Paul Henry talks a lot about championing free speech, but his Dunedin event showed where he draws the line

OPINION: Paul Henry pretends to be a great believer in free speech. His Dunedin event just gave him an opportunity to prove it, but the result was hardly convincing.

BHN Podcaster Mike “Chewie” Bennett went to Henry’s ACT Party event at the Glenroy Auditorium, listened, took notes and eventually challenged a claim made during the public question-and-answer session.

This ad is not available right now due to a network issue or pending review with the Google Advertisement Network. Please check back later.

Henry told the audience an anecdote about an engineer in Palmerston North who supposedly earned less than a beneficiary living nearby. Bennett disputed it.

“I’m sorry, there’s no way that that is true,” Bennett said.

Image: Outside the Glenroy Auditorium, Mike “Chewie” Bennett was detained by police after refusing to provide his details for a trespass notice, before being taken to Dunedin Central Police Station and later released. (Supplied / BHN / Mike "Chewie" Bennett)

Security removed Bennett shortly afterwards.

This ad is not available right now due to a network issue or pending review with the Google Advertisement Network. Please check back later.

Henry later defended that decision, accusing Bennett of shouting, interrupting and attempting to ruin the evening. He said removing Bennett was “entirely appropriate”.

There is an important distinction here.

The arrest came outside the venue after Bennett’s removal, when he initially refused to provide police with his details during the trespass process.

Henry says people are entitled to ask difficult questions, disagree with him and even think he is an idiot. But, apparently, there are limits to the free speech he ponders about when he is the one questioned.

Free speech is easy to champion when the person speaking agrees, politely waits their turn and accepts whatever answer they are given. The principle becomes meaningful when someone pushes back, disputes a claim and makes the room uncomfortable. That is how democracy works in a functioning society.

Nobody is arguing that free speech gives someone an unlimited right to commandeer a meeting or prevent everyone else from speaking.

Organisers are entitled to maintain order.

This ad is not available right now due to a network issue or pending review with the Google Advertisement Network. Please check back later.

The issue is proportionality.

Image: Mike “Chewie” Bennett standing inside the Dunedin event, where he said he had been quietly taking notes on his phone before later questioning Paul Henry during the Q&A session. (Supplied / BHN / Mike "Chewie" Bennett)

Bennett challenged the accuracy of something said by a political candidate at a political meeting during a Q&A. Moments later, security was escorting him out.

A politician campaigning on ideas of liberty should welcome that scrutiny.

Free speech cannot simply mean protecting speech until it becomes inconvenient.

Henry can be entitled to defend his event and Bennett is entitled to challenge claims. But once you build part of your political identity around freedom of expression, you set yourself a higher standard.

This ad is not available right now due to a network issue or pending review with the Google Advertisement Network. Please check back later.

Dunedin was a test of that principle and Henry now has some explaining to do.

Advertisement

Advertisement Why this ad? Advertising revenue keeps articles free to read. Ads are personalised by Google, not us. Thank you for your support! 🎉

Advertisement