Open evidence draft: nothing here gets a free ride. Claims, costs and assumptions are available for challenge.
Evidence & public review

Start with the actual proposal. Then bring the red pen.

The proposal reader is the centre of this review system. It lets readers target exact passages, attach a category and source, inspect related feedback, vote, share and export the review record.

The exact public ask

Fund Stage 0—not a national rollout.

Parliament should fund a transparent feasibility and co-design phase to determine whether He Ara Angitū can be made safe, culturally legitimate, affordable, deliverable and worth testing in a limited pilot.

Stage 0 should produce a robust business case, safeguarding design, technical specifications, supplier evidence, independent evaluation plan and pre-published stop/scale rules.

Signing the future petition will support investigation—not blind adoption.

Follow the petition launch

The bargain

Public money should buy disciplined answers—not a promise that a citizen’s preferred design gets adopted.

  • Safety gate
  • Affordability gate
  • Delivery gate
  • Cultural legitimacy gate
  • Independent evaluation gate
Review standard

Make criticism specific enough to be useful.

“I do not like it” is a valid reaction, but not yet a complete argument. Strong review identifies the claim, mechanism, assumption, number or safeguard that fails—and explains why.

The same standard applies to support. “This sounds good” is not evidence; supporters should show their working too.

Best possible contribution

Identify the weak bolt before a pilot reaches the road. That is more valuable than applause, dismissal or party-line reflexes.

Challenge an exact passage