It’s a worrying day when the Greens seem to be more on board with the rights of terrorists, than the safety of all New Zealanders.
This new Terrorism Suppression Bill the government wants to bring in would give Police the ability to apply control orders or restrictions, to those who’ve engaged in terrorism overseas.
The hastiness of the bill coming in can be attributed to the fact our so-called bumbling Jihadi Mark Taylor, who may be released from his Kurdish prison and potentially wind up back here.
National’s on board with it, bar a few changes to broaden its terms, and NZ First agrees it's necessary too.
But not the Greens.
Golriz Gharahman described it as “dog whistling” and said she’s concerned about the human rights implications of the bill.
She’s also concerned that it’s potentially racist.
She says she feels existing criminal laws in New Zealand already cover "everything that needs to be covered to keep us safe".
She says there’s no place for it.
How can she know that, you may ask? I asked the same question.
So, in a Golriz world, imagine if there were no additional restrictive conditions made for returning terrorists, (as the bill looks to set), then what would the Greens do, if and when someone like Taylor returns home, has access to the internet, and is potentially radicalised again?
What do they say at that point? Oh well, at least he had his human rights in tact?
Do his rights outweigh the safety of New Zealanders?
I would have thought the very obvious answer to that is no.
If you choose to leave the country, and go fight with ISIS and engage in terrorist activity, you effectively give up your access to equal treatment at that point.
The day you choose a life which involves extinguishing other’s human rights, surely is the day you choose to give up your own.
What’s concerning is that the Greens want to pick a fight with the Prime Minister on this one.
To throw around terms like ‘dog whistling’ and ‘oppression’ just shows up the Greens for the lightweights they are inside this government.
The PM has said the Bill strikes the right balance, that it’s necessary to meet new global challenges like returning terrorist fighters and that we have to be adequately prepared for it.
The fact the Greens disagree here and want to push the human rights barrow instead, only goes to show how out to lunch the Greens are.