Uncategorized


Chris Trotter opines on Phil Goff’s “Nationhood” speech:

To these New Zealanders he was saying: “It’s okay, you and I think alike on this. I’m not going to brand you a racist because, like me, you were offended by Hone Harawira’s obscenities; or because you were repelled by the dirty dealing between National and the Maori Party over the ETS legislation.”

Well, I too was offended by Hone Harawira’s obscenities – although no more than I was by Trevor Mallard calling Chris Finlayson “Tinkerbell” in Parliament – , and I’m certainly repelled by the dirty dealing between National and the Maori Party over the ETS legislation.

If Goff had confined himself to that, he would have been, to use Trotter’s words, “taking the first, and absolutely necessary steps towards Labour’s rehabilitation – and re-election”.

But he didn’t confine himself to that.  Goff found in necessary to dog-whistle to racism by regurgitating a thinly disguised version-lite of Don Brash’s “Nationhood” speech.  Even worse, he defended the status quo on the foreshore and seabed.

The Foreshore and Seabed Act is racist legislation.  It nationalised without compensation all foreshore and seabed for which the Court of Appeal found iwi or hapu had the right to make claim to customary title before the courts had even had the chance to consider one single such claim.  But it didn’t nationalise any of the over 12,000 parcels of foreshore and seabed in private fee simple ownership.  It deprived one specific group of New Zealanders of their right to have their claim to property rights determined by the Courts.  The fact that the group of New Zealanders so deprived were defined by race makes the legislation racist – pure and simple.

As recently as July we looked to be finally working towards a political consensus on the foreshore and seabed, with Labour Shadow Attorney General David Parker stating:

National’s change of heart has established an opportunity to revisit the Act, which we support. John Key said in April that our submission indicated ‘there could well be agreement between the three of us, National, Labour and the Maori Party, (in) which case you’ll get a much better solution and one that’ll achieve what we want…’ ”.
We hope this remains the case. Changes which need to be made include restoring the ability for iwi and hapu to gain a customary title to the foreshore and seabed.”

But now we have Goff’s shameful backtrack to again supporting that racist legislation:

But for all the criticism I have heard, most people accept that the current foreshore and seabed rules aren’t broken and they’re a good foundation for moving forward. They believe its good legislation for all New Zealanders.

It’s hard to see why the country should be put through all the grief just to put a new brand on law that’s working.

Trotter is right to remind us that a class analysis is required, and that Goff needs to return Labour to its egalitarian, socialist roots.  He needs to also recall that the Labour Party has some racist roots, exemplified by things like the Foreshore and Seabed Act and the lower rate of unemployment benefit for Maori that persisted through to the 1950s.  Trotter is wrong to assert that it is all about class and not at all about race.

The people who waged the wars and made the laws that alienated 63 million acres of Maori land and nationalised the foreshore and seabed without compensation were not just les mofos riches – they were also les mofos blancs.

Tolley was born happy. She had a mother and father, and they had lots and lots of money. They loved each other, and they had lots and lots and lots of money.

Tolley was warm and cozy in whichever of her many houses she chose to live in. What more could she want?

Tolley loved the simple things in life. She loved to ride in helicopters. When she had an itch on her back, all Tolley would want was someone to scratch her back for her. She never wanted to be someplace other than up in a helicopter.

Tolley was never bothered with the problems workers have because she had lots and lots and lots of money. When she looked in a mirror all she saw was what she was. Tolley fell in love with money and power and became a National Party MP.

She was the most perfect and happy Tolley when the nice Mr Key made her Minister of Education.

She could ride in helicopters whenever she chose. She could cut Enviroschools and community education classes and school staffing levels and freeze wages and draw up league tables and read children’s stories to teachers.  She was the most perfect and happy Tolley.

She could ride in helicopters whenever she chose and the nice Mr Key would still be relaxed.

Sadly enough, the political life of a Minister of Education is short, and especially so when she is thick and incompetent.

[With apologies to Colin Thompson and Amy Lissiat]

Update: Roger Waters beat me to it – by over 30 years:

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:

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

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

I recently found this great video on the Standard.

It raises a very good point that New Zealand’s inaction on climate change will damage our reputation and our international branding. This could have a big impact on our Tourism sector which represents almost 10% of our GDP, because it is branded on the 100% pure image.

 

Bill English is still protesting loudly that because he’s only claiming as much as a backbencher for living somewhere he doesn’t actually live, we cannot expect any more from him. He’s simply and demonstrably wrong.

While I have no issue with him identifying Dipton as his home, (I still feel that way about London to a degree, and I haven’t lived there in over a decade) it is plainly not where he is actually living. Accomodation allowances are designed to offset the costs of MPs who have no residence in Wellington, and would have to rent one.

If Bill English wants the pressure to come off, he should admit he lives in Wellington, and was never entitled to take the allowance in the first place, stop taking the backbencher-level accommodation supplement, and repay the rest of the money he wrongly claimed. If he’d do that, I’d willingly forgive him the lies, the obfuscation, and the blatant attempts to disguise his living arrangements because he made the situation right and made clear that MPs are only entitled to additional pay when they face additional difficulties in serving the country. I’d even defend that he had no need to step down from anything, if he did it very quickly- as far as I’m concerned he’s probably procrastinated more than he has rights to if he expects people to believe he did not intend to rort the taxpayer, but just because I dislike him doesn’t mean I fancy the idea of anyone else in his party trying to be finance minister. (and presumably failing even worse)

Being an MP is not a career. Every term you are re-elected, and it is a privilege every time, as it entitles you to do a great service for the country. MPs do not need competitive pay with the private sector, they need pay that takes into account the stress and expenses of being an MP, and their current remuneration is perfectly adequate, many would say without all the allowances we add on.

This is the disconnect: Bill thinks he’s entitled to the allowance because it is legal for him to take it, and it is legal to take it because MPs like him have set the rules based on the mistaken presumption that being an MP is a career. I think he’s not entitled to it because he lives in a house with his name on the deed, in Wellington, for most of the year, and thus does not need the additional money. The Nat’s “reform” of ministerial allowances does not address this matter, and highlights the need for a truly independent body that sets the pay and allowance rules for MPs in a transparent, fair, and non-partisan way, ensuring MPs can do their jobs if they have additional disadvantages compared to other MPs, but neither excessively punishing nor excessively rewarding them.

Suffice it to say I don’t think I need to detail the new joke of an “emissions trading scheme”1 here, but I do want to say I feel pretty stupid defending the Māori Party all these times and having them betray their own constituents, the country, and the future with a law designed to pay polluters to damage our climate when it is clear the planet cannot take this sort of treatment and remain the welcoming place it is today. I had thought maybe they were just trying to edge out Act by being an undemanding coalition partner, but this isn’t strategy. This is stupidity, plain and simple.

As far as I’m concerned, signing on to something like that is pretty much indefensible, especially seeing a grand coalition on the ETS seemed much more likely than just leaving it to die, and probably would’ve resulted in an ETS that might almost have been worthwhile. The Māori Party has a lot of proving itself again to do if it wants people to believe they can ever work with parties of the left after the repeated capitulations to completely failed policies that we’ve witnessed. And that’s even discounting questions of whether they’re truly representing Māori anymore, or just the relatively few wealthy elites that probably voted for National anyway.

As for National- well, it appears even shooting for the centre doesn’t stop them from shelling out over $12002 million to subsidise polluters and giving out tax cuts to people who don’t need them while at the same time firing productive and loyal employees just to gut the public service, refusing to enter good-faith negotiations on pay for teachers and health professionals, refusing to fix the leaky homes which their own failed attempt at deregulation created, and many more opportunities to actually lighten the load on hardworking kiwis during the recession. What utter hypocrites.

1It’s not actually an emissions trading scheme because the amount of carbon credits available is not capped, extra subsidised credits will be added for “productive” polluters3. And even if the amounts of credits were capped, it’s still not an emissions trading scheme if you artificially cap the price of carbon credits like the government proposes to do. This doesn’t even guarantee a net drop in emissions, let alone reaching any target- even the government’s pathetic 20% one.
2See comments.
3An oxymoron if ever I’ve heard one. Pollution is by definition wasteful, and pollution that threatens the climate isn’t likely to make something that outweighs the value of the damage it will do.

No Right Turn and The Standard both have blogs today on John Key’s announcement of the “reform” of Ministerial accommodation expenses.

So I decided to crunch some numbers – based on the 1 January – 30 June 2009 Ministerial Expenses return, but adjusting for Sir Double Dipton’s agreement to pay back at least part of the money he was rorting for living in his own Wellington home.

The annual expenses for the affected Ministers’ accommodation:

minaccom

Yes, Key’s “reform” will end up costing the taxpayer an additional $55488 a year – and that money will not even be spent on accommodation expenses. It will end up in Ministers’ pockets, and tax free to boot.

Lloyd’s List’s Last Word opines:

DON’T you get heartily sick of namby-pamby, bleeding-heart liberals and their stick-in-the-mud notion that containers are primarily a means of shifting cargo between world ports, rather than keeping criminals under lock and key?

Last Word understands that in New Zealand, Judith Collins — a politician who, we understand, rejoices in the title of corrections minister, which probably isn’t as saucy as it sounds — is planning to bang up cons in Rimutaka Prison in surplus boxes.

A new unit will provide beds for 60 inmates at a cost of NZ$63,000 ($43,000), which is substantially less than conventional prison accommodation.

Ms Collins is looking to cut costs further in future and is considering proposals to make prisoners do the conversion work themselves.

But hand-wringing do-gooders such as Peter Williams, president of the Howard League for Penal Reform, has blasted the scheme as bringing about “tin shanties and slum prisons”.

He has even called for them to be air-conditioned in summer and heated in winter. What does he think prison is — a holiday camp?

The move has also been slammed by Maritime Union of New Zealand general secretary Trevor Hanson, who says: “New Zealanders needs secure jobs, not jail cells.”

We at Lloyd’s List can have no truck with such social worker sentiment. Given that containers are regarded as the last word in luxury by stowaways, they are more than good enough for Kiwi crims, especially if container lessors can flog worn-out units to the New Zealand government at suitably inflated prices.

Judith Collins is off to Gdansk, one of Europe’s largest ports, next week, ostensibly in her capacity as Veterans’ Affairs Minister to attend commemorations to mark the 70th anniversary of the start of World War II.

But given that Collins is also Corrections Minister, this seems too good an opportunity for her to pass by.

What’s the bet she will also be hanging around Gdansk’s port looking for a cheap deal on some of these:

Next Page »