I’ve kept a record, now 70 strong, of the fictitious human rights claims that have arisen in the media over the last six years. But one five years back, given its source, probably still takes the prize for insanity.
This was from the then Human Rights Commissioner David Rutherford no less and copped a half page in the NZ Herald in June 2017.
Rutherford’s contract was not renewed which is why his name may be unfamiliar, due to the government’s anger at his failure to deal with (here’s another) human rights breach for a female staff member in his office, not to be sexually molested.
Anyway, Rutherford excelled himself, imagination-wise with his declaration – brace yourself – that “FIREPROOF CLADDING IS A HUMAN RIGHT.”
Given that was five years back, doubtless every home is now fire-proof clad. If not, why not?
6 Comments
Great work, Sir Bob. As a matter of interest, how many of those 70 odd human rights have been “fundamental human rights”?
I’m thinking on applying for a Royal Society of NZ grant to study how a human right gets reclassified as a fundamental human right.
Should be good for a couple of hundy thou at least. I might go for a dip into the Arts Council coffers as well. Sadly, having self identified as a white heterosexual male, Te Puni Kokiri won’t be interested into coming to the party.
It never ceases to amaze me the level of continued stupidity of government dept heads…
It’s my human right to have a higher level of governance!
Not being sexually attacked is a very real human right . So why doesn’t our government offer chastity belts to all females ? That’s an ironclad method to protect our ladies . It wouldn’t be compulsory to wear them . But a taxpayer funded subsidy would ensure equal rights for all to protection .
Let’s start with adding that to the Residential Tenancy Act and make all landlords (except Housing NZ of course) comply within a year, shall we?
A right is between two individuals. The individual claiming the right and the individual responsible for the acknowledgment of the right. If the latter refuses to acknowledge the right then it is up to other individual, who is claiming the right, to take responsibility.
Hmmm … another hot issue … left on the back burner five years too long. David’s LinkedIn profile is impressive – moved on from saying contentious things now by the look of it.