i know it's going to sound terribly partisan, but i still have to say it. the way helen clark has dealt with winston peters, her ability to negotiate the "standing aside" and the fact that she has treated him with dignity and respect even though she must be totally pissed off - all shows her very strong leadership skills. compare this with john key rubbing bill english's nose in the dirt a few weeks ago, and mr english then doing the same to maurice williamson re the toll roads. these guys don't have a clue about leadership and one has to wonder how they can possibly work constructively together in cabinet.
despite the stand-aside tonight, there will still be fallout from this whole thing. for a start, it has let national off the hook for a few days and may slow the momentum that labour has been building up for the past month or so. of course, alot now depends on the outcome of the two inquiries (SFO & privileges committee). dr cullen said in the house on thursday that labour really want mr glenn to front up to the PC, & it looks like he's going to do so.
an interesting point has been raised by colin espiner on his blog:
Incidentally, there is an intriguing side angle to all of this. The SFO, by launching an inquiry into Peters, has effectively saved its own life. A bill that was due to be passed under urgency by Parliament next week would have effectively abolished the SFO, reduced its powers, and folded staff into the police.
The SFO was vehemently opposed to this move, as you can imagine. So is the National Party. The bill has now been placed on hold while the investigation takes place. With only two weeks of Parliament remaining, it will almost certainly now not be passed. If National wins the election, it will never be passed.
I’m not for a moment suggesting the SFO launched the inquiry into Peters to save its own skin, just pointing out that Peters could justifiably claim a slight conflict of interest on the part of the SFO, given the benefit to itself of holding the inquiry.
the one thing you can say about mr peters (and believe me, i'm no fan of his) is that he has been providing plenty of entertainment. i don't think people have been this interested in politics for a long while.
Friday, 29 August 2008
Thursday, 28 August 2008
things are getting better
while we all wait to see how long mr peters can keep his job, there is actually other news. the MSD social report is out, with comment here and here. the good news being that income inequality has been reduced, as a result of the working for families package.
a list of key facts can be found here. a couple of the negative results are that housing affordability is down and it looks like we are not winning the battle on obesity. the latter is a difficult one to win, because any move to encourage healthy eating and exercise quickly get written off as "pc gone mad". in that kind of environment, persuading people to look after their health is a challenge.
i'm a little bemused with comments from the police association that the decision around the use of tasers has been politicised. greg o'connor has been criticising the commissioner's (and minister's) decision to go to parliament on this decision, saying that it is a matter for police. i strongly disagree. i don't think that it should be an internal matter for the police if they choose to arm themselves more heavily, particularly with a weapon such as the taser.
it is a matter for the public, and we are represented by our elected representatives. if the police wanted to make a decision to arm themselves with guns, they should not be allowed to take that decision without the public having their say. there does need to be some control over the power of the police, and that control is provided by the state, through parliament.
i should think that an act of parliament was required before the police could make any decision about the use of guns. i would have preferred an act of parliament in order for them to use tasers.
for mr o'connor to say that there should be no politics involved in the process is nonsense. there must be politics involved when there is an exercise of power. he wants the decision to be based on evidence, but evidence requires interpretation. and it requires someone independent from the police to be looking at it and making judgement.
in the absence of an act of parliament, at the very least parliament was consulted and the parties who could be bothered put forward their views. i fully support the move.
a list of key facts can be found here. a couple of the negative results are that housing affordability is down and it looks like we are not winning the battle on obesity. the latter is a difficult one to win, because any move to encourage healthy eating and exercise quickly get written off as "pc gone mad". in that kind of environment, persuading people to look after their health is a challenge.
i'm a little bemused with comments from the police association that the decision around the use of tasers has been politicised. greg o'connor has been criticising the commissioner's (and minister's) decision to go to parliament on this decision, saying that it is a matter for police. i strongly disagree. i don't think that it should be an internal matter for the police if they choose to arm themselves more heavily, particularly with a weapon such as the taser.
it is a matter for the public, and we are represented by our elected representatives. if the police wanted to make a decision to arm themselves with guns, they should not be allowed to take that decision without the public having their say. there does need to be some control over the power of the police, and that control is provided by the state, through parliament.
i should think that an act of parliament was required before the police could make any decision about the use of guns. i would have preferred an act of parliament in order for them to use tasers.
for mr o'connor to say that there should be no politics involved in the process is nonsense. there must be politics involved when there is an exercise of power. he wants the decision to be based on evidence, but evidence requires interpretation. and it requires someone independent from the police to be looking at it and making judgement.
in the absence of an act of parliament, at the very least parliament was consulted and the parties who could be bothered put forward their views. i fully support the move.
Wednesday, 27 August 2008
Race Relations in Aotearoa New Zealand
well, what a lot of things were happening in the political arena today. winston peters looks to be facing the end of his career, although i find it hard to believe that he will be beaten by the issues around the owen glenn donation. the fact that close-up's on-line poll had 30% of people not wanting him to be sacked as foreign minister was interesting. given that polls like this are hugely biased, and usually to the right, it was a surprising result. of course, it could mean every nz first party supporter in the country rang in 5 times. but if that wasn't the case, then mr peters may still get his 5% of the vote, if he can survive the current scandal.
funniest thing today was seeing john key trying to be tough and failing badly on close up. all he could confirm was that he wouldn't have mr peters in his cabinet; but he couldn't rule out going into coalition with nz first. what a difference the absence of paul henry has made in the past month or so. mike hosking has been doing a great job of asking the tough questions and demanding a straight answer. that he does so across the board and without favour is to his credit.
then there was the decision on the tasers. not sure that i support this one, even with all the provisions they have in place ie can't be carried by officers (have to be in the police car, not on their person); officers have to be properly trained to use them, and i think i heard something about an in-built recording mechanism. i have no doubt that police officers face some dangerous situations where their personal safety is at risk. but tasers just don't seem to be the right answer - they're pretty nasty and the statistics tariana turia quoted about the greater use of tasers against people of colour just make me feel wary. nonetheless, with the majority of parties supporting the move (the maori party and the greens were the exceptions), it looks like they will be used.
and finally, there was the emissions trading scheme which now has enough support to pass through all its stages before the election, which is great.
as promised yesterday, i've found the list of recipients of the diversity action awards:
Auckland Interfaith Council; Asia New Zealand Foundation; Changemakers Refugee Forum; Federation of Islamic Associations of New Zealand; Marlborough Migrant Centre; National Association of ESOL Home Tutors; New Plymouth District Council; TVNZ's Tagata Pasifika; Christchurch Art Gallery; and Waitakere City Libraries.
and also waikato museum and asia downunder. at the awards ceremony, the reasoning for each of the awards was given, and each of these were very worthy recipients.
the diversity forum also saw the launch of the statement on race relations in nz. i thought that the bill of rights would have covered all of this, but the statement does go much further. so while it includes freedom from discrimination and freedom of expression, it goes much further:
1. acknowledging the Treaty as the nation's founding document
2. freedom from discrimination
3. freedom of expression, including respecting the rights of others
4. the right to be free from harm
5. the opportunity to be involved in decision-making
6. the right to decent work, education, health services and housing
7. the right of newcomers to enjoy the same rights and opportunities as all New Zealanders
8. the opportunity to learn about our diverse society
9. the right to practise our own cultures and use our own languages
10. the responsibility to respect the rights and freedoms of others and to contribute to harmonious race relations.
it's a pity that this has been overshadowed by the other news of the day. these statements are well worth discussing and debating around the country. number 5, for example, could have significant implications as would some of the others. it's time we had a healthy debate about this, one held without the usual nastiness and attempts at point scoring.
funniest thing today was seeing john key trying to be tough and failing badly on close up. all he could confirm was that he wouldn't have mr peters in his cabinet; but he couldn't rule out going into coalition with nz first. what a difference the absence of paul henry has made in the past month or so. mike hosking has been doing a great job of asking the tough questions and demanding a straight answer. that he does so across the board and without favour is to his credit.
then there was the decision on the tasers. not sure that i support this one, even with all the provisions they have in place ie can't be carried by officers (have to be in the police car, not on their person); officers have to be properly trained to use them, and i think i heard something about an in-built recording mechanism. i have no doubt that police officers face some dangerous situations where their personal safety is at risk. but tasers just don't seem to be the right answer - they're pretty nasty and the statistics tariana turia quoted about the greater use of tasers against people of colour just make me feel wary. nonetheless, with the majority of parties supporting the move (the maori party and the greens were the exceptions), it looks like they will be used.
and finally, there was the emissions trading scheme which now has enough support to pass through all its stages before the election, which is great.
as promised yesterday, i've found the list of recipients of the diversity action awards:
Auckland Interfaith Council; Asia New Zealand Foundation; Changemakers Refugee Forum; Federation of Islamic Associations of New Zealand; Marlborough Migrant Centre; National Association of ESOL Home Tutors; New Plymouth District Council; TVNZ's Tagata Pasifika; Christchurch Art Gallery; and Waitakere City Libraries.
and also waikato museum and asia downunder. at the awards ceremony, the reasoning for each of the awards was given, and each of these were very worthy recipients.
the diversity forum also saw the launch of the statement on race relations in nz. i thought that the bill of rights would have covered all of this, but the statement does go much further. so while it includes freedom from discrimination and freedom of expression, it goes much further:
1. acknowledging the Treaty as the nation's founding document
2. freedom from discrimination
3. freedom of expression, including respecting the rights of others
4. the right to be free from harm
5. the opportunity to be involved in decision-making
6. the right to decent work, education, health services and housing
7. the right of newcomers to enjoy the same rights and opportunities as all New Zealanders
8. the opportunity to learn about our diverse society
9. the right to practise our own cultures and use our own languages
10. the responsibility to respect the rights and freedoms of others and to contribute to harmonious race relations.
it's a pity that this has been overshadowed by the other news of the day. these statements are well worth discussing and debating around the country. number 5, for example, could have significant implications as would some of the others. it's time we had a healthy debate about this, one held without the usual nastiness and attempts at point scoring.
Tuesday, 26 August 2008
diversity awards
i've had an extremely busy couple of days at the diversity forum. i took my older child to the youth forum on sunday, which she really enjoyed. sunday night, i went to a panel discussion at the town hall which was great. monday was a full day with so many interesting events on, it was really hard to choose. in the morning, i attended the police forum, and in the afternoon i was at the religious diversity forum.
then rushed off to radio nz for the panel with jim mora, and ended up opposite stephen franks. if you didn't manage to hear it yesterday, you can still listen from the radio nz website here and here. we had what i thought was a good discussion on MMP.
the funny bit was where stephen was trying to argue that people shouldn't vote based on policy but based on the people (personality cult anyone!). his rationale was that parties never delivered on the policies they campaigned on anyway. this is just so much nonsense. labour has been extremely busy delivering policy over the last 9 years, whether it's the primary health strategy (including cheaper doctors visits), the cap on tertiary fees and interest-free student loans, industry training and modern apprenticeships, paid parental leave, kiwibank, kiwisaver, kiwirail, etc etc etc.
stephen was simply trying to divert attention away from the fact that national has failed to provide detailed policy documents. and some policy is being announced by their spokespeople (as it should), only to be contradicted the next day by the leadership. there seem to be some serious problems inside the national party, and neither the behaviour of key nor english has been up to the standard that would develop cohesion and loyalty within the team. they'd do well if they only stuck to one very simple rule: don't embarras members of your own top team in public.
rodney hide's behaviour in the house today was appallingly bad. it looked like a very calculated intention to get himself thrown out of the house. the speaker gave him absolutely every opportunity, and at least 7 attempts to get his line of questioning right. but he was adamant that he wanted to get thrown out just so he could complain about being shut up.
he's an experienced MP, he knows the rules very well. he knew damn well he was breaking them. if he doesn't want to play by the rules, he should simply stay out of the house. for a party that has always had an extremely tough line on "law and order" (i prefer to call it justice), he seems to regard the rules of the house with complete contempt. i think he should get the harshest punishment he would have doled out to others who break the law.
for those interested in the US-india civil nuclear agreement, which i sort of wrote about at the very end of this post, a press release has been put out here. but i can't make any sense of it at all. it sounds like nz is going to allow india to have some kind of exemption so that the agreement can go ahead. i'd love to hear from anyone with more expertise in foreign affairs than moi to explain what exactly is happening here and what the implications are.
and on a more positive note, it was lovely to attend the cermony for diversity awards last night. i can't find a full list of the organisations who were given awards, but i'll keep looking over the next few days. waitakere library has a press release about their award here. other recipients were tagata pasifika, asia down under, waikato museum, and 8 others. wish i had a better memory! but it was really nice to see positive achievements recognised and celebrated. just a pity that none of the major media appear to have picked this up.
finally, it was great to catch up with so many familiar and friendly faces, as well as meeting new ones. julie middleton, ex herald journalist with a very positive focus on ethnic issues, is back in the country and it was lovely to see her. another person it was nice to see again was tom calma, aboriginal and torres strait island social justice commissioner and australian social justice and race relations commissioner. i had the opportunity to meet him a couple of years ago, and he struck me as a very wise man. he was chosen as the person who received the apology to the stolen generations, and responded to it.
and several people told me they read my blog, which was great! given that i'm so technologically incompetent i don't know how to work out how many hits i'm getting, the personal feedback makes me feel that the time i put into this is worthwhile.
then rushed off to radio nz for the panel with jim mora, and ended up opposite stephen franks. if you didn't manage to hear it yesterday, you can still listen from the radio nz website here and here. we had what i thought was a good discussion on MMP.
the funny bit was where stephen was trying to argue that people shouldn't vote based on policy but based on the people (personality cult anyone!). his rationale was that parties never delivered on the policies they campaigned on anyway. this is just so much nonsense. labour has been extremely busy delivering policy over the last 9 years, whether it's the primary health strategy (including cheaper doctors visits), the cap on tertiary fees and interest-free student loans, industry training and modern apprenticeships, paid parental leave, kiwibank, kiwisaver, kiwirail, etc etc etc.
stephen was simply trying to divert attention away from the fact that national has failed to provide detailed policy documents. and some policy is being announced by their spokespeople (as it should), only to be contradicted the next day by the leadership. there seem to be some serious problems inside the national party, and neither the behaviour of key nor english has been up to the standard that would develop cohesion and loyalty within the team. they'd do well if they only stuck to one very simple rule: don't embarras members of your own top team in public.
rodney hide's behaviour in the house today was appallingly bad. it looked like a very calculated intention to get himself thrown out of the house. the speaker gave him absolutely every opportunity, and at least 7 attempts to get his line of questioning right. but he was adamant that he wanted to get thrown out just so he could complain about being shut up.
he's an experienced MP, he knows the rules very well. he knew damn well he was breaking them. if he doesn't want to play by the rules, he should simply stay out of the house. for a party that has always had an extremely tough line on "law and order" (i prefer to call it justice), he seems to regard the rules of the house with complete contempt. i think he should get the harshest punishment he would have doled out to others who break the law.
for those interested in the US-india civil nuclear agreement, which i sort of wrote about at the very end of this post, a press release has been put out here. but i can't make any sense of it at all. it sounds like nz is going to allow india to have some kind of exemption so that the agreement can go ahead. i'd love to hear from anyone with more expertise in foreign affairs than moi to explain what exactly is happening here and what the implications are.
and on a more positive note, it was lovely to attend the cermony for diversity awards last night. i can't find a full list of the organisations who were given awards, but i'll keep looking over the next few days. waitakere library has a press release about their award here. other recipients were tagata pasifika, asia down under, waikato museum, and 8 others. wish i had a better memory! but it was really nice to see positive achievements recognised and celebrated. just a pity that none of the major media appear to have picked this up.
finally, it was great to catch up with so many familiar and friendly faces, as well as meeting new ones. julie middleton, ex herald journalist with a very positive focus on ethnic issues, is back in the country and it was lovely to see her. another person it was nice to see again was tom calma, aboriginal and torres strait island social justice commissioner and australian social justice and race relations commissioner. i had the opportunity to meet him a couple of years ago, and he struck me as a very wise man. he was chosen as the person who received the apology to the stolen generations, and responded to it.
and several people told me they read my blog, which was great! given that i'm so technologically incompetent i don't know how to work out how many hits i'm getting, the personal feedback makes me feel that the time i put into this is worthwhile.
Saturday, 23 August 2008
diversity forum
i won't be blogging for a few days now, as i'll be at the HRC diversity forum. there are so many wonderful events happening, it's hard to choose. i've got 3 on my list for monday morning, and another 3 i'd like to be at during the afternoon. tomorrow is similarly conflicted with both afternoon and evening running 2 concurrent sessions and i want to be at both.
you could say that the forum is simply a talkfest. which would be true. but if we don't talk about problems and discuss possible solutions, then how will anything change? there is the opportunity for government agencies and other organisations to get feedback from ethnic minority communities. there is the ability to make contacts and network. the research focused forum will be particularly useful in that regard. most importantly, it gives ethnic minorities a voice, and that is particularly important. there is nothing more empowering than being heard, with respect.
i'll be speaking at the religious diversity forum, along with verpal singh (you may have seen/heard him doing some media work after the death of navtej singh). the first part of the session has a focus "on the principles of safety and freedom from discrimination set out in the Statementon Religious Diversity." us two were chosen to speak because muslims and sikhs are the most visibly different religious minorities. interestingly, it's the women that stand out most for muslims, while the men stand out most with the sikhs. so it will be interesting to hear the difference in experiences of discrimination, from a gendered point of view.
now here's something i didn't know: 1 september is "gamble free day", organised by the problem gambling foundation. they are offering a "10% dining discount at the participating restaurants (137 restaurants in the five major cities in NZ)". you can get vouchers from www.pgfnz.org.nz. this information came with the promo:
Did you know:
· Everyday in NZ $5.5 million is lost on gambling
· There are 14 convictions relating to gambling everyday
· Among those who seek help, the average amount of money lost from Asian clients is 7 times that of other ethnic clients
that last one is interesting. i wonder if it's because asians gamble more or because they wait longer before seeking help.
you could say that the forum is simply a talkfest. which would be true. but if we don't talk about problems and discuss possible solutions, then how will anything change? there is the opportunity for government agencies and other organisations to get feedback from ethnic minority communities. there is the ability to make contacts and network. the research focused forum will be particularly useful in that regard. most importantly, it gives ethnic minorities a voice, and that is particularly important. there is nothing more empowering than being heard, with respect.
i'll be speaking at the religious diversity forum, along with verpal singh (you may have seen/heard him doing some media work after the death of navtej singh). the first part of the session has a focus "on the principles of safety and freedom from discrimination set out in the Statementon Religious Diversity." us two were chosen to speak because muslims and sikhs are the most visibly different religious minorities. interestingly, it's the women that stand out most for muslims, while the men stand out most with the sikhs. so it will be interesting to hear the difference in experiences of discrimination, from a gendered point of view.
now here's something i didn't know: 1 september is "gamble free day", organised by the problem gambling foundation. they are offering a "10% dining discount at the participating restaurants (137 restaurants in the five major cities in NZ)". you can get vouchers from www.pgfnz.org.nz. this information came with the promo:
Did you know:
· Everyday in NZ $5.5 million is lost on gambling
· There are 14 convictions relating to gambling everyday
· Among those who seek help, the average amount of money lost from Asian clients is 7 times that of other ethnic clients
that last one is interesting. i wonder if it's because asians gamble more or because they wait longer before seeking help.
Friday, 22 August 2008
the asian radio show
just a quick note to promote a new radio show on radio live, which sapna samant has been involved with:
Starting on 23 August on Radio Live at 7.30 pm, THE ASIAN RADIO SHOW brings a different perspective to ‘being Asian’ in New Zealand. Funded by New Zealand On Air, this show aims to inform, entertain and engage audiences about life in Aotearoa New Zealand through Asian eyes. And sometimes about Asian lives through non-Asian eyes.
Being Asian in New Zealand is complex and The Asian Radio Show acknowledges that complexity through storytelling, reports, interviews and panel discussions with just a touch of irreverence.
Fronted by stand-up comedian and actor Tarun Mohanbhai and co-produced by thedownlowconcept and Holy Cow Media, The Asian Radio Show covers the spectrum from the frivolous to the important. From fashion to sexuality, health, politics, Asian posterchildren and even cosmetic dentistry in Cambodia. Issues that matter to all New Zealanders and are of relevance to those of Asian origin.
Mitch Harris of Radio Live says the show is another way of including New Zealanders from all backgrounds and experiences. “The Asian Radio Show isn’t just a show for people from Asia, or of Asian descent, it focuses on stories of interest for everyone but works to highlight issues often overlooked by mainstream media. I’m really looking forward to getting those stories out there.”
let me sheepishly admit that this is a little bit of self-promotion, in that i'll be on the first show along with pansy wong, discussing politics. i haven't heard the final cut of the show, so am hoping it comes out ok! but i think this is a great development nonetheless - a decent asian show on a commercial station, at a decent time. yay!!
and while i'm at it, i'll also be on radio nz's "the panel" on monday. wish me luck!
chris trotter has started a new blog, which i've added to the blogroll. i sometimes find that i violently disagree with what he writes, but the analysis is usually good and every now and then he'll come up with something absolutely stunning. in any case, i've had a look through a couple of posts, and it looks pretty good. chris is taking the trouble to interact with commenters, and they're keeping tight moderation on the comments. i wish him well with the blog.
Starting on 23 August on Radio Live at 7.30 pm, THE ASIAN RADIO SHOW brings a different perspective to ‘being Asian’ in New Zealand. Funded by New Zealand On Air, this show aims to inform, entertain and engage audiences about life in Aotearoa New Zealand through Asian eyes. And sometimes about Asian lives through non-Asian eyes.
Being Asian in New Zealand is complex and The Asian Radio Show acknowledges that complexity through storytelling, reports, interviews and panel discussions with just a touch of irreverence.
Fronted by stand-up comedian and actor Tarun Mohanbhai and co-produced by thedownlowconcept and Holy Cow Media, The Asian Radio Show covers the spectrum from the frivolous to the important. From fashion to sexuality, health, politics, Asian posterchildren and even cosmetic dentistry in Cambodia. Issues that matter to all New Zealanders and are of relevance to those of Asian origin.
Mitch Harris of Radio Live says the show is another way of including New Zealanders from all backgrounds and experiences. “The Asian Radio Show isn’t just a show for people from Asia, or of Asian descent, it focuses on stories of interest for everyone but works to highlight issues often overlooked by mainstream media. I’m really looking forward to getting those stories out there.”
let me sheepishly admit that this is a little bit of self-promotion, in that i'll be on the first show along with pansy wong, discussing politics. i haven't heard the final cut of the show, so am hoping it comes out ok! but i think this is a great development nonetheless - a decent asian show on a commercial station, at a decent time. yay!!
and while i'm at it, i'll also be on radio nz's "the panel" on monday. wish me luck!
chris trotter has started a new blog, which i've added to the blogroll. i sometimes find that i violently disagree with what he writes, but the analysis is usually good and every now and then he'll come up with something absolutely stunning. in any case, i've had a look through a couple of posts, and it looks pretty good. chris is taking the trouble to interact with commenters, and they're keeping tight moderation on the comments. i wish him well with the blog.
Thursday, 21 August 2008
only words
i've spent a lot of the evening researching this comment relating to porn. so i'll leave you to read through that and some of the related links.
on the topic of hate speech, here is a comment from catherine mckinnon, from her book, "only words":
“We argued that group libel, most of it concededly expression, promotes the disadvantage of unequal groups; that group-based enmity, ill will, intolerance, and prejudice are the attitudinal engines of the exclusion, denigration, and subordination that make up and propel social inequality; that without bigotry, social systems of enforced separation, ghettoisation, and apartheid would be unnecessary, impossible, and unthinkable; that stereotyping and stigmatisation of historically disadvantaged groups through group hate propaganda shape their social image and reputation, which controls their access to opportunities more powerfully than their individual abilities ever do; and that it is impossible for an individual to receive equality of opportunity when surrounded by an atmosphere of group hate.
“We argued that group defamation is a verbal form inequality takes. . . . We argued that group defamation in this sense is not a mere expression of opinion but a practice of discrimination in verbal form, a link in systemic discrimination that keeps target groups in subordinated positions through the promotion of terror, intolerance, degradation, segregation, exclusion, vilification, violence, and genocide.
on the topic of hate speech, here is a comment from catherine mckinnon, from her book, "only words":
“We argued that group libel, most of it concededly expression, promotes the disadvantage of unequal groups; that group-based enmity, ill will, intolerance, and prejudice are the attitudinal engines of the exclusion, denigration, and subordination that make up and propel social inequality; that without bigotry, social systems of enforced separation, ghettoisation, and apartheid would be unnecessary, impossible, and unthinkable; that stereotyping and stigmatisation of historically disadvantaged groups through group hate propaganda shape their social image and reputation, which controls their access to opportunities more powerfully than their individual abilities ever do; and that it is impossible for an individual to receive equality of opportunity when surrounded by an atmosphere of group hate.
“We argued that group defamation is a verbal form inequality takes. . . . We argued that group defamation in this sense is not a mere expression of opinion but a practice of discrimination in verbal form, a link in systemic discrimination that keeps target groups in subordinated positions through the promotion of terror, intolerance, degradation, segregation, exclusion, vilification, violence, and genocide.
Wednesday, 20 August 2008
diversity
it seems that everyone is into diversity at the moment. the police join in the act, with an increasing level of diversity in their new recruits. this is as a result of significant promotion within ethnic minority communities. the low numbers of women graduate is a concern though, with only 16 female graduates out of 76.
in case you missed it, i posted a photograph of roqaya al-gassra at the hand mirror yesterday. she's in the semi-finals tonight, i'm hoping she does well.
and i see the media has finally caught up with the discussion paper on changes to sexual violence legislation, which i wrote about last week. the reactions have focused on the suggestion that there be some requirement for the accused to show what steps he took to obtain consent. it's a significant change, but significant changes are required if we are going to improve the current situation.
in case you missed it, i posted a photograph of roqaya al-gassra at the hand mirror yesterday. she's in the semi-finals tonight, i'm hoping she does well.
and i see the media has finally caught up with the discussion paper on changes to sexual violence legislation, which i wrote about last week. the reactions have focused on the suggestion that there be some requirement for the accused to show what steps he took to obtain consent. it's a significant change, but significant changes are required if we are going to improve the current situation.
Tuesday, 19 August 2008
tiring day
i've had another extremely busy day today. there was an open day at shama, to commemorate our 7th anniversary. then there was a waikato interfaith council meeting, but i couldn't stay for long. then rush back home for a teleconference. and that was in addition to the normal workday and kids to deal with!
the open day at shama was great. finally, after all these 7 years, i was able to stand up and say that we are on our feet and delivering successful programmes. after all these years of struggle, of ups and down and almost shutting up shop, we are finally a fully functioning ethnic women's centre providing a range of programmes and support for the ethnic women of hamilton and the waikato.
and finally, i'm so glad that there is going to be a pre-march in front of the boobs on bikes parade tomorrow organised by the auckland women's centre. i can't remember where i read it first, but i echo the sentiment that it's so great someone is finally standing up against this stuff. wish i could have been there.
the open day at shama was great. finally, after all these 7 years, i was able to stand up and say that we are on our feet and delivering successful programmes. after all these years of struggle, of ups and down and almost shutting up shop, we are finally a fully functioning ethnic women's centre providing a range of programmes and support for the ethnic women of hamilton and the waikato.
and finally, i'm so glad that there is going to be a pre-march in front of the boobs on bikes parade tomorrow organised by the auckland women's centre. i can't remember where i read it first, but i echo the sentiment that it's so great someone is finally standing up against this stuff. wish i could have been there.
Monday, 18 August 2008
national's candidates
pop over to the hand mirror, to see my post on national's women candidates.
other interesting points on their list are:
- the fall of david bennett, in light of chris finlayson, nathan guy, craig foss and chris tremain all rising spectacularly on the list;
- the rise of maurice williamson, that failed minister of transport and of telecommunications, who set nz back more than 10 years due to his inability to ensure significant investment in these areas;
- the old guard all staying put, including mr brownlee, mr ryall, mr power, mr david carter, the 2 dr smiths, and dr mapp. all in the top 15, and all have been there for years. no mood for renewal at the top of the party then.
other interesting points on their list are:
- the fall of david bennett, in light of chris finlayson, nathan guy, craig foss and chris tremain all rising spectacularly on the list;
- the rise of maurice williamson, that failed minister of transport and of telecommunications, who set nz back more than 10 years due to his inability to ensure significant investment in these areas;
- the old guard all staying put, including mr brownlee, mr ryall, mr power, mr david carter, the 2 dr smiths, and dr mapp. all in the top 15, and all have been there for years. no mood for renewal at the top of the party then.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)