Garrett David: General Debate 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Garrett David: General Debate 
[Sitting date: 18 November 2009. Volume:659;Page:7785. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) 
: 
 Recently Mr Hone Harawira wrote an email spelling out how he feels about white people. The email’s contents are well known far and wide. But I want to talk not about Mr Harawira but about the role of the Race Relations Commissioner both in regard to that recent incident and in general. 
Mr Joris de Bres is quite sure about his role; he says his hands are tied. He says Mr Harawira is entitled to the fundamental right of freedom of speech and he was exercising that. I am inclined to agree with the commissioner on that point. However this raises the question of why we have a Race Relations Commissioner in the first place. Perhaps it is to intervene when someone says something that de Bres does not like because his belief in freedom of speech seems to be very selective. 
When Paul Holmes made a comment about a “cheeky darkie” a few years ago the commissioner was very quick to get involved. Holmes’ supposed freedom of speech on that occasion was less important than what he said. Holmes was forced to write a letter of apology to Kofi Annan—the target of his comment—among other touchy-feely “bridge-building” exercises. Holmes’ original public apology was deemed insincere by Mr de Bres so he was forced to make a better one. Members of the public will have made their own judgement regarding Mr Harawira’s apology and Mr de Bres’ claims that he cannot get involved. 
Perhaps we can find the explanation for this double standard in 2002. That was the year the commissioner gave a speech that described European colonisation of New Zealand as “a sorry litany of cultural vandalism”. He then went on to compare colonisation in New Zealand with the Taliban’s destruction of 3rd century Buddhist statues in Afghanistan. Did he apologise for any of that? Oh no! He refused to say sorry despite a massive public uproar. 
And he is not the only one. Such questionable behaviour has been seen before in his office. Mr Wally Hirsch an earlier Race Relations Conciliator as he then was was asked to act after activist Hana te Hemara told young Maori to “kill a white and become a hero”. Mr Hirsch’s reaction was to demand an apology from a Sunday 
newspaper 
for repeating those comments. All those characters are entitled like the rest of us to freedom of speech. The problem many people have is that taxpayers have been paying for people like Hirsch and de Bres to espouse these double standards for more than 20 years. So I return to my original question of why we need a Race Relations Commissioner. 
Race-based discrimination is already illegal; there are already mechanisms in place to deal with it. The most important mechanism though which is more powerful than any court of law or tribunal is the court of public opinion. The old saying that “sunlight is the best disinfectant” springs to mind. The public can recognise stupidity ignorance and prejudice and judge people accordingly. People will judge those of us here on the quality of the ideas we bring and the values we espouse and practise. When Holmes made his comments he lost a lot of public support. Mitsubishi withdrew its sponsorship from his TV show and he was tried by the public and found wanting. As an elected member of this House Mr Harawira will have to face the judgment of the electorate sooner or later as we all do in one way or another. 
But what about our Race Relations Commissioner? He is not elected by the people; his is a political appointment. He may have suffered a backlash for his Taliban comments but he is still there at the taxpayers’ expense blundering his way around exercising double standards and determining when free speech can be practised without penalty and when it cannot. It is absurd to pay someone to proclaim that racism is wrong. We all—at least most of us—know this already and have for a long time. Absurdity is one thing but sinister motives are altogether another. The evidence seems to be that not just this guy but race relations commissioners in general come with their own agendas. Harawira and de Bres like the rest of us are perfectly entitled to hold and express their views— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: I regret to advise the member that his time has expired.