A wide-ranging conversation with the opposition spokesperson on foreign affairs. 

Even before the second Trump term began, the world was a volatile place. But since January 20, across eight whiplash weeks, the pace of change has been astonishing. Donald Trump’s America First geopolitics, melding expansionist and isolationist instincts, has created a febrile, volatile atmosphere in foreign affairs.

In the coming days, Winston Peters will meet Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, in the most important engagement between New Zealand and Washington so far in Trump’s second term. Winston Peters, an experienced minister for foreign affairs, is expected to approach the meeting with caution. 

How differently might the opposition spokesperson for foreign affairs, David Parker – a previous minister for trade and climate and a former attorney general – tackle the challenge?

“There is a realpolitik here,” he said. “That means that you don’t put your head above the parapet unnecessarily, and you don’t provoke a response, particularly when things are so volatile.” But while “we understand that the government wants to tread with care”, Parker condemned New Zealand’s refusal to join 79 countries in pushing back against the US sanctions against the International Criminal Court. 

“It’s one thing for the United States to say, look, we don’t want to be part of that international institution, that’s their right … But it’s another thing for them to sanction countries that do cooperate … New Zealand wouldn’t sign up [and] we thought that that was wrong.” It was important, he said, to “speak up at a time like that”. 

Parker was keen to be clear, however, that, were he in Peters’ shoes, he would not be looking to make a scene in DC. “I think, in truth, we’d be being careful with our language, not to be provoking a response from the US administration, as the current government is.” Behind closed doors, he would be sending a sterner message, as Peters could well be, too. “I would be saying, please don’t trash the international institutions. You know, we need them.”

The broader breakdown in the conventional international order and emergence of populism had roots that pre-date Trump, said Parker. “The underlying trends have been there for a while. You know, the the ineffectiveness of the United Nations, the overuse of the veto in the Security Council, the way in which, on the back of the undermining of the authority of the UN, there seem to be more and more breaches of the international rule of law, which in turn make people more cynical about the effectiveness of the UN … Some underlying trends have been the undoing of the consensus that was largely driven by the US, in concert with other countries like New Zealand since World War II.”

Ahead of a speech for Diplosphere with the title “Navigating the New World (Dis)order in Turbulent Times”, Parker joined Toby Manhire for a wide-ranging discussion on foreign policy and the acute challenges faced by the world and New Zealand. The special edition of Gone By Lunchtime spanned a range of subjects, including Ukraine, Gaza, the Cook Islands’ deal with China and the recent muscle flexing by Beijing in the Tasman Sea. Parker explained the Labour Party stance on Aukus, and covered Five Eyes, tariff threats and defence spending. The conversation inevitably touched also on Labour plans to introduce a capital gains or wealth tax, as well as the role social media has played – and continues to play – in “undermining civil society in New Zealand and everywhere”. 

He said: “I’ve been in politics now for over 20 years. I’ve been attorney general, had a lot of portfolio responsibilities in trade and foreign affairs. I’ve got a keen interest in civil liberties. I’m a real believer in free speech … I’m just saying you shouldn’t be able to sell a dangerous product.” Parker’s personal view is that “the only way through this is to remove the exclusion of liability that’s been afforded them for third-party content”. He explained: “At the moment, there’s a piece in our telecommunications legislation which says that social media companies are not liable for content that is published through their platforms or given access via their platforms.” The different rules that apply to such companies, he argued, should be revisited, given their impact on democracy. 

“Do I think that’s one of the most important issues facing the world? Yes, I do. Could New Zealand fix those issues alone? Unlikely. Will there come a point in time when the world just gets sick of the overreach of some of these megalomaniac tech billionaires who pay tax nowhere and interfere in foreign countries? Maybe there will. Should New Zealand be willing to be a participant if the world reacts against the overreach by those billionaires? In my opinion, yes. Is that coming tomorrow? I don’t know. Is that a decade away? I don’t know. But I think we should be having a conversation as citizens of the world.”

Ditching the ‘woke’ guidelines was in the NZ First coalition agreement so not unexpected, but the lack of any replacement has teachers and health advocates concerned.

The Ministry of Education has removed relationship and sexuality teaching guidelines, with no replacement in sight – a move that has been labelled a “huge step backwards” that “sends a harmful message” to queer teaching staff and students in Aotearoa.

The Relationship and Sexuality Education (RSE) guidelines were introduced in 2020 by then associate education minister Tracey Martin of New Zealand First, when her party was in a coalition with Labour. Building upon the hauora model (looking holistically at the physical, mental, emotional and spiritual), the guidelines responded to emerging gaps in the curriculum around consent, digital technologies and relationships, as well as to changing family structures, shifting social norms in relation to gender and sexuality, and the increased use of digital communications and devices.

Despite these RSE guidelines being introduced by one of NZ First’s own MPs (Martin left the party in 2021), it campaigned on their removal at the 2023 election – specifically, “removing gender ideology from the curriculum”. Leader Winston Peters publicly denounced the guidelines, posting on X: “Why are our school children, from age five, now being taught about ‘relationships, gender, and sexuality’?” (Read what was actually in the guidelines here.) In November 2023, NZ First secured the removal of the guidelines as part of its coalition agreement with National, promising to “refocus the curriculum on academic achievement and not ideology, including the removal and replacement of the gender, sexuality, and relationship-based education guidelines”. 

In an April 2024 interview with 1News, education minister Erica Stanford emphasised that the guidelines would be replaced, not simply removed, and said they had important content she wished to keep. In December, Stanford announced a relationship and sexuality education refresh, following an ERO review that found some inconsistencies in what was being taught and when. The report also found that four in five school leaders found the RSE guidelines useful, and that teachers who didn’t use the RSE guidelines were 1.6 times more likely to be stressed. Among the recommendations was to “ensure clarity on what should be taught and when, spanning from Years 0 to 13”. The review did not recommend removing RSE altogether. 

Stanford’s announcement of the refresh said a draft of the replacement topic areas to be taught would be available from term one 2025, with a consultation process open later in the year. At the end of the minister’s release, she acknowledged that the term one timing “will coincide with the current gender, sexuality and relationship-based education guidelines being removed by the end of the first term. This will meet a coalition commitment between National and New Zealand First.” Peters celebrated the news on Facebook:  “We campaigned to get these woke out-of-touch guidelines removed from our schools and to stop indoctrinating our kids. Promise made. Promise kept.” 

While some teachers were aware the RSE guidelines were to be removed this term, the lack of even a draft replacement has caused concern. School leaders were notified of the removal of the guidelines in an email sent by secretary for education Ellen McGregor-Reid on March 3, which advised that RSE teaching should now align with the 2007 version of the curriculum. The email said  there would be “further updates and support” as the refresh progressed, as well as the opportunity to provide feedback later this year. 

The Spinoff emailed Stanford a number of questions about the removal of the guidelines and lack of replacement, but a spokesperson said these should be directed instead to the Ministry of Education as it was an “operational matter”. 

In an emailed statement, the ministry’s Curriculum Centre acting hautū Pauline Cleaver said the guidelines were removed on February 25, “in line with the approach endorsed by Cabinet in December 2024”, and would be “replaced by a clearer curriculum that sets requirements for the teaching and learning of relationships and RSE each year of schooling”. This “more specific curriculum” would mean “teachers have the detail they need for teaching and learning without the need for supplementary guidance, such as the relationships and sexuality education (RSE) guidelines”. 

A “draft framework” to support RSE teaching and learning would be released later in term one, which would be “refined through consultation to create a knowledge-rich HPE [health and physical education] learning area”, said Cleaver. “The focus will be on ensuring RSE content is age-appropriate, evidence-informed, and clear about what to teach and when each year of school.” In the meantime, schools were advised to “plan their teaching and learning programmes …  to align with the 2007 version of the New Zealand Curriculum and this should be informed by community consultation”.

Teachers’ union NZEI Te Riu Roa said its members were “deeply concerned” about the lack of information now available to teachers, with president Ripeka Lessels calling it “a huge step backwards to inadequate support for the health and PE learning area”. The guidelines “should be left in place as they are reworked and put out for consultation. Removing them now creates a huge, confusing and dangerous vacuum.”

The Spinoff spoke to one Auckland primary school teacher, Sam*, who said the RSE guidelines were useful in clarifying what should be taught at a younger level, and encouraging teachers to be aware of cultural differences. The sections about “special considerations about our rainbow community students, or our disabled students” were particularly valuable, as were those that  “mentioned being aware of the Māori worldview, and also sensitivities for our Pasifika whānau”. 

“It was helpful even if it was just confirming what you already know,” they added. “Because at the end of the day, teachers are there to make sure that our students feel comfortable and that they feel safe. And the guidelines were making sure that conversations that we would have with our students would make them feel comfortable and safe.”

University of Canterbury lecturer Tracy Clelland, who contributed to the 2020 RSE resources and has since returned to the classroom to teach, said the lack of a replacement was destabilising. “Teachers are a little bit uncertain of what to do and what to teach at the moment. We all need guidelines. We all need support,” she said. “I feel concerned that with what’s happening here and across the world, that we’re not actually putting young people’s needs first. Young people are calling out for the chance to have these discussions in a critical way, and the removal just creates more misinformation.” 

Reports of concern in the teaching community were backed up by Fiona McNamara, director of health promotion for Sexual Wellbeing Aotearoa, who said schools were left “in limbo” by the move. “We’re aware that a number of schools are holding tight and not delivering RSE at the moment, because they are just really confused about what they should be doing,” she said. Sexual Wellbeing Aotearoa works closely with schools to help them implement the health curriculum, but McNamara noted “we have a much lower number of schools who are taking us up on that offer at the moment”.

Tabby Besley, managing director of Inside Out, said the removal of the guidelines without replacement was “appalling” and could have “extremely dangerous” consequences. “At this time where rainbow rights are under attack globally, it’s more important than ever for rainbow young people to see themselves reflected in the curriculum – and for their non-rainbow peers to build compassion,” she said. “Despite the government’s focus on attendance and achievement, they are neglecting to do anything to support rainbow young people.”

The removal of the guidelines was also a mental health issue, said Shaun Robinson, chief executive of the Mental Health Foundation of New Zealand. “Without adequate guidance, kaiako and school leadership may lack crucial advice on how to create positive environments in which bullying, discrimination and social exclusion can’t thrive – especially for rainbow and takatāpui tauira,” he said. “Removing the guidelines sends a harmful message to rainbow staff and tauira that they don’t deserve to be safe at school or work.”

Robinson also raised concerns about the way the change was being presented. “We suspect the removal of the RSE guidelines is being framed as being a standard part of the wider health and physical education refresh to avoid drawing attention to the driving force behind the coalition agreement,” he said. “We strongly oppose these sentiments, and what they signal to takatāpui students and staff – that they don’t deserve to be safe at school or work, when in fact everybody deserves this, regardless of their gender, sexuality or background.”

The draft replacement framework is expected to be released later in term one, with feedback on the RSE refresh opening later in 2025. “If we are to go on the consultation processes that have been carried out during 2024 and 2025 so far, we can expect a timeframe of as little as three weeks, with kura and schools being encouraged to feed their consultation through a SurveyMonkey form, where questions are very contrived for particular answers,” said NZEI Te Riu Roa president Rissels. “We are unlikely to get much warning of them coming, either.”

In the meantime, primary school teacher Sam* shared a metaphor for the situation: “You don’t take away the support for the problem until you’ve fixed the problem,” they said. “If your table is being held up by a bookcase on one corner, you wouldn’t get rid of it until you’ve actually got a new leg.” As for Winston Peters’ celebration about the removal of the “woke” guidelines? “To quote Jane Fonda, the ‘woke’ guidelines are just giving a damn about other people, about minorities being heard and seen and recognised and valued as human beings,” they said. 

“It doesn’t matter if it’s only one kid that would benefit from hearing something – if it’s going to benefit them, it’s also going to benefit the other kids for hearing it.” 

*Name has been changed