News

The Otago Daily Times are at it again, this week falsely reporting on a meeting they didn’t attend. The gathering in question was hosted last Tuesday afternoon at OUSA’s Recreation Centre by the New Zealand Union of Students’ Associations (NZUSA). It was a workshop designed to involve students in the “constitution discussion” recently launched by NZ’s Constitutional Advisory Panel.

The ODT reported an attendance of 20 students at the event, but Critic was present and meticulously counted the entire audience, which consisted of one person. The attendee, who does not wish to be named, did however give a 20-minute monologue which easily made up for his lack of comrades. Critic suggests that when the ODT skips meetings in future, they get their statements from participants, not organisers.

OUSA president Francisco Hernandez has also been dragged into the fiasco, being quoted in the ODT as saying that the discussion was “very worthwhile” and provided “some student perspective on the issues.” Critic reminds El Presidenté that “one” does not equate to “some,” and also notes our Dear Leader’s sudden comment of “oh fuck! You’re the media, aren’t you?” when he arrived mid-meeting, spouting confidential details of the Hyde Street Keg Party “turning to shit.”

The low turnout does not, however, undermine the campaign. Very few New Zealanders understand New Zealand’s constitution. Unlike in America where the constitution is one legal document to protect the rights of its people, here we are protected by a mash-up of other pieces of law.

One of the questions raised was whether our lack of a single written constitution is a problem at all, let alone one which needs fixing. It was also noted that this is a much wider debate which encompasses the broad question of “how you want our country to be run in the future,” including issues such as the length of electoral terms, the voting age, and New Zealand’s changing demographics.

“We need to get every opinion out in the open in order to start solving issues,” one organiser told Critic. “‘Agree to disagree’ is nonsense.” Critic was deeply impressed by this, and suggests that rabid opposition to respectful disagreement should be the guiding principle of any new constitution.

The event was held as part of NZUSA’s Big Questions “tour,” which is designed to give an opportunity for the “student voice” to be heard. Critic would like to point out that the quotation marks were actually NZUSA’s, not ours, and came from the organisation’s (presumably sarcastic) tumblr page. As for the nature of the meeting itself, it was acutely (and desperately) noted that a lot of the hoped-for discussion actually happens around the dinner table at home. Organisers now hope to target these debates in future. Critic is unsure what this entails, but it sounds terrifying.

The morning discussion on Superannuation was more widely attended.