In recent months, New Zealand’s civil society has been ringing alarm bells about the Atlas Network. This coalition networks more than 580 of these partner think tanks in over 100 countries. The New Zealand Initiative and the Taxpayers’ Union are two stand-out partners working on a national level in New Zealand. Debates over the role of federal and state government policy have arisen as well. That includes their Treaty Principles Bill and a new Standards Regulation Bill introduced as a result of the alleged foreign influence on local governance.
Atlas Network, which declared receiving more than $28 million from donors in 2023, has funded its partners significantly, allocating over $7.6 million in grants globally. The organization’s influence extends well beyond New Zealand’s borders. It works closely with allied partner think tanks, such as the Heritage Foundation in the U.S., and with Australian institutions like the Centre for Independent Studies and the Institute for Public Affairs. Supporters and many critics argue that the abundant financial muscle and intentionally disruptive strategies of these upstart think tanks are having an immediate impact on local policy. They’re concerned that these influences undermine New Zealand’s democratic values.
Overview of Atlas Network’s Global Presence
Atlas Network fosters a global coalition of free-market think tanks, research centers, and other organizations dedicated to the ideas of liberty. It gives special attention to important principles such as individual liberty, property rights, limited government, and free markets. All of these things are offered up with the legal shield. This wide-reaching global network supports the implementation of numerous local and national initiatives, promoting these ideals, as seen above.
Fighting to reform the law in every country,” Professor Nancy Maclean observed. She underscored the association’s engagement and leadership in shaping these legislative blueprints. The Atlas Network partners compete in a global marketplace of ideas for compelling activity intended to advance the cause of economic freedom and entrepreneurship. The organization aptly boasts that its mission is to “liberate the economic potential of all people.” It intentionally engages in place-making to set conditions for economic development.
In addition to this, the extensive and unusual nature of Atlas Network’s partnerships allows it to exert great power. Or in Argentina, where a partner organization this past spring collaborated with presidential candidate Javier Milei in his successful campaign. This partnership exemplifies how think tanks can become enmeshed in political movements.
Local Partnerships and Funding Dynamics
In New Zealand, the New Zealand Initiative and the Taxpayers’ Union are important voices under the Atlas Network umbrella. The New Zealand Initiative feels this tenderly business advocacy. As such, it is mostly funded by its corporate stakeholders. This curious relationship begs an important question. What are the dangers of increased corporate influence over them, particularly when think tanks favor the corporate agenda over the public interest?
The fond interests are those who love freedom,” exclaimed Dr. Tom Palmer, long-time leader of Atlas Network–affiliated think tank the Cato Institute. This desire mirrors the overall political philosophy that prefers market-based solutions but warns against picking winners and losers in the market. Supporting market principles, Palmer explains, does not mean you’re supporting big business at all costs.
Dr. Oliver Hartwich, another advocate for Atlas Network’s principles, articulated a stance on property rights: “We think that when somebody is required to give up their property rights, they should be compensated.” This viewpoint illustrates the importance and value of an orientation towards fairness and transparency in rulemaking and enforcement.
Implications for New Zealand’s Political Landscape
The conversation around Atlas Network’s impact has grown louder as lawmakers continue to thoughtfully engage with important legislation like the Treaty Principles Bill. Critics argue that external funding sources may compromise local governance and lead to policies favoring corporate interests over community welfare.
Dr. Hartwich stressed the importance of having government be transparent and accountable for regulatory decisions. He advocated for a comprehensive review of every alternative before applying new federal prescriptive requirements. This call for greater transparency is part and parcel with the national conversation taking place today. These conversations center on the impact that foreign-funded organizations should have over our national policy decisions.
Atlas Network’s financial contributions and training programs—such as those received by David Seymour, leader of New Zealand’s ACT Party—have raised eyebrows among those concerned about potential conflicts between local interests and external ideologies. Seymour’s Canadian engagement history with partner organizations casts an additional shadow on notions of accountability on the part of local politicians.
Leave a Reply