Archive
The Christchurch Attack: is the stage is set for a continuing domino of death?
.
.
“New Zealanders hearing so many of the details and seeing Weatherston taking the stand will have been absolutely dumbfounded that this remorseless killer has had a platform for his justifications and excuses televised and thoroughly reported by the media.”
That was from the trial of Clayton Weatherston in 2009, convicted killer of Sophie Elliott. His behaviour in court, televised for all to see, was appalling.
Chief executive of Women’s Refuge (at the time), Heather Henare, described Weatherston’s self-serving exploitation of his courtroom platform with disgust;
“New Zealanders hearing so many of the details and seeing Weatherston taking the stand will have been absolutely dumbfounded that this remorseless killer has had a platform for his justifications and excuses televised and thoroughly reported by the media.
Everyone must have a fair trial, of course, but I think we need to be asking whether a trial like this actually represents any kind of justice whatsoever.”
Even as the nation looked on at Weatherston’s performance, the fact is that there was only one real person that Weatherston was playing to: himself. He would have had very little, if any, support from his audience.
Two years later, another killer took the ‘stage’ in a Norwegian courtroom. Mass-murderer, terrorist, and far-right fanatic, Anders Breivik was charged and later convicted of murdering seventyseven innocent people. Breivik made his court appearances with dramatic effect;
.
.
(Note: this blogger will not share images showing the killer’s face. If you’re sufficiently curious, look it up yourself.)
Breivik justified his killing spree with a chilling statement that bears relevance to the Christchurch terror attack on 15 March;
“They were not innocent, non-political children; these were young people who worked to actively uphold multicultural values…”
During his court case, Breivik expounded his far right views. It became his platform to promulgate his ideology and to create an image of “heroic action” amongst the far-right in every nation on Earth, from America to Britain to Greece to Ukraine and elewhere.
One survivor of his terror attack, Viljar Hanssen, was clear in his condemnation of the Courtroom circus;
“For many of us, the relentless struggle for a good and dignified life continues… while the media incessantly give a podium to the Breivik circus.”
It had an eerie similarity to critics of Weatherstone’s behaviour during his trial.
The difference between Weatherstone and Breivik is that Breivik was playing to a supportive, approving audience throughout the world.
It should not be lost on people that the alleged Christchurch shooter committed his terrorist atrocity having been inspired by Breivik.
Breivik, in turn, disclosed he had been inspired by Oklahoma bomber and far-right terrorist, Timothy McVeigh.
Breivik and McVeigh have becomes heroes amongst the far right, with many openly declaring their admiration of the murderers. Some, llike Christopher Paul Hasson, were fortunately caught by law enforcement authorities before they could carry out their own terrorist attacks.
Hasson had been inspired by Breivik.
In the far-right “community”, the term “Going Breivik” has obvious, deadly meaning.
There are multiple instances of far right individuals carrying out, or attempting to carry out, their own terror attacks. All have been inspired by other attackers. It is an ongoing cycle of domino of death.
It is against this back-drop that we now have to consider the alleged Christchurch shooter’s own looming trial. The alleged killer has indicated he will represent himself;
The duty lawyer who represented Tarrant in court on Saturday confirmed to the Herald today that he was no longer acting for him.
Richard Peters said Tarrant appeared to be lucid and was not mentally unstable – other than the extreme views that he held.
Peters said that his job representing Tarrant ceased on Saturday – and that the accused gunman had told him he wanted to represent himself in future.
This raises the spectre of the alleged Christchurch shooter repeating past instances of terrorists turning his trial into a platform to spout his racist, xenophobic views; his motivations; and his ideas of a world-wide war against other ethnic and religious groups.
Any notion that this will not happen is naive.
When the alleged shooter went on his killing spree, it was live-filmed and up-loaded onto social media. Since then Facebook confirmed removing 1.5 million copies of the terror attack. That was two days ago (as at writing this blogpost). The number has probably increased by the time you read this.
The purpose of filming and uploading a video of the attack should be clear to everyone.
For the alleged shooter to be given a Court platform by televising or radio-broadcasting his comments would compound his desire to spread his toxic extremist views. As Massey University law professor, Chris Gallivan, pointed out;
“We’re going to hear a lot more about this gentleman and probably from this gentleman, and also about his ideology, before this is over.
We have to ensure the victims are protected through that and that it is not a platform to be able to extol his worldview. But if he self-represents – the courts probably will struggle to stop him using this as a platform.
Anders Breivik didn’t recognise the jurisdiction of the court and used every opportunity he possibly could to spout his vitriol and worldview.”
From there, it is a short step to that publicity being widely disseminated amongst the far right, and inspiring the next terrorist attack. Copy-cat attacks are already occurring in Britain;
Detectives are investigating an alleged far-Right terror attack in Surrey after a teenager was stabbed amid a spate of racist incidents across Britain which came in the wake of the New Zealand massacre.
Politicians and police have condemned the attacks and said extremism has no place in British society.
The 19-year-old victim was said to have been attacked by a man armed with a knife and a baseball bat who it is claimed was heard shouting racist comments.
Yet, conducting the trial in secret is also not a solution.
Secrecy breeds suspicion. It would give birth to a host of mind-numbingly tedious conspiracy theories. Salient information about his actions would be lost. It would create dangerous legal precedent.
There has to be a middle-ground. A compromise where the alleged shooter is denied a platform – but where secrecy does not create unintended consequences.
Televising and radio-broadcasting the alleged shooter’s comments is simply not tenable. That would give him the stage to encourage others by his own words.
Just as The Daily Blog denies links to ‘Infowars‘ because the administrator(s) consider Alex Jones a crazed hate-monger who cannot be reasoned with.
Worse still, it re-victimises the survivors and families of the terror attack. The ghoulish spectacle of the alleged shooter on our TV screens or his voice on our radios, would be an unbearable trauma for many people. There is no fairness in such a prospect.
The best compromise is to allow media to attend the trial – without electronically recording and disseminating anything the alleged shooter says. His comments can be paraphrased, if they are salient. Simply repeating his toxic beliefs is unnecessary. Anyone interested in his ideology has a multitude of far right websites to visit: they are not shy in seeking publicity (and recruits).
RNZ chief executive, Paul Thompson, has taken a lead by approaching other news media to show restraint how the alleged shooter’s comments should be reported in the media;
RNZ chief executive Paul Thompson said the organisation would have “really strong editorial controls” in its court coverage, focusing on the key legal aspects of the case.
“Just because someone’s representing himself, perhaps, and makes a three-hour opening statement, you don’t have to cover every word of it,” he said.
Mr Thompson said he had begun contacting others in the news business to see if they wanted to develop a joint approach.
“It’s no good if some of us exercise that restraint and other outlets don’t,” he said.
This shows responsible restraint.
Furthermore, Court gallery seating should be given priority to the families, friends, and community leaders of his victims. They, above all of us, have a right to see the face of the alleged killer who took so many precious lives.
Recording devices (smart phones, dictaphones, etc) should not be allowed into the Court.
Some may balk at these suggestions. I make no apology for making them.
‘Phase 1’ of the alleged shooter’s plan was to live-stream his terror attack. If the alleged shooter is allowed to use the Court as a platform for his toxic views, we are, in effect, allowing him ‘Phase 2’ of his plan for maximum publicity.
We should deny him that oxygen. Just as we deny ISIS the oxygen of publicity by removing their on-line propaganda videos whenever they are found.
Otherwise, any direct publicity given to him could inspire the next far right terrorist to commit his own atrocity. We would be complicit in that.
New Zealanders never thought this would happen here. But it did.
New Zealanders may think giving the alleged shooter a platform won’t inspire the next killer. It will.
We should think carefully on what we do next. There will be consequences.
There are always consequences.
Postscript
This episode of Radio NZ’s “mediawatch” appeared too late for the blogpost above, but it is pertinent to the issues raised:
Mediawatch – How Christchurch’s assault has made a mark on our media
Mediawatch – Lessons from Norway on covering the quest for justice
.
.
.
References
NZ Herald: Weatherston trial a ‘national disgrace’
The Guardian: Anders Behring Breivik claims victims were not innocent
France24: Breivik makes Nazi salute at court appearance
Sydney Morning Herald: Christchurch suspect claimed ‘brief contact’ with Norwegian mass murderer
The Buffalo News: For some alt-right extremists, bomber Timothy McVeigh is a hero
Public Radio International: Oklahoma City bombing inspired Breivik, Norway’s mass murderer
Washington Post: ‘They hate white males’ – A Norwegian mass murderer inspired the Coast Guard officer accused of plotting terror, feds say
New York Times: The Anatomy of White Terror
NZ Herald: Christchurch mosque shootings – Brenton Tarrant to represent himself in court
Mediaworks/Newshub: Christchurch terror attack: Lessons from the Anders Breivik trial
Fairfax/Stuff: Christchurch shootings: Facebook removed 1.5 million videos
The Telegraph: Surrey teenager stabbed in ‘far-Right terror attack’ amid spate of racist incidents after New Zealand massacre
Radio NZ: How media plan to cover the accused Christchurch shooter’s trial
Additional
ADLS: Judges zoom in on courtroom cameras
Other Bloggers
TDB: On the trial, on the failure of our intelligence agencies & on the blame game
TDB: Dr Liz Gordon – The narcissist twins and the future of humanity
TDB: Selwyn Manning – Christchurch Terror Attacks – New Zealand’s Darkest Hour – Friday 15th 2019
Previous related blogposts
A funny thing happened at the Mall
15 March: Aotearoa’s Day Of Infamy
.
.
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 24 March 2019.
.
.
= fs =
15 March: Aotearoa’s Day Of Infamy
.
.
On a day when our young people succeeded in prodding grownups to take notice of the looming climate change disaster bearing down on us, other “grownups” had more nefarious, murderous thoughts in mind. On a day which should have been positive and filled with idealism and hope, we ended with tragedy and tears.
This was not our first terrorist attack in modern times. Many of us will recall the Wellington Trades Hall bombing in March 1984 and most of us will recall the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland harbour a year later.
A life was lost on each occassion.
On 15 March, 49 unarmed, innocent people – men, women, children – were shot dead by a coward. His political agenda – white nationalism. His means of “persuasion” – a high-powered rifle.
It was a gutless act of terror espousing a corrupt, poisonous ideology.
The handful of fanatics responsible do not represent Aotearoa New Zealand and our espoused values. Not even close. Their minds are as alien and repellent to us as something that crawled out of a primordial swamp.
It is still early days. New Zealanders are still in shock as disbelief is replaced with reality setting in. Then will come the other stages of grief, including anger. Our Prime Minister’s steady, measured voice of calm reassurance has been a godsend. Her resolute rejection of extremism was heartening, almost Churchillian;
“For those of you who are watching at home tonight and questioning how this could have happened here, we, New Zealand, we are not a target because we are a safe harbour for those who hate, we were not chosen for this violnece because we condone racism, because we are an enclave for extremism, we were chosen for the fact we represent none of these things. Because we represent diversity, kindness, compassion, a home for those who share our values, refuge for those who need it.
And those values, I can assure you, will not and cannot be shaken by this attack. We are a proud nation of more than 200 ethnicities, 160 languages and amongst that diversity we share common values and the one that we place the currency on right now and tonight is our compassion and the support for the community of those directly affected by this tragedy
Secondly, the strongest possible condemnation of the ideology for those who did this … we utterly reject and condemn you.”
After the grief and anger, there will be debate and questioning. Perhaps I am premature, but these are some of the things we, as a nation, will have to confront and address…
1. A Message to the GCSB and NZSIS: where were you?
Why were security services targetting left-wing bloggers like Martyn Bradbury and investigative journalists like Nicky Hager – but white supremacists were “unknown” to them? What do they spend their days and budget on?
Commentator, Matthew Hooton was one if the first to put the question on social media:
@MatthewHootonNZ
I know this is early, but it seems to me the Director-General of Security should at least offer her resignation to the Prime Minister, even if it probably shouldn’t be accepted today. This is a disastrous & inexcusable failure by the intelligence services.9:09 PM · Mar 15, 2019
@tauhenare
It was so easy for the Security Forces of NZ to lay camera’s in the Urewera to spy on Maori “terrorists” It was so easy for them to arrest Tame and to send him to prison for having a clapped out Lee Enfield rifel. I’m sorry, but this is NZ. “How did we miss this” the media ask?8:22 AM · Mar 16, 2019
“No agency has had any info about these people. I’ve been in touch with my Australian colleagues who had no information about them either.”
It cannot be for a lack of resources and legislative power.
Since 2002, successive governments (mostly National) have enacted a string of amendments and new laws. Each law change ramped up surveillance powers of the State’s agencies:
Labour government
National government
Search and Surveillance Act 2012
Countering Terrorist Fighters Legislation Bill (aka Customs and Excise Amendment Act 2014)
National/Labour
Customs and Excise Act 2018 (legislation) (history)
The Government Communications Security Bureau Amendment Act 2013 – one of the most contentious in recent history – increased the reach of the GCSB to allow monitoring of New Zealand citizens, and other individuals, at home and abroad.
Prime Minister at the time, John Key, justified increased State surveillance by invoking the threat of terrorism;
“In a world of global terrorism where Isis is trying to reach influence into a country like New Zealand, of course on a much lower scale than they do somewhere else, we can best defend ourselves by stopping that before it ever happens.”
During a review of the security agencies in 2016, Michael Cullen put the case for widening the surveillance powers of the GCSB by invoking emergency scenarios;
“Let us suppose a New Zealander is in imminent danger, in terms of their life overseas. Maybe lost at sea or some other example. Under this legislation as the GCSB feels it has to interpret it, the GCSB’s capacity to trace an individual’s cellphone and to say exactly where it is, cannot be used.
We have no way of finding out where that person is, using that capacity, in order to take immediate and urgent action, in whatever way, to try to protect the safety of that New Zealander.”
The National government got the “green light” and the GCSB Act was duly amended.
And it did not help us one iota.
As for financial resources, both the GCSB and NZSIS enjoyed a considerable increase in funding over a decade:
GCSB:
2008/09: $48,888,000 (up $8,543,000 from 2007/08)
2018/19: $158,029,000
NZSIS:
2008/09: $36,889,000 (up $3,138,000 from 2007/08)
2018/19: $82,843,000
So any suggestion that State agencies did not have the legislative power or government funding to enable monitoring of extremist groups in this country is not credible and flies in the face of facts.
The threat existed. Just not from ISIS. The State was looking in the wrong direction.
Indeed, surveillance was widespread in Aotearoa New Zealand by State agencies, even going so far as to employ private investigators to spy on Christchurch property-owners, affected by the earthquakes in 2010 and 2011.
The spying by Thompson and Clark was illegal, but it indicated a strong willingness by various State agencies to carry out snooping when it suited them. Thompson and Clark spied on political activists, iwi groups, and environmental protestors such as Greenpeace.
The invasive and illegal breach of Nicky Hager and Martyn Bradbury’s privacy by Police is also a matter of public record.
But when it came to keeping a watchful eye on our own, local hate groups, the Police, SIS, and GCSB failed.
They had one job to do and they failed us. They failed 49 innocent people.
Where were you?
2. A Message to Simon Bridges
As the awful horror of the terrorist attack slowly dawned on us, social media was flooded with many messages of support, well-wishes, empathy, as well as disbelief, anger, and horror, our elected representatives added their voices.
One, from current leader of the National Party, Simon Bridges, ‘tweeted’;
Simon Bridges
@simonjbridgesI’m shocked to hear about the incident unfolding in Christchurch. My heart goes out to the families and I stand with the Canterbury community.
2:49 PM – 15 Mar 2019
My response – perhaps overly emotional as the Christchurch terror-attack impacted on me – was not impressed;
fmacskasy
@fmacskasyReplying to
Simon Bridges
@simonjbridgesMr Bridges, I have one request of you. DON’T YOU DARE USE THIS TRAGEDY AS SOME PERVERTED LAW & ORDER ELECTION ISSUE NEXT YEAR. Don’t even think about exploiting this for votes. Just. Don’t.
6:29 PM · Mar 15, 2019
Is it a forlorn hope that National’s party strategists, desperate to regain the government benches, would not exploit this tragedy and the deaths of fortynine people? National has exploited the “law and order” issue in the past;
.
.
If, as I suspect, National goes down this road, I hope the vast majority of good New Zealanders responds accordingly.
Does Mr Bridges really want to end his career as the self-serving politician who was willing to exploit the worst terrorist attack in our modern history? I hope that wiser heads in the National Party counsel him against such a grotesque idea.
Don’t do it, Mr Bridges.
I held a different view.
On 29 August last year, I explained why I believed that countenancing the spread of hate-ideology by visiting “activists” was a luxury we could ill-afford;
For many others, free speech was not absolute. Spreading racist, homophobic, sexist, and transphobic vitriol belittled already-marginalised and disempowered people in our society.
For others, their Care Factor was zero. Faced with an empty refrigerator, or sleeping in a garage or car, or choosing whether to pay the power bill or medication for a child with rheumatic fever, was a closer reality for many New Zealanders.
If you were white, male, and straight – you would be right to feel safe from the bigotted chauvinism of two alt-right Polite Fascists . A White, Male, Straight could countenance violence as a price for “free speech”.
If you were a person of colour, gay, a woman with a career and a baby, or transgender – not so much. You might feel less inclined to welcome people into our country whose main purpose was to denigrate you; deny you your equality; your inclusivity in society; your very identity.
[…]
For the more rational angels on the side of the Free Speech debate, it was a necessary price to pay for a free society.
Unfortunately, it could be said that ‘price’ was paid mostly by those minorities and women targetted by our Polite Fascist visitors.
Perhaps my background as the son of immigrant parents gave me an insight that other New Zealanders, whose parents were also born here (or immigrated from another Anglo-Saxon country) could not easily appreciate.
I repeated my subtle warning that “free speech” was not free and “unfortunately, it could be said that ‘price’ was paid mostly by those minorities and women targetted by our Polite Fascist visitors“.
As in the United States, many Americans support their Second Amendment “right to bear arms”. At least 5% support gun rights with “no or very few” restrictions”. For those Americans, mass-shootings is the “price” to pay for their Second Amendment rights. Unfortunately, that “price” is paid by others.
Just as the sale of one gun, from one gun shop, somewhere in New Zealand, probably didn’t contribute directly to the mass-shooting in Christchurch. Or the sale of one gun in the US didn’t contribute directly to mass shootings in Las Vegas, Orlando, Sandy Hook, Columbine, etc.
Am I suggesting that Southern and Molyneux were directly responsible for the terror attack in Christchurch. No, not directly.
After all, their voices were only two, of many.
But really, what did people think was the purpose of Southern and Molyneux to visit Aotearoa New Zealand? To engage in rational debate with progressives over a cup of Earl Grey and gingernut? To do the Tourist Thing and take ‘selfies’ on the Fox Glacier?
What did we think their purpose was to visit Aotearoa New Zealand?
Let me answer that. They were not here to debate. They are past debate.
They were here to (a) encourage new recruits amongst the disaffected and (b) re-energise existing far-right and alt-right groups.
It took barely six months after I wrote my rebuttal to permitting the Polite Fascists to visit. They came, nevertheless. They made their public speeches. (There was no debate.) And they left, to continue their ‘mission’ to spread their poison somewhere else, to eager listeners with anger and hate in their minds.
So we had our free speech. Only, it wasn’t “free”. There was a cost attached.
The price for their free speech has been paid-in-full. By the gods, we paid dearly.
Or at least, people of colour; of another religion; another ethnicity, paid. Those earnest, white, Free Speech Advocates who called for free speech – they didn’t have to pay the price.
The alleged shooter reportedly approached a white male by-stander outside one of the Mosques and spared his life. Because the person was white. Fortynine others were not so lucky. Wrong skin colour.
I hope that Aotearoa New Zealand’s naive notions of free speech for visiting far right extremists has come to an end. Extremists have no natural, “god-given” right to enter our country. That “right” has never existed and was an indulgence we mistakenly encouraged.
The price to pay is too high.
15 March was a day when thousands of young people took to the streets to demand action on worsening climate change; which would impact on them and steal their futures. Meanwhile another “grownup” was committing cold-blooded murder. On a day which should have been positive and filled with youthful idealism and hope…
… it ended in tragedy and tears and grief that would break our hearts.
15 March 2019 – it was the best of days, it was the worst of days.
15 March 2019. Our Day of Infamy.
#Love
#Christchurch
#ThisIsNotWhoWeAre
.
.
.
References
Twitter: Matthew HootonMatthew Hooton
Twitter: Tau HenareTau Henare
Maori TV: Christchurch shootings – Man charged with murder
Fairfax/Stuff media: New GCSB bill allows spying on Kiwis
Radio NZ: Focus on Politics – 11 March 2016 (alt. link)
Budget 2008/09: Vote Communications Security and Intelligence
Budget 2008/09: Vote Security Intelligence
Budget 2018/19: Vote Communications Security and Intelligence
Budget 2018/19: Vote Security Intelligence
Radio NZ: Thompson and Clark spied on earthquake victims, inquiry finds
Radio NZ: Private investigators used vehicle register to spy on environmentalists for years
Twitter: Simon Bridges – 15.3.2019 2.49PM
Twitter: Frank Macskasy – 15.3.19 6.29PM
Southern Poverty Law Centre: Stefan Molyneux
Fairfax media: Southern and Molyneux good test for our free speech tolerance video
Mediaworks/Newshub: Jacinda Ardern ‘simply can’t’ be both a mum and Prime Minister – Stefan Molyneux
Fairfax media: Oscar Kightley – This free speech victory tastes a little strange
Reuters: Gun control support fades three months after Florida massacre – Reuters/Ipsos poll
Previous related blogposts
Audrey Young, Two Bains, old cars, and… cocoa?!?!
National Party president complains of covert filming – oh the rich irony!
An Open Message to the GCSB, SIS, NSA, and Uncle Tom Cobbly
Dear Leader, GCSB, and Kiwis in Wonderland
One Dunedinite’s response to the passing of the GCSB Bill
The GCSB Act – Tracy Watkins gets it right
The GCSB – when plain english simply won’t do
The GCSB law – vague or crystal clear?
The Mendacities of Mr Key #1: The GCSB Bill
Campbell Live on the GCSB – latest revelations – TV3 – 20 May 2014
The real reason for the GCSB Bill
Letter to the Editor: John Campbell expose on Key and GCSB
A letter to the Dominion Post on the GCSB
Dear Michael Cullen: the GCSB is not International Rescue!
“Free speech” – The Rules according to the Right
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 17 March 2019.
.
.
= fs =
Christchurch City Council – Having your asset-cake and eating it
.
.
Prelude
On 29 January 2013, Prime Minister John Key announced that the rebuild of Christchurch would be a Herculean, multi-billion dollar task;
“New Zealand also faces a domestic construction boom. That will be centred, of course, on Christchurch, where the total spend is now estimated to be around $30 billion.”
By 15 May 2014, National’s Finance Minister, Bill English delivered his sixth Budget speech to Parliament. The cost of the Christchurch re-build had escalated by $10 billion;
“The total cost of the rebuild has been estimated at $40 billion and the Government’s share will be significant.
On current estimates, the Government’s contribution to the rebuild is expected to be $15.4 billion, of which $7.3 billion will be incurred by the Earthquake Commission, net of reinsurance proceeds.”
Despite central government’s massive re-build bill for Christchurch, in his Budget Conclusion, English was at pains to repeat his new mantra;
“The Government’s books are on track to surplus next year and are the envy of most developed countries.”
The surplus English referred to was an Operating balance Before Gains and Losses (OBEGAL), forecast to be a hair-thin $86 million for 2014/15.
English’s Budget document pointed out;
“Government is still borrowing a net $78 million a week, and in dollar terms, net debt is expected to peak at $64.5 billion in 2015/16...”
Little wonder that English stated, with blinding obviousness four days earlier;
“It means we will need to maintain firm expenditure control beyond our return to surplus...”
Which is why an increasingly nervous Finance Minister, conscious of spiralling re-build costs, came down hard and crushed any suggestion that taxpayer’s money be used to subsidise the proposed SkyCity convention centre;
“There’s no contingency for that. If the less preferred option ended up being the option then that money would be part of the Budget process.”
Firm expenditure control in this case meant that the government-purse was firmly shut. And padlocked.
National Government’s Predictable Response
In May 2011, barely three months after Christchurch’s devastating earthquake that killed 185 people, there were already suggestions from Gerry Brownlee that the Christchurch Council would have to sell part of their community-owned assets to fund the re-build.
National’s mis-handling of the economy, with two unaffordable tax-cuts, as well as the Global Financial Crisis and resultant recession, had left the government’s books deep in the red.
At first, Brownlee was coy at any suggestion of asset sales;
“I don’t foresee the council having to sell any assets, though in the end that will be their choice. ”
But in the next breath, he added;
“I would suspect that Treasury have had a look at the city council’s balance sheet, given that we are going to have to take a whole lot of debt onto our [the Government’s] balance sheet.
It’s only natural we would have a look at what the council can stand [to pay].
Yes, there is provision in this legislation for Cera [Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority] to suggest to council that they might need to sell something. ”
Brownlee denied that government or Treasury had been scoping CCC assets with a view to partial (or full) privatisation;
“The accusation is that Treasury have been looking at council assets with a view to what the council will sell. That is, I think, completely erroneous.”
On 9 February 2012, a year after the second earthquake, Brownlee admitted in Parliament (in response to questioning by the future mayor of Christchurch, Lianne Dalziel);
“In the days leading up to that particular injudicious comment from me there were numerous discussions going on with the council—between the senior executives, the mayor, me, and the senior executives of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority—over a number of issues that we want the council to take some responsibility, alongside us, for. Although Treasury officials will have talked to the council, I am unaware of exactly what that discussion would have been about. But let me tell you that when the Government is spending $5.5 billion anywhere we expect the recipients of that to have some plan for how they will participate in what will be a very, very expensive recovery, and that plan has to be a lot better than saying “We’re just going to put up the rates, and we’re going to borrow a lot more money”.”
Brownlee would have us believe that he was “unaware of exactly what that discussion would have been about” between Treasury officials and Christchurch council? As Minister of Earthquake Recovery of that devastated city, that proposition is simply not credible.
Brownlee was not being truthful.
The Minister’s denial was further shown to be less than truthful with this evasive response in Parliament on 2 August 2012;
“I have received advice from Treasury and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority on a range of funding options for the rebuilding of Greater Christchurch, to which the Government has committed $5.5 billion to date. Alongside the Christchurch City Council, I support the regeneration of our city, which will be enhanced by the development of the central city plan, released on Monday. I have publicly acknowledged the funding challenges for both the city council and the Government. Councillors and I have agreed to discuss, alongside our respective organisations, a sensible and achievable time line and funding programme for the delivery of the blueprint. I approach these discussions in good faith, as the thousands of city residents would expect us to do so. I intend to say no further on this matter.”
The full text of a remarkable, and somewhat ‘testy’ exchange between Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery, Gerry Brownlee, and the then-Speaker of the House, Lockwood Smith, under-scored the sensitivity of any suggestion that central government was putting the “squeeze” on Christchurch to sell community-owned assets and relieve pressure on English’s struggle to balance the books.
By May 2013, all pretences that asset sales were not being discussed were firmly kicked to the side, with John Key entering the political fray (and Gerry Brownlee standing pensively and obediently in the background);
.
.
Key was clear with Christchurch residents in his expectations;
“The only other option available to it is that it doesn’t actually embark on some of the projects it might want to embark on. In the end Cantabrians will have to have a say on what they think is the right mix.
I actually personally hold the view that for Canterbury, where you love sport, happen to be pretty darn good at it, and have climatic conditions that argue that a covered stadium might make sense, then actually it could be a really sensible thing to do.
And if it was up to me I would make that choice in a heartbeat if it meant changing the mix of assets, but I understand for lots of other people they might not hold that view.
This is the chance to get it right. I just urge everyone to think that through. There is the opportunity to have some quite fantastic facilities here.
The Government is quite happy to step up and put $15bn in, and there is a limit as to how much we can put in, and some of it must come from the council.”
The threat is obvious; ‘cough up the extra cash by selling some of the family silver, or no more rugger for you lot’!
Faced with National firmly closing off any options to meet ever-increasing re-build costs, Christchurch was faced with few alternatives and on 1 August last year the Council caved to central government pressure in the form of a report from investment bankers, Cameron Partners. As Mayor Lianne Dalziel admitted;
“We’ve got nothing, there isn’t even wriggle room any more, there’s just nothing there, we’re over the line and we have to pull it back before 2017.
Creating financial certainty will attract much needed investment in the rebuild. We want to work alongside the Canterbury earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA) to scope the possibilities for a one-stop landing point for both local and foreign investors.”
Note the year Dalziel refers to: 2017. An election year.
Dalziel’s reference to “both local and foreign investors” is an oblique acknowledgement that the Christchurch City Council will have to part-privatise community assets to raise money that will not be forthcoming from Key’s government.
She was more forth-coming here, on the same day;
“Releasing capital from our balance sheet alongside the other options, (including increased income, reduced operational expenditure and government assistance), is clearly one of the ways we can address the uncertainty around the city’s finances.”
Dalziel also hinted at why Christchurch was forced to undertake asset sales;
“The purpose of releasing capital would be to generate funds to assist in solving the identified funding shortfall; provide the level of confidence and certainty required to develop a credible long term financial strategy and get on with the rebuild of our community facilities, infrastructure and housing; allow CCC to buffer Christchurch residents and businesses from the exponential rates increases; and allow CCC to align our vision and strategic objectives for the rebuild with our asset portfolio – that is, what we own and operate.”
It is simply untenable – both from a commercial perspective, as well as morally – that citizens in one city should be forced to pay for the rebuild of their infra-structure. This was a disaster not of their making.
Any suggestion that the cost should not be spread more evenly around the country would create a precedent that we are each solely responsible for any disaster that might befall our own region. Do New Zealanders really want to go down that road? They should think long and hard if that is the kind of society they want for themselves and their children.
Earthquake Recovery Minister could not endorse the Cameron Partners report fast enough, releasing this statement on the same day – 1 August;
“The Cameron Partners report makes it clear some major areas of financial uncertainty are causing headaches for Christchurch City, including the cost of repairing and replacing the city’s essential horizontal infrastructure [pipes, roads, waterways].
When we signed the cost-sharing agreement with the council in June 2013 we foresaw this and undertook to do a thorough review of where the shared costs of the rebuild lay by 1 December this year.
Once we have this information we can consider if any amendments are required to the cost-sharing agreement.
Officials from CERA and the Treasury are working with the council already to ensure the review provides Christchurch City with the clarity it needs to help make some of the big decisions ahead of it.”
National had won.
Brownlee had successfully forced Christchurch Council to adopt unofficial National Party policy; that Council’s were expected to divest themselves of strategic assets if funding for extraordinary projects was required. This was the same policy that Brownlee had forced on Auckland, to fund it’s rail loop, and which he outlined on TV3’s ‘The Nation‘, on 30 June 2013;
Rachel Smalley: “John Key said on Thursday that Auckland should consider selling its assets in order to meet some of these costs. Should the Council consider that?”
Gerry Brownlee: “Well I think it’s one of those things that’s inevitably going to be on the table. Remember that we’ve got a programme that is now set out for the next 10 years, and as we come up to the point where you’re getting the business case together for the city rail link and that huge expense that’s involved in that, and recognise that you’ve got a 2016 Local Body Election as well, I’d be very surprised if it wasn’t something that was considered by some people.”
But more was come on 6 December 2014, Brownlee was demanding that Christchurch Council increase the level of asset sales;
“So it’s a positive step but it’s not the end yet. I do have some worries that it might be a little timid and particularly if it were to lead to much higher rates there in Christchurch.”
Murray Horton, from the lobby group ‘Keep Our Assets Canterbury’, was correct when he warned;
“Once a chunk of ownership of those assets, the council’s assets, is gone then it won’t be long before there are calls for more to go.”
Horton’s prescience was proved barely three months later.
Costs & Consequences
On 26 February, 2015, four years and four days after the city’s second quake, the Christchurch City Council voted;
“...subject to public consultation, the council will release $750m in capital through the sale or partial sale of assets the council owns through its commercial arm, Christchurch City Holdings, to help plug its $1.2 billion funding shortfall.”
By the following day, Brownlee was demanding more asset sales, which he repeated more forthrightly on TVNZ’s Q+A on
“I don’t think you can put a particular price on it. What I think they need to do, and I’m sure that the council will get there. I’ve got to say the council have been edging their way to a position that I think will leave them in a good space progressively. What really is necessary is a sales process that gets you the highest possible price. If you go out and say, ‘Look, I’m just going to sell a little bit of this and a little bit of that,’ then you’re not going to get any premium on it at all. And if you’re going to sell something, you may as well get as much for it as you possibly can. That’s my real point.
[…]
…if you look at something like the airport. It’s essentially a real estate company that just provides parking for planes. You could break it down to being that simple. It’s still going to get used. It’s still going to provide the service the city requires whoever owns it. It is partly price controlled through the Commerce Act, as is Orion. Completely price controlled. So the idea that someone else would buy it and the pricing of your electricity lines are going to become completely out of control is completely wrong. ”
The sale of community assets is a perfect fit with National’s ideological and fiscal needs;
- Ideologically, National is as wedded to privatisation as it ever was. It is only held back from a more radical asset sales programme by public opinion – a point no doubt reinforced through National’s on-going secret polling.
- Fiscally, forcing local territorial authorities to finance infra-structure through sales of community-own assets lets central government off the hook, and gives English his desperately needed surplus.
Territorial Authorities have little control over Point 2.
With regards to Point 1, however, Territorial Authorities finding themselves under financial pressure can be more strategic when it comes to finding ways and means to navigate political pressure from the likes of right-wing governments and ministers like Gerry Brownlee.
One such mechanism is found within Christchurch City Council’s own document, “Council decision on proposed Financial Strategy“, where it states;
The sale of 14.3 % of Orion on condition that the shares are only offered to another public entity, such as another TA [Territorial Authority], or an institutional investor such as NZ Super Fund, and that any agreement would be subject to the shares returning to the CCC should the investor wish to sell down its share at a future date.
The same document suggests the sale of 34% of Lyttleton Port Company and 9% of Canterbury International Airport Ltd to “a suitable strategic partner“.
The latter measure opens the proverbial slippery slope to further down-selling of Christchurch Council’s shares in both companies. As such, it would be unacceptable to most Cantabrians (and New Zealanders, who have experienced the down-side of sales of strategic assets).
The NZ Super Fund would be an ideal partner for a Territorial Authoritory such as Christchurch Council. At present the NZSF’s investment in New Zealand amounts to only 13.8% in 2014 (down from 14.2% in 2013).
Not only would the NZSF offer an ideal means by which to keep these assets in New Zealand ownership, but would retain the profits instead of seeing them sent off-shore, worsening our Balance of Payments even further.
It would also fulfil the Super Fund’s 2009 directive from the Minister of Finance “requiring us to, while always investing in a prudent and commercial manner, identify and consider opportunities to increase the allocation to New Zealand assets in the Fund“.
Lastly, the Christchurch Council could eventually re-purchase the shares from the NZSF once the city’s re-build was essentially completed and it’s books were back to some semblance of normality.
The first option should always be that local strategic assets remain in local ownership, so that everyone in the community benefits.
In the face of intransigence from an ideologically-bound, and fiscally inept National Government, the best we can hope for is Plan B.
Plan B: transferring ownership, by temporary sale, to the New Zealand Super Fund. It ticks nearly all the boxes.
Additional – Christchurch City Asset Holdings
- Christchurch City Holdings Ltd (CCHL) is the commercial/investment arm of the Christchurch City Council.
- CCHL manages the Council (ratepayers’) investment – worth around $2.6 billion – in these seven fully or partly-owned council-controlled trading organisations.
- CCHL is forecasting to paying $46 million in dividends for 2015/16 period.
- CCHL Special dividend for 2015/16 period: $549,300,000
- “The return on our CCHL investment from cash dividends has averaged 3 per cent in the last three years and 4 per cent in the last 10 years. When the appreciation in the capital value of its investments is taken into account, CCHL has achieved an internal rate of return over the past five years of 8.0per cent a year, or 25.9 per cent a year since its inception in 1996.” (Source)
Trading Organisations
Orion New Zealand Ltd: 89.3% shareholding
Christchurch International Airport Ltd: 75%
Lyttelton Port Company Ltd: 78.9%
Christchurch City Networks Ltd (trading as Enable Networks): 100%
Red Bus Ltd: 100%
City Care Ltd: 100%
Selwyn Plantation Board Ltd: 39.3%
[Acknowledgement Fairfax Media]
.
References
National Party: Prime Minister’s Statement to Parliament
NZ Treasury: 2014 Budget Speech
NZ Treasury: Rebuilding Christchurch
NZ Treasury: Budget Priorities
Beehive.govt.nz: Budget will confirm track to surplus in 2014/15
Interest.co.nz: Finance Minister prefers not to spend taxpayer cash to avoid Sky City ‘eyesore’; no money in Budget 2015 for it
Fairfax media: Christchurch door open for asset sales
TV3 News: Government accounts show $18.4 billion deficit
Scoop media: Parliamentary Questions And Answers Feb 9 2012
Green Party: Eugenie Sage questions the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery on Christchurch asset sales
NZ Herald: Christchurch rebuild – Council needs to come to the party – PM
Fairfax media: Cameron Partners Review – full report
TV One News: Christchurch facing huge financial black hole
Sharechat.co.nz: Christchurch considers selling strategic assets stake to fund rebuild
The Press: Council asset sales mooted to help raise $900m
Scoop media: Brownlee says its up to Len to sell assets for loop
Radio NZ: Asset sales plan ‘may be too timid’
The Press: Christchurch City Council votes for $750m asset sales
The Press: Gerry Brownlee says Christchurch rate rise as ‘too much’
Scoop media: TV1 Q+A – Govt will protect identities of NZ troops – Brownlee
NZ Super Fund: 2014 Annual Report
NZ Super Fund: 2009 Ministerial Directive
Statistics NZ: Balance of Payments and International Investment Position – December 2014 quarter
Christchurch City Council: Christchurch City Long Term Plan 2015 – 2025
Christchurch City Council: Council decision on proposed Financial Strategy
Additional
Christchurch City Council: Long Term Plan consultation document adopted
Previous related blogposts
Christchurch, choice, and charter schools
Christchurch – Picking the bones clean?
The “Free Market” is a fair-weather friend
.
.
This blogpost was submitted to the Christchurch City Council as a submission to the Long Term Plan, on 22 March 2015.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 23 March 2015.
.
.
= fs =
Pita Sharples, Spooks, Maggie Barry, and Bully-boy Brownlee
.
Pita Sharples – gone
.
Acknowledgement: Radio NZ – Pita Sharples quits Maori Party leadership
.
Pita Sharples has effectively taken responsibility for the Maori Party’s poor showing (third place) at the recent Ikaroa-Rāwhiti by-election. That result was an indictment on the Maori Party’s decision to support an increasingly shakey government that is losing support in more accurate polling.
The internal leadership struggles between himself and Te Ururoa Flavell has also taken it’s toll on the 71 year old,
“It’s clear that the leadership issue…has taken a toll on the Maori Party and our people deserve a united Maori Party.”
Acknowledgement: Domninion Post – Sharples quits Maori Party leadership
It’s also something that is focusing closer scrutiny upon an increasingly unstable government. The toll thus far;
- Hekia Parata – lost part of her port-folio. In essence, a partial sacking.
- Aaron Gilmore – forced to resign from Parliament.
- John Banks – facing charges in Court. If found guilty, he will hve to resign.
- Peter Dunne – Party de-registered; lost his ministerial portfolios; and becoming increasingly oppositional to National’s policies.
- Pita Sharples – standing down as Maori-Party co-leader
An early election this year (or early next year) is becoming more likely with each passing crisis.
Not a good time for National.
.
The spooks have a new Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security…
.
On 1 July, John Key announced that Paul Neazor would be replaced in his role as Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (for the SIS and GCSB) by former-Judge Andrew McGechan.
Key says that McGechan’s role will be on an “interim” basis, instead of the usual three years, as the GCSB and Related Legislation Amendment Bill is currently being considered by a Parliament Select Committee.
However, with Peter Dunne wavering on this issue; with mounting public opposition; and god-only-knows which way Winston Peters will jump; the passing of the GCSB and Related Legislation Amendment Bill is by no means guaranteed.
In which case, National has two options remaining,
1.
The office of the Inspector-General must be expanded; properly staffed; and appropriately funded. At present, the Inspector-General’s role is a part-time position, with no permanent staffing. Our Inspector General is faced with oversight of two intelligence agencies with a combined staff of around 520. In effect he is out-numbered, out-resourced, and consequently, out-manouvered.
By contrast, our Aussie cuzzy’s version of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security has approximately 20 people working full time for the Inspectorate (see IGIS Annual Report 2011-12 Part three: Management and accountability )
This, I believe is the real problem surrounding our security-intelligence agencies – not the legislation needing “tightening up”. The legislation is tight enough as it is.
It just needs to be obeyed.
2.
The Labour Party’s call for a full public commission of inquiry on this matter cannot be ignored any longer. If Key wants cross-party support and public buy-in to secuirity/intelligence issues, then it must be open to all political parties and the public to contribute to the debate.
As matters stand now, if National forces through unpopular, undemocratic, and ultimately counter-productive laws – an incoming government will be bound to amend or repeal it entirely. This is grossly wasteful use of the Parliamentary process and taxpayer’s money.
This blogger hopes that the GCSB and Related Legislation Amendment Bill is set aside. Aside from National ministers and a few misguided rightwing bloggers, there is very little support for this proposed legislation.
Additional
Parliament: External oversight of intelligence agencies: a comparison
.
Egg; Face; Maggie Barry
.
Ex-radio host-come-National politician – known for her acerbic and often nasty tongue in Parliament’s debating chamber – has copious amounts of egg on her face.
Ever the loyal, obedient National Party foot-soldier for towing the OPL (Official Party Line), she loudly parroted her party’s opposition to the Auckland rail link. She expressed her “well wishes” to Len Brown after he won the 2010 Mayoralty race with this graceless message,
The morning after National’s resounding victory she sent a strong message to Auckland mayor Len Brown, saying there would be a CBD rail link before a second harbour crossing “over our dead bodies”.
Acknowledgement: Fairfax Media – Maggie Barry’s line in sand
Charming.
But political Karma being what it is, National’s change of heart on this issue had made her look foolish. Her senior fellow politicians have now endorsed Len Brown and Auckland Council’s plans for the Auckland rail link,
.
Acknowledgement: Interest.co.nz – Auckland Mayor celebrates Government’s agreement to support rail loop
.
Ms Barry, not quite bringing herself able to tow the new OPL, endorsed only certain aspects of Auckland Council’s transport plans,
North Shore National MP Maggie Barry said there was a “flurry of excitement” about the suggestion the North Shore could get another link to the city.
“It is essential and long overdue, and it would make a phenomenal difference to the North Shore.”
Acknowledgement: NZ Herald – Key to give Auckland a crossing
I suspect there’s enough egg on Ms Barry’s face to cook up a decent size omelette.
.
Bully-boy Brownlee
.
Not content with creating the Auckland super city without first putting it to Auckland ratepayers through a referendum…
Not content with pushing more laws through Parliament under “Urgency” than probably any other government in New Zealand’s history…
Not content with dis-establishing Environment Canterbury in March 2010; replacing it with un-elected Commissioners; whose decisions cannot be appealed to the Environment Court…
Not content with usurping the authority of the Christchurch City Council with the creation of CERA…
Not content with being given sweeping political power in the Christchurch re-build, via the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act which effectively gives unbridled power to National Ministers for five years…
Not content with expanding the surveillance powers of the GCSB, where no one will be safe from being spied upon by the State…
Not content with moving to take control of Christchurch…
Gerry Brownlee is now putting none-too-subtle pressure on Auckland City to sell its assets to help pay for the Auckland rail loop,
.
Acknowledgement: NZ Herald – City’s shares eyed for rail
.
Acting more reminiscent of a feudal Baron ruling over his fiefdom, Brownlee is treating Mayor Len Brown as a vassal, forcing Auckland City to obey National’s diktats.
I wonder what Aucklanders think of this kind of high-handed Ministerial control being exerted over their city – all the way from Wellington?
It must be demeaning for Aucklanders to realise that their elected local representatives are being treated like puppets, and that real power is being exerted from the Beehive?
So much for the quaint notion of democracy.
So much for Aucklanders being in charge of their own destiny.
So much for the “partnership” that our mendacious Prime Minister promised, three years ago,
The Government will work in partnership with the new Auckland council to improve the city’s transport systems, Prime Minister John Key says.
He said today the Government shared Mayor Len Brown’s vision of getting Auckland moving and it was a government priority as well.
“The Government will work in partnership with the new Auckland City Council on what comes next, and contribute its fair share to the continuing goal of improving transport,” Mr Key said at his post-cabinet press conference.
Acknowledgement : NZ Herald – Govt will work with council on Auckland’s transport
Having a Minister of the Crown attempting to bully Auckland to sell it’s assets in not a “partnership”. And just because National has engaged in an act of wilful economic sabotage by it’s agenda of partial asset-sales – is no reason to expect others to follow that lunatic policy.
Gerry Brownlee should take note. He is playing with political fire, and a million votes in Auckland may come raining down on his (and other National MPs’) head.
If I know Kiwis as well as I think I do, they will not take kindly to being bossed around. (The Americans found this out, to their cost, when the Lange-led Labour government passed our nuclear-free legislation.)
How much does Brownlee really want to piss that many voters off?
Tread carefully, bully-boy.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 3 July 2013.
.
.
= fs =
Radio NZ: Politics with Matthew Hooton and Mike Williams
.
– Politics on Nine To Noon –
.
– Monday 8 July 2013 –
.
– Kathryn Ryan, with Matthew Hooton & Mike Williams –
.
Today on Politics on Nine To Noon,
.
.
Click to Listen: Politics with Matthew Hooton and Mike Williams (23′ 26″ )
- Labour’s so-called “man ban”
- What does Maori/Mana/Labour all add up to?
- The latest on Christchurch
- And Kim Dotcom vs John Key
Acknowledgement: Radio NZ
.
.
= fs =
Good luck to Phillipstown School!
It was almost exactly a month ago that the Ministry of Education – at the behest of this shabby, poor-excuse-for-a-government, announced the closure and “merger” of several schools in Christchurch;
.
Acknowledgement: TV3 – Tears, shock as Chch school mergers announced
.
Phillipstown School was one of three schools chosen to “merge” with others – in effect another closure.
However, tonight (30 June), Phillipstown School will be following in the footsteps of Salisbury School (see previous blogpost: Why Salisbury School was right to be wary of this government) in refusing to take this threat to their existence lying down. In a press release today, Phillipstown School made it’s position crystal clear,
The Board of Phillipstown School will be filing judicial review proceedings in the Christchurch High Court on Monday. The School is seeking a declaration that the Minister of Education’s decision to close Phillipstown school and merge it with Woolston school from the beginning of 2014 is illegal and in breach of the Education Act 1989.
Acknowledgement: Scoop Media – Phillipstown School launches Judicial Review
As Board of Trustees Chairperson, Wayne West, said on Scoop Media,
“The Minister’s decision appears to be based on mistakes of fact. The statutory consultation required with the School and with the parents of students was also illegal because the officials refused to give us the information needed to respond to claims about the costs of remediating the earthquake damage at the school, and other property related issues. The Minister cited both of these as key reasons for her decision.”
Acknowledgement: IBID
As this blogger has pointed out previously, it seems to be the height of callousness and indifference to the stress and suffering of Christchurch people over the past two years. With two major earthquakes and thousands of aftershocks; damaged infra-structure; disrupted services; closed or struggling businesses; and the heart of the city all but destroyed – National Ministers seem content to add human-imposed misery upon Cantabrians.
This is the worst possible time to be “rationalising” any public service in that city.
I believe that National will suffer badly in the next election if they persevere with their appallingly-concocted plans.
This blogger supports schools in Christchurch; the staff; the parents, and children, to help preserve their already stressed communities. They deserve support and assistance – not further under-mining of public services.
I hope their request for a Judicial Review is successful.
And I hope that National MPs in the Canterbury electorates receive the full opprobrium of voters, at the next election, for their shameful conduct. Perhaps it is time for Cantabrians to send a “seismic political shock” to this government?
Good luck, Phillipstown School!
.
*
.
Previous related blogposts
Four schools to close in Aranui, Christchurch
.
.
= fs =
Amazing events this last month!!!
Three amazing events that’ve taken place this last months, and which serves to remind us how unpredictable and weird the Universe can really be…
.
Sensational!!!
Richard III’s skeleton discovered!
.
The grave of Richard III was discovered on 4 February, under a carpark in Leicester (fitting, being the 21st Century), and caused a worldwide sensation as this 528 year old King was prominent in British history as well as the subject of a play by William Shakespeare…
.
.
Astounding!!!
Meteor shower over Russia!
Straight out of a science fiction movie, a huge meteor entered the atmosphere and exploded over the Russian city of Chelyabinsk, three days ago. Luckily, it exploded into fragments high up in the atmosphere.
Had it impacted the ground intact, the devastation and loss of life would’ve been far more severe.
It was a small taste of what our dino cuzzies must’ve experienced, 65 million years ago…
.
.
Unbelievable!!!
Hekia Parata fronts on Campbell Live – Sceptics Society shocked!
.
.
Yeah, I couldn’t believe it either…
After sending her ‘flunkies’ (see previous blogopost: Parata, Bennett, and Collins – what have they been up to?) to front for her and take media heat for Christchurch schools closures, the Novopay debacle, and other foul-ups – Education Minister, Hekia Parata finally fronted for an interview with TV3’s John Campbell.
The media training that Parata has been given seems to have worked. Her demented grin…
.
.
.
– was gone.
Meanwhile, in ‘quake ravaged Christchurch, where increased stress is causing children to have nightmares and instances of bedwetting has skyrocketed (see: Quakes traumatise kids), Parata has decided not to close or amalgamate 31 schools.
She’s only going to close/amalgamate 13 schools (see: Minister announces fate of Canterbury schools).
Well, that’s that’s f*****g big of her, isn’t it?!
Why not further gut the heart out of a community that has lost 185 of it’s people to a violent, natural disaster; thousands of homes damages or destroyed; businesses closed; insurance companies and EQC dicking people around; and entire neighbourhoods written off.
In case anyone needed proof that National has no heart, well, look no further.
And for all you National supporters out there who don’t give a rats because it hasn’t happened to you… well, Karma is working over-time at present.
Your turn will come.
To the people of Christchurch, and for those shocked by today’s announcements, I just want to say that a whole lot of your fellow New Zealanders are with you, in spirit at least. I just hope there’s a change of government before Parata can implement her rotten-to-the-core, penny-pinching, policies.
.
.
= fs =
WINZ, waste, and wonky numbers
From previous blogpost, Bill English: When numbers don’t fit, or just jump around…
… Paula Bennett has directed WINZ to make life more difficult for the unemployed, when registering with WINZ. As if losing one’s job wasn’t stressful enough, Bennet has forced the implementation of some draconian rules and requirements for beneficiaries. (The implication being that it’s the fault of the unemployed for being unemployed?!)
One of the bureacratic bundles of red tape are the number of forms issued to WINZ applicants.
For those readers who have never had the “delight” of dealing with WINZ – these are the forms that are required to be filled out. Note: every single applicant is given these forms (in a little plastic carry-bag).
And if you have to reapply to WINZ for a benefit (if, say, you’ve lost your job again) you are required to fill out these forms all over again.
This is where taxpayer’s money is really going to waste in welfare.
All up, seventythree pages of information and forms to read, understand, fill out, to collect information,
.
.
.
(Blogger’s Note: for a comprehensive view of each page, please go to previous blogpost: Bill English: When numbers don’t fit, or just jump around)
This system becomes even more laughable when one considers that if an an applicant has been a WINZ “client” (ie, beneficiary) before, they remain on MSD’s computer files. Much of the information sought is already on-file.
The cost of this must be horrendous, and it is ironic that at a time when National is cutting “back room” support staff to save money, that they are permitting taxpayer funding for this ‘Monty Pythonesque ‘ exercise in out-of-control form-filling. (More on that below.)
No wonder that this was reported in Fairfax media,
“Social Development Minister Paula Bennett this morning said latest figures showed 328,043 people were now on benefits, with 57,058 of those on an unemployment benefit.
Reforms passed by Parliament require people on an unemployment benefit to reapply for it after one year. Bennett said this change had led to 5000 people cancelling their benefit.
More than 1400 of those said they had found work, more than 2600 didn’t complete a reapplication and more than 1000 were no longer eligible. ”
See: 5000 beneficiaries quit dole rather than reapply
How many people with minimal education or poor command of the English language could hope to fill out so many forms of such complexity?
By contrast, applying for a bank mortage is vastly simpler – an irony considering the vastly greater sums of money involved.
In fact, an application for an ANZ Mortgage comprises of eight pages (four, double-sided),
.
.
Eight pages for a mortgage to borrow anywhere from $250,000 to $1 million and upward.
And 72 pages for an unemployment benefit of $204.96 per week, net, for a single person over 25. (See: Unemployment Benefit – current)
So how much does all this cost us?
Last year, this blogger emailed the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) with an Official Information Act (OIA) request, asking what the cost of all these pamphlets cost,
.
Date: Tue, Wednesday, 14 November 2012 1:38 PM
From: Frank Macskasy
Subject: Information Request
To: Paula Bennett “Paula.bennett@parliament.govt.nz”Kia Ora Ms Bennett,
I would like to make an official Freedom of Information Request.
Please provide information as to the costings of the following forms and information leaflets produced by MSD/WINZ;
“Work and Income Employment-Earnings Verification” (VO6-mar 2011)
“Work and Income Find a job build a future Tools to help you find work” (JOBSW0007-nov 2010)
“Jobz4u Manual Jobseeker Enrolment” (-)
“Work and Income Unemployment Benefit Application” (M18-JUL 2011)
“Work and Income Unemployment Benefit Application – What to bring” (M18-JUL 2011)
“Work and Income How can we help you” (CM0001 – OCT 2010)
“Work and Income Online Services” (-)
“Work and Income” plastic carrybag for above items.
Please provide total costings for EACH item printed, on an annual basis for the last four years, and a break-down of costings for usage per year and per WINZ client.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Regards,
-Frank Macskasy
Blogger
.
After seeking an extension, on 4 February this year, the MSD replied with these costings,
.
.
.
Firstly, it’s disappointing to note that of the eight items that I requested costings for, MSD could provide figures for only five. They admitted not have costings for two documents (“Jobz4u Manual Jobseeker Enrolment” and “Work and Income Online Services” ) and made no mention of another (“Work and Income Unemployment Benefit Application – What to bring” ).
However, based on figures provided for other documents, we can certainly make some rough guesses. If MSD’s figures are correct, over four years, the cost of printing these 72 pages is around $1 million. Not a hell of a lot, when considering that WINZ benefit’s will be approximate $4.9 billion for just this financial year alone (see: Budget 2012 – Vote Social Development).
But if a Bank can offer mortgages from $1 to millions of dollars, using an eight page application form – then why would a government department be wasting hundreds of thousands of dollars – millions over decades – for a measely $204.96 (per week, net, for a single person over 25)?
The reason is fairly obvious.
A Bank welcomes a new client in the hope of offering a financial service – eg, a mortgage. Banks view clients as assets.
Under the current government, WINZ is actively discouraging people from signing up for welfare assistance,
Reforms passed by Parliament require people on an unemployment benefit to reapply for it after one year. Bennett said this change had led to 5000 people cancelling their benefit.
More than 1400 of those said they had found work, more than 2600 didn’t complete a reapplication and more than 1000 were no longer eligible. ”
See: 5000 beneficiaries quit dole rather than reapply
Yet, at a time when we have a critical shortage of skilled workers in this country – especially tradespeople for the Christchurch re-build – National views those seeking welfare assistance as a liability.
This is about as short-sighted as a conservative, market-oriented government can get. It shows a lot about the narrow-sightedness of National’s ministers when, like a bank, they don’t see that 170,000 unemployed is an asset waiting to be upskilled; trained and supported into new careers.
Just imagine; 170,000 new builders, computer technicians, doctors, electricians, nurses, quantity-surveyors, scientists, teachers, vets, etc. Imagine the economic growth this country would have if National viewed an army of 170,000 unemployed as an asset waiting to be tapped – rather than discouraged.
I can imagine it.
National evidently can’t. Not when they prefer to spend millions on 72 pages of bureacratic rubbish, which would put of a lot of people.
I wonder how much business a bank would get if they demanded that new clients fill out 72 pages of forms?
Not much, I’d wager.
So why does the government do it?
Addendum
.
.
This is the predictable consequence when a hands-off government does nothing to grow the economy and generate new jobs.
This is the predictable consequence when a government treats unemployed workers as a liability to be discouraged and labelled as ‘bludgers’ – rather than recognising the asset that they really are.
This is the predictable consequence of a National government.
.
.
= fs =
Parata preparing for another backdown?
.
I – National Standards
.
.
Wearing a Joker-like grin on TVNZ’s Q+A (30 September 2012) , National’s Education minister, Hekia Parata was interviewed by Shane Taurima on ‘National Standards’ and planned closures and forced amalgamations of several Christchurch schools.
Her answers regarding ‘National Standards’ suggest that she is no long “owning” the policy and is attempting to shift “ownership” (or responsibility) on to schools and parents. Parata ducked questions and constantly pointed to schools and parents as if they were leading the charge for change,
SHANE Little Johnny’s off to school next year, so Mum and Dad are going to jump online to see how the schools in their area are performing. As things sit now, just how reliable and accurate is that [National Standards] information for Mum and Dad?
HEKIA So that’s one of the things Mum and Dad are going to do. It’s not going to replace Mum and Dad visiting the schools that they want to enroll their children in. What they’ll find on the website is not only the first year of National Standards data but the ERO report and the annual report that relate to the schools they’re thinking about.
[abridged]
HEKIA Schools have had faithfully reproduced the information that they have provided, so we’re relying on schools to tell us themselves what their valid and accurate data is…
[abridged]
HEKIA We are relying on schools to tell us that, and schools have. 2088 schools have produced their report on the 31st of May. It’s their data. We’re relying on their judgement.
[abridged]
HEKIA Well, it’s schools’ data…
[abridged]
HEKIA They can rely on what the schools have said about themselves…
Notice the constant reference back to schools? As if schools actually had choice in whether or not to participate in National’s programme?
But the most astounding comment came from Parata when she herself admitted that National Standards were every bit as ‘ropey’ as what Dear Leader Key had previously claimed.
SHANE What’s the point of the information, though, if the Prime Minister, for example, he calls it ropey; the head of your own ministry, she has described it as unreliable.
HEKIA Well, what I have said all along is that it is variable. For the purposes of comparing schools, it is not reliable…
“Not reliable”?!?!
“NOT RELIABLE”???!!!
Key and National have spent millions of taxpayers’ dollars on implementing ‘National Standards’; have threatened schools that do not comply with demands for data; and have turned our education system on it’s head for something that is “not reliable“?!?!
I just about spat my coffee when I heard Parata utter those words.
If New Zealanders needed further proof that National is implementing loopy policies based more on weird right wing ideology than common sense – then Parata has provided it.
I ask my fellow New Zealanders who last year cast their vote for National; do you think that a Party that implements a policy that has such far-ranging implications on our schools and children’s education; that spends millions of our taxes on these “reforms”; that has been discredited internationally by other countries; only to learn that “for the purposes of comparing schools, it is not reliable” – does this make any sense to you?
If you were a National supporter last year, you may wish to reconsider just what it was that you voted for?
.
II – National Standards Internationally
.
‘National Standards’ was all but put to the sword this morning (1 October) on Radio NZ’s ‘Check Point’, as visiting overseas Education professionals explained that the system was simplistic, unproven, and based more of ideological expectations rather than any realities we know about.
Pasi Sahlberg from Finland’s Ministry of Education rejected national standards, charter schools or league tables. Which is startling – as Finland is in the top four of the OECD ranking of developed nations’ education performance. The other three are Japan, Canada and South Korea.
Listen to Pasi Sahlberg here on Radio NZ’s Morning Report – International experts pan government education policies
Sahlberg knows what he is talking about. (Which is why Finland is outperforming New Zealand’s educational outcomes.)
As outlined in my previous blogpost of this issue – See: Finland, some thoughts – the Finns have rejected the simplistic policies of national standards, charter schools, and league tables. They see these as little more than a neo-liberalised view of education; an attempt to implement competition; notions of “success” and “failure”; and the illusion of “choice”.
In fact, those with a fairly good memory will recall that previous National Governments tried precisely the same policies with our health system, implementing the CHE model for our hospitals.
Essentially “CHEs” were expected to compete against each other; drive down costs; become more efficient through “competition”; and all with less ands less funding.
Not only did it not work, but people on waiting lists – like Southland farmer, Colin Morrison – died waiting for life-saving medical procedures.
The Minister of Health at the time was Bill English.
See: Widow says little improvement seem
See: GP hits out at health reforms
Instead of adopting dumbed-down Americanised systems – which are the desperate clutchings of a failed market-driven society – it is worth thinking about the success story shown by nations such as Finland,
.
” The flexible curriculum is set by the Ministry of Education and the Education Board. Education is compulsory between the ages of 7 and 16. After lower secondary school, graduates may either enter the workforce directly, or apply to trade schools or gymnasiums (upper secondary schools). Trade schools prepare for professions. Academically oriented gymnasiums have higher entrance requirements and specifically prepare for Abitur and tertiary education. Graduation from either formally qualifies for tertiary education.
In tertiary education, two mostly separate and non-interoperating sectors are found: the profession-oriented polytechnics and the research-oriented universities. Education is free and living expenses are to a large extent financed by the government through student benefits. There are 20 universities and 30 polytechnics in the country. Helsinki University is ranked 75th in the Top University Ranking of 2010.
The World Economic Forum ranks Finland’s tertiary education #2 in the world. Around 33% of residents have a tertiary degree, similar to Nordics and more than in most other OECD countries except Canada (44%), United States (38%) and Japan(37%). The proportion of foreign students is 3% of all tertiary enrolments, one of the lowest in OECD, while in advanced programs it is 7.3%, still below OECD average 16.5%.
More than 30% of tertiary graduates are in science-related fields. Forest improvement, materials research, environmental sciences, neural networks, low-temperature physics, brain research, biotechnology, genetic technology and communications showcase fields of study where Finnish researchers have had a significant impact.
Finland had a long tradition of adult education, and by the 1980s nearly one million Finns were receiving some kind of instruction each year. Forty percent of them did so for professional reasons. Adult education appeared in a number of forms, such as secondary evening schools, civic and workers’ institutes, study centers, vocational course centers, and folk high schools. Study centers allowed groups to follow study plans of their own making, with educational and financial assistance provided by the state. Folk high schools are a distinctly Nordic institution. Originating in Denmark in the nineteenth century, folk high schools became common throughout the region. Adults of all ages could stay at them for several weeks and take courses in subjects that ranged from handicrafts to economics.
Finland is highly productive in scientific research. In 2005, Finland had the fourth most scientific publications per capita of the OECD countries. In 2007, 1,801 patents were filed in Finland. ”
Source: Wikipedia
Here’s a novel idea; why not chase Finland’s example rather than America, which is way down on the OECD education performance listing?
Why? Because Finland invests heavily in education. National’s screwy policies are about market-driven competition and cost-cutting.
Didn’t that work out well for CHEs and Colin Morrison?
.
III – Christchurch School Closures – Back-down imminent?
.
Hekia Parata’s statements, on Q+A (30 September), regarding school closures and amalgamations in quake-ravaged Christchurch, were not as hard-line as previously reported in the media.
In fact, Parata was at pains to insist that,
“We are following the process that is set out in the Education Act. We’re being very clear what the proposal is, and I and the Ministry of Education will listen to everything that is said by the community. There is no pre-determined outcome. We are listening.”
Up till this point, his blogger found it hard to work out National’s understanding of this crisis,
… that National was totally oblivious to the shock, trauma, and suffering of Christchurch residents after two major earthquakes that shattered their city, killing 185 people, and is foisting their brutish policies without considering their impact,
… or, that National understood the trauma felt by Christchurch residents – but was pushing ahead anyway.
Pressed by Taurima, Parata made this jaw-dropping confession,
” Well, look. School closures around the country under any administration around the country are always difficult. Here in Christchurch is a community that’s been under intolerable stress for a very long time. “
Christchurch “is a community that’s been under intolerable stress for a very long time“?!?!
So National – being a Party brimming over with humanitarian compassion – compounds the intolerable stress by adding to it?!
Now, I’ve no doubt that there is a sizeable faction of any society that has psycopathic tendencies and finds it hard to empathise with the misery of people who’ve survived a traumatic, destructive disaster.
But most New Zealanders are not cold-hearted, bean-counting, self-centered, quasi-psychopaths to whom the destruction of communities can be easily brushed aside in the pursuit of efficiencies. New Zealanders will view events unfolding in Christchurch with growing dismay.
Their thoughts will probably run along lines something like this,
” Bugger me! What if the Big One hit my town? Is this what National has in store for me, my family, and my community?”
This is when the Middle Classes start to feel… uneasy.
Expect opposition to grow in Christchurch.
Expect to see distraught families and crying children on our TV screens.
Expect to see National drop in the polls.
Expect to see Hekia Parata back down on this loathsome, inhuman issue.
.
IV – Proposed School Closures & Electorates
.
Planned Closures
Banks Avenue School – Christchurch Central – Nicky Wager (N) – Majority: 47
Branston Intermediate – Wigram – Megan Woods (L) – Majority: 1,500
Burnham School – Selwyn – Amy Adams (N) – Majority: 19,451
Burnside Primary School – Ilam – Gerry Brownlee (N) – Majority: 13,312
Duvauchelle School (becomes a hub of Akaroa Area School) – Selwyn – Amy Adams (N) – Majority: 19,451
Glenmoor School – Christchurch Central – Nicky Wager (N) – Majority: 47
Greenpark School – Wigram – Megan Woods (L) – Majority: 1,500
Hammersley Park School – Christchurch Central – Nicky Wager (N) – Majority: 47
Kendal School- Ilam – Gerry Brownlee (N) – Majority: 13,312
Le Bons Bay School – Selwyn – Amy Adams (N) – Majority: 19,451
Linwood Intermediate – Christchurch Central – Nicky Wager (N) – Majority: 47
Manning Intermediate – Wigram – Megan Woods (L) – Majority: 1,500
Okains Bay School (becomes a hub of Akaroa Area School) – Selwyn – Amy Adams (N) – Majority: 19,451
Ouruhia Model School – Christchurch East – Lianne Dalziel (L) – Majority: 5,334
Richmond School – Christchurch Central – Nicky Wager (N) – Majority: 47
Schools to close and merge
Schools to become Year 1 to 13:
Aranui High School – Christchurch East – Lianne Dalziel (L) – Majority: 5,334
Aranui School – Christchurch East – Lianne Dalziel (L) – Majority: 5,334
Avondale School – Christchurch East – Lianne Dalziel (L) – Majority: 5,334
Chisnallwood Intermediate – Christchurch East – Lianne Dalziel (L) – Majority: 5,334
Wainoni Primary School – Christchurch East – Lianne Dalziel (L) – Majority: 5,334
Mergers
Burwood School and Windsor School on Windsor School site – Christchurch East – Lianne Dalziel (L) – Majority: 5,334
Discovery One School and Unlimited Paenga Tawhiti as Year 1 to 13 school – Christchurch Central – Nicky Wager (N) – Majority: 47
Freeville and New Brighton North School – Christchurch East – Lianne Dalziel (L) – Majority: 5,334
Linwood Avenue School and Bromley School on Bromley School site – Port Hills – Ruth Dyson (L) – Majority: 3,097
Lyttleton Main School and Lyttleton West School – Port Hills – Ruth Dyson (L) – Majority: 3,097
Philipstown School and Woolston School (moving to new site) – Christchurch Central – Nicky Wager (N) – Majority: 47 — Port Hills – Ruth Dyson (L) – Majority: 3,097
South New Brighton School and Central New Brighton School – Christchurch East – Lianne Dalziel (L) – Majority: 5,334
Te Kura Kaupapa Maori o te Whanau and Te Kura Kaupapa Maori o Waitaha – Wigram – Megan Woods (L) – Majority: 1,500 — Port Hills – Ruth Dyson (L) – Majority: 3,097
Schools in Labour-held electorates: 22
Schools in National-held electorates: 14
.
*
.
Sources
See: Q+A – Education Minister Hekia Parata (video)
See: Q+A – Education Minister Hekia Parata (transcript)
Radio NZ: 13 schools to close, others to merge in Christchurch
Wikipedia: New Zealand general election, 2011
Previous related blogpost
Christchurch, choice, and charter schools)
Additional
School standards report card ‘ropey’
.
.
= fs =
Christchurch, choice, and charter schools
.
.
National is a Party of choice. National loves to give individuals choice. National hates the idea of “Nanny State” taking away the individuals’ right of choice and governments making decisions on their behalf. National believes that individuals know better than the state.
“Choice is good”.
“State decisionmaking is bad”.
According to National.
Which is why, when National announced it would be adopting ACT’s policy of implementing Charter Schools (in poor areas only – but no doubt that was just a coincidence), choice was high on the list of rationale’s for this policy,
.
.
Dear Leader John Key stated,
” It’s a step towards more choice, at the end of the day I expect the vast bulk of schools will be the same as they are now.”
See: Ibid
Little Dear Leader, Bill English, parrotted the Party line; Charter Schools offered choice,
” Hon BILL ENGLISH: As the member knows, the issue of whether teachers are qualified is being discussed in the context of charter schools, which will offer an element of choice, although a very small element of choice, in the general school system. All other schools will continue to run with registered teachers.
Hon BILL ENGLISH: In respect of the State-run schools, no. In respect of the charter schools, it is an aspect of providing choices for young New Zealanders that are not currently available to them. “
See: Parliament: Questions for Oral Answer
National MP for Maungakiekie, Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga, repeated the mantra (in case we missed it the first time),
” With our Government’s focus on raising achievement for all our students, I see partnership schools as just another option for our parents and students. It will give them more freedom to choose the type of education that best suits their children’s learning needs. “
See: Scoop.co.nz – Partnership Schools are Good for High Needs Communities
And the only human member of ACT with high-functioning mental processes, Catherine Isaac, chipped in (as it was ACT policy after all – even though it had never been announced during last year’s election campaign),
” Well, what is different is that these schools are going to get greater freedom to innovate, to find different ways of engaging with children who are struggling to learn, and you need more opportunities, more freedom... “
See: Scoop.co.nz – Q+A – Corin Dann interviews Catherine Isaac and Ian Leckie
It is abundantly clear that National’s preference is always; choice. Lots and lots of choice!
Except…
When National takes away an entire city’s choice.
Like with Christchurch,
.
.
On 13 September, National announced the closure or mergers of dozens of schools in the quake-hit city of Christchurch. Amongst those closing or merging, according to NBR and Radio NZ stories on 14 September,
Schools to close include:
- Aranui High years 1 to 13
- Aranui Primary
- Banks Avenue Primary, or relocate depending on geotech report
- Branston Intermediate
- Burnham Primary
- Burnside Primary
- Chisnallwood Intermediate years 1 to 13
- Duvauchelles Primary
- Glenoor Primary
- Greenpark Primary
- Hammersley Park Primary
- Le Bons Bay Primary
- Linwood Intermediate
- Manning Intermediate
- Ricmond Primary
- Wainoni Primary
Who will merge:
Avonside Girls High will merge with Christchurch Girls High as a “dual shift” or may close depending on geotech report.
Christchurch Boys High will possibly merge with Shirley Boys High as a “dual shift”.
Central New Brighton Primary will merge with New Brighton Primary.
Burwood School and Windsor School on Windsor School site
Discovery One School and Unlimited Paenga Tawhiti as Year 1 to 13 school
Freeville and New Brighton North School
Linwood Avenue School and Bromley School on Bromley School site
Lyttleton Main School and Lyttleton West School
Philipstown School and Woolston School (moving to new site)
South New Brighton School and Central New Brighton School
Te Kura Kaupapa Maori o te Whanau and Te Kura Kaupapa Maori o Waitaha
See: Up to 13 Chch schools to be closed, as many as 18 will merge
See: 13 schools to close, others to merge in Christchurch
The shock news was delivered to a packed meeting of principles and Boards of Trustees members by these three,
.
DELIVERING THE NEWS: Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee, Education Minister Hekia Parata and Secretary for Education Lesley Longstone deliver the news.
.
The proposed closures and mergers would result in hundreds of teachers losing their jobs; thousands of students uprooted and moved; and the remaining centres of communities – which have lost many of their infra-structure and services – finally eradicated.
The response from many Christchurch education-sector workers, parents, and residents was unsurprisingly one of anger and disgust. It seems that what the earthquakes had begun – National was hellbent on finishing off.
For many, this was an unprovoked, unforeseen, craven attack on their communities,
” I state here and now … Shirley Boys’ High School as a school exists and will continue to exist – mark it. There is no way in God’s creation that we cease to exist. (source)
We are not going to merge for the most practical reason. I have 1300 students in the school I think Trevor McIntyre at Christchurch Boys’ will have something similar.
To simply say that Shirley closes and suddenly Christchurch Boys’ High School is equipped to double in size is absurd. They don’t have the land, they don’t have the infrastructure. It’s nonsense. (source)”
– John Laurenson, Shirley Boys’ High School principal
“I just don’t understand what’s going on . . . my boy’s got three years left and I didn’t want him to move.
We live nearby and yes, it’s damaged but this is our community so you can’t just pick us up and move us.”
“We’ve got five classrooms at our school, excellent staff doing wonderful things and just can’t for the life of me see why they would want to close Ouruhia.”
” I wonder how many people who were staying so their kids had stability and didn’t have to be uprooted from schools, will now leave and follow all the others to Brisbane… say 20 schools x 500 pupils/school… is a lot of affected families…. “
“Men and women are in tears at the possibility of losing their jobs, their schools and communities.
Schools are the focal point of their communities. Schools are identified by the names of their community. Families now have to gravitate, take their children to other places, create new identities.
This is going to affect families in a major way. This is going to affect parents in a major way, just like it is going to affect teachers and children.”
– Paul Kennedy, Cathedral Grammar school headmaster
“Our house is TC3 and everything around this school is red-zoned pretty much, but Banks Ave has been the one and only constant in their lives since the earthquakes.
Children had gone through enough without having their school taken off them“.
“We got more than we bargained for today.”
– Philip Harding, Paparoa Street School principal
“Where are the kids supposed to go? Haven’t we been through enough? Half the kids are on medication because of the earthquakes.”
“No parent is going to enrol their child in an intermediate school that they know is closing so already we’re looking at losing half our pupil population next year alone.
I need to look after my staff, maintain the quality of teaching and keep looking after the children because they’ve been heroes since the quakes . . . everyone has gone through so much and now we have to go through this.”
– Geoff Siave, Shirley Intermediate principal
As this blogger pointed out above; National loves choice.
Except when it’s not convenient.
Then it will act with all the ruthlessness of a mad Arab dictator or ex-Soviet Asiatic republic that never quite “got democracy“.
National will give us the ‘choice’ of Charter schools, whether we want them or not.
Whilst at the same time it will gut the heart out of Christchurch, inflicting more heartache, stress, misery, and uncertainty on a city that has endured more than the rest of us could possibly imagine.
I leave the reader with this piece, taken from a National Party 2011 policy-document on education,
12. Support Canterbury
Rebuilding Canterbury is a top priority for National. We supported the people of Canterbury in the immediate aftermath of the earthquakes and we are committed to getting greater Christchurch back on its feet over the coming months and years.
National:
• Ensured all schools were up and running eight weeks after the February earthquake.
• Double-funded students who moved out of Christchurch for 2011. That is, we funded the Christchurch school they no longer attended and also funded the school outside of Christchurch they did attend.
• Created new exemptions so that Christchurch students would not unfairly miss out on NCEA qualifications.National will rebuild the Canterbury school network
* Ensure schools make the most of their facilities and resources, and they collaborate rather than compete with each other.
* Ensure there is a range of education provision so parents can continue to have choice about what type of school they send their children to.
Schools in Christchurch will become part of the most advanced schooling network in New Zealand with facilities that support education in the 21st Century.
See: National Party – Education in Schools – Building Better Public Services
Choice.
We all have it.
Especially on Election Day.
– Christchurch schools –
– Lest We Forget –
.
*
.
Additional
Scoop.co.nz: Christchurch schools to reopen as charter schools?
.
.
= fs =
Christchurch – Picking the bones clean?
.
.
It is fast becoming apparent that this government is eyeing up Christchurch’s community-owned assets, to “help” pay for the costs of that city’s re-build.
Gerry Brownlee recently stated,
“Let me tell you, when the Government is spending $5.5billion anywhere, we expect the recipients of that to have some plan for how they will participate in what will be a very, very expensive recovery. And that plan has to be a lot better than ‘we’re just going to put up the rates and we’re going to borrow a lot more money’.” – Source
Which, strangely enough, is pretty much what National has done in the last three-and-a-bit years; raise gst; raise ACC premiums; raise EQC levies; and borrowed $380 million a week until we were (last reported) over $18 billion in debt,
.
.
So it’s ok for Central government to raise taxes/charges/levies and borrow like crazy – but not Christchurch!?
Ok, got it.
So what alternatives are Gerry Brownlee and John Key expecting of Christchurch City Council?
It appears that Key and Brownlee are indeed pressuring the Christchurch Council to privatise it’s community-owned assets to raise $1 billion for re-building. Chief amongst these, I suspect would be the Orion Power company – one of few in New Zealand still in public ownership. (Orion is 89.3% owned by the Christchurch City Council and 10.7% owned by the Selwyn District Council.) Red Bus Ltd, Lyttelton Port Company, and Christchurch airport could also be privatised if Brownlee gets his way.
Brownlee stated,
“”We have asked Treasury, obviously, to give us advice about what the capacity is for Christchurch’s rating base to take on the extraordinary expense they have to face in the future,” he said.
”It is a $1billion-plus bill that they have to face and we are very interested, given that we are putting up $5.5b, as to how they might meet that cost.” ” – Source
Which is ‘code’ for “how are you guys going to cough up $1 billion for your re-build”?
It would be crazy to expect the people of Christchurch to rebuild the second largest city in this country. After enduring so much devastation; the death of 184 loved oved ones; thousands of people leaving the stricken city; losing teaching staff and other skilled workers – expecting the local people to weather such an onerous billion-dollar cost is patently unjust.
And it would be commercial insanity to privatise Council-owned assets at a time when, due to Christchurch’s current state, would constitute ca “fire sale” and not fetch the best possible prices.
As Gordon Campbell wrote on Scoop.co.nz.,
“Please. It would be idiotic to force Christchurch to sell its assets to pay for its rebuild, under present conditions. Given the current state of the city, those assets would earn only fire sale returns. Hocking off the city’s assets dirt cheap is yet another version of the destruction of its legacy – and while it may make sense to Brownlee to sell off that legacy to any of his government’s real estate speculator mates who may be waiting in the wings, it would be a betrayal of the people of Christchurch who as [Lianne] Dalziel says, have been through enough: “What they don’t need are backroom deals being done on the future of their city and their city’s assets.” – Source
As for the government’s financial problems – these are of John Key’s own making. Cutting taxes (April 2009, October 2010) during a recession, when we most needed to stimulate the economy via encouraging strong infra-structure investment was just irresponsible,
.
.
Bill English may have “expected the “tax switch” to be revenue-neutral” – but his ‘expectations’ are not part of reality. Instead, National has left a gaping hole of several billions of dollars in government revenue. No wonder we’re borrowing $380 million a week – and paying hefty interest amounts on those borrowings!
Refusing to raise taxes (except gst, which impacts mostly on the poorest) to finance the rebuild of our second largest city simply defies logic. But then, I, and others, have long since given up trying to figure out this governments plans.
Even the business community said as much,last year,
“Business NZ also released the results of its election survey of more than 1300 small to large businesses. While almost all believed it was important for the government to have a co-ordinated plan of action that raised economic performance, little more than a third thought John Key’s Government had one.
Deloitte chief executive Murray Jack said the finding was “disturbing” and the plan Mr Key had earlier in the day confidently spoken to the conference about “was obviously news to most people in this room”.” – Source
It’s fairly obvious that this government is relying on short-term “gains” (asset sales) to achieve long-term results. Applying “free market” policies to rebuild a crippled city is simply more right wing craziness.
A far better option would be the Green Party proposal for an Earthquake Levy. Such a levy would spread the cost of Christchurch’s re-build; take unnecessary financial pressure off Christchurch citizens; preserve Council-owned assets in public ownership; and retain the income stream – $100 million per annum – from these assets.
It’s a win-win-win scenario.
Does this government have the wit to investigate this, and/or other options?
Or does John Key really looking to buy into yet another fight with another community over another sensitive issue?
Your call, Mr Key.
.
***
.
Additional
The Press: Brownlee turns up heat on council over rebuild
Green Party: How an earthquake levy could look
Scoop: On bank profits, and Gerry Brownlee’s asset sales plans for Christchurch
.
.
Booze – it’s time for some common sense
.
.
I sympathise with Newtown residents. This country has a glut of alcohol outlets, and most folk have had a gutsful.
The ready availability of cheap booze satisfies heavy drinkers; liquor companies; and naive libertarians, none of whom care greatly about communities – but I think it’s time that NZ called “time” on our growing liquor problems.
Enough is enough.
The “liberal pendulum” has swung too far to the “rights” of drunkeness and crime, and we need to get back to the simple notion of community responsibility.
No one is suggesting prohibition or returning to 6PM closing, but as a society it’s time we returned to moderation, balance, and a sense obligation to create safer communities.
It’s time that communities were allowed to regain control of their own neighbourhoods.
And it seems that many communities are doing precisely that,
.
.
When 88 submissions were lodged, opposing the relicensing of Fantame Liquor Store, and people are sufficiently angry and galvanised to take to the streets in protest – then that should be a clear indication that the community has had enough.
The growing community resistance to liquor outlets is cropping up throughout the country, and sometimes all it takes is for one courageous individual to take a stand and show leadership,
.
.
Good on you, Mr Hawker. If New Zealand had more gutsy people like you, politicians would have to take heed of communities crying out for common sense decision-making that make safer neighbourhoods – not create a preponderance of liquor outlets, selling cheap booze to hard-core drinkers at all hours of the day and night.
Jim Anderton, MP for Wigram (ret.), made an impassioned speech on this issue. I think he summed matters up quite nicely,
.
Enough is enough – liquor outlet community protest
– Jim Anderton’s speech at liquor outlet community protest
20/08/11
Another liquor store is the last thing we need. Public drinking is a serious problem for this area. It’s got worse since the earthquakes closed the inner city. Just two weeks ago, four students were arrested, cars were vandalised and police were pelted with bottles in Riccarton.How much of this behaviour do we have to take before we say it’s too much? It’s too hard for communities to oppose liquor outlets when we feel there are already too many in our neighbourhoods.
More places selling alcohol, a lower drinking age, and longer opening hours – it all adds up. It adds up to more alcohol abuse. It adds up to more harm to communities.
Communities are in a good position to judge for themselves whether there are too many places in an area to buy liquor.
Residents are good at gauging for themselves whether there are enough places.
But the law doesn’t give local communities enough say. The result is that it is too hard for a community to respond to increasing alcohol abuse.
You don’t have to be a wowser to say the rules are too heavily weighted in favour of alcohol. But ‘wowser’ and ‘zealot’ and the labels that the alcohol industry puts on anyone who expresses concern about the harm caused by alcohol – Sensible people like Doug Selman, from the National Addiction Centre at the University of Otago, and Ross Bell, from the New Zealand Drug Foundation.
Liquor lobbyists like the Hospitality Association say drinkers should take personal responsibility for their own actions. That sounds reasonable. But it is the opposite, and it’s just as cynical as the arguments the tobacco industry used to use.
Those who are addicted to alcohol or affected by it are generally the least well equipped to deal with it responsibly. The hospitality industry knows this only too well.
I often ask myself what some of those same people would say if their own children or family members became addicted to an illegal drug such as methamphetamine.
Would they blame the children alone, or would they put some responsibility on the dealers.
The same goes for the alcohol industry.
We have a serious alcohol problem in New Zealand.
Sixty per cent of criminal offences are committed when the offender is under the influence of alcohol. There are 1350 violent physical assaults which take place in New Zealand homes each week fuelled by alcohol abuse.
If we want less crime and safer streets, we need to make alcohol less available.
This community is taking action. Everyone here today is taking personal responsible for making this community safer. We deserve to be listened to. We are entitled to say enough is enough.
We don’t need more drinking nor more places to drink.
What we need are safer streets and more respect for the wishes of this community to control the number of liquor outlets in our neighbourhood. Source
.
And just to put this issue into monetary terms (for those who give no credence to concepts of community), a BERL report on alcohol abuse revealed the following costs to tax-payers,
.
Costs of harmful alcohol and other drug use
– Adrian Slack
Client: The Ministry of Health and ACC
Authors: Adrian Slack, Dr Ganesh Nana, Michael Webster, Fiona Stokes and Jiani Wu
Date: July 2009
This research estimates the social costs of harmful alcohol and other drug use, excluding tobacco, in New Zealand. Harms related to drug use include a wide range of crime, lost output, health service use and other diverted resources. Harmful use has both opportunity costs, which divert resources from alternative beneficial uses, and psychological or intangible costs, such as reduced quality or length of life.
The report provides four broad answers. It estimates the:
-
total social costs from harmful drug use in 2005/06.
-
potential level of social costs that are avoidable.
-
cost to society stemming from alcohol and other drug-related injuries
-
social costs from harmful drug use borne by the government
The study shows that harmful drug use imposed a substantial cost on New Zealand in 2005/06.
-
Overall, harmful drug use in 2005/06 caused an estimated $6,525 million of social costs.
-
Harmful alcohol use in 2005/06 cost New Zealand an estimated $4,437 million of diverted resources and lost welfare.
-
Harmful other drug use was estimated to cost $1,427 million, of which $1,034 million were tangible costs.
-
Joint alcohol and other drug use that could not be separately allocated to one drug category cost a further $661 million. If the joint costs are split proportionately, total alcohol and total other drug costs equate to $4,939 million (over three quarters) and $1,585 million (just under one quarter).
-
Using estimates from international research, this study suggests that up to 50 percent ($3,260 million) of the social costs of harmful drug use may be avoidable.
-
The research indicated that 29.9 percent (or $1,951 million) of the social costs of harmful drug use result from injury.
-
The costs of harmful drug use from a government perspective amount to an estimated $1,602 million, or just over one third (35.1 percent) of the total tangible costs to society. Source
.
At least $4.4 billion lost in harmful alcohol-related incidents. That’s $4.4 billion in tax-payers money. The cost by now is probably much higher.
Meanwhile, liquor companies continue to make huge profits selling their products.
Let’s be honest; this country has a serious problem with alcohol abuse. The ready availability of cheap booze; late opening hours of bars; heavy advertising to promote a drinking culture – all contribute to problems of violence, property damage, lost productivity, added stresses on families; and preventable injuries and deaths.
This is not about peoples’ freedom to drink. This is about returning power to ordinary citizens and communities to say “enough is enough”; we don’t want our streets unsafe because of drunken idiots; our hospital A&E Wards filled with people who are half-dead with alcohol poisoning, or injured in fights; police resources stretched to the max dealing with drunkeness and alcohol-fueled crimes; and billions wasted on this problem.
We can curtail alcohol abuse in this country and still buy a bottle of wine to drink with our meals. Or go out on a Friday night for a quiet druink at our local. In fact, it may even be a safer, nicer experience.
But not if we’re going to continue down our current road of excess.
Meanwhile, Peter Dunne has been a ‘busy’ lad, suppressing surveys with damning data,
.
.
Peter Dunne – the same minister who passed an amendment to legislation to make “kronic” illegal within a matter of weeks.
.
.
I guess we know where his priorities lie, eh? (Clue: not with alcohol abuse.)
Peter Dunne, and others like him in this National Government are irrelevant.
It’s up to communities to reassert their values and protect their neighbourhoods.
.
***
.
Additional
.
.
Perhaps this should be a case of Three Strikes – Permanent Loss of Licence?
.
.
Additional
Dunne accused of keeping alcohol survey quiet
Stay away from our city, Croatian tells Kiwi drunks
.
Related
Community Needs vs Business Demands
New Zealand 2011AD: Drunken Mayhem and a nice Family Day Out
Our ‘inalienable right’ to destroy communities through alcohol abuse
.
.
John Key – Show me the jobs!
.
.
At a time when New Zealand’s construction sector should be moving into Warp Factor 9.9, it beggars belief that we learned yesterday that Fletcher Challenge – New Zealand’s largest construction company – is shedding jobs,
.
.
This is a follow-on from a previous media story, which I remarked on in my piece, “How can this possibly be?”,
.
.
We have a shortage of housing in this country; we have a lengthy waiting list for State Housing; and we have our second largest city waiting for reconstruction – and the building industry is in a… slump?!?!
Never mind this government not being able to organise a piss-up in a Brewery – they can’t seem to organise a nail-up in a building shortage.
Let’s play a simple game,
.
.
Even Business NZ, the former Employer’s Federation and close ally of the National Party, has become exasperated at this government’s do-nothing, hands-off approach to our stagnant economy and lack of job creation,
.
.
As I pointed out at the beginning of August, investment in housing and a building reconstruction would have vastly beneficial flow-on effects for our economy.
I even presented ‘ball-park‘ costings for what a construction programme to build 10,000 new state houses would cost the country, and how much would be recouped through normal taxation revenue; savings in welfare payouts; and rental-income from the new houses.
As I explained here, in some detail: Can we do it? Bloody oath we can!
On top of that would come even more jobs and economic activity by speeding up reconstruction in Christchurch.
On Stratos TV yesterday (4 November), political commentator, Chris Trotter made a pertinent observation about this current government: they are timid. Too timid to embark on bold, radical initiatives (beneficiary-bashing is not bold – it’s formulaic for center-right wing governments), they are doing very little that might antagonise the far-right and conservative elements of their Party,
.
.
The last thing Key andf his strategists would welcome would be a flight of party-support to ACT, or Colin Craig’s new Conservative Party.
Which suggests that Key is waiting to win a second term before possibly implementing something more radical.
Let’s hope that Key is planning something more enterprising and visionary. Selling assets and re-labelling benefits is not creative – it is lazy, sloppy government, that (a) takes the easy route and (b) panders to low-information voters to whom the ills of the world can be sheeted home to welfarism.
Beneficiary-bashing has to stop when electioneering is completed.
If the msm polls are correct, and if the Horizon Poll is out-of-kilter, then it appears that despite the spectre of asset sales, that New Zealand voters are inclined to give National a second term. If so, a repeat of the last three years will simply draw out the recession, high unemployment, and growing wage-gap with Australia. We will have voted for another term of timidity and hands-off Do Nothing.
Is that what New Zealanders are voting for?
In which case, we may as well vote for SM in the Referendumn. But in this case, SM will stand for sado-masochism. Because it seems we have a deep streak of that tendency running deep with us, as a society.
.
.
Let’s destroy more jobs, Prime Minister!
You know that things in this country have turned to custard when ordinary citizens, like Sandra Spekreijse, living in a quake-battered city have to make a public appeal to the Prime Minister, just to do the Decent Thing,
.
.
Going back to a pre-election speech on 29 January 2008, John Key said,
.
“Well, I’ve got a challenge for the Prime Minister [to then Prime Minister, Helen Clark]. Before she asks for another three years, why doesn’t she answer the questions Kiwis are really asking, like:
… Why is one in five Kiwi kids leaving school with grossly inadequate literacy and numeracy skills?” Source
.
And then went on in the same speech to state,
.
“The National Party has an economic plan that will build the foundations for a better future…
… We will be unrelenting in our quest to lift our economic growth rate and raise wage rates…
… We will concentrate on equipping young New Zealanders with the education they need for a 21st century global economy…
… And we will do all of this while improving the public services that Kiwis have a right to expect… “ Ibid
.
One wonders how making 170 teachers redundant will help to “equip young New Zealanders with the education they need for a 21st century global economy” ? Call me old fashioned – but I thought that teachers were a necessity in a class-room?
Or does this government expect our children to educate themselves?
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist (which we won’t have any more – not enough teachers to train them) to figure out that National’s crazy decision to axe 170 fulltime teacher jobs in Christchurch will not help that city re-build, and instead we may see those 170 teachers join the migration to Australia.
John Key asked, “Why is one in five Kiwi kids leaving school with grossly inadequate literacy and numeracy skills?”
Well, Mr Prime Minister, it’s because of insane decisions like this that probably contributes to our under-skilled, low-achieving, and ultimately unemployed kids.
Mr Prime Minister – stop this ridiculous action. Save those jobs. We need teachers. Christchurch needs those teachers. Cutting 170 positions may save our balance sheet a few hundred thousand bucks – but it will not help Christchurch re-build. Nor will it help the morale of our Cantabrian cuzzies.
Australia does not need any more of our skilled professionals.
Do the decent thing, Mr Prime Minister. Do it now.
.
***
.
Further reading
Hey! Key! Leave our teachers alone!
John Key’s email address
john.key@parliament.govt.nz
.
.
The “Free Market” is a fair-weather friend.
Ir seems quite likely that New Zealand will soon be joining the ranks of Japan and San Francisco, where earthquake insurance is either highly expensive, or unavailable to home owners,
.
.
Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee may chest-thump and bellow till the cows come home, but if insurance companies – as Chris Ryan is suggesting – no longer consider New Zealand property a safe risk to insure against earthquakes, then he had better start taking notice.
Internationally, the insurance industry has been hard-hit after the severe floods in Queensland; two major quakes in Christchurch; and a triple-whammy in Japan; earthquake, tsunami, and atomic reactor disaster. Insurance companies have been hard hit, as Reuters reported in March,
“Some analysts said the disaster, combined with heavy losses already suffered this year from floods in Australia and last month’s New Zealand earthquake, could push up global insurance prices, boosting insurers’ shares.
“In our view the loss will be so large that it will probably provide the trigger to ensure a re-rating of the non-life sector,” Panmure Gordon analyst Barrie Cornes wrote in a note.” Source
Climate-related disasters were also impacting on the insurance industry,
“Climate change is largely to blame for Australasia putting in almost a quarter of the world’s natural disaster insurance claims last year.
Data from major reinsurance provider Munich Re, shows that from 1980 to 2009, Australasia was responsible for 3% of natural disaster insurance claims in dollar terms. But after the Christchurch earthquake, floods in Queensland, and enormous hailstones in Melbourne and Perth, that skyrocketed to 22% last year.
Munich Re, in its own report on the deluge of natural disasters, said climate change “is real and continuing” and cited floods in Pakistan and wildfires caused by a heatwave in Russia. The Christchurch quake was not climate-change related.
Munich Re said 2010 was one of the warmest years since 1850 and featured the second-highest number of loss-related weather catastrophes since 1980, when it started keeping data.
Niwa principal climate scientist Dr James Renwick agreed that weather events like heavy rain were linked to global warming. “It’s possible part of the change since the 1980s is natural variation, but I’m sure there’s a climate change component. We know the globe has warmed and it’s well-documented that the occurrence of extreme rainfalls around the world has increased in a way that’s consistent with the climate models,” he says.
“It’s just what you’d expect – you warm things up, more moisture, more energy, more rain falls. There’s definitely a climate change component in extreme rainfalls around the world.” ” Source
So it seems a little strange that Gerry Brownlee is (a) attempting to dismiss Chris Ryan’s warnings as “scaremongering” and (b) is in denial that re-insuring properties in this country will not be a major problem in future. Of course it will be a problem! How can it not?
Insurance companies and their re-insurers have suffered billions of dollars worth of claims over the last year – $34 billion estimated for the Japanese ‘quake and tsunami, alone, according to a Bloomberg report.
Mr Brownlee should know how the free market works. After all, his party – National – espouses the doctrine of the free market as part of it’s core-philosophy.
Even as we face the prospect of the insurance industry abandoning New Zealand households – we may be left to our own devices when it comes to insurance. Which may be the EQC.
Whilst the EQC is not a full-insurance company in the sense of Tower, AMI, AMP, etc, it has provided a level of protection to New Zealanders since it’s inception in 1945.
The only thing is – it’s broke. Two calamitous earthquakes in Christchurch have effectively emptied the Commission’s ‘war-chest’. Source. As John Key said in February of this year,
“”The good news part of the story is that EQC had about $6 billion before that (quake), that’s going to be exhausted, but we pay in on a continuous basis and we had significant re-insurance in the order of $5b, that will be exhausted.”” Source
Irrespective of Mr Brownlee’s futile rantings against the Insurance Council, it should be abundantly clear that in the near future we will not have the insurance cover that we once enjoyed. Those days are over.
We will have to rely on our own resources and our own ingenuity, whether we like it or not. (Most likely ‘not’, going by past experiences of Baby Boomers who like to Spend Now, Pay Later (or Never, preferably – let the kids pay). To that end, the Greens – as usual – have once again realised what must be done,
“So, it seems, the Greens were right all along – a special levy to fund the costs involved with the Christchurch earthquake still makes good sense, if only (this time around) to replenish the funds available to the Earthquake Commission. Yesterday, it became apparent that the likely cost of the Christchurch rebuild had risen by a massive $4 billion.
This blowout means the EQC couldn’t cope with an additional major disaster (ie anything costing over $2.5 billion) and the government would have to pick up the tab, directly. There are three options on the table : (a) a special levy on all taxpayers (b) a further additional charge attached to insurance premiums already expected to rise significantly, or (c) a rise in income taxes.” – Gordon Campbell, Source
However, in the light of Chris Ryan’s warnings, we may have to reconsider the role of the EQC to adopt a more wide-ranging, pragmatic role in earthquake and flood insurance. The EQC may have to step in where private insurers once provided a service – or else face the prospect of uninsured properties. That would have serious consequences for current and prospective building owners. (Banks currently insist on full insurance cover before they will consider extending a mortgage over a property.)
Once upon a time, we owned an insurance company called – quite simply – State Insurance. State Insurance was sold in June 1990 by the Bolger-led, National government of the day.
It now seems that may have been a mistake (as most asset sales were). The people of this country may yet discover that the Free Market is a Fair Weather friend and when times are tough, we will have to step up and put in place our own, Very Kiwi Solution(s).
The time for a new State-owned insurance company – “EQC-Plus” – has come.
.
.
It’s a simple matter of choice.
With Labour’s release today, of their youth skills/employment policy, voters are now presented with the clearest choice yet between the two main parties. Aside from the issue of asset sales, where National has announced a programme of part-privatisation, and Labour opposes any/all privatisation, employment policy is the real litmus of both party’s essential core philosopies.
National prefers to step back and allow the “free market” to work it’s magic.
Labour has no hesitation in using the power of the State to address social-economic problems.
The National Business Review – hardly an organ for marxist-leninist groups – was moved to report on an opinion piece penned by Duncan Garner;
“In a lengthy blog post, Unemployed youth would fill Eden Park, Duncan Garner declares that ‘this government’s biggest failure to date is our young people’. With 58,000 youth not in work or education, ‘We are at crisis point. 27.6% of those aged 15-24 are out of work and out of luck. It’s even higher for Maori and Pacific youth’. And how has the Government performed on this issue? Garner says ‘there is a yawning gap between Key’s rhetoric and the reality’, and asks, ‘So what did Key do in the weekend to target the problem? Very little’. He suggests that ‘Key needs to be bold, he needs to take risks’.”
In stating that Key had done “very little” to target the problem, Garner was referring to the Prime Minister’s policy speech at National’s Conference on 13 August. Indeed, thus far National’s track record at addressing unemployment has consisted of the following;
- Building a cycleway. Anticipated new jobs: 4,000. Actual new jobs created: 215. (Source)
- Hiring an advisor for Finance Minister, Bill English, at $2,000 a day. (Source)
- A new payment card for 16,17, and some 18 year old beneficiaries that could not be used for things like alcohol or cigarettes; (though it’s already illegal for 16 and 17 year olds to purchase these products)
- … and… that’s it.
It is worth noting the seriousness of youth unemployment in this country. According to the Department of Labour;
“Youth aged 15–19 years have an unemployment rate over three times that of the entire working-age population. Young workers are more vulnerable to downturns in labour market conditions due to their lower skill levels and lesser work experience. The latest official figures show that 17.2% of youth aged 15 to 19 and 8.4% of those aged 20 to 24 years were unemployed, which represents a deterioration of the trends found in the report. Maori and Pacific youth had significantly higher unemployment rates.”
Ducan Garner seems in no mood to respond to John Key’s “smiles and waves” politics when he opens his piece with this caustic observation;
“58,000. This is the crucial number that should be ringing in John Key’s ears every night he bunks down in the refurbished Premier House.
58,000 young people between the ages of 15-24 are not in education, training or work. The majority of them are on a benefit.”
Garner adds,
“Sure the recession has been tough on young people worldwide. 81 million youths are now unemployed around the globe, it was 71 million before the recession. It is a ticking time bomb. In London, it’s already exploded.”
- Problem: growing, lingering unemployment.
- Potential disaster: social unrest, exploding into mass-violence.
- Solution – ?
[click to expand]
Labour would cut dole, increase training
National to clamp down on youth beneficiaries
At a time when New Zealand has 170,000 unemployed – of which 58,000 are aged 15-24; when we will be needing thousands of skilled tradespeople to re-build a broken city that has endured massive earthquake devastastion; the current government has done next-to-nothing during its three year tenure.
Except create 215 new jobs in building a cycleway; hire some very expensive advisors; and give tax cuts to some very rich people.
In doing so, we do not have the skilled tradespeople required to re-build Christchurch. Because we are currently losing around 20 skilled tradespeople a day to overseas destinations such as Australia. At the same time, people are losing their jobs in Christchurch and unemployment is rising.
To show how badly this government has failed, nothing better illustrates that failure than this;
Only the most die-hard National/ACT supporter will believe this this situation is acceptable. (And they usually come up with all manner of excuses why it is acceptable.) But I suspect – or at least hope – that ordinary New Zealanders who look at this situation and will ask the inevitable hard questions;
- Why are we not offering training for unemployed?
- Why are we not planning to put our people to work?
- Why are we hiring workers from overseas?
- How will this help unemployed New Zealanders to get back into the workforce?
On the 13 of August, at the National Party Conference, Prime Minister John Key stated,that “the current system “is not working and needs to change“.
Unfortunately, he wasn’t talking about job creation or training for unemployed. He was talking about not letting 16 and 17 year olds buy booze and ciggies.
Goff says it is ”crazy”to have high youth unemployment alongside a growing skills shortage crisis“.
Which one resonates with you?
Postscript;
A bouquet to Hutt Gas and Plumbing Systems Ltd , a Lower Hutt company that is one of the many thousands of small businesses in our communities, quietly ‘beavering’ away in the background, that make our economy work.
Hutt Gas & Plumbing featured on TV1’s evening news where Phil Goff released Labour’s youth skills and employment package.
Hutt Gas & Plumbing train several apprentices, giving young people an opportunity to learn a trade; earn a wage; and contribute to their local community. These folk are the real pillars of our society. Not the big, flash corporations and financial institutions that shuffle bits of paper around, and make their profits on speculation.
These are the small companies that deserve our support and encouragement. They are the ones that some of our children will rely on for jobs’ training to get into a trade.
Kudos to Labour for planning to increase apprenticeships. This is the hard policy planning that will create jobs and give our kids opportunities.
And a bloody big brickbat for Minister for Tertiary Education Steven Joyce, for saying that Labour’s proposal was just National policy dressed up,
“They’re basically doing what the government is already doing, they just want to throw more money at it.”
It’s rather revealing that National thinks that creating jobs for our young people is “throwing money”.
Because buying 34 new BMW limousines, for National ministers, is not “throwing money”?
Police-inspired craziness ends.
About time.
This case should never have proceeded as far as it did. The mis-use of police power in this matter has brought the entire Police Force into disrepute.
Thankfully, saner heads have prevailed.
More here, though I am not fully comfortable with the ex;planation given by Police in this matter. Their “explanation” appears to be more one of a face-saving excuse, rather than an impartial look at the events that transpired that night.
One question that is unanswered is why this matter has taken exactly six months to resolve. Surely this was not a complex issue at all and if a relatively simple case like this can take six months for the Police to come to a satisfactory conclusion – then there is something seriously wrong.
More.
Dumber and dumber…
.
I understand that the Police in Christchurch are stressed, tired, and are burdened with keeping their community safe over the last twelve months.
That is the only rational reason why they seem to have lost the facility for basic common sense, in regards to Cornelius Arie Smith-Voorkam.
.
.
I understand that the Police have a tough job. I understand that they deal with awful situations that many of us only glimpse on tv shows like “Police Ten 7”. But I also understand that someone in the Police Force should have realised the mess they were creating for themselves and called a halt. Police HQ should have intervened; had a quiet word with Inspector Derek Erasmus; and sent Arie on his way.
In this instance, the Police have done more harm to their reputation than any organised crime gang ever could.
Defendent: NZ Police
Charge sheet: Lack of common sense
Public verdict: guilty
.
Simon Power, Minister of Justice
simon.power@parliament.govt.nz
Judith Collins, Minister of Police
judith.collins@parliament.govt.nz
.
+++ Update +++
.
.
It seems that a measure of common sense has been shown here, with regards to TVNZ.
Let’s hope the police “offer no evidence” (ie; drop all charges), when Arie next appears in Court. This ridiculous farce has gone on far too long.
.
.
News Archives
Crony Watch
Keeping an eye on dodgy government appointees, crony-by-crony!
Frankly Speaking... 