By Mary Hobbs

The future depends on what we do in the present. — Mahatma Gandhi

The Gene Technology Bill – Part 1

The First Reading of the Gene Technology Bill 2024 was introduced to Parliament on 17 December 2024, by National MP, Judith Collins. It made this day one of the darkest in New Zealand’s history, because here, with a blithe, airy wave of the hand, crucial Human Rights were trampled over, vital safety regulations were ignored, and Kiwis were left with a blueprint for the destruction of all that is held sacred in our country — in Nature and in Life.

The following article is based on my opinion — that of an everyday New Zealander. Everyone should read this Bill and make their own conclusions. Please let me know if my evaluation is incorrect, but I have done the best I could with an extremely complex Bill, under unreasonable time constraints, as submissions must be in by 17 February 2025. This, in itself, shouts a vulgar, unnecessarily rushed piece of legislation that has the potential to irreversibly alter all living things, including human beings, in our country. (No politician or corporation has the authority to do that.)

I would like to acknowledge and thank some outstanding professionals, particularly the astute qualified barrister and solicitor of New Zealand and NSW lawyer, Katie Ashby-Koppens, who devoted an enormous amount of time to helping me unravel the furtive way in which the Bill was written. I wouldn’t have been able to see the extent of the complexities of this Bill, or explain it, without her knowledge of the key legal issues.

This article is part one of three intended articles on the Gene Technology Bill. Part One, as a matter of urgency, focuses on the most concerning parts of the proposed legislation, including a provision that grants the New Zealand regulator the requirement to rely on approvals of overseas regulators to authorise genetically-modified injections for New Zealanders. Similar reliance on the ‘overseas regulator approval’ is ear-marked for the Medicines Act, which would see little to no national safety precautions considered for authorisations of gene technologies for use in human beings. The definition of ‘medical activity’ in Clause 8 is also of great concern, as are the ‘substances’ that can be used in a ‘special emergency’ in Clause 242. There is much more, as outlined below.

Part 2 will focus on how this Bill recklessly omits meaningful caution in regard to genetic technology and genetically modified organisms, through failing to require robust and vital regulation. It highlights how it will destroy our competitive advantage in export markets by decimating New Zealand’s envied status of GE/GM-free and organic GM-free produce. It will also show how it removes choice from Kiwis by not requiring GM produce to be labelled and, most importantly, highlights a reckless disregard for Nature’s sacred blueprint.

Part 3 is an Open Letter to all MPs.

NZDSOS has a short and powerful article on it here. An excellent discussion on it is on RCR here and here. Dr Guy Hatchard has several articles and a video here with suggestions on how to respond before submissions close on 17 February 2025. J.R. Bruning has an excellent article on it here as well as another excellent one entitled When Parliament is Misdirected. The Daily Telegraph has additional vital articles here. The exceptional GE Free NZ team has been fighting this for many years and their website, along with their accurate information and information on what to do about it is here. Additional suggestions are also in the final paragraphs of this article. Farmers are also extremely concerned about the rush and have grave misgivings about the technology here.

As noted by lawyer, Katie Ashby-Koppens: This Bill is an integral part of globalist control of the world and New Zealand. This is now clear for all to see. No longer hiding in the shadows, the World Economic Forum, the United Nations or its purported agency of health, the World Health Organisation and their funders, big pharma, biotech companies, Bill Gates, and Larry Ellison, are paving the way for there to be no barriers, limited questions and virtually no regulation for their gene-altering products to be administered to New Zealanders, our animals, our flora, our fauna or our agriculture. This is the One Health policy of these’ global organisation’s in action. It seems clear that this is their depraved quest for world power and control.

The world-renowned Catherine Austin-Fitts, of the Solari Report, gives her view on Ellison in this four-minute clip here.

It is not size that counts. It is truth on our side, love in our hearts, positive creativity, and an indomitable will — attributes of the spirit. — MH

Weeks have been spent on this article to enable it to be as accurate and as easily understandable as possible. For this reason, some of the long clauses that seem of the greatest concern are linked within the document, with shorter clauses added in, for easy reference. It would be great to have the clauses in sequential order, but this isn’t possible as the relevant information is in different places in the Bill. An opinion is below each one. Stay with the article if you can, because it is crucial information in regard to your future and that of your loved ones and the time to make our voices heard is now.

So, here we go. Buckle up Kiwis — it’s a wild ride.

1. The Bill sets out six tiers of gene technology under: Risk tiers and authorisations, with the final two below being the most concerning:

a. mandatory medical activity authorisations: for a human medicine that is or contains gene technology that has been approved by at least 2 recognised overseas Gene Technology Regulators:

b. emergency authorisations: where there is an actual or imminent threat to the health and safety of people or to the environment, for example, threat from a disease outbreak or an industrial spillage. The Minister responsible for the Bill when enacted (the Minister) will have the power to grant an emergency authorisation.

a. Mandatory medical activity authorisations

The title alone sounds dangerous. It is.

It means that the New Zealand Regulator is legally required to grant authorisation to a person to use regulated organisms or gene technology on human beings for a ‘therapeutic’ purpose if two overseas regulators recognised by the New Zealand Regulator have already approved a regulated organism gene technology! (Relevant clauses to that follow.)

This conclusion has been arrived in the following way:

A mandatory medical activity authorisation is said to be defined in Clause 50 but it is not.

A ‘medical activity’ is defined in Clause 8 (see below). But it also states “unless the context otherwise requires” and this seems to fit that exception. I have been advised that for Clause 50 we need to apply the ordinary meaning to the book-end words —mandatory and authorisations. Applying the ordinary meaning, the New Zealand Regulator will be required by law to grant the authorisation for use of regulated organisms or gene technology to human beings for a ‘therapeutic’ purpose where ‘two recognised overseas Gene Technology Regulators’ have already approved the regulated organisms or gene technology to human beings for a ‘therapeutic’ purpose in their countries.

New Zealand has one check and balance to the automatic overseas approval pass-through and that is if the New Zealand Regulator considers the granting of the authorisation would result in imminent risk of death, serious injury to people or serious damage to the environment (Clause 50(3)). (With Covid injections still being administered, despite the shocking amount of injury, harm and death, it doesn’t leave one with hope that the NZ Regulator would use this ‘one check and balance’. And with the use of the word ‘imminent’ does this also mean there is no regard for long-term risks that could be catastrophic?)

‘A recognised overseas authority’ is not specified in the Bill. Instead, and in a very circular self-fulfilling prophecy, the Regulator can decide if a person is so recognised by them (as long as they are operating in a comparable manner to the Regulator and under a comparable legislative framework (Clause 57(2)).

Interpreting that as written, it means that if two people recognised by the New Zealand Regulator have already approved a regulated organism gene technology in their countries, the New Zealand Regulator will be required to grant the mandatory medical authorisation to Group A to administer to persons equivalent to Group B (Clause 57(1)). Also Clause 50(1). This cedes our sovereignty.

There is no specific definition in the Bill for ‘group A’ or ‘group B’ but it is inferred in Clause 50, where Group A is the person who is given the authorisation by the New Zealand Regulator to conduct the medical activity (to administer a regulated organism or gene technology to humans for a ‘therapeutic’ purpose) on persons fitting within Group B. Could this, at its worst, mean a gene technology could be authorised to the Ministry of Health (Group A) to administer gene technology to all New Zealanders (Group B)? Is this what is intended?

While any medical activity involving a gene technology will still have to be approved under the Medicines Act 1981 by the Ministry of Health’s regulator Medsafe (Clause 16), the Medicines Act 1981 may soon be amended to include a similar ceding of sovereignty provision if the following provision — agreed to by National and NZ First in their Coalition Agreement — is included in the Medicines Act:

Require Medsafe to approve new pharmaceuticals within 30 days of them being approved by at least two overseas regulatory agencies recognised by New Zealand.

Remarkably, the clause of the National and NZ First Coalition Agreement reads in a very similar way to that proposed in the Gene Technology Bill. If this provision is added to the Medicines Act, any regulation by a New Zealand Regulator for gene technology medicines will be circumvented when overseas Regulators have already approved it. In essence, this means that New Zealand could have “overseas regulators” from Uganda, North Korea, China — or anywhere in the world — approve a gene technology for use in a very short timeframe.

(How can anyone approve a ‘new pharmaceutical’ in 30 days to ensure it was safe — or has Medsafe just become a rubber-stamping bureaucracy? And now, even more so? It is also astounding to note that, according to them, they don’t consider they have a Duty of Care to New Zealanders.)

Clause 50 of the Bill bypasses genetic consequences and safety checks as they pertain to New Zealanders and cedes our country’s decision-making power (sovereignty) regarding biotechnologies for humans to two foreign decision makers. Whether New Zealand needs it or not.

There will be no proper subjective checks and balances specific to New Zealanders, such as our geography, and any relevant genetic considerations, nor consideration in regard to the risk of substantial loss of life and harm —that may or may not be described as ‘imminent’ — caused by the rollout of the first mRNA ‘Covid’ injections in our country

b. Emergency authorisations

The last risk tier or authorisation (listed under Risk Tiers and authorisations) is the emergency authorisation provision. This gives the Minister the power to grant emergency authorisation to a person to carry out an activity in relation to a regulated organism or gene therapy if there is an actual or ‘imminent threat’ to the health and safety of people or to the environment. The examples given include a threat from a disease outbreak or an industrial spillage.

This seems to be written in such a way that a disease outbreak does not need to have occurred. Just the ‘threat’ of one, or an ‘industrial spillage’. A threat? According to a ‘relevant Minister’? That’s a bit too general. Based on what proven evidence? And an industrial spillage? Of what? A deadly pathogen? If so, why would that be permitted into the country? Or is the government intending to manufacture gene technology jabs here too, and could this refer to ‘leaks from labs’ in our country? Doesn’t this wording sound eerily close to the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) recommendation for use of a gene-technology ‘vaccine’ for even just the ‘threat of a pandemic’ that the Director General of the WHO is authorised to declare?

Note, the WHO receives substantial funding from private interests including biotech, pharmaceutical companies and personalities such as Bill Gates whose philanthropic organisations are heavily focused on manufacturing and administering vaccines, for example, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Gates funded Gavi Alliance. From 2000-2022, 88% of the WHO’s philanthropic donations are from Gates Associated foundations. Bill Gates has said the world is over-populated. And he wants to ‘vaccinate’ the planet to ‘save everyone’ if there may be a ‘threat’?

2. Medical Activity

Clause 8: The following is the definition of ‘medical activity’. It is hair-raising and has serious implications with regard to the NZ Bill of Rights 1990, the Precautionary Principle, the Nuremberg Code and all that we hold sacred in Nature and Life.

Note (iii) includes a definition of ‘medical activity that enables the use of a ‘medical device’ on humans or animals. What ‘medical device’? One that is injected? Note (iv) includes a definition of ‘medical activity’ that enables the undertaking of clinical trials on humans or animals. Shouldn’t that have its own definition that includes the word experiment? Why is it under the definition of ‘medical activity’? Presumably, according to this Bill, they mean ‘medical devices’ can be used under ‘medical activity’, that are not further defined, and ‘trials’ that have not been agreed to by any Kiwi can be undertaken under the words ‘medical activity’? Doesn’t this hide ‘medical devices’ and experimentation? Most Kiwis would think medical activity was to do with a medical treatment they understood, not potentially having a device put in them and not a ‘trial’ done on them. How many Kiwis will read this and be oblivious to what a ‘medical activity’ could cover? Also, how many would be told it was a gene technology injection or a ‘regulated organism’? Move over Mengele, — the NZ government seems keen to lead the world in Frankenstein-type experimentations under the name of ‘medical activity’.

The power of our dreams and the creativity we employ can break the chains of injustice and oppression. — Bishop Desmond Tutu

3. Allowance of a medicine or medical device that is or contains a hazardous substance, or a new organism, or a regulated organism used in a ‘special emergency?

Clause 242-24D

Below is one part of Clause 242. Please click the link for the full clause to be shown.

Worksafe defines hazardous. It includes the word toxic: can harm people if it enters the body through contact, being inhaled or ingested. The effects can range from mild to life threatening, and can be immediate or long term. And this Bill enables it to be given en masse, by force?

And a ‘new organism’ or ‘a regulated organism’ that could perhaps be injected? There is no further explanation on the definition of ‘organism’ but the everyday definition of it is a ‘living thing’. Just what ‘living thing’ does this government have in mind? No mention of ensuring it is safe?

That certainly doesn’t sound as though it has anything to do with health.

4. Pharma advertising during a ‘special emergency?

Clause 242/24D also appears to allow that medicines can be approved, distributed, sold and advertised during a ‘special emergency’ that is or contains a hazardous substance, a new organism, or a regulated organism.

An emergency also appears different from a ‘special emergency’ as mentioned immediately above? Clause 242 (24 C) defines ‘special emergency’ and also refers to sections 49A and 49B in the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996. (Apparently there was a new version of this Act. Interestingly, it is dated 23 December 2023.)

So does that mean New Zealanders will be subjected to unlimited promotion of such ‘medicines’ with Big Pharma’s unlimited budget (and vested interest) in a ‘special emergency’ that would submerge the voices of all who were brave enough to advise caution? Yes, that is likely. NZ and the US are the only countries in the world where pharma can advertise their products. In the US this is far more regulated and they list the side effects. In NZ they don’t. Why should pharma be advertising in a ‘special emergency’?
What clearly stands out is that if the government intends, with this Bill, to make it easier for biotech companies to get their products into NZ, or produce them here, it may well lead to enforced mandatory medication of hazardous gene technology injections (and other substances as outlined above) as we saw in the ‘Covid-era’. If so, then that is:

In violation of The Nuremberg Code.
In violation of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and Human Rights Act 1993.
In violation of The Hippocratic Oath.
In violation of the Precautionary Principle.
A violation of the genetic blueprint of life and all that we hold sacred.
It has NO place in a democracy.
It is tyrannical.

5. Exemption from Liability

The Regulator, employee or agent of the Regulator, enforcement officer, or any members of the committees are exempted from any liability.

Note, the clause states: The person is protected from civil and criminal liability, however it may arise, for any act that the person does or omits to do. . . So if their emergency mandatory enforced authorisation maims and kills, there is no liability.

Why not? Where is The Precautionary Principle? An excellent definition of the precautionary principle is at the above link. The article is well worth a read but, in short, it defines it as: .. . if an action poses potential harm, in the absence of scientific consensus that harm would not ensue, the burden of proof falls on those taking the action. If the Precautionary Principle was added to this proposed legislation it would probably be gone by lunchtime. If this technology is so safe, why would they need protection? Didn’t Pfizer also absolve themselves from all liability of the ‘Covid’ shots that maimed and killed?

6. No requirement for Regulators and Ministers to disclose all or any potential conflicts of interest and any meetings with those who could benefit from this Bill:

It is of great concern that nowhere in the Act does it describe the need for regulators and Ministers to disclose all or any potential conflicts of interest, and any meetings with lobbyists from organisations or companies that would benefit greatly from this legislation.

7. Is the Attorney-General conflicted?

Under Part 1, General Provisions of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (Version as at 30 August 2022) it states:

7 Attorney-General to report to Parliament where Bill appears to be inconsistent with Bill of Rights

Required actions after declarations of inconsistency

7A Attorney-General to notify Parliament of declaration of inconsistency
7B Responsible Minister to report to Parliament Government’s response to declaration

The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 requires the Attorney-General to report to Parliament if a bill appears to be inconsistent with this Act, but this report does not appear to have been provided yet. But isn’t it a conflict if the Attorney-General and the Minister who introduced this Bill (Judith Collins) is the same person? Or has this not been done because this Bill only addresses making an authorisation mandatory (yet, in doing so, doesn’t it cede our sovereignty and also potentially pave the way to approve mandatory medical gene-tech jabs in the future)? Either way, it would be good to know.

It may be difficult for many to believe a government would wish to enact such a Bill that allows such a free pass to gene-technology companies to interfere with nature’s blueprint and has known and unknown, irreversible ramifications on all life. This is particularly relevant after the devastating injury and death caused by the Covid injection that Dr David Martin has repeatedly called a bio-weapon. He is also very clear that when he calls the gene-altering ‘Covid’ jab a bio-weapon and says that is not an allegation, but an accusation. He clarified that the world did not have a pandemic. It had genocide. He has the qualifications and the experience to make such statements, as before the ‘Covid’ era he was a top consultant in this field for the US government. He has extensively spoken out about the dangers of these gene-altering injections on the world stage and, as a patent attorney, has meticulous knowledge of the patents filed that lead him to these conclusions. Watch his riveting 23-minute speech in the European parliament here.

Belgian virologist, Dr Geert Vanden Bossche, gave a sober message to the world warning: “What I am predicting is a massive, massive tsunami of illness and death among highly vaccinated populations with dysregulated immune systems. You commit errors or even crimes at the very small scale, you can hide them. I have seen this happen with the Ebola vaccination with Africa a number of years ago . . However, if you do this at the very large scale, like what has happened with this mass [‘Covid’] vaccination campaign, the truth will surface.” With an increased all-cause mortality recorded in New Zealand since 2021, Dr Vanden Bossche’s predictions may alarmingly be true.

Dr Vanden Bossche was also adamant at the beginning of the Covid panic in 2021, when there were mass ‘vaccines’ given, that it was the wrong strategy from an immunological point-of-view, and sure to produce a grievous outcome. If this plays out how he anticipates, will those effects be masked under rhetoric of another planned ‘pandemic’ herding the world into another shot, through fear, that causes even more grievous harm? I sincerely hope not.

It is easy to stand with the crowd. It takes courage to stand alone. — Mahatma Gandhi

For several years now, the New Zealand government has known these gene-altering jabs are harmful. How could they not, with the innumerable pages of factual information that NZDSOS ensured they received? Just look at the many pages of documents sent to them from these legends since this debacle began. Link that with the Health Forum evidence, the NZDSOS Truth Project, and the Open Letters that have also been written to them from many Kiwis who cared enough to make it known, along with many groups in the freedom movement, as well as Barry Young, a giant amongst us, who risked everything to provide New Zealand with the factual data. Yet the government punished him for his courage and put all its efforts into suppressing the information he publicly provided to warn fellow Kiwis, when his seniors and members of parliament took no action.

The evidence of harm the gene-altering ‘Covid’ jab has done and continues to do to New Zealanders is undeniable, yet they are still being given, they continue to cause serious harm and kill, and they continue to be touted as ‘safe and effective’. That is surely the time to make all gene technology jabs illegal in this country and stop all that are currently being given. It appears inconceivable that, instead, the government is attempting to pass legislation that enables — or perhaps later potentially enforces — New Zealanders to take more, even if there is just the ‘threat’ of a ‘pandemic’.

8. Is the timing with Phase 2 of the Royal Commission coincidental?

This Bill is being rushed through and if passed will be enacted before Phase 2 of the Royal Commission is completed. This is relevant because Phase 2 is to examine the safety of the ‘Covid vaccines’ that are gene-therapies and would have fallen within this Gene Technology Bill legislation had it been in place in 2020 when the Labour government approved the Covid-19 mRNA-LNP ‘vaccines’. There is much expectation being put in the Phase 2 commissioners who were specifically appointed in response to the whitewash of the Phase 1 Labour appointed commissioners. My point here being that, if there is an Inquiry into the safety and effectiveness of gene-therapies already mandated and received by a large number of New Zealanders, shouldn’t that report be concluded and considered in advance of this legislation being rushed through, legislation that would automatically see the automatic approval of further gene-therapies if 2 overseas regulators approved them? Whatever your views on ‘Covid’, the unprecedented public health response should be considered and findings made before the legislation is rushed through. Or is it perhaps that this is one of the reasons for the legislation being rushed?

The purpose of the Bill states it is to enable the safe use of gene technology and regulated organisms in New Zealand. Within the objectives, it states that it seeks to provide for risk-proportionate regulation. But it doesn’t appear to do that when one views the down-grading of the potentially catastrophic risks with classifications of ‘low-risk’, especially when considering the proven harm of the last gene-technology jab. For example —beneath the purpose of the Bill — it states under ‘Risk tiers and authorisations’: non-notifiable activities: very low-risk activities that do not require active monitoring by the Regulator, for example, gene therapies that are also regulated by Medsafe. notifiable activities: low-risk activities that require the Regulator to be notified, for example, laboratory research with mice: So mice qualify for a higher risk assessment than humans? And apparently, some GE technologies are to be exempted from regulation?!

Look at their actions. How is that ‘safe’?

9. Why is there little detail in the stated Objectives?

Other objectives of the Bill could, on a lenient day, be described as little more than window-dressing fluff. For example: . . .efficient application and decision-making processes. Does this mean ‘cost-saving’ efficient? If so, it probably is ‘efficient’ as it appears written in a way that is so generalised and lacking in safety requirements that applications to use genetically-modified products look set to be rubber-stamped.

Another objective is: a flexible legislative framework able to accommodate future technological and policy developments without frequent amendment . . . Does this ‘flexibility ‘mean it is so weak that any type of genetic-modification technology can be introduced without frequent amendment? So there are minimal checks and balances that look set to destroy the sacred God-gene of our bodies, our food, all plants, the air, the water, and all we hold sacred? It is difficult to see any meaningful requirement for proven safety on any gene-technology injection the government decides New Zealanders could, in the future, be potentially forced to receive. The wording is all so loose you could drive a truck through it.

A further objective is . . . international alignment, including with key trading partners, to facilitate trade and to improve access to new technologies. It seems in this sentence there is a deft sleight of hand as the writer of the Bill omits clarification of what international alignment, what trade and what new technologies. The government must clarify with whom it intends to align and how. Is it the World Health Organisation? One World Government under the UN? The WEF? Central Banks? Blackrock? Their donors? All of them? The ‘alignment’ also intends to improve access to new – as yet unnamed – technologies. What exact ‘technologies’ does the government have in mind? Please don’t say it is new mRNA jabs to save the population from serious illnesses — not when the government has not put an immediate halt to the continued use of mRNA ‘Covid’ jabs that are still maiming and killing so many. Surely, putting an immediate stop to those jabs would be a faster way to initially help Kiwis regain their health?

10. Who is behind the Bill?

Who wrote this Bill? Was it big pharma? Certainly their lobbyists will be looking for the next bumper profits this legislation will grant them given it applies to animals, agriculture, crops, and humans — is it a demonic marriage with the WHO?

New Zealanders need to know this.
WHO WROTE THIS BILL?

The Bill is poised to potentially cause indiscriminate harm to all forms of life in our beloved country, including human beings. The regulator of this gene-tech is apparently only answerable to the Minister who introduced the Bill. Does that sound like democracy? If a corporation wanted a free-pass on whatever ‘GM-experiments’ they wished to try, including those on people, then this Bill appears to provide a rubber-stamp for it, without liability to those involved. Damien O’Connor, Labour MP, also highlighted relevant concerns in trade, as did others in Opposition, but they all seem oblivious to the dangers of gene tech to human health and glibly support that part of the Bill. Have they read it?

In my view, if this Bill is passed, it will give carte blanche permission for genetically modified organisms to be released with scant meaningful regulation and ultimately destroy our food and health. The description of what a medicine can include (under Explanatory Note – Risk Tiers and authorisations), and the definition of ‘medical activity’ seem very dangerous — the products of which can cause serious and potentially fatal harm to New Zealanders and their descendants — particularly with the gene tech jabs that alter DNA. This legislation has the potential to be a disaster for all living things in our country. It will destroy our export markets. New Zealand trade will crash with this Bill, for our country relies heavily on our GM-free status in international markets. It contaminates our country. It’s like Frankenstein letting the genie out of the bottle.

As Dr Hatchard reports in a message to MPs: “Before the pandemic, despite the lessons of smoking, thalidomide, laudanum, asbestos, etc (it is a long list), widespread use and prevalence of biotech experimentation were wrongly believed to be proof of inherent safety. This is no longer the case. As Professor Tim Spector OBE, a Downing Street Advisor and leading geneticist at King’s College London, put it in a November 2024 piece for the UK Telegraph “Labs across the world [undertaking biotechnology experimentation] should face more oversight and be treated with the same seriousness as a nuclear threat.” The Washington Post. . : “The nightmare of a biological holocaust is far from fanciful.”

Why would the politicians of National, ACT and NZ First vote in favour of ceding our sovereignty on this crucial issue to two unnamed ‘gene-tech regulators’? Particularly with the documented evidence of harm that has been provided to them by NZDSOS, and many others, and when even cardiologists in our country are finally speaking out about the dangers of the gene-altering ‘Covid’ jab.

Don’t each of the above political parties advertise themselves as championing freedom, democracy and bodily autonomy? Isn’t ACT about Libertarian values? How could opening the door to enforced gene-tech jabs along with an open-slather of gene technology in plants and medicine where side effects can be irreversible, or are unknown, fit into that definition? And is Seymour’s recent Bill a ruse to distract attention from this one? While he has you hot under the collar about another issue, is that ‘noise’ just so they can rapidly slip this Luciferian Legislation in without fanfare?

One of National’s key values is ‘individual freedom and choice’? How does that fit?

New Zealand First? Was it just about the votes for them? Didn’t they only agree to this Gene Tech Bill, as part of the coalition government, “while ensuring strong protections for human health and the environment? “(Click on the link and scroll to p7, bullet-point 5). How does this Bill make it safe — which is surely how most Kiwis would understand the phrase as written in the coalition agreement? Remember their tweets in regard to the last government removing freedoms from Kiwis and how they, quite rightly, spoke out against that before the last election? Well, attempting to deny Kiwis the freedom to have their bodies and their food free of gene-technology is not freedom. And ceding sovereignty to those off-shore? That is right up there on the scale of removing freedoms for which they had so clearly advocated. Where are you Winston?

All of the MPs who voted in favour of this Bill at the first reading need to CROSS THE FLOOR AND VOTE AGAINST IT at the second. It is dangerous and potentially lethal to every New Zealander and our country. It sets the stage for trashing democracy, individual human rights and freedom.

This Bill appears to potentially set the stage for future gene-technology jabs, even though some in parliament are aware that they are very dangerous with unknown and also irreversible side-effects. Potentially, it could undermine the human race and certainly alter our God-given DNA. (Yuval Harari’s (World Economic Forum) clip describes that.)

With clauses that carefully protect themselves and absolve them of all responsibility, one might get the idea that they do not have much confidence in the products though — while seemingly ignoring the Bill of Rights, the Hippocratic Oath and the Precautionary Principle. This is not a government representing our Rights — or our democracy and freedom.

11. New Zealanders call for Genuine Representation and Protection of their Bill of Rights

Stellar New Zealanders genuinely make gargantuan efforts to follow the democratic process and stop head-long rushes like this that will head NZ towards oblivion. They put in endless submissions with near-impossible deadlines that are largely ignored. This illustrates the callous disregard the government shows for such efforts. That is not the way democracy should work. New Zealanders have already had a Royal Commission of Inquiry on gene technology and came out in droves against it. Read our history. That will tell you what we think of this. And the mobilisation of hundreds of thousands of Kiwis in a convoy to establish Camp Freedom in 2022 to protest the ‘no jab, no job’ mandates should also tell every member of parliament just how Kiwis feel on this issue. That and the subsequent carnage to the health of thousands of New Zealanders who were tricked, and so many of whom were faced with either getting it or losing their job. That is tyranny. This Bill seems to allow even more. We will not let parliament — purporting to represent New Zealanders — forget these souls. Compassionate New Zealanders continue to speak for them, help ensure they are compensated, assist them to regain their health, and comfort them as they grieve for loved ones. And we will continue to call parliament to account.

Every time we turn our heads the other way when we see the law flouted, when we tolerate what we know to be wrong, when we close our eyes and ears to the corrupt because we are too busy or too frightened, when we fail to speak up and speak out, we strike a blow against freedom and decency and justice. — Robert Kennedy

12. On Whose Authority?

Again, on whose authority do they attempt to do this? They do not have our authority.
It is particularly difficult for Kiwis to understand this evil if they have no real concept of what has unfolded over the past five years and are only tuned into the sponsored mainstream media. For them it may be a substantial challenge to connect the dots, but perhaps they will gain more understanding if they can see that the NZ government appears to be dutifully moving in lockstep with the wishes of offshore interests such as the WHO, UN, WEF, the Club of Rome, other technocrats, and those with multi-billion/trillion dollar interests in the shadows. These cabals appear to seek a totalitarian one-world government under the UN with WHO in control of world ‘health’. WHO intends to dictate what medicines everyone must have — through acquiescent governments under the control of the cabals — while ‘pandemic threats’ are created for which, of course, a gene-technology jab is the only ‘solution’. Dr David Martin spells it out again here, and also exposes the dark history of the WHO — using their own words that state their intentions. It is a riveting speech.

This is now in plain sight. They have no authority to do this, but their plan appears to be — according to them — to drastically reduce the world population and control whoever remains through trans-humanism, artificial intelligence, and facial recognition. In this way, they apparently intend to control what we think through a hive mind and also remove our inner essence — the soul, the spirit. As mentioned, Yuval Harari of the WEF said that is what they intend and he is an integral part of it. To do that, it appears they need gene-altering tech that connects to A.I. in the blood of every human that it doesn’t maim or kill. The jab contents are apparently also able to track people. (Unless together, we peacefully say NO.) Dr Ana Mihalcea frequently refers to the trans-humanist agenda on her substack here.

The former prime minister of New Zealand was a WEF graduate and — without our consent — signed NZ up for the pilot A.I. project. Small population. An island. Perfect for a trial? Seems too far out? Well, again, listen to Yuval Harari (the side-kick of WEF Klaus Schwab). He spells it out. Does that sound like he and the cabals are focused on our health? If they were so focused on our ‘health’ would they continue to make, and try to enforce, gene-altering jabs that maim and kill? No. The catastrophic damage that this jab has done to New Zealanders so far is appalling. We must not forget these souls, many of whom are too ill or too overwhelmed to speak, or have died, so we also speak for them.

As mentioned in an earlier article: The common denominator in each of their playbooks is that they create the “problem” and then provide the “solution” to the problem of their creation through lies, subterfuge and propaganda. Paid propaganda in mainstream media. This is threaded through all of their chaos. [They have spoken about it and this comes from them. Look them up. Join the dots. For example: They create a “deadly disease”, use their owned-media to drum up terror, herd populations to take an experimental jab, ban all other successful options, while censoring those who speak out. . .

After sufficient manufactured fear and chaos they intend to usher in a New World Order and a One World government under the corrupt UN, and herd the population to accept Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) with a Universal Basic Income (UBI). They will attempt to steal all natural resources and property. If you don’t comply, you don’t eat. Unless we peacefully say NO. (They have spoken of this, too.) The problem for them is that millions now realise they were deceived. They will peacefully not comply. The cabals are few. We are many. They can only achieve their goals with our acquiescence. As Gandhi said, ‘The truth makes you a soldier’. (Albeit a peaceful one).

The Bill has many other clauses that are shocking. However, as mentioned, I have focused on the most alarming aspect of this Bill in Part One, of several articles that follow, in the interests of enlightening as many as possible to the most acute and serious threat to our freedoms and the potential threat to body autonomy of every New Zealander.

13. Where to from here?

The Bill needs to be immediately withdrawn. An immediate peaceful action would be to speak with everyone you know to enlighten them on the dangers of this Bill, so they can add their voice to the growing opposition to it. Send links to this article and many of the others listed above. Write to your MP and, if they voted for the Bill, enlighten them of the dangers and insist they cross the floor and vote no for the remaining Readings. If your MP voted against it, then an acknowledgement of that may also be of value. (I am not aware of any MPs that voted against the Bill who spoke against the medical gene-tech mandate clause in their speeches. This tells me they walk in tandem on that point and have no idea of the implications to them and their families, with few realising the lethality of gene-tech jabs.

We do need to peacefully make our voices heard. For at the end of the day, when you look back at this pivotal time in history and ask yourself what you did, you’ll know you did all you could to speak for our freedoms and the sacred nature we have in all life as a God-given right — and for our descendants who follow. You will know you DID something. You spoke. You protested. You made your objections known. You peacefully defended our people, our country and the God-given sacred DNA in each of us and in all of nature.

OBJECT to the Bill, let them know you do NOT consent and call it out for what it is. ROAR LIKE A LION. (Peacefully.) To make it easier to enforce any medical treatment is a complete violation of one of the most vital Human Rights. Make your objections known. You can send your objections to the Select Committee by 17 February 2025. RCR has template answers to help. Other suggestions on how to stop the Bill are here. Additionally, lawyer Kirstin Murfitt has put a tremendous amount of work into a campaign for New Zealand to exit the WHO by setting a target to obtain 400,000 signatures for a Citizens Initiated Referendum to Exit the WHO. Trump exited the WHO overnight. We could, too. Throwing off the shackles of the WHO would be a great start.

The Gene Technology Bill is the single most important Bill on which to stand up, speak out, and give a resounding NO to in the history of this country. We must peacefully and rapidly create a groundswell of opposition to this Bill, despite the fact that it was crudely and unethically given a rushed First Reading on 17 December 2024, the last day of Parliament for the year at a time when, as they well-knew, everyone had their mind on Christmas and a welcome holiday break that often lasts until the end of January. Submissions close on 17 February 2025 and the intention is to enact it by the end of 2025. That is an obscenely rapid advancement of a despicable, authoritarian Bill that is set to run roughshod over the most key aspects of our Rights and grants power to a chosen few who have no right to meddle with Nature’s blueprint. They have already proven with this Bill that those who support it either grossly misunderstand the destruction the Bill would cause, or worse, this is what the government intends to have happen. It beggars belief. We say NO.

As Mike Adams (www.naturalnews.com) and Dane Wigington said in a recent interview on what people could do about the devastating effects of geoengineering [here at around 31.29m]:

Don’t think, for a moment even, that your voice is ineffectual. It isn’t. He mentions it is a lot to take in, [as is this current Bill on Gene Technology] it’s heavy, it’s overwhelming and easy to feel helpless in the face of such massive systemic issues, but he reminds us: We are not powerless. Every single one of us has the power to make a difference, whether it’s spreading awareness, supporting organisations . . . or simply refusing to accept the status quo, we all have a role to play. Any one of us could be the final pebble that triggers the landslide of awakening. What is the takeaway? He urges everyone to . . . wake up, pay attention to what is happening in the world around us and question the narratives we are being fed and, most importantly, don’t give up. The stakes are too high and the time to act is now. If we can come together, raise our voices and demand change we might just have a chance to turn this ship around. (There is just a bit of trash to take out first).

14. Envisioning a Positive Future

As dark as times look, we must never forget our power to change our world by continuing to envision the one we dream of — conceptually living in one of peace, harmony, good health, happiness and joy. A world where no one has to use the word organic, because everything is organic. A world where mind, body and spirit are in harmony with nature —and held sacred. Where our children are free to grow up in a beautiful, loving environment happy, healthy and care-free. Where our environment is free from toxic poisons in the sea, the air, on land, and in water. We can have the world we dream of if we just keep creating it with a song in our hearts, while living it with grit, determination — and a grin. With love, always.

Keep shining your wonderful spiritual light — it has tremendous power and the world needs it. Then, as if by magic, the clouds will clear and the sun will shine again. — Mary Hobbs