In this critical clip, the discussion centres on the single most important question in Barry Young’s case: is he a whistleblower under New Zealand’s Protected Disclosures Act?
If the court says yes, the case ends, he is protected, and the people’s own data can finally be examined by independent epidemiologists around the world.
If the court says no, the Act itself is effectively gutted - reduced to another hollowed-out piece of legislation, just as the Bill of Rights was overridden by vaccine mandates, financial coercion and the constant use of “emergency” powers.
Barry is described as the archetype whistleblower. The outcome will either empower future truth-tellers or send a chilling message that no one who challenges the government will ever be protected.
A clear warning about the erosion of civil liberties and why this ruling matters far beyond one man’s court case.
Clip Transcript:
[Liz Gunn] “If you don’t qualify as a whistleblower Barry Young, no one in New Zealand will ever qualify as a whistleblower.
[Barry Young] It’ll be a game changer.
[Liz] You are the archetype whistleblower.
[Barry] It will be a game changer because this has never been tried before under this new Act.
It’s a unique case.
It’s a very nuanced case, but essentially it just boils down to: Am I a Whistleblower or not?
It’s a very simple question.
[Liz] If you are a whistleblower, the case is over.
You’re no longer in court. You are protected.
So from that point you can then put out to the People the People’s own data.
And it can go around the world for epidemiologists of integrity to examine that data and say, hey, what’s going on in New Zealand, shows also what’s happening in the UK or Canada or Australia. Same thing.
So it’s crucial that you are designated a whistleblower.
What happens if the court says, no, we’re going to go with the corruption.
We’re going to go with the government’s instructions.
We’re not going to designate Barry Young a whistleblower.
What happens then?
[Barry] Well, if they say no, they essentially hollow out the purpose of the Act.
They basically just destroy it.
And it becomes another legacy Act that they’ve just gutted.
Along with the Bill of Rights, who I think is that is just, yeah, it’s just paper.
It’s not worth anything now, what they’ve done to that.
Because we had all these these Rights about vaccinations and stuff like that.
We were allowed to decide whether or not to put a substance in our body.
We’ve got that freedom.
It went to Nuremberg as well - right!
That was the whole purpose of the Nuremberg trials.
You should not put an unknown substance into your body.
You’ve got that fundamental right as a human being to say NO, however, with... the Bill of Rights didn’t apply.
Oh, now you’ve got to have the vaccine or you don’t work.
We will cut you off from your finances.
You will not be allowed to feed your children if you don’t have this vaccine.
Now, hang on. What happened to the Bill of Rights there?
And so if they do that with this, it’ll just [be] another erosion of our civil liberties and our rights.
[Liz] And the way Ardern got around the Bill of Rights was saying this is emergency. This is an emergency. And they keep on bringing emergency.
They’re trying to ramp up the bird flu scam here.
Under emergency, we will do it.
We must never let the government do anything to us under emergency.
The government is not our friend.
It’s not trustworthy.”
Barry Young's Upcoming Court Case is July 28, 2026, now at 3:45pm at the Wellington District Court - All support is welcome.
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.