Wardfire

David Farrar over at Kiwiblog has replied on the subject of unbalanced supercity wards, accusing critics of simply having a go at Rodney Hide. I shall oblige and leave the minister of local government out of this, and instead focus on the undemocratic shambles that this new supercity plan is building.

Farrar claims that the grossly disproportionate wards are okay, as we need to be able to make exceptions for some cases for rural areas. I actually agree- my issue is not with the fact that there is a ward with a greater than 10% difference from the average of the Supercity. My issue is that eight of the twelve proposed wards (or twelve of the twenty counselors) are within the unacceptable range. By definition, two thirds of a group cannot all be exceptional cases. Even if this arrangement benefited the left, it would clearly be wrong and necessitate urgent reform. It’s not about who’s winning. It’s about the principle that elections ought to be fair, and votes ought to be as equitable as possible for people living in different areas.

With relatively little deviation from areas of interest, it should be possible to smooth out the differences between the wards much more, and allow the two wards Farrar mentions to be truly exceptional outliers that barely graze that 10% margin, instead of crushing it at 24% and 17% deviations. A 24% outlier can’t even be called an exceptional case- it’s the kind of statistic that smells of gerrymandering. Let’s preserve geographic and social boundaries without making a joke out of local elections, shall we?

 

Wingnuts Wishart and Whale wet themselves – several times

Our favourite wingnut conspiracy theorists Ian Wishart and Cameron Slater must have had to buy in additional stocks of adult diapers over the weekend, such was their excitement over the release of emails stolen from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit.

Wishart has managed three posts on the topic in the last four days, as has Whale.

Now, lets start with what happened. Someone hacked into the University of East Anglia’s mail server and stole – yes it is a criminal offence – a 61MB mail file. Does it not occur to Wishart, Whale and the other right wing climate cranks that someone sufficiently dishonest to hack a mail server and steal a mail file is also likely to be sufficiently dishonest to doctor a few of the emails to enhance the effect before release. No, that wouln’t fit their conspiracy theory, would it.

Whale blathers on about:

…an elite group of climate scientists have conspired to massage data, dodging scrutiny, hounding out sceptical editors, fudging figures, the possibly criminal destruction of data under FOI request, tax avoidance, gloating over a sceptic’s death, character assassination of sceptics. admissions of using “tricks” to “hide” inconvenient trends, farming grants, private admissions of grave doubts in their own public warming warnings, close collusion with green groups, the joint concocting of the most alarmist announcements and much more.

Well, a 661MB mail file contains thousands of emails, and I don’t have the time to read all of them. Nor would Wishart, Whale and their fellow cranks. But from what I have read, and it seems that the emails have been selectively released, there is nothing to justify the extravagant claims they are making.

Take the using “tricks to hide inconvenient trends” bit. That’s been thoroughly debunked at RealClimate:

Phil Jones in discussing the presentation of temperature reconstructions stated that “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.” The paper in question is the Mann, Bradley and Hughes (1998) Nature paper on the original multiproxy temperature reconstruction, and the ‘trick’ is just to plot the instrumental records along with reconstruction so that the context of the recent warming is clear. Scientists often use the term “trick” to refer to a “a good way to deal with a problem”, rather than something that is “secret”, and so there is nothing problematic in this at all. As for the ‘decline’, it is well known that Keith Briffa’s maximum latewood tree ring density proxy diverges from the temperature records after 1960 (this is more commonly known as the “divergence problem”–see e.g. the recent discussion in this paper) and has been discussed in the literature since Briffa et al in Nature in 1998 (Nature, 391, 678-682). Those authors have always recommend not using the post 1960 part of their reconstruction, and so while ‘hiding’ is probably a poor choice of words (since it is ‘hidden’ in plain sight), not using the data in the plot is completely appropriate, as is further research to understand why this happens.

Good science, rather than the deception the cranks would have us believe.

None of the other generalised allegations stack up either, although I have to admit the email about possibly destroying data to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests, if it was genuine, was unwise (although I’ve seen no evidence that any data was actually destroyed, and I can understand the frustration of scientists having to deal with a never-ending flood of infromation requests from cranks).

Wishart likes to think of himself as an investigative journalist. Perhaps he could turn his skills to investigating who stole the University of East Anglia’s mail file and what their motive was, rather than use the episode to promote his thoroughly discredited crank book.

 

Arise, Sir Rodney Bjelke-Petersen

Sir Joh would have been proud.

Back in the1970s and 1980s one of New Zealand’s more infamous emigrants, the corrupt and racist Queensland Premier the late Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen, held onto power by what became known as the Bjelke-mander under which electorate boundaries were drawn so that rural electorates had about half as many voters as metropolitan ones.

As a result, Bjelke-Petersen was able to retain the State Premiership with as little as 20% of the vote going to his Country (later National) Party.

Now take a look at this table, taken from the Local Government Commission’s proposed ward boundaries for the Supercity:

I live in the Waitakere ward. So the vote of someone who lives in the Rodney ward will be worth 1.42 times my vote.  The vote of someone who lives in the Hibiscus-Albany-East Coast Bays ward will be worth 1.32 times my vote.  The vote of someone who lives in the Howick-Botany-Pakuranga ward will be worth 1.31 times my vote.  The vote of someone who lives in the Frankin ward will be worth 1.28 times my vote.

The structure is clearly screwed to provide greater worth to votes from areas that traditionally vote centre-right than those that traditionally vote centre-left or are more evenly politically balanced.

I don’t blame the Local Government Commission.  They were left with little choice given the Government’s legislating that there  would be only 20 councillors, that they would all be elected under First Past the Post, and that Rodney and Franklin would have to have one councillor each.

A gerrymander was inevitable.  And was no doubt planned because, as Rodney Hide said himself:

…you turn up with your papers … they [Cabinet] are too busy with their own stuff; they’re not bothered…

 

Labour: South of the Mason-Dixon line

Scratch the surface, and you see deep-seated racism alive and well in New Zealand.

Unfortunately for those of us on the environmental left, it is alive and well in the Labour Party which, I guess, is another good reason to be Green.

Hone Harawira was attacked by Phil Goff – not for the stupid sexist “rape” and “motherfucker” terminology in his ill-advised email (for which he has apologised) – but on this basis:

When you come out and you make a comment like that, where you brand a whole ethnic group in this country in the most obscene and vile way, and then apologise for the language, but not for the meaning, there is no place in parliament for that.

Harawira’s actual words were:

“White motherfuckers have been raping our lands and ripping us off for centuries…”

Which is true. Harawira didn’t implicate white people in general. But some white colonists and their descendants did precisely what Harawira describes – starting with legislation designed to alienate Maori land in the 1860s and, shamefully and most recently, Helen Clark and Michael Cullen – both of whom I otherwise hold a lot of respect for – through the Foreshore and Seabed Act.

It pains me that otherwise astute and well researched commentators such as Marty G at The Standard have bought into the Goff line. I’m not sure if they actually believe it, or if it is just blind loyalty to the Labour Party.

As Zetetic, another commentator at The Standard says:

It’s clear that Turia and Sharples will always go with the elite. Harawira represented the Maori working class.

Harawira’s clearly been deeply unhappy with the direction Turia and Sharples have taken the party. Betraying the Maori working class on issues like tax cuts and ACC. Cuddling up to the bosses’ party.

Right on! Despite his silly choice of language, Hone is one of us.

So I’m sure he won’t mind me posting this song by a bunch of white motherfuckers, albeit leftie and environmentalist ones, for him:

 

Guardian exposes NZ shame

So how many times have you been sent a link to this article:

Some countries with big emissions growth started from a low figure in 1990. Arguably, they were playing catchup. There is no such excuse for New Zealand. Its emissions started high and went higher…

Where do all these emissions come from? New Zealand turns out to be mining ever more filthy brown coal to burn in its power stations. It has the world’s third highest rate of car ownership. And, with more cows than people, the country’s increasingly intensive agricultural sector is responsible for approaching half the greenhouse gas emissions.

Fred Pearce’s Guardian article has arrived in my inbox several time already today.  So, even if nobody else, my overseas acquaintances are reading it, and rapidly changing their opinion on New Zealand. As Russel Norman says it’s a massive economic risk:

“Brand New Zealand” is one of our greatest assets, and we’re rightly proud of our international reputation for being a small but effective country that punches above its weight in the international arena. But if we are going to add our environmental image to that brand, it needs to be authentic, and it needs to stand up to scrutiny.

And as No Right Turn notes any reason that gets people taking notice and doing something is good – whether it is losing money or the even bigger picture.

Personally I don’t think New Zealanders are engaged in the level of spin or hagiography that Pearce alleges. Most do genuinely believe in protecting and celebrating New Zealand’s environment. But we have failed for decades now to convert those personal beliefs into political action. Our failure to turn our personal believes into public political action allows ministers like Tim Groser and Nick Smith to get away with this sort of game playing. It’s an embarrassment, a very public one.

 

Reclaim the Night returns to Wellington

Wellington Reclaim the Night 2009

Reclaim the Night is an international event putting the issue of women’s safety from male violence on the agenda for this night and every day.
We march to demand our right to be free from the fear or reality of rape, of sexual harassment, of domestic violence, of stalking.

In Aotearoa/New Zealand
􀁹1 in 3 women will experience physical or sexual violence from a partner in their life
􀁹99% of sexual violence incidents reported to the Police are perpetrated by men
􀁹95% of them on women
􀁹A woman is killed in a domestic violence incident every 3 ½weeks
􀁹92% of protection orders are taken out by women
􀁹1 in 3 women report sexual harassment in the workplace

This year the Wellington Reclaim the Night march addresses:
“The culture of violence towards women”
and is focused around being safe in our city;
in our homes,
at work,
while out exercising or walking,
going clubbing or out for a drink with our friends

When: Friday the 27th of November, 6.00pm

Where:
Assemble at the front of the Wellington Railway Station for speakers including Labour’s Lynn Pillay on the changes to ACC for sexual violence survivors
Performance by the Real Hot Bitches (tbc)

Who: All self-defined women and their children

After party:
Ivy, Dixon Street from 8pm with performances from…
Edwardene Tanaki, Tyree Robertson
Mahinarangi Maika, Rachael Wright
Freya Eng, Palace This!
And others…

Let’s celebrate being safe in our city
Questions, comments?
www.reclaimthenight.blogspot.com
vuwsa.womens.group@gmail…com

 

Invitation to Explosive Expression Art Auction and Exhibition

Dear friends,

You are warmly invited to: *Explosive Expression* – Creative Resistance to the State Terror Raids of October ‘07

Art Auction 7pm, Saturday 17 October, Thistle Hall, Cuba Street,
Wellington – to view all the 65 artworks go to
www.October15thSolidarity.info/artauction
or visit Thistle Hall, Cuba Street, Wellington, 12-6pm every day this week.

The ‘Operation 8′ raids on houses in Te Urewera and around Aotearoa targeted indigenous rights, environmental, anti-war and union activists. 18 people still face politically motivated charges. Funds raised from the
auction will support those affected by the raids.

If you are in Wellington, we invite you to share in a week of events
commemorating the 2007 ‘terror’ raids:

*Friday 16 Oct, 6pm:* Meet the artists and hear about their creative
resistance at Thistle Hall

*Saturday 17 Oct, 12-4pm:* *Political screen-printing *workshop for youth at Aro Valley Community Hall sponsored by a Creative Communities grant

*Saturday 17 Oct, 7pm*: AUCTION NIGHT with food, drinks, and all of these amazing works for sale

*Sunday 18 October, 1-5pm: **Documenting our communities* workshop with local filmmakers at Aro Valley Community Hall sponsored by a Creative Communities grant

:: Articles

1. Putting on a show of resistance
By KATIE CHAPMAN – The Dominion Post

A confiscated police flag and a self-portrait by Maori activist Tame Iti are among more than 50 artworks being auctioned to mark two years since the “terror raids”.

Iti will officially open the Explosive Expression exhibition tonight at Thistle Hall Gallery in Wellington, with the final auction on Saturday.

He is one of 17 people facing charges after the 2007 police raids, which resulted in the arrests of 18 people in Bay of Plenty, including at alleged military-style training camps in the Ureweras, under the Terrorism Suppression Act.

They were charged with more than 300 firearms charges, including
possession of guns, Molotov cocktails and ammunition.

One person had the charges dropped, and 10 had charges reduced after a preliminary hearing last year.

Volunteers were setting up the exhibition yesterday. Artist and organiser Graham Jury said the aim was to raise awareness about the raids, as well as mark the anniversary.

“We need to take a stand against this ongoing process.”

An exhibition was a way to celebrate freedom of thought after the raids, and art was a traditional form of protest, he said.

“We’re concerned about the terror raids targeting people whose main
crime has been to express contrary opinions to the Government.

“We’re celebrating creativity in art in the face of encroachments on
our freedom of speech.”

The show was also a chance to raise funds for those facing charges,
with the proceeds going towards legal fees and helping the families.

Iti’s self-portrait, showing red eyes peering from a dark background,
is expected to be popular, as is a confiscated police flag, with the words “rules and violence” spraypainted on it.

The work, No Reverence for the Badge, is by an artist using the
pseudonym “Rob de Rich”. It is unknown how he or she got the flag.

Other works range from paintings and photography to fabric works and
jewellery.

Challen Wilson contributed an installation to the exhibition, and used
the theme of honour. “Honour ourselves, honour each other, and honour
our spirits.”

Former MP Nandor Tanczos will host the auction.

2. Proposed powers ‘bordering on police state’
By MAGGIE TAIT – NZPA

On the second anniversary of controversial police raids, political activists today told MPs a new bill allowing police greater powers to
search and monitor could stifle freedom of speech.

Privacy Commissioner Marie Shroff also raised concerns and recommended a raft of beefed-up safeguards to better protect people.

Parliament’s justice and electoral select committee is considering the
Search and Surveillance Bill which is based on a 2007 Law Commission
report and also brings together police powers which are scattered
through numerous statutes.

It gives police and other law enforcement agencies increased powers
such as the ability to compel people to answer questions, clone
computer information and makes changes to searches and surveillance.

Several activists, arrested by police in the past, referred to the October 15, 2007 controversial police “anti-terror raids” at Ruatoki in the Eastern Bay of Plenty and Whakatane, Palmerston North, Auckland and Wellington when appearing before the committee today.

Activist Annemarie Thorby made an impassioned submission to MPs saying the new bill gave police powers to search without warrant any arrested or detained person, or if authorities had concerns about safety or felt their investigation would be compromised.

“They can just go straight in, they don’t need a judge’s permission,”
she said.

“It’s a nightmare, it’s bordering on a police state.”

MPs emphasised the bill focused on criminals, but activists were worried it would apply to them.

Ms Thorby said the bill removed the right to silence; allowed surveillance without warrants in some circumstances; expanded excessively what information police could require a suspect to give and gave police search powers they could use for “fishing expeditions”.

Privacy Commissioner Marie Shroff said law enforcement needed to be
balanced against invasion of privacy and while she supported the bill, she felt better safeguards were needed.

She said people should be notified, even if it was after an investigation was completed, if they had been watched.

Warrants for searches of people’s computers, including remote searching if people held information on websites, should be as specific as possible.

Another safeguard was needed around orders requiring people to produce information to authorities.

“Production orders potentially make a vast amount of information available to enforcement officers. There need to be adequate controls,” she said.

“I think the confidence that your papers and your communications which now may be held electronically are secure from intrusion, is going to be an essential part of freedom of speech, liberty and people’s right to feel their personal information will be kept secure.”

Ms Shroff said family members’ privacy should be considered. Issuing
officers should be required to be precise about what would be covered
by the orders, only judges should be able to issue the orders and there should be reporting for instance to Parliament on how they had been used.

“Safeguards applicable to search warrants such as notification and
reporting should be applied to surveillance device warrants and
production orders and we can’t see why there should be lesser
standards applied.”

Asked about concerns raised, Justice Minister Simon Power said the bill had not raised human rights issues when vetted but he was interested to hear what the select committee decided.

:: DONATIONS

If you would like to make a donation, check out
www.october15thsolidarity.info/donate
for details of the various funds.

:: RESOURCES

The www.October15thSolidarity.info website is regularly updated. The
website aims to be multilingual and gives background information
aswell as updates on legal proceedings. There are poster, newsletters
and leaflets available here:
october15thsolidarity.info/en/node/236 A new leaflet has just
been printed with a circulation of 2000! You can download it here:
october15thsolidarity.info/sites/default/files/drop%20the%20charges20A4.pdf

:: LINKS

www.October15thSolidarity.info | www.indymedia.org.nz | www.tuhoe.net
| www.gpja.org.nz | www.civilrightsdefence.org.nz | www.aotearoa.maori.nz

 

A waste of time

I’m a republican.  I always have been – Although I shy away from the word these days because of the connotations it carries in a world dominated by American culture.  I find the idea that people can be born into positions of power and privilege while others are excluded repugnant.  But, having said that I’m a little bit in two minds about Keith Locke’s bill on republicanism being pulled from the ballot.  I’ve come to the conclusion that, interesting as they are, debates about the head of state, the flag and even entrenching the constitution are not likely to make a significant difference to people’s lives, or to the state of the planet. I think I’d rather have seen any of the other Green MP’s bills drawn than this one. I haven’t read all of them but from their titles they all appear to address issues I consider more urgent. (especially Kevin Hague’s Fisheries Precautionary Approach Amendment Bill)

On the other hand this republican bill probably has the potential to generate the most debate of all of them.  That could prove a distraction for parliament and, as Ari noted in his earlier post:

Distraction from what, exactly? The only thing they seem to be doing is cutting funding to things. I’m perfectly happy for the government to be distracted from that.

So, yeah, let’s waste some time rather than have this Parliament continue to use its time trashing the environment and sabotaging our social framework. let’s spend several months talking about whether Prince William and Kate will come to visit us if we snub them like this, or whether Colin Meads would wear a rugby club tie if he were president, or whether we suffer from colonial cringe because we let the English pick up the bill for our head of state. What will happen to our women’s magazines? Will Buckingham Palace loan us some beefeater hats for our new head of state? What will Australia think? I’m all for having all these debates for the next three years rather than having John Key’s government debating and deciding on ACC, emissions trading or mining.

 

Nick the prick

This is really just appallingly outrageous from ACC Minister Nick Smith.

“If my doctor told me that I was terminally ill and I had 30 days to live, with the ACC rules the way they are, I’d be finding myself a train to throw myself under on the 29th day because my family would be treated so much more generously,” he said.

Smith has subsequently (under orders from John Key, presumably) offered an apology. But this is a Minister out of control.

How can John Key have confidence for Smith to hold the ACC portfolio when Smith says that, if terminally ill, he would throw himself under a train to get his family ACC entitlements? This is Cabinet Minsiter admitting that he would himself rip off ACC.

The reality is that National is proposing to disallow any entitlement to the families of suicide victims – even though their mental state was so deranged that they had no rational perception of what was happening in reality when their lives ended.

That stinks, and is discriminatory in terms of the Bill of Rights Act (i.e discrimination on the grounds of disability).

If Smith’s vile Bill can eventually get the numbers to be introduced to Parliament (and frogblog and The Standard suggest there is a problem there), then I would hope Attorney-General Chris Finlayson will report, as is statutory duty, that it is in breach of the Bill of Rights Act.

But, given that he is a senior National Party Minister, who knows whether he will follow the path of integrity, or Nick Smith’s path of lies, obfuscation, and duplicity.

A challenge for Chris Finlayson, who is one of the few National MPs I still have much respect for.

 

To Republic or not to Republic

Keith Locke’s Head of State (Referenda) Bill was drawn from the ballot for members bills today. (Press release is here) The Bill is a simple minimalist approach to setting up a republic which sets up a referendum on whether to rename the Governor General to President, and if so, whether to directly or indirectly elect the President. It also clarifies that the Treaty of Waitangi remains in force.

Republican support has been steadily growing recently, and as I recall the last poll on the matter had about 40% support for a republic. It’s possible that this bill could actually succeed in constitutional reform if it passes.

While I don’t see any justification for National to vote against the bill given their stance on an MMP referendum, I’m not expecting any support from either National or Labour just yet. It will be interesting to see what happens here, and I don’t really think that voting to set up a referendum can hurt any political party. Of course, that’s not stopped them from being incredibly cautious on this issue before.