told us that not being able to afford enough power to keep warm made them more likely to get sick and exacerbated existing health conditions. They described mental distress from unaffordable electricity and the threat of disconnection. Research participants used words such as 'stressed', 'anxious' or 'depressed'. They also spoke about having to choose between food and power bills. If power is disconnected, there can be additional costs from losing food in the fridge and freezer, as well as the problem of paying disconnection and reconnection fees when people already can't afford the bill. What's driving up power bills? In 2024, a 'dry year' that increased the value of hydro generation, combined with lower-than-usual wind and declining supply of gas, resulted in wholesale electricity price spikes. But these winter shortages aren't the only factor pushing up power bills. Electricity bills reflect several costs along the supply chain from generation to getting the electricity to the sockets in our homes. A new regulatory period for lines charges from April 2025 increased bills by $10 to $25 per month, depending on where you live. At the same time, low fixed daily charges are being phased out. This means the cost of being connected to the grid is the same no matter how much power is used. It is the poorest New Zealanders who are being hardest hit. The lowest income households spend a bigger proportion of their income on power compared to higher income households. Having electricity prices increase faster than inflation will put even more families at risk. The average household electricity bill was up 8.7% in May 2025 compared to June 2024. According to a recent Consumer NZ survey, 20% of respondents said they struggled to pay their power bill in the past year. Tackling hardship The new Consumer Care Obligations might help reduce some of the risks. Power companies must now comply with these obligations when working with households struggling to pay their bills, are facing disconnection or have someone in the home who is medically dependent on electricity. If households feel their power company is not meeting these obligations, they can contact Utilities Disputes, a free independent electricity and gas complaint resolution service, or the Electricity Authority. But multiple changes are needed to address the different parts of the energy hardship problem. Improving home energy efficiency through schemes like Warmer Kiwi Homes is crucial. Introducing an Energy Performance Rating for houses would make it easier for home buyers and renters to know how much it will cost to power a home before they move in. This would also help target energy hardship support. The government can also make electricity more affordable by supporting not-for-profit power companies. Another good move would be to help more households to install rooftop solar by providing access to long-term low-interest finance. Lower prices during off-peak hours are a good start. But it is clear the sheer size and complexity of the problems mean government action, with community and industry collaboration, needs to go beyond slightly cheaper electricity when there is less demand. Disclosure statement Kimberley O'Sullivan receives funding from a Rutherford Discovery Fellowship administered by the Royal Society Te Apārangi, the Health Research Council, the Ministry of Business, Employment, and Innovation, and Lotteries Health Research.
