OPINION: THE FILTHMEISTERS ARE BACK — AND NEW ZEALANDERS SHOULD CARE

On the Breakfast Show this week I talked about Nicky Hager’s new book Dirty Work, and I used a word to describe the Taxpayers’ Union and the political ecosystem around it: filthmeisters.

It was deliberate.

Because for the past few years I have watched campaigns around kaupapa Māori, co-governance, Three Waters and Te Tiriti become increasingly toxic. I have watched Māori become a convenient political target. I have watched fear replace facts and division become a campaigning strategy.

Hager’s Dirty Work puts the Taxpayers’ Union at the centre of that story. His central allegation is that the organisation discovered during the Three Waters debate that campaigning around Māori and co-governance could mobilise supporters and money, and that this helped drive a broader shift in its political campaigning. Former staff quoted by Hager reportedly describe internal disagreement over that direction. The Taxpayers’ Union strongly rejects Hager’s characterisation and says his book is a politically motivated attack that omits important context.

That distinction matters. Allegations are allegations, and those accused are entitled to respond.

But the wider questions raised by the book cannot simply be wished away.

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has responded by saying New Zealanders do not care about the subject. I beg to differ.

New Zealanders are not stupid.

We have been here before.

Many remember the era exposed by Hager’s 2014 book Dirty Politics and the political controversies surrounding Cameron Slater and the Whale Oil website. Dirty Work is being presented as the third instalment of the same broad series, after The Hollow Men and Dirty Politics.

The names change. The technology changes. The organisations change.

But the questions remain remarkably familiar.

Who funds political influence? Who benefits from it? Who is coordinating with whom? Where does advocacy end and political campaigning begin? And how transparent should organisations seeking to influence our democracy be about the money and networks behind them?

Those questions become even more important when Māori are used as the battlefield.

I have watched kaupapa Māori repeatedly become fodder for campaigns designed to generate anger. Three Waters. Co-governance. Te Tiriti. Māori wards. The Waitangi Tribunal. Māori representation.

Hager alleges the Taxpayers’ Union deliberately used anti-Māori sentiment during its Three Waters campaign. The organisation disputes his wider account of its motives and operations. The Greens have now called on political organisations to reject what they describe as the tactics documented in Dirty Work.

And then there is Hobson’s Pledge, another organisation campaigning vigorously against what it calls race-based policy and Treaty obligations. Its own recent material demonstrates that this agenda remains very much alive.

People are perfectly entitled to oppose co-governance. They are entitled to oppose Māori wards, Three Waters or any other public policy.

That is democracy.

But there is a difference between arguing policy and turning Māori into a political bogeyman. There is a difference between debating ideas and deliberately manufacturing resentment. If organisations are influencing elections and public policy, then scrutiny of their funding, relationships, methods and motivations is not an attack on democracy.

It is democracy.

Which brings me to Jordan Williams.

When journalists have come after me, I have fronted. When a TVNZ journalist produced a story about me that I believed was wrong and unsupported by the facts, I still fronted the 6pm news and answered the questions.

That is what accountability looks like.

Williams has responded publicly to Dirty Work, but he has also accused Hager of failing to approach the Taxpayers’ Union before publication and says the organisation was denied a fair opportunity to respond. The Taxpayers’ Union has separately issued a categorical denial of one specific allegation concerning an alleged employment settlement. Hager says he independently verified that allegation and has challenged the organisation to waive any relevant confidentiality rights. Those competing claims remain disputed.

So put the questions on the table.

Who funds the campaigns? What relationships exist between advocacy organisations and political parties? What coordination occurs? How are campaign themes selected? And when Māori become the subject of those campaigns, who decided that division was an acceptable political tool?

Those questions deserve answers rather than dismissal.

Former National finance minister Ruth Richardson is now chair of the Taxpayers’ Union, which itself demonstrates why transparency around political networks matters. It does not prove wrongdoing, but neither should obvious political connections place an organisation beyond scrutiny.

This is bigger than Jordan Williams. It is bigger than Nicky Hager. It is bigger than the Taxpayers’ Union.

It is about what sort of political culture we are prepared to tolerate.

You can campaign for lower taxes without demonising Māori.

You can argue against co-governance without turning tangata whenua into the enemy.

You can advocate smaller government without manufacturing a culture war.

And you can participate in democracy without poisoning the well from which all of us eventually have to drink.

So yes, I called them filthmeisters.

That is my opinion.

But the underlying issues raised by Dirty Work deserve something considerably more substantial than name-calling from either side.

They deserve sunlight.

Because when political influence operates in the shadows, the answer isn’t to tell New Zealanders they don’t care.

Turn on the lights and let New Zealanders decide for themselves.

#Opinion #TeKaupapa #DirtyWork #NickyHager #TaxpayersUnion #JordanWilliams #DirtyPolitics #PoliticalTransparency #TeTiriti #KaupapaMāori #Māori #ThreeWaters #CoGovernance #HobsonsPledge #Democracy #Election2026 #NZPolitics #Aotearoa #WaateaNews #RadioWaatea