thedailyblog--2020-09-17--MUST READ: Uncomfortable Choices

MUST READ: Uncomfortable Choices

THE GREAT MORAL CHOICE of the 1930s was between communism and fascism .
The so-called “ Great Powers ” which had not yet succumbed to fascism : Britain , France and the USA ; did not strike those in search of a better world as its most likely midwives .
The first two still presided over vast empires in which wealth and liberty were allocated strictly according to skin pigmentation .
At home , Uncle Sam followed a very similar distribution scheme , even if , internationally , he presented himself as the enemy of European imperialism .
When push @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most especially if that shove came from below , the liberal democracies proved to be neither liberal nor democratic .
The Soviet Union , or at least the version of it presented in the newsreels , seemed to be reaching for something higher .
A future dedicated to something more uplifting than the doctrine of white supremacy and the global looting it underwrote .
The great moral choice of the twenty-first century is no longer between fascism and communism .
The history of “ actually existing socialism ” – a devastating human tragedy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sheer scale of its multiple and murderous betrayals – utterly discredited the Soviet blueprint .
Tragically , fascism has fared a great deal better than its historical rival .
Adolf Hitler may have failed – a betrayal of sorts – but his belief in the superiority and right-to-rule of the Aryan peoples never wavered .
His ghost , and the spectre of his ideology , have proved alarmingly easy to raise .
Which leaves neoliberalism as the only “ actually existing ” contender to fascism redux .
Neither a happy , nor a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as the neoliberals are so fond of asking : “ What ’ s the alternative ?
” It is the ongoing inability of the Left to answer this question that makes the present era so hard to bear .
Since actually existing socialism blipped-off history ’ s screen in 1991 , capitalism has had nothing to restrain its worst “ animal spirits ” .
The social ruin produced by so much unconstrained greed has , entirely predictably , provided an ideal breeding-ground for fascist ideas .
The smashing of the West ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the contemporaneous ideological subversion of the social-democratic political parties they had created , left a yawning chasm between the casualties and the beneficiaries of the new , neoliberal , world order .
Stripped of effective economic and political defences , the western working-class was left to wither and rot as the factories that had sustained it for nearly two centuries were shut down and their jobs shipped off to China , Indonesia , Mexico and Brazil .
The upshot ?
Millions of desperate white men , gripped by a toxic nostalgia for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still meant something ” , found themselves transformed into a tempting political prize .
But although the parties of the racist right were successful in persuading members of the decaying working-class to give them their votes ; those same voters were singularly unsuccessful in persuading the all-conquering neoliberals to bring back their secure , well-paying jobs .
This resentful remnant would become , indeed , the “ grapes of wrath ” ; a bitter vintage just waiting for the trampling feet of opportunistic populist politicians .
Which presented the hyper-capitalist , hyper-globalised economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the One Percent who clip its ticket , and the narrow social layer of managers and professionals who make it run , it is absolutely vital that their delicate economic mechanism be kept as far away from stupid people as possible .
The extreme sophistication and complexity of the science and technology that make hyper-capitalism work are violently allergic to ignorance .
The woeful responses of populist regimes to the global Covid-19 pandemic have made this agonisingly clear – in both human and economic terms .
Hyper-capitalism and its neoliberal defenders can not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fatal alliance between the fascist brutes who seized control of the German state in 1933 , and the highly-sophisticated civil servants , managers and professionals who , in spite of Nazi brutality , kept the German economy and German society functioning until the bitter end .
Neoliberalism ’ s hyper-capitalist china-shop , and the clumsy ignorance of fascist bulls , are a dangerous combination – as Trump ’ s America proves .
Neoliberalism ’ s dilemma is how to keep fascism at bay without raising the spectre of communism .
Or , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ populism without resurrecting the politics of class conflict ?
The solution which presented itself most persuasively to neoliberal ideologues was “ identity politics ” .
By shifting the focus of left-wing attention away from the injuries of class : inflicted by capitalism ; and directing it instead towards the injuries of race , gender and sexuality : inflicted by whites , men and straights ; identity politics made the broad political unity needed for a successful struggle against the capitalist system much more difficult to attain .
Better still , by branding whites @ @ @ @ @ @ @ structural ” enemies of justice and equality , identity politics set its followers on a collision course with the very same white working-class males the far-right were seeking to recruit .
Neoliberalism , which has always been supportive of racial and sexual equality ( both of which enlarge the capitalist marketplace ) seized the opportunity presented by this bitter cultural clash to inoculate the next generation of professionals and managers against the fascist distempers unleashed by their unenlightened brethren .
Hyper-capitalism is now ready to embrace the “ woke ” – and heaven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her corporate employer ’ s public image by challenging , even privately ( via Facebook , Instagram or Twitter ) the new orthodoxy .
Increasingly , this will be the choice confronting those coming of age in the 2020s .
Embrace Neoliberalism ’ s belief in racial and sexual equality ; adopt its secular and scientific world view ; and cultivate the technocratic , multicultural , global outlook required of those who keep the machinery of hyper-capitalism humming .
Or , throw your support behind the defenders of the national people ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ free-trade and globalisation ; and use any means necessary ( including violence ) to uphold the social , sexual and racial hierarchies of your ancestors .
That is to say – become a fascist .
Neither of these options has anything to offer the poor .
Neither of them will restrain the rich .
Neither will do anything like enough , or anything at all , to combat climate change .
Neoliberalism believes itself to be rational .
Fascism claims to reflect the natural order .
But the followers of both ideologies remain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of human-beings whose rights and aspirations they do not consider worthy of serious regard .
It was to these people that the socialists used to speak .
“ Workers of the world , unite !
” , cried Karl Marx .
“ You have nothing to lose but your chains .
You have a world to win !
” If only he and his socialist successors had given a little more thought to how they should win the capitalists ’ world – and what to do with it when they did .

THE GREAT MORAL CHOICE of the 1930s was between communism and fascism. The so-called “Great Powers” which had not yet succumbed to fascism: Britain, France and the USA; did not strike those in search of a better world as its most likely midwives. The first two still presided over vast empires in which wealth and liberty were allocated strictly according to skin pigmentation. At home, Uncle Sam followed a very similar distribution scheme, even if, internationally, he presented himself as the enemy of European imperialism. When push came to shove, however, and most especially if that shove came from below, the liberal democracies proved to be neither liberal nor democratic. The Soviet Union, or at least the version of it presented in the newsreels, seemed to be reaching for something higher. A future dedicated to something more uplifting than the doctrine of white supremacy and the global looting it underwrote.
The great moral choice of the twenty-first century is no longer between fascism and communism. The history of “actually existing socialism” – a devastating human tragedy made all the more unbearable by the sheer scale of its multiple and murderous betrayals – utterly discredited the Soviet blueprint. Tragically, fascism has fared a great deal better than its historical rival. Adolf Hitler may have failed – a betrayal of sorts – but his belief in the superiority and right-to-rule of the Aryan peoples never wavered. His ghost, and the spectre of his ideology, have proved alarmingly easy to raise. Which leaves neoliberalism as the only “actually existing” contender to fascism redux. Neither a happy, nor a particularly comfortable, choice. But, as the neoliberals are so fond of asking: “What’s the alternative?”
It is the ongoing inability of the Left to answer this question that makes the present era so hard to bear. Since actually existing socialism blipped-off history’s screen in 1991, capitalism has had nothing to restrain its worst “animal spirits”. The social ruin produced by so much unconstrained greed has, entirely predictably, provided an ideal breeding-ground for fascist ideas.
The smashing of the West’s trade unions in the 1980s, and the contemporaneous ideological subversion of the social-democratic political parties they had created, left a yawning chasm between the casualties and the beneficiaries of the new, neoliberal, world order. Stripped of effective economic and political defences, the western working-class was left to wither and rot as the factories that had sustained it for nearly two centuries were shut down and their jobs shipped off to China, Indonesia, Mexico and Brazil.
The upshot? Millions of desperate white men, gripped by a toxic nostalgia for the days when being Caucasian and male “still meant something”, found themselves transformed into a tempting political prize. But although the parties of the racist right were successful in persuading members of the decaying working-class to give them their votes; those same voters were singularly unsuccessful in persuading the all-conquering neoliberals to bring back their secure, well-paying jobs. This resentful remnant would become, indeed, the “grapes of wrath”; a bitter vintage just waiting for the trampling feet of opportunistic populist politicians.
Which presented the hyper-capitalist, hyper-globalised economy with a really big problem. For the One Percent who clip its ticket, and the narrow social layer of managers and professionals who make it run, it is absolutely vital that their delicate economic mechanism be kept as far away from stupid people as possible. The extreme sophistication and complexity of the science and technology that make hyper-capitalism work are violently allergic to ignorance. The woeful responses of populist regimes to the global Covid-19 pandemic have made this agonisingly clear – in both human and economic terms.
Hyper-capitalism and its neoliberal defenders cannot, therefore, allow a repeat of the fatal alliance between the fascist brutes who seized control of the German state in 1933, and the highly-sophisticated civil servants, managers and professionals who, in spite of Nazi brutality, kept the German economy and German society functioning until the bitter end. Neoliberalism’s hyper-capitalist china-shop, and the clumsy ignorance of fascist bulls, are a dangerous combination – as Trump’s America proves.
Neoliberalism’s dilemma is how to keep fascism at bay without raising the spectre of communism. Or, more bluntly, how to combat right-wing populism without resurrecting the politics of class conflict? The solution which presented itself most persuasively to neoliberal ideologues was “identity politics”. By shifting the focus of left-wing attention away from the injuries of class: inflicted by capitalism; and directing it instead towards the injuries of race, gender and sexuality: inflicted by whites, men and straights; identity politics made the broad political unity needed for a successful struggle against the capitalist system much more difficult to attain.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Better still, by branding whites, men and straights as the “structural” enemies of justice and equality, identity politics set its followers on a collision course with the very same white working-class males the far-right were seeking to recruit. Neoliberalism, which has always been supportive of racial and sexual equality (both of which enlarge the capitalist marketplace) seized the opportunity presented by this bitter cultural clash to inoculate the next generation of professionals and managers against the fascist distempers unleashed by their unenlightened brethren. Hyper-capitalism is now ready to embrace the “woke” – and heaven help any employee who declines to polish her corporate employer’s public image by challenging, even privately (via Facebook, Instagram or Twitter) the new orthodoxy.
Increasingly, this will be the choice confronting those coming of age in the 2020s. Embrace Neoliberalism’s belief in racial and sexual equality; adopt its secular and scientific world view; and cultivate the technocratic, multicultural, global outlook required of those who keep the machinery of hyper-capitalism humming. Or, throw your support behind the defenders of the national people’s community; agitate for an end to free-trade and globalisation; and use any means necessary (including violence) to uphold the social, sexual and racial hierarchies of your ancestors. That is to say – become a fascist.
Neither of these options has anything to offer the poor. Neither of them will restrain the rich. Neither will do anything like enough, or anything at all, to combat climate change. Neoliberalism believes itself to be rational. Fascism claims to reflect the natural order. But the followers of both ideologies remain content to be carried on the backs of human-beings whose rights and aspirations they do not consider worthy of serious regard. It was to these people that the socialists used to speak.
“Workers of the world, unite!”, cried Karl Marx. “You have nothing to lose but your chains. You have a world to win!”
If only he and his socialist successors had given a little more thought to how they should win the capitalists’ world – and what to do with it when they did.


thedailyblog--2020-09-16--Left wing, Right wing – It’s the same bird

Judith Collins has been coached .
Someone may have told her to smile more often , she ’ s looking quite smart in a made-up matronly way , with her facecake and trimmed hair as she does the rounds visiting steel fabrication plants and other businesses around the country .
She ’ s most compelling when she ’ s warmed up , and may even become convincing to ( swing voters ) , with practice .
Her performance in the National Party ad is stunted and almost a laugh for a non-supporter like me .
On the other hand , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much coaching , with smiling delivery of complex policy announcements like it comes naturally .
It does come naturally – so puts every current and other aspiring politician in the shade .
Her ease with shy children and their infatuated parents , and schoolgirls who think she ’ s a gift from God while making it look natural and unforced , and not exhausting , charms those in the path and breathless overseas journalists .
But it also risks overexposure when other Ministers can ’ t get a word in .
It also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wood ) their due space to add depth to policy announcements and the Labour Party itself .
Jacinda doesn ’ t need to prove anything – she could just stand there looking beatific and some supporters would be happy .
In their first electoral ad , Jacinda looked slick and polished , almost hyper-real .
The two leaders and their parties have been at pains to outflank each other , and all other players , in the centre – Hotelling ’ s Law , or Tariq Ali ’ s extreme centre .
Labour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ electricity in their proposed ‘ Think Big Version 2020 ’ Lake Onslow dry-year storage scheme .
But renewable doesn ’ t mean sustainable or a good investment , compared with other options such as insulating houses and is dependent on an expensive business case , uncertain consent approval and a huge sum of money for moderate gains while still letting agriculture and transport off the hook for climate change emissions which would be a better effort .
That makes me wonder , in light of the potential Tiwai point closure freeing up extra @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On the right , Labour outflanks National with their inconsequential ‘ revenue policy ’ which alienates no-one on the right or the left and makes only a symbolic attempt at targeting the uber-rich whose wealth will only be impacted by the price of a cup of coffee a day by this new proposal , generating only half the tax that cannabis reform would .
In a brainfade that Party members would rather forget , James Shaw outflanked Act with his enthusiasm to get at least one win from the ‘ shovel ready ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Green School .
-Shovel ready projects by the way that disproportionately favour male-based work sectors even though it ’ s women who are impacted by COVID-19 job losses in 9 cases out of 10 .
Meanwhile the National Party has stolen a hand from any progressive party by promising funding increases for improved dental treatment and for parenting assistance – but in the latter by following a neo-liberal distributive ‘ voucher ’ model rather than through cash .
All the while publishing memes that suggest people know what ’ s best for their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you know best ” – but still not trusting them to do so .
When the National Party promises ‘ reasonably ’ good social intervention policies , those in my left-ish echo chamber say they are hollow words , PR , and can ’ t be trusted .
The most strident calls for James Shaw ’ s resignation came from Green Party supporters and those further left , showing that Lefties hold themselves and their leaders to a higher standard than centrist moderates – which is probably why they are called moderates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ principles and promises of transformation , it ’ s ‘ pragmatism ’ , and ‘ realism ’ given the economic situation we ’ re in , and the ‘ cost of power ’ .
Therein lies a conundrum – the Greens say they ’ d be possibly prepared to sit on the cross-benches rather than compromise their principles , Labour supporters say the surrender of principles is essential in order to win and retain power .
But then what is power for ?
But we ’ re tribal after all , and policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re forgivably a bit tired and jaded with politics .
Coronavirus is the only thing that matters , and anyway , according to an Ipsos Poll , “ No critical inquiry please – we ’ re New Zealanders ” .
And in the choice of the centrist duopoly ( with a few centrist minor players – NZ First , Act and the Greens included ) , people may just vote for the party – or leader in particular , that makes them feel better – and according to a recent poll , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Judith does .
However , commentators warn about the ‘ shy Tory ’ factor , voters who are reluctant to admit they are conservative voters in public polling , which may skew the election , and good reason why Jacinda Ardern is ‘ taking nothing for granted ’ .
Labour didn ’ t expect to win last time ( and in terms of a majority , they didn ’ t ) , but even though things are looking more certain now , there ’ s still time for any fickle consensus to unravel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unravelled , with Winston racing out of the blocks to claim credit for his Party ’ s many wins ( and therefore wins for the crony interests where there ’ s mutual support – and donations ) , while dissing Labour and the Greens .
There ’ s no love lost from the Greens ’ side either ( James Shaw ’ s comments that NZF have been a ‘ chaotic ’ influence ) , and Labour carrying a subtext that their promises for the living wage for public sector workers may still come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a future Coalition requirement .
But also that they would prefer to govern alone without the Green Party either .
Ultimately though in the race between Jacinda and Judith , Labour and National , a hark back to First Past the Post battles for the centre , it ’ s the centre , not the margins that carry the vote .
This election , it ’ s not the ‘ Battle of the Babes ” over Auckland Central from years ago , when Nikki Kaye beat Jacinda Ardern .
But where the main @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the nominal ‘ left ’ and the right , are wings of the same conservative , neo-liberal bird .

Judith Collins has been coached. Someone may have told her to smile more often, she’s looking quite smart in a made-up matronly way, with her facecake and trimmed hair as she does the rounds visiting steel fabrication plants and other businesses around the country. She’s most compelling when she’s warmed up, and may even become convincing to (swing voters), with practice. Her performance in the National Party ad is stunted and almost a laugh for a non-supporter like me.
On the other hand, Jacinda doesn’t seem to need much coaching, with smiling delivery of complex policy announcements like it comes naturally. It does come naturally – so puts every current and other aspiring politician in the shade. Her ease with shy children and their infatuated parents, and schoolgirls who think she’s a gift from God while making it look natural and unforced, and not exhausting, charms those in the path and breathless overseas journalists. But it also risks overexposure when other Ministers can’t get a word in. It also denies competent Ministers (such as Megan Wood) their due space to add depth to policy announcements and the Labour Party itself. Jacinda doesn’t need to prove anything – she could just stand there looking beatific and some supporters would be happy. In their first electoral ad, Jacinda looked slick and polished, almost hyper-real.
The two leaders and their parties have been at pains to outflank each other, and all other players, in the centre – Hotelling’s Law, or Tariq Ali’s extreme centre. Labour trumps Green aspirations for 100% renewable electricity in their proposed ‘Think Big Version 2020’ Lake Onslow dry-year storage scheme. But renewable doesn’t mean sustainable or a good investment, compared with other options such as insulating houses and is dependent on an expensive business case, uncertain consent approval and a huge sum of money for moderate gains while still letting agriculture and transport off the hook for climate change emissions which would be a better effort. That makes me wonder, in light of the potential Tiwai point closure freeing up extra electricity, so what and why?
On the right, Labour outflanks National with their inconsequential ‘revenue policy’ which alienates no-one on the right or the left and makes only a symbolic attempt at targeting the uber-rich whose wealth will only be impacted by the price of a cup of coffee a day by this new proposal, generating only half the tax that cannabis reform would.
In a brainfade that Party members would rather forget, James Shaw outflanked Act with his enthusiasm to get at least one win from the ‘shovel ready’ projects, in supporting the private Taranaki Green School. -Shovel ready projects by the way that disproportionately favour male-based work sectors even though it’s women who are impacted by COVID-19 job losses in 9 cases out of 10.
Meanwhile the National Party has stolen a hand from any progressive party by promising funding increases for improved dental treatment and for parenting assistance – but in the latter by following a neo-liberal distributive ‘voucher’ model rather than through cash. All the while publishing memes that suggest people know what’s best for their children “your child, your family, you know best” – but still not trusting them to do so.
When the National Party promises ‘reasonably’ good social intervention policies, those in my left-ish echo chamber say they are hollow words, PR, and can’t be trusted. The most strident calls for James Shaw’s resignation came from Green Party supporters and those further left, showing that Lefties hold themselves and their leaders to a higher standard than centrist moderates – which is probably why they are called moderates after all. But when Labour abandon principles and promises of transformation, it’s ‘pragmatism’, and ‘realism’ given the economic situation we’re in, and the ‘cost of power’. Therein lies a conundrum – the Greens say they’d be possibly prepared to sit on the cross-benches rather than compromise their principles, Labour supporters say the surrender of principles is essential in order to win and retain power. But then what is power for?
But we’re tribal after all, and policy matters less again than personality. We’re forgivably a bit tired and jaded with politics. Coronavirus is the only thing that matters, and anyway, according to an Ipsos Poll, “No critical inquiry please – we’re New Zealanders”. And in the choice of the centrist duopoly (with a few centrist minor players – NZ First, Act and the Greens included), people may just vote for the party – or leader in particular, that makes them feel better – and according to a recent poll, Jacinda makes people feel more hopeful than Judith does.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
However, commentators warn about the ‘shy Tory’ factor, voters who are reluctant to admit they are conservative voters in public polling, which may skew the election, and good reason why Jacinda Ardern is ‘taking nothing for granted’. Labour didn’t expect to win last time (and in terms of a majority, they didn’t), but even though things are looking more certain now, there’s still time for any fickle consensus to unravel. The Government consensus has certainly already unravelled, with Winston racing out of the blocks to claim credit for his Party’s many wins (and therefore wins for the crony interests where there’s mutual support – and donations), while dissing Labour and the Greens. There’s no love lost from the Greens’ side either (James Shaw’s comments that NZF have been a ‘chaotic’ influence), and Labour carrying a subtext that their promises for the living wage for public sector workers may still come to nothing if New Zealand First are a future Coalition requirement. But also that they would prefer to govern alone without the Green Party either.
Ultimately though in the race between Jacinda and Judith, Labour and National, a hark back to First Past the Post battles for the centre, it’s the centre, not the margins that carry the vote. This election, it’s not the ‘Battle of the Babes” over Auckland Central from years ago, when Nikki Kaye beat Jacinda Ardern. But where the main incumbent parties have little to distinguish them, the nominal ‘left’ and the right, are wings of the same conservative, neo-liberal bird.


thedailyblog--2020-09-16--Trump, Israel, the UAE and Bahrain “normalise” relations

Dr Yara Hawari of the Middle East Institute summed up well yesterday ’ s signing of an agreement to “ normalise ” relations between the US , Israel , the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain .
Israel is a racist apartheid state with laws discriminating against Palestinian Israelis and an army renowned for its murderous brutality against any Palestinian resistance to its racist rule .
The United Arab Emirates has no elections , no political parties .
It ’ s a medieval regime which tortures anyone resisting its autocratic rule .
Bahrain is another tinpot despotic regime .
It has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ house is elected but all 40 people in the upper house are appointed by the King who has the final say on everything .
The US is a declining empire at war with itself .
These are the four countries making “ peace ” with each other .
It ’ s no surprise these four are joining together to betray the Palestinian people .
The US and Israel have conspired to do so for over 70 years .
The UAE and Bahrain are joining the betrayal because they need modern weapons to put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Meanwhile around the world the great mass of humanity supports the Palestinian struggle .
Our weapon against today ’ s betrayal is BDS – Boycott , Divestment and Sanctions – against Israel until it abides by international law and United Nations resolutions .
BDS is growing in strength and it will be as important for the struggle against Israeli apartheid as it was for the struggle against South African apartheid .

Dr Yara Hawari of the Middle East Institute summed up well yesterday’s signing of an agreement to “normalise” relations between the US, Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.
Israel is a racist apartheid state with laws discriminating against Palestinian Israelis and an army renowned for its murderous brutality against any Palestinian resistance to its racist rule. The United Arab Emirates has no elections, no political parties. It’s a medieval regime which tortures anyone resisting its autocratic rule. Bahrain is another tinpot despotic regime. It has two houses of parliament – the lower house is elected but all 40 people in the upper house are appointed by the King who has the final say on everything. The US is a declining empire at war with itself.
These are the four countries making “peace” with each other.
It’s no surprise these four are joining together to betray the Palestinian people. The US and Israel have conspired to do so for over 70 years. The UAE and Bahrain are joining the betrayal because they need modern weapons to put down popular uprisings of their people.
Meanwhile around the world the great mass of humanity supports the Palestinian struggle. Our weapon against today’s betrayal is BDS – Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions – against Israel until it abides by international law and United Nations resolutions.
BDS is growing in strength and it will be as important for the struggle against Israeli apartheid as it was for the struggle against South African apartheid.


thedailyblog--2020-09-18--UTU JUSTICE FOR WORKERS REPORT: Takes $500,000 COVID Subsidy to Save Jobs – Sacks Workers & Pockets

UTU JUSTICE FOR WORKERS REPORT: Takes $500,000 COVID Subsidy to Save Jobs – Sacks Workers & Pockets the Money

DOLLAR DEALERS , an Auckland pawn shop chain , sacked several workers after taking nearly $ 500,000 from the COVID fund set up to protect these workers ’ jobs .
Dollar Dealers sacked these workers on the spot , with no redundancy pay in the middle of the COVID lockdown .
Dollar Dealers then pocketed the COVID subsidy for themselves .
The workers got nothing .
The boss made money .
Shortly afterwards Dollar Dealers advertised vacancies .
None of the ‘ redundant ’ workers were offered their jobs back .
This was a clear case of an unscrupulous company @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus crisis as cover .
Taking taxpayers money meant for these workers reveals the ethics of the owners , Peter Delmont and his son James Delmont .
Ironically it reinforces the stereotypes portrayed in film and media of the shady characters who run pawn shops .
OneUnion has filed a case against the employer on behalf of two workers .
We don ’ t believe for a minute there were any genuine redundancies .
The employer went through an insultingly fake consultation requiring employers to give feedback within 48 hours .
Within days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the spot and ordered to immediately leave the premises .
Initially employees were told the company would pay any redundant workers the outstanding COVID subsidy .
However it seems once the employer realised there was a loophole in the subsidy scheme that didn ’ t require them to pay out the money to specific workers , they reneged .
The redundant workers got nothing .
Next time you hear about employers telling the government that they can be trusted to do the right thing when the taxpayer give them dosh , don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dollar Dealers has over 66 employees .
Given the annual staff turnover in the national retail sector is 50 % , that would mean through natural attrition they lose an average three employees a month .
The employer tell me they only made three workers redundant .
Duh !
So they would have us believe , that despite having a government subsidy for their employees , they went through an elaborate consultation process with their entire workforce , just to reduce their workforce by three ?
Really ?
Dollar Dealer advertised for staff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mediation meeting this Friday .
If I wasn ’ t so outraged , I ’ d look forward watching them trying to explain themselves with a straight face .
The truth is they deliberately sacked these workers for dubious reasons that we are not aware of .
Eventually we will find the real reason .
Sadly , many employers have taking advantage of the COVID crisis to sack workers they don ’ t like and pretend it ’ s a genuine redundancy .
That ’ s outrageous enough , but pocketing the taxpayers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a workers ’ jobs , is sickening .
We as a community must stop this abuse and hold these people accountable for their behaviour .
If we don ’ t get a fair outcome at mediation with Dollar Dealers , we will launch a campaign for justice against the owners .
You can help in two ways .
• None We have our campaign bus ready for action .
I ’ d really appreciate Daily Blog supporters offering a small koha to get us on the road .
With your support we can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ locals against their corporate abuse .
Please go here .
• None If you can offer practical support either through social media , or being part of our UTU squad email Matt McCarten is the National Director of One Union

DOLLAR DEALERS, an Auckland pawn shop chain, sacked several workers after taking nearly $500,000 from the COVID fund set up to protect these workers’ jobs.
Dollar Dealers sacked these workers on the spot, with no redundancy pay in the middle of the COVID lockdown. Dollar Dealers then pocketed the COVID subsidy for themselves. The workers got nothing. The boss made money. Shortly afterwards Dollar Dealers advertised vacancies. None of the ‘redundant’ workers were offered their jobs back.
This was a clear case of an unscrupulous company targeting certain workers for sackings using the coronavirus crisis as cover. Taking taxpayers money meant for these workers reveals the ethics of the owners, Peter Delmont and his son James Delmont. Ironically it reinforces the stereotypes portrayed in film and media of the shady characters who run pawn shops.
OneUnion has filed a case against the employer on behalf of two workers. We don’t believe for a minute there were any genuine redundancies. The employer went through an insultingly fake consultation requiring employers to give feedback within 48 hours. Within days several employees were called in, terminated on the spot and ordered to immediately leave the premises.
Initially employees were told the company would pay any redundant workers the outstanding COVID subsidy. However it seems once the employer realised there was a loophole in the subsidy scheme that didn’t require them to pay out the money to specific workers, they reneged. The redundant workers got nothing. Next time you hear about employers telling the government that they can be trusted to do the right thing when the taxpayer give them dosh, don’t believe them – ever!
Dollar Dealers has over 66 employees. Given the annual staff turnover in the national retail sector is 50% , that would mean through natural attrition they lose an average three employees a month. The employer tell me they only made three workers redundant. Duh!
So they would have us believe, that despite having a government subsidy for their employees, they went through an elaborate consultation process with their entire workforce, just to reduce their workforce by three? Really? Dollar Dealer advertised for staff within a month.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
We have a mediation meeting this Friday. If I wasn’t so outraged, I’d look forward watching them trying to explain themselves with a straight face. The truth is they deliberately sacked these workers for dubious reasons that we are not aware of. Eventually we will find the real reason.
Sadly, many employers have taking advantage of the COVID crisis to sack workers they don’t like and pretend it’s a genuine redundancy. That’s outrageous enough, but pocketing the taxpayers gift that was meant to help save a workers’ jobs, is sickening. We as a community must stop this abuse and hold these people accountable for their behaviour.
If we don’t get a fair outcome at mediation with Dollar Dealers, we will launch a campaign for justice against the owners.
You can help in two ways.
We have our campaign bus ready for action. I’d really appreciate Daily Blog supporters offering a small koha to get us on the road. With your support we can start visiting Dollar Dealer stores and mobilising locals against their corporate abuse. Please go here. If you can offer practical support either through social media, or being part of our UTU squad email justice@oneunion.org.nz Julia will contact you back.
Matt McCarten is the National Director of One Union


thedailyblog--2020-09-18--Break the silence – defend free speech

Break the silence – defend free speech

On 1 September , Israeli soldiers assaulted and silenced a 68-year-old farmer , Khairi Hanoun , for peacefully , even if noisily , protesting against the theft of his land by the Israeli Occupation .
This knee-on-neck operation was caught on video and , while the BBC reported the Israeli Army claim that Hanoun had initiated the violence , saying the footage was “ only partial , slanted , and does not reflect the rioting and violence toward the army forces that preceded the arrest ” , other videos show that not to be the case .
Hanoun is seen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one catching up with him and wrestling him to the ground .
Israeli forces have already seized nearly 80 hectares of land belonging to the villages of Shufa and Ijbara in order to develop an industrial zone , in violation of international law .
Israel is building roads to connect the zone with settlements , as well as preventing farmers from gaining access to their land .
The villagers protest , in the hope that some notice might be taken to bring pressure upon Israel to cease its land-grabbing violations .
While such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and its news-media allies seek to dismiss it as ‘ violent rioting ’ .
By the end of August , Israeli Gaza ceasefire violations had already totalled 920 for the year .
Since then , up to and including 14 September , Israel has committed 32 more violations , compared with the entire Palestinian year ’ s total of 71 .
Between 27 August and 14 September , there were 192 raids by the Israeli Army , including home invasions , with eight destroyed ( one partially ) and three tent dwellings seized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ took place , with a racist arson attack by Israeli settlers and one resident being beaten up during an Israeli Army home invasion .
On 7 September , the Israeli Occupation forced the owners of five business to destroy their livelihoods , and settlers uprooted and took away 45 olive trees .
On 9 September , the Israeli Army destroyed 22 Palestinian olive trees and , on 12 September , settlers set fire to more olive trees .
On 13 September , the Israeli Army took prisoner and interrogated an 80-year-old man and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was wounded during an Israeli Army home invasion .
Israel has moved a chemical plant , closed down by court orderbecause of its toxic emissions , from Netanya in Israel to across the Green Line , into Occupied Palestine .
The privately-owned Geshuri Company ‘ s plant manufactures pesticides and fertiliers , and it was subject to the Israeli Court order , due to complaints from residents .
In militarily-Occupied Palestine , where Palestinian lives matter little to Israel , the company can continue its poisonous activity , free from Israel ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , specifically seized for the purpose , accommodates not one , but twelve Israeli chemical factories in an industrial zone , between Tulkarem and Israel , called Nitzanei Shalom .
Emissions and chemical waste are ruining Palestinian agricultural land and polluting both the air and ground water .
Locally , there is an increase in respiratory diseases , eye infections and cancer .
The Geshuri factory operations are so toxic that , when the wind blows in the direction of Israel , the plant ceases operations .
Dr Abed Darak of the Tulkarem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the city has the highest cancer and leukaemia rate in the West Bank .
A 10 September report from the United Nations Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs ( OCHA ) states that : “ The period from March to August 2020 saw the demolition or confiscation of 389 Palestinian-owned structures in the West Bank , on average , 65 per month , the highest average destruction rate in four years.
” OCHA ’ s Humanitarian Co-ordinator , Jamie McGoldrick said that : “ Early during the COVID-19 pandemic , the Israeli @ @ @ @ @ @ @ longstanding policy of demolishing inhabited Palestinian homes .
Sadly , demolitions during the period March-August 2020 left 442 Palestinians homeless , further exposing many to risks associated with the pandemic .
In August alone , 205 people were displaced , more than in any other single month since January 2017.
” Of course , it is not only homes in Palestine that are smashed .
The barbaric Israeli Occupation destroys water supply , hygiene and sanitation facilities , as well as farm buildings and agriculture .
Zionist contempt for world opinion has led @ @ @ @ @ @ @ international donors as humanitarian aid .
The destruction of property on territory subjected to foreign , military occupation is prohibited under international humanitarian law .
Today , such devastation inflicted during the COVID-19 pandemic is particularly menacing as it inevitably compounds the risks faced in the already highly vulnerable West Bank .
In 2010 , the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported an assertion that Julian Assange had secretly agreed with Israel not to publish documents damaging to Israeli interests .
An online publication , Al Haqiqa , even claimed that Assange had removed or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2006 and 2008–2009 attacks on Gaza .
Nothing could be further from the truth .
For almost nine years , 2007–2015 , WikiLeaks exposed the powerful influence Israel had over the US , releasing diplomatic cables and emails , mostly between the US Embassy in Tel Aviv and Washington , that are now part of the Public Library of US Diplomacy .
Now Assange faces a cruel travesty of justice in a US-sponsored extradition case at the Central Criminal Court in London .
The one-sided battle in the British court is part of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of freedom of speech and democracy , in which the UK has given up its sovereignty to serve the US .
The UN has twice found that the WikiLeaks publisher had been arbitrarily detained and , in a public statement , the UN OHCHR called on the Swedish and British authorities to end Mr Assange ’ s deprivation of liberty , respect his physical integrity and freedom of movement , and afford him the right to compensation .
US citizen , Alfred de Zayas , appointed as the first Independent Expert on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ order by the Human Rights Council , said in a press release “ .
.
.
international order depends on the consistent and uniform application of international law .
.
.
” He emphasied the value of whistle-blowers , who he described as key human rights defenders against a growing culture of secrecy , closed-door deals , disinformation , lack of access to information and 1984-like surveillance of individuals .
Although Israel and its allies assert that the only path to peace is direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority ( PA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the PA is made clear in a cable sent from the Embassy in Tel Aviv on 3 November 2008 .
The cable reveals both Israel ’ s intention to keep Gaza in poverty and its military plans to attack urban areas .
WikiLeaks also revealed Israel ’ s fear of International Criminal Court ( ICC ) investigations and possible proceedings regarding its 2008–2009 Gaza invasion .
The US tries to exercise its power and influence globally in efforts to further Israel ’ s interests .
In 2011 , it sent agents of its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Iceland to engage in a subversive exercise aimed at Assange and WikiLeaks .
Years later , in 2016 a former Icelandic Minister of the Interior , Ögmundur Jónasson , revealed how his suspicions were aroused regarding the FBI ’ s motives and purpose .
The FBI told Iceland that they had advanced knowledge of impending attacks by ‘ hackers ’ to destroy the country ’ s software systems .
But Jónasson was not convinced and , as he put it , was “ well aware that a helping hand might easily become @ @ @ @ @ @ @ permission for them to interfere and with no reason at all to target WikiLeaks , Jónasson told the FBI that they should immediately cease all activities in Iceland .
In fact , the FBI were ordered out of Iceland .
Just so that there could be no doubt , he made it very clear that “ if I had to take sides with either WikiLeaks or the FBI or CIA , I would have no difficulty in choosing : I would be on the side of WikiLeaks.
” To say the least , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ non-alignment and independence that deserves respect and emulation by all who value freedom of information and rules-based international relations .
The online journal Independent Australia also published an article dealing with the FBI attempt to infiltrate Iceland ’ s security that contains the following statement by Ögmundur Jónasson : “ What is Australia doing ?
Isn ’ t Julian Assange an Australian citizen ?
However , I don ’ t see Australian authorities taking on the responsibility to protect their citizen .
Australia shows , as far as I can see , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US as is the case in most other lands .
And may I add where is the world press , the same press which gratefully published the material WikiLeaks provided them with ?
Why are they quiet ?
In the end , we are all responsible .
We are seeing an individual and an organisation taken to court , with 18 charges which could lead to 175 years in prison .
All this for carrying out investigative journalism.
” The final stage of the US/UK-collaborated extradition court hearing began on 7 September .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ motive was for starting WikiLeaks , he replied : “ Transparency and accountability are moral issues that must be the essence of public life and journalism.
” For this effort , as the UN expert , Nils Melzer , has observed , the selfless public-serving journalist has been subjected to the most horrendous neglect , isolation and psychological torture .
Now Julian Assange is no longer news and , having profited from his journalism , the Guardian has fallen silent .
The mainstream news media and western-allied political leaders collectively betray Julian Assange @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threaten the right to free speech and respect for humanitarian international law .
WikiLeaks published news , comprising information about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan , US diplomatic cables and Guantánamo Bay that revealed evidence of war crimes .
The US can never forgive WikiLeaks for publishing a military video showing a 2007 attack by Apache helicopters on a street in Baghdad that killed a dozen people , including two Reuters news staff .
What is seldom mentioned is the wounding of two children in the attack , a girl who suffered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eyes and a boy who received head injuries .
In a debate on Threats to Media Freedom and Journalists ’ Security in Europe , the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe ( PACE ) , unanimously called on member states to “ oppose the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to the United States ” .
The Assembly , noting that the detention and criminal prosecution of Julian Assange set a dangerous precedent for journalists , was also in accord with the recommendation of the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Punishment , who has declared that Assange ’ s extradition to the United States must be barred and that he must be promptly released .
The leader of the Italian Parliamentary Intergroup for monitoring the Assange case , Senator Gianni Marilotti , told the meeting that , “ We should be surprised and in a certain way outraged by the cautious silence kept by some states not only on Julian Assange ’ s situation but also on the facts revealed by him through WikiLeaks ’ work .
In 2003 , George W. Bush @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Howard , as Washington ’ s sheriff , gladly promoting him from his own declaration of being merely deputy sheriff to the US .
The only change since then is that the subservience is spreading .
The silence of our five-eyes partners and news media concerning Israel ‘ s war crimes , and the injustice being meted out to Julian Assange , is helping to undermine the very rules-based international law we claim to support .
Where does New Zealand stand ?
Silence is a grim indicator .

On 1 September, Israeli soldiers assaulted and silenced a 68-year-old farmer, Khairi Hanoun, for peacefully, even if noisily, protesting against the theft of his land by the Israeli Occupation. This knee-on-neck operation was caught on video and, while the BBC reported the Israeli Army claim that Hanoun had initiated the violence, saying the footage was “only partial, slanted, and does not reflect the rioting and violence toward the army forces that preceded the arrest”, other videos show that not to be the case. Hanoun is seen being pursued by Israeli soldiers, with one catching up with him and wrestling him to the ground. Israeli forces have already seized nearly 80 hectares of land belonging to the villages of Shufa and Ijbara in order to develop an industrial zone, in violation of international law. Israel is building roads to connect the zone with settlements, as well as preventing farmers from gaining access to their land. The villagers protest, in the hope that some notice might be taken to bring pressure upon Israel to cease its land-grabbing violations. While such legitimate protest is only natural, Israel and its news-media allies seek to dismiss it as ‘violent rioting’.
By the end of August, Israeli Gaza ceasefire violations had already totalled 920 for the year. Since then, up to and including 14 September, Israel has committed 32 more violations, compared with the entire Palestinian year’s total of 71. Between 27 August and 14 September, there were 192 raids by the Israeli Army, including home invasions, with eight destroyed (one partially) and three tent dwellings seized. Many Israeli Occupation acts of violence took place, with a racist arson attack by Israeli settlers and one resident being beaten up during an Israeli Army home invasion. On 7 September, the Israeli Occupation forced the owners of five business to destroy their livelihoods, and settlers uprooted and took away 45 olive trees. On 9 September, the Israeli Army destroyed 22 Palestinian olive trees and, on 12 September, settlers set fire to more olive trees. On 13 September, the Israeli Army took prisoner and interrogated an 80-year-old man and, on 14 September a 16-year-old youth was wounded during an Israeli Army home invasion.
Wilful and contemptuous inhumanity
Israel has moved a chemical plant, closed down by court orderbecause of its toxic emissions, from Netanya in Israel to across the Green Line, into Occupied Palestine. The privately-owned Geshuri Company‘s plant manufactures pesticides and fertilisers, and it was subject to the Israeli Court order, due to complaints from residents. In militarily-Occupied Palestine, where Palestinian lives matter little to Israel, the company can continue its poisonous activity, free from Israel’s strict domestic environmental laws. The land, specifically seized for the purpose, accommodates not one, but twelve Israeli chemical factories in an industrial zone, between Tulkarem and Israel, called Nitzanei Shalom. Emissions and chemical waste are ruining Palestinian agricultural land and polluting both the air and ground water. Locally, there is an increase in respiratory diseases, eye infections and cancer. The Geshuri factory operations are so toxic that, when the wind blows in the direction of Israel, the plant ceases operations. Dr Abed Darak of the Tulkarem Ministry of Health, has warned that the city has the highest cancer and leukaemia rate in the West Bank.
UN deplores Israeli aggravation of West Bank pandemic risk
A 10 September report from the United Nations Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) states that: “The period from March to August 2020 saw the demolition or confiscation of 389 Palestinian-owned structures in the West Bank, on average, 65 per month, the highest average destruction rate in four years.” OCHA’s Humanitarian Co-ordinator, Jamie McGoldrick said that: “Early during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Israeli authorities indicated that they would restrain their longstanding policy of demolishing inhabited Palestinian homes. Sadly, demolitions during the period March-August 2020 left 442 Palestinians homeless, further exposing many to risks associated with the pandemic. In August alone, 205 people were displaced, more than in any other single month since January 2017.”
Of course, it is not only homes in Palestine that are smashed. The barbaric Israeli Occupation destroys water supply, hygiene and sanitation facilities, as well as farm buildings and agriculture. Zionist contempt for world opinion has led it to destroy 50 structures provided by international donors as humanitarian aid.
The destruction of property on territory subjected to foreign, military occupation is prohibited under international humanitarian law. Today, such devastation inflicted during the COVID-19 pandemic is particularly menacing as it inevitably compounds the risks faced in the already highly vulnerable West Bank.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Julian Assange
In 2010, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported an assertion that Julian Assange had secretly agreed with Israel not to publish documents damaging to Israeli interests. An online publication, Al Haqiqa, even claimed that Assange had removed or destroyed documents related to Israel’s 2006 and 2008–2009 attacks on Gaza. Nothing could be further from the truth. For almost nine years, 2007–2015, WikiLeaks exposed the powerful influence Israel had over the US, releasing diplomatic cables and emails, mostly between the US Embassy in Tel Aviv and Washington, that are now part of the Public Library of US Diplomacy.
Now Assange faces a cruel travesty of justice in a US-sponsored extradition case at the Central Criminal Court in London. The one-sided battle in the British court is part of a wider war on the very principles of freedom of speech and democracy, in which the UK has given up its sovereignty to serve the US. The UN has twice found that the WikiLeaks publisher had been arbitrarily detained and, in a public statement, the UN OHCHR called on the Swedish and British authorities to end Mr Assange’s deprivation of liberty, respect his physical integrity and freedom of movement, and afford him the right to compensation. US citizen, Alfred de Zayas, appointed as the first Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order by the Human Rights Council, said in a press release “. . . international order depends on the consistent and uniform application of international law . . .” He emphasised the value of whistle-blowers, who he described as key human rights defenders against a growing culture of secrecy, closed-door deals, disinformation, lack of access to information and 1984-like surveillance of individuals.
Although Israel and its allies assert that the only path to peace is direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA), Israel’s contempt for the PA is made clear in a cable sent from the Embassy in Tel Aviv on 3 November 2008. The cable reveals both Israel’s intention to keep Gaza in poverty and its military plans to attack urban areas. WikiLeaks also revealed Israel’s fear of International Criminal Court (ICC) investigations and possible proceedings regarding its 2008–2009 Gaza invasion.
The US tries to exercise its power and influence globally in efforts to further Israel’s interests. In 2011, it sent agents of its Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to Iceland to engage in a subversive exercise aimed at Assange and WikiLeaks. Years later, in 2016 a former Icelandic Minister of the Interior, Ögmundur Jónasson, revealed how his suspicions were aroused regarding the FBI’s motives and purpose. The FBI told Iceland that they had advanced knowledge of impending attacks by ‘hackers’ to destroy the country’s software systems. But Jónasson was not convinced and, as he put it, was “well aware that a helping hand might easily become a manipulating hand!” With no permission for them to interfere and with no reason at all to target WikiLeaks, Jónasson told the FBI that they should immediately cease all activities in Iceland. In fact, the FBI were ordered out of Iceland. Just so that there could be no doubt, he made it very clear that “if I had to take sides with either WikiLeaks or the FBI or CIA, I would have no difficulty in choosing: I would be on the side of WikiLeaks.” To say the least, this was a great example of declared non-alignment and independence that deserves respect and emulation by all who value freedom of information and rules-based international relations.
The online journal Independent Australia also published an article dealing with the FBI attempt to infiltrate Iceland’s security that contains the following statement by Ögmundur Jónasson: “What is Australia doing? Isn’t Julian Assange an Australian citizen? However, I don’t see Australian authorities taking on the responsibility to protect their citizen. Australia shows, as far as I can see, the same indifference and hence complicity with the US as is the case in most other lands. And may I add where is the world press, the same press which gratefully published the material WikiLeaks provided them with? Why are they quiet? In the end, we are all responsible. We are seeing an individual and an organisation taken to court, with 18 charges which could lead to 175 years in prison. All this for carrying out investigative journalism.”
The final stage of the US/UK-collaborated extradition court hearing began on 7 September. When John Pilger asked Julian what his motive was for starting WikiLeaks, he replied: “Transparency and accountability are moral issues that must be the essence of public life and journalism.” For this effort, as the UN expert, Nils Melzer, has observed, the selfless public-serving journalist has been subjected to the most horrendous neglect, isolation and psychological torture. Now Julian Assange is no longer news and, having profited from his journalism, the Guardian has fallen silent. The mainstream news media and western-allied political leaders collectively betray Julian Assange and, by so doing, also threaten the right to free speech and respect for humanitarian international law.
WikiLeaks published news, comprising information about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, US diplomatic cables and Guantánamo Bay that revealed evidence of war crimes. The US can never forgive WikiLeaks for publishing a military video showing a 2007 attack by Apache helicopters on a street in Baghdad that killed a dozen people, including two Reuters news staff. What is seldom mentioned is the wounding of two children in the attack, a girl who suffered a stomach wound and glass in her eyes and a boy who received head injuries.
In a debate on Threats to Media Freedom and Journalists’ Security in Europe, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), unanimously called on member states to “oppose the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to the United States”. The Assembly, noting that the detention and criminal prosecution of Julian Assange set a dangerous precedent for journalists, was also in accord with the recommendation of the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, who has declared that Assange’s extradition to the United States must be barred and that he must be promptly released. The leader of the Italian Parliamentary Intergroup for monitoring the Assange case, Senator Gianni Marilotti, told the meeting that, “We should be surprised and in a certain way outraged by the cautious silence kept by some states not only on Julian Assange’s situation but also on the facts revealed by him through WikiLeaks’ work.
In 2003, George W. Bush described the then-Australian Prime Minister, John Howard, as Washington’s sheriff, gladly promoting him from his own declaration of being merely deputy sheriff to the US. The only change since then is that the subservience is spreading. The silence of our five-eyes partners and news media concerning Israel‘s war crimes, and the injustice being meted out to Julian Assange, is helping to undermine the very rules-based international law we claim to support. Where does New Zealand stand? Silence is a grim indicator.


thedailyblog--2020-09-18--UTU JUSTICE FOR WORKERS REPORT: Takes $500,000 COVID Subsidy to Save Jobs Sacks Workers – Pockets th

UTU JUSTICE FOR WORKERS REPORT: Takes $500,000 COVID Subsidy to Save Jobs Sacks Workers – Pockets the Money


thedailyblog--2020-09-21--MUST READ: The Looming Fight

MUST READ: The Looming Fight

THERE ’ S A FIGHT LOOMING .
No , not with National – they ’ ll be licking their wounds for years .
Not with Act , either .
Their numbers will gradually decline as National ’ s slowly recover .
And the looming fight certainly won ’ t be with the Greens .
They have some very serious soul-searching to do out there in the political wilderness where the voters are poised to send them .
Like all prophets , they will be required to wrestle with the Devil in lonely places , defeat him , or never be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fight that ’ s looming will be where it always is when the future of New Zealand is being decided – in the Labour Party .
Now some on the Left may be anticipating a renewal of the fight that was brought to an abrupt end by David Cunliffe ’ s catastrophic performance in the general election of 2014 .
The election ( by the slimmest of margins ) of Andrew Little to Labour ’ s leadership was a vote , by what remained of Labour ’ s left , for what David @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pause in the ongoing hostilities during which the wounded could be attended to and the dead decently buried .
It was a long truce , during which nothing much happened either ideologically or practically .
Under Little , a grey fog descended upon Labour .
A poll-depressing pall which was only lifted by the sudden rise of Jacinda ’ s glorious sun .
If , as seems increasingly likely , that same brilliant Jacinda leads Labour to an absolute electoral victory on 17 October , all thought of some sort of factional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For the foreseeable future , what Jacinda wants , Jacinda is likely to get .
Which means that the fight , at least initially , will be for the Prime Minister ’ s ear .
Ground-breaking policies will be proposed .
Bright futures sketched-out confidently on paper serviettes .
Historic opportunities grandly explained .
Only then will the real fight finally begin – the fight between Jacinda ’ s heart and Jacinda ’ s mind .
Shortly after ascending to Labour ’ s leadership , Jacinda described herself as a “ pragmatic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ oxymoron – packing into just two words the essence of the social-democrat ’ s dilemma .
It was good to know that she knew what lay ahead of her .
That as undisputed leader of the centre-left , she would herself become the battlefield upon which these contradictory impulses : her idealism and her pragmatism ; would engage one another .
The coalition with NZ First and her understanding with the Greens spared the prime Minister the worst of it .
For the past three years jacinda has been able to make out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ little choice but to reach a series of pragmatic accommodations with “ Mr Peters ” innate conservatism .
It was a good line , because it allowed her followers to believe that Jacinda ’ s idealism remained unbeaten and unbowed .
That , given a chance , her bright blade would flash in the sunlight and the forces of inertia and indifference would be laid low beneath its righteous fury .
Jacinda ’ s pragmatism , it seemed , was all about making sure that , when the moment came , her idealism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ awful intervening between now and election day , it would seem that this long awaited and keenly anticipated moment will soon be upon us .
Jacinda ’ s pragmatism , if it is not to be twisted into a cynical and demoralising opportunism , will then be required to meet the extraordinary challenge of setting the unencumbered Labour government ’ s idealistic pace .
How “ unrelentingly positive ” can Jacinda and her colleagues afford to be – and how kind ?
Much will turn on how Jacinda perceives “ idealism ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that some call “ wokeness ” ?
Is it a simple matter of scratching every itch inflamed by the Twitterati ’ s ideological eczema ?
Will an unencumbered Labour Government put all TERFs to flight ?
Legislate for tino rangatiratanga ?
Ban all forms of hate speech ?
Destroy the dairy industry ?
Squeeze the rich until the pips squeak ?
Or , is Jacinda ’ s idealism something more organic ?
Something rooted in the idea of community ?
In the mutual obligations of citizenship ?
We must hope it is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former , then the next three years will be very fraught and full of political danger .
“ Wokeness ” has about as much support in the New Zealand electorate as the Green Party – which is to say , bugger-all .
Not that the woke understand that .
As actual or wannabe members of the “ progressive ” wing of the political class , they are anxious to impose their own , tortuous , ideology upon what they regard as the deplorable prejudices of their unenlightened fellow citizens .
If Jacinda ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ idealism , then the people will flee from her in droves – and bitter disappointment .
But I do not believe that the looming fight will be a struggle between a woke Jacinda and the rest of us .
I believe it will be a fight between Jacinda ’ s vision of a government that continues to foster the solidarity and sacrifice manifested in the battle against Covid-19 , and those who want to put an end to it .
Her idealism , so far , has been about bringing New Zealanders together @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that an unencumbered Labour government , led by Jacinda , will be one which builds on New Zealanders ’ new appreciation of the role an active and protective state can play in securing the common welfare of all its citizens ?
Everything in Jacinda ’ s political career to date points to her almost instinctive understanding of how important it is ( to quote Jim Anderton ’ s famous injunction ) “ to build your footpaths where the people walk ” .
Her political pragmatism has always recognised the futility of trying to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political idealism is founded on her conviction that people find goodness in themselves , or not at all .
“ They are us ” , she declared on 15 March 2019 , and a whole nation showed the world what she meant .
“ Unite against Covid-19 ” , she urged , and New Zealand did just that .
“ Be kind ” , she implored , and 50 percent-plus of us are willing to go on giving it a try .

THERE’S A FIGHT LOOMING. No, not with National – they’ll be licking their wounds for years. Not with Act, either. Their numbers will gradually decline as National’s slowly recover. And the looming fight certainly won’t be with the Greens. They have some very serious soul-searching to do out there in the political wilderness where the voters are poised to send them. Like all prophets, they will be required to wrestle with the Devil in lonely places, defeat him, or never be heard from again. No, the fight that’s looming will be where it always is when the future of New Zealand is being decided – in the Labour Party.
Now some on the Left may be anticipating a renewal of the fight that was brought to an abrupt end by David Cunliffe’s catastrophic performance in the general election of 2014. The election (by the slimmest of margins) of Andrew Little to Labour’s leadership was a vote, by what remained of Labour’s left, for what David Lange called “a cuppa” – a pause in the ongoing hostilities during which the wounded could be attended to and the dead decently buried. It was a long truce, during which nothing much happened either ideologically or practically. Under Little, a grey fog descended upon Labour. A poll-depressing pall which was only lifted by the sudden rise of Jacinda’s glorious sun.
If, as seems increasingly likely, that same brilliant Jacinda leads Labour to an absolute electoral victory on 17 October, all thought of some sort of factional renaissance should be dismissed out of hand. For the foreseeable future, what Jacinda wants, Jacinda is likely to get. Which means that the fight, at least initially, will be for the Prime Minister’s ear. Ground-breaking policies will be proposed. Bright futures sketched-out confidently on paper serviettes. Historic opportunities grandly explained. Only then will the real fight finally begin – the fight between Jacinda’s heart and Jacinda’s mind.
Shortly after ascending to Labour’s leadership, Jacinda described herself as a “pragmatic idealist”. It was an inspired oxymoron – packing into just two words the essence of the social-democrat’s dilemma. It was good to know that she knew what lay ahead of her. That as undisputed leader of the centre-left, she would herself become the battlefield upon which these contradictory impulses: her idealism and her pragmatism; would engage one another.
The coalition with NZ First and her understanding with the Greens spared the prime Minister the worst of it. For the past three years jacinda has been able to make out a plausible case for her idealism having little choice but to reach a series of pragmatic accommodations with “Mr Peters” innate conservatism. It was a good line, because it allowed her followers to believe that Jacinda’s idealism remained unbeaten and unbowed. That, given a chance, her bright blade would flash in the sunlight and the forces of inertia and indifference would be laid low beneath its righteous fury. Jacinda’s pragmatism, it seemed, was all about making sure that, when the moment came, her idealism would be ready.
Barring something truly awful intervening between now and election day, it would seem that this long awaited and keenly anticipated moment will soon be upon us. Jacinda’s pragmatism, if it is not to be twisted into a cynical and demoralising opportunism, will then be required to meet the extraordinary challenge of setting the unencumbered Labour government’s idealistic pace. How “unrelentingly positive” can Jacinda and her colleagues afford to be – and how kind?
Much will turn on how Jacinda perceives “idealism”. Does she equate it with the phenomenon that some call “wokeness”? Is it a simple matter of scratching every itch inflamed by the Twitterati’s ideological eczema? Will an unencumbered Labour Government put all TERFs to flight? Legislate for tino rangatiratanga? Ban all forms of hate speech? Destroy the dairy industry? Squeeze the rich until the pips squeak? Or, is Jacinda’s idealism something more organic? Something rooted in the idea of community? In the mutual obligations of citizenship?
We must hope it is the latter. Because if it is the former, then the next three years will be very fraught and full of political danger. “Wokeness” has about as much support in the New Zealand electorate as the Green Party – which is to say, bugger-all. Not that the woke understand that. As actual or wannabe members of the “progressive” wing of the political class, they are anxious to impose their own, tortuous, ideology upon what they regard as the deplorable prejudices of their unenlightened fellow citizens. If Jacinda’s idealism turns out to be woke idealism, then the people will flee from her in droves – and bitter disappointment.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
But I do not believe that the looming fight will be a struggle between a woke Jacinda and the rest of us. I believe it will be a fight between Jacinda’s vision of a government that continues to foster the solidarity and sacrifice manifested in the battle against Covid-19, and those who want to put an end to it. Her idealism, so far, has been about bringing New Zealanders together. Is it too much to hope that an unencumbered Labour government, led by Jacinda, will be one which builds on New Zealanders’ new appreciation of the role an active and protective state can play in securing the common welfare of all its citizens?
Everything in Jacinda’s political career to date points to her almost instinctive understanding of how important it is (to quote Jim Anderton’s famous injunction) “to build your footpaths where the people walk”. Her political pragmatism has always recognised the futility of trying to force people to be good. Her political idealism is founded on her conviction that people find goodness in themselves, or not at all. “They are us”, she declared on 15 March 2019, and a whole nation showed the world what she meant. “Unite against Covid-19”, she urged, and New Zealand did just that. “Be kind”, she implored, and 50 percent-plus of us are willing to go on giving it a try.


thedailyblog--2020-09-20--Dave Macpherson: Right-wing party puts more thought into Mental Health Policy than the others….

This will be one of the more unusual , and probably contentious , blogs I ’ ve written , but I ’ ve come to the conclusion that ACT has paid significantly more attention to putting out a coherent mental health policy than any of the other parties currently represented in Parliament .
Saying anything positive about ACT , the party of corporate business , is not something I have much experience in , so my conclusions are as much a surprise to me as to anyone else !
Having read the policies , which are mostly pretty sparse ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case ) , its clear that • the Labour Party is relying solely on the significant mental health funding it put in its 2019 budget , and the future Mental Health Commission , without looking at the improvements needed to turn around a discredited system ; • ACT has actually read the findings of the Labour-led Government ’ s mental health Inquiry and has got someone who is not part of the current system to outline an actual alternative to the system ; • The Greens have certainly got a policy , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a paper prepared for an academic conference , is full of politically-correct phrases and lacks much practical reality , although it makes mention of the role of primary health carers in mental health ; • National – the party that presided over the biggest increases in suicide rates this nation has ever seen , had a Minister in charge correctly nicknamed ‘ Dr Death ’ , and oversaw collapsing facilities and services right around the country – has as its mental health policy a call for more resources to be given to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ callouts ( I ’ m not joking , their mental health ‘ policy ’ links only to their police policy ) ; • NZ First , a month out from the election , has no mental health policy as yet – my news for them is not to bother , as with a bit of luck they won ’ t be back in the next Government .
It ’ s all a far cry from 2017 , where mental health issues and policy were pretty much front and centre of the election campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election meetings and out on the streets .
Several surveys three years ago put mental health as one of the key issues affecting voters ’ thoughts , and it certainly formed a significant part of the incoming Labour-led Government ’ s first policy initiatives , one of them being the establishment of the 2018 Government Inquiry into Mental Health and Addiction .
The Inquiry essentially found that the mental health system was broken , as were many of the facilities and services ; that many people couldn ’ t access appropriate ( or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; that family and whanau were often excluded from being involved ; that the impact of addictions on mental health was poorly understood ; that Maori and Pasifika were way over-represented in the statistics while being way under-represented in the response planning and governance areas ; that acute facilities were creaking , crumbling , understaffed and in need of replacement ; that there was a high correlation between mental health problems and poverty , poor housing and unemployment – and that the whole sector had been starved of funding for years .
ACT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certain extent like the Labour-led Government ’ s – acknowledged the need for a dedicated Mental Health Commission to govern the response to the mental health crisis the country is experiencing .
They openly state the need to take the delivery of solutions out of the hands of the Ministry of Health and the DHBs , going further , correctly , than Labour in that respect .
Labour is still in thrall – in the mental health sector – to the same mental health professionals who regard themselves as the only arbiters of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the appalling mental mess delivered by the previous unlamented National Government , and who continue to position themselves , both in the Ministry and in the DHBs , to be the continuity cheerleaders going forwards .
So , despite the significant mental health funding improvements put forward by the Labour-led Government ’ s budget , the changes needed ( and funded ) have barely been seen on the ground , and there is no-one in the Government driving this area .
Some of Labour ’ s concepts have been very good – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in schools , but this has only been rolled out in a handful of ‘ pilot ’ situations ; and the correct acceptance of the link between poverty , housing , unemployment and poor mental health , but where we have only very recently seen improvements in Living Wage policy and benefit levels and conditions .
Some , like the removal of mandatory training of police recruits in dealing with mental health callouts , have been poor .
ACT seems to acknowledge the importance of those with mental health problems being placed at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and support , and the huge role mental health NGOs can ( and do , where allowed ) play in delivering that support .
The problem with its policy arises where , reading between the lines , it would effectively set up a ‘ competitive ’ system for mental health care providers , who would be contracted by the Mental Health Commission , and where I can see private sector entities muscling their way in….. ’ Radius , for peace of mind ’ , ‘ BUPA , we will set you straight ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fails to acknowledge the link between poor mental health and wider societal issues , with their policy treating it as somewhat of a standalone issue .
The news is that the only two platforms worth considering in the mental health area are those of Labour and ACT , where Labour needs to be served a written warning about its failure to perform after a good start , and where the hard right economic party might start gaining traction if the incumbent doesn ’ t start fronting up with some results .
Dave Macpherson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Waikato DHB Elected Member whose son was killed by public health incompetence .

This will be one of the more unusual, and probably contentious, blogs I’ve written, but I’ve come to the conclusion that ACT has paid significantly more attention to putting out a coherent mental health policy than any of the other parties currently represented in Parliament.
Saying anything positive about ACT, the party of corporate business, is not something I have much experience in, so my conclusions are as much a surprise to me as to anyone else!
Having read the policies, which are mostly pretty sparse (or non-existent in NZ First’s case), its clear that
the Labour Party is relying solely on the significant mental health funding it put in its 2019 budget, and the future Mental Health Commission, without looking at the improvements needed to turn around a discredited system;
ACT has actually read the findings of the Labour-led Government’s mental health Inquiry and has got someone who is not part of the current system to outline an actual alternative to the system;
The Greens have certainly got a policy, but it unfortunately reads like the executive summary of a paper prepared for an academic conference, is full of politically-correct phrases and lacks much practical reality, although it makes mention of the role of primary health carers in mental health;
National – the party that presided over the biggest increases in suicide rates this nation has ever seen, had a Minister in charge correctly nicknamed ‘Dr Death’, and oversaw collapsing facilities and services right around the country – has as its mental health policy a call for more resources to be given to the police to cope with mental health callouts (I’m not joking, their mental health ‘policy’ links only to their police policy);
NZ First, a month out from the election, has no mental health policy as yet – my news for them is not to bother, as with a bit of luck they won’t be back in the next Government.
It’s all a far cry from 2017, where mental health issues and policy were pretty much front and centre of the election campaign, and were being regularly raised at election meetings and out on the streets. Several surveys three years ago put mental health as one of the key issues affecting voters’ thoughts, and it certainly formed a significant part of the incoming Labour-led Government’s first policy initiatives, one of them being the establishment of the 2018 Government Inquiry into Mental Health and Addiction.
The Inquiry essentially found that the mental health system was broken, as were many of the facilities and services; that many people couldn’t access appropriate (or any, in some cases) help; that family and whanau were often excluded from being involved; that the impact of addictions on mental health was poorly understood; that Maori and Pasifika were way over-represented in the statistics while being way under-represented in the response planning and governance areas; that acute facilities were creaking, crumbling, understaffed and in need of replacement; that there was a high correlation between mental health problems and poverty, poor housing and unemployment – and that the whole sector had been starved of funding for years.
ACT’s policy has – to a certain extent like the Labour-led Government’s – acknowledged the need for a dedicated Mental Health Commission to govern the response to the mental health crisis the country is experiencing. They openly state the need to take the delivery of solutions out of the hands of the Ministry of Health and the DHBs, going further, correctly, than Labour in that respect.
Labour is still in thrall – in the mental health sector – to the same mental health professionals who regard themselves as the only arbiters of correct mental health policy; who presided over the appalling mental mess delivered by the previous unlamented National Government, and who continue to position themselves, both in the Ministry and in the DHBs, to be the continuity cheerleaders going forwards. So, despite the significant mental health funding improvements put forward by the Labour-led Government’s budget, the changes needed (and funded) have barely been seen on the ground, and there is no-one in the Government driving this area. Some of Labour’s concepts have been very good – like mental health support workers being placed in schools, but this has only been rolled out in a handful of ‘pilot’ situations; and the correct acceptance of the link between poverty, housing, unemployment and poor mental health, but where we have only very recently seen improvements in Living Wage policy and benefit levels and conditions. Some, like the removal of mandatory training of police recruits in dealing with mental health callouts, have been poor.
ACT seems to acknowledge the importance of those with mental health problems being placed at the centre of decision-making about their care and support, and the huge role mental health NGOs can (and do, where allowed) play in delivering that support. The problem with its policy arises where, reading between the lines, it would effectively set up a ‘competitive’ system for mental health care providers, who would be contracted by the Mental Health Commission, and where I can see private sector entities muscling their way in…..’Radius, for peace of mind’, ‘BUPA, we will set you straight’, etc, etc. ACT also fails to acknowledge the link between poor mental health and wider societal issues, with their policy treating it as somewhat of a standalone issue.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
The news is that the only two platforms worth considering in the mental health area are those of Labour and ACT, where Labour needs to be served a written warning about its failure to perform after a good start, and where the hard right economic party might start gaining traction if the incumbent doesn’t start fronting up with some results.
Dave Macpherson – TDB mental health blogger & Former Waikato DHB Elected Member whose son was killed by public health incompetence.


thedailyblog--2020-09-20--EXPLOITER EXTORTS  AND BLACKMAILS WORKERS

Tokoroa businessman Harjit Singh is accused of blackmailing employees to pay cash and work free overtime for three years .
Failure to pay the boss meant the workers would lose their jobs and be deported .
OneUnion filed a case for two workers to be reimbursed nearly $ 100,000 for wages , overtime and annual holiday pay .
Harjit Singh , was the owner of the two petrol stations Challenge Aotea and Mobil Tokoroa ( the latter was recently later renamed as Challenge Tokoroa ) .
Harjit employed the workers for three years from 2016 .
Since the workers first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the owner has used an everchanging line-up of five different lawyers in a cynical strategy to delay and frustrate the case against him .
Three days before he was instructed by the Employment Relations Authority ( ERA ) to attend an investigation meeting , he ‘ sold ’ the Challenge Tokoroa station to his son and liquidated his company .
Harjit then filed with the ERA to dismiss the case because his company no longer existed .
His son Udamjit Singh was the manager of the business and we believe was an active @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recordings of Udamjit , as well as his father , demanding cash from the workers .
OneUnion has been told that Harjit has also been exploiting other previous employees for years .
The father has now gone into hiding , but we know he remains in Tokoroa with his son .
OneUnion demands that Harijit return $ 41,000 to one worker and $ 55,000 to the other .
With penalties , interest and costs , the full amount exceeds well over $ 100,000 .
For nearly three years , these workers were required @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Recordings reveal how these workers were robbed .
Although they were paid the correct wages as per their contracts , they were forced on pay day to hand over cash equal to 15 hours work ( i.e .
the difference of 40 and 55 hours ) .
This amounted to $ 250 – $ 300 a week .
If a worker did this to a boss , the police would arrest the worker and they would be imprisoned .
Clearly , we have one law for bosses and one law for workers .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the workers paid PAYE on money they had to give to their boss .
Neither worker was paid for public holidays nor received their annual holiday entitlements .
Harijit admitted to OneUnion that the two employees did work 55 hours a week , although he denies they had to pay him money back .
The recordings show otherwise .
To get himself off the hook , he offered each worker $ 7,000 if OneUnion would agree to drop the case against him .
Harijit has been dishonest throughout the entire process to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even to his own lawyers .
He tried many excuses , such as his apparent bad health , to avoid being held accountable .
He even got his doctor to write to the ERA saying he was incapacitated at home .
That fell apart when he was seen walking around Tokoroa in fine form .
Eventually , when the Authority had tired of his tactics , they ordered him to attend their hearing .
Three days before he was booked to appear , he sold the Challenge Aotea in Tokoroa to his son @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Harijit and Udamjit think they have gotten away with their crime by using dubious legal tricks .
We shall see .
When we first filed this case , Harijit owned two Challenge petrol stations in Tokoroa .
We advised the Authority that Harijit was seeking to get rid of both stations before he was held to account .
He sold Challenge Tokoroa shortly after we filed our case .
Now we hear that the purchaser has taken Harijit to court .
Totally unsurprising .
His son now has the Challenge Aotea station .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Workers Association to get justice for these two employees .
We are visiting Tokoroa on Friday 25 September to meet with community leaders and the extended whanau of the two exploited employees .
We have advised Challenge NZ of their franchisee ’ s criminality last Friday .
This was all news to them .
Harijit is no longer a franchisee , so there is little they can do .
However Udamjit is now a new franchisee .
We will provide our case file to Challenge .
They have agreed to investigate the matter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ monitor this commitment .
The Tokoroa community has a proud history of fighting for workers ’ rights .
We have no doubt the good people of Tokoroa will show the rest of our nation how to win justice for minimum wage workers who have been exploited .
Harijit Singh and his son Udamjit need to make it right .
Harijit and Udamjit should not be allowed to be employ workers , let alone sponsor visas for migrant workers .
OneUnion is compiling a dossier on both men for the MBIE Labour Inspectorate , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department .
One Union will request action from these government entities .
If you have any information on Harjit Singh or his son Udamjit Singh , or would like to help the campaign to end exploitation in Tokoroa , please contact us at justice @ oneunion.org.nz .
Julia will contact you back .
We have our campaign bus ready for action to support a campaign to end exploitation in Tokoroa .
We would appreciate you making a small koha to help get us on the road .
Please go to here .
Matt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Union

Tokoroa businessman Harjit Singh is accused of blackmailing employees to pay cash and work free overtime for three years. Failure to pay the boss meant the workers would lose their jobs and be deported. OneUnion filed a case for two workers to be reimbursed nearly $100,000 for wages, overtime and annual holiday pay.
Harjit Singh, was the owner of the two petrol stations Challenge Aotea and Mobil Tokoroa (the latter was recently later renamed as Challenge Tokoroa). Harjit employed the workers for three years from 2016. Since the workers first raised their claims 18 months ago, the owner has used an everchanging line-up of five different lawyers in a cynical strategy to delay and frustrate the case against him. Three days before he was instructed by the Employment Relations Authority (ERA) to attend an investigation meeting, he ‘sold’ the Challenge Tokoroa station to his son and liquidated his company. Harjit then filed with the ERA to dismiss the case because his company no longer existed.
His son Udamjit Singh was the manager of the business and we believe was an active participant in the abuses. We have recordings of Udamjit, as well as his father, demanding cash from the workers. OneUnion has been told that Harjit has also been exploiting other previous employees for years. The father has now gone into hiding, but we know he remains in Tokoroa with his son.
OneUnion demands that Harijit return $41,000 to one worker and $55,000 to the other. With penalties, interest and costs, the full amount exceeds well over $100,000.
For nearly three years, these workers were required to work 55 hours a week. Recordings reveal how these workers were robbed. Although they were paid the correct wages as per their contracts, they were forced on pay day to hand over cash equal to 15 hours work (i.e. the difference of 40 and 55 hours). This amounted to $250 – $300 a week.
If a worker did this to a boss, the police would arrest the worker and they would be imprisoned. Clearly, we have one law for bosses and one law for workers. To rub salt into their wounds, the workers paid PAYE on money they had to give to their boss. Neither worker was paid for public holidays nor received their annual holiday entitlements.
Harijit admitted to OneUnion that the two employees did work 55 hours a week, although he denies they had to pay him money back. The recordings show otherwise. To get himself off the hook, he offered each worker $7,000 if OneUnion would agree to drop the case against him.
Harijit has been dishonest throughout the entire process to the workers, OneUnion, the ERA and even to his own lawyers. He tried many excuses, such as his apparent bad health, to avoid being held accountable. He even got his doctor to write to the ERA saying he was incapacitated at home. That fell apart when he was seen walking around Tokoroa in fine form.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Eventually, when the Authority had tired of his tactics, they ordered him to attend their hearing. Three days before he was booked to appear, he sold the Challenge Aotea in Tokoroa to his son Udamjit, who was the manager. Harijit and Udamjit think they have gotten away with their crime by using dubious legal tricks. We shall see.
When we first filed this case, Harijit owned two Challenge petrol stations in Tokoroa. We advised the Authority that Harijit was seeking to get rid of both stations before he was held to account. He sold Challenge Tokoroa shortly after we filed our case. Now we hear that the purchaser has taken Harijit to court. Totally unsurprising. His son now has the Challenge Aotea station.
OneUnion has linked up with the Migrant Workers Association to get justice for these two employees. We are visiting Tokoroa on Friday 25 September to meet with community leaders and the extended whanau of the two exploited employees.
We have advised Challenge NZ of their franchisee’s criminality last Friday. This was all news to them. Harijit is no longer a franchisee, so there is little they can do. However Udamjit is now a new franchisee. We will provide our case file to Challenge. They have agreed to investigate the matter and take appropriate action. We will monitor this commitment.
The Tokoroa community has a proud history of fighting for workers’ rights. We have no doubt the good people of Tokoroa will show the rest of our nation how to win justice for minimum wage workers who have been exploited. Harijit Singh and his son Udamjit need to make it right.
Harijit and Udamjit should not be allowed to be employ workers, let alone sponsor visas for migrant workers. OneUnion is compiling a dossier on both men for the MBIE Labour Inspectorate, Immigration NZ, and the Inland Revenue Department. One Union will request action from these government entities.
If you have any information on Harjit Singh or his son Udamjit Singh, or would like to help the campaign to end exploitation in Tokoroa, please contact us at justice@oneunion.org.nz. Julia will contact you back.
We have our campaign bus ready for action to support a campaign to end exploitation in Tokoroa. We would appreciate you making a small koha to help get us on the road. Please go to here.
Nga Mihi / Thank you
Anu Kaloti is President of Migrant Workers Association.
Matt McCarten is the National Director of One Union