Those who found it inappropriate for an Anzac Day speaker to call out United States President Donald Trump for attacking Iran may need to think again.
Anzac Day is a time for remembering and honouring those who died in conflicts as well as reminding us of the folly of wars and why we should steer well clear of them.
The speaker, Montecillo Trust chairman David More, is in a country where we supposedly value freedom of speech.
Ironically, it is not unusual to hear views expressed around Anzac Day that such freedoms have been preserved as a result of our involvement in world wars.
What better time, then, to use that ability to speak without fear of retribution to draw attention to situations which might lead us or other countries into needless bloodshed?
It may also be worth remembering Anzac Day has not been without controversy over the years.
There were protests about people laying wreaths protesting against the Vietnam War and those commemorating women raped and killed in wars.
Some readers may be old enough to remember speakers opposing the anti-nuclear policy also aired their views at some services in the 1980s.
In recent years, speakers have drawn attention to the illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine, including former prime minister Dame Jacinda Ardern in 2022 who described it as a senseless act of war.
‘‘It is a threat to the international laws that a nation like ours relies on - but it is also a threat to our sense of humanity. And that makes it a threat to all of us,’’ she said.
We do not recall controversy over that.
Matters of war and peace will always be political.
Mr More’s words were not dishonouring those who had died in previous conflicts.
Rather, he was emphasising the importance of the rules-based system set up after World War 2, based on the principle of sovereign equality of all nations, and which was aimed at preventing another world war.
‘‘We owe it to those we honour today, who gave their lives in two world wars in the cause of freedom, to continue to uphold the rules of international law.’’
It is his view there is a real risk President Trump, through his unlawful actions, has returned the world to the conditions that brought about the second world war.
Mr More, whether you agree with him or not, has the right to call it as he sees it.
Events funding questions
The unseemly stoush between Act New Zealand’s Todd Stephenson and Tourism and Hospitality Minister Louise Upston over the $40 million Events Attraction Package could be dismissed as election year party posturing.
However, while it might have been a step too far for Mr Stephenson to describe it as starting to look less like an economic strategy and more like her personal slush fund, there are ongoing questions about what is attracting funding from this.
It beggars belief Robbie Williams, who has happily held concerts in New Zealand as an add-on to every Australian tour he has had in the past 28 years, suddenly now needs a government subsidy to come here.
Nor do we know how much that subsidy is for the two concerts in Christchurch and Auckland.
Ms Upston has hit back at Mr Stephenson’s accusations, but it is difficult to understand her new-found love of the value of concerts from overseas artists when as recently as last June she was much more realistic about their value.
Then, she was saying some might generate an economic boost for the region where they were held, but overall the profit tended to go offshore.
Mr Stephenson is not the only one to be sceptical of the claim that for every dollar spent on live performances, $3.20 goes back to the wider community.
The Events Attraction Package is not a contestable fund, but one where projects are identified by an independent panel and invited to apply. The panel then advises Ms Upston with the government making the final decisions.
We agree with Mr Stephenson that a contestable process would be fairer.
Much more transparency is needed around all of this.
