top of page

Subscribe Form

Thanks for submitting!

Search

BRYCE WILKINSON: Dangerous belittling of NZer's liberty and property rights

Governments have many roles, but some are of fundamental importance. A vital role is to secure citizens in their persons and possessions.


I am amazed by the extent of public opposition to this long-standing principle. It has been triggered by its inclusion in the government’s Regulatory Standards Bill.

Some prominent academics deny it is fundamental. At least one is vitriolic, asserting it is partisan and ideological.


Some assert it elevates the individual over the collective. Others that it puts profits before wages, or big business over everyone.


Thousands see the Bill as anti-Treaty and thereby anti-Māori.


It is none of these things. Magna Carta established that King John could not rule his subjects by improper decree. Especially not the barons at Runnymede. The US Declaration of Independence similarly objected to King George III’s tax on tea.


Long-standing English common law traditions guard against despotic government rule. These gains were hard won. One king lost his head in the process. Rule by Parliament, not divine right, won the day.


Take the liberty principle. You own your own body. You are not a slave; you can choose what job to pursue and where you will live. You own what you earn, be it a wage, self-employed income, profit or interest on savings.


In the words of Adam Smith in 1776, the property we have in our own labour “as it is the original foundation of all other property, so is it the most sacred and inviolable”.


The prime importance of security in the peaceful enjoyment of your possessions follows. Theft and trespass are illegal. Police searches need a warrant. And the state must enforce these laws well. Many victims of crime could tell us that.


None of these and other venerable protections are absolute. Parliament is the sovereign law-maker. Its tax and other laws trump all. It can override any guiding principles.


It could deny due process. It could ban anything on a whim. It could imprison political opponents. It could seize out of malice or envy any individual’s property without compensation.


Of course, it should not do such things. It should act in a principled manner. Its justifications should have integrity. But must they?


People need to be clear about which principles are fundamental. Otherwise, hard-won liberties are easily lost.


The government’s Legislation Guidelines spell out the fundamental importance of respect for the dignity of the individual.


To undermine its importance by spurious assertions is dangerous.


Bryce Wilkinson is a Senior Fellow at The New Zealand Initiative. Bryce was made an Officer of the New Zealand Order of Merit in the 2025 New Year's honours for his significant contributions to public policy formation and economic research, spanning his influential work at Treasury during New Zealand's major economic reforms and his extensive research on fiscal discipline and regulatory quality.


This article was sourced from The NZ Initiative

 
 
 

31 Comments


Unknown member
7 days ago

Private Property rights are the difference between communism and capitalism put differently totalitarianism and democracy.

When I studied economics 101 I learnt that economic take off takes place when the citizens have private property rights which allow them access to capital.

Damn right they are important.

Like

Thanks, Bryce. Freedom is the most precious necessity of human life. It is taken for granted until taken away. Yet, all around there are those who seek to use their own to take away others'. The privileged members of academia, law and government are at the forefront of this insidious affront to human dignity. They do not realize they are betraying their own humanity as well as of those they would oppress.

Like

Basil
Basil
Jun 08

“There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it”.

Sowell

Like

Right on the money Bryce!

Like

Yet again, as described, more socialist academics twisting the meaning being successful as unfair to others not in the same boat,and seeking to create a perceived " privileged" idealoogy to punish those,who are not rich by any stretch of the imagination but have worked their guts to achieve what they own.

Tell me this. How in God's name does the aquiring a property remove an individual from any collective in New Zealand society as it stands today? It doesn't and never will do so. This is yet another vicious attack on people in society that through their own efforts have succeeded in doing well for themselves, and for any government to take that right away , to me, is treasonous.…

Edited
Like
Replying to

Extremists of any political persuasion are so far up themselves they can see the next tutai coming.

Like

©2021 by Bassett, Brash & Hide. Proudly created with Wix.com

bottom of page