Panel Discussions
hosted By Susan Wood

In response to DAME SUSAN DEVOY interview

SUSAN WOOD
Raymond Miller, Fran O’Sullivan and Gregory Fortuin. Well, Gregory, of course, you have held that office. Dame Susan was very strong on Winston Peters, very strong on those Nisbett cartoons. Does the office, though, need more teeth to actually make a difference?

GREGORY FORTUIN - Former Race Conciliator
Yeah, well, firstly just let me comment on Dame Susan, and I’ve publicly defended her for two reasons, and the first one is that people out there tend to judge by screaming headlines and 20-second sound bites, and Dame Susan was judged even before she was in the job. And, secondly, one of the points she made was that she can appeal to mainstream. And I think, you know, there’s no race relations school where we go and come out with a degree and now I’m the Race Relations Conciliator. So you need people for the time, and minorities and vulnerable groups, because of adversity, leaders are born who can be quite aggressive. I think at this point in time, it’s important that we do have somebody using her word, from mainstream who can appeal to mainstream. And mainstream in NZ, which still makes up 75 per cent, are not going to respond by being shouted at or having the finger wagged at them or having us trying to embarrass or shame them. Dame Susan, I think, is ideally placed to inspire them to a position of more inclusiveness. And so I think that we have a right person for the moment.

SUSAN And you think inspiration will work? You don’t think she actually needs any more, sort of, legislative power to make a difference?

GREGORY If you talk legislative power, I think the courts have set the benchmark and the threshold at the right place, where we’ve said we have to show detriment. Although with the cartoons, I would actually take them to court, because why should I wait for there to be a riot to then say this has then led to detriment? I would actually want to test whether there was potential for-

SUSAN So if you had had that job, you would have actually acted on it? Because Dame Susan’s was that it didn’t meet the threshold.

GREGORY Yeah, and for me, I’m saying I agree with the courts that the threshold says you have to prove detriment. I would like to go to court and prove potential detriment, because it’s too easy, you know, the stigmatising of segments of the population, etc, and then we say everybody in that group is like this. I think she took the right approach. She said that it was offensive, and she said that she though it- But I would actually want to test whether the courts are saying I should wait to show detriment. I actually want to show potential detriment.

SUSAN Raymond, Winston Peters. She was very strong on Winston Peters. She said, ‘Yes, I probably will be getting involved at some point.’ From Mr Peters’ perspective, though, what is behind what he saying?

RAYMOND MILLER - Political Scientist
Well, of course, we probably wouldn’t be having this conversation right now were it not for the cup of tea enjoyed by John Key and John Banks enjoyed at the last election. (ALL CHUCKLE) Because, quite frankly, that gave Winston Peters the opportunity to raise his party in the polls to a point where they reached the 5 per cent threshold, and that’s why they’re in Parliament right now. This is vintage Winston Peters. He’s a populous leader, and populous leaders mobilise resentment and particularly around election time. And what he sees right now is that he is in a critically important position to be able to help National or help Labour to form a government after the next election. If we go back to 1996, he did precisely- In fact, he’s done this sort of thing at seven elections now. He’s been one of the most dominant figures in NZ politics for good or bad. And, I mean, the point is he is looking toward the next election, and he can see that on issues such as race or the political elite controlling power or whatever he chooses, he’s able to mobilise resentment. It may not be a large number of New Zealanders, but as long as he gets to 5 or 7 per cent, he’s home and hosed, and he’s able to support either National or Labour. And, believe me, he’s not going to tell us which one it will be till after the election.

SUSAN Fran you do have to give him points for that. He is the master at picking the issues that just resonate with a certain section of NZ.

FRAN O’SULLIVAN - NZ Herald Columnist
Yes, he does, but when the facts are untrue and they’re lies, I think it’s really beholden (GESTURES TO GREGORY) and, frankly, on the Race Relations Commissioner, uh, Conciliator, and I guess there’s a difference between conciliating and actually being a commissioner, but I think, for God’s sake, why don’t they put together a report and fact check everything he says and issue it, destroy him by facts? Because he uses hyperbole, he has not always told the truth, and I think also the media gives his oxygen at times when they shouldn’t.

RAYMOND Yeah, I don’t think he’ll take a blind bit of notice of whatever Susan Devoy decides to do. But nevertheless, I do think that, in a way, there needs to be a focus on how offensive and how hurtful the things he is saying to particular segments of our community.

SUSAN Panel, thank you.

ENDS

© Scoop Media