Invercargill Council votes against cutting ties with companies that operate in illegal Israeli settlements
Photo:
RNZ / Nate McKinnon
Invercargill City Council has voted against cutting ties with companies that operate in
illegal Israeli settlements
on occupied Palestinian land.
On Tuesday afternoon, councillors debated whether to change to the council's procurement policy, following a proposal brought by local residents and members of Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa.
Similar spending bans have already been adopted by Nelson City Council, Christchurch City Council and Environment Canterbury, targeting companies listed by the United Nations Human Rights Council.
Invercargill City Council was split down the middle - with six councillors in favour and six against - but Mayor Nobby Clark's casting vote ended the debate.
He said the council needed to balance its ethical commitment to the United Nations with its responsibility to be frugal in procurement decisions.
Councillor Allan Arnold was also opposed, arguing that such a move wasn't in the council's remit.
"We're the Invercargill City Council. Our job is to look after the water assets, infrastructure of Invercargill, and look after the people. This is far, far beyond our scope," he said.
"We're here to look after our community in Invercargill. I can't understand why this is something we're looking at, at all."
However, earlier, councillor Lesley Soper said taking a stand on ethical issues was an important part of being part of the world community.
"We're not some isolated island, or some isolated council. Other councils have already taken the decision to make this inclusion on very valid grounds," she said.
She noted the United Nations database would have made it easy to identify which companies to exclude.
Councillor Darren Ludlow also wanted to see the council taking action.
"As pointless as it may seem, there is a point. And that's leadership," he said.
Earlier this week, the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa said it would also present a proposal to Environment Southland, calling for a boycott of companies operating in illegal Israeli settlements.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
36 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Playful or harmful? David Seymour's posts raise questions about what's OK to say online
By Kevin Veale* of David Seymour's claim he was being "playful" while using his platform to criticise individuals follows a pattern of targeting critics while deflecting criticism of his own behaviour. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii Deputy Prime Minister and ACT Party leader David Seymour says he is being "playful" and having "fun" with his "Victim of the Day" social media posts, targeting opponents of his Regulatory Standards Bill . But the posts - which have singled out academics and MPs who have criticised or made select committee submissions against the bill, accusing them of suffering from "Regulatory Standards Derangement Syndrome" - have now led to at least two official complaints to Cabinet. Wellington City mayor Tory Whanau has alleged they amounted to "online harassment and intimidation" against academics and were in breach of the Cabinet Manual rules for ministers. According to the manual, ministers should "behave in a way that upholds, and is seen to uphold, the highest ethical and behavioural standards. This includes exercising a professional approach and good judgement in their interactions with the public, staff, and officials, and in all their communications, personal and professional". Academic Anne Salmond, one of those targeted by the posts, has also alleged Seymour breached the behaviour standards set out by the manual. According to Salmond: "This "Victim of the Day" campaign does not match this description. It is unethical, unprofessional and potentially dangerous to those targeted. Debate is fine, online incitements are not". Dame Anne Salmond says the posts are unethical, unprofessional and potentially dangerous to those targeted. Photo: Claire Concannon / RNZ Seymour's claim he was being "playful" while using his platform to criticise individuals follows a pattern of targeting critics while deflecting criticism of his own behaviour. For example, in 2022 Seymour demanded an apology from Māori Party co-leader Rawiri Waititi, after Waititi earlier joked about poisoning Seymour with karaka berries. At the time, Seymour said: "I'm genuinely concerned that the next step is that some slightly more radical person doesn't think it's a joke." But the same year, Seymour defended Tauranga by-election candidate Cameron Luxton's joke that the city's commission chair Anne Tolley was like Marie Antoinette and should be beheaded. In 2023, Seymour joked about abolishing the Ministry of Pacific Peoples: "In my fantasy, we'd send a guy called Guy Fawkes in there and it'd be all over, but we'll probably have to have a more formal approach than that." Māori researcher and advocate Tina Ngata criticised Seymour's argument that he was joking: "Calling it a joke does not make it any less white-supremacist. What it does is point to the fact that in David Seymour's mind, violence against Pacific peoples is so normalised, that he can make a joke out of it but he's not any person is he? He is a politician, a leader of a political party, with a significant platform and the means and opportunities to advance that normalised violence into policy and legislation." An analysis of Seymour's recent social media posts by researcher Sanjana Hattotuwa at the Disinformation Project has argued they have the potential to lead to online harassment, saying they are: "designed to silence opposition to the controversial Regulatory Standards Bill whilst maintaining plausible deniability about the resulting harassment, harms and hate. The "Victims of the Day" posts about Anne Salmond and former Green leader Metiria Turei were textbook examples of "technology-facilitated gender-based violence and online misogyny", Hattotuwa argued. And the use of the term "derangement" framed academic criticism as a mental disorder - undermining expertise. As my own research shows, online harassment and violent rhetoric can raise the chances of real-world violence. Since the early 2000s, researchers have used the term "stochastic terrorism" to describe a way of indirectly threatening people. Nobody is specifically told "harm these people", so the person putting them at risk has plausible deniability. Seymour is already aware of these dynamics, as shown by his demand for an apology from Waititi over the karaka berry poisoning "joke". Tusiata Avia Photo: The Arts Foundation Te Tumu Toi Seymour and ACT have long presented themselves as champions of free speech: "Freedom of expression is one of the most important values our society has. We can only solve our most pressing problems in an open society in which free thought and open enquiry are encouraged." By going after critics of the Regulatory Standards Bill, Seymour may only be ridiculing speech he does not like. But he has taken things further in the past. In 2023, he criticised poet Tusiata Avia for her poem Savage Coloniser Pantoum , which Seymour said was racist and would incite racially motivated violence. He made demands that the government withdraw NZ$107,280 in taxpayer money from the 2023 Auckland Arts Festival in response. ACT list MP Todd Stephenson also threatened to remove Creative NZ funding after Avia received a Prime Minister's Award for Literary Achievement. Avia said she received death threats after ACT's criticism of her work. The more serious purpose of saying something contentious is "just a joke" is to portray those who disagree as humourless and not deserving to be taken seriously. ACT's "Victim of the Day" campaign does something similar in attempting to discredit serious critics of the Regulatory Standards Bill by mocking them. But in the end, we have to be alert to the potential political double standard: harmless jokes for me, but not for you. Dangerous threats from you, but not from me. * Kevin Veale is Senior Lecturer in Media Studies, part of the Digital Cultures Laboratory in the School of Humanities, Media, and Creative Communication, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa - Massey University.
RNZ News
36 minutes ago
- RNZ News
David Seymour rejects claim Regulatory Standards Bill 'set up for his mates'
Labour MP Willie Jackson believed the bill would invite "big business" into the country and take away "community input". Photo: VNP / Phil Smith Labour MP Willie Jackson says he does not "acknowledge", "believe" or "trust" that the Regulatory Standards Bill won't give corporations more power, despite a clause saying it would not impose legal obligations. But ACT Leader David Seymour said Jackson was wrong and "muddying" the waters. In recent days, Seymour HAS made a series of social media posts singling out prominent opponents of the Bill, and accusing them of suffering from "Regulatory Standards Derangement Syndrome ." His targets included Jackson along with academics such as Dame Anne Salmond, Dr George Laking, and Metiria Turei. Wellington mayor Tory Whanau accused Seymour of setting a "dangerous precedent" for how dissenting voices were treated, and laid a formal complaint with the Prime Minister. On Monday, standing in for Christopher Luxon at a post-Cabinet press conference, Seymour dismissed the criticism, and accused the opponents of the bill of making incorrect statements. Speaking to media, Jackson said the bill was set up for "David Seymour's mates" and would invite "big business" into New Zealand while taking away "community input". "It's shocking, the way that he's just incorporated ACT values, libertarian values, at the expense of community values, Māaori values, New Zealand values, it's a shocking bill," Jackson said. Clause 24 of the bill stated that the Act "does not confer a legal right or impose a legal obligation on any person that is enforceable in a court of law". Asked if he acknowledged the bill would not impose legal obligations on people, Jackson said he still did not believe the bill nor Seymour, its architect. "You can tell me what you think. I'll tell you what I think, and that he wants to bring in Act libertarian values. He wants to bring in corporations on boards. He wants to ignore communities. He wants to ignore Māori. He wants to ignore your average New Zealander. "No, don't acknowledge it. Don't believe it. Don't trust it." Jackson said. Speaking to reporters, Seymour said the bill was very clear. David Seymour introduced the Regulatory Standards Bill. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii "It requires makers of laws to be transparent to Parliament what their law does and who it affects." "But it is also explicit that the regulatory standards bill... says that it does not give anybody any additional legal rights." Seymour said people "muddying the water" with misinformation were either not capable of understanding the law or deliberately making mischief. "It's not up to Willie Jackson to interpret the law. It's up to the courts, and I suspect that when they see in black and white, there are no additional legal rights." "The purpose of this law is to increase transparency to Parliament.... the good news is, I don't think Willie Jackson is going to become a judge anytime soon." Seymour said. Seymour said he had taken advice about the "likely" interpretation by the courts and was satisfied there would be a strong guide for lawmakers. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
36 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Shane Jones questions place of regional government
local council 40 minutes ago "What is the point of regional government?" That's the question the regional development minister posed to a meeting of local government officials last week. Regional Development Minister Shane Jones spoke to Alexa Cook.
