Distributed in voluntary urgency to members/alumni of the University of Auckland [Motorsport Club]/Aotearoa-New Zealand’s social motoring community – and other comparable clubs/student groups/collegially interested parties in the Auckland Learning Quarter as a matter of:

1) Public Interest¹;

2) Academic Freedom²; and

3) Subsequent to unconsented multi-year collective conduct that calls into question the character of those students, staff, discreet/upfront community activists, and members of the nation’s governance apparatus who may have participated in an arguably bad faith interpretation of ‘our’ Bill of Rights¹, the Education and Training Act², and potentially the intent for regulatory capture as implied by the commercial actions³ of our hallowed academic institution and its partners:

• Acknowledgement of New Zealand’s current codified processes under its Legislative, Governance, and Parliamentary structures potentially being inappropriate, inconsistent, and ineffective at satisfying the spirit of Aotearoa-New Zealand’s foundational document (The Treaty of/Te Tiriti o Waitangi, 1840)⁴.

¹ https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0109/latest/whole.html

² https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2020/0038/latest/whole.html

³ e.g. https://app.iponz.govt.nz/app/Extra/IP/Mutual/Browse.aspx?sid=638651243630659776&op=EXTRA_PS_CB&headerVisible=0&idMark=1087906&tyApp=1

⁴ https://nzhistory.govt.nz/politics/treaty/read-the-Treaty/differences-between-the-texts

In the instance of weblinks being inaccessible, they may be available via https://web.archive.org, https://archive.today, and/or https://megalodon.jp

Kia ora,

Belated Merry Christmas and a Happy New Calendar Year.

Minus those who have unsubscribed from this Club channel, all community members from 2019 to 2024 – in the spirit of appropriate transparency AND with respect to technical reality, e.g. Google Suite ‘Super Administrators’: https://support.google.com/a/answer/2405986?hl=en – have been anonymously addressed in this email.

Please find below discussion on any outstanding matters – apparent or otherwise – related to this social collective, as per prior publications.

These shall be:

A) PREFACE

B) OUTSTANDING GENERAL BUSINESS

C) ACADEMIC FREEDOM

The matters above are to be prefaced by a general overview of what’s transpired in 2024; without forgoing fundamental rights to privacy, the privileges and obligations afforded to University [of Auckland] (UoA) students and alumni, and the overarching UoA Code of Conduct.

A) PREFACE

i) Academic Year (2024 / 2025)

Much like New Zealand’s Motorsport seasons having overlap as function of its Southern Hemisphere climate – e.g. Toyota GR86 2024-2025 season⁵ ⁶ – there is some overlap with the 2024 academic year technically ends, and when the 2025 year begins, as listed in the University Website⁷ and Calendar:

⁵ https://www.toyota.co.nz/toyota-racing/gr86-championship/calendar--results/

⁶ https://www.toyota.co.nz/toyota-racing/gr8championship/gr86-championship-news/2024-25/

⁷ https://www.calendar.auckland.ac.nz/en/keydates/dates/otherdates.html#9dfd471aac3d04cf9cd2a8aa26663b16

ii) 70% of Members as Students Requirement

Recall the Club’s initial activation being that of the Undergraduate Semester 2 Club Expo, 2019. Let’s reasonably assume that many of the Clubs’ members were freshmen then. Many of that year’s cohort would then be eligible for graduation circa-2023 (assuming an average degree length of members is ~3.5 years).

Thus, come the 2025 academic year’s graduation cycles, a large proportion of the Clubs’ 2019 cohort would no longer be considered students by UoA’s Campus Life Division, as per Clubs Handbook’s – past⁸ and present⁹ – apparent three year grace period for who is considered a student. This would more or less be the case for every successive cohort afterwards, provided that no further study was undertaken by said cohorts’ members.

⁸ https://web.archive.org/web/20240000000000*/https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/on-campus/life-on-campus/clubs-societies/clubs-handbook.html

⁹ https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/on-campus/life-on-campus/clubs-societies/clubs-handbook.html

No significant effort was made by the majority of executives from ‘founding’ to validate this status of members beyond inferring the express relationship of membership with the University via their @aucklanduni.ac.nz (student, past/present) or @auckland.ac.nz (staff) emails. It is further worth questioning whether there would be a truly legitimate purpose in obtaining academic programme information from members on the presumption that these student groups are pseudo-non-profits (until the groups become incorporated societies/charities).

Should this unquestioned requirement revolve around collective financial matters regarding Campus-Life-derived student-services-fees funding – as discussed in prior publications typically amounting to fractions of cents per member, i.e. quantitatively trivial amounts – then perhaps membership fees should be tiered depending on the member’s status as a student or alumni.

iii) Financial Membership Benefits (and Costs)

Recall that given the general lack of active financial leadership, financial members are loosely and ill-defined terms prior to members being expressly charged fees. Nonetheless, financial membership serves as a legal instrument in the process of contract formation between member and Club, and is something that may require a level of due diligence by members of the community – namely those who have made financial contributions from Semester 2, 2023 onwards to the Club’s account (number: 06-0158-0953784-00).

Further to the above, students that hoped to compete in events held under comparable conditions by national/international sporting bodies – such as Motorsport New Zealand or AASA NZ – require financial outlay that covers the registration fees of the respective governing organisation, at minimum.

This was historically handled by prior partners of these student groups at – and only at – cost to students. Moving forward, it may be worthwhile formalising the nature of these partnerships, and is a matter of discussion in later sections.

iv) Application of Academic Freedom

Explored in its own section in-depth. To be applied and expanded on where relevant otherwise; e.g. The University’s draft policy¹⁰ on the subject, and its Executive Committee refraining from the internal enactment of the policy pending Parliamentary decisions⁵ regarding the matter.

¹⁰ https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/about-us/about-the-university/policy-hub/policy-development-review/draft-policies/draft-freedom-of-expression-and-academic-freedom-policy.html

¹¹ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btPDwCie9u4

B) OUTSTANDING GENERAL BUSINESS

i) Hampton Downs Experience Vouchers

Available on request (note that original voucher redemption dates have lapsed and/or experience options in venue have changed, e.g. refreshed HDMP vehicle fleet).

On-track facilities tour and filming day discussed with outgoing BDM.

Business case for travel to ‘city limits’ venue requires reengagement with any remaining members of the community.

ii) Intellectual Property (I.P.) Retrieval

For example, the Club’s Instagram account which is one of – if not the – most engaging digital channel(s) its members interact(ed) with. The featured works and student-generated content should have ultimately been protected by the University of Auckland’s I.P. Policy¹². However, it was conveniently deactivated by Meta Platforms Inc. the month immediately subsequent to the Auckland University Students Association (AUSA)’s digital advertising push for 2023.¹³ ¹⁴ ¹⁵ ¹⁶ ¹⁷ ¹⁸

¹² https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/about-us/about-the-university/policy-hub/research-innovation/conduct/intellectual-property-created-staff-students-policy.html

¹³ http://ausa.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Social-Media-Rates.pdf

¹⁴ http://ausa.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/eNewsletter-Rates.pdf

¹⁵ http://ausa.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Craccum-Rates-2023.pdf

¹⁶ AUSA Commercial: https://ausa.org.nz/commercial/

¹⁷ Compare February 2023: https://web.archive.org/web/20230203224841/https://ausa.org.nz/commercial/

¹⁸ with June 2023: https://web.archive.org/web/20230609140736/http://ausa.org.nz/commercial/

N.B.: Recall that there is an unsurprising institutional interest for the University to cultivate the reach – and ultimately the status – of its de facto “third party” for affairs related to its students for the purpose of simplifying its administrative obligations, with this being AUSA (the postgraduate alternative being the PGSA).

This reach – which is still relatively low in relation to student body representation as of 2024¹⁹ – may have been the result of what transpired in the campus community discourse circa-2017.

¹⁹ https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=917655200396912&id=100064573214020

There were corresponding codified amendments to the relationship between UoA and AUSA²⁰ potentially resultant from 2017, where AUSA had its wholesale management of now independent student groups ‘divvied-up’ between members of their student executive and UoA staff (in the form of the “Clubs Support Committee”), a privilege it has sought to reclaim as stated in prior Club publications.

²⁰ https://archive.is/jlqfQ

Supplementary to this, the University ultimately filed an incredibly delayed application for the “UOA” trademark in 2018²¹. This successful trademark application was subsequently utilised by the 2024 Clubs Support Committee leadership to ‘throw more books’ toward long-serving members and patrons of UoA.

²¹ https://app.iponz.govt.nz/app/Extra/IP/Mutual/Browse.aspx?sid=638651243630659776&op=EXTRA_PS_CB&headerVisible=0&idMark=1087906&tyApp=1

Uncollegial and potential intent for regulatory capture by both parties against this Club aside, it’s worthwhile noting that the Postgraduate Students Association – the postgraduate counterpart of AUSA – have announced their intention to merge²² with the more visible student association, and is an unsurprising development given all of the above.

²² https://instagram.com/p/DC7kv5_TX82/

Rounding out this section, besides the community members who contributed to the zero-sum outcome(s) described – comparable to any/all of the above or otherwise – please advise if there are any objections toward a custodian of Club records seeking the retrieval of any I.P. on your behalf.

iii) Finance (Club Bank Account, Membership Fees, etc.)

Recall that the account details of the Club’s primary bank account with ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited is as follows:

Name: UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND MOTORSPORTS

Account number:  06-0158-0953784-00

Further note that there were membership fees deposited to the Club Bank Account up to and including the Semester 1, 2023, and that the funds in said account were “stopped” conveniently upon activation of the “One Last Ride” promo campaign from the 19th of May, 2023.

An informal audit of the Club’s records indicate that there may have been those who deposited funds into said account who potentially also participated in the process of having access to all of the Clubs funds restricted.

It appears that this bank account is now being used by the fork-Club [“Vroom UoA”]; and may have potentially been the case as early as the end of February 2024: https://www.instagram.com/C3q0qLTgizX (see below for sign-up and instructions from this segment of the student motoring community).

Notwithstanding the propensity of the founding member cohorts to engage in practical jokes that potentially would have jeopardised their individual and collective professional pathways; the non-collegial, intentionally UoA Code of Conduct breaching vitriol spewed by fork-Club representatives toward some of the longest-serving members of this community, the situation described above may have brought about complications for membership – particularly from a contract-law perspective – as first-time or renewing members are faced with the probability of having accepted the fork-Club’s publically available [apparent] constitution²³ from February 2024 onwards.

Any community member – prior UoA-MSC cohort or otherwise – who filled in the form above and subsequently deposited the requisite “$5” into the 06-0158-0953784-00 account potentially has a contract with the fork-Club. The Club will withhold making further commentary on this matter as this would breach the spirit and intention of not involving legal professionals in the running and administration of an unincorporated student group, as per “The Accord” [despite multiple members and executives in this community having current/relatively recent access to legal counsel with no apparent conflicts of interest, as afforded to them by UoA staff access to HR].

Prior UoA-MSC signatories – and apparently relevant fork-Club “executives” – were reached out to at multiple occasions in 2024 to confirm whether or not those funds were accessible for community access and enjoyment. No meaningful response was received to confirm fund/account access for the enjoyment of membership/student body. ANZ Bank Limited was subsequently approached to confirm the state of affairs on the 16th of October, 2024; and it appears that any potential issues regarding signatories – and by extension account access – may have been largely resolved; though it would be remiss not to state the concerning state of affairs with how both industry, the University – and by extension its directly connected members of the student and staff community – have participated in an elongated process of obfuscation (see Section 3 onwards).

Aside from the conduct of so-called student “community leaders” bringing into question the purpose for the soundness of character test being removed from education legislation²⁴ in 2020 – and on the presumption that the quantitative affairs explored above are not a significant issue for members past or present – then the only unresolved matter are the outstanding funds owing to members (for costs incurred by said members on behalf of the Club or otherwise).

Some of these funds have been held in the personal accounts of individual members – such as those unused from the Gran Turismo film night – and the relevant depositors have been reached out to so as to validate the contributions they made for either refund or reuse.

²³ https://auckland.campuslabs.com/engage/organization/vroomuoa/documents/view/2196297

²⁴ https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1989/0080/latest/whole.html

iv) Other Club Assets

The physical Beach Flag is held by a Club custodian.

This was offered for community use in Semester 2, 2024; though subsequently and incoherently rejected by 2024 Vroom leadership; in the digital presence of UoA Campus Life staff – and associated fork-club leadership – no less.

Cultural identities and customs aside, a member of the wider University of Auckland community may want to chime in regarding how comparable this conduct is to the historic nationwide aversion of respectfully incorporating Māori symbolism and assets in New Zealand’s presentation.

Further setting aside the multiple instances of outreach to UoA’s Student Groups/Campus Life regarding this entire saga, the fact that members of the University – all of whom having the requisite formal education or training – have willingly permitted this de facto double-standard to continue to transpire, i.e. silence – as conducted by those with express knowledge of of UoA’s position on sustainability AND its statutory obligations toward the The Treaty of/Te Tiriti o Waitangi – may be a damning display of folly in Aotearoa-New Zealand’s higher-learning environment.

Nonetheless, collegial and constructive criticism of active groups that carry the University’s title are fair game with respect to Academic Freedom. As an example different from above:

With that said, there are underutilised member assets that may be sound candidates for donation to the Club, either as a “barn-find” project or as a “car-party”/spare parts donor vehicle for members to utilise. More pristine images of the privately owned assets are below; and only requires the time, tooling, and a way to transport said assets to any potential new homes; should membership find value in use/exchange from either or.

v) Grand Prix Executive Selection Format

Given the issues and challenges with the local and global environments²⁵ since the Clubs founding in 2019, to the lasting impact of said state of affairs – a state which even New Zealand’s Treasury can only forecast to barely maintain and recover from²⁶ – this format as an innovative, radical, and potentially cost-effective way to truly identify value and talent has been proven in the past already from the motorsport fraternity’s pool of “human capital” (one need only look at the number of sim-racers that have made a successful jump into a real race car).

²⁵ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_of_the_COVID-19_pandemic_on_motorsport

²⁶ https://www.treasury.govt.nz/information-and-services/nz-economy/covid-19-economic-response

The appetite for this format needs to be cultivated given the past 4 years, and any remaining Club executives are encouraged by the fact that:

a) The Hiwa Recreation Centre on Symonds Street is now open for business²⁷ ²⁸ ²⁹; and

b) Red Bull New Zealand is reviving its much-loved Trolley Grand Prix this coming February. ³⁰ ³¹ ³²

In the instance of a UoA-community-led approach to this becoming feasible, then the delivery of this format needs to be reviewed and potentially iterated upon in-light of the non-collegial state of affairs that was expressly spearheaded by sociodemographically vociferous segments of the University/New Zealand Motorsport communities’ as far back as November 2022.

It may be worthwhile acknowledging that Red Bull NZ received a TGP entry with the very go-kart in the image from the prior section many moons ago, and is refreshing to see their commercial activities encourage active public engagement and participation in the most bare-bones/grassroots racing format available in Auckland’s CBD.

²⁷ https://wam.studio/work/university-of-auckland-recreation-and-wellness-centre

²⁸ https://www.colliers.co.nz/en-nz/real-estate-news/uoa-recreation-and-wellness-centre

²⁹ https://www.linkedin.com/posts/the-university-of-auckland_welcome-to-hiwa-a-new-era-for-wellbeing-activity-7265145042816634880-9Vre

³⁰ https://www.redbull.com/nz-en/events/red-bull-trolley-grand-prix-new-zealand-2025/rules-flugtag-master-2025

³¹ https://www.instagram.com/p/C_eVPgVPmb1/

³² https://www.redbull.com/nz-en/events/red-bull-trolley-grand-prix-new-zealand-2025/grant

C: ACADEMIC FREEDOM, APPLICATION OF (IN CONTEXT OF SUBSECTIONS)

An endeavor has been made to keep this section – and its corresponding subsections – as brief as reasonably possible.

i) Technology

For example, “Technical Reality” denotes that those with an asymmetric command of the digital environment relative to Club executives and membership – such as UoA [super] administrators, UoA I.T., and UoA service division directors – should also be reasonably expected to employ the privileges of their positions with reasonable duty and care.

It would appear that this may not have been the case as far back as when the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic surfaced, when UoA staff were reached out to for the purposes of communicating these concerns around technical reality, cybersecurity, and best practise. These issues were re-escalated as far up as University of Auckland executives, as recently as January 2024.

Given the lack of return correspondence about said issues beyond the natural tendency to point fingers, issues with technical security that remain unresolved – potentially to ensure the presence of digital ‘back-doors’ (as is now being discovered by the public³³ ³⁴) – then verifying the root causes of what transpired over the past 4 years may now be next to impossible if, in the arguable technocratic age that may be here now, remaining lawful is not beyond aspirational.

³³ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52v6gKPA4TM

³⁴ https://arstechnica.com/security/2024/05/hacker-free-for-all-fights-for-control-of-home-and-office-routers-everywhere/

ii) Other concerns include but aren’t limited to:

• The technical – and cultural – lack of privacy in using both University networks/hardware/software without reasonable encryption and obfuscation methods, e.g. given UoA ‘super administrators’ do not have a ‘zero-access encryption’ roadblock – a privacy and cybersecurity standard that global institutions should be aspiring towards – there is technically nothing that prevents the informal sharing of private information among UoA community members that enjoy the social privileges of identifying with a sociopolitically and institutionally favoured demographic segment;

• UoA’s use of automation software such as “UIpath” – as installed in the some University web browsers – not having an expressly defined policy on how the student’s “digital twin” would be protected under the University’s I.P. policy;

• Capacity for this technical knowledge being employed outside the University’s property and premises, and into the personal digital networks and devices of community members they – one way or another – deem a risk, e.g. “Windows Recall” in Copilot+ PCs are not necessary to have remote surveillance capabilities of networked devices when even browser-based email clients can log keystrokes in order for drafts to be saved;

• The scaled distribution of the capacity described above via ‘mandatory’ software installations – such as the Inspera Integrity Browser, where students en masse have been asked to expressly consent to installing software that has direct access to their devices’ web-traffic, web-cams, microphones, and other direct/peripheral hardware that permits exam invigilators, proctors, and other contracted parties to satisfy the policing of ‘academic integrity’, i.e. consented “click/tapjacking” access to user networks and devices, circa-2021 – should be a significant matter of public interest as those who have control over said technical capabilities typically end up abusing these e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearview_AI (further reference: https://youtu.be/efs3QRr8LWw&t=5737 )

iii) Community

The natural progression of the subsection above is how digital technology interacts with the members of the community who actually use them, though a broader exploration and commentary on the concept of ‘community’ is a worthwhile endeavor from a university club’s perspective in any case.

Recall that technology should ideally be supplementing the community experience at an individual and collective level without being overbearing on individual rights. If the example being set by government and corporations – which either have a civic duty to its people, or a fiduciary duty to its shareholders – is one of ‘technical accessibility being the benchmark [and everything else being a suggestion]’; then it may be noteworthy for the community to consider that their online/digital presence with little to no barrier to entry may be described as ‘public domain’, e.g. graduate students/staff/alumni sharing passive-aggressive opinions on their public social media profiles; community members who directly participated in ‘piling on’ Club leadership on a naive interpretation of protest and freedom of expression:

Said privileges to utilise those rights are acknowledged, despite potentially being in discreet violation of the University’s respective Code; though it may be worthwhile for these community members to exercise greater foresight in what their conduct encourages from the more impressionable in the community, and what the exogenous implications of participating in the intentional breach of the University’s Code of Conduct may entail. This collegial address benevolently employs the custom of ‘utu’/reciprocity in the unresolved affair described above.

iv) Overreach

Given both the willingness of some community members to enjoy the freedoms granted to them by an apparently informed and liberated society – as well as the unrestrained encouragement of non-collegial conduct by said community members, students, alumni, current and/or former University staff toward executives who remain students with The University of Auckland; it may be worthwhile pointing out the folly in this potentially unethical multiparty campaign that may have extended beyond the actions of those community members described.

In other words, it should be of significant public interest to be made aware of instances of questionable institutional practise to employ learning methods mirroring the experience of Aotearoa-New Zealand’s historically marginalised groups in an arguably unethical interpretation of The Education and Training Act 2020’s Section 267, subsection (4)(d).

When the University community improperly assumes both its technical capabilities and human resource advantage – voluntary, employed, or otherwise – to achieve agreement and compliance toward institutionally manufactured policies and narratives; the case with this Club seeing its executives have their personal and educational lives (routines, agreements, enrolments, devices, endeavours, and relationships; professional or otherwise) observed, tracked, and eventually ‘nudged’ for the purposes described prior; this should be of extreme concern to members of the global/international community who believe Aotearoa-New Zealand to be a progressive and libertarian safe-haven at the bottom of the world.

The details of said community overreach is private in nature, and won’t be expanded on beyond implied University encouragement for Club executives to reengage with their preferred/de facto third party (i.e. student association advocacy). To do so without the implied due-diligence of this address’ proliferation would be comparable to accepting an unfavourable set of negotiation terms of this community’s ‘less savoury’ characters, some of whom have either left the University or the community vicinity outright. Thus, the recommendation from the previous subsection applies toward the intentionally uncollegial, and potentially unethical community-wide conduct.

Those students, staff, discreet/upfront/performative community activists, and members of the nation’s governance apparatus who participated in this multi-year campaign are encouraged to refrain from these collective actions toward Club leadership in 2025 onwards, and to consider revisiting their individual and collective definition of the “Kiwi way of life“ in this subsection’s context.

In short, this institutional misconduct – potentially misrepresented in its identifying as impartial – directed toward long-standing Club executives and eventually seeing its spread beyond the UoA community toward the professional, voluntary, and public domains – needs to stop.

v) Dangers of Unscrutinised ‘Expert[ise]’

Issues above aside, the University of Auckland’s Senate/Executives must be commended for withholding – if not outright rejecting – the University’s proposed “Freedom of Expression Policy Draft” as the policy restricts expression [of academic freedom] to those with credentialed domain expertise.

Consider that there were expert opinions on the other side of this conversation³⁵ that did not align with the unilateral authority exercised by the 2020-2023 Parliament.

These alternative³⁶ ³⁷ ³⁸ – though no less qualified³⁹ – experts having had their professional reputations implicitly reprimanded potentially thanks in part to the unpoliced conduct of less savoury characters in the Auckland Learning Quarter.

³⁵ https://www.publish.csiro.au/hc/pdf/HC20132

³⁶ https://www.covidplanb.co.nz/category/news-and-videos/

³⁷ https://www.xcancel.com/simonthornley30/with_replies?cursor=DAABCgABGgcE9VC__-oKAAIV8_NcdNqAAAgAAwAAAAIAAA

³⁸ https://xcancel.com/simonthornley30?cursor=DAABCgABGgcEmtw__9QKAAIUTIhTT1UQAggAAwAAAAIAAA

³⁹ http://web.archive.org/web/20200424073136/http://www.covidplanb.co.nz/our-expert-panel/

Given the politicisation of the public discourse; the learned opinions of titans from industry⁴⁰ do become attractive propositions despite the nationwide aspiration for remaining loyal to New Zealand’s institutions and way of life. Nonetheless, scrutinising said opinions – especially those stemming from charismatic leaders – should be par for the course for any nation built on principles of freedom.

⁴⁰ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io3sdAAcZLw

It’s tragic that the hindsight sought in significant governance decisions were available very early during the proliferation of SARS-CoV-2 via the medical, scientific, and economic expertise of The University of Auckland’s people³⁵; the caveat being Prime Minister Ardern et al opting⁴¹ for the draconian scenario which was permitted by questionable pandemic modelling and recommended response⁴² – a response which has since been deemed⁴³ inappropriate, ineffective, and not based on any reputable scientific standard beyond the title of the institution.

⁴¹ https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/2020-03/background-overview-approaches-covid-19-pandemic-contro-aotearoa-new-zealand-30mar20.pdf

⁴² https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9508693/

⁴³ https://megalodon.jp/2024-1215-1457-15/https://nitter.poast.org:443/COVIDSelect/status/1863637368261021849 (U.S. COVID Select Committee Report)

Ironic that those from the Commonwealth response found hypocritical in their conduct⁴⁴ ⁴⁵ ⁴⁶ are vilified by findings in opposition to their respective opinions.

⁴⁴ https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/covid-19-coronavirus-lockdown-health-minister-david-clark-demoted-after-driving-20km-to-beach-breaking-lockdown-rules/X4AP6J336VNHT7OJYZB6YT6VKQ/

⁴⁵ https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/19/boris-johnson-and-staff-pictured-with-wine-in-downing-street-garden-in-may-2020

⁴⁶ https://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/collins-calls-dr-siouxsie-wiles-big-fat-hypocrite

The New Zealand Royal Commission tasked with reviewing what transpired during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic⁴⁷ may do well in incorporating the sources referred to in this subsection if it hasn’t done so already. However, it’s incredibly unacceptable for our very own elected officials to be aware of the potential outcomes⁴⁸ in their choices – made on our behalf – such that globally appealing pseudo-marketing and promotions campaign can be activated (potentially to attract foreign investment and migration to the region)⁴⁹.

⁴⁷ https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/royal-commission-covid-19-phase-1-report-received

⁴⁸ https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/covid-19-sees-record-12-2-percent-fall-in-new-zealands-economy/

⁴⁹ https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancpub/article/PIIS2468-2667(20)30225-5/fulltext

For how this Club was impacted by the commentary above, look no further than how Motorsport New Zealand⁵⁰ and the F.I.A.⁵¹ have had to succumb to the flawed Imperial College modelling; voluntarily, commercially, or otherwise.

⁵⁰ https://motorsport.org.nz/covid-19/

⁵¹ https://www.fia.com/fia-return-motor-sport-guidelines

Advanced institutional knowledge of unscrutinised governance rollout: https://web.archive.org/web/20220118232323/https://covid19.govt.nz/news-and-data/latest-news/introducing-the-covid-19-protection-framework/

vi) Code of Conduct (as counterweight to Academic Freedom in Motorsport/Community Context):

Let’s bring the discussion back to the tangible motoring community.

On the presumption that the intentional breaches of the University Code of Conduct’s fundamental spirit by some leaders of said community – and their respective subjects (students/staff/industry partners/alumni or otherwise) – stemmed from a form of institutional sophistry, including but not limited to:

• Long-term transitory narratives,

• Organisational [re]structure, and/or

• Advantageous human resource redirection of students/staff/club executives⁵² for an additional layer of regulatory capture against long-term community members with alternative views to the majority of the University and its subjects;

A reasonable amount of discussion in the public domain of how the University of Auckland [Motorsport Club]/Aotearoa-New Zealand’s social motoring community has conducted themselves toward members of this community they feel are ‘deserving’ – by action or omission – of the treatment dished out post-pandemic is worthwhile having.

⁵² https://uoacollectiveagreements.blogs.auckland.ac.nz/individual-employment-agreement-terms-conditions/*

* More discussion in the supplementary section titled “Further Resources”

Setting aside the use of unscrutinised expert opinion by New Zealand’s governance circa-2020, and the subsequent willingness [née, failure] of the local, national, academic, and motorsport communities to “play along” with issues which are either misleading, unethical, or outright long-term harmful; the use of this state of affairs for the purposes of reciprocity/utu/balance prompts the level of public scrutiny this address engages in – as permitted by the Education and Training Act 2020’s section 267.

Let’s take a verifiable incident at the Newmarket Innovation Precinct on the 19th of October, 2024 (Car Meet by UoA-FSAE Garage); where such an instance of unquestioned, potentially harmful, and borderline discriminatory collective conduct saw – by action AND omission – a concerted effort by all students/groups/staff/external parties present in prompting a legacy community executive to exercise a level of real-time discernment in not escalating a potential flashpoint in this community at such a late stage of 2024 Semester 2.

Members from UoA-FSAE, UoA-PhotoSoc, Girls In Motorsport, UoA alumni, and other community partners willingly conversed with said ‘village elder’; while Vroom_UoA 2024 executives were acknowledged by said elder upon venue arrival.

It is extremely concerning for:

• Vroom-UoA executives – who “apparently” have had no exchanges with the foundational 2019 cohort – to have potentially been party to the temp/contracted UoA-third-party security staff’s exclamation toward said village elder that:

“[He’s] not welcome” [at that University of Auckland student-body affiliated event];

• Other groups (UoA-FSAE, UoA-PhotoSoc, Girls In Motorsport, UoA alumni, etc.) present – potentially with tacit knowledge of the inbound security contractor’s exchange with said elder – at minimum watch idly by as an express display of non-inclusion take place in University of Auckland premises;

• Members of these groups to subsequently continue a convoluted live-action roleplay with said legacy community executive upon his voluntary leaving the venue (with this performative community-wide conduct, having been applied before AND after this incident, being a questionable part of the ‘Kiwi way of life’);

Recall comparable instances of this type of community conduct as articulated in The Accord. This was not the first instance of institutional sophistry that’s been employed by structurally undefined – though demographically accounted for – segments of the University against other members of the voluntary student body.

Furthermore, this concern extends to the multiple instances of how the nation’s historically marginalised groups were treated be applied – consistently – against said ‘village elder’ in virtually every imaginable manner; from how:

• Members of enforcement on apparent sabbatical inserted themselves in student affairs,

• To how there was a concerted and coordinated community-wide effort to prompt a response from outstanding member,

• All the way to the natural comparibility of outstanding executive’s heritage to said marginalised groups (and have this be unreasonably appropriated in matters surrounding his agreements with the University of Auckland – agreements which every other member of the campus community are technically more or less subject to⁵³).

⁵³ https://web.archive.org/web/20211017003518/https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/about/the-university/how-university-works/policy-and-administration/a-z-listing.html

Example: apparent coordinated community response toward individual executives (2023)

Any household exploring participation, enrolment, and/or admission in the Auckland Learning Quarter may want to exercise due diligence in exploring these state of affairs in academia (where others from cultural and religious groups saw their respective members and executives being subject to comparable treatment in the past).

Industry – particularly those hailing from the local and global motoring/motorsport communities – may want to get some fresh air and start paying attention to the details if this is the type of conduct that’s being encouraged and permitted from the current cohort in “education and training”.

For the majority of the community who is yet to start the 2025 academic year, the negative state of affairs needs to remedied such that it is water under the bridge. A.S.A.P.

CONCLUSION / SUMMARY:

As above. Outstanding orders of business requiring resolution in good time such as:

1) Retrieval of Student Intellectual Property related to Club affairs;

2) Remedy of Code of Conduct breaches by multiple segments of the University community;

3) Club directive for internal motorsport/academic communities AND public en masse to desist from negatively interfering with Club executives personal affairs;

4) Enable community asset use/maximisation; e.g. Beach Flag, ‘Barn Find’ Club Go-Kart, Club Car Project/Part-Out, Crazy-Cart, etc.;

5) Reconnect with current and legacy members of the greater community;

6) Revisit and potentially redevelop the UoA Motorsport Club Grand Prix format for “product-market-fit” in 2025+.

FURTHER CONTENT (which did not make the cut for significant address incorporation):

Find below noteworthy sources, content, and academic references which did not make the cut but ultimately figured in the writing of this address.

• Interesting to note the fork-Club withholding the publication of their 2024 AGM results (https://www.instagram.com/p/DASSMOJS6X5/), opting for an SGM instead (https://www.instagram.com/p/DCD2jnARaj5/) .

Compare this with 2023 (https://www.instagram.com/p/CyejUCpPvTZ/) and the apparent subsequent update: https://www.instagram.com/p/Cy7yWZ8qBcP/

• AUT Racing has been removed from the New Zealand Incorporated Societies Register via dissolution in August 2024 ( https://app.businessregisters.govt.nz/view/is/9429048450751 ). They still appear to be informally holding events with the fork-Club: https://www.instagram.com/autracing

• UoA-FSAE has received a $350,000 gift from the ‘Four S Trust’ which could sustainably supplement their relatively expensive comp[etition] campaigns if placed in an appropriate security / trust / interest-bearing time deposit account:

https://www.auckland.ac.nz/assets/about-us/the-university/governance-and-committees/university-council/agenda/Part%20A%20Council%20Agenda%20and%20attachments%20For%20public%20and%20press%2009.10.2024%202.pdf (Appendix 1, bullet-point 6, page 27). Said society has also apparently undergone a restructure post-SARS-CoV-2, potentially having their member intake restricted from 2025 onwards.

• Re: ⁵² https://uoacollectiveagreements.blogs.auckland.ac.nz/individual-employment-agreement-terms-conditions/

“Advantageous human resource redirection of students/staff/club executives”

Comparable to the informal macro-audit of affairs that may impact the Club e.g. low barrier to entry in accessing member social media activity (see section on Intellectual Property), community volunteer profiles which were publically accessible were reviewed; and this included the finding that there were Club executives in the University’s payroll as far back as 2021; i.e. there was UoA staff coverage of Club affairs well before any disputes “formally” arose.

Extrapolated, this state of affairs brings about more questions, given the highly likely notion that the University – and its partners – were aware of the technical errors in the administration of this Student Group (where it was permitted to operate in a relatively low-risk period in New Zealand’s recent history, i.e. SARS-CoV-2 lockdowns).

Consider that between late-2022 to today; an almost fatal ‘pseudo-kill-switch’  was directed toward this group (see Instagram example) potentially in favour of student groups either more established or more willing to ‘earn hall monitor points’ with the current sociopolitical hegemony in the New Zealand motorsport communities/the Auckland Learning Quarter.

• Macro opportunities and risks (Global):

Content linked below considers a nationwide yearning for an alternative system to the current ‘Western hegemony’ – as encouraged by local inequities and acknowledged in Address Matter ‘C’:

“Acknowledgement of New Zealand’s current codified processes under its Legislative, Governance, and Parliamentary structures potentially being inappropriate, inconsistent, and ineffective at satisfying the spirit of Aotearoa-New Zealand’s foundational document (The Treaty of/Te Tiriti o Waitangi, 1840).⁴”

Link i) and ii) potentially summarises the opportunity, while link iii) to vi) explores the risk of said yearning from an Asia-Pacific perspective – a region which New Zealand is technically part of, and ultimately subject to:

i) https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/11/brics-summit-geopolitics-bloc-international

ii) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBXANgqh404&t=1239

iii) https://publications.armywarcollege.edu/News/Display/Article/3789926/what-american-policymakers-misunderstand-about-the-belt-and-road-initiative/

iv) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V80MGYrWWaM

v) https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11735

vi) https://youtu.be/b-dpiEwSmB0 *

* compare with UoA Privacy Statement’s affinity for Meta Platforms Inc. (https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/privacy.html) with respect to Alumni Relations (https://www.calendar.auckland.ac.nz/en/info/alumni.html).

e.g.

“[UoA] use[s] Facebook Custom Audiences to target our advertising. This allows us to provide a better online experience and connect with our alumni and friends in ways that are relevant and meaningful. If you would like to opt out of this, contact us using the details set out below at Accessing and controlling your personal information.”

Consider how Club Instagram was service provider-side deactivated, while Club Facebook selectively retained in the context of the excerpt above. Further consider the following excerpt in the context of ‘technical reality:

“[UoA] share[s] the personal information we collect about website users only with the third-party service providers – such as Google – that provide us with advertising and other online services.”

Technical reality allows University IT administrators to infer identity based on the device ID of the user, permitting advertising partners to target messaging on networks and devices which the community of interest may be using.

Inferred identity from implicitly consenting to data capture carries risks (as indicated by Edward Snowden; e.g.:

- https://medium.com/@1kg/ive-got-nothing-to-hide-and-other-misunderstandings-of-privacy-b7ae8bf26603

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_surveillance_in_China | https://cset.georgetown.edu/article/chinas-sharp-eyes-program-aims-to-surveil-100-of-public-space/

- https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/the-streets-have-eyes-but-does-that-make-them-safer/PEUX5U5LYETLJCU2CWFBFDEHII/

• Local opportunities and risks (Academic)

[Potentially hybridised] global trends – transitory or otherwise – which have been reflected in the impact of the pandemic response as discussed above; as well as the activities and standards within the University of Auckland.

• Transitory Trends:

University[‘s the nation all over] are faced with challenging task of financially recovering from a now non-top-of-mind governance response from 2020 onwards, and may be required to capture value from the BRICS trend described above; e.g:

Decade-long transition of UoA’s Centre for Learning and Teaching towards its current, published multiple purposes (retrieved from https://www.coursebuilder.cad.auckland.ac.nz/flexiblelearning/arts-students-employability/):

- https://www.clear.auckland.ac.nz/ | https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/news/2024/06/13/new-centre-to-focus-on-ai-impact-and-opportunities-for-chinese-l.html

- http://web.archive.org/web/20140000000000/https://www.clear.auckland.ac.nz/

- https://web.archive.org/web/20200000000000/https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/staff/learning-and-teaching/clear.html

- https://clearalumni.blogs.auckland.ac.nz/

- https://www.clear.auckland.ac.nz/app/coursebuilder | https://web.archive.org/web/20150113172516/https://www.clear.auckland.ac.nz/en/elearning/coursebuilder.html | https://web.archive.org/web/20150114112700/http://flexiblelearning.auckland.ac.nz/coursebuilder_support/

Perceived risk in cultivating this as per “Global” subsection, though opportunities not dismissed out of hand given stated intent for understanding and collaboration, i.e. carries apparent alignment with the nation’s local and global obligations; for example, the protection and cultivation of [indigenous] cultures – in New Zealand’s case, the language of Te Reo Māori for instance.

Further content for reader consideration:

• Ethics

Ethics a significant matter of debate – in the context of this address and outside of it – given it is accounted for in the Education and Training Act 2020’s section 267. Areas of concern stem from UoA documentation below:

- https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/about-us/about-the-university/the-university/governance-and-committees/committees/a-z-committees/human-participation-ethics-committee.html

- https://courseoutline.auckland.ac.nz/dco/course/advanceSearch?advanceSearchText=ethics&pageNumber=0

- https://web.archive.org/web/20161012040924/https://www.artsfaculty.auckland.ac.nz/courses/?Subject=ETHICS

Ethics ‘expert’ committee role concerning given pandemic government choice and subsequent economic outcome.

Ethics courses do not span across faculties, and concern naturally arises from anecdotal reports from students of the tendency for faculties in which ethics courses are administered to engage in sorority-tier skullduggery and conduct.

Further concern arises from the number of management and administrative staff that carry qualifications from said/comparable faculties, where the University has enamoured said community members with roles that wholesale enforce a Code and culture which result in some segments of the current campus demographic being underrepresented by way of opinion and voice.

• Local opportunities [and risks] (Sport):

2024 Clubs Support Committee [i.e. UoA Campus Life]-extended opportunities as communicated to membership last year September, including:

1. 🎓 UoA Connection with UTS-NZ (University & Tertiary Sport New Zealand)’s Board: https://www.utsnz.co.nz/our-team.html

2. 🏂 Olympics-themed Event Ideation as spearheaded by UoA Arts Student Association: https://forms.gle/WwSjJFyskARay2Ni6 (consider and compare with prior opportunities and risks discussion with emphasis on Transitory Trends discussion)

3. 🎖️ UoA High Performance Support Portal: https://www.auckland.ac.nz/high-performance

N.B.: Both NASCAR and Drifting had roots from ‘grey areas’.

https://www.history.com/news/how-prohibition-gave-birth-to-nascar

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcYwisP1x00

However, may potentially be worthwhile pursuing a more aligned collective sporting activity with UoA (something akin to the British Universities Karting Championship as was proposed as far back as early last decade and currently being explored by incumbents on campus; other obvious opportunity is pursuit of Nissan GT Academy-style community development format).