CHANGE OF TACK FOR NEW ZEALAND LOYAL

As stated by Liz Gunn in a broadcast on 23^rd July, the New Zealand Loyal Party, formed last year to contest the 2023 election, will be de-registered. Liz informed us in that report that the old organization would become the New Zealand Loyal's People's Movement and would have a new leader. A day later the name of this leader was disclosed, and he is John Armstrong, former NZL candidate for Howick and Botany.

John is a very capable and likeable man, and in the interview he made with Liz on 24^th he gave good reasons for a difference in tactics away from politics and towards multiple community transformations. Also, the changes are quite in accordance with what I argued in two recent Substack articles, written on June 19^th and May 24^th, where I opined that to be a force for the good in New Zealand, NZ Loyal should really be working outside of the political arena.

But the way that this has been decided is not satisfying to all members, and a few things need to be cleared up before some members can feel this is the right step.

For a start, is it in harmony with NZ Loyal’s own Constitution? This document which is fourteen pages in length, should be the “rulebook” by which all significant decisions are made. NZ Loyal was always a grassroots movement, and the Constitution recognizes that decisions as important as the dissolution of the party cannot be made by any Executive group alone. At such a time, in order to see that the party’s course be charted according to the wishes of its members, it is necessary to take a look at this founding document of the NZ Loyal Constitution.

For a start, under “principles”, we have four objectives for which NZL is established. These are to:

● Promote and support policies which reflect the Core Philosophies of the Party.

● Promote and manage the goals of the Party, including the selection of and support for List and Electorate Constituency candidates for election to the New Zealand House of Representatives.

● Establish and maintain a political party structure of national infrastructure to achieve these objectives.

● Ensure prudential and fiscal oversight of all monies which comes into the possession of the Party.

In her interview with John, Liz makes the valid points that the New Zealand electoral system is corrupt and that the Electoral Commission has been incredibly difficult to deal with. That may be so, but what if the majority of members were to believe that the next election needs to be contested and still wished to have a vehicle to do this? Must the political portion of the party be disbanded completely or could it go on, perhaps in an altered form? Can a few individuals make that decision without consultation with other members of the party?

No, not according to the Constitution! This defines at the outset how party de-registation would need to happen through a “Special Conference, called by the Board for the purpose of considering a resolution to wind up the Party.”

It is the NZL Board who “manages or supervises the affairs of NZL, and has all the powers necessary for managing, directing, and supervising the management of NZL” The Party Leader was Liz Gunn for the 2023 NZ Election, and she should have been either reappointed or succeeded by a new leader at an AGM after that. This is specifically stated in Article 7. Yet to date no AGM has been called, despite members asking for this to happen.

As well as Annual General Meetings there are “Special General Meetings” (SGMs). Concerning these, the Constitution states that:

“The Board may convene a SGM whenever it thinks fit. Party members may also call a SGM by a petition to the Board of not less than 50 members. The petition will include agenda items for the SGM.”

The Constitution has clear rules for the calling of an Annual General Meeting or a Special General Meeting of the Members, how many days warning needs to be given, how often the meetings should be held, who can attend and how voting shall take place to ratify decisions. 

The Board has the responsibility to call for an AGM within a year of the registration of the party. As this took place on 28^th August 2023, the Board still has plenty of time to make arrangements for this AGM.

For an issue as serious as the winding up of the party and the disposal of its assets, the Constitution is quite specific:

“Article 13: Dissolution

1. The Members may decide, by a resolution passed with the affirmative vote of at least 80% of the votes cast by Members voting at a Special Conference convened for that purpose resolve that the Party shall be wound up. (My emphasis.)

2. A notice of any resolution passed under shall be sent to the Electoral Commission.”

These procedures need to be followed. Liz in conversation with John decries various ills that have taken place and says some of it is a kind of “tribalism” which she hopes “can all go away now.” There are very few party members who wish ill on Liz or on NZ Loyal, but we are an obstreperous lot and have different opinions on a lot of things, and the one saving grace in such a situation is to hold to protocols and rules of procedure that are designed to allow the will of the people to be heard. If the party is to be wound up, this must be done properly.

It is to be hoped that the Party Executive will hear the member’s voices, and the present situation can be turned into something that brings benefit to all through healthy and necessary discussion. In first becoming a political party, the democratic principle was accepted. When it becomes a reality, the New Zealand Loyal's People's Movement can follow more Republican principles where leadership revolves around those seen as most knowledgeable in different departments. But in the sphere of rights, it is “one man one vote” and democracy must hold sway.

My first article pointed out the need for there to be an AGM and gave suggestions as to how this could happen:

Liz, ... since NZ Loyal was formed, there hasn’t been a national conference as yet. Maybe we start with local meetings, and you come to as many of those as you would like. ... After the local meetings, we can then meet somewhere central as a national movement and have our very first Annual General Meeting. And there we will hammer out our next steps...

Unfortunately, at the time this was ignored, but the need for an AGM or an SGM cannot be denied longer. A few local meetings (perhaps two in the South Island and two in the North) could be held in preparation for the national AGM. Liz and John’s resolution for the future of the party could then be properly digested and debated by members up and down New Zealand. If the Board will not call this AGM, it will not be hard to find 50 members who see the need for an SGM and ask for this to happen – something that the Board would, of course, need to respond to.

Whatever is ultimately decided, a few at the top cannot call the shots without giving the rest of us opportunity to respond. As well as being quite counter to how Kiwis like to do things, it also breaks the rules of our own Constitution. Although my first article suggested NZ Loyal could do more work outside of the system than in it, I was not suggesting the political route be dropped forever. If there are those who wish to keep to it, this is their party, set up for that purpose, and they should be able to continue.

Much of the enthusiasm at the party’s founding came because people wanted to have a party that would represent their deepest concerns in the election. Many members have now given up on elections, but they should not stop this from being a possible area for others to work in. And if the situation should arise that Kiwis suddenly in big numbers realise how they have been lied to by all their elected representatives, there should surely be a party that they can believe in that will take their vote.

Getting into dialogue is all about finding the best possible way to move forward into the future together. As John says, “At the end of the day, it’s about the will of the people.