It was odd the fourth anniversary of the horrific attack on the Christchurch mosques passed without any official observance on the government’s part yesterday.
Every March 15 since that fateful afternoon in 2019, the 51 lives lost and the dozens more who were injured in the gunman’s rampage have been rightly acknowledged by multiple ministers, with then-Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern always taking the lead.
But this year, nada.
Apparently, the government’s line is that the affected community didn’t want a commemoration this year. But is it overly cynical to wonder whether it was considered politically unhelpful to the current occupant of the Beehive’s ninth floor to remind voters of how his predecessor’s handling of the violent tragedy catapulted her to global attention, positioning her in the minds of many as the perfect emblem of modern progressive leadership?
One doesn’t have to be an ardent fan of Jacinda Ardern to appreciate the way she conducted herself in the days immediately following the massacre was utterly magnificent.
Ardern initially had several things to achieve.
First was to provide a focal point for the shock and grief of the nation as a whole.
Second was to emphatically communicate with the reeling Muslim community in Christchurch, as well as members of the faith across Aotearoa.
In terms of cultural and political symbolism, her decision to wear a hijab during the aftermath of the attack was a stroke of semiotic brilliance, creating an enduring image of culture-bridging kindness and reconciliation in the face of a hate-filled crime.
Her third task has been less remarked on, perhaps due to the fear it would serve to stoke the Islamophobia presumed to have prompted the atrocity in the first place.
Following the mass murders there were legitimate fears at the highest levels of government the mosque attacks would make New Zealand a destination for jihadists intent on revenge for their slain brethren. As such, Ardern’s every utterance about the event was calibrated with both a local and a potentially antagonistic international audience in mind.
Ardern managed to fulfil all these requirements with a preternatural political aplomb that seemed completely sincere, with a strong sense of shared humanity shining through.
So it wouldn’t be a great surprise if Hipkins and his minders concluded it would be prudent to avoid giving the public a reason to recall Ardern at the height of her powers. Because however you slice his “bread and butter” approach, ‘Chippy’ pales in comparison to his former boss – and not just because he’s a ginger.
Then again, perhaps it was decided to elide the events of four years ago because since then the government’s response to the tragedy has been less than stellar.
The swift change in our firearm laws was hailed around the world but we certainly don’t seem safer from gun violence as a result – and arguably quite the opposite.
The promised hate speech laws intended to give added protection to Muslims – and other religious groups – have been kicked to touch.
And the Christchurch Call initiative – however laudable its aims – is at risk of looking increasingly repressive instead of progressive.
It would be a shame if the lack of commemoration was due to such calculations.
