seems like a week of not so bright ideas. with all the pressure around the food and petrol price rises and high mortgage rates, the pressure is building to do something, anything.
so mr dunne has put forth the income-splitting proposal again. which is a bad idea because it doesn't help genuinely poor families. families with children that have a family income of around $40,000 to $50,000 are already paying zero tax (through working for family tax credits) so won't benefit. families with incomes less than $38,000 will get very little benefit, as they are already on the lowest tax rate anyway. income-splitting won't help families where both partners are earning between $38,000 and $60,000 or where both partners are earning more than $60,000. so who does that leave? very few families, but especially single high-income families. these are not the people that need the most relief from high food and petrol prices. there is no point in reducing the tax base to help those on higher incomes, while providing little or no relief for those on low incomes. at least it doesn't make sense if you actually care about reducing poverty and helping those most in need.
the other bad idea put out this week was the proposal to make food items gst exempt. the reasons why this is a bad idea are pretty well covered on the standard, and this discussion on public address is pretty useful. i can speak from my own experience as a chartered accountant. it would be a very bad idea. it would be so bad that i would seriously consider leaving my profession rather than having to deal with the administrative nightmares involved. more than that, it doesn't solve the underlying problems, which are largely international in nature and not likely to be solved by domestic policy settings.
across the board tax cuts tend to have the same problems as income-splitting - they benefit those on higher incomes most, so do nothing to reduce poverty for those at the bottom end.
so those are the bad ideas. now it's time to think up some good ones! the basic ones are generally the best: reduce household debt, particularly debt used to fuel consumption (ok, difficult for those on lower incomes, but possible for higher income earners). stop investing in property and start investing in productive assets. and targetted tax relief for those most in need.
Wednesday, 30 April 2008
Tuesday, 29 April 2008
left behind
it's been a pretty hectic day. aside from my normal workday (and unexpected childcare crisis in the morning), i attended the worker's memorial day event in hamilton, then went to the monthly board meeting for community radio and finished off the day by driving to auckland (and back) for the launch of the child poverty action group report "left behind".
needless to say, i'm pretty tired just now, so will give random impressions of the day.
the workers memorial day service was pretty moving, especially with the attendance of the fire service to commemorate the recent death of their colleague derek lovell. also present in numbers were the rail and maritime transport union, remembering the death of one their workers in hamilton last year.
it was a pretty good turn out with some excellent speakers. the figures were quite sad, particularly ACC figures around the numbers of workers who go on to long-term compensation each year because of a workplace injury. sorry, i'm too tired to go looking for them now.
noticably absent were any employer groups. to be fair, it may be because they weren't aware of the event. in future years, i'd like to see the employers and manufacturers association there, as well as federated farmers (given that the agriculture industry has a relatively high number of deaths). as the speaker for the RMTU said, issues of health and safety can only be resolved when all groups make a joint effort to deal with them.
the CPAG launch was interesting. enjoyed hearing tapu misa speak - she's a writer i admire greatly. i didn't agree with everything said at the launch but there were some very pertinent points.
the approach this government has taken to reducing poverty is to get people into work. it's by far the best option, as it restores dignity, gives purpose and puts people on to a career path which will lead to an improvement in their situation. combined with this is the focus on training and upskilling, particularly with the modern apprenticeship programme, intererst free student loans and the cap on tertiary fees.
however, this approach does not address the poverty faced by children of beneficiaries. the massive gap created by the ruth richardson "mother of all budgets" has never been reversed. i understand that the government of the time did some research into the minimum income required to survive. the benefit was then set to 80% of that amount.
since then (possibly before then as well), the narrative around beneficiaries has been that they are all lazy bludgers, sucking off the state, using up the money earnt by the rest of us hard-working taxpayers while sitting on their bums doing nothing. this is the attitude that has prevailed, with few serious challenges. ms misa acknowledged the role the media has played in perpetuating this myth. it's something that needs to be turned around if we are going to be serious about dealing with child poverty.
i think back to one of my earliest posts, where i made the point that nz'ers are not nearly as generous as we like to think we are. when it comes to people on benefits, we're not very generous at all. while some beneficiaries will fall into the narrative outlined above, i would say that the majority of them have fallen on hard times, and plenty are genuinely unable to work. (i'm meaning all benefits here - disability, domestic purposes etc.)
i wonder how many nz'ers would today, if asked, be prepared to give up tax cuts this year and next year in order for that money to be paid out for the children of beneficiaries? the CPAG report is clear about the effects of poverty on the development of children. money is not the only solution, but money can start making things happen.
for example, one speaker made the point that the neighbourhoods where the poor people live are the neighbourhoods where the least amount of services are provided. he gave the example of early childhood education centres. few of these are located in poor suburbs, as compared to affluent suburbs, because so much ECE is privately provided. private providers know that in poor suburbs, they won't be able to earn the profits they need so will not set up solely to provide the 20 free hours. the way to deal with this issue is to adequately fund community-based not-for-profit centres, and that needs money. taxpayer money.
there's a lot to think about, and i hope to read the report in the coming weeks. the important point is that we, as a society, need to be serious about removing income inequalities if we want to give every child a positive start in life.
needless to say, i'm pretty tired just now, so will give random impressions of the day.
the workers memorial day service was pretty moving, especially with the attendance of the fire service to commemorate the recent death of their colleague derek lovell. also present in numbers were the rail and maritime transport union, remembering the death of one their workers in hamilton last year.
it was a pretty good turn out with some excellent speakers. the figures were quite sad, particularly ACC figures around the numbers of workers who go on to long-term compensation each year because of a workplace injury. sorry, i'm too tired to go looking for them now.
noticably absent were any employer groups. to be fair, it may be because they weren't aware of the event. in future years, i'd like to see the employers and manufacturers association there, as well as federated farmers (given that the agriculture industry has a relatively high number of deaths). as the speaker for the RMTU said, issues of health and safety can only be resolved when all groups make a joint effort to deal with them.
the CPAG launch was interesting. enjoyed hearing tapu misa speak - she's a writer i admire greatly. i didn't agree with everything said at the launch but there were some very pertinent points.
the approach this government has taken to reducing poverty is to get people into work. it's by far the best option, as it restores dignity, gives purpose and puts people on to a career path which will lead to an improvement in their situation. combined with this is the focus on training and upskilling, particularly with the modern apprenticeship programme, intererst free student loans and the cap on tertiary fees.
however, this approach does not address the poverty faced by children of beneficiaries. the massive gap created by the ruth richardson "mother of all budgets" has never been reversed. i understand that the government of the time did some research into the minimum income required to survive. the benefit was then set to 80% of that amount.
since then (possibly before then as well), the narrative around beneficiaries has been that they are all lazy bludgers, sucking off the state, using up the money earnt by the rest of us hard-working taxpayers while sitting on their bums doing nothing. this is the attitude that has prevailed, with few serious challenges. ms misa acknowledged the role the media has played in perpetuating this myth. it's something that needs to be turned around if we are going to be serious about dealing with child poverty.
i think back to one of my earliest posts, where i made the point that nz'ers are not nearly as generous as we like to think we are. when it comes to people on benefits, we're not very generous at all. while some beneficiaries will fall into the narrative outlined above, i would say that the majority of them have fallen on hard times, and plenty are genuinely unable to work. (i'm meaning all benefits here - disability, domestic purposes etc.)
i wonder how many nz'ers would today, if asked, be prepared to give up tax cuts this year and next year in order for that money to be paid out for the children of beneficiaries? the CPAG report is clear about the effects of poverty on the development of children. money is not the only solution, but money can start making things happen.
for example, one speaker made the point that the neighbourhoods where the poor people live are the neighbourhoods where the least amount of services are provided. he gave the example of early childhood education centres. few of these are located in poor suburbs, as compared to affluent suburbs, because so much ECE is privately provided. private providers know that in poor suburbs, they won't be able to earn the profits they need so will not set up solely to provide the 20 free hours. the way to deal with this issue is to adequately fund community-based not-for-profit centres, and that needs money. taxpayer money.
there's a lot to think about, and i hope to read the report in the coming weeks. the important point is that we, as a society, need to be serious about removing income inequalities if we want to give every child a positive start in life.
Monday, 28 April 2008
workers memorial day
i watched the video clip of one of the men involved in the london bombing as he said goodbye to his daughter. my feelings ranged from feeling sad to feeling sick to feeling extremely angry. the sadness was for his family and his victims. the sickness was at the way this person had lost his moral compass so much that he could commit mass murder in cold blood, and somehow think it was his ticket to heaven. the anger was at his claim that he was committing this act "for islam". i felt that phrase as a personal insult. by using those words, he was associating himself to me and to the other 1.4 billion muslims around the world, by way of our supposedly shared religion. yet the vast majority of them have condemned his act. muslim scholars from around the world have been increasingly vocal in condemning violence and terrorist acts, and particularly bombings such as these.
i caught the tail end of the programme "give it a whirl" on tv1 this saturday morning. it seemed to be about a christian man going to live as a muslim for a month. when i tuned in, his muslim host was expressing disapproval at the christian fellow apologising for the 9/11 bombing on a radio programme (the christian appeared to be posing as a muslim for the show). the muslim explained that by apologising, he was accepting that he somehow had a responsibility for the attack, when in fact there was none. guilt by association is simply unacceptable, yet it's very hard to escape.
tomorrow is worker's memorial day, being commemorated in various places across the country. it's a day to remember workers who have died while at work. the figures i've linked to don't inlcude "fatalities in the maritime or aviation sectors, or fatalities due to work-related crashes on the road as these are investigated by Maritime New Zealand, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and the NZ Police respectively. The Department of Labour figures do not include fatalities from long latency diseases caused by exposure to hazardous substances." so the number of deaths is much higher.
in an environment where health and safety laws are treated as "red-tape", as adding unnecessarily to labour costs, and as "nanny-statism"; it's vital that we take time to remember why these laws are so important. they save lives. they prevent accidents. if manufacturers like fisher & paykel are taking their work off-shore because of over-regulation, we really need to be asking which parts of the health and safety regulations they think are unnecessary?
many years ago now, i visited a factory in india where brass doorknobs and the like were manufactured. the workers were mainly teenage boys, very skinny. they wore no protective clothing. they were breathing in smoke and who knows what else, with nothing to protect them. i can only imagine the pittance they were being paid. at the time i didn't have the courage to grill our host who was giving us a tour of the family business he was so proud of. a business that allowed him to live in a beautiful mansion, with chauffer-driven cars and all the other accoutrements of the high-class asian life.
looking back now, it amazes me that he could go to work every day and be immune to the work conditions of his staff. but he is very obviously not unique. that so many major companies around the world are shifting their centre of operations to low-wage economies shows the blindness is universal.
tomorrow we need to be thinking not just about nz workers, but about all those around the world. especially those who have little or no protection. it's not that there aren't any labour laws in these countries. it's that the laws can be flouted with little or no consequence. it's that the regulations are seen as tedious and a barrier to successful business. it's the loss of humanity in the search for ever-rising profits.
i hope people aren't all grieved out from anzac day. we must spare a moment to grieve for dead workers too.
i caught the tail end of the programme "give it a whirl" on tv1 this saturday morning. it seemed to be about a christian man going to live as a muslim for a month. when i tuned in, his muslim host was expressing disapproval at the christian fellow apologising for the 9/11 bombing on a radio programme (the christian appeared to be posing as a muslim for the show). the muslim explained that by apologising, he was accepting that he somehow had a responsibility for the attack, when in fact there was none. guilt by association is simply unacceptable, yet it's very hard to escape.
tomorrow is worker's memorial day, being commemorated in various places across the country. it's a day to remember workers who have died while at work. the figures i've linked to don't inlcude "fatalities in the maritime or aviation sectors, or fatalities due to work-related crashes on the road as these are investigated by Maritime New Zealand, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and the NZ Police respectively. The Department of Labour figures do not include fatalities from long latency diseases caused by exposure to hazardous substances." so the number of deaths is much higher.
in an environment where health and safety laws are treated as "red-tape", as adding unnecessarily to labour costs, and as "nanny-statism"; it's vital that we take time to remember why these laws are so important. they save lives. they prevent accidents. if manufacturers like fisher & paykel are taking their work off-shore because of over-regulation, we really need to be asking which parts of the health and safety regulations they think are unnecessary?
many years ago now, i visited a factory in india where brass doorknobs and the like were manufactured. the workers were mainly teenage boys, very skinny. they wore no protective clothing. they were breathing in smoke and who knows what else, with nothing to protect them. i can only imagine the pittance they were being paid. at the time i didn't have the courage to grill our host who was giving us a tour of the family business he was so proud of. a business that allowed him to live in a beautiful mansion, with chauffer-driven cars and all the other accoutrements of the high-class asian life.
looking back now, it amazes me that he could go to work every day and be immune to the work conditions of his staff. but he is very obviously not unique. that so many major companies around the world are shifting their centre of operations to low-wage economies shows the blindness is universal.
tomorrow we need to be thinking not just about nz workers, but about all those around the world. especially those who have little or no protection. it's not that there aren't any labour laws in these countries. it's that the laws can be flouted with little or no consequence. it's that the regulations are seen as tedious and a barrier to successful business. it's the loss of humanity in the search for ever-rising profits.
i hope people aren't all grieved out from anzac day. we must spare a moment to grieve for dead workers too.
Friday, 25 April 2008
anzac day
lot's of interesting discussion about anzac day today. i really enjoyed this piece in the herald today by irfan yusuf. less enjoyable, but still worth listening to was this discussion on the panel today (can't believe i've linked to chris trotter twice in a week!). i think it went on too long and was too repetitive, but the initial discussion did raise some good points. finally, this alternative commemoration of peacemakers was brought to my attention by email today.
parts of the peace movement regard anzac day as a celebration of war. i like to think of it more as a rememberance of the dead. it's a rememberance of courage and strength, and a mourning of the loss of life. there are times and places where we should be active in denouncing and protesting against war, but i don't think anzac day is one of them.
however, remembering peacemakers is another issue. i think we should recognise the courage of the people who refused to go to war for reasons of conscience. they often had a very difficult time, although were unlikely to be as much at risk as soldiers on the battlefield. the peacemakers were making a very public stand for principles they strongly believed in, and i don't think including them in our thoughts diminishes the recognition of our soldiers.
i also would have to agree with mr trotter, in that we seem to have imbued the first world war with modern values that weren't apparent at the time. we commemorate a more sanitised version of events, possibly endowing them with more than was there in order to increase the poignancy of the rememberance.
it's certain that WW1 was not about democracy and freedom. we know it can't be so because the side we were fighting for was a colonial power that was not at all interested, at that time, in establishing democracy in its colonies. it was a power not much interested in racial equality, and women's sufferage (in britain) was still several years away.
i think it's important to remember that the heroism was in the way the soldiers fought, but not necssarily in what they fought for. i'm no historian, and i'd have to say that my knowledge of the politics of the day is sadly lacking. i wish i knew more, and it's important that we all do know more. to forget the politics of the time is to glorify a past that never existed except in our minds.
to forget the politics and the full history, good and bad, is a failure to learn the lessons of that time. remember, this was supposed to be the war that ended all wars. but it didn't, and we need to understand why.
i'll be going to the commemoration service in hamilton tomorrow. i want to pay my respects to the dead. i want to remember the loss of so many young lives. not to glorify the way they died but to grieve that it had to happen at all.
post script: here is chris trotter's piece in the dom and deborah's post on her blog, both eloquently written.
parts of the peace movement regard anzac day as a celebration of war. i like to think of it more as a rememberance of the dead. it's a rememberance of courage and strength, and a mourning of the loss of life. there are times and places where we should be active in denouncing and protesting against war, but i don't think anzac day is one of them.
however, remembering peacemakers is another issue. i think we should recognise the courage of the people who refused to go to war for reasons of conscience. they often had a very difficult time, although were unlikely to be as much at risk as soldiers on the battlefield. the peacemakers were making a very public stand for principles they strongly believed in, and i don't think including them in our thoughts diminishes the recognition of our soldiers.
i also would have to agree with mr trotter, in that we seem to have imbued the first world war with modern values that weren't apparent at the time. we commemorate a more sanitised version of events, possibly endowing them with more than was there in order to increase the poignancy of the rememberance.
it's certain that WW1 was not about democracy and freedom. we know it can't be so because the side we were fighting for was a colonial power that was not at all interested, at that time, in establishing democracy in its colonies. it was a power not much interested in racial equality, and women's sufferage (in britain) was still several years away.
i think it's important to remember that the heroism was in the way the soldiers fought, but not necssarily in what they fought for. i'm no historian, and i'd have to say that my knowledge of the politics of the day is sadly lacking. i wish i knew more, and it's important that we all do know more. to forget the politics of the time is to glorify a past that never existed except in our minds.
to forget the politics and the full history, good and bad, is a failure to learn the lessons of that time. remember, this was supposed to be the war that ended all wars. but it didn't, and we need to understand why.
i'll be going to the commemoration service in hamilton tomorrow. i want to pay my respects to the dead. i want to remember the loss of so many young lives. not to glorify the way they died but to grieve that it had to happen at all.
post script: here is chris trotter's piece in the dom and deborah's post on her blog, both eloquently written.
Thursday, 24 April 2008
men's health
now here's a healthy development. it's the "first men's health meeting", called by hon damien o'connor. about time really.
there are obvious gender differences around health issues, and having men's groups or advocates getting together is much more useful than having women doing it. also, there seems to be a perception that men's health issues don't get the attention that women's health issues do. i would debate that. i think women's health issues, particularly around mental health, were badly neglected for a long time. there has been a lot of hard work around advocacy and lobbying by women's groups for many years that have lead to significant advances, particularly around issues like breast cancer and cervical cancer.
however, by having men's health as a separate delegation in the health portfolio, the perception that men's health is somehow less important can be changed.
there are obvious gender differences around health issues, and having men's groups or advocates getting together is much more useful than having women doing it. also, there seems to be a perception that men's health issues don't get the attention that women's health issues do. i would debate that. i think women's health issues, particularly around mental health, were badly neglected for a long time. there has been a lot of hard work around advocacy and lobbying by women's groups for many years that have lead to significant advances, particularly around issues like breast cancer and cervical cancer.
however, by having men's health as a separate delegation in the health portfolio, the perception that men's health is somehow less important can be changed.
Wednesday, 23 April 2008
connections
i found this story on the stuff website today. it's about a jewish woman who has responded to the desecration of her husband's grave by educating people about the holocaust, in an attempt to promote tolerance. i applaud it as a superb response to an event that could have caused her to become bitter or angry.
it's a response i can relate to, because it mirrors some of my own experiences. for me, it was the 9/11 attacks and the bali bombings that spurred me to change the way i was living my life. whereas previously i had concentrated on my work and my family, it became patently clear to me that i now had to move out into the community. i had to speak out against these attrocities, and let people know that my religion does not tolerate this kind activity.
it hasn't been an easy thing to do. i remember about 10 years ago from now, when i would literally be shaking (i mean it, physically shaking) if i had to walk into a room full of people i didn't know. social interaction was really difficult a lot of the time due to my own shyness and lack of confidence. nonetheless, i knew that i couldn't stand by and let the hatred and anger spread through our society as it had been overseas. so i stepped out of my own little world into the big wide one, and wow, what a journey it's been.
i hope that i made and continue to make a difference. yet every now and then i come up against a situation that takes me back to the person i was 10 years ago. it happened today. i was invited to a lunch meeting organised by the institute of chartered accountants, with about a dozen people present. as you can imagine, it was a group of upper-class white people, and i stood out like... well, like a coloured muslim woman in a group of upper-class white people.
it didn't help that i'd forgotten about the meeting when i dressed in the morning, so i was wearing something very ethnic in the arab style, with a reasonable amount of black involved. i'm sure that didn't help. at the start of the meeting, i felt like an invisible person. i could sense that most of these people felt uncomfortable with me, and they didn't really want to talk to me. the people i was sitting next to both turned to talk to people on the other side.
whereas previously i would have been dying inside at this treatment, i now have a strategy. it involves breathing deeply, giving myself positive internal messages, relaxing and waiting. sure enough, within half an hour, i was interacting with everyone on an equal footing. people just need time to realise that i'm like them, but dress a little differently. it doesn't usually take long.
it reminds me of an experience i had last year, when i was filming the close-up easter special on interfaith issues. before filming started, the panel sat down for a chat. this was the first time i met rabbi jack engel. initially he was very reserved towards me. not hostile, certainly not rude in any way. just reserved. i could sense maybe a lack of trust or just that feeling of being uncomfortable.
i didn't let it bother me, and chatted to him before, during (in the breaks) and after filming. the moment we connected was when he was describing to me the level of discrimination his community still faces. he told me about the rude comments and taunts he would get when walking from the synagogue to his home. i told him i knew exactly what that feels like, and we both realised that we had a shared experience. pity it was a negative experience, but the connection was important.
i've only talked to the rabbi once since then. i rang him about a month later to ask his help for a friend who was organising a youth interfaith activity. he response was very positive and helpful, and i believe some young jews participated. i hope that things are getting better for him, and that he can walk home in peace.
so kia ora inge woolf for the work that you're doing. every little bit counts. i hope one day i can visit your holocaust centre, and that we too can connect at an emotional level. all these little connections count. for me, they give me hope of a positive future, of a world where our children can be free from hatred, anger and fear.
it's a response i can relate to, because it mirrors some of my own experiences. for me, it was the 9/11 attacks and the bali bombings that spurred me to change the way i was living my life. whereas previously i had concentrated on my work and my family, it became patently clear to me that i now had to move out into the community. i had to speak out against these attrocities, and let people know that my religion does not tolerate this kind activity.
it hasn't been an easy thing to do. i remember about 10 years ago from now, when i would literally be shaking (i mean it, physically shaking) if i had to walk into a room full of people i didn't know. social interaction was really difficult a lot of the time due to my own shyness and lack of confidence. nonetheless, i knew that i couldn't stand by and let the hatred and anger spread through our society as it had been overseas. so i stepped out of my own little world into the big wide one, and wow, what a journey it's been.
i hope that i made and continue to make a difference. yet every now and then i come up against a situation that takes me back to the person i was 10 years ago. it happened today. i was invited to a lunch meeting organised by the institute of chartered accountants, with about a dozen people present. as you can imagine, it was a group of upper-class white people, and i stood out like... well, like a coloured muslim woman in a group of upper-class white people.
it didn't help that i'd forgotten about the meeting when i dressed in the morning, so i was wearing something very ethnic in the arab style, with a reasonable amount of black involved. i'm sure that didn't help. at the start of the meeting, i felt like an invisible person. i could sense that most of these people felt uncomfortable with me, and they didn't really want to talk to me. the people i was sitting next to both turned to talk to people on the other side.
whereas previously i would have been dying inside at this treatment, i now have a strategy. it involves breathing deeply, giving myself positive internal messages, relaxing and waiting. sure enough, within half an hour, i was interacting with everyone on an equal footing. people just need time to realise that i'm like them, but dress a little differently. it doesn't usually take long.
it reminds me of an experience i had last year, when i was filming the close-up easter special on interfaith issues. before filming started, the panel sat down for a chat. this was the first time i met rabbi jack engel. initially he was very reserved towards me. not hostile, certainly not rude in any way. just reserved. i could sense maybe a lack of trust or just that feeling of being uncomfortable.
i didn't let it bother me, and chatted to him before, during (in the breaks) and after filming. the moment we connected was when he was describing to me the level of discrimination his community still faces. he told me about the rude comments and taunts he would get when walking from the synagogue to his home. i told him i knew exactly what that feels like, and we both realised that we had a shared experience. pity it was a negative experience, but the connection was important.
i've only talked to the rabbi once since then. i rang him about a month later to ask his help for a friend who was organising a youth interfaith activity. he response was very positive and helpful, and i believe some young jews participated. i hope that things are getting better for him, and that he can walk home in peace.
so kia ora inge woolf for the work that you're doing. every little bit counts. i hope one day i can visit your holocaust centre, and that we too can connect at an emotional level. all these little connections count. for me, they give me hope of a positive future, of a world where our children can be free from hatred, anger and fear.
Tuesday, 22 April 2008
pangea day
i'm having a bit of a sad day today. it's very difficult to watch someone close to you going through a difficult time, knowing that you really can't do anything to help them, other than to offer unconditional love and support. sometimes that doesn't feel like enough.
it's also been difficult watching the journalism standards here, which are nothing like what i wrote about yesterday. chris trotter has been the only one i've heard talking about the breach of trust and lack of ethics involved in recording and reporting on a closed session at the labour party conference. this compares to the breach of trust a year or so back, when guyon espiner was involved in broadcasting a pre-interview chat with dr michael cullen. it's the duplicity involved here that is so frustrating: mr espiner was well aware that dr cullen believed he was speaking off the record. and finally, there was the front-page herald report last week giving the impression that the labour party was planning to distribute government information as campaigning material. turns out that there was no such plan; someone had just made an off-the-cuff comment from the floor.
it seems very strange that these kinds of ethical breaches occur only when the labour party is involved. there's been no spying on other parties' annual conferences. closed sessions have thus far been respected as such. there's been no airing of pre-interview chats involving other party's politicians. furthermore, the herald has been found to be in breach of the press council's standard of accuracy. they didn't tell the full truth in that front-page editorial on the EFA last year.
this seems to show that there is some truth in the contention that the main opposition for the labour party in the 2008 campaign won't be the national party. they provide no effective opposition at all. they have no policies, no vision for the country, no leadership skills, and pretty much the same front bench that was in power in the 1990s. no, the main opposition will be the media. and that is a much tougher opposition.
one thing that must be said about the labour team though, is that they don't give up. they take the punches and keep standing back up to fight on. and while the media sideshow continues, they continue running the country and implementing the policies that improve the lives of the majority of new zealanders. that's what it's all about for me, and that's what the conference was about. i don't have to rely on media reports, i was at the labour party conference. and what i saw was an energetic bunch of activists who care deeply about this country, committed to developing and implementing policies that deal with the issues of importance.
so to cheer me up (and hopefully you as well) here is something sent to me by a friend a few days ago. may 10 is the first ever pangea day, when 24 short films will be broadcast simultaneously around the world. it's an attempt to build a global community, a step towards peace, and an encouragement to social action.
for a short taste of the sort of things that are planned, watch these short videos of a choir in one country singing the national anthem of another country. they really are lovely. france sings for the USA, kenya sings for india and japan sings for turkey.
it's also been difficult watching the journalism standards here, which are nothing like what i wrote about yesterday. chris trotter has been the only one i've heard talking about the breach of trust and lack of ethics involved in recording and reporting on a closed session at the labour party conference. this compares to the breach of trust a year or so back, when guyon espiner was involved in broadcasting a pre-interview chat with dr michael cullen. it's the duplicity involved here that is so frustrating: mr espiner was well aware that dr cullen believed he was speaking off the record. and finally, there was the front-page herald report last week giving the impression that the labour party was planning to distribute government information as campaigning material. turns out that there was no such plan; someone had just made an off-the-cuff comment from the floor.
it seems very strange that these kinds of ethical breaches occur only when the labour party is involved. there's been no spying on other parties' annual conferences. closed sessions have thus far been respected as such. there's been no airing of pre-interview chats involving other party's politicians. furthermore, the herald has been found to be in breach of the press council's standard of accuracy. they didn't tell the full truth in that front-page editorial on the EFA last year.
this seems to show that there is some truth in the contention that the main opposition for the labour party in the 2008 campaign won't be the national party. they provide no effective opposition at all. they have no policies, no vision for the country, no leadership skills, and pretty much the same front bench that was in power in the 1990s. no, the main opposition will be the media. and that is a much tougher opposition.
one thing that must be said about the labour team though, is that they don't give up. they take the punches and keep standing back up to fight on. and while the media sideshow continues, they continue running the country and implementing the policies that improve the lives of the majority of new zealanders. that's what it's all about for me, and that's what the conference was about. i don't have to rely on media reports, i was at the labour party conference. and what i saw was an energetic bunch of activists who care deeply about this country, committed to developing and implementing policies that deal with the issues of importance.
so to cheer me up (and hopefully you as well) here is something sent to me by a friend a few days ago. may 10 is the first ever pangea day, when 24 short films will be broadcast simultaneously around the world. it's an attempt to build a global community, a step towards peace, and an encouragement to social action.
for a short taste of the sort of things that are planned, watch these short videos of a choir in one country singing the national anthem of another country. they really are lovely. france sings for the USA, kenya sings for india and japan sings for turkey.
Monday, 21 April 2008
killed in the line of duty
yet again, the really good stuff is screened late at night. last night, i watched veronica guerin, the film about the irish journalist killed after exposing irish drug lords. it was a powerful film, and very sad.
reminded me of another journalist working for reuters, killed in the line of duty in gaza last week. and the aljazeera journalist and other independent journalists killed during the iraq war. in fact, the committee to protect journalists reports that 685 journalists have been killed between 1 january 1992 and 4 april 2008.
i was pondering over why it would matter more when a journalist was killed than any other person. every life has value, and every one has given something or has some potential that should be equally mourned. can we say that the value of a journalist is more than that of a medical specialist or a child or a mother or any other person? probably not.
yet the killing of a journalist is chilling, because of the wider implications. it's like the killing of free speech, or the suppression of truth. the journalist is there to provide us with a true picture of what's happening; independent, without fear or favour. needless to say that there are many who don't live up to that standard. but the ones who walk into danger zones, determined that the truth be brought to the rest of the world, show a special form of courage.
by providing us with the truth, they alter our perceptions and thereby create political pressure for change. in current times, when the truth is so often massaged with spin, when journalists are underpaid and/or under pressure to simply regurgitate press releases, people like veronica guerin are even more valuable.
after watching what happened to her, the herald headline last year announcing the death of democracy seems nothing less than obscene. perhaps some of their editorial staff need to have a good look at what's happening around the world, and have a good think about their continued and unhampered ability to crusade against the EFA. it's a potent reminder of just how lucky we are in this country. democracy is alive and kicking, and journalists' lives are not in any danger.
i just hope that there will be others to take up the pen, to carry on the work of those journalists killed in the line of duty. it's easy to say, sitting here in the safety of my suburban home, wanting others to put themselves at risk while i take none. yet i can't bear to live in a world where such people no longer exist. all i can offer them are my prayers, and my heartfelt gratitude for the work that they do.
reminded me of another journalist working for reuters, killed in the line of duty in gaza last week. and the aljazeera journalist and other independent journalists killed during the iraq war. in fact, the committee to protect journalists reports that 685 journalists have been killed between 1 january 1992 and 4 april 2008.
i was pondering over why it would matter more when a journalist was killed than any other person. every life has value, and every one has given something or has some potential that should be equally mourned. can we say that the value of a journalist is more than that of a medical specialist or a child or a mother or any other person? probably not.
yet the killing of a journalist is chilling, because of the wider implications. it's like the killing of free speech, or the suppression of truth. the journalist is there to provide us with a true picture of what's happening; independent, without fear or favour. needless to say that there are many who don't live up to that standard. but the ones who walk into danger zones, determined that the truth be brought to the rest of the world, show a special form of courage.
by providing us with the truth, they alter our perceptions and thereby create political pressure for change. in current times, when the truth is so often massaged with spin, when journalists are underpaid and/or under pressure to simply regurgitate press releases, people like veronica guerin are even more valuable.
after watching what happened to her, the herald headline last year announcing the death of democracy seems nothing less than obscene. perhaps some of their editorial staff need to have a good look at what's happening around the world, and have a good think about their continued and unhampered ability to crusade against the EFA. it's a potent reminder of just how lucky we are in this country. democracy is alive and kicking, and journalists' lives are not in any danger.
i just hope that there will be others to take up the pen, to carry on the work of those journalists killed in the line of duty. it's easy to say, sitting here in the safety of my suburban home, wanting others to put themselves at risk while i take none. yet i can't bear to live in a world where such people no longer exist. all i can offer them are my prayers, and my heartfelt gratitude for the work that they do.
Sunday, 20 April 2008
v8s
me, my cowbell & my sore throat got home last night after a good night out. i did enjoy the game, especially because we won, and pretty comfortably. i had to rely on the crowd's reactions to figure out what was happening a lot of the time, and the second half was pretty boring, but there you go. the only negative aspect of the game were the cheerleaders. like the "grid girls" - who got another front page piece in the waikato times for no news reason at all - i hate to see the women relegated to the sidelines in skimpy gear. i just think they're worth way more than that. how about having a women's rugby match before the main match, and at least promote women's sports just a little? now that would be at least a partial celebration of female achievement.
the v8s have been going on all day. they had practice rounds yesterday that drove us all crazy at work with the constant noise. i wouldn't have believed cars could make so much noise if i hadn't had to listen to it.
this event was supposed to have brought bucketloads of money into the city. the coverage in the local paper has been extensive to the point of nauseous. there have been front page stories for weeks, and today's paper has hardly got any other news in the first section. i feel like my subscription has been put towards free advertising for the event that should have been paid for by the organisers.
the city council is not behind in this regard. aside from the millions of ratepayer dollars that have gone into hosting the event, the council latest paper (the city news) is pretty much devoted to the v8's; so my ratepayer money is also being spent on advertising that also should have been paid for by the organisers.
the pay-off was supposed to be in the form of economic benefits to hamilton. city businesses have been repeatedly encouraged to stock up for the crowds of shoppers that were to have hit the city. except they seem to have never arrived. the times reported that the restaurants and bars were pretty empty last night, and business has been slower than usual over the last week.
one shopkeeper i spoke to, who supplies to several restaurants as well as running their own retail outlet, says that businesses have been pretty disappointed. at 5pm tonight, this retailer had received no more than the normal level of business for a saturday. driving through town at 6.30, most restaurants seemed to be pretty empty. maybe things will pick up later in the evening; i certainly hope so.
some people will have made money though. one of them is montana catering, the official caterers for the event. who are apparently contracting out to auckland firms (at least according to a letter-writer to the waikato times), which means part of the economic benefit is going out of hamilton. the interesting thing about this company is that one of it's owners was involved in the election campaign for hamilton mayor bob simcock. and also the campaign of the previous mayor, michael redman, who now happens to be the CEO for hamilton city council and earning thrice the salary.
in the last election, mr simcock raised the full $50,000 he was allowed to spend on his campaign. he spent much more by far than any of the other candidates. he has not revealed who donated to his campaign and maintains he doesn't know. he says the money was handled by his campaign team, who didn't pass the information on to him.
it just doesn't seem right that one of his campaign team gets a lucrative contract from this event. michael redman definitely played a large part in getting this event to hamilton. are his mates profiting while many other businesses in the city miss out?
it would be nice to have some further investigations once it's over. how much money was actually made, and who were the ones that made it? were they the same people who contributed to the simcock campaign? i don't really expect any answers to be forthcoming any time soon. but i hope people keep asking the questions and demanding answers. given that we have to put up with this event for several years, it's only right that we get the full story.
the v8s have been going on all day. they had practice rounds yesterday that drove us all crazy at work with the constant noise. i wouldn't have believed cars could make so much noise if i hadn't had to listen to it.
this event was supposed to have brought bucketloads of money into the city. the coverage in the local paper has been extensive to the point of nauseous. there have been front page stories for weeks, and today's paper has hardly got any other news in the first section. i feel like my subscription has been put towards free advertising for the event that should have been paid for by the organisers.
the city council is not behind in this regard. aside from the millions of ratepayer dollars that have gone into hosting the event, the council latest paper (the city news) is pretty much devoted to the v8's; so my ratepayer money is also being spent on advertising that also should have been paid for by the organisers.
the pay-off was supposed to be in the form of economic benefits to hamilton. city businesses have been repeatedly encouraged to stock up for the crowds of shoppers that were to have hit the city. except they seem to have never arrived. the times reported that the restaurants and bars were pretty empty last night, and business has been slower than usual over the last week.
one shopkeeper i spoke to, who supplies to several restaurants as well as running their own retail outlet, says that businesses have been pretty disappointed. at 5pm tonight, this retailer had received no more than the normal level of business for a saturday. driving through town at 6.30, most restaurants seemed to be pretty empty. maybe things will pick up later in the evening; i certainly hope so.
some people will have made money though. one of them is montana catering, the official caterers for the event. who are apparently contracting out to auckland firms (at least according to a letter-writer to the waikato times), which means part of the economic benefit is going out of hamilton. the interesting thing about this company is that one of it's owners was involved in the election campaign for hamilton mayor bob simcock. and also the campaign of the previous mayor, michael redman, who now happens to be the CEO for hamilton city council and earning thrice the salary.
in the last election, mr simcock raised the full $50,000 he was allowed to spend on his campaign. he spent much more by far than any of the other candidates. he has not revealed who donated to his campaign and maintains he doesn't know. he says the money was handled by his campaign team, who didn't pass the information on to him.
it just doesn't seem right that one of his campaign team gets a lucrative contract from this event. michael redman definitely played a large part in getting this event to hamilton. are his mates profiting while many other businesses in the city miss out?
it would be nice to have some further investigations once it's over. how much money was actually made, and who were the ones that made it? were they the same people who contributed to the simcock campaign? i don't really expect any answers to be forthcoming any time soon. but i hope people keep asking the questions and demanding answers. given that we have to put up with this event for several years, it's only right that we get the full story.
Friday, 18 April 2008
a good night out?
i have finally succumbed to popular culture. tomorrow night, i'm going to watch my first ever live rugby match. this is a big deal, because i have never even sat through a whole rugby match on tv. i've missed every rugby world cup, every bledisloe cup match, the NPC thing and the super 12 (14?). i've watched a little bit of matches where waikato had a chance to win the ranfurly shield, but that's about it.
i find that rugby bores me. it's a game with constant stopping and starting, too much pushing and shoving, and big boys banging straight into each other for no good reason that i can make out. i'd have to agree with brian edwards that the bits where they pass the ball and run are good. but these bits tend to be too few and far between for me to have any interest in the game. give me soccer, netball or tennis any day of the week. these are fast-moving games with obvious skills on display. yes, i know rugby requires skills as well, but these are not so readily apparent when you actually watch the game.
nonetheless, my workmates have persuaded me to go and watch the chiefs play someone tomorrow night. i'm thinking that i'll enjoy the atmosphere and the noise, even if i'm not that interested in the game. and i have a cowbell. that should help. i can at least enjoy annoying everyone else around me.
i will report back on the experience tomorrow night, but don't expect me to be converted into a rugby fan. and don't think this means i will now attend rock concerts, read fashion magazines or start wearing make-up. one can only go so far after all.
sad news today about the closure of the fisher & paykel factory in dunedin. but not wholly unexpected. this is the sort of thing that has been plaguing american and other western countries for some time now. the basic fact is that we can not compete on wages with developing countries, nor do we want to.
fisher & paykel management are blaming the high nz dollar and lack of government support. the nz dollar could be lowered by lowering interest rates, but that affects inflation and would be harmful for the economy at this point. do we want to put the whole country under strain to support one sector?and as for the government not doing enough, i'm not sure what else they want. they're getting a business tax cut from 1 april, along with support through the research & development tax breaks. the government has been busy negotiating trade deals with various countries around the world for some years now, to strengthen our export markets. the only further measure that can be taken is to control the exchange rate, which would be a pretty drastic step indeed, with some potentially nasty side-effects.
the fact is that this company wants to cut costs by paying workers the minimum amount they can get away with. and they can only get away with it by moving somewhere else. there is no government policy that is going to bring the minimum wage down to $2 per hour, cut holidays, cut health & safety regulations and so on.
it's time we demanded more social responsibility from companies, nationally and internationally. the only way pressure can be brought on these companies to pay fair wages in whatever country they operate in is through consumer action. the excuses they are providing are not good enough, and it's pathetic to blame the government when it's simply a matter of maximising shareholders wealth.
i find that rugby bores me. it's a game with constant stopping and starting, too much pushing and shoving, and big boys banging straight into each other for no good reason that i can make out. i'd have to agree with brian edwards that the bits where they pass the ball and run are good. but these bits tend to be too few and far between for me to have any interest in the game. give me soccer, netball or tennis any day of the week. these are fast-moving games with obvious skills on display. yes, i know rugby requires skills as well, but these are not so readily apparent when you actually watch the game.
nonetheless, my workmates have persuaded me to go and watch the chiefs play someone tomorrow night. i'm thinking that i'll enjoy the atmosphere and the noise, even if i'm not that interested in the game. and i have a cowbell. that should help. i can at least enjoy annoying everyone else around me.
i will report back on the experience tomorrow night, but don't expect me to be converted into a rugby fan. and don't think this means i will now attend rock concerts, read fashion magazines or start wearing make-up. one can only go so far after all.
sad news today about the closure of the fisher & paykel factory in dunedin. but not wholly unexpected. this is the sort of thing that has been plaguing american and other western countries for some time now. the basic fact is that we can not compete on wages with developing countries, nor do we want to.
fisher & paykel management are blaming the high nz dollar and lack of government support. the nz dollar could be lowered by lowering interest rates, but that affects inflation and would be harmful for the economy at this point. do we want to put the whole country under strain to support one sector?and as for the government not doing enough, i'm not sure what else they want. they're getting a business tax cut from 1 april, along with support through the research & development tax breaks. the government has been busy negotiating trade deals with various countries around the world for some years now, to strengthen our export markets. the only further measure that can be taken is to control the exchange rate, which would be a pretty drastic step indeed, with some potentially nasty side-effects.
the fact is that this company wants to cut costs by paying workers the minimum amount they can get away with. and they can only get away with it by moving somewhere else. there is no government policy that is going to bring the minimum wage down to $2 per hour, cut holidays, cut health & safety regulations and so on.
it's time we demanded more social responsibility from companies, nationally and internationally. the only way pressure can be brought on these companies to pay fair wages in whatever country they operate in is through consumer action. the excuses they are providing are not good enough, and it's pathetic to blame the government when it's simply a matter of maximising shareholders wealth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)