Search
Close this search box.

Your Centre for New Zealand News

Did Hipkins learn the meaning of ‘compulsory’ from the podium of truth?

In brief
  • The PM and Pinnochio agree the covid vaccination was always your own choice.
  • Have you chosen to be robbed if you agree under threat of something worse?
  • Even those that agree with Hipkins’ fine distinctions might still be mad they were forced into that choice.
  • Voters will determine who’s got the bigger team now.  

No compulsory vaccination? 

Prime Minister Chris Hipkins sparked a minor furore with his comment stating “there was no compulsory vaccination” and claimed that “people made their own choices” regarding accepting (or refusing) COVID 19 injections.

It is true soldiers did not forcibly inject anyone, but do you have to go that far to be “compulsory” in this context? Confessions are routinely thrown out by courts if they are coerced, but they are never “compulsory”. Also, it may be particularly sensitive because, before the last election, former PM Jacinda Ardern stated vaccines would not be mandated

If you do a google search of “Hipkins says vaccines not compulsory”, it returns a lot of searches relating to vaccine mandates. So if the multiple mandates don’t equal compulsory, someone should let Google know because their algorithm says differently!

Of course we’re just being tongue-in-cheek, but it illustrates the real point here, which is that the PM is playing very self-serving word games. Which is more of the same for the Labour party, as far as we are concerned.

The reality was that under no-jab-no-job policies and related mandates, on practically everything aside from essential services, there was virtually no choice at all for many people.

Added to that was perhaps the most aggressive public relations campaigns in recent history, so pressure was applied by other citizens as well.

Did Hipkins learn the meaning of ‘compulsory’ from the podium of truth? - Centrist

Isn’t this endless gaming of words a giant issue as well?

Plenty of animosity about the mandates remains. Also, even if you were happy to be vaccinated you might not like that others were coerced with the mandates. So Hipkins downplaying (read “misrepresenting”) them like this is antagonising people. Wouldn’t it be better if instead he just acknowledged how hard it was for many and the government tried to do their best in a difficult time?

Instead, he has now expanded the mandate issue into one of deceit as well. Something that will resonate with many that were against his other policies where he is less than forthright, even if they may have sympathised with the mandates.

Two world views on offer for voters

Perhaps Hipkins feels the Government was ethically justified to coerce people into taking vaccinations. He isn’t alone. Ultimately, the election is going to determine who’s got the bigger team here. 

You can’t count your chickens before they’re hatched, but the way it’s going, the anti mandate crowd (cynically dubbed ‘anti vaxxers’) may have the last laugh. 

Enjoyed this story? Share it around.​

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
5 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Read More

NEWS STORIES

Sign up for our free newsletter

Receive curated lists of news links and easy-to-digest summaries from independent, alternative and mainstream media about issues affect New Zealanders.