.
Archive
Posts Tagged ‘Q+A’
The Virus, the Media, and John Key
3 October 2021
5 comments
.
Acknowledgement: @komerata
.
“People are crying on TV and on radio stations, every single day, because they are stateless, they cannot come back to New Zealand.” – John Key, ex-Prime Minister, “Morning Report”, RNZ
.
The crocodile tears flew – albeit briefly – on RNZ’s “Morning Report” on 27 September, by ex-Prime Minister ex-Merril Lynch ‘banker’, and still-practicing smiling assassin, John Key.
The interview with Corin Dann showed a side of Key not often seen by the Great Unwashed Masses; condescending; quick to anger; and irritable at being questioned. His defensiveness was over the publication of his op-ed in no less than four major daily newspapers was either fortuitously achieved – or with great precision-planning and with the witting or unwitting collusion of the media involved.
This screen-cap from The Spin-Off (with associated excellent satirical piece, lampooning Key’s dangerous ‘reckons’) showed the four dailies involved in the synchronised, targetted release of the agit-prop article he purportedly wrote:
.
.
The lampooning of Mr Key’s reckons – by Spinoff editor Toby Manhire – is pure cutting satire and the only possible way to deal with the ill-informed pronouncements of a man who was, at best, a mediocre prime minister and achieved nothing except a failed flag referendum; tax cuts for the rich; and a novel – if utterly barmy – idea of a sheep farm in the middle of the Saudi desert. (Who knew sheep preferred to eat grass, instead of sand?)
My ex-journo friend wondered:
“I see Key is also sounding off in the Sunday Herald as well. His business mates are likely channeling through him rather than coming out and saying anything directly so as to protect themselves from public backlash.”
Unfortunately,Mr Key’s (?) op-ed was not the first to be platformed in the mainstream media.
As has been pointed out by many on social media – and by my ex-journalist friend – it is almost as if the public are being “softened up”.
But softened-up for what?
The mainstream media has – and currently still is – flooding their platforms with “Open Up” (current version of Plan Bers) demands from business lobbyists, sports people, and a bunch of Kiwis who have the crazy notion that travelling overseas during a raging pandemic – or bringing in a flood of tourists and migrant workers – is a jolly good idea.
It’s like a small – but increasing vociferous number – have not been paying attention to New South Wales, Fiji, Brazil, United States, United Kingdom, and practically almost everywhere else on this planet. And every time platformed and amplified almost wholly uncritically by every media outlet in the country.
Including, bizarrely, state-owned, non-commercial, Radio NZ. (The profit motive may not apply to RNZ’s corporate structure, but personal career advancement might play a role.)
Only Stuff media has published an op-ed questioning this current, relentless push to live (ie, die) with covid:
.
.
Yes, Dominion Post editor, Anna Fifield, has called it: Aotearoa New Zealand is not North Korea. Not even close. In fact, contrary to our geographically-confused American cuzzies’ belief, we are not Australia either.
North Korea. Australia. Aotearoa New Zealand. Three different countries.
You can tell they are different: we make a better Flat White and our rugby team is the best of all three. (Does North Korea even play rugby? Ask John Key: he seems up with communist dictatorships.)
Unfortunately, for Ms Fifield, there was a very brief comment in her 27 September editorial, where she admits:
“And we in the Wellington newsroom of Stuff have been actively reporting about the impact of our system on businesses, including the tech sector, and the long-term economic ramifications of it.“
Not only is she correct, but every other mainstream media (msm) in the country has been fulsome in “actively reporting the impact of our system on businesses“. Reporting every day. On every TV news and current affairs broadcast. On every radio station, including non-commercial RNZ. In every newspaper and probably most magazines.
Relentlessly.
Often repetitively – in case we missed it the first time:
.
.
.
.
Interesting how categories of the three, related stories above went from “Health/Politics” to “Business/Covid19“. When did Covid19 cease to be a Health issue for RNZ?
In fact, unless you stopped reading; scrolling, listening, and watching, the entire nationwide msm spectrum – you’d be hard-pressed not to be informed of “the impact of our system on businesses“.
To describe the msm as business-friendly propaganda would be apt, probably even under-stated.
Only communist nations have broadcast “positive” aspects of their economic system as constantly; widely; repetitively, and incessantly. (Yes, Ms Fifield, I have lived under a communist system. For about eleven months, in the late 1970s) in my parents homeland, the Hungarian People’s Republic, governed by the Hungarian Socialist Workers’ Party.)
The only way to avoid the incessant bombardment of negativity; whining; hysterical pleas to “open up”; never-ending stream of stressed businesspeople; onslaught of ‘heart-string’ stories of New Zealanders trapped overseas (often after voluntarily travelling overseas since March last year) – is to avoid the msm altogether.
This blogger switched off all electronic media for three days during last year’s Level 4 lockdown.
This year, the off-switch was flicked for RNZ’s “Checkpoint“, which had seemingly perfected whinging and negativity to a fine art. This blogger ceased listening for about a week and a half, until Aotearoa New Zealand (minus Auckland) dropped to Level 2.
And what was the first story on “Checkpoint” on 8 September, the first full day of Level 2?
Guess…
.
.
Yup. They just couldn’t help themselves, could they? The very first story: a business whinge.
I switched of.
If RNZ has become a subsidiary of the National Business Review, we certainly missed that memo.
Following John Key’s first salvo of op-eds, he was followed by Richard Prebble, Paul Henry, and Steven Joyce (on tediously numerous occassions). All three thankfully paywalled. The term male, pale, and stale has never felt more appropriately descriptive.
Mr Joyce’s reference to the current “Jacinda Ardern Government getting too big for its bossy boots” was a bit rich, considering his decidely authoritarian-flavoured comment to tertiary students almost exactly decade ago:
.
Minister to students: ‘keep your heads down’
NZ Herald – 27 Sep, 2011 11:39 AM – By Claire Trevett
Tertiary Education Minister Steven Joyce has warned protesting university students to keep their heads down lest they draw attention to their relatively privileged position in hard economic times.
Asked about the student protests at Auckland University yesterday, Mr Joyce said university students had 75 per cent of the tuition subsidised on average and benefited from interest-free student loans.
“My general advice to NZUSA (NZ Union of Students’ Associations) on the cost of living for students is to keep your heads down because actually most people probably think you’re doing OK.”
.
The steady stream of debilitating, depressing media negativity has not gone unnoticed by many fellow New Zealanders (including my own partner and other close friends and work colleagues – most of whom are sick of it all). Social media is full of people expressing their weariness of msm negativity:
.
I’m in MIQ and yes it has its flaws & shortcomings, being away from family I desperately want to see but I’m prepared to do to keep Delta out. WTF are we doing listening to JFK when he just wants to be able to flit to Hawaii and back on a whim? F**k him and his self-centredness. – 1:19 PM · Aug 12, 2021
.
Kia ora @1NewsNZ, @TVNZ, no matter the decision today, please, please, please can we not hear from the moaners & whingers. It’s the moaning that is getting to many of us here in L4 & it will greatly improve our outlook if we weren’t subjected to more. Kia ora mo o taringa. – 12:23 PM · Sep 20, 2021
.
100% We’re doing the mahi and the constant moaning and complaining is not representative of most of us. It’s so hard to deal with. We need positivity – 2:52 PM · Sep 20, 2021
.
Individual journalists may not realise the cumulative effect their negativity has. Yes govt should be held to account but that can be done w/o centring ignorance without pushback and exaggerating errors. Social license to lock down is only thing stopping us from turning into NSW. – 7:02 AM · Aug 30, 2021
.
Although my business is closed until we hit L2 I realise it’s the right thing to do to be in lockdown. I wonder if the media will ever go for comment from small business owners that accept that this is the way forward because we understand what that means for the economy? – 9:07 AM · Aug 26, 2021
.
Are the media being responsible during our outbreak, or are they nitpicking, delving into the sewers, which includes foreign media, to make us all fearful and anxious? Some words do matter, be careful how you use them. – 8:51 AM · Aug 26, 2021
.
It’s interesting that at no stage has any official said we stop elimination strategy now. But all the media are softening the public up to do just that. And more and more antivax coming up with extreme right “learn to live with it” bollocks. Manipulation is occurring why? – 8:37 AM · Sep 26, 2021
.
Seeing journos moaning about the slating they are getting. Either be a tabloid hack and ignore the criticism, or do a better job, don’t write such rubbish then bitch when people don’t like it. – 12:52 PM · Sep 24, 2021
.
Because the media live on playing games for profit. Now stakes involve human lives – they’ve never felt a more thrilling empowerment. – 7:25 PM · Sep 26, 2021
.
I don’t get it honestly. I tend to back away from news sources now, I just cant even – 5:27 PM · Sep 26, 2021
.
Because national disasters sell newspapers. – 8:49 PM · Sep 26, 2021
.
Fair minded KIwis are sick to death with the barrage of MIQ and stranded traveller sob stories Kiwis have had opportinities over 500 days to get back to NZ . Those that went to Australia were pre-warned by PM Ardern flyer beware and get back on red flights or risk being stranded – 8:43 AM · Sep 16, 2021
.
Totally sick of hearing about vaccine logistics stuff. We’ve just had a massive demand spike of a perishable product with very precise transport demands. Hell, the timber industry couldn’t even get its shit together with a few years notice, & we grow the bloody wood – 1:22 PM · Sep 7, 2021
.
Agreed it seems like the media want to highlight every small thing that goes wrong in MIQ..it’s poor form given more than 170k kiwis have returned and they highlight the less than 5% that have had issues.. – 9:37 AM · Sep 16, 2021
.
I agree. I would love to go & see my Dad in Scotland as he’s just had major heart surgery @ 84 but I decided early 2020 I would not be leaving NZ for anything ~ not to spread it around the globe, not to bring it back but most of all to survive. – 10:13 AM · Sep 16, 2021
.
This genius departed for the USA to work in a summer camp on 13 June, and now can’t get a spot in MIQ, seriously? https://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/travel-troubles/300408053/american-dream-turns-into-nightmare-for-new-zealander-desperate-to-return-home – 9:57 AM · Sep 16, 2021
.
News junkie son in Melbourne tells me he has switched off all news. Professional comms daughter in Sydney has switched off all her private social media. I have turned off RNZ. Personal wellbeing decisions in stressful times. – 9:35 AM · Aug 31, 2021
.
Moaning Report – 9:57 AM · Aug 31, 2021
.
NZ media has had more of an effect on my mental health than lockdown itself. I’m just finding myself being bombarded with right wing hatred towards our current government. I am always a supporter of valid criticism but this has gone past the line of criticism. – 10:09 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
.
It’s kind of a very New Zealand thing that the media are telling us we are “totally feed up”, and completely “over it” yet we are just stoically getting on with doing what we need to as a whole. – 6:29 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
I just can’t stand feeling ok, getting on with it, making the best of it, only to feel dragged down by the weight of the negativity on the 6pm news. We all know people are struggling. But just framing some things in a positive light would be nice – 6:38 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
There’s no money in stories about Kiwis just getting on with it… Which is kind of sad… – 6:37 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
I deleted the Stuff app from my phone over this. (deleted NZ Herald a year ago) – 10:55 AM · Aug 30, 2021
.
Yep, for the first time in my life I’ve stopped checking in on media sites – their clickbaity, dramatised headlines are all too often misleading and unnecessarily distressing. I figure if anything important happens, I’ll hear about it pretty quickly here, and with some nuance. – 8:37 AM · Aug 30, 2021
.
Yep, feeling pretty much the same way. The constant negativity and political twattery all for the sake of scoring points is exhausting. I know that they don’t talk for the majority but their voices are so much louder than everyone else’s… – 1:33 PM · Aug 30, 2021
.
My feelings exactly. I’m exhausted by the media negativity. – 7:42 AM · Aug 30, 2021
.
So agree. The only thing that gets me angry is the platforming of RW, business viewpoints that just see workers as grist for their mills. – 10:59 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
Delete any app that bring news. Mute those outlets’ accounts. I did, and it helps. – 11:29 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
The equivalent of “some people say” and/or using their opinion writers as speaking for the nation while the nation is saying “who writes this shit”? – 9:37 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
to be fair to the media I think there’s a fair amount of them (outside of Granny, obvi) who do support the strategy, they just want more accountability and more preplanning, which is hard to argue against. The vaccine catastrophizing is utterly ridiculous though, lol. – 6:40 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
Totally agree, it is really depressing being bombarded every day by sniping & negativity. Do they know that this is the effect they are having? – 8:51 AM · Aug 30, 2021
.
Remember by their own fruition the majority of NZ’s mainstream media are HQed in Auckland.
They gutted regional newsrooms & shut down external studios to base everything there.
Now the chickens have come home to roost & Auckland gets a month-longer lockdown than everyone else! –
7:34 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
Couldn’t agree more! I’m not fed up at all…except with the crappy media! Kiwis have got this! Around 85% thought we were right to lock down and since there is light at the end of the tunnel, why stop now!? – 11:27 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
It’s such a crack up when they have a story with a mayor or a business leader going on about how unhappy everyone is and then they cut to interviews in the street and the people they speak to are overwhelmingly for what we are doing. – 6:41 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
Actually I am over it, I’m over the media telling me what I feel despite it not being anywhere near what I infact feel – 8:36 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
Well, we are totally fed up….. with the media that is. I’m definitely over people with no health qualifications pontificating about how we ‘just need to live with it’ – 7:51 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
The media need to take along hard look at themselves. I am totally fed up with opinion posing as journalism, reckons as facts, completely over it. – 10:13 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
The thing is “NZ media” as it relates to Covid is the press gallery, whose world revolves around listening to stand ups and having to interview the opposition for their daily shit takes. It’s no wonder their summation is “Kiwis are over it.” I would be too in their shoes. – 10:21 AM · Aug 30, 2021
.
I’m so sick of the NZ journalists, fucking depressing bunch and all they want to do is bitch and moan. Meanwhile, the rest of us just get on with it – 7:02 PM · Aug 29, 2021
.
Apologies for the long list of comments. Believe me, there were way, way more. The above is only a small, random sampling of comments gleaned from Twitter.
More important from the comments on this issue came from Chloe Ann-King, a spokesperson for hospitality workers and founder of Raise the Bar Hospo Union (RBHU), this salient criticism of the media:
.
.
So not only have media relentlessly amplified business voices – almost always complaining, criticising, and demanding – but inevitably no workers are ever (?) interviewed for their takes.
On 29 August this year, Stuff’s political reporter, Andrea Vance, published an overtly defensive “opinion” piece, dismissing criticism of media coverage of the covid crisis.
In it she opined that scrutiny of the government was an essential role of the media:
“Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has given a spirited defence of her Government’s decisions. She’s more than up to handling the criticism.
Of course, she must exude confidence in the strategy and maintain consistent and clear messaging. But it’s troubling when she says she doesn’t want a debate.
And that makes it even more crucial to have robust scrutiny from outside her inner circle.
Because if they are the right decisions, then they remain the right decisions. Questions and alternative viewpoints won’t change that, and we can be more confident we’re on the right course.
We shouldn’t run from transparent and open debate – scrutiny can only improve the decision-making.”
Few would disagree with that statement.
In fact, it was media scrutiny that revealed severe short-coming in MIQ facilities with security; lack of appropriate PPE gear, and behaviours of some staff which was less than ideal.
This blogger, and most people have no problem with media ensuring that MIQ, vaccinations, and lockdowns are appropriately handled.
We are mature people (generally, with minor exceptions) . We can take information that may be difficult to digest. We want bad news given to us unvarnished, with options for answers.
That is why, as Ms Vance writes – though in a vaguely dismissive way – that we value our scientists and medical personnel with such high regard:
It’s fantastic that the tight circle of academic experts advising the Government make themselves readily available to explain the modelling and the science.
In the pandemic, medical experts (the virologists, epidemiologists, statisticians and modellers) have become our modern-day talisman. It’s a refreshing change from the tendency to devalue expertise seen in recent years.
Physicist and covid-modeller, Shaun Hendy’s participation in the Government’s daily 1PM ‘presser’ on 23 September and Epidemioloist, Rod Jackson appearing on TV3’s Newshub Nation, on 2 October, did not ‘sugar coat’ what we were facing. They were blunt and honest with the facts and possible consequences.
Few people objected and those that did, in one instance, appears to have had a bad case of bruised-egoitis.
But what she and her colleagues fail to utterly comprehend is that it’s not scrutiny of the government that has provoked a torrent of criticism against the media itself.
Criticism – as comments above clearly show – revolve around non-stop, negative stories from business interests; New Zealanders stuck overseas (a number of whom are the authors of their own predicament); naked political opportunism; and giving voice to practically anyone with dissatisfaction. It is repetitive; lacking any real purpose (except click-generating headlines); and – I submit – psychologically detrimental.
Individual journalists and media outlets seem to think that they don’t produce much in the way of negative stories. Perhaps one or two a day? But add all the media outlets together, many with different aspects of an individual organisation (eg; RNZ’s ‘Morning Report‘, ‘Mid Day Report‘, ‘Checkpoint‘, ‘Lately‘); each churning out their own ‘doom n gloom’ stories – and it mounts up very quickly.
Ms Vance and her colleagues are wholly responsible for the material they put out. The public has little in-put into decision-making. The things they write; the stories they publish or broadcast, have content that inevitably has an effect. (Why else preface some stories with warnings of “Content may be disturbing – viewer/reader discretion advised”?)
A constant diet of bad news stories cannot be mentally healthy. Especially to a nation already stressed with hyper-vigilance as covid bangs on our rampart walls. When five million people have experienced massive disruption to their lives with outbreaks; closures of schools and businesses; lockdowns; and advised to stay home – these are all pressures we have to face.
Most do not complain. We do what we must to save lives. We have seen the misery covid19 has caused overseas, bringing even the most powerful nations to the brink of disaster. So we have seen the lessons from overseas and the consequences of failure is not lost on us.
It is already tough-going for many and stressful. Adding the burden of negativity is not only unhelpful, it adds further despondency. It is a slow chipping away of our resolve.
So when we do speak up, it would do the media industry well to listen. After all, are media folk not part of our community?
The whole point of journalism and the media machine is to engage and inform the public (as well as sell toothpaste, pet-food, etc). The moment the public stop listening, reading, because of an onslaught of highly-emotive stories is the point they stop engaging.
When people switch off and refuse to engage any further, journalism has failed us.
The media are not above scrutiny or criticism. Just as politicians are open to scrutiny and criticism. Consider the criticisms – maybe, just maybe, critics have a point?
Think, before you publish yet another carping from Michael Barnett, or a traveller who is stuck in Sydney after the Trans Tasman bubble was closed. Is it really “news”? What will it achieve? Will it inform us? Or is the headline simply geared to attract eyeballs and clicks and bugger the effects it might have on already-stressed people?
If it’s not ‘new’ then maybe it’s not news.
Postscript
Lest this blogger be another cog in the Great Negativity Machine, I point to today’s (3 October) episode of TV One’s Q+A episode.
The show presented critical problems affecting the nation’s vaccination programme. There was vox populi and community workers interviewed. Solutions were suggested and discussed.
No emotion-bombing; no ‘heart string’ stories. No whining from entitled sector lobbyists or ill-informed ‘reckons’.
The viewer was encouraged to engage, listen, and think on what was presented.
The same with the follow-up interview with Air New Zealand CEO, Greg Foran. No whining, no demands, no sense of entitlement; just a basic Kiwi attitude of dealing with the cards that have been dealt, and getting on with it*.
At one point, Q+A host Jack Tame asked Mr Foran’s opinion on government’s elimination strategy;
“Do you think the elimination strategy is sustainable?”
The CEO’s reply?
“Look, Jack, that’s something that probably the scientists and the government need to answer…”
It felt as if we were in a room listening to mature adults.
More of this style of responsible media, please.
.
(* Note: Admittedly, Air New Zealand has a billion dollar ‘life line’ with the government. But their potential liabilities can also be measured in the billion-dollar range. That ‘life-line’ can become shortened very quickly; airlines can gobble up hundreds of millions of dollars almost as fast as their jets can fly.)
.
.
.
.
.
References
RNZ: Covid-19 – Young people need some rights taken away to encourage vaccination – Sir John Key (alt.link)
The Spinoff: Ranked – All of today’s op-ed columns by Sir John Key
Stuff media: Anna Fifield – No, Sir John Key, New Zealand is not like North Korea
NZ Herald: Covid-19 Delta outbreak – Retirees stuck in Australia fear being stripped of pensions
RNZ: ‘We need clarity’ for Covid-19 test to cross Auckland border – business owner
RNZ: Orion Health CEO urges revamp of MIQ to allow business travel
RNZ: Business pushing for self-managed isolation for overseas work travel
RNZ: Businesses on home isolation trial – ‘This has been a long time coming’
NZ Herald: Covid Delta outbreak – Richard Prebble – Muldoonism looms large – and that’s a problem
NZ Herald: Paul Henry – I love this country – but I’m not sure I have the heartbeats for it any more
NZ Herald: Steven Joyce – Jacinda Ardern Government getting too big for its bossy boots
NZ Herald: Minister to students – ‘keep your heads down’
Twitter: @MightyBlender –1:19 PM · Aug 12, 2021
Twitter: @_seashelleyes_ – 12:23 PM · Sep 20, 2021
Twitter: @CamDouglasMS – 2:52 PM · Sep 20, 2021
Twitter: @fabtknz – 7:02 AM · Aug 30, 2021
Twitter: @liberal_owners – 9:07 AM · Aug 26, 2021
Twitter: @MariaSherwood2 – 8:51 AM · Aug 26, 2021
Twitter: @vincristine – 8:37 AM · Sep 26, 2021
Twitter: @DesiCommsMan – 12:52 PM · Sep 24, 2021
Twitter: @BozzyWozzer – 7:25 PM · Sep 26, 2021
Twitter: @mlpgirl77 – 5:27 PM · Sep 26, 2021
Twitter: @cleotibbitts – 8:49 PM · Sep 26, 2021
Twitter: @LetsGetPfizered – 8:43 AM · Sep 16, 2021
Twitter: @RobSuisted – 1:22 PM · Sep 7, 2021
Twitter: @Shawn67586943 – 9:37 AM · Sep 16, 2021
Twitter: @sandzz77 – 10:13 AM · Sep 16, 2021
Twitter: @Tukeke70 – 9:57 AM · Sep 16, 2021
Twitter: @Tikorangi – 9:35 AM · Aug 31, 2021
Twitter: @MarkcyCleary – 9:57 AM · Aug 31, 2021
Twitter: @IdioticTwinkles – 10:09 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @WormwoodNGall – 8:13 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @FoxyLustyGrover – 6:29 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @infinite_ink 6:38 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @SJPONeill – 6:37 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @pet_brain – 10:55 AM · Aug 30, 2021
Twitter: @Kate_DowlingNZ – 8:37 AM · Aug 30, 2021
Twitter: @fkleitch – 1:33 PM · Aug 30, 2021
Twitter: @BoxyBristol – 7:42 AM · Aug 30, 2021
Twitter: @kaffiene_nz – 10:59 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @Writer_Caroline – 11:29 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @Feebeekiwi – 9:37 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @MJWhitehead – 6:40 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @HantonSusie – 8:51 AM · Aug 30, 2021
Twitter: @NapierinFrame – 7:34 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @Lady__Seraphina – 11:27 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @douggie27 – 6:41 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @js_eighty – 8:36 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @MarieMenzies5 – 7:51 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @gracillus – – 10:13 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Twitter: @platinumpixienz – 10:21 AM · Aug 30, 2021
Twitter: @Hurricane15 – 7:02 PM · Aug 29, 2021
Raise the Bar Hospo Union: About
Twitter: @GGrucilla – 12:09 PM · Oct 2, 2021
Stuff media: If the Government is making the right decisions on Covid-19, it will withstand scrutiny
Coast: Brian Tamaki’s controversial new ‘hot’ advertisement
Ministry of Health: COVID-19 update 23 September 2021
Stuff media: Covid-19 NZ – Rodney Jones says Shaun Hendy’s 7000-death vaccine model doesn’t pass plausibility test
TVNZ: Q+A – 3 October 2021
Twitter: Shaun Hendy – 8:04 AM · Sep 26, 2021
Additional
The Spinoff: New Zealand cannot abandon its Covid elimination strategy while Māori and Pasifika vaccination rates are too low
The Spinoff: Siouxsie Wiles – Why we need to stay the course on elimination
Reference sources
MIQ: History and origins of MIQ
Covid19: History of the COVID-19 Alert System
MBIE: Managed isolation and quarantine data
RNZ: Timeline – The year of Covid-19 in New Zealand
Other Blogs
Bryan Gould: The Herald’s Dilemma
The Daily Blog: John Minto – When will Michael Barnett stop whinging, whining and bleating?
The Standard: Smug hermit king
The Standard: Key’s baaaack
Previous related blogposts
One thousand dead New Zealanders per year?
.
.
.
Acknowledgement: Guy Body
.
Liked what you read? Feel free to share.
Have your own thoughts? Leave a comment. (Trolls need not bother.)
.
= fs =
Categories: Global, Media, The Body Politic
Covid-19, john key, mainstream media, North Korea, Plan B, Q+A, Raise the Bar Hospo Union, RBHU, social media, Twitter
2020: The History That Was – Part 4
21 February 2021
Leave a comment
.
.
As the rest of the world was perceived to be “going to hell in a handbasket with an out-of-control pandemic; ructions in Europe as Britain copes with “Brexit” chaos; Trumpism in the United States climaxing with the 6 January mob-led coup attempt in Washington’s Capitol; a deadly resurgent covid19 outbreak in Victoria, Australia (at time of writing); Russia continuing to harass and murder political dissidents with impunity; China cracking down brutally on Hong Kong and it’s Uighur minority; and global temperatures continuing to rise as Humans blithely pump CO2 into the atmosphere – New Zealanders were spectators to our own issues, dramas, and problems…
Media (1 – Clickbait)
We all coped with the Level 4 and 3 lockdowns in our own personal way. Some better than others, with varying degrees of stress.
According to the Ministry of Health website (last updated 25 August 2020), they were fully cognisant of the psychological impact that the threat of covid19; lockdowns; restricted movement and social contact, might have upon the general population;
“We want people to know it is normal to not feel all right all the time – it’s understandable to feel sad, distressed, worried, confused, anxious or angry during this crisis. Everyone reacts differently to difficult events, and some may find this time more challenging than others. The ways people think, feel and behave are likely to change over time – we all have good days and bad days.”
Psychological stress was soon picked up by medical professionals.
In October last year, writing for the NZ Medical Journal, Meisha Nicolson and Jayde Flett reported;
“Although fewer people reported severe experiences of depression and anxiety post-lockdown (5% compared to 8% during lockdown), this reduction mostly occurred in non-Māori/non-Pasifika people. Of those who completed both during and post-lockdown surveys, over half reported no experiences at both time points, while 22% had improved experiences and 13% had worsening experiences post-lockdown.
Experiences of depression and anxiety were common for young people both during and post-lockdown. Almost 60% of young people had some experience of depression or anxiety post-lockdown (57%), 10% being severe.”
In November, Clinical Psychologist for Victoria University of Wellington and Umbrella Health, Dr Dougal Sutherland, commented;
“The data confirms in many ways what was expected: that many Kiwis were distressed and anxious in the midst of the lockdown. However, the study also shows a few interesting twists: about a third of New Zealanders reported significant distress, and rates in younger people (18-34 years) were higher than for older people. Interestingly, rates of distress amongst women and men were quite similar, which is unusual as often women report higher levels of distress.
Although the study couldn’t tell us exactly what about the lockdown people found stressful, it is likely that a combination of health anxiety and worry about the potential economic consequences of COVID-19 played a role. Sadly, more people reported feeling suicidal and there were higher rates of family violence during lockdown too.
Whilst the focus of our response to COVID-19 has now shifted onto the economy and ongoing containment on the virus, this study is a timely reminder that the virus has not only biological, but also psychological consequences. These psychological effects are likely to have a ‘long tail’ and be with us long after the virus has been contained or eliminated. The new Minister of Health will want to pay close attention to studies like this and continue investing in training of mental health professionals to inoculate the country against a future wave of mental health difficulties.”
The mainstream media not only failed to ameliorate the psychological impact of lockdowns (and post lockdowns) – but exacerbated anxiety with a constant, non-stop, daily diet of “human interest” stories. These were almost always focused on expat New Zealanders struggling to get home – often for tragic reasons such as terminal illness;
.
.
The stories were relentless. Day after day, almost always personalised with photos of couples or entire families, they were tragic, heart-breaking, and intensely intimate.
Even Radio NZ was not immune, with “human interest” stories – often with interviews – on “Morning Report” as well as “Checkpoint“.
Even when Returnees has succeeded in coming home, the “human interest” value continued to be exploited; milked of every hint of pathos and frustration;
.
.
It is hard to ascertain how deeply these “human interest” stories impacted on audiences, creating unnecessary anxiety, but it is worth noting this warning on the Covid-19 website;
.
“Looking after your mental wellbeing
You may find it useful to limit your time online. Check media and social media at specific times once or twice a day.”
.
The website for Depression NZ was even more dire with it’s warning to limit media intake;
.
Find a healthy balance in relation to media coverage
-
-
- Being exposed to repeated negative information can be upsetting. While it’s important to stay informed, you may find it useful to limit your media intake if it is upsetting you or your family.
- Try to stick to the facts and verified and government sources Unite against COVID-19.
- Reassure your child or teen that it is OK to feel worried. Share with them how you deal with your own stress so that they can learn how to cope from you.
- When others share information with you, their facts may not always be accurate – keep this in mind when you hear something about COVID-19 that is not endorsed by trusted sources such as Unite against COVID-19 or the World Health Organization.
-
.
This blogger acknowledges that it is a delicate balancing act when presenting accurate information to media audiences.
But the personalisation of “human interest” (aka, “sob stories”) was counter-productive and ultimately, harmful. They were “clickbait” to sell advertising (or increase audience share in RNZ’s case), at the expense of our mental well-being and sensationalised at a time when many of us were vulnerable to heightened levels of stress and anxiety.
This blogger at one point last year switched off all devices and instituted a self-imposed, 48 hour, black-out on all media – including RNZ. When I switch off RNZ, you know things are getting bad.
This blogger maintains that there is a vast difference between presenting the public with hard news that make us more informed citizens – and flooding us with a non-stop, unrelenting diet of tragedy that serves no purpose and only heightens peoples’ anxiety.
Contrast the stories above with the measured reporting by TVNZ journalist, Jack Tame, upon his return and quarantine. His reporting was a mix of “human interest” and factual details, but without “ambulance chasing” exploitation of people’s circumstances and/or “First World” complaints;
.
.
Some wit at the Otago Daily Times, noting the preponderence of teeth-gnashing and wailing, had their own ‘take’ on the #nzhellhole stories with this subtle ‘dig’;
.
.
(April fools story or real? Hard to tell the difference!)
And when even the vacuous Kate Hawkesby pens a story that puts things into perspective;
“Yes this week has shown up some potentially glaring issues at the Pullman, but it doesn’t mean all Hotels are doing a bad job. It doesn’t mean the returnees are at fault or doing anything wrong either. Most people are grateful to be here, appreciative of what NZ has achieved, and want to do the right thing.”
– you just know that some Returnees need to get their priorities in order, and the media should look closely at how it amplifies (and exploits) peoples’ frustrations and fears.
Meanwhile, the real stories we need to know are barely covered;
.
.
Underpaid and over-worked MIQ workers apparently don’t attract the eyeballs and/or clicks, as much as families in tragic circumstances.
(Note: The so-called “human interest” stories continue to present day.)
Media (2 – Or, “The RNZ Holiday Silly Season”)
Speaking of RNZ, former producer for RNZ’s “Saturday Morning” for Kim Hill, Mark Cubey on Twitter last December pointed out one of my personal pet peeves when it comes to Aotearoa’s mainstream media;
.
.
Every year, for about a month, RNZ closes down ‘Morning Report‘, ‘Nine to Noon‘, ‘Checkpoint‘, and loses a whole bunch of well known hosts. The end-of-year winding-down of NZ’s flagship programmes began the week before Christmas. After Christmas, main programming is put on hiatus until the third week of January.
First to go is ‘Morning Report‘, which in the week leading up to Christmas is reduced from three to two hours in length. The last three hour episode is on Tuesday 22 December, and the following day, the programme is whittled down to two hours.
From Tuesday, 29 December 2020, the programme is reduced to one hour and in the New Year re-branded ‘Summer Report‘. Episode lengths are one hour (or two, when it was forced to increase it’s duration on 8 January to cover the Washington coup d’état attempt). Programme lengths increased to two hours from Monday, 18 January 2021 to Friday, 22 January 2021.
There was a further special three hour edition of ‘Summer Report’ on Thursday, 21 January 2021 to cover President Biden’s Inuguration.
‘Summer Report‘ remains in-situ until ‘Morning Report‘ resumes, at its normal three hour duration, on Monday, 25 January 2021.
‘Nine to Noon‘ is replaced with ‘Summer Times‘, hosted by Emile Donovan. The show is a more chat-show-like version of the regular ‘Nine to Noon‘ programme. ‘Summer Times‘ runs from 29 December to 22 January this year.
‘Checkpoint‘ – usually hosted by the tenacious and talented Lisa Owen – was missing altogether for a solid month. Only a five minute news report replaced the usual one and a half hour in-depth reporting. On 7 January, RNZ was forced to broadcast a one-hour long “RNZ Checkpoint Special” following the Washing riots and failed coup.
‘Checkpoint’s‘ month-long hiatus is inexplicable. As Mark Cubey pointed out, RNZ effectively “pretends news stops for the NZ summer“.
To the contrary, the world did not close down for the Christmas/New Year period. A pandemic continued to rage around the globe; Brexit was happening and the failure of a UK-Europe agreement came perilously close; and post-Presidential election events in the United States were causing ructions that reverberated around the planet.
At a time when events escalated, RNZ was missing in action.
And not just the state-owned broadcaster. The final episode (end-of-year Christmas party segment notwithstanding) of TV3’s “The Nation” aired on 28 November, and TV1’s “Q+A” on 6 December. Both then closed down, going into summer-hibernation for several months. (Q+A‘s first episode this year aired on 13 February.)
At a time when we most needed in-depth reporting of global events, we were – and remain – poorly served by our three main broadcasters.
It is understandable that producing programmes like ‘Morning Report’ and ‘Checkpoint‘ place high demands on RNZ staff. They all deserve well-earned breaks from the stresses of their work. But it should not be beyond the wit and abilities of RNZ management (with consultation with staff) to create a holiday roster that allows programming to continue as normal. If necessary, RNZ could employ journalism students (on a living wage) as paid interns, on short-term contracts.
It is not acceptable that, for a month, we are denied current affairs programmes by our main broadcasters.
RNZ has a strong, dedicated following of loyal listeners who expect high standards from our public broadcaster. Those expectations do not lessen from late December through to late January. The world does not stop on 24 December and resume at some arbitrary point in time in the new year.
National
National was thrashed at last year’s election.
Overall, they crashed from 1,152,075 Party Votes in 2017, to 738,275 last year, losing 23 MPs in the process.
The causes of their defeat has been well canvassed. Reasons range from in-fighting; three leadership changes; leaks; inconsistent policy-making and fiscal ineptitude; and a current Leader who is – frankly speaking – just downright unlikeable.
All of the above is true.
But there is a more basic reason: National got hit by a virus called covid19 – at least metaphorically speaking.
National fought last year’s election as if it were 2017. They were wedded to their mantra that “National are better economic managers”.
Unfortunately (for National supporters) the economy was only secondary to people’s concerns. For the majority, the main issue of concern – unsurprisingly – was health. More specifically, our health and safety as humanity faced a global pandemic sweeping almost every nation, and which has hospitalised and killed millions.
Almost daily, we were witnessing an out-of-control pandemic raging through Europe, UK, South America, and even the United States – the most advanced and wealthiest nation on the planet. We saw hospitals over-run by covid cases and mass graves being dug in Brazil and elsewhere in South America. In New York, trucks filled with rotting corpses seemed like something out of a post-apocalypse horror/science fiction movie.
In Aotearoa New Zealand, the then-Labour-NZ First- Green coalition moved reasonably quickly (some might argue they should have acted earlier – but hindsight is always 20/20). At one minute to midnight on 23 March 2020, the country moved to Alert Level 3. Two days later, we went to near total lockdown to Level 4. On 29 March, the inevitable happened: we had our first covid death.
As we listened and watched our Prime Minister address the nation on those first evenings, and subsequently thereafter, we must have felt like five million “extras” in the Will Smith movie, “I Am Legend“, or the 1970s British sf tv series, “The Survivors“.
It was unprecedented. We were practically at war. And we were called upon to do our bit: stay home; watch TV. (How difficult could that be?)
It was against this backdrop that National contested the election.
But National was fighting a pre-Covid campaign based on “economic management” and – at one point – a promise of “temporary” tax cuts. Worse still was Paul Goldsmith’s startling explanation that the tax cuts would be paid out of the $14 billion Covid Recovery fund set aside in the event of a second wave hitting the country!
New Zealanders got the message perfectly: National’s priority was the economy.
Voters would have been uneasy. That was not our collective priority. Our main concern was fighting a virus and keeping it out of the community.
Could National be trusted to make that their Number One Focus? At least 1,670,300 New Zealanders thought not.
National has always touted itself to be a pro-business, small-government Party. It’s policies on its own website is unequivocal in that respect. Even their Covid19 policy page was heavility tilted toward the economy;
A National Government will inject some steel into our first line of defence against COVID-19 by delivering robust border systems that will keep the virus at bay and allow our economy to thrive, National Party Leader Judith Collins says.
“The threat of COVID-19 will be with us for years to come and National is committed to safeguarding the health of all New Zealanders, as well as the wider economy.”
And their reference to limiting lockdowns to preserve economic activity also left no room for doubt where their priorities lay;
Preparing a more effective response to future outbreaks, should they occur, allowing lockdowns to be more targeted and shorter in duration.
[…]
Reducing the need for lockdowns could not be more crucial. The first lockdown saw 212,000 Kiwis end up on unemployment benefits with another 450,000 jobs kept alive by wage subsidies. The current lockdown is estimated to be costing Auckland 250 jobs and up to $75 million a day in economic activity.
[…]
“Continuous improvement of our systems is required so that lockdowns become more targeted and effective, with minimal impact on our communities and the economy.”
(See also “Wally of the Year” Award below.)
On 22 September, it was reported that National would relax border controls for economic reasons. Couched in terms of pseudo-safety rhetoric, National’s intentions were plain for all to see;
National have announced that, if elected, they will ramp up the private provision of quarantine to allow workers and long-term tourists into the country.
At an event in Auckland’s Viaduct Harbour deputy leader Gerry Brownlee said Covid-19 would be with us for a long time and the country had to establish safe conditions for skilled and essential workers to re-enter the country.
Allowing workers in the Recognised Seasonal Employer scheme to return is at the top of that agenda, but the kind of measures the National Party is interested in exploring would extend to a number of industries with the costs of quarantine paid by industry or by individuals who wanted to enter New Zealand.
“Our horticultural industry, for example, is desperate to fill the worker shortage created by border restrictions that is putting $9.5 billion of the country’s economy at risk,” Brownlee said.
The party would implement a booking system for managed isolation facilities and explore “streamlined” travel arrangements for low-risk countries like Covid-free nations in the Pacific.
And private quarantine facilities were also mooted;
Brownlee said National would work with accommodation providers to create private quarantine arrangements that met or exceeded levels of safety, security, reporting, transporting, training and testing.
But in Victoria private security guards proved to be utterly disastrous;
The failures in Victoria’s “hastily assembled” hotel quarantine are “responsible” for the state’s 768 deaths and 18,418 cases since the end of May, the inquiry heard on Monday.
[…]
“One only needs to pause and to reflect on those figures to appreciate the full scope of devastation and despair occasioned as a result of the outbreak,” counsel assisting Ben Ihle said.
“It was a program which failed to meet its primary objective to keep us safe from the virus.”
[…]
Throughout the course of the inquiry, none of the witnesses, including the premier, Daniel Andrews, said they made the decision to use private security guards for guarding returned travellers.
This was the clear message New Zealanders got from National: they were more focused on economic activity than on keeping the virus out of the country.
On 27 August last year, National issued a press statement outlining it’s small business policy. Covid19 and border controls were not mentioned once.
The UK has had “targetted lockdowns” – half-hearted measures that has resulted (at time of writing) 3,929,835 cases and 112,092 deaths.
This was National’s offering to New Zealanders and we wanted no part of it. Quite simply, most people did not trust National to prioritise our health over someone elses’ wealth.
NZ First
For the second time in it’s twentyseven year long history, NZ First has been thrown out of Parliament by voters. It’s share of the Party vote dropped from 7.2% in 2017 to 2.6% last year. 111,685 voters deserted the Party.
Again, the reasons are varied, but this blogger submits that one specific factor was the cause of it’s Parliamentary demise.
In October 2019, a survey found that 44.5% of NZ First voters would have preferred National as a coalition partner after the 2017 General Election. Only 34.1% opted for Labour.
So the majority of NZ First supporters leaned toward National, not Labour.
Winston Peters and his party chose Labour instead, alienating nearly half their voter-base.
This is the only possible outcome when a political party refuses to disclose it’s preferred coalition intentions to voters so that they can cast their ballots accordingly.
In effect, by not making such a disclosure; by leaving that decision until after the election, NZ First supporters were handing Mr Peters & Co a “blank cheque”.
The remaining 34.1% who supported coalition with Labour were also alienated when NZ First made it clear it was a “hand brake” on their coalition partners.
A prime example was Labour’s attempt to implement a capital gains tax to slow investor speculation in the steadily worsening housing price-bubble. NZ First MP Shane Jones made it crystal clear who was responsible for “killing” the tax;
“The reality is you already had that announcement and none of you rung to thank me for NZ First killing off the capital gains tax.”
NZ First managed to anger both National and Labour-leaning supporters. Quite a feat when you think about it.
It’s demise was inevitable.
Wally of the Year Award
There were several contenders:
- Simon Bridges for his non-stop negativity and failing to read-the-room when the nation was focused solely on keeping covid out and saving lives.
- Judith Collins, for her sheer, barely-contained malice.
- This idiot.
- Minister David Clark, who should have known better.
- Jami-Lee Ross for unmitigated colossal cheek for naked political opportunism and (alleged) harassment of staff.
- Billy Te Kahika, for achieving the dubious distinction as Aotearoa New Zealand’s go-too man for every conspiracy fantasy under the sun.
- Former National Party President, Michelle Boag, for being so blindingly wrong on just about everything, especially why covid19 has the number ’19’ followings it’s name. (Clue; no, it’s not because there were 18 strains preceding this one.) And for leaking private covid19 patient names.
- Former National MP, Hamish Walker, also for leaking private Covid19 patient details.
- National MP Michael Woodhouse, for his bizarre (and untrue) “homeless man” story.
- Plan B “sciencey poster boy”, Simon Thornley, who despite all the evidence, apparently wants Aotearoa New Zealand to follow Sweden’s model in dealing with covid19. Because, y’know, our 25 dead compared to Sweden’s 12,428 death toll is somehow a “failure” in his eyes?
But heads above the candidates listed, this blogger nominates Auckland Chamber of Commerce CEO, Michael Barnett.
Mr Barnett’s non-stop carping against lock-downs or calling for watered-down lock-downs, or exemptions for every business and Uncle Tom Cobbly, were in a league of their own;
.
.
In a blogpost on 23 August last year, activist John Minto detailed Mr Barnett’s non-stop carping and misguided attempts to undermine Aotearoa New Zealand’s strategy to eliminate covid19. Had National been in power there is every chance they would have capitulated to Mr Barnett’s increasingly strident demands to weaken lockdowns and allow businesses to operate “as normal”.
The consequences, as shown by other countries, would have been horrific. Hospitals flooded with infected people; ICU wards over-flowing; rising death toll; cemetaries filling up; and Long Covid leaving people suffering debilitating after-effects for months later, perhaps for years to come.
As an agent speaking on behalf of business, he earned his salary. As an agent agitating on behalf of covid19, he excelled.
2020 – But wait, there’s more!
There was more – so much more! – to 2020. But let’s leave something for future (and present) historians to mull over, shall we?
And now, 2021…
.
.
The concluding fourth chapter of 2020: The History That Was.
.
.
.
References
The Wall Street Journal: The Covid-19 Death Toll Is Even Worse Than It Looks
Al Jazeera: In post-Brexit UK, quiet ports hide mounting transport chaos
The Atlantic: This is a coup
The Guardian: Victoria hotel quarantine failures ‘responsible’ for Covid second wave and 768 deaths, inquiry told
CNN: Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny dupes spy into revealing how he was poisoned
CNBC: Hundreds arrested in Hong Kong protests, as analysts weigh in on national security law’s impact
BBC: The Uighurs and the Chinese state – A long history of discord
Reuters: Global temperatures reached record highs in 2020, say EU scientists
NZ Herald: Covid 19 coronavirus – Quarantine food so bad guest forks out for Uber Eats every night
Stuff media: Coronavirus – ‘Tantrum’ as level 1 quarantine walks denied
ODT: Travellers angry over Rotorua quarantine
ODT: Family trapped in luxury Auckland hotel for quarantine
Newstalk ZB: Kate Hawkesby – My brother’s having the time of his life in quarantine
RNZ: MIQ nurses speak out – ‘We’re going to get sloppy … we’re tired and stressed’
RNZ: Risky work – MIQ cleaners underpaid and undervalued, union says
RNZ: Mark Cubey (profile)
Twitter: Mark Cubey – RNZ stopping for summer – 21.12.2020
RNZ: Morning Report – Tuesday 22 December 2020
RNZ: Morning Report – Wednesday 23 December 2020
RNZ: Morning Report – Tuesday 29 December 2020
RNZ: Summer Report
RNZ: Summer Report – Friday 8 January 2021
RNZ: Summer Report – Monday 18 January 2021
RNZ: Summer Report – Friday 22 January 2021
RNZ: Summer Report – Friday 21 January 2021
RNZ: Morning Report – Monday 25 January 2021
RNZ: Summer Times
RNZ: Summer Times – All episodes
Stuff media: Election 2020 – ‘Covid-19 election’ confirmed in new poll of voters’ concerns
New York Times: Covid Overload – U.S. Hospitals Are Running Out of Beds for Patients
NZ Herald: Covid 19 coronavirus – Mass graves dug as Brazil hits grim new toll
Reuters: Bodies found in unrefrigerated trucks in New York during COVID-19 pandemic
RNZ: Recap – Coronavirus updates in NZ and around the world on 23 March
RNZ: Coronavirus – Covid-19 updates in NZ and around the world on 25 March
RNZ: Coronavirus – First death in New Zealand from Covid-19
RNZ: Coronavirus – First death in New Zealand from Covid-19
Wikipedia: I Am Legend
Wikipedia: The Survivors
Stuff media: Election 2020 – National a better manager of economy, says Goldsmith
RNZ: National promises $4.7bn in tax cuts in economic and tax policy
Electoral Commission: New Zealand 2020 General Election – Official Results
National Party: Economic Recovery
Newsroom: National’s plan to let workers and tourists in
The Guardian: Victoria hotel quarantine failures ‘responsible’ for Covid second wave and 768 deaths, inquiry told
Scoop media: National Will Back New Zealand’s Small Businesses
Worldometer: United Kingdom Coronavirus Cases
Stuff media: NZ First voters preferred National to Labour at 2017 election by wide margin
NZ Herald: ‘A handbrake for silly ideas:’ Peters to discuss coalition disagreements in conference speech
Stuff media: NZ First put an end to capital gains tax, Shane Jones claims in post-Budget speech
NZ Herald: Covid-19 coronavirus – National MP Hamish Walker, Michelle Boag admit leaking patient details
NZ Herald: Covid 19 coronavirus – Michael Woodhouse’s isolation homeless mystery man claim debunked
Newshub: Coronavirus – ‘Take me out of God’s waiting room and put me back to work’, business leader begs
NZ Herald: Covid 19 coronavirus – Michael Barnett calls for Auckland to move to level 1.5
National Geographic: Pandemic victims are filling graves on New York’s Hart Island. It isn’t the first time.
Mayo Clinic: COVID-19 (coronavirus) – Long-term effects
Additional
Greenpeace: Five ways NZ will be much better if Jacinda makes good on her promise to Build Back Better
Other Blogposts
The Daily Blog: When will Michael Barnett stop whinging, whining and bleating? – John Minto
Previous related blogposts
Observations on the 2017 Election campaign thus far… (rima)
Life in Level 2: Two Tier Welfare; A Green School; Right Rage, Wrong Reason
2020: Post-mortem or Prologue?
2020: The History That Was – Part 1
2020: The History That Was – Part 2
2020: The History That Was – Part 3
.
.
.
Acknowledgement: Jeff Bell
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 16 February 2021.
.
.
= fs =
Categories: Social Issues, The Body Politic
2020, Covid-19, Hamish Walker, Michael Barnett, Michelle Boag, MIQ, msm, National, NZ First, Q+A, RNZ, TV3's 'The Nation'
Life in level 1: Newshub Nation, Q + A, and the end of Todd Muller’s leadership
18 July 2020
7 comments
.
.
Two things happened this weekend that added to the scandal swirling around the leaked list, of eighteen covid19-positive Returnees.
The National Party scandal has claimed the ‘scalps’ of one MP – Hamish Walker – and operative and former President, Michelle Boag. It has also drawn in Todd Muller, who has been shown to be “loose with the truth”, and Michael Woodhouse, who also recieved emails from Ms Boag – and promptly deleted them.
The Walker-Boag whirlpool is slowly dragging others down into it’s swirling, murky maw.
The first thing that should have raised eyebrows was TV3’s “Newshub Nation” on 11 July. If the viewer was expecting wall-to-wall coverage of the Leaked List scandal, they were to be sorely disappointed. The episode, hosted by Simon Shepherd made a brief mention of Hamish Walker resigning, and the panel briefly discussed the issue.
Otherwise, the focus was on Shane Jones and his bid for the Northland electorate; ACT Party leader, David Seymour; the fringe nutter’s “New Conservative Party”; pandemic management discussion with epidemiologist, Michael Baker; and “Back Story” featuring Green MP, Julie-Anne Genter.
All very interesting, but…
Other than that, there were no interviews with any of the main actors or other political commentators or past National Party apparatchiks… it was a Leaked List-free zone.
Not so TVNZ’s “Q+A” today (12 July).
Though Todd Muller, Michelle Boag, Michael Woodhouse, and Hamish Walker were all invited to attend – none took up the offer.
Instead, it was left up to National’s Deputy Leader, Nikki Kaye, to front. Host, Jack Tame, grilled her mercilessly with rapid-fire questions and naked disbelief to Ms Kaye’s insistence that Michelle Boag did not confide in her about the Leaked List. This despite Ms Kaye acknowledging the closeness between the two – including Ms Boag being (until her recent resignation from the position) Nikki Kaye’s electorate campaign manager.
Ms Kaye was also left to explain and defend not just her conversation with Michelle Boag – but also Michael Woodhouse’s dubious actions and Todd Muller’s inconsistant (outright lies?) responses to what he knew and when did he know it.
She defended to her utmost Michael Woodhouse and Todd Muller. She defended her Party. She stood her ground.
This is what Leaders do.
They defend their team.
At no point did Ms Kaye deflect hard questions relating to two of her colleagues with the oft-repeated mantra, “Oh, you’d have to ask them”.
She took responsibility for answering on their behalf. To defend her Team.
Because that is an essential quality to leadership.
.
.
Contrast Ms Kaye’s courage to the disturbing fact that Todd Muller refused to front for the interview.
Think about that for a moment.
The worst scandal to hit the National Party since Nicki Hager’s “Dirty Politics” – and Todd Muller was in hiding leaving his Deputy in the firing line.
Whatever one may think of Nikki Kaye’s responses to Jack Tame’s relentless questioning – she had the courage and determination to front.
Muller was nowhere to be seen.
As we both watched the spectacle, and noted Muller’s absence, my partner turned and pointed out to me;
“She’s doing a fine job as Leader of National.”
The date 12 July is the turning point for Todd Muller’s faux leadership of the National Party. Quite simply, it beggars belief that he failed to front for the interview. It was his responsibility to represent his Party in difficult times. And it doesn’t get any more difficult when one of his MPs is forced to stand down at the next election after admitting to releasing confidential medical details; a past-President was responsible for the leak; another MP wilfully deletes potential evidence; and Muller himself has been caught out being flexible with the truth.
When the so-called Leader of a political party fails to carry out his most basic responsibility and shoves his Deputy into the firing line, it calls into question his fitness to hold that position.
New Zealanders take note. Todd Muller hid away in safety whilst his Deputy took the hits.
There’s a word for that.
Cowardice.
#MullerUnfitToLead
.
.
.
.
References
Twitter: Laura Beattie – 8 July 2020
Previous related blogposts
Life in Level 1: Cunning Plans, Unanswered Questions
.
.
.
Acknowledgement: Rod Emmerson
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 13 July 2020.
.
.
= fs =
Categories: Media, The Body Politic
Covid-19, Hamish Walker, Michael Woodhouse, Michelle Boag, Nikki Kaye, Q+A, Todd Muller, TV3's 'The Nation'
Life in Lock Down: Day 4
30 March 2020
26 comments
.
.
Lock Down: Day 4 – A photo essay with observations
.
March 29: Usual wake up routine as RNZ snaps on my radio-clock. Jim Mora’s voice slowly enters my conciousness; there’s talk of a second wave of covid19 taking hold in South Korea; the week in Parliament – not that there’s been much activity in the Debating Chamber; the plight of New Zealanders stuck in Peru and having to pay extortionate prices for return air flights (even if air flights *ARE* available)…
It is raining heavily outside. My back yard will be a swamp fit for pukekos. I am relieved; this will keep people inside.
Lurch out of bed… jug on… feed companion animal (double check to make sure I give her cat food and not my coffee)… prepare for Q+A on TVNZ. Breakfast is figs and peanut butter on rye toast again (which I love)… Coffee ready… note pad… tablet…
Jack Tame’s eternally youthful visage appears on screen. He tells the nation there were eightythree new cases yesterday, taking the numbers up to 451. He wonders if this is going to be the “new normal”…
He presents his guests for the day… his first guest, Minister of Health David Clark.
.
.
Though nothing really new through the interview, Minister Clark did drive home the most basic point;
“Ultimately it’s in our hands… I’ve heard reports of people playing touch rugby or going into business that are non-essential. That cannot continue. We have zero tolerance for that kind of thing going on. If people do those kinds of things we will need to stay in lockdown longer because that behaviour affects all of us. So we’re asking every New Zealander to play their part.
… It’s about staying home, staying safe, and ultimately that will save lives.”
The problem of community workers without protective gear was raised. These are essential support professionals who are often faced with numbers of clients – without any protection at all.
Jack’s next guest, Professor Shaun Hendy, an expert in modelling pandemic spread;
.
.
Jack opened describing a “morbid alternative. Researchers researchers at Auckland University say that without intervention or preventative measures as many as eighty thousand New Zealanders could have died from Covid19”.
Professor Hendy expressed concern at potential growth of community transfers: locals inadvertently transferring the virus as they continued to ignore strict rules for personal “bubbles. He warned;
“It could get very bad… the 80,000 figure that was the kind of the worst case scenario that we were looking at; we’re not facing that now we’re taking these steps. But we still have to be… still a possibility that we could have tens of thousands of deaths.
But, given the steps the government is taking, given the lockdown they’re taking, that’s reducing the possibility of that happening all the time.
By going into lockdown, us keeping to our bubbles, we’re protecing ourselves, by not having contact with other people who might be infected. But also if we do get infected then we’re reducing the number of people we might go on to infect.
And that number… we want that number to get below ‘1’. So on average, right, every person is infecting less than one other person, and if we get that, then what we will see, we’ll actually contain and be able to eliminate the disease in New Zealand and that’s the number we’re looking for.”
He said that the number of possible deaths in New Zealand was “still up in the air”. It depended on how New Zealanders observed the lock down.
Professor Hendy warned “If not, these lock down measures would have to go on longer, and we still facing a scenario where we might have thousands of deaths.”
He also predicted restrictions to international travel until an effective vaccine had been developed. Otherwise the country could be re-infected.
The next segment had reporter Whena Owen in various Wairarapa towns talking to people from rural and small town New Zealand. Some interesting insights. Eyebrows and alarms must have been raised when one gentleman – supposedly self-isolating in a campervan in one spot for the next three and a half weeks – was gone when Ms Owen returned the following day to speak to him;
.
.
Ms Owen’s report was followed by a crackly Skype interview with National Party Leader, Simon Bridges, now heading the Epidemic Response Committee.
The interview went fairly well and Mr Bridges gave a fair response to Jack Tame’s questioning of his disastrous speech in Parliament on 18 March. But the Opposition Leader couldn’t help himself and took another swipe at the Coalition government’s increase to welfare payments. Which is ironic when considering how many of Mr Bridges’ voting base may well up up as WINZ “clients”.
Following on was an interview with Grant Webster, CEO of Tourism Holdings Ltd. While confirming the massive damage wrought to tourism, Mr Webster suggested that post-lockdown, New Zealand might reinvent itself as a “high end” destination with “lower end” tourism “falling away”.
If true, it could prove a significant boon to our natural environment that has been severely impacted by large numbers of tourists. DoC could finally spend it’s budget on its core purpose: conservation, rather than building carparks and toilets.
Mr Webster predicted that 2020 and next next would both be “tough”. He expressed the view that what would happen next would be “covid19 related”.
Perhaps the last interview was saved because of it’s chilling aspects. Guardian US weekend editor, Martin Pengelly, gave a run-down of the covid19 crisis and chaos in the United States.
.
.
He described the situation as;
“It’s very bad. It’s very very bad indeed.
Hospital system over-whelmed, or soon be over-whelmed. US Navy medical ships, one’s in Los Angeles, one’s setting off for New York now. Deadlock between state governments and Federal governments about resources, about ventilators, about the whole response.
… It got to this stage because of a number of factors, including the macro-factor of the US having no public health system. There is access to public health, but no working system.
… New York, where I am, is [an] alarming hot-spot [and] the worst is coming.”
He called it a very confusing and bleak situation.
As the United States stands on the precipice of catastrophe, Trump is stroking his own ego, denying assistance to states that are governed by Democrat leaders; Biden is struggling to remain relevant; and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is being whispered about as the secret candidate to stand against the incumbent President.
On Youtube, The Young Turks ran a piece showing how Biden is not coping with what little media media attention he has been getting. Again, mention is made of Governor Cuomo.
My txt-msg sent to Q+A was read out at the conclusion of the programme;
“Shaun Hendy’spoint is simple: ongoing transmission depends on us. Not govt. Not foreigners. Not even the virus. It’s US.Thesooner people get their heads around this, the better outcome we have.” – @fmacskasy – 9:22 AM · Mar 29, 2020
Writing and formatting this blogpost took up most of my late morning, early afternoon. Managed to stop for a bit of late lunch at 2PM; melted cheesy on rye bread with chopped onion, paprika, and basil. And coffee. Fed cat again. (Cat got water, not coffee.)
By mid-afternoon, the weather has cleared up. The sun is out. This is not good.
This afternoon, I discovered that things have taken a turn-for-the-worst. As I replied to a poster on The Daily Blog;
“As at 1pm today the first person in Aotearoa New Zealand has died from covid19. The numbers of infections has risen to 514.
.
.
I don’t mind confessing that it is a frightening prospect to go to work tomorrow. But I’m one of the “lucky bastards” who works in an essential service. Lucky me.
If I catch the virus, my diabetes and age group (to put it delicately I’m no longer in my 20s…) will be two strikes against me. I think the medical term is “I’m f****d”.
But I wouldn’t have it any other way.
(PS: In the event of my demise my Will is in my Filing Cabinet; someone feed my cat; and please clear my Browser History. )
Anyways, I think this explains my low tolerance threshold for those individuals who think this is a holiday and life is normal.
We lost “normal” last week.”
On a more mundane note, I had a txt-msg chat with a mate; the 78th World Science Fiction Convention – aka CoNZealand – scheduled to take place 29 July to 2 August this year in Wellington has been effectively cancelled. The irony should not escape us; one of the most well-used plot-devices in science fiction literature and film (remember the old 1970s television series, “The Survivors“?) – has blown a global annual sf fan gathering out of the water with a viral version of a photon torpedo.
5.45PM: Dinner is two egg sandwiches on rye. Not much of an appetite, might try to eat something later. Cat is happy though.
Watched TV1 news at 6PM, carrying the story of Aotearoa’s first covid19 fatality. Will this drive home to New Zealanders just how f*****g serious this is?! Short answer? Probably not.
I’m familiar with the New Zealand psyche of hyper-individualism; giving the two-fingered salute to Authority; accompanied by a toxic bloated sense of entitlement which so many people seem afflicted with. We’ve devoted an entire pop-culture to anti-establishment sentiments, with Goodbye Pork Pie probably our best effort. For a small minority, requiring people to stay home is a challenge to do the polar opposite.
It will take more people to die before it slowly dawns on that tiny minority that, yes, This Is A Thing.
Might watch some Seth Meyers or Star Trek Continues later on Youtube. (The actor who portrays Capt James Kirk bears a striking resemblance to William Shatner The Younger.) Looking forward to relaxing and laughing to some of Seth Meyers’ ascerbic satire and some nostalgia sf…
9.30PM: Hot mug of sugar free drinking chocolate and my cat on my lap, settled in to watch Miriama Kamo present her ‘Sunday’ programme. The backgrounder on where viruses like H1N1, SARS, and now covid19 spring from is a testament to humanity’s abuse of our surrounding natural environment.
It may be anthropomorphising it, but it certainly feels as if Nature is mightily pissed of at us and is giving the human race a swift kick up the pants.
Afterward, I sat back down at the computer to refresh my memory how long ago Aotearoa New Zealand experienced its first covid19 case.
It was 28 February.
.
.
Only a month and one day later, our country has 514 (known) cases.
I’m no mathematician – anything past the multiplication table escapes me – but even I recognise the steep rising curve in numbers. At that rate, had our PM not made perhaps the boldest call since we joined Great Britain in declaring war on Nazi Germany, the numbers would be in the tens of thousands by the end of the year. The experts at Auckland University, as covered this morning in Q+A, knew pretty much what they were talking about.
It is half past ten at night as I put the finishing touches to todays entry to Life in Lockdown.
Work tomorrow. I have latex gloves in my satchel – and nothing else. A full hazmat suit would be nice. Is there a choice in colours? Perhaps something ‘Star Trekky’? (But not in red. Trek fans know what I’m talking about.)
I should be so lucky.
And finally, let’s remember to all do our bit. It’s not quantum mechanics, people.
You have a better chance at survival if you follow the protocols;
.
.
And, in Frank Speak;
Stay the F**K home!!
.
.
.
References
TVNZ Q+A: Minister of Health says there is enough protective equipment for health workers
TVNZ Q+A: People should prepare themselves for the possibility of a longer lockdown – Scientist
TVNZ: Q+A looks at how one small town coped with shutting down life as we know it
RNZ: Coronavirus – Simon Bridges criticised for ‘politics-as-usual’ pot shots amid covid-19 crisis
TVNZ Q+A: The shutdown could provide a reset for the tourism industry – Tourism Holdings CEO
TVNZ: Q+A: Very confused, very bleak – New York journalist on the COVID-19 crisis in America
Youtube: The Young Turks – Joe Biden GIVES UP Mid Interview
NewstalkZB: ‘A very sad day’ – NZ has its first coronavirus death
Wikipedia: The Survivors (1975)
NZ Herald: The life of Pie
RNZ: New Zealand confirms case of Covid-19 coronavirus
Previous related blogposts
The Warehouse – where everyone gets a virus
.
.
.
.
This blogpost was also published on The Daily Blog on 30 March 2020.
.
= fs =
Categories: Global, Social Issues
Covid-19, level 4 lock down, New Zealand, Q+A
Apartheid in Aotearoa New Zealand – yes, it does exist
5 March 2019
4 comments
.
.
apartheid
noun
1. (in the Republic of South Africa) a rigid former policy of segregating and economically and politically oppressing the non-white population.2. any system or practice that separates people according to color, ethnicity, caste, etc.
.
Imagine having to apply a State body to confirm who and how you identify. Imagine if you are a Pakeha or Maori; CIS male or female; or a gay, lesbian, or bisexual, having to acquire evidence from multiple medical specialists and compile a file to support your identity.
Imagine if you, reading this blog, had to rely on that Court’s decision as to how you would be identified by society.
Imagine, for example, if the identities of fellow bloggers Willie Jackson’s as a male Maori; David Farrar as a male Pakeha; Martyn Bradbury as a male Pakeha; Susan St John as a female Pakeha, former blogger Marama Davidson as a female Maori – were all determined by a Court of law.
Imagine if the required paperwork to present your application to the Court involved corroborating documentation from various professionals.
Imagine that the process was not free, but costs thousands of dollars. Imagine if you could not afford the cost, you could not apply to the Court: it was dependent on your ability to pay.
Imagine that the final decision then rests with a Court and a solitary judge (usually an old white male).
Imagine that your application could be knocked back; denied on a number of grounds.
Imagine that without approval from the Court, you could not identify as the gender, race, etc, that you felt yourself to be.
No need to imagine.
It exists.
There is a class of New Zealanders for whom all of the above is a reality: dictated by law.
But not for everyone. For the majority of us, there is no legal requirement for us to undergo a process to define who we are.
If you are heterosexual, gay, lesbian, or bisexual, you are who you are. The State plays no role in determining who you are or how your identify (for gay and bisexual men, since 1986).
You are a free citizen.
But the same does not apply for 100% of New Zealanders. We have a two-class system operating in this country.
If you accept the broad definition above, it may be surprising to discover we have an invisible form of apartheid operating in this country.
The following is ‘Andrea’s’* story and how our own apartheid system has impacted on her.
Andrea is in her late 50s/early 60s. She is a university-educated professional, highly respected and successful in her field. Her research papers are required reading and has been referenced overseas by others working in her area of endeavour.
She is smart, observant, highly capable, articulate, and with a strong, supportive, close circle of friends, loyal work colleagues, and loving family. She has two sons who adore her and are not shy or short of offering plenty of hugs, and an ex-partner with whom she maintains tight bonds of friendship and mutual support.
Andrea is also a trans-woman.
Andrea’s journey to transition to the gender she identifies with – female – did not begin in 2002, when she undertook gender-reassignment surgery here in New Zealand.
Andrea’s journey did not begin in 1999 when she came out to her work colleagues.
Andrea’s journey did not begin a year earlier, when she confronted her own true self and disclosed to her then-wife, Sharon*, that she identified as a woman and not as the male’s body she had been born into. It ended their marriage (which had already been under considerable pressure because of Andrea’s hidden gender dysphoria) – but in turn her disclosure to Sharon created a much stronger bond of trust and friendship.
Andrea’s journey began when she was three years old, when she “didn’t feel right” as a boy, and wanted to be a girl.
Her journey was not a simple one. But she says the surgical intervention she went through seventeen years ago was the least of her considerable challenges.
“The surgery itself was reasonably straight forward,” she says.
The real challenges were the legal, procedural, and regulatory barriers she had to face.
To achieve a diagnosis for gender dysphoria and gain access to the female hormone oestrogen she first had to be assessed by a psychologist. That assessment consisted of ten, one hour long, sessions. It was a financial cost she had to bear.
Her next step was another specialist, an endocrinologist. That assessment was paid through her local DHB. This allowed Andrea to be prescribed androgen-blockers as well as critically-needed oestrogen.
She underwent electrolysis for unwanted facial hair. This process would be required for the following fifteen years. Cost, around $25,000, paid by Andrea.
Then came the major event that would transform her forever: genital reassignment surgery by New Zealand’s sole plastic surgeon qualified in this particular field. Cost, around $27,000, again paid by Andrea.
But first – more professionals came and went through her life. The surgeon required two independent psychologist’s assessments; a psychiatric assessment and report, and an assessment by a social worker. The cost of these professionals – around $4,000 – was paid by Andrea.
In 2003, following succesful surgery, Andrea applied to the Family Court for a Declaration changing her gender, and recognising her as female. This required a sworn affidavit from Andrea’s endocrinologist to be presented by her lawyer.
A personal, sworn affidavit was also demanded from Andrea, affirming that she would not change her mind – despite already having undergone radical genital reassignment surgery. (Perhaps law-makers thought she might “want it put back” later that afternoon?)
Cost of lawyer and court fees: paid by Andrea.
Andrea suffered an unexpected setback when the Judge refused to accept the endocrinologist’s affidavit. He demanded instead that the operating surgeon supply the required documentation.
Disappointed, but with black humour, Andrea asked her lawyer;
“What does he want? That I lift my dress and drop my knickers?”
Her lawyer replied that would probably not be helpful.
She paid more lawyer’s fees – around $3,000 – to obtain the surgeon’s affidavit. Another Court hearing followed.
That was followed by a process called tracheal shave – paid by Andrea. Cost, around $7,000.
The eventual Declaration by the Court reaffirming Andrea as legally female allowed her to be issued with a new much-needed female birth certificate.
That, in turn, would allow Andrea to apply for a passport in her newly identified female gender.
This permitted her to undertake facial feminisation surgery in Belgium. Cost, approximately $40,000, paid by Andrea.
That was followed by vocal chord surgery in Luxembourg in 2016, costing Andrea about $15,000.
A year later she had additional corrective surgery. More cost for Andrea; $12,000.
Andrea recognises that she is highly privileged. Her social status; high education; generous income; progressive employer and work-colleagues; and well-defined support network have benefitted her in ways that the vast majority of trans-people do not enjoy.
At the time the public health system funded only two trans-gendering operations per year and she could personally afford to “jump the queue”. There is an underlying painful sadness in Andrea’s tone when says ruefully that most trans-people are nowhere as lucky or privileged as she is.
Her decades-long journey to become her true self could by no means be described as a “spur-of-the-moment” fancy. The many years she waited; the number of professionals involved; each momentous step; the milestones achieved; the high financial cost; the regulatory demands from medical professionals and Court; the incredible patience and support from her colleagues, friends, and family – was not for the faint-hearted.
Yet, this is what we demand from those who are our trans-brothers and trans-sisters.
Nowhere else do we expect people to jump through regulatory hoops and cross artificial barriers to simply be allowed to be who we are. Whether you are straight or gay or bi-sexual, you don’t have to fill out a form and beg a Judge’s approval on a “Declaration”.
But we demand it from people who identify as “trans”. For no apparent, logical, reason that makes any coherent sense.
There is the spurious argument that trans-men and trans-women are a “special case” because they require invasive surgery to allow them to function as they identify.
Yet we don’t expect the elderly to undergo multiple psychiatric, psychological, social worker assessments, plus a Court Declation, to undergo hip surgery. Or organ transplants. Or any of the myriad millions of other invasive medical interventions which nearly all New Zealanders undergo throughout their lives.
But we demand it from trans-men and trans-women.
There is no clear reason why we treat trans-men and trans-women so completely differently to the rest of the population.
As a person who self-identifies as a CIS Male, who do I have to appeal to, to be recognised as such? No one of course.
If the State demanded such stringent, bureaucratic, legal rules from the rest of us, there would be widespread, massive public resistance. “State thuggery” and “nanny statism” would be screamed from both Left and Right.
But for reasons that remain unclear, it is considered acceptable to treat trans-people in such a callous, inhumane way.
In some ways, the way we treat trans-people is a form of legally-sanctioned, socialised bullying. As if society has found the smallest, weakest, most vulnerable minority in our community and saddled them with huge demands that exists nowhere else.
On TVNZ’s Q+A, Internal Affairs Minister Tracey Martin, announced that the Births, Deaths, Marriages, and Relationships Registration Bill would be deferred. She offered the excuse that it was necessary to deal with “problems” caused by the select committee process;
“However, significant changes were made to the Bill by the select committee around gender self-identification and this occurred without adequate public consultation. This has created a fundamental legal issue.”
The Select Committee is usually the appropriate forum where public consultation takes place. It is unclear where Ms Martin believes “adequate public consultation” should occur, if not Parliament’s Select Committee – the highest “Court” in the nation.
It would be disturbing if a tiny, shrill minority of so-called “gender critical feminists” has put pressure on Ms Martin. If a Minister of a supposedly progressive government cannot act with courage to protect our most vulnerable, then that would be a tragedy.
I hope I am wrong in thinking that is what took place behind closed doors.
When Fran Wilde presented gay reform legislation to Parliament in 1986, she suffered unbelievable threats of intimidation, violence, and death. Opposition to homosexuality elicited insane arguments from homophobes;
Some people argued that the law would lead to more homosexuality and that this would eventually mean the collapse of the family unit. Fear and a lack of understanding led some to claim that young boys would be put at risk. Homosexuality and paedophilia – sex with children – were sometimes regarded as the same thing.
Many of the lunatic arguments against legalising male homosexuality in 1986 are being repeated again against trans-people. Most of those arguments are similar to the “claim that young boys would be put at risk” – but this time the supposed “victims” of the trans-bogey are girls and women “threatened in safe places”. Such claims are unclear in specifics and are deliberately vague to create a sense of unease with a phantom menace.
So-called “gender critical feminists” have taken to using offensive and degrading terms such ‘misgendering’ and ‘deadnaming’ to further undermine and deny trans-gender activists’ identities. It is an unnecessary, cruel tactic more commonly found on right-wing websites.
But Ang Jury, from New Zealand Women’s Refuge refutes any suggestion of problems with trans-gender women with Susan Strongman reporting for Radio NZ that “there is a solid process around deciding who gets into safe houses, and that transgender women have been allowed into many refuge spaces for years without issue“.
Last year, National Council of Women and YWCA came out strongly in support of the trans-gender community, with NCW CEO, Gill Greer, stating;
“Trans women’s rights are women’s rights – and ‘women’s rights are human rights.”
Feminists who support the trans-movement know full well that there are few such “safe places” and that most sexual abuse/attacks on girls and women occur in the home (or work place) and the perpetrator is usually known to the victim/survivor.
Exploiting the fear of “stranger danger” against the trans-community – many of whom have themselves been victims of harassment and/or sexual assault – is obscene.
The trans-community and it’s supporters counter opposition to the right to self-ID and describe it as fear-mongering;
Local transphobic campaigners are backed by a large group of extremely bigoted international social media accounts, many of which are controlled by extreme right wing and religious fundamentalists.
This article from the Southern Poverty Law Centre helps explains the relationships between the groups driving the campaign.
Campaigners are making claims about predators using the proposed law changes to gain access to vulnerable people. These claims are manufactured and intended to create a moral panic. Evidence shows that no such incidents have been reported in countries where these changes have been made.
It’s important to remember that anybody making changes to markers on their birth certificates would make a statutory declaration in front of a Justice of the Peace under penalty of perjury. The ability to more easily change the gender marker on your birth certificate can’t be carried out on a whim or with dubious intent. The changes proposed simply brings the process for changing all major forms of identification in line with one another.
Minister Tracey Martin has a moment in our history to do the right thing. Fran Wilde led the way with gay law reform.
But the movement for social justice and inclusion did not end thirty-three years ago. Just as the feminist movement still has much to accomplish.
We cannot, as a society, exclude a small minority by creating a system or practice that separates people according to their status as trans-gendered.
That is apartheid.
And we’re all agreed that apartheid is a bad thing?
To Minister Martin I say this: thirty-three years years ago, your Parliamentary predecessor, Fran Wilde, did the right thing by standing up for gay men. She endured a storm of personal threats and vitriol that would wither most of us.
But she stood up for what was right.
Will you do the same; will you stand up for what is right?
It’s not a difficult question. Fran Wilde knew the answer.
…
.
Acknowledgement: this author wishes to thank Andrea and others in the Wellington trans-community for sharing their experiences and allowing me to honour their stories. – Frank Macskasy
* Name changed to protect ‘Andrea’s’ and ‘Sharon’s’ privacy and prevent harassment.
.
.
.
References
Dictionary.com: Apartheid
Radio NZ: Births, deaths and marriages bill deferred to allow more public consultation
NZ History: Homosexual law reform – Page 4 – Reforming the law
The Right To Self ID: What is the Births Deaths and Marriages Act?
YWCA: We support trans rights in Aotearoa
Radio NZ: Sex self-identification debate a ‘cesspool of harmful stereotypes’
Additional
Radio NZ: Transgender and non-binary communities disappointed at bill deferral
Robinhead: Gender Roles
Previous related blogposts
Fairfax media and Kiwiblog revise incorrect story denigrating trans-people
.
.
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 28 February 2019.
.
.
= fs =
Media bullsh*t vs the Bovine variety
16 May 2018
Leave a comment
.
.
A case in point where the media can misrepresent what an elected representative has stated occurred immediately after Corin Dann interviewed Environment Minister, David Parker, on 6 May, on TVNZ’s Q+A;
.
David Parker and Corin Dann on TVNZ’s Q+A, 6 May 2018
.
The interview itself was professional, with Dann asking pertinent questions and drilling down into Minister Parker’s stated objective to reduce agricultural pollution of our waterways.
Corin Dann asked;
“So an admirable goal, but the question is — how will you do it? Now, you have a— you’ve talked about beefing up the current guidelines, the national policy statement on water. How far will you go? And I guess the key question is here — will you cap the number of cows that can be in a certain paddock, depending on nutrient levels? In other words, potentially force farmers to destock?”
To which Minister Parker replied;
“Well, cow numbers have already peaked and are going down, but yes, in some areas, the number of cows per hectare is higher than the environment can sustain. That won’t be done through a raw cap on cow numbers; it will be done on nutrient limits, the amount of nutrient that can be lost from a farm to a waterway, because it’s not just a dairy cow issue.”
Note the Minister’s carefully chosen words;
“…the number of cows per hectare is higher than the environment can sustain. That won’t be done through a raw cap on cow numbers; it will be done on nutrient limits, the amount of nutrient that can be lost from a farm to a waterway, because it’s not just a dairy cow issue.”
Minister Parker flatly rejected “ a raw cap on cow numbers” – explaining “it will be done on nutrient limits“.
For a politician, it was a remarkable moment, providing a clear-cut answer to a crucial question. (How many National Ministers have ever given such an unambiguous response?)
How did the rest of the mainstream media report Minister Parker’s comments?
Dishonestly.
TVNZ – Q+A’s broadcaster – presented Minister Parker’s position on the same day as the programme was aired, with this stunningly inaccurate headline and lead-paragraph;
.
.
Despite Minister Parker’s categorical statement that reducing effluent-pollution “won’t be done through a raw cap on cow numbers; it will be done on nutrient limits” – TVNZ chose to misreport the Minister’s position. Anyone who had not watched/listened to Minister Parker’s original interview would inevitably have concluded that cow-reduction was on Minister Parker’s main agenda.
Later that same day – 6 May – Radio NZ also misrepresented Minister Parker in an online article headline and lead-paragraph;
.
.
However, the author of the Radio NZ write-up could not have been ignorant of Minister Parker’s stated position, because the second paragraph read;
Environment Minister David Parker said there wouldn’t be a direct cap on the number of cattle, but instead work was being done on restricting the amount of nutrients being lost from farm to waterway.
Two day later, the Otago Daily Times followed suit;
.
.
– though in a stunning exercise in double-think, the un-named Editorial-writer presented two conflicting statements of Minister Parker’s position;
At the weekend, Mr Parker indicated he wants fewer cows per hectare because the number now is higher than the environment can sustain.
This will not be done through a raw cap on cow numbers. Instead, it will be done on nutrient limits, the amount of nutrients that can be lost from a farm to a waterway.
It was clear from on-line stories that the mainstream media were finding difficulty in reporting Minister Parker’s statements. After all, how could effluent be reduced with reducing cow numbers?
Despite the Minister stating without ambiguity that he was targetting “the amount of nutrient that can be lost from a farm to a waterway, because it’s not just a dairy cow issue” – the msm couldn’t seem to get their heads around that concept.
How could effluent be reduced without cutting cow numbers?
Canterbury dairy farmer, Willy Leferink, offered one solution;
Mr Leferink said he had built a large hangar-like barn on his land to house his cows at certain times during winter which would collect and treat their waste instead of it dropping straight onto paddocks.
It’s bad enough when a politician misrepresents a situation. Former Dear Leader John Key built quite a reputation around misrepresentation; omission; bending the truth; and some outright lies.
But we expect more from our media.
If an elected representative expresses a clear direction, the correct response of the media is to report it fairly to the public. Question; probe; and doubt, by all means. Look behind the facade. Follow-up. Do the stuff we expect from the Fourth Estate.
But do not misreport.
Misquoting or misreporting adds nothing to the sum total of informed discourse. It only reaffirms suspicion that the media cannot be trusted.
For when the media that has exhausted its trust with the public, the road to political corruption and the rise of demagoguery becomes easier to travel.
Aesop’s The Boy Who Cried Wolf is a fable about loss of credibility that is as valid now as it was 2,600 years ago.
.
.
.
References
Scoop media: TVNZ Q+A – Minister David Parker interviewed by Corin Dann (transcript)
Radio NZ: Farmers may be forced to reduce cattle numbers
Otago Daily Times: Fewer cows no easy task
Radio NZ: Moves made to reduce runoff already – farmers
Wikipedia: The Boy Who Cried Wolf
Previous related blogposts
When the mainstream media go feral
Only four years too late – TVNZ-Colmar Brunton catch up with The Daily Blog
Worse than “fake news” – sloppy news!
Syria: the mendacities of the mainstream media (part tahi)
Syria: the mendacities of the mainstream media (part rua)
.
.
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 11 May 2018.
.
.
= fs =
National spins new “fake news” narrative: there is no health crisis
6 May 2018
2 comments
.
.
National is under attack. It’s reputation as a “prudent fiscal manager” is threatened by a growing realisation that it has achieved government surpluses at the expense of under-funded DHBs, decaying infrastructure, poorly resourced mental healthcare, budget cuts to DoC, frozen funding for Radio New Zealand, cuts to early childhood education and schools, etc.
After nine years of frozen budgets (a cut, once inflation, population growth, and other pressures are factored in), New Zealanders have been made to understand the painful realities of austerity-National-style;
.
.
It is against a backdrop of startling revelations that hospital buildings are rotting from within and threatened with sewage leaking through walls, that National’s credibility has been challenged.
The new narrative is that National’s so-called “successful fiscal stewardship” has been achieved by deferring vitally-needed spending on critical infrastructure and basic social services.
In essence, after nine years in government, National is being held to account.
But National is beginning to push-back on the new narrative.
This became apparent on 29 April, on TVNZ Q+A’s Twitter account when several ‘tweets’ by obvious-National tribalists (and one disaffected ex-Labour member) all featured a similar theme. The recurring use of the terms “false story” appeared several times along with the short-hand cliche, “fake news”;
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
All of which could be dismissed as the self-induced, delusional denials of individuals who identify a little too closely with the National Party – except it does not end with a handful of misguided National Party members.
On the same day Q+A was broadcast, and whilst National’s faithful Keyboard-warriors were engaging in “fake news” denials all over social media, NewstalkZB posted this on their Twitter account;
.
.
NewstalkZB’s website carried this story that the above ‘tweet’ referred to;
.
.
On TV3/Newshub, Woodhouse was reported as saying;
[Michael Woodhouse] said the Government has racked up a “woeful litany” of broken promises in just six months, including “the manufactured Middlemore crisis, raising massive expectations for nurse pay increases he won’t now meet, the debacle of the air ambulance tender, inertia and an unnecessary inquiry in mental health”.
Woodhouses’ statements were taken from a National Party Press Release, dated 29 April, where he alleged;
“The Prime Minister recently stated the issues at Middlemore Hospital are emblematic. I agree – emblematic of a Government that has manufactured a crisis that doesn’t exist in order to mask its broken promises.
The Minister’s record now includes the manufactured Middlemore crisis, raising massive expectations for nurse pay increases he won’t now meet, the debacle of the air ambulance tender, inertia and an unnecessary inquiry in Mental Health and now a billion dollar broken promise. This is a woeful litany after just six months in office.”
Woodhouse has a singular gift for misrepresenting facts and ‘bending the truth’ when it suits him.
On 12 February 2018 on Radio NZ, National’s Housing spokesperson – Michael Woodhouse – responded to New Zealand’s housing crisis – by denying it!
He stated categorically;
“They acknowledge that social housing includes housing provided by NGOs [non governmental organisations] but then ignore that when they conclude that the number of state housing properties have gone down. Clearly that hasn’t happened, they’ve gone up.”
His assertion “that the number of state housing properties have … gone up” was a bare-faced lie.
After nine years in office, National had disposed of some six thousand state houses. As this blogger reported in February this year;
In the 2008/09 Annual Report, Housing NZ stated that it “manages a portfolio of more than 69,000 houses” (p4).
Nine years later, Housing NZ’s 2016/17 Annual Report revealed “we own or manage approximately 63,000 homes”. (p7)
Either Mr Woodhouse’s or my arithmetic is way out, because that is a 6,000 drop in State housing.
National’s track record after nine years in government is so bad that that cannot rely on the truth to validate themselves. Instead, they must resort to lies.
National’s MPs and their tribalist supporters have nothing to be proud of.
.
.
.
References
Fairfax media: Is National really better than Labour with the Government books? Well, not really
Radio NZ: Doctors blame under-funding for DHB blowouts
Mediaworks: Sickening state of Auckland hospital buildings revealed
Radio NZ: DoC funding cut by $40m – independent expert
Mediaworks: What’s behind New Zealand’s mental health funding crisis?
NZ Herald: Govt has cut millions off early childhood education – Study
Manawatu Standard: Struggling schools cut teacher aide hours to keep up with minimum wage increase
NZ Herald: John Drinnan – Radio NZ survives the big freeze
Fairfax media: Funding in Auckland health sector not keeping up with population growth, politicians told
Radio NZ: Sewage leaking into Middlemore building’s walls
Fairfax media: Over 5000 at risk of going blind waiting for treatment, Ministry of Health says
Twitter: TVNZ Q+A
Twitter: NewstalkZB – Michael Woodhouse – 29 April 2018
NewstalkZB: Government manufacturing a health-sector crisis – Michael Woodhouse
Mediaworks: GP visits might not get cheaper soon after all
Scoop media: Clark confirms broken promise on GP fees
Radio NZ: Housing report paints ‘sobering picture’ of crisis
Housing NZ: Annual Report 2016/17
Related Other Blogs
The Standard: Micky Savage – National’s fiscal ineptitude over Auckland transport
The Daily Blog: Martyn Bradbury -New Zealand’s new Alt-Right Twitter Trolls – Dirty Politics 2018
Previous related blogposts
National’s housing spokesperson Michael Woodhouse – delusional or outright fibber?
The many mendacities of Mr Bridges – a few volts short of an EV
The Mendacities of Mr English – No, I wasn’t told – Yes, I was told
National’s housing spokesperson Michael Woodhouse – delusional or outright fibber?
Newsflash: apparently our public hospital system is in crisis?!
.
.
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 1 May 2015.
.
.
= fs =
2017: Parting shots from the Right: tantrums, bloated entitlements, and low, low expectations for our Youth – rua
6 January 2018
3 comments
.
.
.
Bill English has low hopes for young New Zealanders.
.
.
Bill English – putting the peasantry in their place
When born-to-rule Tories – with a bloated sense of self-worth and entitlement – slip up and let us peasants know how they really view us – it is usually unsurprising to most on the Left.
Take, for example, Bill English’s candid admission that New Zealand’s lower wage rates were beneficial when it came to competing with Australia. On 10 April 2011, in an exchange with Guyon Espiner on TVNZ’s Q+A, English boasted of the benefits of low wages;
GUYON Can I talk about the real economy for people? They see the cost of living keep going up. They see wages really not- if not quite keeping pace with that, certainly not outstripping it much. I mean, you said at the weekend to the Australia New Zealand Leadership Forum that one of our advantages over Australia was that our wages were 30% cheaper. I mean, is that an advantage now?
BILL Well, it’s a way of competing, isn’t it? I mean, if we want to grow this economy, we need the capital – more capital per worker – and we’re competing for people as well.
GUYON So it’s part of our strategy to have wages 30% below Australia?
BILL Well, they are, and we need to get on with competing for Australia. So if you take an area like tourism, we are competing with Australia. We’re trying to get Australians here instead of spending their tourist dollar in Australia.
GUYON But is it a good thing?
BILL Well, it is a good thing if we can attract the capital, and the fact is Australians- Australian companies should be looking at bringing activities to New Zealand because we are so much more competitive than most of the Australian economy.
GUYON So let’s get this straight – it’s a good thing for New Zealand that our wages are 30% below Australia?
BILL No, it’s not a good thing, but it is a fact. We want to close that gap up, and one way to close that gap up is to compete, just like our sports teams are doing. This weekend we’ve had rugby league, netball, basketball teams, and rugby teams out there competing with Australia. That’s lifting the standard. They’re closing up the gap.
GUYON But you said it was an advantage, Minister.
BILL Well, at the moment, if I go to Australia and talk to Australians, I want to put to them a positive case for investment in New Zealand, because while we are saving more, we’re not saving more fast enough to get the capital that we need to close the gap with Australia. So Australia already has 40 billion of investment in New Zealand. If we could attract more Australian companies, activities here, that would help us create the jobs and lift incomes.
Perhaps realising he had dug a hole for himself, English added at the end; “… and lift incomes“. Though of course, if “incomes lifted”, New Zealand workers would no longer be competitive with their Australian cuzzies, according to his Bizarro-world “logic”.
In 2016, at a Federated Farmers meeting in Feilding, English probably felt “at home” and sufficiently comfortable in his surroundings to let his guard down. English attacked workers again, trashing them as “hopeless“;
“A lot of the Kiwis that are meant to be available [for farm work] are pretty damned hopeless. They won’t show up. You can’t rely on them and that is one of the reasons why immigration’s a bit permissive, to fill that gap… a cohort of Kiwis who now can’t get a license because they can’t read and write properly and don’t look to be employable, you know, basically young males.”
A year later, English took a further swipe at New Zealand workers, effectively labelling them en-masse as “druggies. On 27 February 2017, he told the Parliamentary press;
“One of the hurdles these days is just passing a drug test. Under workplace safety you can’t have people on your premises under the influence of drugs and a lot of our younger people can’t pass that test.”
English’s startling (and offensive) generalisation came as a response to questions why National was allowing a flood of immigrant workers when 140,000 local workers remained unemployed.
Blaming others is de rigueur for National when facing one of their countless failures;
.
.
Some more blame-gaming;
.
.
And yet more…
.
.
Not satisfied with those digs at workers and the unemployed, English made it clear only four days before Christmas precisely what he thought of young people bettering themselves through higher education. Responding to Labour’s enactment of their election promise for one year’s free tertiary education – English lamented that “Government’s fees-free policy will ‘soak up staff out of McDonald’s’...”;
.
.
That’s right, folks. Bill English’s ambition for young New Zealanders is to get a job at McDonalds; work hard; and – stay there. No higher education for you mini-peasants!
McDonalds New Zealand realised immediatley the implications of English’s derisory comment and quickly fired out a statement countering the former-Prime Minister;
“We don’t expect to see much impact as a result of the Government’s free fees policy.”
When a major business contradicts National – the political party ostensibly representing the interests of business – you know Bill English has screwed up. Essentially his brain was in ‘neutral’ when his mouth opened and words tumbled out.
It should come as absolutely no surprise that English is so harsh in his criticism. Labour’s one year free tertiary education is only the beginning. It heralds a gradual return to what New Zealanders once enjoyed: near-free tertiary education.
It is another cog removed from the creaking neo-liberal system as it is dismantled, piece-by-rotten-piece.
Postscript
According to Wikipedia;
[Bill] English went on to study commerce at the University of Otago, where he was a resident at Selwyn College, and then completed an honours degree in English literature at Victoria University of Wellington.
After finishing his studies, English returned to Dipton and farmed for a few years. From 1987 to 1989, he worked in Wellington as a policy analyst for the New Zealand Treasury…
Bill English undertook his tertiary education prior to 1987. Student fees/loans did not start until 1992.
That means Bill English graduated with his Commerce and English Lit degrees without having to pay fees or take out massive loans. His tertiary education was (near-)free.
A job at McDonalds awaits him.
.
.
.
References
Scoop media: Guyon Espiner interviews Finance Minister, Bill English
Fairfax media: Bill English describes some Kiwis looking for work as ‘pretty damned hopeless’
NZ Herald: Unions demand Bill English apologise for describing jobseekers as ‘pretty damned hopeless’
Fairfax media: Bill English says employers are regularly telling him that Kiwis can’t pass drug tests
Twitter: Newshub – Bill English “soak up staff out of McDonalds”
Mediaworks: Government’s fees-free policy will ‘soak up staff out of McDonald’s’ – Bill English
Wikipedia: Bill English
Other Blogs
The Standard: Kiwi workers are pretty damned hopeless – says Bill English
Previous related blogposts
John Key – Practicing Deflection 101
When National is under attack – Deflect, deflect, deflect!
National under attack – defaults to Deflection #2
National under attack – defaults to Deflection #1
.
.
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 1 January 2018.
.
.
= fs =
Letter to the editor – “Throwing money at the problem” of homelessness
23 June 2016
2 comments
.
.
from: Frank Macskasy <fmacskasy@gmail.com>
to: Listener <letters@listener.co.nz>
date: Sun, Jun 19, 2016
subject: Letter to the Editor.
Letter to the editor
The Listener.
On TVNZ’s Q+A on 19 June, former National Party President, Michelle Boag referred to solving homelessness as “throwing money at the problem”.
Because as we all know, the homeless should just bunk down at the nearest Marae or in a ute parked up by some handy public toilets.
Meanwhile, National forked out a $30 million subsidy to Rio Tinto; $26 million for a flag referendum, and $11.5 million to a Saudi businessman for a farm in the middle of the Saudi desert. These are evidently not “throwing money at the problem”. They are ‘investments’.
In the next breath, Boag shed a couple of crocodile tears saying, “we want to be a compassionate society”.
Well, actually, many of us already are compassionate.
It’s Boag who seems to have trouble with the concept.
.
Frank Macskasy
[address and phone number supplied]
.
.
.
References
TVNZ: Q+A – The Panel
.
.
= fs =
Categories: Social Issues, The Body Politic
homelessness, Michelle Boag, Q+A
Dodgy tax havens and even dodgier Peter Dunne’s memory
11 May 2016
2 comments
.
.
“To put it bluntly, if the label ‘tax haven’ is being bandied about now as it is, sticks, then that’s extremely damaging. You think of the way we perceive other countries that we’ve historically labelled as tax havens. We don’t view them credibly, and I think that’s the big risk to New Zealand.” – Peter Dunne, TVNZ’s Q+A, 2 May 2016
.
Against a swirling back-drop of revelations surrounding the Panama Papers, Mossack Fonseca, John Key’s lawyer, Ken Whitney, then-Revenue Minister Todd McLay, the IRD dumping a review into foreign trusts, and New Zealand’s reputation for offering secret trusts as part of the tax-haven industry, TVNZ’s Greg Boyd interviewed former Revenue Minister, Peter Dunne for Q+A on 2 May;
.
.
Boyd’s first question to Dunne seemed innocuous enough, setting the basis of the interview. Dunne’s response appeared unremarkable;
Greg Boyd: “When you were in the job, if the IRD had concerns about this country’s international reputation, how seriously would you have taken that?”
Peter Dunne: “Very seriously. And the way it works is that they report on a series of issues that are both current in the New Zealand tax environment or the international tax environment, and clearly the Government would be foolish not to take heed of that advice. I have to say that at the time I was minister, the big issue of concern that was just beginning to bubble related to the Googles and the big multinationals and the share of tax they were paying. The issue of foreign trusts was on the edges of that, but I didn’t receive any specific advice from the IRD at that time that they were a problem.”
To put some context to Dunne’s response above, first bear in mind that Dunne was Revenue Minister across two governments, Labour and National, from October 2005 to June 2013, when he abruptly resigned…
…after an investigation into how a top-secret report on the GCSB was leaked to media pointed to him.
Eighty-six emails were sent between Mr Dunne and Dominion Post reporter Andrea Vance in the lead up to the leak but Mr Dunne turned down requests to make them public.
Edited copies of the emails from Mr Dunne show 44 of them discussed the GCSB report, and he planned to meet with Ms Vance the day before she went public…
But how credible was Dunne’s assertion on last week’s Q+A that;
“…The issue of foreign trusts was on the edges of that, but I didn’t receive any specific advice from the IRD at that time that they were a problem.”
– when in May 2012, New Zealand and Russia had been removed from the European Union banking and corporate “white list” over this country’s frighteningly inadequate money-laundering controls?
.
.
As reported by Fairfax’s Michael Field, Latvia’s Deputy State Secretary on financial policy issues in the Ministry of Finance, Arina Andreicika, stated;
“I would like to inform you that Latvia has intended to exclude New Zealand and Russian Federation from the list of countries whose legal requirements of money laundering and terrorist financing prevention are equivalent to legislation of the European Union.”
Our removal from the EU “white list” had put New Zealand in the same league as the corruption-ridden Russian Federation.
Gareth Vaughan, from Interest.co.nz, reported;
New Zealand’s dumping from the list also comes amid growing publicity around New Zealand registered companies being linked to crime overseas. This includes a report by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project on how Tormex Ltd, a New Zealand registered company, allegedly laundered US$680 million through a Latvian bank account. It’s just one of many examples of entities exploiting New Zealand’s simple company registration regime. Another is the General Equity Building Society, which claims to hold about US$5.5 billion of equity through unnamed mines, gold, silver and granite ore.
In the same story, Vaughan added,
The World Bank and International Finance Corporation rank New Zealand the easiest of 183 countries surveyed in which to start a business. Commerce Minister Craig Foss told interest.co.nz in April the Government had no plans to tighten company registration rules.
In the previously mentioned Fairfax story, Michael Field reported;
On the Auckland shell company accused of laundering $680m at a Riga bank, Foss said it was removed from the register in 2010 because it failed to file an annual return.
Too late. The damage to our reputation had been done.
In May 2012, when the European Union’s announcement became public, Peter Dunne was still Minister for Revenue. (His resignation after his alleged involvement in the leaking of the GCSB report was still thirteen months in the future.)
In November 2013, then co-leader of the Green Party, Dr Russel Norman, warned;
“Our secretive foreign trust regime and lax company registration requirements are damaging our international reputation. Anonymous shell companies and secret trusts are one of the most common ways of moving tainted money into the banking system.”
Yet, only months earlier, as the full implications of the EU’s moves were becoming clear, evidently then-Revenue Minister Peter Dunne “didn’t receive any specific advice from the IRD at that time that they [foreign trusts] were a problem“.
However, whilst then-Revenue Minister Peter Dunne had not received “any specific advice from the IRD at that time that they [foreign trusts] were a problem“, the Tax Justice Network had, by November 2013, “ranked New Zealand for the first time on its Financial Secrecy Index [at number 48 – see page 17 here]. New Zealand features on the Index due to our lack of transparency around foreign trusts and registered companies, and our below-average levels of co-operation with other countries when it comes to fighting international tax evasion”.
Is it Dunne’s assertion on Q+A, really credible;
“…The issue of foreign trusts was on the edges of that, but I didn’t receive any specific advice from the IRD at that time that they were a problem.”
No, it is not credible.
As far back as October 2012, Dunne was certainly aware of the problem of secret trusts in New Zealand;
.
.
The Herald report goes on to state;
Mr Dunne today dismissed the idea that New Zealand was a tax haven for foreign trusts.
“The key identifying characteristics of tax havens are secrecy and lack of transparency. Those are simply not factors here in New Zealand. Our legislation for taxing trusts is fully transparent.”
Dunne’s dismissive attitude toward tax havens and foreign trusts is starkly summed up in this excerpt from 60 Minutes on TV3’s website;
.
.
However, Dunne’s defensive assertions were made to look foolish and mendacious when Herald reporter, Matthew Backhouse , added;
The trusts must be registered with Inland Revenue, but are not required to pay tax and their ownership is effectively anonymous.
At the time, our esteemed Dear Leader also supported New Zealand’s involvement in secret foreign tax trusts;
Prime Minister John Key was today unconcerned by Mr Dunne’s comments.
He had not seen the 60 Minutes interview but Mr Dunne would have been using “the absolutely correct technical terms”, he said.
“Tax evasion is completely against the law. Tax avoidance means that it’s a responsibility of your accountant to actually look to minimise your tax as best you can within the bounds of the law.”Mr Key said servicing foreign trusts in New Zealand was a strong and legitimate business that employed a lot of professionals and added to the New Zealand economy.
“It’s a very sensible place to house a trust.”
It is difficult to believe Dunne’s assertion that he “didn’t receive any specific advice from the IRD at that time that they [foreign trusts] were a problem“.
Especially as revelations on 60 Minutes clearly revealed that a problem with tax evasion existed; trusts were central to the rorts; and Dunne was responding to it.
Even Key referenced foreign tax trusts as he rushed to defend his then-Revenue Minister;
Key who said Dunne was right. “He’ll be using the absolutely correct technical term. There are two things, going back to my days at university – tax evasion and tax avoidance. There is actually quite legitimate business in New Zealand for servicing foreign trusts”.
In response to Dunne’s denials, Labour’s then-Revenue spokesperson, David Clark, showed amazing prescience when he warned;
“We are in danger of losing our hard-one reputation as an ethical and respectable country. Peter Dunne’s relaxed attitude to overseas tax avoidance and National’s failed attempts to create a foreign funds hub shows the Government has no concerns about us becoming the Cayman Islands of the South Pacific.”
And Dunne is now telling us that he did not know that foreign trusts were a problem?
In 2012, Dunne stated;
“The key identifying characteristics of tax havens are secrecy and lack of transparency. Those are simply not factors here in New Zealand. Our legislation for taxing trusts is fully transparent.”
The legislation may be “transparent”.
John Key, Todd McLay, and Peter Dunne are not.
.
.
.
References
TVNZ: Q+A – Peter Dunne Interviewed by Greg Boyed (video)
Radio NZ: Further revelations don’t blunt PMs faith in lawyer
TVNZ: Q+A – Peter Dunne Interviewed by Greg Boyed (transcript)
Wikipedia: Peter Dunne
Southland Times: Taxing Times – New Minister of Revenue still has work to do
NZ Herald: Key’s Government
TV3 News: Peter Dunne resigns as minister
Fairfax Media: New Zealand removed from EU ‘white list’
Radio NZ: NZ struck from EU list over money-laundering controls
Scoop media: Foreign trusts earn New Zealand tax haven status
Tax Justice: Financial Secrecy Index 2013
NZ Herald: Dunne dismisses tax haven suggestions
TV3 News: Govt rejects tax haven claim
Scoop media: Dunne evades tax haven questions
Additional
Liberation: New Zealand cartoons about tax, transparency and the Panama papers
Dept of Internal Affairs: AML/CFT Act and Regulations
NZ Herald: Fran O’Sullivan – Key chases luck o’ the Irish
Converge: New Zealand – A Tax Haven For Super-Rich Foreigners
Previous related blogposts
When National is under attack – Deflect, deflect, deflect!
.
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 6 May 2016.
.
.
= fs =
Categories: The Body Politic
foreign trusts, Minister for Revenue, Panama Papers, Peter Dunne, Q+A, tax havens
Climate Change Minister Paula Bennett revealed
3 May 2016
3 comments
.
.
TVNZ’s Q+A on Sunday 24 April featured an interview with Climate Change Minister Paula Bennett. Her responses were further evidence that National was increasingly unable (or unwilling) to cope with the growing threat of climate change.
Posing a series of surprisingly incisive questions and follow-ups, the ever-youthful-looking Jack Tame held Minister Bennett to account in a way that few other interviewers have done;
.
.
Up untill now, Jack Tame’s presence in the US focused mainly on the theatrics of the Hollywood entertainment industry or the equally-theatric Presidential primaries. They were for the most part light, breezy stories – even with the increasingly bizarre and somewhat menacing nature of the rise and rise of Lex Luthor Donald Trump, as the potential Republican candidate.
However, on this occassion, Tame’s Q+A interview was a masterful deconstruction of Minister Bennett’s waffle, revealing how woefully unprepared for Tame’s skillful probing she really was.
As the thirteen minute segment progressed, it rapidly became apparent that, aside from platitudes and rhetoric, Bennett had no real answers or any actual, meaningful commitment to addressing New Zealand’s increasing emissions of greenhouse-gas pollution of our atmosphere. It was as it she were still Social Welfare Minister, patiently explaining how National would be “helping” solo-mums with contraception, all the while sounding like an overly-concerned, benevolent, tough-loving nana.
In fact, not since 2 May 2015 – when Corrections Minister Sam Lotu-Iiga was interviewed and demolished by seasoned interviewer, Lisa Owen, on TV3’s The Nation – has a government minister had their ineptitude so publicly paraded for the entire country to witness (if they so decided to tune in on a Sunday morning, at 9am.
Unfortunately, we should not be surprised that National is luke-warm on the looming crisis of climate change. Despite making very clear promises, National has broken one of it’s prime committments to the Emissions Trading Scheme – to eventually include agriculture.
The time-line to this act of duplicity clearly illustrates National’s early promises and then reneging;
13 May 2007
In a speech by then Opposition-leader, John Key;
“In particular I’m going to speak about the biggest environmental challenge of our time: global climate change.
The National Party will ensure that New Zealand acts decisively to confront this challenge.
The scientific consensus is clear: human-induced climate change is real and it’s threatening the planet. There are some armchair sceptics out there, but I’m not one of them…
… National is committed to growing our economy. Confronting climate change will be a vital part of the policy mix for fuelling that growth…
… In the decades ahead, peoples’ perceptions around climate change will affect the brand image of New Zealand and its exports. New Zealand must take credible steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or risk becoming a trading pariah…
… National will have policies that reflect the fact that living on a diet of carbon will be increasingly bad – bad for the world and bad for our economy. We will have policy that encourages ‘climate friendly’ choices like windmills, hydro power and tree planting, and reduces the desire for ‘climate unfriendly’ behaviours, like burning coal…
… National will bring all Kiwis – industry, energy producers, farmers, mums and dads – closer to a shared and well-understood goal. We need to be united in our pursuit of a ’50 by 50′ target.“
8 April 2010
Prime Minister John Key rejects demands to amend the Emissions Trading Scheme before it takes effect on the energy and transport sectors in July despite calls from business groups, farmers, and ACT.
Key tells reporters at the launch of the Global Research Alliance’s inaugural meeting on agricultural greenhouse gas emissions,
“I’d say it’s unlikely it would be amended.”
6 June 2010
Climate Change Minister Nick Smith announces that whether or not agriculture comes into the emissions trading scheme in 2015 will depend on technological advances and what other countries do.
9 November 2011
Environment Minister Nick Smith announces,
“… It is not in New Zealand’s interests to include agricultural emissions in the ETS yet.“
2 July 2012
Then-Climate Change Minister, Tim Groser, announces four amendments to the Emissions Trading Scheme;
- Keeping the ‘one-for-two’ obligation in place until after this year. This means participants in the scheme will continue to surrender units for half the carbon they emit;
- Maintaining the $25 ‘fixed-price option’ until at least 2015, which caps the price firms will face if carbon prices begin to rise internationally;
- Introducing off-setting for pre-1990 forest land owners, and allocating the full second tranche of compensation where off-setting is not taken; and
- Leaving agricultural emissions out of the ETS until at least 2015.
20 August 2012
National introduces “Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Bill 2012”, which will remove agricultural emissions indefinitely, and will,
“remove a specified entry date for surrender obligations on biological emissions from agriculture”.
National’s repudiation of it’s 2007 committment to include agriculture was complete. Despite a clear promise by our esteemed Dear Leader, agriculture was permanently omitted from the ETS.
As I pointed out in October 2012;
During National’s four years in office, they have broken several promises and the weakening of the ETS is simply one more on the list. It also further highlights John Key’s ability to say one thing – whilst knowing full well that he has no intention of fulfilling committments, or will do completely the opposite.
An editorial in the Dominion Post, on 20 April, was no less scathing in it’s condemnation of National’s inertia;
The Government’s climate change policy has been a failure and will have to be rebuilt. There needs to be a fundamental change in the Emissions Trading Scheme, the subject this week of a damning report by the Gareth Morgan Foundation. But other changes are also needed.
[…]
Bennett concedes, however, that the ETS was “not perfect”, and is now being reviewed. In fact the ETS has been a fiasco. What’s more, it continues to cast its dirty shadow.
The Government has banned the purchase of foreign credits, but it could still use the bad credits to meet its climate change targets up to 2020.
It must not do so. Instead, it needs to revamp the whole scheme, starting by ending the subsidies it gives to polluters such as the oil industry. The “one for two” scheme introduced in 2009 allows businesses to pay only half the cost of their greenhouse gas emissions.
It also needs to reverse its decision to keep agriculture, which produces half the country’s emissions, out of the ETS. National argues that making farming pay for its pollution would be unfair because there is no workable way yet of reducing animal emissions and our export industry should not be penalised.
Farmers, however, are not exempt from the country’s global environmental duties, and will also respond to economic signals – even if this is a pledge to bring agriculture into the scheme within, say, five years
Jack Tame’s superb interview on 24 April merely confirms pathetic National’s track record on this issue and it now appears that Minister Bennett will simply follow in the footsteps of her do-nothing-predecessors, Ministers Smith, Groser, et al.
Bennett certainly has no intention of adopting any of the bold, radical – but much-needed – policies as advocated by Professor Jim Skea, co-chairperson of the IPCC Working Group III, and interviewed by Radio NZ’s Kathryn Ryan on 27 April;
.
.
Listen to the two interviews and judge for yourself which person is seriously committed to combating climate change – and which person is a politician who has plenty of empty platitudes to offer, but little else.
In her previous role as Social Welfare Minister, Paula Bennett had much to say about welfare-fraud.
Her empty words on addressing climate change is a fraud on a much grander, and ultimately vastly more destructive, scale.
.
.
.
Postscript1: Memo to TVNZ
Jame Tame’s interview with Minister Bennett reveals a young man with considerable journalistic skills. He should be given every opportunity to make full use of his under-utilised talents.
TVNZ (and TV3) should maximise the talents of their journalistic and production staff by shifting Q+A and The Nation to prime time viewing slots during the early evening.
Why hide excellence early on weekend mornings, where it is not easily appreciated and valued by the general public?
.
.
.
Postscript2: Memo to Paula Bennett
Ms Bennett, your performance on 24 April was a dismal failure. You are either unwilling to seriously confront the challenges of climate change or, apparently, you are in way over your head on this issue.
Either way, you should resign your Climate Change portfolio. This job is too important to be left to your glib inanities.
.
.
.
References
TVNZ: Q+A – Climate Change Paris Agreement signed
NZ Herald: NZ’s greenhouse gas emissions soar
Fairfax media: Beneficiary contraception plan ‘intrusive’
Scoop media: John Key Speech – Climate Change Target
NZ Herald: ETS changes ‘unlikely’ despite pleas
NBR: ETS may exclude agriculture – Climate Change Minister
Interest.co.nz: National would phase in ETS obligations for transport, electricity, industrial sectors; Will review Agriculture in 2014
Beehive.co.nz: Government announces ETS amendments
Parliament: Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading and Other Matters) Amendment Bill 2012
Dominion Post: Editorial – Big changes are needed in the Government’s climate change plan
Radio NZ: How do we wean ourselves off fossil fuel ? (alt. link) (audio)
Previous related blogposts
Johnny’s Report Card – National Standards Assessment y/e 2012 – environment
John Key – more pledges, more broken promises?
As predicted: National abandons climate-change responsibilities
National ditches environmental policies
ETS – National continues to fart around
National – what else can possibly go wrong?!
National’s moving goalposts on climate change targets
“The Nation” reveals gobsmacking incompetence by Ministers English and Lotu-Iiga
.
.
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 28 April 2016.
.
.
= fs =
The Curious World of the Main Stream Media
19 April 2015
9 comments
.
.
Q+ A and The Nation
The biggest news story of the week broke on Thursday, 9 April, with Mediaworks revealing to a stunned public that ‘Campbell Live‘ – which had just celebrated it’s tenth anniversary – was “under review”. It was a story appearing in practically every media outlet in the country;
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
On Facebook, a Save Campbell Live! group quickly sprang up, with 1,545 members as 12.01am, 14 April.
One petition on Change.org has acquired 19,654 signatures, and another on Action Stations has 66,974.
The tweet hashtag, #SaveCampbellLive, was trending near the top of Twitter’s New Zealand Trends on 9 April;
.
.
Acknowledgement for use of image above: Halloween Mike1
As well as the msm, most of the top blogs in the country covered the story, one way or another (see: Other blogs)
So I was looking forward to see some serious analysis on ‘The Nation‘ and/or ‘Q+A‘, on this issue.
Incredibly, and alarmingly, none was forthcoming, except for a brief throw-away-line by comedians Jeremy Corbett and Paul Ego, during their sixty-second satirical-slot on ‘The Nation‘ (though without any actual direct reference to John Campbell), to “being replaced by Jono Pryor and Ben Boyce“.
TV1’s ‘Q+A‘ was also strangely silent on an issue that had been a nationwide talking point.
Instead, on Saturday’s ‘The Nation‘, we had stories on;
- Legal highs, with interviews with Peter Dunne and Matt Bowden
- the booming Auckland Property market, with interviews with Mayor Len Brown; Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse; Kate Healy from Ngati Whatua Orakei Whai Rawa Ltd, and property developer David Whitburn
Sunday’s ‘Q+A‘ on TV1 gave us;
- an interview with HSBC economist, Paul Bloxham, who coined the phrase “rock star economy”
- urban-designer, Charles Montgomery, on how to improve our cities
Considering that ‘Campbell Live‘ is one of the last serious current affairs programme remaining on free-to-air television, one would have thought that this was worthy of scrutiny by either ‘Q+A’ or ‘The Nation‘.
Understandably, perhaps, TV3’s executives Julie Christie and Group Chief Executive Officer Mark Weldon – who have allegedly expressed a dislike for ‘Campbell Live‘ – may have dissuaded ‘The Nation‘ from enquiring further into the matter.
When Fairfax Media made redundant large numbers of sub-editors a few years ago, the event was not reported in ‘The Dominion Post‘ or any other Fairfax title. The news was suppressed by management. In this respect media management can be every bit as shy of public scrutiny as the politicians they profess to scrutinise.
The media demand press freedom to allow public scrutiny – except when it applies to them.
Stranger still is that TVNZ – a direct commercial competitor to Mediaworks – made no mention of goings-on at TV3. One would think that a major event in this country’s media would have rated some sort of story or analysis with media experts.
Instead – nothing.
Television executives seem very shy when it comes to public attention on their own activities.
How NOT to promote a flagship programme
Palmerston North teacher, Scott Milne, pointed out that ‘Campbell Live‘s’ poor ratings may be due to Mediaworks not promoting the programme as enthusiastically as it does with others.
On Twitter, Scott posted this screen-shot of a TV3 webpage;
.
.
When an advert for hair shampoo (lower right on page) is larger than the promo for a current affairs show, it becomes fairly clear how well the broadcaster is supporting their own product (the programme – not the shampoo).
Perhaps there is an element of truth to suggestions that certain Mediaworks executives are not “fans” of Campbell and/or his show?
The sooner that a free-to-air, non-commercial, public broadcasting channel is established, the better it will be for this country. If the UK can have the BBC and Australia has the ABC and SBS – why can’t we have something similar?
Short answer: lack of political will coupled with ideological stubborness.
If we had a new NZBC, commercial free, and dedicated to something resembling quality programming – TVNZ and Mediaworks/TV3 could broadcast all the crappy reality and crime shows that the rest of the public could possibly stomach.
More than anything, a lack of a free-to-air, non-commercial, public broadcasting channel shows how immature we are as a nation. Distracted by trivia has given us the only form of dumbed-down television the masses can digest.
More head-scratching decisions at TV3?
News over the weekend indicates that TV3 will be cutting back their weekend news bulletins at 6pm to only half an hour – less when you subtract advertising, weather, and sports;
TV3 is to chop its Sunday night news bulletin to 30 minutes, in the latest dramatic move to turn its news department into a “news, commentary and conversation” team.
MediaWorks chief executive Mark Weldon is at odds with many among his 200-strong news staff after announcing “bubbles and bagels” to celebrate the launch of Paul Henry – at the same time as Campbell Live staff were being told their programme faced the axe.
“It was just insensitive and inappropriate,” a TV3 news staffer said.
A cut-down version of ‘Third Degree‘ will be given a new – and somewhat bizarre – name; “3D and will be shortened to 30 minutes“.
If MediaWorks executives still have faith in their 6PM news bulletin and ‘Third Degree/3D‘, they have an unusual way of showing it. Which raises a few questions – what do they hope to gain? More time allocated for commercial programming?
Those viewers who enjoy watching the 6PM news bulletins may find themselves feeling cheated at TV3’s cut-down, “budget” version. They may vote with their remotes to switch to TV1, where the format will offer an unchanged, longer version.
After all, if you enjoy watching TV news, which would you opt for?
Those who don’t watch TV news won’t care either way.
So MediaWork’s decision will impact only on news-watchers – and cutting back the format to 30 minutes may yet prove to be one of the biggest blunders in TV3’s history. Perhaps bigger than it’s excellent 1993 sitcom, ‘Melody Rules‘…
MediaWorks group head of news Mark Jennings just keeps digging…
Just when you thought that threats to ‘Campbell Live’s‘ survival and cutting TV3’s 6pm news bulletin was bad enough, MediaWorks group head of news Mark Jennings seems to have made things worse by these incongruous utterances on 12 April;
“We know that Sunday night is a good place for current affairs. People are increasingly time poor and we believe 30 minutes of news plus 30 minutes of current affairs is a winning formula for this popular timeslot.”
No, Mr Jennings, we are not “time poor” – we are information poor. In a world of superficiality and bastardised media services masqerading as “news”, we are poor in real, in-depth, news and analysis.
When “X Factor NZ” receives more promotion from MediaWorks than one of the most respected broadcasters in the country – then it is fairly obvious where management’s priorities lie.
Trying to pass off responsibility for questionable decision-making by MediaWorks executives, onto the public being “time poor”, is exceedingly bad form. And dishonest.
If people are so “time poor”, the 6PM news bulletin might as well be cut to 15 minutes. Or eliminated altogether. There. Sorted. Plenty of time for people now…
… to switch to TV1.
Mr Jennings added;
“This way we can guarantee a pacey, high-quality product that will be appointment viewing.”
Yes, “pacey” – until each advertising break. Take ten or fifteen minutes out of each ‘3D” episode, and it become so “pacey” as to rush past the viewer. Blink, and you’ll miss it.
And then, this “gem” from Mr Jennings;
“I am very proud of our investigative journalism, and the 3D Investigates strand will build on our ground-breaking work on the Teina Pora and David Bain cases, and the Fox Glacier crash.”
Yes, indeed. He is so “proud of [TV3’s] investigative journalism” – that he is cutting both the 6PM News Bulletin and ‘Third Degree‘ in half – and considering dumping ‘Campbell Live‘.
What a peculiar way to express one’s “pride” in their work.
With regards to ‘Campbell Live‘, Mr Jennings explained his rationale for reviewing the programme;
“Viewer expectations in 2015 are quite different from those of 2005 and we need to constantly review our programming to ensure we are meeting those expectations.”
How “viewer expectations in 2015 are quite different from those of 2005″ is never quite explained. But it cannot be that different; people may take their information from the internet, but they also still watch television.
The advent of television was supposedly the death knell for movies. That belief was wrong.
On-line e-books were supposed to make real books redundant. That belief, too, was wrong.
People will watch television. What they won’t watch is crap.
In that respect, “viewer expectations in 2015 are [not so] different from those of 2005″.
Perhaps MediaWorks’ management should be looking at themselves and not at the public for reasons of ‘Campbell Live‘ not gaining increased viewership.
First and foremost; has it been promoted with the same vigour and gusto as Paul Henry? ‘The Block‘? ‘X Factor‘? ‘The Bachelor‘?
If the answer is “no” – the solution that follows on is fairly evident. Does it need to be spelled out?
MSM antics just get weirder and weirder…
Just when you thought the msm couldn’t get any weirder, comes this strange story about Fairfax media touting for ‘freebies’ from it’s readers;
Fairfax encourages readers to write
NZCity, 11 April 2015Fairfax Media New Zealand has outlined more of its plans to make readers involved in its editorial process.
The company’s Stuff Nation product already publishes more than 2300 articles every year written by readers and the pieces are among stuff.co.nz’s most read and commented on.
Fairfax Media New Zealand group executive editor Sinead Boucher told theNewspaperWorks masthead newsrooms will set assignments for readers on newsworthy topics, as well as encourage them to send in more personal topics they may wish to discuss.
Pieces will be individually verified and edited by Fairfax journalists and edits discussed with contributors.
It’s not an attempt to get free content or do away with journalists, Ms Boucher says.
The company wants readers to play a larger role.
Popular issues include bullying, elections, obesity, the road toll, marriage equality and the property market.
On March 18, Fairfax Media New Zealand announced it was introducing a new approach to digital storytelling with a renewed focus on local journalism.
A series of changes and proposed changes aimed at enhancing local and national journalism across digital and print will be rolled out nationally.
Accepting op-ed pieces or letters-to-the-editor is one thing.
But “setting assignments for readers on newsworthy topics” appears to me that Fairfax is attempting to attract free content, which it will then on-sell for commercial gain.
There is a word for that: exploitation.
Not exactly surprising though, as Fairfax has lost many of their journalists and sub-editors over the last decade, as the company seeks to increase it’s profits and returns to shareholders.
“It’s not an attempt to get free content or do away with journalists”, Ms Boucher says.
That should go on a Tui billboard.
With fewer staff expected to do more; increasing use of “news hubs”; and a focus on on-line content at the expense of newspapers – that is precisely what Fairfax are aiming at.
Is this the future of newspapers; a msm-version of de facto bloggers-in-lieu-of-real-journalists, mass-producing stories on the cheap (free)? If so, it makes for grim reading.
.
References
Fairfax media: Campbell Live vs Jono and Ben
Fairfax media: Campbell Live to be reviewed
NZ Herald: Campbell Live to be axed? TV bosses place show under review
Radio NZ: The end for Campbell Live?
NZ Newswire: Support swells as Campbell Live faces chop
Mediaworks/TV3: MediaWorks confirms Campbell Live review
Newstalk ZB: Campbell Live facing the axe
NBR: Will Campbell Live survive?
TV3: The Nation (11/12 April 2015)
TVNZ: Q+A (12 April 2015)
Converge: Fairfax In Trouble
Twitter: Scott Milne
Fairfax media: Campbell Live should have moved with the times, pundits say
TV3: TV3 to reduce Sunday 6pm news bulletin to 30 minutes
Wikipedia: Melody Rules
TV3: TV3 current affairs moves to premium timeslot
Scoop media: Jono and Ben and Campbell Live
NZ CIty: Fairfax encourages readers to write
Additional
Previous related blogposts
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 14 April 2015.
.
.
= fs =
Categories: Media, The Body Politic
Campbell Live, Julie Christie, Mark Weldon, Q+A, Third Degree, TV3's 'The Nation'
How biased is the media? A Patrick Gower case study
29 November 2014
7 comments
.
.
.
.
Isn’t it interesting that Patrick Gower – who made his partisan feelings crystal clear on Twitter on 29 May with this extraordinary outburst;
“Lalia Harré – you make me feel sick by how you are rorting MMP http://www.3news.co.nz/Opinion-Hone-and-Dotcoms-grubby-deal/tabid/1382/articleID/346334/Default.aspx#ixzz334vE4jKO Same goes for your pals Hone, Dotcom, Minto and Sykes.”
– is also the same one who interviewed Laila Harre on Saturday, 22 November, on TV3’s “The Nation”? What measure of neutrality did “The Nation’s” producer, Tim Watkin, believe that Gower possessed, to run that interview?
Quite simply, any reasonable individual would have arrived at the conclusion that Gower should have disqualified himself and the role given, instead, to the highly talented Lisa Owen.
Notice how Gower was very well behaved during the interview, when face-to-face with Harré?
But once Harré was off the set and he was with the panel (Mike Williams and Matthew Hooton), the gloves and mask came off and Gower’s vitriol issued forth;
“… She blamed Labour there, she blamed the Greens, she blamed the National Party, she blamed the media, she blamed Georgina Beyer, although she did say-“
“… I think there’s two words for what we saw over there, before and that’s called in denial. Hmmph!”
“… She’s not going to go in with the Greens, she’s betrayed them. Labour won’t have a a bar of her. No chance of Laila Harré coming back to Parliament. And that’s why you see this sort of denial from her. She’s got it horribly, horribly wrong and she still can’t admit it.”
It should be noted that neither Williams (an ex-Labour President) nor Hooton (a right-wing commentator) could possibly comment impartially on the Mana-Internet Alliance. Both Labour and the Right had a unified agenda to smash Mana-Internet at the election (See: 2014 Election – Post-mortem Up-date). There was simply no attempt at balance with the panelists or the the host-interviewer (Gower).
What is abundantly clear is that Gower seemed to lack a certain inner fortitude to say the things he did to the panelists, to Harré’s face.
This was part of an ongoing, unrelenting onslaught against the Left. The same dirty media that saw right-wing, self-professed “media personalities” appointed to host political debates, despite public opposition and cries of partisanship;
.
.
There was good reason for public disquiet over Mike Hosking hosting one of the election leadership debates. His political allegiance was already well known;
.
Hosking: “As I see it, all things considered we are doing pretty bloody well. We box above our weight.
“We have bright prospects for the future, so long as you keep them [National] in Government.”
An example of media bias was clearly shown over the issue of two holidays by two party Leaders. As I wrote on 24 July;
The recent non-story on David Cunliffe’s three day holiday should be proof-positive that the mainstream media (msm) is fixated on pumping out as many “bad news” reporting as can be generated by a headline-seeking; advertising-driven; lazy corporate-media system.
We’re all aware that whilst Cunliffe took a three day break (I’m surprised he bothered to come back, instead of telling this country to go get f- – – – – !), our illustrious Dear Leader was off on a ten-day holiday, sunning his pale, $55 million arse, on a Maui beach in Hawaii.
Whilst the media did indeed mention that salient fact (albeit in passing), it was taken as a given that the leader of a party polling 50%-plus in the polls is entitled to a holiday.
Meanwhile, the leader of a mid-twenties-polling (?) Party is – it was hinted – not entitled to any such break.
The subtext was blindingly obvious; success breeds reward. In this case, a warm, sunny Hawaiian beach.
And failure means you don’t deserve a single damn thing, so get-back-to-work-peasant!
(See: When the mainstream media go feral: A tale of two holidays)
Perhaps the most outrageous, recent political “hatchet job” was the Herald’s character assassination scheme launched against David Cunliffe, using unproven (and later discredited) allegations from immigrant-businessman, Donghua Liu. The story behind Liu’s shonkey allegations; a 13 year old letter; and information strategically released by National minister, Michael Woodshouse, to Herald and TV3 journos, was nothing less than a disturbing abuse of ministerial power and media influence. (See: The Donghua Liu Affair – The Players Revealed)
When a party leader continually receives bad press (eg; condemnation over taking a 3 day break; the colour of the scarf he wore; a manufactured “scandal” regarding a 13 year old letter, etc) what is the mainstream media telling this country?
At one stage the level of attacks against Cunliffe descended into pettiness and farce when, on TV3, on 24 July, TV3’s Tova O’Brien ran this report on their 6PM News bulletin, about Key’s face appearing – photo-shopped – on the cover of the “Rugby News“;
.
.
However, stuck at the very end of the video-version of the story, was this oddball, juvenile parting-quip by O’Brien;
“So once again the blue team gets one over the red team. Yes, it’s cringey, but it’s left Cunliffe looking whingey.”
(See: When the mainstream media go feral: the descent into sheer farce, according to Tova O’Brien)
As I pointed out on 30 July,
Despite the fact that the story was ostensibly about Key getting his face photo-shopped onto a magazine and scoring some free election-year publicity – a supposedly well-educated, “impartial” journo still managed to somehow insert a childish comment about David Cunliffe. That’s despite the fact that Cunliffe’s comments were much more restrained and measured than the criticism made by Winston Peters in the same video.
So there we have it, folks. Even when the story is about John Key – a silly little journo still managed to turn it into a swipe at David Cunliffe.
Such was the mainstream stream leading up to the election on 20 September.
Returning to Patrick Gower, there are three questions I would like to pose to him;
1. Why is it that Gower condemned the Internet-Mana alliance as “sickening” – but not the ACT-National deal in Epsom, with the same intensity?
2. Or the National-NZ First-Maori Party deal to endorse Labour’s Kelvin Davis over Hone Harawira in Te Tai Tokerau?
3. Why was Dotcom’s funding of Mana-Internet such a big deal worthy of condemnation – but millionaires funding National and ACT is barely noted, in passing, if at all?
Otherwise, Patrick, this is not impartial, intelligent journalism.
It’s not even close.
Postscript1 (Brick-bat)
Note to MSM journos, sub-editors (those remaining), current affairs/news producers, et al) – ok, we get the “Stuart Little” reference,
.
.
Ho, ho, ho.
But enough already.
It was funny for the first thirty seconds. Now it’s just lame.
Message to journos: don’t be lame. It’s not cool.
Postscript2 (Bouquet)
For an excellent interview with a political leader (whether Labour, National, Greens, whatever), check out TVNZ’s Q+A today (22/23 November), where veteran reporter/interviewer, Heather du Plessis-Allan interviewed new Labour Leader, Andrew Little. This is how an interview should be conducted; the host asks the questions; the guest is given time to respond, without interuption.
All TV/radio hosts take note.
.
References
Twitter: Patrick Gower
Pundit: Tim Watkin
TV3: Laila Harre stepping down as Internet Party leader
TV3: “The Nation” Panel – Patrick Gower, Mike Williams & Matthew Hooton
Fairfax Media: Labour claims Hosking’s biased
NZ Herald: Media – Hosking plugs car and Key
NZ Herald: Donghua Liu’s new statement on Labour donations
TV3: David Cunliffe owns up to getting it wrong
TV3: Stuart Little, leader of the Opposition?
TVNZ: Q+A 22/23 November
Previous related blogposts
Mike Hosking as TVNZ’s moderator for political debates?! WTF?!
The Donghua Liu Affair – The Players Revealed
When the mainstream media go feral: A tale of two holidays
When the mainstream media go feral: the descent into sheer farce, according to Tova O’Brien
2014 Election – Post-mortem Up-date
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 24 November 2014
.
.
= fs =
The Mendacities of Mr Key #5: Has Tim Groser shown the P.M. to be a liar on the TPPA?
21 June 2014
15 comments
.
.
In the ongoing debate on the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement negotiations, Dear Leader John Key has been at pains to try to reassure New Zealanders that any TPPA document would be “first presented to Parliament”.
“With all [free trade agreements] the way that they work is that have to be ratified by Parliament, and we have to build a parliamentary majority, and all of that has to happen through the transparency of the deal.”
And on 31st March this year, Key asserted on NewstalkZB;
“In the end, this thing has to go through our Parliament has to be ratified by our Parliament and has to bear scrutiny and I believe is in the best interests of New Zealand.”
Professor Jane Kelsey was one of many who countered Key’s assertions that Parliament would “ratify” any final agreement. Also on 31 March, she stated;
“How many times do the Prime Minister and other members of the government have to be hauled up for misrepresenting the role of Parliament in making treaties, especially the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement’? The Prime Minister is either woefully ignorant of the fundamental process of treaty making, as set out in the Cabinet Manual, or he is wilfully misrepresenting the process to the New Zealand public.
Parliament’s role in treaty making is largely symbolic. It has no power to decide whether or not the TPPA should be signed or ratified and no ability to change its terms TPPA or require it to be renegotiated.
The select committee process is a farcical exercise because its members know they cannot change the treaty.
At most, Parliament could refuse to pass legislation that is required to bring a particular law into compliance with the TPPA. But the government will have plenty of non-legislative ways to achieve compliance.”
Finally, on 15 June, on TVNZ’s Q+A, National’s own Trade Minister, Tim Groser responsible for TPPA negotiations clearly and utterly refuted any notion that the TPPA would have to be “ratified” by Parliament;
.
![“Oh well, we wouldn't put [this] before the New Zealand Parliament. If we're the government of the day, that has to put the ratifying legislation through Parliament, a deal didn't make a great deal of sense to New Zealand.”](https://fmacskasy.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/tppa-tim-groser-tvnz-qa-parliament-ratification-15-june-2014.png)
“Oh well, we wouldn’t put [this] before the New Zealand Parliament. If we’re the government of the day, that has to put the ratifying legislation through Parliament, a deal didn’t make a great deal of sense to New Zealand.”
Note the first part of Groser’s response to interviewer, Corin Dann;
“Oh well, we wouldn’t put [this] before the New Zealand Parliament.”
There we have it. The Trade Minister himself confirming what Jane Kelsey and other critics of the secret deal-making surrounding the TPPA have said all along: once the government agrees to a final document, it will not require ratification by Parliament.
John Key making a mistake once, is understandable.
John Key repeating that same mistake at least three times is no longer a “mistake”. It becomes willful misinformation. A deliberate lie.
Caught out again – this time by one of his own Ministers!
Charge: broken promise/deflection/half-truth/hypocrisy/outright lie/misinformation?
Verdict: Outright lie/misinformation
.
References
TV3: Key accused of spreading TPPA ‘mistruths’
Parliament: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers
NewstalkZB: Key defends TPPA negotiations
Scoop media: One more time, PM: Parliament does not get to ratify TPPA
TVNZ: Government may not seek bipartisan support for a TPP – Groser
Previous related blogposts
The Mendacities of Mr Key #4: “Trolls & bottom-feeders”
.
Above image acknowledgment: Francis Owen/Lurch Left Memes
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 16 June 2014.
.
.
= fs =
Review: TV3’s The Nation – “Let them eat ice cream!”
29 May 2014
11 comments
.
.
In the last three years I have been truly outraged and sickened only twice when watching a current affairs/documentary programme. The first was Bryan Bruce’s “Inside Child Poverty“, broadcast back on 22 November 2011.
Bryan presented the viewer with a country of increasing child poverty, disease, low-quality housing; and growing inequality that few of us (except hardcore ACT and National supporters) would have believed possible in a wealthy country like New Zealand. Especially a country which once prided itself on egalitarianism, fairness, and looking after those less fortunate than the privileged Middle Classes.
The second time was just recent – watching TV3’s current affairs programme, The Nation, on 24 May. The one word that came to mind as I watched the episode was: revulsion. Not revulsion at the fact that our once proud egalitarian nation is now one of the most unequal on the face of this planet – but revulsion at the injection of humour in interviews; panel discussion, and levity between the hosts, Lisa Owen and Patrick Gower.
.
Hosts for TV3’s “The Nation”, Lisa Owen and Patrick Gower
.
I am not even referring to Patrick Gower “interviewing” Ben Uffindell, editor of the satirical blogsite, The Citizen. Though one certainly has to question why this segment was deemed worthy of insertion? What was the point of suggesting that children living in poverty – many of whom go to school without food (or are given “food” that is of dubious nutritional value); no shoes; no rain coats; or lacking other items which Middle Class families take for granted – would find it funny to be given ice cream or a South American animal?
.
.
I recall a legend of someone else trying to “make light” of the plight of the poor. That person suggested cake, in lieu of ice cream.
The highly talented Mr Uffindell has never been invited to comment on other pressing issues and problems confronting our country. So why start with inequality and associated problems with child poverty? A question I posed to The Nation, via Twitter;
.
.
So why is levity suddenly the order-of-the-day when poverty and inequality is under the media microscope?
Because we are “just laughing at ourselves” some might say?
No. We are not “laughing at ourselves”. We are laughing at the thought of children, living in poverty, being given free ice cream and llamas.
We are not “laughing at ourselves”. We are laughing at children and families living in poverty – at their expense.
That is the difference.
Funnily enough, there was certainly no humour on The Nation (10 may) when ACT’s Jamie Whyte proposed a flat tax policy. Where was the mirth? The satirical hilarity? Where was the wink-wink-nudge-nudge repartee between The Nation’s hosts?
Any humour must have been lost amongst the rustling sound of $100 bills been eagerly counted…
On top of which, was Torben Akel’s piece on “fact checking” looking at whether or not inequality in New Zealand has increased;
.
.
“But first, a bit of good old fashioned fact-checking“, said Patrick Gower, as he introduced Torben Akel’s piece. A pity, then, that no one at The Nation bothered to “fact check” Akel’s reporting.
Bill English stated in the above video,
“Income inequality has not got worse. In fact we’re one of two developed countries where the OECD has recently as yesterday have said it’s stable since 1994. And in fact in the last few years there’s some indications it’s fallen slightly.”
Torben Akel asked for evidence to back up English’s claims;
“What we got was a page lifted from a new OECD report with a graph showing income inequality here in 2010 was less than it was in the mid nineties.”
So the “new” OECD report was based on data, taken in the midst of the Global Financial Crisis and resulting Recession?! Data that was four years old?!
Akel continued with this – and here is the relevant bit;
“As for what had happened in the last few years, we were directed to the Ministry of Social Development’s household incomes report, released last July. And specifically, this graph, which shows why the Beehive [is] so sure our income gap isn’t growing.”
A cover of the Report flashed on our television screens;
.
.
The document above is Bryan Perry’s Household incomes in New Zealand: Trends in indicators of inequality and hardship 1982 to 2011. It used data from Treasury to assess child poverty in this country;
“To calculate disposable income Statistics New Zealand uses the Treasury’s tax-benefit microsimulation model (Taxwell1) to estimate tax liabilities for individuals and benefit units. The resulting personal disposable incomes are summed to give disposable household income. Disposable household income is sometimes referred to as net income or after-tax cash income.”
– p25
“The Treasury has also developed a set of weights for use with its HES-based tax-benefit microsimulation model, Taxwell. The Taxwell weights include the number of beneficiaries as one of the key benchmarks, in accordance with Treasury’s primary use for the HES in the Taxwell model. Treasury’s Taxwell weights therefore provide a better estimate, for example, of the number of children in beneficiary families, although to achieve this there has been a trade-off with achieving other benchmarks…”
-p33
“We know that the estimates using Statistics New Zealand’s weights consistently under-estimate the number of beneficiaries compared with the administrative data. Generally, the estimates using the Treasury’s Taxwell weights are closer to the administrative data, but the sampling error from the HES can still lead to either or both weighting regimes under- or over-estimating the population numbers. “
-p128
The relevance of all this?
As reported back in February, Treasury had under-estimated the level of children living in poverty, as Bernard Hickey wrote on the 28th,
“Treasury and Statistics said in a joint statement they had double counted accommodation supplements in estimates of household disposable income between 2009 and 2012, which meant incomes were over-estimated by NZ$1.2 billion and the number of children in families earning less than 50% of the median income was under-estimated by 25,000.”
For those who want to read the actual Media Statement from Treasury, can be found here: Media Statement: Data error prompts process improvements. Refer to the table headed “Miscalculation – Scale – Key statistics affected”.
Bryan Perry’s revised report can be found here: Household incomes in New Zealand: Trends in indicators of inequality and hardship 1982 to 2012 Revised Tables and Figures
27 February 2014. In it, he states,
“The revised trend-line figure is 32.9 compared with 32.7 [Gini Co-efficient] before the corrections. The trend line is still flat.”
.
.
(The Gini Co-efficient measures inequality, with the higher the value, the lower the equality in income.)
The”trend line” may still be “flat”, but I submit to the reader that for a family on low income; paying exorbitant rent; in a cold, damp house, with very little food in the pantry and fridge – it matters very little.
What does matter is that since 1984, before the Neo-Liberal “revolution”, the Gini Coefficient was only 28.
It is now 37.7.
We are going in the wrong direction.
So not only are National’s claims not backed up by evidence; not only has data been found to be incorrect; but also Torben Akel and The Nation’s research team missed the obvious; inequality has worsened since 1984.
Falling home ownership rates are another indicator which confirm increasing inequality in this country (and throughout the rest of the world).
The Nation’s comedic episode continued with this exchange between hosts Lisa Owen and Patrick Gower, and panellists, author Max Rashbrooke, and right-wing commentator and National Party cadre, Matthew Hooton;
Lisa Owen: “Let’s change to a lighter note. The Civilian Party. Let’s be clear. That was a bit of fun. It was tongue in cheek, if anyone’s confused about that out there. Do we need this in an election year. Do we need some humour?”
Max Rashbrooke: “Oh I think, absolutely. I mean it’s great to see Ben do his thing with the Civilian [Party].
If there’s a problem though, it’s that some of his policies which he puts out as satire, are actually quite close to reality. I mean he talks about we should tax the poor, more. Well actually, if you add up income tax and gst, people on low incomes are paying pretty much the same proportion of their income in tax as people at the top half. If you added capital gains into that story, the poor are probably paying a bigger chunk of their income than the rich are.”
Patrick Gower: “And, and, I, I agree with you there. Because llamas, in my opinion have been dodging tax for years and years, and until someone moves on that loophole, um…”
[general hilarity ensues]
Then Matthew Hooton had to go spoil it all by getting All Serious again, and witter on about Paradise in Scandinavia with more of his skewed ‘spin’ on those country’s taxation system.
Yup. Poverty and rising inequality. A laugh a minute.
What next on The Nation – point and laugh at people with disabilities?
“Jolly good fun”!
Postscript
TVNZ’s Q+A on 25 May also had Ben Uffindell as a guest. As usual, his wit was on form. The big, big difference between Q+A and The Nation? On the former, he satirised and poked fun at politicians. On the latter, the targets for laughter were children in poverty.
Draw your own conclusions.
.
References
TV3: Inside Child Poverty
TV3: Child poverty doco ‘apolitical’ – filmmaker
TV3: Party calls for free ice-cream and llamas
Twitter: Frank Macskasy/The Nation
TV3: ACT leader steals thunder in minor party debate
TV3: New Zealand’s record on inequality
Ministry of Social Development: Household incomes in New Zealand: Trends in indicators of inequality and hardship 1982 to 2011
Hive News: Inequality data error revealed
NZ Treasury: Media Statement: Data error prompts process improvements
Ministry of Social Development: Household incomes in New Zealand: Trends in indicators of inequality and hardship 1982 to 2012 Revised Tables and Figures
27 February 2014
Wikipedia: Gini Coefficient
Statistics NZ: 2013 Census – Trend of lower home ownership continues
TV3: Panel – Patrick Gower, Max Rashbrooke and Matthew Hooton
Other blogs
The Standard: Snapshot of a nation: inequality
.
Above image acknowledgment: Francis Owen/Lurch Left Memes
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 25 May 2014.
.
.
= fs =
Categories: Media, The Body Politic
Ben Uffindell, Bryan Bruce, Bryan Perry, child poverty, economic inequality, GINI Coefficient, Inside Child Poverty, Lisa Owen, Matthew Hooton, Max Rashbrooke, Ministry of Social Development, NZ Treasury, Patrick Gower, Q+A, The Civilian, Torben Akel, TV3's 'The Nation'
Media Review for 26 May: Q+A, Susan Wood, & some casual racism
21 June 2013
3 comments
.
Sunday morning TV current affairs yielded a wide range of issues discussed; Len Brown and the Auckland Unitary Plan; Hekia Parata’s political career; US-NZ relations; New Zealand Universities; the high incidence of asthma in Maori; the Living Wage campaign; the rising careers of Dayna Grant and Maisey Rika; and the recently released findings of the Independent Police Complaints Authority. Plus the obligatory ‘plug’ for TV3′s “X Factor” on TV3′s “The Nation“.
On the issue of the IPCA’s report, “Q+A” host, Susan Wood introduced the issue with this segment;
SUSAN WOOD: “And the police conduct authority delivering it’s findings on the Urewera raid. Some road blocks and searches found to be unlawful. Some on the receiving end thinking about compensation.”
[cut to:]
RUATOKI CITIZEN: “Because you know, stress and all that kind of stuff. Cleaning the house. Because it took quite a while. That tear gas is quite hard to get rid of. I had to paint the ceiling.”
SUSAN WOOD: (smiling) “Who’d have known?”
Time Stamp: 1.05 – 1.20
TVNZ – Q+A – Series 2013, Episode 12
A screen-shot captures the moment when Wood made light of the young man’s experience, with her flippant, dismissive remark,
“Who’d have known?”
Yes, Susan. Who’d have known that a white pakeha could so openly lack empathy with fellow New Zealanders, in our own country, that had been terrorised by a para-military exercise that our own IPCA labelled as unlawful, unjustifiable and unreasonable?
Who would have thought, Susan, that women and young children could be locked up in a garage for nine hours under guard, without food, and a supposedly reputable journo like you could make light of it?
Who’d have thought, Susan, that an entire small town could be locked down and sealed off from the rest of the country in a scene straight out of C.K. Stead’s “Smith’s Dream/Sleeping Dogs” – and it would be an object of mirth for you?
When something like this – perhaps one of the most shameful events in our recent history – is so casually dismissed by you, then perhaps you should reconsider if you’re in the right job.
Your flippancy might be suitable on the cyber-sewer that is Whalesoil or David Farrar’s marginally less odious Kiwiblog, like this insensitive clod, anonymously revelling in his racism,
Kiwiblog – Greens see racism everywhere
Is that the kind of racist moron you’re lining up with, Susan?
Sorry, but one expects better from a supposedly experienced, professional in our media. Just because they were brown folk and poor, and not like your refined middle-class neighbours in your fine, leafy suburb – a bit of empathy mightn’t go astray here.
Or has the mask slipped, revealing the true attitudes of white mainstream media in this country?
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 26 May 2013.
.
.
= fs =
Categories: Media, The Body Politic
casual racism, IPCA, Q+A, Ruatoki, Susan Wood, Urewera Terror Raids
More dispatches from Planet Key
17 March 2013
4 comments
.
.
Planet Key’s #3 Moon “Brownlee”; Largest of the Moons, it tends to disturb other bodies through it’s presence. “Brownlee” has a rough surface and highly abrasive atmosphere that many find obnoxious. “Brownlee’s” gravitational influence has a negative, perturbing, influence on nearby bodies such as Planet Christchurch.
Brownlee recently let rip at Christchurch City Council for not carrying out repairs to council-owned community housing fast enough,
.
Acknowledgement: Radio NZ
.
Consider for a moment that Brownlee, as the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Minister, is in constant contact with CERA, Christchurch’s mayor, and anyone else remotely connected with that city and it’s re-build.
Brownlee has channels of communications that are open to him that allows him to discuss issues and problems as they arise.
So what was the purpose of this display of public excoriation of the Christchurch Council and especially the vilification of one Councillor, Yani Johanson?!
Does Mr Johanson not have a telephone?
Email? Skype? A paper letter? Smoke signals? (The latter seems to work well for the Vatican.)
Could Brownlee not have sat down around a table and asked the most basic of questions,
“How can we help?”
Or is the public display of testosterone-fuelled machismo Minister Brownlee’s new modus operandi when dealing with those who fall within his ministerial orbit?
This kind of authoritarianism may be the norm in Zimbabwe, Burma, or North Korea – but here in New Zealand it comes across as the cries and foot-stamping of a petulant child.
Meanwhile, National ministers should look in their own backyard when it comes to housing,
.
Acknowledgement: Dominion Post
.
Christchurch has been wracked by two massive earthquakes and thousands more quakes since. Every aspect of their basic infra-structure was damaged or ruined to varying degrees.
I think we can cut them some slack when it comes to re-building an entire city, from beneath ground-up.
Meanwhile, nearly eighteen months later, with no earthquakes or any other major disasters (unless one calls a National Government a major disaster), one wonders why National ministers have not progressed any further to re-build Pomare’s state housing?
After nearly a year and a half, all we’re seeing is a vast vacant lot, where once peoples’ homes existed,
.
.
.
Any ideas, Mr Brownlee?
(More on this issue in an up-coming blog-story)
.
Planet Key’s #4 Moon “Dunne”; covered in a dense, white atmosphere; “Dunne” is known to move from Planet Key to Planet Labour depending on which mass is greatest. The largest surface object on “Dunne” is the ‘Make Me a Minister’ volcano, which erupts whenever there is a nearby power-source.
As Minister of Revenue and Flashy Hairstyles, Peter Dunne is charged with taxation issues in this country.
No doubt his job was made considerably harder with two tax cuts (2009 and 2010) which considerably reduced taxation revenue for the State. (see: Govt’s 2010 tax cuts costing $2 billion and counting, see: Outlook slashes tax-take by $8b) Indeed, English was forced to tax children and their paper-rounds. (see: Key rejects criticism of ‘paperboy tax’)
Taxing kid’s meagre earnings. That’s how low and desperate National ministers have gone, to make up for the 2009/10 ‘lolly scrambles’ when the Nats gave away billions in unaffordable tax cuts.
To try to fill the fiscal hole that Bill English, Peter Dunne, et al, have put themselves into, they’ve been scrambling to raise government charges and tax everything and anything else that moves. (see: Prescription fees increase, see: Vulnerable children at risk from Family Court fees increase, see: Student fees rise faster than inflation, see: Petrol price rises to balance books)
The latest attempt to raise new taxes is Peter Dunne’s ‘carpark tax’,
.
Acknowledgement: Fairfax media
.
Well, well, well… a new tax?
A new fringe benefit tax?!
This is interesting.
Because John Key has always insisted that his Party cuts taxes and doesn’t increase them. Specifically, way back on 4 April 2005, when National was in Opposition,
.
National Party Finance spokesman John Key has signalled an overhaul of the Fringe Benefit Tax, during a speech to the Auckland Rotary Club today.
“The next National Government will cut the red tape and compliance costs that are choking our businesses and preventing them from getting off first base,” he says.
“A practical example of what I am talking about is in the area of Fringe Benefit Tax.
“Today I want to announce that National will revamp Fringe Benefit Tax to remove a substantial amount of the paperwork that currently occupies too much administrative time for many of our businesses, especially the small ones.
[…]
– We won’t entertain suggestions of applying FBT to on-premises car parks.”
Acknowledgement: Scoop.co.nz
And again in 2010, when a video was uncovered where Dear Leader was quoted as saying,
“National is not going to be raising GST. National wants to cut taxes, not raise taxes.”
See: Key ‘no GST rise’ video emerges
When challenged on this in the House, just recently, Minister for Everything, Steven Joyce, responded with this bit of bovine faecal material,
“I would say that I think a fair amount has changed since that statement was made back in April 2005, which was when Don Brash was leader of the National Party. Since that time we have had three leaders of the Labour Party, and maybe a fourth leader of the Labour Party—”
Source: Parliament Hansards – 9. Tax System Changes—Employee Car-parks
Yeah. Lot’s of things have changed. Like, for example, the difference between being in Opposition and Promising the Moon – and being in Government and having to explain why the Moon is still out of reach.
And when the Nats have to make smart-arse comments about Labour’s leaders, then you know they’re really on the ropes. Defensive much, Mr Joyce?
Like Key’s broken promise on GST, the “carpark” tax is another instance of National breaking it’s election promises. Which indicates, mainly, that National’s tax-cuts were never as affordable as they made out in 2008.
.
Acknowledgement: National Party
.
Planet Key’s #5 Moon “Bennett”; “Bennett” originated from the asteroid belt, where many poorer dwarf-planets with low mass; minimal mineral wealth; and mostly invisible, are locked in orbits that will take them nowhere. “Bennett” gravitated to the National Zone where her mass and mineral wealth increased by close association with Planet Key and it’s many moons.
.
To repeat and quote Bennett, when she stated on TVNZ’s Q+A on 29 April 2012,,
“There’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, or else we wouldn’t have the unemployment figures that we do. “
See: TVNZ Q+A: Transcript of Paula Bennett interview
To quote Minister Bennett’s latest utterances on this issue, on 12 March 2013, when hundreds of people recently queued for just seven jobs at Carter Holt Harvey in Auckland,
“Well I am absolutely thrilled that 200 turned up quite frankly we’ve got more than 50,000 on the unemployment benefit but work expectations of them I think the fact that they are lining up that they want those jobs um speaks for itself and about peoples’ motivation to get work.”“There’s always a lot of people going for certain types of jobs and if in particular if they are lower skilled they feel they can do them, they don’t have a lot of work experience, they have been out of work for some time.”
“No I don’t feel there is a job for everyone and I think it’s damn tough but I am incredibly proud of New Zealanders and their motivation and the fact that they want them and I know that the economy is improving and we are going to see more happening.”
See: TV3 – Campbell Live: Sign of the times: hundreds queue for 7 jobs
Acknowledgement for transcript: Waitakere News – Don Elder, Paula Bennett and the rest of us
Ok, so the lightbulb has finally clicked in Bennett’s head. New Zealand has a problem. We do not have enough jobs for the number of unemployed and solo-parents who want to work.
It’s not often that a politician acknowledges the bleedin’ obvious – so kudos to her for having the courage to do so. (John Key might learn a thing from Bennett in terms of not ducking issues.)
However, if there are not sufficient jobs to go around – what is the point in wasting taxpayers’ money and Parliament’s time on this exercise in futility,
.
Acknowledgement: NZ Herald
.
And why is language like this used by Bennett,
.
Acknowledgement: NZ Herald
.
If there are insufficient jobs – as Bennett herself has now acknowledged on at least two occassions, then ipso facto, the following must be true;
- The only ‘trap’ is a lack of work – not welfare
- Why “reform” the welfare system when welfare itself is not broke – it’s the economy that is not working (as are 170,000 people)
- Why muddy the waters with rhetoric like “trap of benefit dependency“; “introduce expectations for partners of beneficiaries and make beneficiaries prepare for work“; or that welfare had “become a bit of a trap for quite a few people“?
What does “a bit of a trap for quite a few people” mean? That it’s a “little” trap as opposed to a “big” trap? Or is she attempting to minimise the impact of her beneficiary-bashing by trying to soften her rhetoric?
So the “dog whistle” rhetoric filters down to the right wing; the ill-informed; and other welfare-hating cliques in our society – but the message is watered-down for the Middle Classes who are uncomfortable with victimising the unemployed, or who may even know someone who recently lost their jobs.
That’s the trouble with beneficiary bashing during times of high unemployment. Most of us know someone who has lost their job through no fault of their own. Bennett is walking a tight-rope here.
Eventually, people will be asking; why are National ministers wasting time on pointless welfare “reform” when it’s jobs we need?
Once that message percolates into the collective consciousness of the masses, National will be left standing naked – their corrupt, bene-bashing, dog-whistle politics exposed for all to see.
A few questions for Ms Bennett,
Why are you messing around with welform “reform”, when it’s jobs that we need?
Why aren’t you and your well-paid ministerial colleagues reforming the economy to create more jobs?
How much are these “reforms” costing us, the tax-payer?
How many extra jobs will welfare “reforms” create?
I don’t expect answers to these questions because, really, they are unanswerable.
.
*
.
Links
Facebook: Pomare save our community
Copyright (c) Notice
All self-made images are freely available to be used, with following provisos,
- Use must be for non-commercial purposes.
- Where purpose of use is commercial, a donation to Child Poverty Action Group is requested.
- At all times, images must be used only in context, and not to denigrate individuals.
- Acknowledgement of source is requested.
.
.
= fs =
NZ media; the Good, the Bad, and the Very, Very, Ugly
17 January 2013
13 comments
.
.
“A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.” – Oscar Wilde
It’s no great secret that the news media in this country – with perhaps one or two exceptions – has been going downhill in the last three decades.
As an example, the previous entities, the ‘Evening Post‘ and ‘Dominion‘ in Wellington, once employed three reporters – two full time and one part-time – to cover local body politics and events in the city. No councillor or mayor could pass wind without one of the journos picking it up. If something smelled rotten, the journos would sniff it out fairly smartly.
Now, with continuing cutbacks at Fairfax media, and most sub-editors gone, the combined entity known as the ‘Dominion Post‘ has one journalist covering City Council activities on a part-time basis. Coverage has becomes sporadic, disjointed, and out of context.
Which is why Wellingtonians now have little idea what’s happening at their Council.
TVNZ and TV3 once had current affairs programmes, at prime time, conducting in depth investigations into government activities and dubious behaviour from dodgy politicians.
Many of those programmes, ‘Holmes‘, ‘Assignment‘, have gone. ‘Sunday” was an hour long on Sunday nights – that’s been cut to thirty minutes.
The main current affairs prpgrammes – TVNZ’s ‘Q+A‘ and TV3’s ‘The Nation‘ – have been relegated to Sunday mornings at 8am and 9am. Hardly conducive to encouraging the public to be aware of political issues in our country. Only insomniacs and the most committed political junkie would be willing to forego a Sunday morning lie-in to watch TV journos in action with our elected representatives.
Private and State radio is perhaps the only part of the industry that has remained consistent.
Talkback Radio – idiot voices screaming at other idiot voices on issues that idiots know little about.
It is the realm where superficial “knowledge” is the main currency and shrill prejudice holds sway over calm reasoned analysis on issues. Imagine allotting a bunch of bigoted, ill-informed rednecks equal speaking time at the Oxford debates, shouting down their more knowledgeable and wiser debating opponants, and that gives an insight into talkback radio.
Even the talkback “hosts” are not ones to rise above the common, noisome mud of prejudice and wilful ignorance, as happened last week,
.
.
Charming.
But hardly surprising.
It’s all part of the commercial radio game; win as many listeners as you can by being as offensive and outrageous as you can. That wins ratings, which in turn let’s you sell more advertising, leading to higher profits, which results in increasing dividends to ever more demanding shareholders.
In a free market society, being offensive and prejudiced (or even better still, offensively prejudiced) is profitable. (See: Laws told off for ‘shoot rabid reporters’ comment)
Ever wondered why radio stations and newspapers “love” Michael Laws so much? Wonder no more. He sells advertising.
Ironically, when radio stations like NewstalkZB are then held to account for offensive behaviour, the additional publicity they gain – as in the case of the subsequent NZ Herald story above – gives them even more public attention. And higher ratings. And sell more advertising… It’s a win/win for them.
Radio NZ – after the political assassination of TVNZ7 – the last remaining non-commercial, public service media in this country.
And National is gunning for it,
.
.
It’s fairly obvious why Peter Cavanagh is resigning as Chief Executive: National has plans to commercialise Radio NZ.
This will no doubt be aided and abetted by Radio NZ board chairman, Richard Griffin. As well as having been a former Radio NZ political editor, Griffin took the job of press secretary to former National, prime minister, Jim Bolger (See: Richard Griffin to chair Radio NZ board).
The stage is set…
For National, non-commercial SOEs such as Radio NZ and TVNZ are anathema to their free market ideology – the very same ideology that saw the closure of TVNZ7 by deliberate political design, despite public support for the channel,
.
See: TVNZ7 supporters rally at Parliament
.
The commercialisation of media such as TVNZ is of considerable benefit to National Party (and perhaps Labour?) politicians, for two very good reasons,
- They yield a profit to the State, thereby making government’s job much easier to balance The Books.
- Commercialisation encourages ratings-driven programming. Hence the preponderence of crime ‘drama’, reality TV shows of every description, cheap US sitcoms, home improvement shows, and more cooking programmes than you can shake a wooden spatula at.
The second rationale has a by-product that governing politicians welcome with cunningly-disguised glee; ratings driven programming does not include current affairs shows and documentary making. These are now funded by NZ on Air – and even NZOA has been captured by National’s party apparatchiks,
.
.
… to fund brain-deadening crap like this,
.
See previous blogpost: NZ on Air funding soft-core porn garbage? Since when? Since now!!
.
It is no coincidence that the gradual demise of intelligent programmes that inform and challenge the viewer has been consistant with the rise and rise of commercialisation of the media – especially the state owned “public broadcaster”, TVNZ.
Quite simply, junk programmes such as cooking porn; MaF officials measuring the size of fish in someone’s bucket; and crime ‘dramas’ depicting the latest grisly murder (usually a female victim) in ghoulish detail, is what sells advertising.
And it should be no surprise that as the media shies away from serious reporting of current affairs, we had the lowest voter turnout last year since 1887 (see: Steve Liddle: Election apathy shows need for civics at school).
The Americanisation of our media (“if it bleeds, it leads”) is creating the Americanisation of our electoral process (apathy and low voter turnout – see: Voter turnout in 2012 US presidential elections 9% lower than 2008 ).
Major political parties – especially those on the Right, such as National – love this kind of thing. An unsophisticated public results in low-information voters. Low information voters allow governments to get way with all manner of dubious policies such as cuts to services; more user pays; environmentally-damaging activities, and further implementation of neo-liberal ideology.
It literally encourages the dumbing-down of society until the consequences are satirised in movies like this,
.
.
“Idiocracy” was produced as a speculative “what if” sf movie. It’s now more like a documentary. If you haven’t see it – this blogger strongly recommends that you do. You’ll be feeling a creepy sense of deja vu throughout it (and you’ll never look at ‘power drinks’ in quite the same way again).
It now appears that we, the New Zealand public, have till the end of the year to mobilise to pressure National not to interfere with the running of Radio NZ.
A statement from the Coalition for Better Broadcasting on 16 January, said,
The real story here is that the National Government – having fully commercialised TVNZ and done away with non-commercial TV channels Stratos, TV6 & 7 – is also slowly strangling RNZ to the point that it cannot survive. In 2007 a KPMG report to the Ministry of Culture and Heritage found that RNZ was already running as efficiently as possible. It recommended a funding increase to allow RNZ to continue its high standards. But the following year, the National Government froze the RNZ budget and that freeze still exists with RNZ operating on the same budget as 5 years ago.
The CBB believes this is a shockingly poor way to treat our national radio broadcaster: the station we rely on in times of emergency, disaster and crisis. We note the repeated absence on RNZ of our Prime Minister (who prefers to goof around on commercial stations) and many of his Cabinet colleagues. This fact and frequent remarks made by Ministers, makes it clear that the decision to freeze funding to RNZ is an attempt to influence the station’s ability to present in-depth news and current affairs. This contradicts statutory requirements that the government does not influence RNZ editorial stance and may even be illegal.
See: Response to the Resignation of RNZ CEO Peter Cavanagh
The under-funding of Radio NZ has been abysmal, with National wilfully attempting to strangle the broadcaster by a lack of money.
The situation for Radio NZ has become so dire that in late 2011, the Crown Entity registered itself as a charity,
The state-owned broadcaster registered itself as the Radio New Zealand Charitable Trust with the Charities Commission last month.
Some of its charitable purposes, which were listed on the commission’s website, included education, research, fundraising and providing grants to a number of individuals and groups.
A spokesperson for Broadcasting Minister Jonathan Coleman said the broadcaster still received $34 million a year but couldn’t say how long it had been receiving that amount.
A financial review of Radio NZ for the 2009/10 financial year showed it had a net deficit of $498,000 after tax, compared to a surplus of $13,000 the year before.
The review said RNZ had been too cash-strapped to participate in the 2010 New Zealand Radio Awards or put in a bid for the Rugby World Cup 2011 coverage.
See: Radio New Zealand ‘forced to register as charity‘
This is a deliberate campaign against Radio NZ and constitutes political interference – something that is strictly forbidden by law. National has found a way to circumvent that law.
Make no mistake, the dumbing down of Radio NZ is National’s final mission-plan to eliminate all critical, in-depth media analysis and reporting in this country. Turning Radio NZ in a radio-version of TVNZ would destroy any remaining semblance of serious current affairs programming, resulting in another medium for mindless, unquestioning, consumerism.
This is the neo-liberal agenda at it’s nastiest. To be successful in re-shaping a society into a “free market”, the new right must first remove all critical elements in society and either destroy it or marginalise it.
The commercialisation of Radio NZ would be the beginning of that marginalisation. Next would be a partial privatisation, followed by a full-scale sell-off.
This blogger encourages the reader to;
1.
Join Save Radio New Zealand on Facebook. Get your friends and family to “Like” the facebook page – the more the better! Support a replacement for Peter Cavanagh who will maintain the non-commercialised status of Radio NZ.
2.
If you have a National MP as your electorate MP, let him/her know your your vote in 2014 will depend on what happens to Radio NZ. Tell your National MP that not only will you vote for another Party, but you’ll be making a donation to them as well! Demand that Peter Cavanagh’s replacement support and maintain the non-commercialised status of Radio NZ.
3.
Write a short letter to your local newspaper and voice your feelings on this issue. The deliberate demise of TVNZ7 was bad enough – but attacking Radio NZ is the final straw. Demand that Peter Cavanagh’s replacement support and maintain the non-commercialised status of Radio NZ.
4.
Write to Labour Leader David Shearer and demand that, if he expects voter support, that Labour reverse National’s policies and undoes any commercialisation of Radio New Zealand.
On Point #4, the demise of TVNZ7 and impending commercialisation of Radio NZ underscores one very critical issue: that important services such as Radio NZ must be protected by entrenched legislation that makes it difficult – if not impossible – for incoming National regimes to to undermine such Crown entities.
It is unbelievable that an organisation such as Radio NZ – which has been operating in one form or another since 1925 – is vulnerable to the ideological machinations of a “government” that has been in office for only the last four years. In existence for 88 years – vulnerable to attack in four?!
A new Labour-led government’s Broadcasting Minister’s first task must be to enact legislation that;
- entrenches protection for Radio NZ,
- denies right governments any opportunity to commercialise the broadcaster,
- ring-fenches funding and ties it to the rate of inflation – perhaps by the Remuneration Authority which also sets MP’s salaries and perks.
The same protections must be in place for any new non-commercial public TV broadcaster that is set up by an incoming Labour-led government. Crown Entities must be free of covert political interference by the likes of Key, English, Joyce, et al, who cannot resist sticking their grubby fingers into places they shouldn’t.
At the risk of sounding overly-dramatic, this issue is not just about saving Radio NZ from commercialisation. This is a battle for the minds and souls of New Zealanders.
As Dave Armstrong wrote in August 2011,
“Despite its budget freeze, National Radio continues to do an excellent job. Its current affairs programmes are intelligent and objective. That’s why you rarely hear the prime minister on Morning Report or Checkpoint. As the recent BBC Hardtalk episode showed, Mr Key becomes dangerously exposed when interviewed by a tough, intelligent journalist. He tends to send in street-smart Gerry Brownlee to take one for the team on Radio New Zealand, while he has a cosy yet inane chat with ex-children’s presenter Petra Bagust on Breakfast or talks to Veitchy on sports radio about hot chicks. That’s far more fun than explaining to Mary Wilson why parents are going to have to pay more for childcare.”
See: Govt consigns RNZ to an undeserved chilly place
In countries ruled by totalitarian regimes (late Soviet Union, North Korea, Iraq under Saddam Hussein, Syria, United States, etc), despots control the media with an iron fist. Members of the state security apparatus watch every word printed; every word uttered; every picture or video screened.
In the West, we do despotic control of the media in more subtle ways. We use “market forces” instead of secret police forces.
The Western model is far more successful because the general populace doesn’t realise it’s happening. In fact, the general populace rather like “Master Chef Albania” or “CSI Timbuktu” or “Mumbai Squalid Home Improvement”. Unfortunately, watching such drivel doesn’t make the populace any smarter or informed. It simply prepares them for Talkback radio.
It’s up to the rest of us to lead the fight and stop National in it’s tracks.
Spread the word, people.
.
.
*
.
Previous related blogposts
I’ll tell you what I want, what I really, really want
Public Broadcasting – down, but not out
TVNZ7 – Picking at the body before it’s cold
21 May – Public meeting: TVNZ7 gets the big tick!
The radio station, the newspaper columnist, and Dear Leader
NZ on Air funding soft-core porn garbage? Since when? Since now!!
References
Scoop.co.nz: PM has questions to answer over NZ on Air link
Fairfax: Call for McElrea to resign from NZ On Air
NZ Herald: Radio Network apologises for ‘dyke’ slur against Alison Mau
NZ Herald: TVNZ reveals Seven Sharp presenting team
NZ Herald: Radio NZ on the hunt for next chief executive
Scoop.co.nz: Response to the Resignation of RNZ CEO Peter Cavanagh
Other blogs
Tom Frewen: GC In Breach Of Funding Agreement?
Pundit: TVNZ kills ad-free channels to grow profits
Tumeke: Seven Sharp already looks blunt
Brian Edwards: TVNZ exchanges current-affairs for a mess of pottage at 7pm
Tumeke: Is the NZ Herald a newspaper or a Police press release?
Tumeke: The future of RNZ
Whoar: “..Radio NZ tops 2012 ratings..”
.
.
= fs =
Categories: Media, The Body Politic
Assignment, BBC Hardtalk, Dominion, Dominion Post, Evening Post, Fairfax, Holmes, Idiocracy, Michael Laws, Newstalk ZB, Q+A, Radio Live, Radio Network, Radio NZ, Sunday, The Nation, TVNZ, TVNZ7
A lesson in Energy Economics
17 September 2012
Leave a comment
.
I
.
This is the Treaty of Waitangi, signed by most tribes in New Zealand, and by the Representative of Her Majesty, Lieutenant-Governor, William Hobson,
.
.
The full English text can be read here: Treaty of Waitangi.
The relevant part to the treaty, guaranteeing rights to land, forests, water, mountain, etc, is this bit, Article 2,
Article the second [Article 2]
Her Majesty the Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the Chiefs and Tribes of New Zealand and to the respective families and individuals thereof the full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries and other properties which they may collectively or individually possess so long as it is their wish and desire to retain the same in their possession; but the Chiefs of the United Tribes and the individual Chiefs yield to Her Majesty the exclusive right of Preemption over such lands as the proprietors thereof may be disposed to alienate at such prices as may be agreed upon between the respective Proprietors and persons appointed by Her Majesty to treat with them in that behalf.
Seems fairly clear; what’s theirs is theirs and no nicking each others’ stuff.
Now, unfortunately, I have fellow New Zealanders who hold to the belief that the Treaty of Waitangi is “no longer relevant” or is “outdated”.
Interesting idea that; “no longer relevant”.
Firstly, the Treaty has no “expiry date” or “statute of limitations”. Nothing in the small print states that the Treaty is valid for only X number of years.
Secondly, imagine trying to tell our American cuzzies that their Declaration of Independence – signed in 1776AD, and therefore some 64 years older than our own Treaty – is “no longer relevant” or “outdated”? They’d have half their US Marines camped outside your front door – and not in a happy way, either.
And of course, there is the Magna Carta, signed in 1215AD, and which is the basis of much of our modern law. If the Magna Carta is “no longer relevant” or “outdated” then we are in serious trouble, as the state would have arbitrary powers of detention and imprisonment without right of trial, and we would lose other legal protections from State abuse.
And then there are the Ten Commandments, several thousand years old, which state the most basic laws of a civilised society; no killing, no stealing, no false accusations, etc.
Few people would try to assert that these basic laws are “no longer relevant” or “outdated”?
Time does not extinguish rights.
Those who object to the principles of the Treaty do so out of fear and misconceptions (and sometimes out of downright racist hostility) than any notions of fairness.
The Treaty is the basis upon which our ancestors agreed to live together and to respect each other. We should respect that agreement and use it in the spirit in which it was signed.
Otherwise we disrespect our forebears (on all sides) and do ourselves a dishonour in the process.
Moving forward and onward…
.
II
.
In replying to Maori claims of water rights, Dear Leader John Key has stated earnestly that “no one owns the water”.
Until now, Maori have made no claims over water in terms of this country’s energy production. With Meridian, Mighty River Power, and Genesis Energy under collective state ownership, it could equally be said that “no one owned the power companies – they belonged to us all.
If, until now, we all benefitted from collective ownership of power companies, then, equally the source of that power was in collective ownership. Now National is attempting to privatise 49% of Meridian, Mighty River Power, and Genesis Energy – effectively changing the rules.
The concept of private ownership is now contemplated for up-till-now collectively-owned assets. So what about the source of that power which will now benefit a small group who will own 49%?
Can the source of hydro power be owned, especially when it produces profits?
Let’s test that idea, shall we?
Simple question: who owns the following resources?
.
.
Oil. Natural gas. Coal. Uranium. None of this stuff is free. Someone owns the ground or the process used to extract it. There is a concept of private ownership over these energy sources that can be quantified, measured, controlled, priced, and sold.
Until Pakeha arrived on these fair shores as the second wave of “boat people” – refugees from a class-stratified society – Maori had no concept of private ownership. Property was not owned by individuals. Iwi and hapu held collective kawanatanga over their lands, waters, forests, hills, seashores, etc.
Once Pakeha arrived, the notion of private ownership and Land Titles were introduced to Maori.
Some Pakeha might object – but water is sacred!
So is land. God knows enough of our young men have gone off to war to defend our nation; our people; our lands, from foreign domination, in two World Wars.
Some Pakeha would object – but water is ephemeral!
So are radio/television frequencies. But that hasn’t stopped the government to leasing/selling those to private companies. (Try broadcasting on the same wavelength as TVNZ or TV3, and see what the reaction from those companies and the State would be.)
This is a hydro power station,
.
.
Powered by this stuff,
.
.
Water generates the turbines which produces the power that is on-sold to consumers.
So how does water differ from oil, gas, coal, and uranium?
Private ownership? It suited us Pakeha when it was used to our benefit to “acquire” land from Maori.
Maori learnt that lesson well and the shoe is now on the other foot.
If Pakeha are going to flog of 49% of assets that, up till now, no one owned and collectively benefitted us all, then by the gods, Maori can – and should – apply precisely the same principle.
Welcome to the world of capitalism – our ‘gift’ to Maori
.
III
.
Pakeha schizophrenia over private ownership was nowhere better summed up than on TVNZ’s Q+A, on 16 September, when Shane Taurima interviewed Dear Leader John Key on this issue,
.
.
In a stunning act of conversion to social democratic principles, John Key equated the collective ownership of water with oil and gas,
“ … So if you accept that viewpoint, then I think you have to accept that elements like water and wind and the sun and air and fire and all these things, and the sea, along with natural resources like oil and gas, are there for the national interest of everyone. They’re there for the benefit of all New Zealanders, not one particular group over another. “
See: TVNZ Q+A Interview with Prime Minister John Key
Really?!?!
JohnKey is telling us that, ” natural resources like oil and gas, are there for the national interest of everyone. They’re there for the benefit of all New Zealanders, not one particular group over another “?!?
Since when did National or Labour nationalise the oil and gas industry???
This little piece of news-trivia slipped by me, that’s for sure. (Must’ve been announced on the other TV channel when we wasted two minutes watching ‘The Ridges‘.)
It’s pure bullshit of course. John Key is spinning porkies when he’s suggesting that the oil and gas industry is ” there for the national interest of everyone “. These resources belong to various corporations – not ” for the benefit of all New Zealanders “.
In fact, the last time New Zealand held any State ownership in any aspect of the oil and gas industry was with Petrocorp and Maui gas – both privatised, respectively, in 1988 and 1990.
See: Treasury – Income from State Asset Sales
John Key’s assertion that the oil and gas industry is ” there for the national interest of everyone ” is either delusional (spending too much time with John Banks?) or a clumsy fairytale to try to woo New Zealanders into a cosy, cotton-wool, fantasy world.
This blogger would welcome and support National nationalising all oil and gas production in this country, ” for the benefit of all New Zealanders “.
The fact is that Dear Leader blew it.
Not only was his paradigm absurdly false – but it actually shored up the legitamacy of Maori claims over water rights.
If private ownership can be conferred over this country’s oil and gas resources, for the private benefit of shareholders, then John Key needs to explain – in far more truthful terms this time – why water is different.
This blogger believes that so far he has made a complete hash of things.
More importantly, will a Court take a similar view?
My money is on Maori winning this one.
.
IV
.
An email sent to Dear Leader,
Date: Monday, 17 September 2012 12:11 AM
From: Frank Macskasy <fmacskasy@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: Frank Macskasy <fmacskasy@yahoo.com>
Subject: Nationalisation of oil and gas resources
To: John Key <john.key@parliament.govt.nz>
Cc: David Shearer <david.shearer@parliament.govt.nz>,
Russel Norman <Russel.Norman@parliament.govt.nz>,
Metiria Turei <metiria.turei@parliament.govt.nz>,
Winston Peters <winston.peters@parliament.govt.nz>Kia Ora Mr Key,On 16 September, you stated on TVNZ’s Q+A the following statement,” … So if you accept that viewpoint, then I think you have to accept that elements like water and wind and the sun and air and fire and all these things, and the sea, along with natural resources like oil and gas, are there for the national interest of everyone. They’re there for the benefit of all New Zealanders, not one particular group over another. “Source: http://tvnz.co.nz/q-and-a-news/interview-prime-minister-john-key-5085886
I missed the occassion when our oil and gas industries were nationalised, so that profits would remain in New Zealand, “for the benefit of all New Zealanders, not one particular group over another”.
This is an excellent state of affairs and I welcome your government’s conversion to social democracy whereby our ” natural resources like oil and gas, are there for the national interest of everyone “.
I take it as a given then, that you have not only abandoned your asset sales programme, but will be re-nationalising Contact Energy.
In which case, it is a truism that “no one owns the oil and gas” in the ground, and subsequently these resources belong to all New Zealanders collectively.
I may have to reconsider my vote, come 2014, as I wish to support the newly discovered social-democratic principles shown by your Party.
With regards,
-Frank Macskasy
BloggerSee: https://fmacskasy.wordpress.com/2012/09/17/a-lesson-in-energy-economics/
.
.
.
= fs =
Folic Acid vs Vitamin B9
2 September 2012
10 comments
.
.
Folic Acid
.
Definition
Folic acid is a water-soluable vitamin belonging to the B-complex group of vitamins. These vitamins help the body break down complex carbohydrates into simple sugars to be used for energy. Excess B vitamins are excreted from the body rather than stored for later use. This is why sufficient daily intake of folic acid is necessary.Description
Folic acid is also known as folate, or folacin. It is one of the nutrients most often found to be deficient in the Western diet, and there is evidence that deficiency is a problem on a worldwide scale. Folic acid is found in leafy green vegetables, beans, peas and lentils, liver, beets, brussel sprouts, poultry, nutritional yeast, tuna, wheat germ, mushrooms, oranges, asparagus, broccoli, spinach, bananas, strawberries, and cantaloupes. In 1998, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) required food manufacturers to add folic acid to enriched bread and grain products to boost intake and to help prevent neural tube defects (NTD).Purpose
Folic acid works together with vitamin B12 and vitamin C to metabolize protein in the body. It is important for the formation of red and white blood cells. It is necessary for the proper differentiation and growth of cells and for the development of the fetus. It is also used to form the nucleic acid of DNA and RNA. It increases the appetite and stimulates the production of stomach acid for digestion and it aids in maintaining a healthy liver. A deficiency of folic acid may lead to anemia, in which there is decreased production of red blood cells. This reduces the amounts of oxygen and nutrients that are able to get to the tissues. Symptoms may include fatigue, reduced secretion of digestive acids, confusion, and forgetfulness. During pregnancy, a folic acid deficiency may lead to preeclampsia, premature birth, and increased bleeding after birth.People who are at high risk of strokes and heart disease may greatly benefit by taking folic acid supplements. An elevated blood level of the amino acid homocysteine has been identified as a risk factor for some of these diseases. High levels of homocysteine have also been found to contribute to problems with osteoporosis. Folic acid, together with vitamins B6 and B12, helps break down homocysteine, and may help reverse the problems associated with elevated levels.Pregnant women have an increased need for folic acid, both for themselves and their child. Folic acid is necessary for the proper growth and development of the fetus. Adequate intake of folic acid is vital for the prevention of several types of birth defects, particularly NTDs. The neural tube of the embryo develops into the brain, spinal cord, spinal column, and the skull. If this tube forms incompletely during the first few months of pregnancy a serious, and often fatal, defect results in spina bifida or anencephaly. Folic acid, taken from one year to one month before conception through the first four months of pregnancy, can reduce the risk of NTDs by 50-70%.It also helps prevent a cleft lip and palate.Research shows that folic acid can be used to successfully treat cervical dysplasia, a condition diagnosed by a Pap smear, of having abnormal cells in the cervix. This condition is considered to be a possible precursor to cervical cancer, and is diagnosed as an abnormal Pap smear. Daily consumption of 1,000 mcg of folic acid for three or more months has resulted in improved cervical cells upon repeat Pap smears.Studies suggest that long-term use of folic acid supplements may also help prevent lung and colon cancer. Researchers have also found that alcoholics who have low folic acid levels face a greatly increased possibility of developing colon cancer.Preparations
To correct a folic acid deficiency, supplements are taken in addition to food. Since the functioning of the B vitamins is interrelated, it is generally recommended that the appropriate dose of B-complex vitamins be taken in place of single B vitamin supplements. The Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDA) for folate is 400 mcg per day for adults, 600 mcg per day for pregnant women, and 500 mcg for nursing women. Medicinal dosages of up to 1,000-2,000 mcg per day may be prescribed.Precautions
Folic acid is not stable. It is easily destroyed by exposure to light, air, water, and cooking. Therefore, the supplement should be stored in a dark container in a cold, dry place, such as a refrigerator. Many medications interfere with the body’s absorption and use of folic acid. This includes sulfa drugs, sleeping pills, estrogen, anti-convulsants, birth control pills, antacids, quinine, and some antibiotics. Using large amounts of folic acid (e.g., over 5,000 mcg per day) can mask a vitamin B12 deficiency and thereby risk of irreversible nerve damage.Side effects
At levels of 5,000 mcg or less, folic acid is generally safe for use. Side effects are uncommon. However, large doses may cause nausea, decreased appetite, bloating, gas, decreased ability to concentrate, and insomnia. Large doses may also decrease the effects of phenytoin (Dilantin), a seizure medication.
Source: The Free Dictionary
.
Overdose risks
.
The risk of toxicity from folic acid is low, because folate is a water-soluble vitamin and is regularly removed from the body through urine.
Source: Vitamins and minerals: efficacy and safety, U.S. National Library of Medicine
.
Folic Acid. Folate. Vitamin B9. Vitamin Bc. Folacin. Pteroyl-L-glutamic acid. Pteroyl-L-glutamate. Pteroylmonoglutamic acid. Take your pick.
All different names to one of many naturally occurring compounds which our (and other animals) bodies need to survive.
Before western society decided to process the hell out of our foods, we ingested Folic Acid/Vitamin B9 in vegetables such as spinach, asparagus, turnip greens, lettuce, cabbage, brussel sprouts, broccoli, beans, peas, lentils, bananas, oranges, peaches, Sunflower seeds, and meats such as liver and poultry, etc.
See: Foods rich in folic acid and vitamin B12
So it’s not exactly some weird concoction, brewed up by a mad scientist slaving over bubbling beakers and arcing electrodes in Victor von Frankenstein’s basement,
.
.
.
.
When the issue first arose in 2009, the debate whether to add Folic Acid/Folate/Vitamin B9/Vitamin Bc/Folacin/Pteroyl-L-glutamic acid/Pteroyl-L-glutamate/Pteroylmonoglutamic acid to all breads, was lost on Day One when the vitamin was referred tro as “Folic Acid”.
This blogger will be the first to admit that had never heard of “folic acid” or “folate”.
Folic acid… Sounded suspiciously like hydrochloric acid… sulphuric acid… hydroflouric acid… Nasty chemicals which have no place in the human body.
Except that the unfortunately-sounding apellation – folic acid – had nothing to do with any of the above tissue-damaging chemicals above. Like ascorbic acid – aka, ascorbate or Vitamin C.
Like most people, the substance was more recognisable with it’s more benign label; Vitamin B9. A quick googling soon informed me that folic acid = Vitamin B9.
*whew*
Panic over.
Visions of a nefarious government secret agency lacing our food with ACID were dispelled.
But… how many other people failed to make the connection? Most folk have only a basic understanding of Nature and science. Fears arise easily – especially when things have gone terribly wrong in history…
Atomic power… asbestos… pesticides… thalidomide… chloroflurocarbons… human-produced atmospheric CO2… History is littered with triumphs of science and technology – only to learn later that there were unintended consequences.
Heck, the Ancient Romans used to store and drink wine from urns made from lead. Wine is acidic… and it leeched lead from it’s vessels. The consequential lead poisoning must have been horrific.
The 21st century version of lead-poisoning in antiquity is plastic bottles containing BPA (bisphenol A) – which has been discovered to have nasty effects on the human body.
See: BPA Chemical Leaches From Hard Plastic Drinking Bottles Into The Body, Study
When humans are unfamiliar with something, they are naturally cautious and wary. (A survival trait, no doubt, when our ancestors had to cope with poisonous plants, big nasty insects, hungry sabre-tooth tigers, and other perils of Paleolithic Earth.)
The reality of Vitamin B9 was simple and straight forward; it was a natural compound that could reduce the incidence of Neural Tube Defects. But even that term – Neural Tube Defects – meant nothing to the average Bloke and Blokette. It was a vague medical term that 99% of us had never heard before.
Another way to explain Neural Tube Defects is spina bifida (one form of NTD),
The human nervous system develops from a small, specialized plate of cells along the back of an embryo. Early in development, the edges of this plate begin to curl up toward each other, creating the neural tube—a narrow sheath that closes to form the brain and spinal cord of the embryo. As development progresses, the top of the tube becomes the brain and the remainder becomes the spinal cord. This process is usually complete by the 28th day of pregnancy. But if problems occur during this process, the result can be brain disorders called neural tube defects, including spina bifida…
… Spina bifida, which literally means “cleft spine,” is characterized by the incomplete development of the brain, spinal cord, and/or meninges (the protective covering around the brain and spinal cord). It is the most common neural tube defect in the United States – affecting 1,500 to 2,000 of the more than 4 million babies born in the country each year.
See: MedicineNet.com – Spina Bifida (Neural Tube Defect)
Whilst many with spina bifida can walk with assistance-devices, others will be confined to wheelchairs for their entire lives.
Many will have problems with urination, having to use plastic catheters inserted into their urethra/penis to urinate. Some will need hygiene pads to contain uncontrollably excreted faeces in their underwear. Others have other surgically-enhanced techniques for relieving themselves.
A number will require ongoing surgery to address complications caused by their condition,
“Some children will need subsequent surgeries to manage problems with the feet, hips, or spine. Individuals with hydrocephalus generally will require additional surgeries to replace the shunt, which can be outgrown or become clogged.
Some individuals with spina bifida require assistive devices such as braces, crutches, or wheelchairs. The location of the malformation on the spine often indicates the type of assistive devices needed. Children with a defect high on the spine and more extensive paralysis will often require a wheelchair, while those with a defect lower on the spine may be able to use crutches, bladder catherizations, leg braces, or walkers.
Treatment for paralysis and bladder and bowel problems typically begins soon after birth, and may include special exercises for the legs and feet to help prepare the child for walking with braces or crutches when he or she is older.“
See: How is spina bifida treated?
For people with spina bifida, in wheelchairs, they will need ongoing assistance until their final day. The way they overcome they restricted mobility and challenges is nothing short of heroic.
There are many things they will struggle with, and many that will be beyond their abilities without varying degrees of assistance.
For many of us, visiting a friend who happens to live a few dozen steps up from the road is something we do without much consideration. Not so for a person with spina bifida.
Imagine the degradation of being lifted up stairs to enter a building, and being carried up by others. (Not all buildings have electors or ramps, contrary to public perception – and 99.99% of private homes certainly do not have elevators.)
If you’re in a wheelchair, you will most likely never journey through New Zealand’s wilderness.
And going to a beach will most likely involve being carried bodily onto the sand. (Unless they can afford an expensive, specialised, wheelchair.)
A home for a person with spina bifida has be be totally adapted to his/her needs; wheelchair ramps (both front and rear door); bathroom adapted to be a “wet area”; modified cabinets, benches, oven, sink, in kitchens; lowered light switches, etc.
The State has to provide ongoing assistance in many areas of a wheelchair bound person’s life and home.
Relationships can be more difficult to form, as many people do not see past a wheelchair or crutches.
I encourage an able-bodied person to try to spend 24 hours in a wheelchair. You probably wouldn’t make it past 30 minutes.
I write this not for pity for people with spina bifida – they don’t need our pity – but for understanding that for every decision we make, there are consequences.
Not adding vitamin B9 to bread will have consequences; women giving birth to babies afflicted with spina bifida.
Critics of fortification use the cliche of “mass medication” and insist that pregnant women take vitamin B9 supplements to assist their unborn child.
“Mass medication” is a mis-nomer. Vitamin B9 is not “medicine”. It is a natural occurring compound like Vitamin C, Vitamin D, Vitamin E, etc, etc, etc.
And if folic acid/vitamin B9/folate/whatever was so harmful – why are bottles of B9 supplements available in every single supermarket, chemists, health-food shop in New Zealand?
No one has ever suggested that adding Vitamin C to our fruit drinks is “mass medication” – it would be ridiculous to suggest so.
And by the time a woman discovers that she is pregnant, it may be too late to take Vitamin B9 supplements,
“Folic acid, taken from one year to one month before conceptionthrough the first four months of pregnancy, can reduce the risk of NTDs by 50-70%…”
Source: The Free Dictionary
Where did the campaign, along with the “mass medication” meme, originate? Like many of these fear-campaigns, it’s a matter of ‘following the money‘,
” The Bakers’ Association has labelled the compulsory introduction “mass medication” of the population, and warned that bread containing folic acid will be less safe than it is now. “
The Bakers’ Association “mass medication” rhetoric was followed by ex-National MP, and neo-liberal, Katherine Rich, who was now leading the NZ Food and Grocery Council,
” Food and Grocery Council chief executive Katherine Rich said there was no good reason to medicate an entire nation without clear benefits and known risks.
“They are embarking on a medical experiment of grand proportions,” she said. “If there are long-term effects and the Government is keen on adding folic acid, they should indemnify”.”
See: Bakers furious at ‘mass medication’ of NZ’s bread
See previous blogpost: Crony Watch!
The same Katherine Rich who opposed liquor controls for supermarkets and has been a staunch defender of light-handed regulation of the alcohol industry.
See: Big Alcohol‘s Global Playbook: New markets, reduced regulation and lower taxes
Interesting how two separate business organisations were using similar fear-tactics; “mass medication” (Bakers’ Association) and “medical experiment” (NZ Food and Grocery Council ). And note that the NZ Herald in which those comments were reported is dated 17 May 2009 – one of the very first references to “mass medication”.
These fear tactics were unsupported by any hard facts, and relied on dubious “experts” and dodgy “science”. It was all very convenient for commercial interests that were more concerned at cost – than the health of this nation’s children.
Bomber Bradbury, from the ‘Tumeke’ blog summed it up nicely when he said,
” There was also a torrent of anger about ‘putting stuff in my food, personal choice blah blah blah’. I’m all for the heavy hand of Government regulation if it means avoiding 70+ children each year (abortions plus live births) being born with deformities. I don’t buy into the ‘personal choice’ stuff at all, we all concede certain choices to live together and if putting folic acid into bread reduces deformities, what’s the problem? The issue HAS to be based on the science, and right now there is science that suggests a connection with cancer – if that science is as weak as some have posted here, and is as weak as Gluckman thinks it is, then it should be a 6month review tops to explore that and make a call. Kicking for touch with a 3 year moratorium is weak by Key and means 200 kids + will be born with deformities in those 3 years.
The irony that many claimed this was the ‘nanny state putting medicine in my food’ misses the point that it will be the nanny state who will have to provide for the deformed children.”
See: Folic Acid U-turn wrong call
Bomber Bradbury has hit the nail on the head when he says,
“The irony that many claimed this was the ‘nanny state putting medicine in my food’ misses the point that it will be the nanny state who will have to provide for the deformed children.“
Bingo!
Profits from bread: privatised.
Massive financial costs of 20+ children born with spina bifida: socialised.
How many times have we heard that?!
Concerns over “increased cancer” fears were dispelled in a discussion on 8 July, on TVNZ’s Q+A, with Andrew Marshall from the Paediatric Society of NZ,
“ GREG BOYED
First and foremost, a couple of hundred more cases of cancer per year – what are your responses to that?
ANDREW MARSHALL
Completely false. If we look at the United States where they introduced mandatory fortification in ’98, there’s been a reduction in all cancers since that time. So it’s not true it will increase cancer. It reduces cancer overall.
GREG What are your thoughts on Dr Smith’s science, because, as he said, he’s done extensive studies on an extensive number of people.
ANDREW I’ve reviewed his studies. He is very selective in the studies he chooses. He talks about a meta-analysis of 38,000. There’s a different meta-analysis using a similar population – some of the studies overlap – of 35,000, which is much stronger. It shows no relationship with cancer, no increased risk, no statistical risk. So he’s selective in the studies he chooses, and he’s chosen a weaker study which showed a borderline. Even the writers of that study said there was no definite increase; it was borderline. “
See: Q+A: Transcript of Andrew Marshall interview
On 2 September 2012, “Food Safety” Minister, Kate Wilkinson was interviewed on TVNZ’s Q+A. Greg Boyd asked why National had decided not to opt to add vitamin B9 to nearly all bread. In a breath-taking example of ignoring real research and common sense, Wilkinson said,
” The decision that was made was really based on consumer choice rather than the science, because, as you know with science, you can have scientists arguing black and scientists arguing white. At the end of the day, the consultation went out. The submissions were clearly in favour of voluntary, so people can make up their own mind whether they want folic acid in their bread or not. “
As Q+A producer, Tim Watkin, said on the ‘Pundit’ blog,
” So the baking industry won the day over the medical folk, not by the strength of their arguments or superiority of their science, but by the weight of numbers.
Bizarre.
We’re an anti-intellectual enough country at the best of times, but to be so cavalier about science is a terrible signal to send. “
See: Q+A: Interview with Food Safety Minister Kate Wilkinson
For Wilkinson to state,
“The decision that was made was really based on consumer choice rather than the science…“
…The clear message is that people want choice.”
… means we have abandoned common sense and policies made for social good, and allowed commercial interests and the paranoia of a few individuals, to determine the health and safety of our children?!
One must also ask that if National was swayed by “the submissions were clearly in favour of voluntary” – why have they not taken heed of the vast number of submissions opposing state asset sales.
See: Hundreds beg committee to stop sale of state assets
Selective much?
Executive director, John Forman, from The Organisation for Rare Disorders was also obviously disappointed by National’s decision,
“Up to 20 babies every year will die or be seriously disabled by neural tube defects (NTD) in New Zealand, thanks to the Government’s decision today to keep the fortification of bread voluntary.”
See: Folic acid to remain voluntary
Indeed, whilst we enjoy our “choice” – unborn children do not. Their future lives will be blighted by the choices that we adults have made for them.
Spooked by back-room dealings and manipulations by vested interests, we have allowed ourselves to be panicked and corralled like a bunch of sheep. The food industry maintains its profits by not having to pay for vitamin B9 to be added to bread, and National maintain’s it’s slavish adhrerence to the mantra of “personal choice”.
Another example of the Cult of the Individual, with it’s nasty, self-centered “Me First” attitude, and all it’s dreadful consequences.
.
*
.
Additional
Bakers furious at ‘mass medication’ of NZ’s bread (May, 2009)
Q + A: Paul Holmes interviews Sue Kedgley and Kate Wilkinson about folic acid (July, 2009)
Minister sides with bakers on folic acid (July, 2009)
Will bill make food safer or be a form of control? (February, 2012)
Folate fortified bread back on table (May, 2012)
Australians beating us over meat labelling (May, 2012)
Folic acid to remain voluntary (August, 2012)
Q+A: Interview with Food Safety Minister Kate Wilkinson (September, 2012)
Previous blogposts
Other blogs
Tumeke: Folic Acid U-turn wrong call (July, 2009)
The Pundit: National’s folic tangle (July, 2009)
Corporations & Health Watch: Big Alcohol‘s Global Playbook: New markets, reduced regulation and lower taxes (December, 2011)
The Pundit: The folate debate – no easy choices (July, 2012)
The Pundit: Get foliced! Now science is just a ‘nice to have‘ (September, 2012)
.
.
= fs =
Q+A – 5 August 2012
5 August 2012
13 comments
.
Q+A, Charter schools
.
.
The highly contentious issue of Charter Schools was canvassed on Q+A this morning (5 August). Corin Dann interviewed NZEI President Ian Leckie and Former ACT president Catherine Isaac.
The Associate Minister for Education and ACT Party MP, John Banks, was nowhere to be seen. Curiously, it was left up to Catherine Isaac – not an elected member of Parliament – to front on the issue of Charter schools.
As Corin Dann said to Ms Isaacs,
.
CORIN OK, Ian Leckie, thank you. Now, Catherine, just finally, is it disappointing-? Are you disappointed that John Banks couldn’t come on this morning and front this issue? I mean, he’s your minister, your person in Parliament. We were pretty disappointed that he couldn’t come on.
ISAAC I couldn’t comment on that. I’m not sure why he couldn’t come on. I haven’t discussed that with him.
CORIN Well, it seems to be… Our feeling is that he’s reluctant, because he may be asked questions about the saga, of course, that’s been running over donations. And why I’m asking you this question is because does that make him an ineffectual minister to be fronting this flagship policy of your party’s?
ISAAC I’m sure you’ll find he’ll be fronting it.
CORIN So he won’t-? Does that mean he’d be-?
ISAAC Well, I can’t speak for him, of course, but he’s very positive about this policy. He’s extremely excited about it, and I’m sure you’ll see him appearing as often as he can.
CORIN But as a high-ranking party member, can you speak for the party? It must be disappointing.
ISAAC I can’t speak for the party. I’m not an official of the party, so I can’t speak for the party. But I think that you will find that John Banks will be a powerful advocate for this policy.
CORIN Do you think he’s been unfairly treated by the media and others?
ISAAC I don’t have a view on that.
CORIN You don’t have a view at all?
ISAAC I don’t
.
See: Q+A: Transcript of Catherine Issac and Ian Leckie interview
Corin Dann has summed it up perfectly; John Banks has become an ineffectual Minister when he is no longer able to front to explain radical new policies that National/ACT are implementing. It’s fairly obvious Banks is too frightened to appear where journalists are in a position to ask him hard questions over the Undeclared Donations saga.
It is also astounding that Catherine Isaacs appeared for National/ACT, when, as she herself stated,
“I can’t speak for the party. I’m not an official of the party, so I can’t speak for the party.”
If she can’t speak for the ACT Party – what was she doing, fronting on Q+A, to promote Charter Schools, which is ACT policy?
Maybe John Banks just ‘forgot’ to turn up for the interview?
.
Q+A, Fred Pearce
.
Of particular interest to us should be journalist and author of ‘The Landgrabbers: The new fight over who owns the Earth‘, Fred Pearce,
.
.
Pearce was interviewed over the critical issue of foreign buy-ups of arable farmland threoughout the world. Pearce revealed that buy-ups of land wasn’t just occurring here in New Zealand – but was taking place in Africa, South America, and elsewhere.
He was adamant in stating that the “land grabs” were part of a process of certain nations securing food sources at a time in our history when this will become a critical issue. He stated, in part,
.
JESSICA Are we right to be jumpy here in New Zealand?
PEARCE I think you are, actually, because you’re a relatively small country. Your land is valuable. Clearly there’s a lot of interest internationally in your dairy farming. There’s a tradition of German interest in New Zealand. And it could easily get out of hand, but it’s still relatively small-scale in New Zealand. Now, the figures I’ve seen suggest 1% or perhaps 2% of New Zealand farmland is in foreign hands, and while that could increase, that’s a heck of a lot less than, say, Liberia in West Africa, where two-thirds of all their land is now under some kind of concession to foreign investors, or South Sudan, the new state that was just set up a year ago in Africa, where 10% of all the land had been given away in some kind of lease deal to foreigners even before the state was created, before they’d raised the flag. So, you know, on the scale of things, New Zealand isn’t in a bad state. But you do have to watch out, because there is a huge kind of land rush round the world going on, and prospectors and national governments and big corporations in expanding nations like China and India are looking out for really quite large areas of land, and if they can get hold of them and at a good price, then they will.
JESSICA Why does it matter whether its foreigners or locals who own the land?
PEARCE Well, maybe it doesn’t matter. In good times, people will invest and it probably won’t matter too much. But in bad times, it can be a problem. And you have to say that land is a very fundamental asset for a country. There’s nothing much more fundamental than land to a nation. And if you sell or give long leases on that land to foreign entities, then you lose control of it. You have much more democratic control, if push comes to shove, with a nationally owned company than you do with a foreign-owned company. But it is also true that we’re all part of a global economy now. Even if the company that owns the land is based in New Zealand, it may well have bankers who are abroad. So we can’t, I think, sort of put up very high walls around our country. But we do need to have democratic accountability. We need make sensible democratic decisions about how much we’re prepared to give land to other countries or other countries. Now, they may bring in expertise, which we want; they may bring in finance that we want. But there again, they may be out for a quick hit. They may be wanting to make a quick profit and not really contribute to the national economy, and those are the kind of things that one has to look out for. As I say, I think New Zealand is a kind of grown-up nation. New Zealand can look after itself. But many – especially in Africa – small, new, poor nations really do have great difficulty in keeping control of their assets if rich foreigners want to come calling.
.
See: Q+A: Transcript of Fred Pearce interview
It seems that we New Zealanders were right to be concerned with offshore investors buying up arable land and that we risk losing control of this valuable asset at our peril.
Whether foreign ownership emanates from Berlin, Beijing, or Boston – be concerned. Be very concerned.
As Pearce said about land,
“You know, they’re not making land any more, so, you know, you’ve got to look after what you have. “
By the way, as a side-note; during the video interview with Pearce, an object appeared at the top right of the screen. It faded away momentarily, then came back brighter and more defined.
Anyone got any ideas what it was? (Cue: the X-Files theme.)
.
.
Q+A, Paul Holmes
.
Also on TVNZ’s Q+A this morning; Paul Holmes.
But not the Paul Holmes we’ve known since 1989, when he first beamed into our homes.
This morning, Paul looked terrible; gaunt, weak, with shaky voice – the result of recent open-heart surgery. At one point he had to reach and grasp an object to support himself on his feet. His appearance was so shocking that at any moment I expected him to collapse,
.
.
What was TVNZ thinking, allowing him on-air?
It was irresponsible.
It was heart-wrenching, watching him struggle to stay on his feet.
Not good, TVNZ.
And for Paul,
Get well soon, mate. You’ve got too much work to do, skivving of up on that farm of yours. TV is not the same without your impish grin on our TV screens.
Get better, please.
And we’ll see you back, when you’re 100% again!
.
.
= fs =
John Key – keep your grubby hands of Local Body Councils!
17 July 2012
8 comments
.
.
At a recent Local Government conference in Queenstown, John Key exhorted local body councils to “reign in” spending and “focus on core services”,
” The Government proposes axing the community wellbeings from the Local Government Act to make councils focus on ”core responsibilities” and reduce the rates burden on constituents. “
See: Councils to pressure Govt over reforms
This theme of “core services” is one that National has been banging-on about since Nick Smith was Local Government Minister. In May of this year, Smith’s replacement as LG Minister, David Carter, was interviewed on TVNZ’s Q+A.
To suggest that he was sending “mixed messages” was fairly evident. But interviewer Greg Boyd managed to elicit responses from Carter that revealed National’s obessesive mania for local governments to stick to “core services”,
GREG BOYD Well, hold on. It sounds like the Government’s wanting a bob each way in this. They’re wanting to say they keep in touch with what’s happening with the rates, but they’re only to go and do core services at a local level or not. Which way is it to go?
DAVID CARTER We are not saying that councils can only do core services. If you take my Christchurch City Council, for example, and it runs the Ellerslie Flower Show in Hagley Park. You could argue that’s not a core service. The council has determined that there is value in delivering that show for the people of Christchurch, and, frankly, I meet a lot of people on planes who are travelling from all over New Zealand to come to that. The council’s decision is to run the Ellerslie Flower Show, and that is a decision for the council to make. It’s certainly not a decision for central government to make or for myself as minister.[abridged]
GREG BOYD So you are limiting local government? They are going to be in charge of very basic things and numbers and keeping an eye on rates. You are limiting their scope quite a bit.
DAVID CARTER We’re certainly going to get local government to be far more focused on what activities it undertakes. In the past, some councils have stepped too far and undertaken activities, Hamilton city, for example, with the Grand Prix racing. I think that was an activity that went far beyond where local government should have gone. It cost local government in that area a lot of money. We’re not saying you cannot run race cars; we’re saying you need to think very very carefully before undertaking that activity. And by putting these financial management tests in place, I think councils will think more carefully about some of those longer-term extraneous activities they’re undertaking than they did in the past.
See: Q+A Interview with David Carter 20 May 2012
So the upshot is;
- Flower Shows – good
- Grand Prix racing – bad
No doubt local government bodies will await further diktats from the Minister as to what is permissable and what is not. (And it;’s laughable how National painted Labour as “nanny statist?!”)
Yet, National is not averse to spending tax-payers money on events that are not Central Government “core services”,
.
.
National had no qualms in spending $39 million of our money on rugby. On top of that, they supported the spending of a further $200 million of public money on the Games.
And National certainly doesn’t seem to mind when SEO’s paid out $54 million in “performance bonuses” to their staff in 2011, with power companies spending the highest.
See: SEOs pay $54m in staff bonuses
Perhaps John Key and National should look at themselves first as to what they are spending our taxes on.
Especially when recent disclosures to Radio NZ reveal that private consultants have been paid hundreds of millions of dollars for “advice” of dubious quality and necessity.
This blogger detects not just the sickly-sweet stench of hypocrisy on this issue, but signs of National’s propensity for heavy-handed, ideologically-motivated, State interference where they are not welcomed, nor justified.
National has it’s own “core services” to focus on – unemployment, stagnating economy, low wages, New Zealanders leaving for Australia, and deeply unpopular programmes of state asset sales, charter schools, mining, school league tables, alcohol abuse, etc .
National should be focusing in their own backyard – because from where I sit, they have enough of a mess to clean up, without peering over the fence onto other people’s “turf”.
We’re still waiting for those 170,000 new jobs, Dear Leader.
.
.
= fs =
Categories: The Body Politic
Local Government Forum, Q+A, Rugby World Cup
Little Dear Leader on Police Pay & State Asset Sales…
25 June 2012
7 comments
.
.
There are often little ‘nuggets’ of insights to be gleaned from interviews of our elected representatives on TV1’s “Q+A” and TV3’s “The Nation” . It’s usually not the carefully ‘spun’ rhetoric that is of interest – but the unintentional slips which offer an insight into their mindset and beliefs.
An interview with National’s Minister of Economic Development, Steven Joyce, on 24 June, was no exception.
Watch full video here: Q+A: Steven Joyce on Economic Growth
Read full transcript here: Transcipt of Steven Joyce interview
.
On Police Pay…
Shane Taurima asked Joyce about police pay.
With recent suggestions that there will be a nil-increase for police pay this year, and talk of a Police march of Parliament, this is obviously a touchy subject for National. Joyce certainly did his best to avoid a direct answer,
” SHANE We take your point, but before we go, because there’s growing concern- Just before we go, there’s growing concern amongst our police over their pay, and I want to know whether they’re going to get-
STEVEN You’re getting a little beyond my portfolios at this point, but, again-
SHANE But you are Associate Finance Minister.
STEVEN That’s true, but let me take you through this. Again, New Zealand has to cut its cloth to actually meet what it actually affords to buy in the world. So you have your Lucy Lawlesses on saying we need to stop-
SHANE Let’s talk about the police-
STEVEN No, no-
SHANE The police-STEVEN No, let me finish.
SHANE You haven’t even mentioned the police yet-
STEVEN No, let me tell you-
SHANE Let’s get your answer on the police.
STEVEN No, let me take you through it, because there’s no answer that’s independent of these other answers. Because the reality is you need to grow the economy to actually create more income to pay for the public services. And in the meantime, things are going to be tight because, actually, we’re spending more than we’re earning. We have for some time.
SHANE So no increase?
STEVEN We have to actually balance it. I’m not saying about no increase with the police. What I’m saying is that every government agency, every public service is dependent on how strongly we grow the economy forward, and that means taking advantage of all the opportunities we have, and, frankly, that includes intensification of agriculture, it includes oil and gas, it includes clean tech and high-tech industries, and that’s what we’re focused on. “
Note Joyce’s reference to linking state sector pay with “growing the economy”,
“…Because the reality is you need to grow the economy to actually create more income to pay for the public services. And in the meantime, things are going to be tight because, actually, we’re spending more than we’re earning. We have for some time. “
If Steven Joyce is suggesting that increasing state sector pay depends on “growing the economy”, that all but guarantees a low-wage state sector, including for nurses, doctors, firefighters, police, teachers, etc. These are the state sector workers that determine the difference between New Zealand being a First World nation with modern services and infra-structure – or a Third World banana republic where skilled workers are in short-supply, having packed up and headed of to Australia.
So much for National’s rhetoric on raising the skill levels for our teachers and paying them more.
National is not a Party that is known for generosity with pay scales and improving wages. In fact, when it comes to state sector workers, they and Scrooge speak from the same page.
With one exception,
.
.
Last November, salaries for the Prime Minister, Ministers, and MPs, were substantially increased,
PRIME MINISTER New salary (backdated to July 1): $411,510. Was: $400,500.
DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER New salary: $291,800. Was: $282,500.
CABINET MINISTER New salary: $257,800. Was: $249,100.
MINISTER OUTSIDE CABINET New salary: $217,200. Was: $209,100.
SPEAKER AND OPPOSITION LEADER New salary: $257,800. Was: $249,100.
BACKBENCHERS New salary: $141,800. Was: $134,800.
Steven Joyce’s salary rose from $249,100 to $257,800 – an increase of $8,700 p.a.
That increase in salary was based on economic growth of 1.8%.
See: Economic growth slowed at end of 2011
.
On Capital Markets…
When Shane Taurima asked if National was going to back down on state asset sales, Joyce offered this reply,
” STEVEN No, I don’t believe the Government’s going to back down on that at all, and the reason for it is this- well, firstly, there’s a couple of things. Firstly, we did take it to the country, and I think what the country said at the last election was some aspects of, say, for example, mixed ownership was of concern to them, but they understood the role of the government in actually bringing the books back into surplus and creating opportunities for New Zealand going forward. And you can’t buy a quarter of the package, which was my point in relation to economic growth. You can’t say, ‘I want the jobs, but I don’t want this, this and this,’ because, actually, you do have to provide those opportunities. Now, if you go to the mixed-ownership model, one of the most important things about it, which I believe so far, you know, hasn’t been talked about enough is the strengthening of the capital markets by getting those shareholdings listed on the capital markets in New Zealand. Now, the New Zealand capital markets actually historically, certainly over the last 10 years, have performed very poorly relative to the rest of the world, and that’s because there’s been some breaches of faith historically. Go back to 1987 – that’s been very difficult for New Zealanders to have confidence in their capital markets since then. We need to grow our capital markets because that’s how our companies get the opportunity for more capital, to grow further, to add more jobs. So I’m hopeful that the mixed-ownership model with the opportunity to list those companies, which would be strong companies in the New Zealand environment, that’s an opportunity to actually strengthen the capital markets and get more Kiwis interested- “
With particular emphasis on this point made by Joyce,
“… one of the most important things about it, which I believe so far, you know, hasn’t been talked about enough is the strengthening of the capital markets by getting those shareholdings listed on the capital markets in New Zealand. Now, the New Zealand capital markets actually historically, certainly over the last 10 years, have performed very poorly relative to the rest of the world, and that’s because there’s been some breaches of faith historically. Go back to 1987 – that’s been very difficult for New Zealanders to have confidence in their capital markets since then…”
It is not the first time that this blogger has heard or read that rationale for privatising state-owned assets. The argument goes something like this;
- After the 1987 share market crash and the global financial crisis (GFC), people are wary in investing in shares.
- People prefer to invest in bricks & mortar – rental and commercial properties, as it is an investment they can see and touch, and no shonkey system is going to steal it away from them.
- The share market and companies are therefore ‘starved’ of investment by “mum & dad” investors.
- Adding share from SOEs to “the mix” will strengthen the share market as SOEs give a certain measure of credibility and confidence to the Share Market.
To which this blogger responds with: well, tough luck, and screw that!
The whole premise of the neo-liberal system is that capital and business must be unfettered by the State and left to operate with the Invisible Hand of the Free Market.
The free market is supposedly superior to the State.
The State cannot run services as efficiently as the private sector.
The State is cumbersome and wasteful when compared to the business world and the Free Market.
Rubbish.
If that were true, then why is Steven Joyce and other National politicians demanding that shares from the part-sale of SOEs are needed to prop up the capital markets system?
Why can’t the capital markets system operate efficiently and effectively without the need for what is, in effect, State assistance, by way of privatising SOE shares to improve investment in the capital markets system ?
This is the share market’s version of a State subsidy.
If the capital markets cannot opperate without the assistance of the State, through SOE privatisation, then what does that say about the validity of neo-liberaliasm and the Free Market?
Consider for a moment, that once all SOEs are privatised (god forbid) and all wealth is now focused on the capital markets; what will National do next time the share markets collpase? Will they sell the roads? The state conservancy parks?
If state assistance for the capital markets is the raison d’etre for asset privatisation, then it becomes obvious that Muldoonist interventionism and corporate welfarism is never far from the surface of the National Party. Little wonder that the ACT Party is so often exasperated with their larger coalition partner.
So New Zealanders should take heed. The partial-privatisation of our state assets is not about “mum and dad” investors. It is about propping up a capital market that seems unable to sustain itself without massive State support.
Which is why the rotten system of neo-liberalism is fated to end the same way as the old Soviet collectivist system. Because eventually we will run out of props to keep it from collapsing. Or SOEs to sell off.
.
.
= fs =
A John, a Tony, and a Winston
17 June 2012
12 comments
.
.
This morning’s ‘Q+A’ (TV1), and ‘The Nation’ (TV3), featured interviews with John Key, Tony Ryall, and Winston Peters. Peters also appeared on John Tamihere’s panel on ‘Think Tank‘ – but more on that in a moment.
The three interviews and panel yielded some interesting points…
.
Tony Ryall, Minister for State Own Enterprises
.
One of National’s constant cop-outs on why the economy is stagnating and unemployment is so high, is a constant finger-pointing at the previous Labour government. According to Key, English, et al in National, the previous Labour government left the economy in a “parlous state”,
” In 2008 the Government inherited an economy that had been in recession for nearly a year and that was up against a world economy in crisis….
… Under the last Labour Government the economy got way out of balance.
… We inherited from Labour a set of government books showing never-ending budget deficits and government debt spiralling out of control. This would have ruined the economy and created an onerous debt burden destructive to jobs and income growth. “
See: John Key, Statement to Parliament 2011, 8 February, 2011
” I do agree with the view that for New Zealand to have a sustained recovery based on a stronger export sector will be a challenge with the dollar at the current levels. But I imagine that that member will not try to make a political point about that, because it is precisely record-high interest rates and a record-high dollar, driven by the previous Government’s reckless economic management, that have put the export sector into such a difficult position. “
See: Bill English, Parliamentary Questions And Answers – 30 July 2009
None of it is true, of course, and National’s attempt to re-write history is simply a dishonest strategy to excuse their own shocking performance at growing the economy. In fact, this blogger pointed this out in a carefully researched analysis of Labour’s track record from 2000 to 2008.
See: Labour: the Economic Record 2000 – 2008
Today (17 June), SOE Minister Tony Ryall let slip on ‘Q+A’ an admission that Labour’s record on fiscal management was not what National Party strategists had been alleging,
” TONY RYALL Uh, its certainly about debt. You know, New Zealands debt is currently $52 billion, $53 billion. Expected to go to $72 billion in the next three years. Thats getting to a level that were uncomfortable with. Thats the reason why we want to sell a minority stake in these assets, free up some cash that can then be invested in the other priority assets that New Zealanders want in the future…
[abridged]
TONY RYALL Thats right. Because at the moment, were going from $8 billion when we started in 2008. The debts now around $52 billion. Were expecting to be at $72 billion in another three years time… “
See: TVNZ Q+A Transcript interview with Tony Ryall
So much for National; their party apparatchiks; and supporters who constantly warn us that Labour was, and is, a “borrow and spend” Party. National seems to be quite adept at racking up massive overseas debt – whilst cutting taxes locally.
Eventually though, that debt has to be re-paid. Hence why National is selling state assets and cutting back on state/social services.
Thank you, Tony Ryall, for the admission that the previous government, in fact, was not as fiscally inept as you and your colleagues have made out. Nor as inept as your handling of the country’s economy.
Feel free to call an early election any time soon?
.
John Key, Prime Minister (Temporary)
.
John Key’s appearance on today’s ‘The Nation‘ as the front man for an ideologically-driven National Party was on-par with past performances as the ever-smiling, smooth-talking politician, whose role it is to put a “human face” on the neo-liberal agenda.
There were several issues touched upon in the interview – though none as deeply as perhaps the viewer might have desired. On the issue of National’s deal-making with Sky City, Key was let off the hook lightly – with Fairfax interviewer, John Hartevelt looking slightly bemused when a particularly promising line of questioning was cut short.
Perhaps the interview tried cramming in too many issues, for the alloted time?
On the issue of the Auditor General’s investigation on National’s involvement in deal-making with Sky City on the possible awarding of a contract to build a new Convention centre, one comment from Key, in particular, should have raised a few eyebrows and generated further questioning.
At 6.37 into the interview;
” KEY: The involvement I had, as Minister of Tourism was to go and talk to a number of critical players, and as part of a general conversation say to them, “Hey, look, New Zealand’s interested in building a convention centre. Did that with Sky City. I did that with people out at ASB Centre The Edge. I did that with Ngati Whatua. That’s not unusual. I mean, and to argue that that would be unusual would be to say, well, look I have discussions with people in Whangarei about building a museum there. And I have discussions with people in Auckland about building a cycleway.
So now what we’re talking about about is, ok, was there undue influence or was the process correctly handled, that’s what the auditor general will say.
So let me tell you this, for a start of, ok, in terms of the expression of interest process, my office had absolutely no involvement, no correspondence, [ interuption by Rachel Smalley] no phone calls, absolutely nothing. So when the auditor general comes in there will be no correspondence, no phone calls, no discussions, zero. “
In a very casual, matter-of-fact manner, Key has stated that whilst he had “talks to a number of critical players, and as part of a general conversation say to them, “Hey, look, New Zealand’s interested in building a convention centre” – that there is no record whatsoever of any such talks or interaction with any of the parties involved.
What we do know is this,
” Prime Minister John Key has confirmed he offered a deal to Sky City allowing the casino to have more pokie machines in return for building a multimillion-dollar convention centre. Mr Key, speaking from Indonesia, confirmed he made the offer to Sky City in his capacity as Minister of Tourism, Newstalk ZB reported…
… Mr Key was asked last July in a question for written answer from Green MP Sue Kedgley whether he or any of his ministers had met representatives from the casino to discuss changes to the Gambling Act.
He replied: “I attended a dinner with the Sky City board 4 November 2009 where we discussed a possible national convention centre and they raised issues relating to the Gambling Act 2003″. “
See: NZ Herald SkyCity deal was PM’s own offer
See: Blogpost Doing ‘the business’ with John Key – Here’s How
The problem here, is that with Key’s “office having absolutely no involvement, no correspondence, no phone calls” we, the public have no way of knowing what has transpired. There is simply no telling what has gone on between Key and “critical players”.
I don’t know about you, the reader, but I am not in the slightest reassured by Key’s explanation. It is an extremely worrying development in our system when important matters between government of commercial intrerests can be discussed in secret; off the record; and with no paper trail or other indication as to how arrangements were agreed upon.
The potential for corruption is plain for all to see.
If Key does not comprehend this, then his political advisors are not doing their jobs properly. This is not the transparent government that we have come to expect in a modern society – nor what John Key promised us.
See: Open and Transparent Government – Declaration
John Key then went on to mount an extraordinary and peculiar attack on Winston Peters.
At 27.35 into the interview;
” KEY: I dare him to go out there and say he will not under any conditions form a government with Labour, even if Labour’s policy is to raise the super age from 2020, not in the three-year period from 2014 to 2017.
“I dare him to say he will not, because he’s tricky and he’ll find a way all around all of that stuff. “
See: TV1 News -National in trouble – Peters
See: TV1 VIDEO: Prime Minister John Key on ACC, super and the future
Curiously, when pushed by John Hartevelt, Key did not categorically rule out a coalition deal with Peters as he did in 2008.
This blogger believes that Key and National understand Rule #1 in politics: learn to count.
If National’s support drops in 2014 (or earlier election) they will require a coalition partner with more numbers than the one-man parties of ACT and United Future. Only NZ First comes anywhere near offering the Nats a potential coalition partner.
At the very least, National’s strategists want to drive Peters away from any potential coalition-partnership or Supply & Confidence support deal for a Labour-led government.
As for Peters – this blogger doubts that he will repeat his fatal mistake of entering into coalition with National, as he did in on 11 December 1996. Peters understands that his constituency vote for him because it is a protest vote against the incumbent government – in this case, National.
Just as in 1996, people voted for him as part of a wide-spectrum political bloc of anti-National sentiment that was sweeping the country. By coalescing with the Nats in 1996, Peters ignored that sentiment and suffered the wrath of the electorate – first at the superannuation referendum in 1998, which was soundly defeated 92% to 8%. A year later, at the general election, Peters barely scrapped back into Parliament by winning his seat with a 63 vote majority. His Party polled under the 5% threshold.
No doubt National will continue to play their silly-bugger games to de-stabilise the Labour-led governmen-in-waiting. They have no option, as their own internal polling must be reflecting what mainstream polling is showing; the public have had enough of National; it’s “Bright Future” never-never promises; and want change. Come 2014 (if not earlier), the Nats will be dog-tucker and will be gone by dinner-time on election night.
Again, feel free to call an early election any time soon, Dear Leader?
.
.
Winston Peters appeared on TVNZ’s ‘Q+A‘, and afterward on TV3’s ‘Think Tank‘, hosted by John Tamihere. Neither appearances could have been more starkly contrasting.
On ‘Q+A‘, interviewed by the personable Greg Boyd, Peters resorted ‘to form’, and displayed his typical media-combativeness and mis-mash of slogans and faux-outrage, that is his public persona.
It was painful to watch.
See: TVNZ Q+A Winston Peters on Coalition and Superannuation
‘Nuff said.
Contrast Peter’s cringeworthy performance on ‘Q+A‘, with his appearance on ‘Think Tank‘, today, as one of three guests; Labour Leader David Shearer and Auckland University professor, Jane Kelsey. This was a Winston Peters from a Parallel Universe where he appeared thoughful; measured; insightful; and practically led the panel. This is a Winston Peters who commands respect and attention – not the Jeykill & Hyde version on ‘Q+A’ who alienates the viewer with his antics.
As a critic of Winston Peters, my suggestion to him is this; lose the attitude. Or at least tone it down. The media can be a pain in the arse, for sure, but why wind them up needlessly?
Save the aggro for the debating chamber in the House. That is where Peters can best utilise that righteous anger he is so famous for. And where he can best show the public that he is on our side as the champion of the Ordinary Kiwi Battler.
The Winston Peters that this blogger saw on ‘Think Tank‘ is the one that will help re-build NZ first.
Not the grumpy old bugger who got into a shouting-match with Greg Boyd.
If Peters reads this, take my criticisms as constructive. Or not. As a Labour-Green supporter, I’m not terribly fussed if he makes it back to Parliament at the next election, or fades away into the Twilight Zone.
But perhaps his supporters and Party activists deserve that opportunity?
Just my 5 cents + 15% gst worth.
.
*
.
Acknowledgement
Cartoons by Murray Webb
.
.
= fs =
Categories: The Body Politic
David Sheaer, Dear Leader, economy, Jane Kelsey, Labour, Q+A, Sky City, The Nation, Think Tank, tony ryall, winston peters
How Paula Bennett and National are wasting our taxdollars
7 May 2012
4 comments
.
Source
.
National today announced that “there will be an upfront investment in welfare reform of $520 million over four years to support more beneficiaries into work“.
What, precisely, does that mean; “to support more beneficiaries into work“?!
A NZ Herald report attempted to provide some answers,
“The funding package includes $80 million for early childhood education and childcare assistance payments, $55.1 million for 155 Work and Income staff who will be dedicated to support people back into work, and $148.8 million for youth services.
Ms Bennett said the $287.5 million included $81.5 million of additional funding, but the remainder would come from “reprioritised” funding from within Social Development.” – Source
Bennett added,
“The Government’s welfare changes require significant up-front financial support. We’ve made a commitment to provide that investment to ensure fewer people are on welfare long term.” – Ibid
Extra funding for childcare is always a good thing (though with National, expect the obligatory ‘fish hooks’ – National gives nothing away without a hidden barb somewhere in the deal), and this Blogger congratulates such a move.
But where this Blogger has serious concerns is the euphemism employed by Bennett, Key, and other well-paid right wing politicians, when they claim that ‘reforms’ “will be to support people back into work “.
National’s idea of what constitutes “support” is often at stark variance with how others might define support.
The all important issue is; are there enough jobs in the country for beneficiaries to go into? This is no empty question, as Paula Bennett herself admitted last Sunday (29 April), on TVNZ’s Q+A,
SHANE
Can I ask you about work, though? Do you think that there is a job out there for all these young people who really really want a job? Is there a job out there for young people who really want a job?PAULA
No. There’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, or else we wouldn’t have the unemployment figures that we do.
– Source
If, as Bennett admits, there there’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, then what is the purpose of spending over half a billion dollars of taxpayers’ money on “welfare reforms”?
Next question: why not invest that $520 million in job creation progammes? We have a critical housing shortage; growing poverty; and unemployment is rising again – why not invest in job creation?
Why invest in welfare “reforms” – when welfare ain’t broke? Welfare is working precisely as intended and is keeping people alive, fed, and housed at a time of economic recession/stagnation.
As Bennett admitted on Q+A, it is the employment market that is broken and there are not enough jobs for those who want one. It’s as simple as that: not enough jobs.
Which means that John Key and Paula Bennett are wasting $520 million of our taxes on a pointless, futile exercise.
How many new jobs will welfare “reforms” create? Not a single one.
This may give ‘jollies’ to National Party groupies; assorted right wing zealots; anti-beneficiary bigots; and low-information voters – but in the end this waste of resources and obvious exercise in beneficiary victimisation will be as useful as seeking a meaningful relationship by scouring internet porn-sites.
I don’t mind if right wingers indulge in a mindless, political, circle-jerk. But not when we, the taxpayer, have to pay for it.
.
Postscript
Our Dear Leader, the Prime Minister of New Zealand enjoyed the benefits of a modern welfare society that protects those in need;
- 1967: Key’s mother would have had access to the widow’s benefit when her husband passed away,
- The Key family lived in a low-rent, State House, in Christchurch
- 1979-81: Key received a free tertiary education at Canterbury University (BCom in accounting)
- Key would most likely have received a student allowance during his tertiary studies
- Key received an extra $5,096 p/a from the April 2009 taxcuts
- Key recieved an extra $7,100 p/a from the October 2010 taxcuts
Paula Bennett, Minister of Welfare,
- Paula Bennet was a solo-mother, at age 17
- Just two years later, she used a Housing Corporation loan to buy a $56,000 house in Taupo.
- All of this while on the domestic purposes benefit.
- Paula Bennet was a recipient of the Training Incentive Allowance (a WINZ benefit)
- Paula Bennet obtained her degree at Massey University, through the TIA – a taxpayer-funded benefit
.
*
.
References
NZ Herald: Budget: Welfare plans revealed
NZ Herald: Unemployment rate lifts to 6.7pc
.
.
= fs =
News Archives
Crony Watch
Keeping an eye on dodgy government appointees, crony-by-crony!
Frankly Speaking... 
