Story by The Daily Examiner.

Janet Dickson, a veteran real estate agent with more than three decades of service, has become a lightning rod in New Zealand’s ongoing discussion about cultural competency and professional freedoms.

Her legal battle with the Real Estate Authority (REA) began after she refused to complete Te Kākano—a mandatory online training module focused on the Treaty of Waitangi, te reo Māori, and tikanga Māori.

For Janet, the training represented more than a continuing professional development course—it symbolized what she and her supporters see as an enforced ideological stance on New Zealand’s bicultural framework.

Backed by the advocacy group Hobson’s Pledge, she took the REA to court. The High Court ultimately upheld the REA’s authority to require the training, resulting in a five-year prohibition from reapplying for her license.

Janet’s case has ignited a national conversation, placing her in the center of a broader debate: should cultural training be mandatory for professionals, and if so, how should it be implemented?

Supporters of mandatory cultural education argue that, in a society as diverse as New Zealand, understanding indigenous perspectives isn’t just a courtesy—it’s a professional necessity. They contend that such training:

• Fosters inclusivity and respect in client-facing roles
• Improves outcomes through more culturally informed service
• Shows that institutions are committed to equity and Te Tiriti o Waitangi
• Encourages self-reflection and reduces unconscious bias

In fields like healthcare and education, advocates say the stakes are even higher—where misunderstandings rooted in cultural ignorance can lead to real harm.

However, opponents, including Dickson and others, argue that mandatory cultural training can cross the line into ideological imposition. Their concerns include:

• A perceived lack of neutrality, where one interpretation of history or identity is promoted over others
• The risk of superficial engagement or resentment if training is seen as forced
• A mismatch between training content and everyday professional responsibilities
• Harsh penalties that seem disproportionate for non-compliance

Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee echoed those concerns, questioning why a professional should be sidelined for five years over a CPD requirement—when no equivalent exists in most other regulated professions.

While Janet Dickson’s case is among the most visible, it fits within a larger trend. Cultural competency requirements are increasing across the spectrum of regulated professions, from social work to early childhood education.

While many practitioners embrace the opportunity to learn, others feel caught between personal convictions and institutional mandates.

What remains clear is that this is not just about one course or one agent—it’s about how New Zealand chooses to navigate its bicultural commitments in a pluralistic society.

As policy, pedagogy, and public opinion continue to evolve, so too will the conversation around professional autonomy, national identity, and what it truly means to engage with the Treaty in everyday life.

And for Janet Dickson, the fight continues—not just for herself, but for what she believes is a principle worth standing up for.

You can read more about Janets case and ongoing support efforts on Hobsons Pledge Official Page.