thedailyblog--2020-02-29--EXCLUSIVE: Dave Macpherson: Waikato families with shocking experience of state mental health service

EXCLUSIVE: Dave Macpherson: Waikato families with shocking experience of state mental health services call for urgent investigation

Four Waikato families with the worst possible experience of DHB-run mental health services have joined forces to write an open letter to the Government calling for an urgent investigation of Waikato DHB ’ s services .
Ranging in time from our son Nicky Steven ’ s death in March 2015 , to the disappearance of Matthew Prichard-Case just last month while on leave from the DHB ’ s Henry Bennett Centre , the four families have told Health Minister David Clark that nothing substantial has improved in the last five years , despite various announcements of extra funding and new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their whanau members shows to the families that the culture and leadership of this country ’ s mental health services remains untouched , and that more disasters and harm will follow without real change .
This is not just a Waikato problem – similar cases are being reported every week in Canterbury , Auckland , Bay of Plenty , Otago , Northland , Wairarapa ; you name it .
Unless Governments understand that the mental health profession does not have the answers to the mental health crisis facing this country , we fear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ burdens being visited on our whanau will continue .
Here is the letter : “ Request for an urgent investigation into Waikato DHB Mental Health services .
is from 4 Waikato whaanau/families who have experienced serious or sentinel events relating to family members who were under the care of Waikato DHB mental health services .
• whose son Nicky died in March 2015 after Waikato DHB community mental health services and acute mental health inpatient services provided inadequate and unsafe care that led to his death .
( See Coroners findings ) • @ @ @ @ @ @ @ May 2015 after Waikato DHB mental health services provided inadequate and unsafe care that led to his death .
( See evidence to Coroners hearing ) • whose son Rhys died in Nov 2019 after Waikato DHB Acute mental health services provided inadequate and unsafe care that led to his death .
( See DHB Internal Review ) • who has submitted a complaint to the Health and Disability Commission regarding her nephew Matthew Prichard-Case .
Matthew went missing from Waikato DHB acute inpatient mental health services in January 2020 as a result @ @ @ @ @ @ @ providing inadequate and unsafe care .
( See Health and Disability Commissioner complaint ) Our whaanau are deeply concerned at the ongoing risks of harm or death to vulnerable patients due to the continuing failure of the Waikato DHB to provide safe and high quality care both in the community and in its inpatient facilities .
There is a long list of preventable deaths and serious events at Waikato DHB and in spite of a section 99 inspection by the former Minister of Health Jonathon Coleman in July 2015 ( after the death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forensic patients . )
And in spite of the Governments Mental Health Inquiry in 2018 , these tragedies continue to happen .
For example ; • The case of Ross Bremer in October 2016 where Ross , his mother and 2 members of the public died and his father was left seriously wounded • The death of Vaughan Te Moananui who was shot by Police during a psychotic episode • The deaths of 2 patients let out on unescorted leave in July 2016 and August 2019 • The disappearance of Matthew Prichard-Case and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ There are also deaths and serious incidents that have happened when people have not had access to services or have been released into the community too soon or without the support they need .
These also need to be investigated .
These preventable tragedies are happening too often .
Families knowledge and concerns are being ignored by mental health providers .
This is the story of each of our families and it has led to the preventable deaths of our loved ones .
Whaanau are not well supported when they need it most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into coming together to call for an urgent investigation .
We are passionate about preventing further tragedies of this nature , and expect you are too .
We call on you as Minister of Health to : • Undertake a , independent and urgent investigation into the safety and quality of Waikato DHB mental Health services .
And : • To action the call of families during the 2018 Mental Health Inquiry to establish a fully independent national complaints and review body that has the capability to investigate quickly and effectively .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the development of independent peer/support/advocacy systems for service users and whaanau/families that enable them to be effectively supported and have a voice during care and treatment , serious and sentinel incidents , reviews , inquests and other processes .
This request is supported by the families of in the hope that our speaking out will contribute to ensuring we get the changes required to ensure transformation of mental health services in the Waikato ( and nationally ) into the safe and high quality services that everyone needs and deserves .
Given the urgency @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to our request by 15th March .
Dave Macpherson – TDB mental health blogger & Former Waikato DHB Elected Member whose son was killed by public health incompetence .

Four Waikato families with the worst possible experience of DHB-run mental health services have joined forces to write an open letter to the Government calling for an urgent investigation of Waikato DHB’s services.
Ranging in time from our son Nicky Steven’s death in March 2015, to the disappearance of Matthew Prichard-Case just last month while on leave from the DHB’s Henry Bennett Centre, the four families have told Health Minister David Clark that nothing substantial has improved in the last five years, despite various announcements of extra funding and new organisations.
The disappearances and deaths of their whanau members shows to the families that the culture and leadership of this country’s mental health services remains untouched, and that more disasters and harm will follow without real change.
This is not just a Waikato problem – similar cases are being reported every week in Canterbury, Auckland, Bay of Plenty, Otago, Northland, Wairarapa; you name it. Unless Governments understand that the mental health profession does not have the answers to the mental health crisis facing this country, we fear that the awful statistics and the terrible burdens being visited on our whanau will continue.
Here is the letter:
“Request for an urgent investigation into Waikato DHB Mental Health services.
This request is from 4 Waikato whaanau/families who have experienced serious or sentinel events relating to family members who were under the care of Waikato DHB mental health services.
Jane Stevens and Dave Macpherson whose son Nicky died in March 2015 after Waikato DHB community mental health services and acute mental health inpatient services provided inadequate and unsafe care that led to his death. (See Coroners findings)
Genevieve Simpson whose brother Vaughan Te Moananui died in May 2015 after Waikato DHB mental health services provided inadequate and unsafe care that led to his death. (See evidence to Coroners hearing)
Ray Thomassen whose son Rhys died in Nov 2019 after Waikato DHB Acute mental health services provided inadequate and unsafe care that led to his death. (See DHB Internal Review)
Dr Rosalind Case who has submitted a complaint to the Health and Disability Commission regarding her nephew Matthew Prichard-Case. Matthew went missing from Waikato DHB acute inpatient mental health services in January 2020 as a result of Waikato DHB acute mental health services providing inadequate and unsafe care. (See Health and Disability Commissioner complaint)
Our whaanau are deeply concerned at the ongoing risks of harm or death to vulnerable patients due to the continuing failure of the Waikato DHB to provide safe and high quality care both in the community and in its inpatient facilities.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
There is a long list of preventable deaths and serious events at Waikato DHB and in spite of a section 99 inspection by the former Minister of Health Jonathon Coleman in July 2015 (after the death of Nicky Stevens and escape of two forensic patients.) And in spite of the Governments Mental Health Inquiry in 2018, these tragedies continue to happen. For example;
The case of Ross Bremer in October 2016 where Ross, his mother and 2 members of the public died and his father was left seriously wounded
The death of Vaughan Te Moananui who was shot by Police during a psychotic episode
The deaths of 2 patients let out on unescorted leave in July 2016 and August 2019
The death of Rhys Thomassen November 2019
The disappearance of Matthew Prichard-Case and other patients while on escorted leave.
There are also deaths and serious incidents that have happened when people have not had access to services or have been released into the community too soon or without the support they need. These also need to be investigated.
These preventable tragedies are happening too often. Families knowledge and concerns are being ignored by mental health providers. This is the story of each of our families and it has led to the preventable deaths of our loved ones. Whaanau are not well supported when they need it most.
This situation has motivated our whaanau into coming together to call for an urgent investigation. We are passionate about preventing further tragedies of this nature, and expect you are too.
We call on you as Minister of Health to:
Undertake a full , independent and urgent investigation into the safety and quality of Waikato DHB mental Health services. And: To action the call of families during the 2018 Mental Health Inquiry to establish a fully independent national complaints and review body that has the capability to investigate quickly and effectively. And: To commit significant resourcing to the development of independent peer/support/advocacy systems for service users and whaanau/families that enable them to be effectively supported and have a voice during care and treatment, serious and sentinel incidents, reviews, inquests and other processes.
This request is supported by the families of Nicky Stevens, Vaughan Te Moananui, Rhys Thomassen and Matthew Prichard-Case in the hope that our speaking out will contribute to ensuring we get the changes required to ensure transformation of mental health services in the Waikato (and nationally) into the safe and high quality services that everyone needs and deserves.
Given the urgency of this issue we request a response to our request by 15th March.
Dave Macpherson – TDB mental health blogger & Former Waikato DHB Elected Member whose son was killed by public health incompetence.


thedailyblog--2020-02-29--Default funds to go fossil free

Default funds to go fossil free

The government has today taken the decision to require ethical standards for default KiwiSaver funds , including exclusion of fossil fuels .
This protects the interests of those who do not make a specific choice of funds when they sign up to KiwiSaver .
The government has a responsibility to ensure their money is not invested in fossil fuels and other companies that cause social and environmental harm .
“ Annual surveys undertaken by Colmar Brunton for Mindful Money show that three quarters of New Zealanders do not want their KiwiSaver funds to be invested in fossil fuels .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public values , as well as government policy.
” This policy is an important building block in government support for sustainable finance .
Climate action needs money to be directed away from fossil fuels towards clean energy and climate solutions .
Through this policy , the New Zealand government is joining with financial institutions around the world that have divested over $ 12 trillion funding from fossil fuels and governments that have developed sustainable finance policies .
“ Avoiding fossil fuels is not only good for climate stability , it is also good @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all the fossil fuel reserves without catastrophic climate impacts , and producers will be left with worthless ‘ stranded ’ assets .
This is a serious risk to the world ’ s financial system as well as to investors .
Excluding fossil fuel producers from default funds protects the interests of those who have not made a specific choice of KiwiSaver fund.
” Research by Mindful Money shows that $ 1.6 billion of KiwiSaver funds are invested in companies that are engaged in fossil fuel production .
Less than 3 % of KiwiSaver @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a policy of excluding fossil fuels .
Mindful Money survey data shows the barriers to investment include a lack of transparency and a lack of objective analysis to compare options .
Mindful Money was established to overcome these barriers .
“ As well as adopting minimum standards on excluding investments in fossil fuels and weapons , future default KiwiSaver providers will need to be transparent about their ethical standards .
However , this is also important to all 3 million KiwiSaver investors .
Minimum standards , transparency and reporting on ethical investment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scheme.
” This decision has come after a thorough process of research and consultation by MBIE , including strong contributions from Mindful Money , 350 Aotearoa , the Climate Change Minister and the finance sector .
Mindful Money undertook research on ethical investment to inform the review of default funds , made a submission , provided further information and encouraged submissions from the public .
“ This is an important decision .
The case for excluding fossil fuels has been made on the basis of policy analysis and evidence provided by Mindful Money @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data .
Mindful Money supporters mobilised to make submissions to the process.
” Mindful Money ’ s work on the default KiwiSaver scheme is part of advocacy work on retirement policy ( included in the recent report from the Retirement Commissioner ) , the FMA inquiry on ethical greenwashing and the Sustainable Finance Forum .
Individuals can find out how much their KiwiSaver fund invests in fossil fuels and weapons by visiting www.mindfulmoney.nz .
They will be surprised to find that $ 4.7 billion is invested in sectors that most New Zealanders want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fund finder tool is a quick , easy and free way for anyone to find a more ethical fund that meets their criteria .

The government has today taken the decision to require ethical standards for default KiwiSaver funds, including exclusion of fossil fuels. This protects the interests of those who do not make a specific choice of funds when they sign up to KiwiSaver. The government has a responsibility to ensure their money is not invested in fossil fuels and other companies that cause social and environmental harm.
“Annual surveys undertaken by Colmar Brunton for Mindful Money show that three quarters of New Zealanders do not want their KiwiSaver funds to be invested in fossil fuels. This new policy on default funds aligns with public values, as well as government policy.”
This policy is an important building block in government support for sustainable finance. Climate action needs money to be directed away from fossil fuels towards clean energy and climate solutions. Through this policy, the New Zealand government is joining with financial institutions around the world that have divested over $12 trillion funding from fossil fuels and governments that have developed sustainable finance policies.
“Avoiding fossil fuels is not only good for climate stability, it is also good financially. The world cannot burn all the fossil fuel reserves without catastrophic climate impacts, and producers will be left with worthless ‘stranded’ assets. This is a serious risk to the world’s financial system as well as to investors. Excluding fossil fuel producers from default funds protects the interests of those who have not made a specific choice of KiwiSaver fund.”
Research by Mindful Money shows that $1.6 billion of KiwiSaver funds are invested in companies that are engaged in fossil fuel production. Less than 3% of KiwiSaver investments are so far in funds that have a policy of excluding fossil fuels. Mindful Money survey data shows the barriers to investment include a lack of transparency and a lack of objective analysis to compare options. Mindful Money was established to overcome these barriers.
“As well as adopting minimum standards on excluding investments in fossil fuels and weapons, future default KiwiSaver providers will need to be transparent about their ethical standards. However, this is also important to all 3 million KiwiSaver investors. Minimum standards, transparency and reporting on ethical investment should be applied to the whole KiwiSaver scheme.”
This decision has come after a thorough process of research and consultation by MBIE, including strong contributions from Mindful Money, 350 Aotearoa, the Climate Change Minister and the finance sector. Mindful Money undertook research on ethical investment to inform the review of default funds, made a submission, provided further information and encouraged submissions from the public.
“This is an important decision. The case for excluding fossil fuels has been made on the basis of policy analysis and evidence provided by Mindful Money, including specific policy proposals and survey data. Mindful Money supporters mobilised to make submissions to the process.”
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Mindful Money’s work on the default KiwiSaver scheme is part of advocacy work on retirement policy (included in the recent report from the Retirement Commissioner), the FMA inquiry on ethical greenwashing and the Sustainable Finance Forum.
Individuals can find out how much their KiwiSaver fund invests in fossil fuels and weapons by visiting www.mindfulmoney.nz. They will be surprised to find that $4.7 billion is invested in sectors that most New Zealanders want to avoid. Mindful Money’s fund finder tool is a quick, easy and free way for anyone to find a more ethical fund that meets their criteria.
Barry Coates, founder and CEO of Mindful Money


thedailyblog--2020-03-02--The Response – Not The Call.

The Response – Not The Call.

WATCHING THE SLOW descent of Bernie Sander ’ s campaign is a depressing reminder of democratic ( and Democratic ) political realities .
The most brutal of these is that Newton ’ s Third Law of Motion applies with equal force to politics as it does to physics .
“ For every action , there is an equal and opposite reaction.
” Call yourself a “ democratic socialist ” and everyone who feels threatened by democratic-socialism will mobilise against you .
The anti-Sanders mobilisation has taken some time to resolve itself into a single challenger , but former Vice-President Joe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ South Carolina has finally cleared the centrists ’ path to the nomination .
No matter how thrilling Sanders ’ wins in Iowa , New Hampshire and Nevada may have been , the brute arithmetic of the primary process remained constant : the combined strength of his opponents was always greater than his own .
As the captains and the kings of the Democratic Party centre depart , with Pete Buttigieg leading the way this afternoon ( 2 March 2020 ) the inevitability of a single opponent standing athwart Bernie ’ s path to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Super Tuesday ” ( Wednesday , 4 March NZT ) will winnow the field with even more force than South Carolina .
The departure of Amy Klobuchar and ( probably ) Mike Bloomberg , will leave the field clear for Biden ’ s folksy homilies .
Elizabeth Warren will likely remain in the race , drawing votes from Sanders in expectation of being rewarded with the Vice-Presidential nomination .
At some point well short of the Democratic Party Convention in Milwaukee ( July 13-16 ) Sanders ’ campaign will falter and fade away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic Party will settle for the half-loaf that is Biden-Warren – especially if it means driving Donald Trump from the White House .
“ No !
No !
No !
” , the Sandernistas will cry .
“ That must not be allowed to happen !
” But the angry protests of these young , idealistic progressives will not avail them .
At some point in electoral politics , the moment comes when you must remove your fingers from your ears , open your eyes , and take in the terrifying spectacle of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Whether you believe in it or not , the Third Law of Political Motion is very , very real .
Why is the Democratic Party leadership so terrified of Sanders becoming the nominee ?
Because they know the size and ferocity of the forces his nomination for the Presidency would unleash .
Sanders supporters rail against the Democratic establishment – accusing them of doing everything within their power to undermine their candidate .
And that ’ s true .
They are .
Not because they ’ re against Medicare For All , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but because the billionaires Bernie denounces , whose enormous power and wealth are directly threatened by his policies , will move heaven and earth to keep him , and them , out of the White House .
Democratic Party stalwarts , the people who have spent years navigating the treacherous waters of the United States ’ political system , have priorities very different from Sanders ’ most vociferous supporters .
They are only too aware that even if , by some miracle , Bernie won the White House ; the Almighty is most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the mix .
Yes , a President Bernie Sanders could achieve some important gains by Executive Order , but he couldn ’ t deliver Medicare For All , or a Green New Deal , or the writing-off of student debt , or any of the other radical measures he is promising , without solid majorities in both the House of Representative and the Senate .
Truth to tell , securing the passage of such radical legislation would be a long shot even with substantial majorities in both houses of Congress .
Without them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a pipe-dream .
As unrealistic as expecting the God of History to deliver the Democratic Party not one , but two , political miracles at the 2020 elections .
Stripping away all the ideological bunting , there is only one unequivocally popular prospect the Democratic Party can hold out to the American electorate : a White House cleansed of Donald Trump and all his evil brood .
But , bringing together an electoral coalition powerful enough to secure Trump ’ s defeat in the Electoral College will not be easy .
Far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ class war , the Democratic Party ’ s candidate will need to speak the language of inclusion , reconciliation and national renewal .
The sentiments of America ’ s Founding Fathers should be turned against the constitutionally illiterate Republican incumbent .
Recalling for voters all the great and redemptive moments of American history , the Candidate should then invite them to contrast the moral strength of America ’ s best leaders with the abject moral squalor of its worst .
Bernie Sanders and his followers have done the United States the inestimable service @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to construct the most progressive Democratic Party platform in a generation .
To implement the Sandernistas ’ progressive dreams , however , the voters of United States must first be persuaded to abandon the ruin of unreasoning and mutually destructive partisanship .
First and foremost , America needs a healer .
If History has taught us anything , it is that revolutions inevitably open up new wounds – even in those rare instances when they succeed in closing up old ones .
Always , the true believers cry : “ Let Justice be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” But what sort of justice has ever emerged from the ruins of paradise ?
Let the equal and opposite reaction to Donald Trump ’ s hate be love .
Allow him to initiate the action that will bring him down .
The Democratic Party can only win in November by being the response – not the call .

WATCHING THE SLOW descent of Bernie Sander’s campaign is a depressing reminder of democratic (and Democratic) political realities. The most brutal of these is that Newton’s Third Law of Motion applies with equal force to politics as it does to physics. “For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.”
Call yourself a “democratic socialist” and everyone who feels threatened by democratic-socialism will mobilise against you. The anti-Sanders mobilisation has taken some time to resolve itself into a single challenger, but former Vice-President Joe Biden’s, runaway victory in South Carolina has finally cleared the centrists’ path to the nomination.
No matter how thrilling Sanders’ wins in Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada may have been, the brute arithmetic of the primary process remained constant: the combined strength of his opponents was always greater than his own. As the captains and the kings of the Democratic Party centre depart, with Pete Buttigieg leading the way this afternoon (2 March 2020) the inevitability of a single opponent standing athwart Bernie’s path to the nomination is now clear.
“Super Tuesday” (Wednesday, 4 March NZT) will winnow the field with even more force than South Carolina. The departure of Amy Klobuchar and (probably) Mike Bloomberg, will leave the field clear for Biden’s folksy homilies. Elizabeth Warren will likely remain in the race, drawing votes from Sanders in expectation of being rewarded with the Vice-Presidential nomination. At some point well short of the Democratic Party Convention in Milwaukee (July 13-16) Sanders’ campaign will falter and fade away. Many on the left of the Democratic Party will settle for the half-loaf that is Biden-Warren – especially if it means driving Donald Trump from the White House.
“No! No! No!”, the Sandernistas will cry. “That must not be allowed to happen!” But the angry protests of these young, idealistic progressives will not avail them. At some point in electoral politics, the moment comes when you must remove your fingers from your ears, open your eyes, and take in the terrifying spectacle of your enemies’ tanks rolling towards you. Whether you believe in it or not, the Third Law of Political Motion is very, very real.
Why is the Democratic Party leadership so terrified of Sanders becoming the nominee? Because they know the size and ferocity of the forces his nomination for the Presidency would unleash. Sanders supporters rail against the Democratic establishment – accusing them of doing everything within their power to undermine their candidate. And that’s true. They are. Not because they’re against Medicare For All, or even the Green New Deal, but because the billionaires Bernie denounces, whose enormous power and wealth are directly threatened by his policies, will move heaven and earth to keep him, and them, out of the White House.
Democratic Party stalwarts, the people who have spent years navigating the treacherous waters of the United States’ political system, have priorities very different from Sanders’ most vociferous supporters. They are only too aware that even if, by some miracle, Bernie won the White House; the Almighty is most unlikely to add a second miracle to the mix.
Yes, a President Bernie Sanders could achieve some important gains by Executive Order, but he couldn’t deliver Medicare For All, or a Green New Deal, or the writing-off of student debt, or any of the other radical measures he is promising, without solid majorities in both the House of Representative and the Senate. Truth to tell, securing the passage of such radical legislation would be a long shot even with substantial majorities in both houses of Congress. Without them, however, Bernie’s programme is a pipe-dream. As unrealistic as expecting the God of History to deliver the Democratic Party not one, but two, political miracles at the 2020 elections.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Stripping away all the ideological bunting, there is only one unequivocally popular prospect the Democratic Party can hold out to the American electorate: a White House cleansed of Donald Trump and all his evil brood. But, bringing together an electoral coalition powerful enough to secure Trump’s defeat in the Electoral College will not be easy. Far from offering voters the bitter rhetoric of class war, the Democratic Party’s candidate will need to speak the language of inclusion, reconciliation and national renewal.
The sentiments of America’s Founding Fathers should be turned against the constitutionally illiterate Republican incumbent. Recalling for voters all the great and redemptive moments of American history, the Candidate should then invite them to contrast the moral strength of America’s best leaders with the abject moral squalor of its worst.
Bernie Sanders and his followers have done the United States the inestimable service of bringing together all the planks necessary to construct the most progressive Democratic Party platform in a generation. To implement the Sandernistas’ progressive dreams, however, the voters of United States must first be persuaded to abandon the ruin of unreasoning and mutually destructive partisanship. First and foremost, America needs a healer.
If History has taught us anything, it is that revolutions inevitably open up new wounds – even in those rare instances when they succeed in closing up old ones. Always, the true believers cry: “Let Justice be done – though the heavens fall!” But what sort of justice has ever emerged from the ruins of paradise?
Let the equal and opposite reaction to Donald Trump’s hate be love. Allow him to initiate the action that will bring him down. The Democratic Party can only win in November by being the response – not the call.


thedailyblog--2020-03-03--Government-induced migrant worker crisis intensifies exploitation

The government has announced a series of changes that will only intensify the crisis around migrant worker exploitation .
The government has allowed a significant reduction in approvals for permanent residency from the long-term guidance number of around 45,000 annually to only 35,000 .
At the same time , there has been a continuing boost to the number of people allowed to come and work on temporary work ( 170,000 ) or student visas ( 100,000 ) to over 270,000 a year with a similar number here at any one time .
This is up 50 % on numbers just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of those temporary visa holders are also held in a form of bondage because they are not allowed to change employer .
The end result is that someone needs to earn over $ 100,000 a year to be able to access the permanent residency .
This wage level was imposed by stealth rather than officially alter the points required because the government can ’ t agree on the new numbers .
There have been huge delays in permanent residency applications .
Successful candidates are left waiting for a year and charged tens of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is on top of whatever may have been spent on tertiary courses to earn points towards a residence and subsidise the entire tertiary sector with around 20 % of their income .
Many workers came here as students and have spent years of their lives and tens of thousands of dollars with the expectation that they would qualify for residency if they got particular qualifications or particular income levels .
After they get here the rules and targets they need to achieve have been changed on them again and again .
Now the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people can qualify – even under the skilled worker category .
The stupid thing is that even teachers and nurses don ’ t qualify when they were brought here on the implied promise that they would .
This policy has also meant that many workers deemed to have lesser skills ( determined because they are paid less than $ 25 an hour ) will not be able to renew visas after three years .
This also means that those workers who have been here up to a decade ( or more in some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their visas again and again because they could show they were needed will now be kicked out when their visas expire .
Most of the ones in this category have partners and children here .
Many of the children were born here and know no other life that of New Zealand .
And since 2006 that child is not eligible for citizenship by right of birth , unlike many other countries .
This is a cruel and heartless policy .
There will be protests up and down New Zealand when these established and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are told to leave – as there should be .
We need a pathway to residency for this group .
The previous National Government proposed a solution for their mates in the dairy industry that anyone who had been working here five years or more could qualify to stay permanently .
That policy should be applied to everyone .
Another consequence of this government policy will be a huge leap in the numb er of people become so-called “ overstayers ” as many try to stay and work as long as they can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they can before they ultimately have to leave .
A new layer of even more vulnerable and exploitable labour will have been created .
The labour movement will have to extend the hand of solidarity and refuse to go along with the inevitable demonisation that will follow .
Any worker brought to New Zealand under these systems designed to make them a vulnerable source of cheap labour should be given full legal rights of any worker in New Zealand , including the right to change employer at any time .
The so-called skills-based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ encourages fraud and deceit .
If we need truck drivers and carpenters then people in those jobs should be able to access permanent residency with full rights associated with that .

The government has announced a series of changes that will only intensify the crisis around migrant worker exploitation.
The government has allowed a significant reduction in approvals for permanent residency from the long-term guidance number of around 45,000 annually to only 35,000.
At the same time, there has been a continuing boost to the number of people allowed to come and work on temporary work (170,000) or student visas (100,000) to over 270,000 a year with a similar number here at any one time. This is up 50% on numbers just a decade ago.
A large percentage of those temporary visa holders are also held in a form of bondage because they are not allowed to change employer.
The end result is that someone needs to earn over $100,000 a year to be able to access the permanent residency. This wage level was imposed by stealth rather than officially alter the points required because the government can’t agree on the new numbers.
There have been huge delays in permanent residency applications. Successful candidates are left waiting for a year and charged tens of thousands of dollars in fees. this is on top of whatever may have been spent on tertiary courses to earn points towards a residence and subsidise the entire tertiary sector with around 20% of their income.
Many workers came here as students and have spent years of their lives and tens of thousands of dollars with the expectation that they would qualify for residency if they got particular qualifications or particular income levels. After they get here the rules and targets they need to achieve have been changed on them again and again.
Now the level is so high that very few people can qualify – even under the skilled worker category. The stupid thing is that even teachers and nurses don’t qualify when they were brought here on the implied promise that they would.
This policy has also meant that many workers deemed to have lesser skills (determined because they are paid less than $25 an hour) will not be able to renew visas after three years.
This also means that those workers who have been here up to a decade (or more in some cases) and were able to renew their visas again and again because they could show they were needed will now be kicked out when their visas expire. Most of the ones in this category have partners and children here. Many of the children were born here and know no other life that of New Zealand. And since 2006 that child is not eligible for citizenship by right of birth, unlike many other countries.
This is a cruel and heartless policy. There will be protests up and down New Zealand when these established and integrated families whose skills are still needed are told to leave – as there should be.
We need a pathway to residency for this group. The previous National Government proposed a solution for their mates in the dairy industry that anyone who had been working here five years or more could qualify to stay permanently. That policy should be applied to everyone.
Another consequence of this government policy will be a huge leap in the numb er of people become so-called “overstayers” as many try to stay and work as long as they can to try to earn as much as they can before they ultimately have to leave. A new layer of even more vulnerable and exploitable labour will have been created.
The labour movement will have to extend the hand of solidarity and refuse to go along with the inevitable demonisation that will follow.
Any worker brought to New Zealand under these systems designed to make them a vulnerable source of cheap labour should be given full legal rights of any worker in New Zealand, including the right to change employer at any time.
The so-called skills-based system is racist and elitist. It encourages fraud and deceit. If we need truck drivers and carpenters then people in those jobs should be able to access permanent residency with full rights associated with that.


thedailyblog--2020-03-03--Dr Liz Gordon: The politics, fears and realities of Covid-19

Our supermarket shelves are not empty here in Christchurch , but there are some fascinating gaps : tissues , toilet paper and bacterial hand sanitisers .
The latter is interesting .
A British study last year found it was not very effective at all against colds and flu ( including coronaviruses like the common cold ) .
Better to wash your hands well and not touch your face .
In a time of uncertainty , people make up their own realities .
Some , like Mr Trump , try and impose these on others , drip feeding incorrect information to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ epidemic , things getting better etc – reminded me of Picard on Star Trek , with his pithy saying “ Make It So ” .
And Picard always could , because he was the Captain of his ship , but Trump can not because he is a buffoon .
Assuming the Covid-19 virus does not bend to his will and obey his orders , Trump stands to be exposed as the Emperor Who Has No Clothes on this issue , and it could lose him the election .
Hope springs eternal .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us humans ) have Covid-19 now and nothing much is going to make it go away .
It is in essence a cold virus and we all know there is no such thing as a cure for the common cold , or even the uncommon one .
So , what if the common cold passes through a Pangolin and becomes deadly ?
Covid-19 is seen by scientists as a particularly dangerous virus , not because the death rate is high , but because it is relatively low – around 2 % .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ able to infect other persons , ensuring the wide spread of the disease .
Flu has a very low death rate , around .1 % , for comparative purposes , and of course spreads widely and mutates itself each year .
Coronavirus spreads by tiny droplets , as does flu .
It is a highly efficient means of transmission .
Thus , Harvard Epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch , who is also director of the Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics , is now predicting that 40 – 70 % of the population will get the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years .
Let ’ s say , just for round figures , that this includes 3 billion ( 3,000,000,000 ) people who will be infected , conservatively speaking .
With a 2 % death rate ( although this may go down in countries with good health care and good living conditions ) , we are looking at ( applies pen to paper and does calculation ) 60 million deaths .
That ’ s a bit of a shocker , isn ’ t it ?
Let ’ s hope Mr Epidemiologist and me are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Or that they find the cure for coronaviruses .
Or it doesn ’ t spread like wildfire , especially in sub-Saharan Africa So remember , wash your hands and not with that gel .
Even the good stuff that smells like a gin and tonic does not kill the coronavirus .
The need for healthy people to self-isolate may come , but surely not now , when there is only one person in the country known to have the disease .
Keep healthy .
Keep young .
It is age and poor health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Be prudent , not afraid .
My best advice is do not spitteth onto others and have them also not spit on you .
Dr Liz Gordon is a researcher and a barrister , with interests in destroying neo-liberalism in all its forms and moving towards a socially just society .
She usually blogs on justice , social welfare and education topics .

Our supermarket shelves are not empty here in Christchurch, but there are some fascinating gaps: tissues, toilet paper and bacterial hand sanitisers. The latter is interesting. A British study last year found it was not very effective at all against colds and flu (including coronaviruses like the common cold). Better to wash your hands well and not touch your face.
In a time of uncertainty, people make up their own realities. Some, like Mr Trump, try and impose these on others, drip feeding incorrect information to the masses. His pronouncements – no epidemic, things getting better etc – reminded me of Picard on Star Trek, with his pithy saying “Make It So”. And Picard always could, because he was the Captain of his ship, but Trump cannot because he is a buffoon. Assuming the Covid-19 virus does not bend to his will and obey his orders, Trump stands to be exposed as the Emperor Who Has No Clothes on this issue, and it could lose him the election. Hope springs eternal.
We (by we I mean all of us humans) have Covid-19 now and nothing much is going to make it go away. It is in essence a cold virus and we all know there is no such thing as a cure for the common cold, or even the uncommon one. So, what if the common cold passes through a Pangolin and becomes deadly?
Covid-19 is seen by scientists as a particularly dangerous virus, not because the death rate is high, but because it is relatively low – around 2%. This means that infected persons survive and are able to infect other persons, ensuring the wide spread of the disease. Flu has a very low death rate, around .1%, for comparative purposes, and of course spreads widely and mutates itself each year. Coronavirus spreads by tiny droplets, as does flu. It is a highly efficient means of transmission.
Thus, Harvard Epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch, who is also director of the Center for Communicable Disease Dynamics, is now predicting that 40 – 70% of the population will get the coronavirus over the next few months and years. Let’s say, just for round figures, that this includes 3 billion (3,000,000,000) people who will be infected, conservatively speaking. With a 2% death rate (although this may go down in countries with good health care and good living conditions), we are looking at (applies pen to paper and does calculation) 60 million deaths. That’s a bit of a shocker, isn’t it? Let’s hope Mr Epidemiologist and me are completely up the wop on this. Or that they find the cure for coronaviruses. Or it doesn’t spread like wildfire, especially in sub-Saharan Africa
So remember, wash your hands and not with that gel. Even the good stuff that smells like a gin and tonic does not kill the coronavirus. The need for healthy people to self-isolate may come, but surely not now, when there is only one person in the country known to have the disease. Keep healthy. Keep young. It is age and poor health that are the biggest indicators of death. Be prudent, not afraid. My best advice is do not spitteth onto others and have them also not spit on you.
Dr Liz Gordon is a researcher and a barrister, with interests in destroying neo-liberalism in all its forms and moving towards a socially just society. She usually blogs on justice, social welfare and education topics.


thedailyblog--2020-03-03--So When Shane Jones Claims Wealthy Donors Are Influencing Immigration Decisions …

Shane Jones says you can ’ t trust the National Party on immigration , because they ’ re “ funded by certain very rich overseas donors ” with a vested interest in the matter .
On this particular matter , I shall have to defer to the superior experience of Jones – after all , I seem to recall an Associate Immigration Minister also by the name of Shane Jones who personally intervened against a mountain of official advice ( including from Interpol ) , to get Kiwi citizenship for a foreign criminal festooned with fraudulent passports and other documents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , donated and otherwise fraternized pretty extensively with both Labour and National .
It seems like Jones ’ outrage about supposedly suspect immigration is seriously selective .
If it ’ s “ Indian ” , he ’ s against it .
If it ’ s “ Chinese ” , he seems rather more circumspect ( as in “ silent ” ) ; and I mention this because I ’ m pretty sure that many of the shifts in our export education sector from the early-mid 2000s onward ( or , as Jones calls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) were the result of a significant expansion in Chinese student visa numbers over that period .
This doesn ’ t mean it ’ s morally right to blame said students , of whatever nation of origin , either .
As a country , we apparently decided we wanted Export Education to be a cornerstone of our growth and development strategy ; and started energetically pushing the ‘ recruitment ’ for this in various target markets including India , the People ’ s Republic of China , and other such places .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ about how long-term study in New Zealand would offer an easy pathway to Work-Visas and then eventually Residency .
And while an array of that is down to unscrupulous immigration brokers and sketchy education providers looking to make a quick buck by mass-importing fee-paying foreign students ( I don ’ t just mean fly-by-night language schools , either – from my time in the tertiary education sector , it seemed that even some of New Zealand ’ s more ‘ reputable ’ universities were quite intentionally in on it ) … … @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decisions were made by *our* Government .
Including , as it happens , two that Jones was personally part of .
I ’ ve previously covered in some detail how Jones ’ bloviating references to “ Butter Chicken ” and “ Bollywood Overreaction ” when castigating immigration , appears to be an effort at setting a narrative , making a name for himself – getting ‘ known ’ as a guy against immigration via the specific , spurious , and repeated targeting of one stereotypable set of migrant demographics .
Yet now I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jones is patently aware that whenever the issue of immigration numbers or the sorts of immigration taking place comes up – that it ’ s *his own* record ( or lack thereof ) in Government that is effectively under scrutiny .
Not the rambunctious rhetoric .
The actual facts of what he and his have – or , more pointedly – have not done upon the matter .
That ’ s a losing wicket ; so instead of allowing attention to be cast upon it , he ’ s attempting to redirect your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So don ’ t look at his actual record , personally enabling *actual* dodgy immigration to New Zealand in a Ministerial capacity … instead keep your eye on the spectral shadow-puppet he ’ s projecting on that wall over there yonder : “ 3 million people [ coming ] here from New Delhi.
” To do anything else is , apparently , some kind of Greek Chorus “ Overreaction ” .

Shane Jones says you can’t trust the National Party on immigration, because they’re “funded by certain very rich overseas donors” with a vested interest in the matter.
On this particular matter, I shall have to defer to the superior experience of Jones – after all, I seem to recall an Associate Immigration Minister also by the name of Shane Jones who personally intervened against a mountain of official advice (including from Interpol), to get Kiwi citizenship for a foreign criminal festooned with fraudulent passports and other documents. Who had, as it happened, donated and otherwise fraternized pretty extensively with both Labour and National.
It seems like Jones’ outrage about supposedly suspect immigration is seriously selective. If it’s “Indian”, he’s against it. If it’s “Chinese”, he seems rather more circumspect (as in “silent”); and I mention this because I’m pretty sure that many of the shifts in our export education sector from the early-mid 2000s onward (or, as Jones calls it, the “ruining” thereof) were the result of a significant expansion in Chinese student visa numbers over that period.
This doesn’t mean it’s morally right to blame said students, of whatever nation of origin, either. As a country, we apparently decided we wanted Export Education to be a cornerstone of our growth and development strategy; and started energetically pushing the ‘recruitment’ for this in various target markets including India, the People’s Republic of China, and other such places.
This appears to have included sotto-voce ‘sweeteners’ about how long-term study in New Zealand would offer an easy pathway to Work-Visas and then eventually Residency.
And while an array of that is down to unscrupulous immigration brokers and sketchy education providers looking to make a quick buck by mass-importing fee-paying foreign students (I don’t just mean fly-by-night language schools, either – from my time in the tertiary education sector, it seemed that even some of New Zealand’s more ‘reputable’ universities were quite intentionally in on it) …
… the manifest fact is that these policy decisions were made by *our* Government. Including, as it happens, two that Jones was personally part of.
I’ve previously covered in some detail how Jones’ bloviating references to “Butter Chicken” and “Bollywood Overreaction” when castigating immigration, appears to be an effort at setting a narrative, making a name for himself – getting ‘known’ as a guy against immigration via the specific, spurious, and repeated targeting of one stereotypable set of migrant demographics.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Yet now I think I’ll go further. Jones is patently aware that whenever the issue of immigration numbers or the sorts of immigration taking place comes up – that it’s *his own* record (or lack thereof) in Government that is effectively under scrutiny. Not the rambunctious rhetoric. The actual facts of what he and his have – or, more pointedly – have not done upon the matter.
That’s a losing wicket; so instead of allowing attention to be cast upon it, he’s attempting to redirect your attention to somebody .. anybody else.
So don’t look at his actual record, personally enabling *actual* dodgy immigration to New Zealand in a Ministerial capacity … instead keep your eye on the spectral shadow-puppet he’s projecting on that wall over there yonder: “3 million people [coming] here from New Delhi.”
To do anything else is, apparently, some kind of Greek Chorus “Overreaction”.


thedailyblog--2020-03-03--If this were a Jewish boy, the international outrage would be plastered across the front page of eve

If this were a Jewish boy, the international outrage would be plastered across the front page of every newspaper and leading every television bulletin around the world

Last week an unarmed Palestinian boy was murdered by the Israeli Defence Force and his body was dangled from and mangled by an Israeli bulldozer .
The video is utterly horrifying .
Is it any wonder Israeli troops act like this when Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu says “ the only way to treat Palestinians is to beat them up , not once but repeatedly beat them up , until its unbearable ” .
Late last year Netanyahu described Palestinians involved in an Israeli government as an “ existential threat to Israel ” – a comment which mirrors what was said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Burma before the Rohingya massacres and in Germany before the Nazi atrocities .
If the word Palestinians were replaced by the word Jews in any of Netanyahu ’ s statements the world would rightly be outraged .
So why the silence when Palestinians are talked about and treated this way ?
The silence is because journalists and media outlets are terrified of being called anti-semitic by the pro-Israeli “ media police ” who determine what is acceptable and what is not to be reported .
The simple , unreported fact is that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Palestinians .
The current Israeli election is being decided on which party will be the most racist and the most brutal towards Palestinians .
The sheer unadulterated brutality ( there is no nice way to put it ) of the Israeli state has been a constant in Palestinian lives for 70 years .

Last week an unarmed Palestinian boy was murdered by the Israeli Defence Force and his body was dangled from and mangled by an Israeli bulldozer. The video is utterly horrifying.
Is it any wonder Israeli troops act like this when Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu says “the only way to treat Palestinians is to beat them up, not once but repeatedly beat them up, until its unbearable”.
Late last year Netanyahu described Palestinians involved in an Israeli government as an “existential threat to Israel” – a comment which mirrors what was said in Rwanda before the genocide, in Burma before the Rohingya massacres and in Germany before the Nazi atrocities.
If the word Palestinians were replaced by the word Jews in any of Netanyahu’s statements the world would rightly be outraged.
So why the silence when Palestinians are talked about and treated this way?
The silence is because journalists and media outlets are terrified of being called anti-semitic by the pro-Israeli “media police” who determine what is acceptable and what is not to be reported.
The simple, unreported fact is that the Israeli leadership is driven by race-hatred towards Palestinians. The current Israeli election is being decided on which party will be the most racist and the most brutal towards Palestinians.
The sheer unadulterated brutality (there is no nice way to put it) of the Israeli state has been a constant in Palestinian lives for 70 years.
Gutless, one-sided media reporting bears a large part of the blame.


thedailyblog--2020-03-04--There’s Method In Shane Jones’s “Racist” Madness.

WHAT IS SHANE JONES trying to do ?
In speaking so insultingly about the Indian student community he must have known he ’ d attract the ire of the people he calls “ Ngati Woke ” .
Was he being provocative just for the hell of it , or did he have a more coherent political motive for courting accusations of racism and xenophobia ?
While it is always unwise to overestimate the thoughtfulness of politicians , many of whom do not think through the consequences of their off-the-cuff public utterances , I do not believe that Shane was simply @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is some pretty solid method to his allegedly “ racist ” madness .
Matt McCarten was fond of telling his comrades in the left-wing Alliance that under MMP it really doesn ’ t matter if you piss off 95 percent of the voters , so long as 5 percent of them want what your offering .
It would seem that the same blunt analysis is currently driving NZ First ’ s electoral strategy .
In practical political terms this means that the party will do whatever it takes to stay in the game @ @ @ @ @ @ @ divisive .
At the heart of this new strategy lies what Jones has identified as NZ First ’ s “ Population Policy Debate ” .
The party is clearly determined to home-in on New Zealanders ’ rising anger over immigration .
The evidence is mounting that New Zealand ’ s unaffordable housing crisis ; the cost blow-outs in its public health system ; the pressure on its schools , and the difficulty so many unskilled workers have in lifting themselves out of wage poverty ; may all be traced back to the unprecedented @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the past two decades .
The fact that the country ’ s population is set to top 5 million this election year , five years earlier than predicted ; and that Statistics NZ is predicting an “ Asian ” population of between 1.2 and 1.4 million by 2038 , has alarmed many Pakeha New Zealanders .
Their fears have been further stoked by demographic projections indicating that over the next 20 years the European population of New Zealand will fall from its current 70 percent to 66 percent .
Given that , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 80 percent of the New Zealand population , the trend is very clear .
Racially-charged anxieties are rising , and NZ First – as it has done so successfully in the past – intends to exploit them ruthlessly .
The most effective way to build support for a radically revisionist “ Population Policy ” , is to provoke the initiators and defenders of New Zealand ’ s curent population policies into demonstrating their bitter opposition to any serious , broad-based debate about the country ’ s current immigration settings .
NZ First is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around the idea that the startling changes to New Zealand ’ s demographic profile are the result of a 34-year-old conspiracy involving this country ’ s intellectual , bureaucratic and political elites .
At the heart of this conspiracy , NZ First will argue , was the elites ’ disgust at what they saw as this country ’ s de facto “ White New Zealand Policy ” .
The framers of what would soon emerge as New Zealand ’ s brand new “ multicultural ” population policy , acknowledged the Pakeha majority ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ethnic balances in New Zealand society , but chose not to treat it as determinative .
The majority , they argued , was racist and wrong : it should not be trusted – or heeded .
As if that wasn ’ t bad enough , NZ First leaders like Shane Jones will argue , the initiators of this new Multicultural New Zealand policy were equally unwilling to consider the preferences of the indigenous Maori population .
Notwithstanding their passionate anti-racist rhetoric , the multiculturalists would have been aware , right from the start @ @ @ @ @ @ @ applied , would eventually result in immigrant communities expanding continuously until they overwhelmed ( at least numerically ) the Maori population .
“ What does it really say about the elites ’ actual commitment to the Treaty of Waitangi , ” NZ First will ask , “ that they have been willing to oversee a process which , according to Statistics NZ ’ s 2017 projections , will see ‘ Asians overtake the Maori in ethnic share within the next five years , and will make up more than one in five – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ population by 2038 ’ ?
” These questions have the potential to unleash the same sort of populist-nationalist fervour that brought the world Brexit and Trump .
They evoke exactly the same feelings of having been excluded from the policy conversations that mattered ; the conversations that resulted in devastating changes to the life-worlds of ordinary people .
NZ First ’ s strategy is clearly to bring these conversations out into the “ public square ” where everyone can hear them , and where their originators can be challenged and interrogated .
Crucial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be the gathering of examples of elite spokespeople deriding and dismissing those who dare to breach these policy taboos .
Jones ’ s comments regarding Indian students were obviously designed to do elicit just such a response – and they succeeded brilliantly .
Just consider the following sentence from a Newsroom opinion piece headed “ Why Jones is wrong about Indian students ” , released yesterday ( 3/3/20 ) under the names of the University of Otago Vice-Chancellor , Harlene Haynes , and Otago Professor of International Relations , Robert Patman : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ security , economic and environmental challenges that do not respect territorial borders and can not be resolved by populist-nationalist politicians promising to ‘ take back control ’ of national sovereignty in New Zealand or anywhere else.
” Clearly intended as a slap-down , the opinion piece played directly into Jones ’ s and NZ First ’ s hands .
It will be held up as powerful proof of the elites ’ scorn for ordinary people ’ s concerns .
Not only that , it will serve as a demonstration of just how much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the media and mainstream politicians .
In this regard , National is especially vulnerable .
An important element of its election strategy involves the electoral destruction of NZ First and the incorporation of its vote into National ’ s tally .
But , just consider what would happen to National ’ s support among older anxious Kiwis , if NZ First was to highlight the fact that upwards of 75 percent of Chinese-New Zealanders vote National .
Suddenly , National ’ s strong support for the Multicultural New Zealand policy would take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they would be charged with keeping the immigration flood-gates open for selfish electoral purposes .
To hell with the kids who can not get so much as a toehold on the property ladder !
For every 10,000 adult Chinese migrants , National nets 7,500 votes .
Ain ’ t “ diversity ” grand !
All those woke journalists working so assiduously to rid Parliament of Winston Peters and NZ First may yet be given cause to rue their actions .
It was the veteran political journalist , Richard Harman , who only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , on a RNZ podcast , to account for the relative mildness of populism ’ s influence on New Zealand politics , by observing that : “ Maybe we owe Winston Peters some thanks for this .
New Zealand First , back in the nineties , picked up on those populist , nationalistic themes that we ’ re now seeing expressed in a much more extreme fashion [ overseas ] .
We ’ re relatively lucky that our populist party – New Zealand First – has behaved in a very democratic and quite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may be about to change .

WHAT IS SHANE JONES trying to do? In speaking so insultingly about the Indian student community he must have known he’d attract the ire of the people he calls “Ngati Woke”. Was he being provocative just for the hell of it, or did he have a more coherent political motive for courting accusations of racism and xenophobia?
While it is always unwise to overestimate the thoughtfulness of politicians, many of whom do not think through the consequences of their off-the-cuff public utterances, I do not believe that Shane was simply blurting. In my view, there is some pretty solid method to his allegedly “racist” madness.
Matt McCarten was fond of telling his comrades in the left-wing Alliance that under MMP it really doesn’t matter if you piss off 95 percent of the voters, so long as 5 percent of them want what your offering. It would seem that the same blunt analysis is currently driving NZ First’s electoral strategy. In practical political terms this means that the party will do whatever it takes to stay in the game – no matter how disruptive or potentially divisive.
At the heart of this new strategy lies what Jones has identified as NZ First’s “Population Policy Debate”. The party is clearly determined to home-in on New Zealanders’ rising anger over immigration. The evidence is mounting that New Zealand’s unaffordable housing crisis; the cost blow-outs in its public health system; the pressure on its schools, and the difficulty so many unskilled workers have in lifting themselves out of wage poverty; may all be traced back to the unprecedented flood of immigrants pouring into New Zealand over the past two decades.
The fact that the country’s population is set to top 5 million this election year, five years earlier than predicted; and that Statistics NZ is predicting an “Asian” population of between 1.2 and 1.4 million by 2038, has alarmed many Pakeha New Zealanders. Their fears have been further stoked by demographic projections indicating that over the next 20 years the European population of New Zealand will fall from its current 70 percent to 66 percent. Given that, 20 years ago, Europeans made up 80 percent of the New Zealand population, the trend is very clear. Racially-charged anxieties are rising, and NZ First – as it has done so successfully in the past – intends to exploit them ruthlessly.
The most effective way to build support for a radically revisionist “Population Policy”, is to provoke the initiators and defenders of New Zealand’s curent population policies into demonstrating their bitter opposition to any serious, broad-based debate about the country’s current immigration settings. NZ First is aiming to build a persuasive political narrative around the idea that the startling changes to New Zealand’s demographic profile are the result of a 34-year-old conspiracy involving this country’s intellectual, bureaucratic and political elites.
At the heart of this conspiracy, NZ First will argue, was the elites’ disgust at what they saw as this country’s de facto “White New Zealand Policy”. The framers of what would soon emerge as New Zealand’s brand new “multicultural” population policy, acknowledged the Pakeha majority’s strong preference for maintaining the existing ethnic balances in New Zealand society, but chose not to treat it as determinative. The majority, they argued, was racist and wrong: it should not be trusted – or heeded.
As if that wasn’t bad enough, NZ First leaders like Shane Jones will argue, the initiators of this new Multicultural New Zealand policy were equally unwilling to consider the preferences of the indigenous Maori population. Notwithstanding their passionate anti-racist rhetoric, the multiculturalists would have been aware, right from the start, that their policy, if successfully applied, would eventually result in immigrant communities expanding continuously until they overwhelmed (at least numerically) the Maori population.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
“What does it really say about the elites’ actual commitment to the Treaty of Waitangi,” NZ First will ask, “that they have been willing to oversee a process which, according to Statistics NZ’s 2017 projections, will see ‘Asians overtake the Maori in ethnic share within the next five years, and will make up more than one in five – or 22 per cent – of the population by 2038’?”
These questions have the potential to unleash the same sort of populist-nationalist fervour that brought the world Brexit and Trump. They evoke exactly the same feelings of having been excluded from the policy conversations that mattered; the conversations that resulted in devastating changes to the life-worlds of ordinary people. NZ First’s strategy is clearly to bring these conversations out into the “public square” where everyone can hear them, and where their originators can be challenged and interrogated.
Crucial to the strategy’s success will be the gathering of examples of elite spokespeople deriding and dismissing those who dare to breach these policy taboos. Jones’s comments regarding Indian students were obviously designed to do elicit just such a response – and they succeeded brilliantly. Just consider the following sentence from a Newsroom opinion piece headed “Why Jones is wrong about Indian students”, released yesterday (3/3/20) under the names of the University of Otago Vice-Chancellor, Harlene Haynes, and Otago Professor of International Relations, Robert Patman:
“Today, all states are confronted by security, economic and environmental challenges that do not respect territorial borders and cannot be resolved by populist-nationalist politicians promising to ‘take back control’ of national sovereignty in New Zealand or anywhere else.”
Clearly intended as a slap-down, the opinion piece played directly into Jones’s and NZ First’s hands. It will be held up as powerful proof of the elites’ scorn for ordinary people’s concerns. Not only that, it will serve as a demonstration of just how much of a lock multiculturalism has on academia, the media and mainstream politicians.
In this regard, National is especially vulnerable. An important element of its election strategy involves the electoral destruction of NZ First and the incorporation of its vote into National’s tally. But, just consider what would happen to National’s support among older anxious Kiwis, if NZ First was to highlight the fact that upwards of 75 percent of Chinese-New Zealanders vote National.
Suddenly, National’s strong support for the Multicultural New Zealand policy would take on a very different complexion. Suddenly, they would be charged with keeping the immigration flood-gates open for selfish electoral purposes. To hell with the kids who cannot get so much as a toehold on the property ladder! For every 10,000 adult Chinese migrants, National nets 7,500 votes. Ain’t “diversity” grand!
All those woke journalists working so assiduously to rid Parliament of Winston Peters and NZ First may yet be given cause to rue their actions. It was the veteran political journalist, Richard Harman, who only a few days ago responded when asked, on a RNZ podcast, to account for the relative mildness of populism’s influence on New Zealand politics, by observing that:
“Maybe we owe Winston Peters some thanks for this. New Zealand First, back in the nineties, picked up on those populist, nationalistic themes that we’re now seeing expressed in a much more extreme fashion [overseas]. We’re relatively lucky that our populist party – New Zealand First – has behaved in a very democratic and quite reasonable way over the years.”
That may be about to change.


thedailyblog--2020-03-05--Super Tuesday 2020: “No, no, no, America – you’ve got it wrong!”

OH , THE WAILING !
Oh , the gnashing of teeth !
How could the American people have been so stupid ?
Why couldn ’ t they see the clear path to paradise laid down for them by Bernie Sanders ?
And how ?
Oh , Dear God !
How could they vote in such self-defeating numbers for Joe Biden ?
More than half a century ago , in the aftermath of the 1953 workers ’ uprising in East Berlin , the German Marxist playwright and poet , Bertolt Brecht , penned the following , justly famous , poem .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the 17th June The Secretary of the Writers Union Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee Stating that the people Had forfeited the confidence of the government And could win it back only By redoubled efforts .
Would it not be easier In that case for the government To dissolve the people And elect another ?
Reading the outpourings of rage and grief at the unsatisfactory outcome ( at least for America ’ s young progressives ) of the Super Tuesday primaries on social media , I couldn ’ t help recalling Brecht @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Sanders campaign ’ s self-proclaimed and much-vaunted ability to mobilise the sort of disillusioned and marginalised American voter who usually sits out elections , especially the young , just about all the energy on display on Super Tuesday came from those who turned out to support Joe Biden .
In Virginia , for example , Democratic Party voters turned out in numbers well up on 2016 : not for Bernie , but for the former Vice-President .
In Massachusetts , where he had done no campaigning , Biden carried the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incumbent Senator Elizabeth Warren , came in a poor third .
Even in Texas , with its large Bernie-backing Latino population , Sanders was bested by Biden .
And again , against all predictions , Biden remains competitive in California – the state Bernie was supposed to run away with .
The short and very painful answer is : Bernie and his progressive supporters were viciously mugged by reality .
Retailing “ revolution ” in the United States of America has always been a hard sell .
Before Bernie , there was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Eugene Victor Debs .
In the Presidential Election of 1912 , representing the Socialist Party of America , Debs racked-up 6 percent of the popular vote .
It ’ s worth noting that support for socialism in America peaked in the years between 1900-1916 .
There were socialist mayors and councillors , socialist legislators and at least one socialist state senator .
When compared to the support for the Republican and Democratic parties , however , the SPA ’ s vote remained stubbornly in the low single digits .
Things got much worse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1917 .
Debs himself was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment for speaking out against military conscription in 1918 .
The draconian legislation he fell afoul of was inspired by the high-minded Democratic President , Woodrow Wilson .
He was eventually pardoned by President Warren G. Harding , a Republican , in 1921 .
Bernie ’ s electoral success has been in spite of , not because of , his socialist principles .
He has always been careful to call himself the “ Independent ” Senator from Vermont , and his outstanding success @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not by the sudden conversion of the US electorate to the principles of democratic socialism , but by the rule allowing non-members to contest Democratic Party caucuses and primaries .
Without this rule , Sanders wouldn ’ t have been able to make more than the slightest impact on the American political scene .
Be honest , could you identify the Socialist Equality Party ’ s candidate for the US Presidency in 2016 ?
Of course not .
Do you know how many votes the SEP ticket received ?
382 .
Faced with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ socialist ” carrying the Democratic Party ’ s colours into the 2020 Presidential Election , most registered Democrats were dismayed .
In their eyes , Candidate Bernie Sanders would be an absolute gift to Donald Trump .
That ’ s why the Democratic Party leadership seized upon Biden ’ s big win in South Carolina to break the log-jam of moderate contenders and give the voters the chance to restore “ Uncle Joe ” to his former position as the man most likely to beat the ogre in the White House .
Yes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want more : that they should take the opportunity to bring their country into the twenty-first century that Sanders is offering .
But , if you take that position , then you are ranging yourself alongside the Secretary of the Writers Union in Brecht ’ s poem .
Castigating the people for failing to live up to your expectations of them is not the best way to win their confidence .
For better or worse , democracy affords ordinary people the occasional opportunity to apply their collective weight to History ’ s rudder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ revolutionary ” course you have suggested , then whose fault is that ?
Theirs , for not taking it ?
Or yours , for not giving them good enough reasons for risking everything on a politician ’ s promise ?
I never really saw eye-to-eye with the late Mike Moore , but there was one saying of his that I ’ ve never had the slightest difficulty in endorsing : “ The people are always right – even when they ’ re wrong .
”

OH, THE WAILING! Oh, the gnashing of teeth! How could the American people have been so stupid? Why couldn’t they see the clear path to paradise laid down for them by Bernie Sanders? And how? Oh, Dear God! How could they vote in such self-defeating numbers for Joe Biden?
More than half a century ago, in the aftermath of the 1953 workers’ uprising in East Berlin, the German Marxist playwright and poet, Bertolt Brecht, penned the following, justly famous, poem. He called it:
The Solution
After the uprising of the 17th June
The Secretary of the Writers Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?
Reading the outpourings of rage and grief at the unsatisfactory outcome (at least for America’s young progressives) of the Super Tuesday primaries on social media, I couldn’t help recalling Brecht’s sardonic proposition.
In spite of the Sanders campaign’s self-proclaimed and much-vaunted ability to mobilise the sort of disillusioned and marginalised American voter who usually sits out elections, especially the young, just about all the energy on display on Super Tuesday came from those who turned out to support Joe Biden. In Virginia, for example, Democratic Party voters turned out in numbers well up on 2016: not for Bernie, but for the former Vice-President. In Massachusetts, where he had done no campaigning, Biden carried the state. Its “favourite daughter”, incumbent Senator Elizabeth Warren, came in a poor third. Even in Texas, with its large Bernie-backing Latino population, Sanders was bested by Biden. And again, against all predictions, Biden remains competitive in California – the state Bernie was supposed to run away with.
What happened?
The short and very painful answer is: Bernie and his progressive supporters were viciously mugged by reality.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Retailing “revolution” in the United States of America has always been a hard sell. Before Bernie, there was the radical trade unionist and Indiana State Senator Eugene Victor Debs. In the Presidential Election of 1912, representing the Socialist Party of America, Debs racked-up 6 percent of the popular vote.
It’s worth noting that support for socialism in America peaked in the years between 1900-1916. There were socialist mayors and councillors, socialist legislators and at least one socialist state senator.
When compared to the support for the Republican and Democratic parties, however, the SPA’s vote remained stubbornly in the low single digits. Things got much worse after the USA entered World War I in 1917. Debs himself was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment for speaking out against military conscription in 1918. The draconian legislation he fell afoul of was inspired by the high-minded Democratic President, Woodrow Wilson. He was eventually pardoned by President Warren G. Harding, a Republican, in 1921.
Bernie’s electoral success has been in spite of, not because of, his socialist principles. He has always been careful to call himself the “Independent” Senator from Vermont, and his outstanding success as a presidential candidate was made possible not by the sudden conversion of the US electorate to the principles of democratic socialism, but by the rule allowing non-members to contest Democratic Party caucuses and primaries. Without this rule, Sanders wouldn’t have been able to make more than the slightest impact on the American political scene. Be honest, could you identify the Socialist Equality Party’s candidate for the US Presidency in 2016? Of course not. Do you know how many votes the SEP ticket received? 382.
Faced with the prospect of a self-proclaimed “democratic socialist” carrying the Democratic Party’s colours into the 2020 Presidential Election, most registered Democrats were dismayed. In their eyes, Candidate Bernie Sanders would be an absolute gift to Donald Trump. That’s why the Democratic Party leadership seized upon Biden’s big win in South Carolina to break the log-jam of moderate contenders and give the voters the chance to restore “Uncle Joe” to his former position as the man most likely to beat the ogre in the White House.
Yes, you can argue that Americans should want more: that they should take the opportunity to bring their country into the twenty-first century that Sanders is offering. But, if you take that position, then you are ranging yourself alongside the Secretary of the Writers Union in Brecht’s poem. Castigating the people for failing to live up to your expectations of them is not the best way to win their confidence. For better or worse, democracy affords ordinary people the occasional opportunity to apply their collective weight to History’s rudder. If they fail to follow the “revolutionary” course you have suggested, then whose fault is that? Theirs, for not taking it? Or yours, for not giving them good enough reasons for risking everything on a politician’s promise?
I never really saw eye-to-eye with the late Mike Moore, but there was one saying of his that I’ve never had the slightest difficulty in endorsing:
“The people are always right – even when they’re wrong.”


thedailyblog--2020-03-06--Remembering Jeanette Fitzsimons, a great Green

The news of Jeanette Fitzsimons ’ death is so sad for me as a friend and former parliamentary colleague .
She symbolized Green politics and was totally committed to the welfare of the planet and the people on it .
She never gave away any of her principles for short term gain .
What environmental protections we have achieved , such as in preventing GE crops being grown here , owe a lot to Jeanette ’ s efforts as the leader of the Green movement in New Zealand .
She will always be remembered for her integrity and her energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leading ( with the late Rod Donald ) the Greens entry into Parliament .
She was a radical Green , promoting a whole system change .
She strongly believed that the current capitalist economic model , based on more and more growth , was destroying the planet and its people .
She led on the full Green agenda , not shying away from pressing social issues like wealth inequality and poverty .
In Parliament I always knew always she had my back I campaigned in my portfolio areas of peace and human rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Zealand ’ s participation in the Afghan war , and in defence of refugees like Ahmed Zaoui .
She knew we couldn ’ t save the planet amidst wars and violations of people ’ s rights .
She was ever active , ever humble and ever supportive of her Green colleagues .
I feel very sad for Jeanette ’ s partner Harry and the rest of her whanau .
[ Keith Locke was a Green MP from 1999 to 2011 ]

The news of Jeanette Fitzsimons’ death is so sad for me as a friend and former parliamentary colleague. She symbolized Green politics and was totally committed to the welfare of the planet and the people on it.
She never gave away any of her principles for short term gain.
What environmental protections we have achieved, such as in preventing GE crops being grown here, owe a lot to Jeanette’s efforts as the leader of the Green movement in New Zealand.
She will always be remembered for her integrity and her energy in pursuing the Green cause and for leading (with the late Rod Donald) the Greens entry into Parliament.
She was a radical Green, promoting a whole system change. She strongly believed that the current capitalist economic model, based on more and more growth, was destroying the planet and its people.
She led on the full Green agenda, not shying away from pressing social issues like wealth inequality and poverty. In Parliament I always knew always she had my back I campaigned in my portfolio areas of peace and human rights. She stood beside me against New Zealand’s participation in the Afghan war, and in defence of refugees like Ahmed Zaoui. She knew we couldn’t save the planet amidst wars and violations of people’s rights.
She was ever active, ever humble and ever supportive of her Green colleagues.
I feel very sad for Jeanette’s partner Harry and the rest of her whanau.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
[Keith Locke was a Green MP from 1999 to 2011]