Our Hometown

ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND : that ’ s the number of jobs likely to be lost as New Zealand ’ s tourist industry collapses .
Very few of those involved in the accommodation , refreshment and entertainment of international visitors are open to the idea that most of their enterprises are gone for good .
Many appear to believe that domestic tourists will fill the gaping hole in their business plans .
Others are counting on Winston Peters ’ trans-Tasman bubble to save the industry .
Such hopes are almost certainly vain .
As the foreman in Bruce Springteen ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it : “ These jobs are going , boys , and they ain ’ t coming back.
” Those tourism jobs , though , they ’ re not like the jobs in Springsteen ’ s soon-to-be-closed textile mill .
The factory jobs of the post-war boom underpinned a whole way of life .
Unionised and well-paid , they conferred dignity and security on a working-class that was still conscious of its power and purpose .
Those jobs paid for houses , cars , household appliances and holidays at grandad ’ s batch or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jobs were solid and they made the people who did them solid too .
When the factories closed and solid livelihoods they provided simply melted into air , New Zealand ’ s proud but fragile working-class culture evaporated along with them .
When all the hotels and restaurants constructed to accommodate the millions of international visitors who poured into New Zealand during the age of hyper-tourism shut down , their workforces will simply scatter .
Mostly young , mostly untethered , and mostly flexible – in the approved neoliberal fashion – they will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The vast majority of these hospitality workers will experience the collapse of their industry as a purely individual misfortune .
The mass unionism of 1936-1991 , which made the closure of any workplace a powerful collective experience ( and generally resulted in some form of redundancy compensation ) has not been a feature of working-life in the private sector for quarter-of-a-century .
Overwhelmingly , the collapse of hyper-tourism in New Zealand will be a small-business tragedy .
These enterprises were the Remora fish who fed off the massive shark of international travel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of all businesses born out of the extraordinary expansion of global markets which has defined the economic history of the past fifty years .
Having taken advantage of global forces over which they exercised not the slightest control , they now find themselves caught up in an equally uncontrollable , exogenously generated , sequence of global events .
Sadly , there is almost nothing that the small business owners can do to prevent these new global realities from smashing their enterprises and shattering their dreams .
Naturally , they will turn to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Government is almost as powerless to redirect the global tide as the small business-person .
The brute facts of the Covid-19 catastrophe toll over the tourist industry like a funeral bell .
The unprecedented affordability of global travel – largely the effect of cost-saving innovations in the aviation industry – can not endure .
The Pandemic is destroying the world ’ s airlines .
When it ends , the number of carriers will have shrunk significantly .
Where there were once hundreds , experts are predicting that there will be only a few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and higher fares .
The number of international travellers will plummet .
New Zealand will find itself in possession of a tourist infrastructure several times too large for its dramatically reduced visitor traffic .
There is nothing any government can do about this .
No politician can conjure up millions of tourists out of thin – or even smoky Australian – air .
Covid-19 has transformed those streams of passengers pouring off the airliners and cruise ships from prized spenders into potentially dangerous carriers of deadly diseases .
Borders will become a lot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ longer receive such a warm welcome .
Not that the foreigners will be much inclined to come anyway .
It is a universal feature of economic crises that the ordinary person in the street becomes extremely risk averse and reluctant to spend .
People become very careful with their money .
Having being thoroughly drenched by the rainy day overhead , they immediately begin saving for the largest possible umbrella to protect them during the next .
From seeing one last carefree hurrah aboard a cruise ship as their bound and due , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thinking about the generations coming after them .
Nothing politicians can do about that , either .
It all sounds very grim , and it will be , but only for a while .
That strange combination of creativity , thrill-seeking and greed , which propels the entrepreneur towards new ventures will soon respond to new incentives and new opportunities .
It is here that politicians can do something .
In fact , it is here that they can do quite a lot .
Governments can help with finance and advice ; they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ skills to new workforces ; they can build affordable homes and lodgings for new workers to live in ; they can re-empower those workers with the right to organise and participate in the new ventures – growing into new industries – that , phoenix-like , will rise out of the ashes of the old .
New Zealanders were surely made for nobler occupations that making beds , cooking food , pouring drinks and providing thrills and entertainment for wealthy foreigners .
It is one of the great paradoxes of the Covid-19 Pandemic , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so far around the world to see only revealed their true selves when the tourists stopped coming .
Fish swam in the fresh clear water of Venice ’ s canals .
The Taj Mahal glittered under azure blue skies .
And we , in our bubbles , looked into the faces of the people we loved and realised for the first time in a long time how very beautiful they were .
There is so much more to see in our hometowns when , like the little boy riding with his father in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ given the opportunity to “ take a good look around ” .

ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND: that’s the number of jobs likely to be lost as New Zealand’s tourist industry collapses. Very few of those involved in the accommodation, refreshment and entertainment of international visitors are open to the idea that most of their enterprises are gone for good. Many appear to believe that domestic tourists will fill the gaping hole in their business plans. Others are counting on Winston Peters’ trans-Tasman bubble to save the industry. Such hopes are almost certainly vain. As the foreman in Bruce Springteen’s classic song “My Hometown” puts it: “These jobs are going, boys, and they ain’t coming back.”
Those tourism jobs, though, they’re not like the jobs in Springsteen’s soon-to-be-closed textile mill. The factory jobs of the post-war boom underpinned a whole way of life. Unionised and well-paid, they conferred dignity and security on a working-class that was still conscious of its power and purpose. Those jobs paid for houses, cars, household appliances and holidays at grandad’s batch or a seaside holiday camping ground. Those jobs were solid and they made the people who did them solid too. When the factories closed and solid livelihoods they provided simply melted into air, New Zealand’s proud but fragile working-class culture evaporated along with them.
When all the hotels and restaurants constructed to accommodate the millions of international visitors who poured into New Zealand during the age of hyper-tourism shut down, their workforces will simply scatter. Mostly young, mostly untethered, and mostly flexible – in the approved neoliberal fashion – they will suffer, struggle, adapt and survive. The vast majority of these hospitality workers will experience the collapse of their industry as a purely individual misfortune. The mass unionism of 1936-1991, which made the closure of any workplace a powerful collective experience (and generally resulted in some form of redundancy compensation) has not been a feature of working-life in the private sector for quarter-of-a-century.
Overwhelmingly, the collapse of hyper-tourism in New Zealand will be a small-business tragedy. These enterprises were the Remora fish who fed off the massive shark of international travel. Their fate will be the fate of all businesses born out of the extraordinary expansion of global markets which has defined the economic history of the past fifty years. Having taken advantage of global forces over which they exercised not the slightest control, they now find themselves caught up in an equally uncontrollable, exogenously generated, sequence of global events. Sadly, there is almost nothing that the small business owners can do to prevent these new global realities from smashing their enterprises and shattering their dreams.
Naturally, they will turn to the Government for assistance, even though the Government is almost as powerless to redirect the global tide as the small business-person.
The brute facts of the Covid-19 catastrophe toll over the tourist industry like a funeral bell.
The unprecedented affordability of global travel – largely the effect of cost-saving innovations in the aviation industry – cannot endure. The Pandemic is destroying the world’s airlines. When it ends, the number of carriers will have shrunk significantly. Where there were once hundreds, experts are predicting that there will be only a few dozen airlines. That means fewer flights and higher fares. The number of international travellers will plummet. New Zealand will find itself in possession of a tourist infrastructure several times too large for its dramatically reduced visitor traffic.
There is nothing any government can do about this. No politician can conjure up millions of tourists out of thin – or even smoky Australian – air. Covid-19 has transformed those streams of passengers pouring off the airliners and cruise ships from prized spenders into potentially dangerous carriers of deadly diseases. Borders will become a lot harder to penetrate. Foreigners will no longer receive such a warm welcome.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Not that the foreigners will be much inclined to come anyway. It is a universal feature of economic crises that the ordinary person in the street becomes extremely risk averse and reluctant to spend. People become very careful with their money. Having being thoroughly drenched by the rainy day overhead, they immediately begin saving for the largest possible umbrella to protect them during the next. From seeing one last carefree hurrah aboard a cruise ship as their bound and due, the Baby Boom Generation may even start thinking about the generations coming after them.
Nothing politicians can do about that, either.
It all sounds very grim, and it will be, but only for a while. That strange combination of creativity, thrill-seeking and greed, which propels the entrepreneur towards new ventures will soon respond to new incentives and new opportunities. It is here that politicians can do something. In fact, it is here that they can do quite a lot. Governments can help with finance and advice; they can help with the imparting of new skills to new workforces; they can build affordable homes and lodgings for new workers to live in; they can re-empower those workers with the right to organise and participate in the new ventures – growing into new industries – that, phoenix-like, will rise out of the ashes of the old.
New Zealanders were surely made for nobler occupations that making beds, cooking food, pouring drinks and providing thrills and entertainment for wealthy foreigners. It is one of the great paradoxes of the Covid-19 Pandemic, that the places so many millions travelled so far around the world to see only revealed their true selves when the tourists stopped coming. Fish swam in the fresh clear water of Venice’s canals. The Taj Mahal glittered under azure blue skies. And we, in our bubbles, looked into the faces of the people we loved and realised for the first time in a long time how very beautiful they were. There is so much more to see in our hometowns when, like the little boy riding with his father in Springsteen’s song, we are given the opportunity to “take a good look around”.


thedailyblog--2020-05-07--The Safety of the People Shall Be the Highest Law.

The safety of the people shall be the highest law SIMON BRIDGES and his supporters ( witting and unwitting ) aren ’ t quite chanting “ Lock her up !
” Not yet anyway .
But they ’ re headed in that general direction .
Faced with a prime ministerial performance that the rest of the world , and most of her own compatriots , have judged to be outstanding , the Right , in desperation , is attempting to criminalise Jacinda Ardern ’ s “ Go Early – Go Hard ” strategy against the Covid-19 Pandemic .
Shown the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Bridges and his media allies are demanding to know the legal basis for locking down New Zealand .
If the Cabinet ’ s decision , made in haste under extreme conditions , is deemed to be ultra vires ( beyond its powers ) the way will be opened to endless and politically vexatious litigation .
What these legal purists and panic-stricken politicians do not appear to understand is that if it is the people who are ultimately the fount of all legal authority , then those same people must also possess the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themselves and their loved ones safe , to elevate that existential imperative above all other legal and juridical considerations .
With an election looming , any political party foolish enough to attempt to punish Jacinda Ardern and her team for keeping New Zealanders safe will be punished severely at the ballot box .
And , if the people are not the ultimate source of all legal authority , well then , who is ?
Law professors ?
Journalists ?
The National Party !
The declaration of a State of Emergency is , by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Among the most extreme of all the powers wielded by executive authority , it is reserved for those moments when the normal appurtenances of state power are no longer deemed sufficient to maintain public safety .
That only those constitutionally sanctioned to do so can declare a State of Emergency is less important than whether or not the persons so empowered believe that such a declaration will be effective .
The declaration of a State of Emergency which can not be enforced is , in effect , a declaration of war by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Or , to put it another way : the safety of the people can only be maintained by exceptional legal means if the people themselves feel sufficiently threatened to abandon legal norms .
But who , in these situations , falls within the definition of “ the people ” ?
Clearly , not everyone can be included if the threat is located within the borders of the state .
A nation under foreign attack ; responding to a natural disaster ; or facing down a global pandemic ; will have no difficulty in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Emergency in the context of a political and/or economic challenge to the smooth functioning of society , however , is a much riskier proposition .
Interfering with the free movement of individuals and/or the free disposition of their property in such circumstances can only be made effective by excluding the challenger/s from the usual definition of “ the people ” .
For emergency measures to succeed , such individuals or groups they must first be transformed into “ the enemy within ” .
This what happened during the last great extended State @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 1951 Waterfront Dispute .
The National Party Prime Minister of the day , Sid Holland and his uncompromising Minister of Labour , William “ Big Bill ” Sullivan , were able to brand the Waterside Workers Union “ wreckers ” and curtail their rights because the dispute arose in a context that made the demonization of the watersiders and their allies considerably easier than it would have been at just about any other time .
The Cold War had just turned “ hot ” in Korea .
The militant trade unions had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and viciously attacked its leaders : a situation which played into the hands of the FOL ’ s Machiavellian “ boss ” , Fintain Patrick Walsh .
Between 1946 and 1949 , the Labour Party , itself , had quite deliberately isolated , vilified and , in at least one instance , deregistered , militant , communist-led trade unions .
This vilification , especially of the Waterside Workers Union , had continued on the pages of the country ’ s newspapers ( most effectively through Gordon Minhinnick ’ s cartoons in The NZ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , therefore , rely upon Walsh , the FOL and the daily press to back any attack on the WWU .
They could also , crucially , be relatively confident that the Labour Party would remain neutral in the ensuing industrial war .
Because it controlled one of the economy ’ s crucial choke-points , the wharfies ’ union had always been vulnerable to a government determined to destroy its power .
Any lengthy period of industrial action could be successfully portrayed as constituting a clear and present danger , not only to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but to the whole community .
This was due to the fact that in the 1950s vast quantities of everyday items were still distributed around the country by ship .
Holland was able to argue that shutting down New Zealand ’ s ports constituted a very real threat to the public safety .
As a consequence , his invocation of the draconian Public Safety Conservation Act ( 1932 ) was held to be justifiable .
It was enough – just – for the majority of New Zealanders to accept the National Government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liberties , and the harsh persecution of their fellow citizens , that Holland ’ s quasi-fascist Emergency Regulations permitted .
Had the Korean War not been raging ; had the FOL not been split ; had Labour been less hostile to the trade union left ; and had the public been less vulnerable to a protracted shut-down of New Zealand ’ s ports ; then the National Government probably wouldn ’ t have risked declaring a State of Emergency .
But , with all these factors working in its favour , and with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which Holland called to secure the electorate ’ s ex post facto endorsement of his treatment of the watersiders , the National Party was given ample proof that , for most Kiwis , the famous maxim of the Roman statesman , Cicero : Salus populi suprema lex ; the safety of the people shall be the highest law ; was indisputable In the light of New Zealanders ’ conscientious adherence to the “ Unite Against Covid-19 ” rules , Cicero ’ s maxim continues to meet with their approval .
Kiwi acceptance of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , however , in the absence of two crucial provisos : 1 ) An overwhelming majority of the people must believe that the threat to their safety is real .
2 ) They must also be convinced that only the imposition of extreme measures will avert a national catastrophe .
Neither of these provisos applied to the political crisis confronting New Zealand in 1981 .
Invoking the provisions of the Public Safety Conservation Act was a move the Rob Muldoon-led National Government was unwilling to make in relation to that year ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that there was insufficient support across the whole country for hard-line emergency measures to be enforced without the use of deadly force .
Such was the temper of the country in 1981 that the killing of protesters by police or soldiers would only have made the disorder on the nation ’ s streets ten times worse .
New Zealand history thus confirms that its people are , indeed , the best judges of their own political security , and will make an exception to the rule of law only when they believe their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is genuinely imperilled .
The Jacinda Ardern-led Coalition Government is the first since 1951 which , confronted with a clear and present danger to the public ’ s safety , has felt confident enough of their broad support to promulgate a stringent emergency regime of indefinite duration .
The New Zealand people ’ s subsequent willingness to “ Unite Against Covid-19 ” constitutes a ringing endorsement of Cicero ’ s militant-democratic slogan .
As their own constitutional guardians , the people are uniquely positioned to recognise those ( thankfully rare ) moments when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safe is by allowing their leaders to operate ( temporarily ) outside the black letters of the law .
And woe betide anyone who tries to stop them !

Salus populi suprema lex
The safety of the people shall be the highest law
– Cicero
SIMON BRIDGES and his supporters (witting and unwitting) aren’t quite chanting “Lock her up!” Not yet anyway. But they’re headed in that general direction. Faced with a prime ministerial performance that the rest of the world, and most of her own compatriots, have judged to be outstanding, the Right, in desperation, is attempting to criminalise Jacinda Ardern’s “Go Early – Go Hard” strategy against the Covid-19 Pandemic. Shown the way by a couple of liberal professors, Bridges and his media allies are demanding to know the legal basis for locking down New Zealand. If the Cabinet’s decision, made in haste under extreme conditions, is deemed to be ultra vires (beyond its powers) the way will be opened to endless and politically vexatious litigation.
What these legal purists and panic-stricken politicians do not appear to understand is that if it is the people who are ultimately the fount of all legal authority, then those same people must also possess the power, in the interest of keeping themselves and their loved ones safe, to elevate that existential imperative above all other legal and juridical considerations. With an election looming, any political party foolish enough to attempt to punish Jacinda Ardern and her team for keeping New Zealanders safe will be punished severely at the ballot box. And, if the people are not the ultimate source of all legal authority, well then, who is? Law professors? Journalists? The National Party!
The declaration of a State of Emergency is, by its very nature, an exceptional occurrence. Among the most extreme of all the powers wielded by executive authority, it is reserved for those moments when the normal appurtenances of state power are no longer deemed sufficient to maintain public safety. That only those constitutionally sanctioned to do so can declare a State of Emergency is less important than whether or not the persons so empowered believe that such a declaration will be effective. The declaration of a State of Emergency which cannot be enforced is, in effect, a declaration of war by the State upon its own citizens. Or, to put it another way: the safety of the people can only be maintained by exceptional legal means if the people themselves feel sufficiently threatened to abandon legal norms.
But who, in these situations, falls within the definition of “the people”? Clearly, not everyone can be included if the threat is located within the borders of the state. A nation under foreign attack; responding to a natural disaster; or facing down a global pandemic; will have no difficulty in accepting emergency regulations. Declaring a State of Emergency in the context of a political and/or economic challenge to the smooth functioning of society, however, is a much riskier proposition. Interfering with the free movement of individuals and/or the free disposition of their property in such circumstances can only be made effective by excluding the challenger/s from the usual definition of “the people”. For emergency measures to succeed, such individuals or groups they must first be transformed into “the enemy within”.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
This what happened during the last great extended State of Emergency in New Zealand history: the 1951 Waterfront Dispute. The National Party Prime Minister of the day, Sid Holland and his uncompromising Minister of Labour, William “Big Bill” Sullivan, were able to brand the Waterside Workers Union “wreckers” and curtail their rights because the dispute arose in a context that made the demonization of the watersiders and their allies considerably easier than it would have been at just about any other time.
The Cold War had just turned “hot” in Korea. The militant trade unions had walked out of the Federation of Labour and viciously attacked its leaders: a situation which played into the hands of the FOL’s Machiavellian “boss”, Fintain Patrick Walsh. Between 1946 and 1949, the Labour Party, itself, had quite deliberately isolated, vilified and, in at least one instance, deregistered, militant, communist-led trade unions. This vilification, especially of the Waterside Workers Union, had continued on the pages of the country’s newspapers (most effectively through Gordon Minhinnick’s cartoons in The NZ Herald). Holland and Sullivan could, therefore, rely upon Walsh, the FOL and the daily press to back any attack on the WWU. They could also, crucially, be relatively confident that the Labour Party would remain neutral in the ensuing industrial war.
Because it controlled one of the economy’s crucial choke-points, the wharfies’ union had always been vulnerable to a government determined to destroy its power. Any lengthy period of industrial action could be successfully portrayed as constituting a clear and present danger, not only to the country’s exporters and importers, but to the whole community. This was due to the fact that in the 1950s vast quantities of everyday items were still distributed around the country by ship. Holland was able to argue that shutting down New Zealand’s ports constituted a very real threat to the public safety. As a consequence, his invocation of the draconian Public Safety Conservation Act (1932) was held to be justifiable.
It was enough – just – for the majority of New Zealanders to accept the National Government’s comprehensive restriction of their civil liberties, and the harsh persecution of their fellow citizens, that Holland’s quasi-fascist Emergency Regulations permitted. Had the Korean War not been raging; had the FOL not been split; had Labour been less hostile to the trade union left; and had the public been less vulnerable to a protracted shut-down of New Zealand’s ports; then the National Government probably wouldn’t have risked declaring a State of Emergency. But, with all these factors working in its favour, and with its decisive victory in the Snap Election which Holland called to secure the electorate’s ex post facto endorsement of his treatment of the watersiders, the National Party was given ample proof that, for most Kiwis, the famous maxim of the Roman statesman, Cicero: Salus populi suprema lex; the safety of the people shall be the highest law; was indisputable
In the light of New Zealanders’ conscientious adherence to the “Unite Against Covid-19” rules, Cicero’s maxim continues to meet with their approval. Kiwi acceptance of draconian emergency measures cannot be guaranteed, however, in the absence of two crucial provisos: 1) An overwhelming majority of the people must believe that the threat to their safety is real. 2) They must also be convinced that only the imposition of extreme measures will avert a national catastrophe.
Neither of these provisos applied to the political crisis confronting New Zealand in 1981. Invoking the provisions of the Public Safety Conservation Act was a move the Rob Muldoon-led National Government was unwilling to make in relation to that year’s highly controversial Springbok Tour. It knew that there was insufficient support across the whole country for hard-line emergency measures to be enforced without the use of deadly force. Such was the temper of the country in 1981 that the killing of protesters by police or soldiers would only have made the disorder on the nation’s streets ten times worse.
New Zealand history thus confirms that its people are, indeed, the best judges of their own political security, and will make an exception to the rule of law only when they believe their own and their loved ones’ safety is genuinely imperilled.
The Jacinda Ardern-led Coalition Government is the first since 1951 which, confronted with a clear and present danger to the public’s safety, has felt confident enough of their broad support to promulgate a stringent emergency regime of indefinite duration. The New Zealand people’s subsequent willingness to “Unite Against Covid-19” constitutes a ringing endorsement of Cicero’s militant-democratic slogan.
As their own constitutional guardians, the people are uniquely positioned to recognise those (thankfully rare) moments when the only effective means of keeping themselves safe is by allowing their leaders to operate (temporarily) outside the black letters of the law. And woe betide anyone who tries to stop them!


thedailyblog--2020-05-09--Join the online protest rally with Gaza for Nakba Day

Media representatives are invited to the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa ’ s second online rally with Gaza this Sunday evening at 7.00pm NZ time .
We will be hearing from Palestinian medical professionals , community activists and journalists about the huge threat Covid 19 poses to the people of Palestine – and Gaza in particular – and what we can do about it .
It ’ s nothing short of a miracle that Palestinians have been able to keep Govid 19 from spreading in the Gaza community until now .
The link to the online rally is here : 7pm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ //us02web.zoom.us/j/85164678448 We will be asking the speakers from Palestine what New Zealand can do to help end the Israeli blockade of Gaza so Palestinians can bring in the medical supplies , equipment and personnel they need to deal with the looming human catastrophe of Covid 19 spreading in this densely populated area with run down medical services .
Prominent New Zealanders have written to the government asking for action but the government is so far unmoved .
Speakers on the rally from Palestine will include : • Basman Elashi , Executive Director of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ El Wafa Elderly Nursing Home .
• Sabreen Annajjar : Mother of Razan Al-Najjar .
Razan ( pictured below ) was the 21-year-old female paramedic killed by an Israeli sniper in the March of Return in 2018 – Wafa will translate Sabreen ’ s words .
• Raed Shakshak : representing young Palestinians in the group WANN ( We Are Not Numbers ) We hope New Zealand media representatives will take part .
Palestinian voices are rarely reported through our media and they desperately need countries like New Zealand to take notice at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Israeli threat to annex vast swathes of Palestinian land .

Media representatives are invited to the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa’s second online rally with Gaza this Sunday evening at 7.00pm NZ time.
We will be hearing from Palestinian medical professionals, community activists and journalists about the huge threat Covid 19 poses to the people of Palestine – and Gaza in particular – and what we can do about it.
It’s nothing short of a miracle that Palestinians have been able to keep Govid 19 from spreading in the Gaza community until now.
The link to the online rally is here: 7pm this Sunday 10 May at https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85164678448
We will be asking the speakers from Palestine what New Zealand can do to help end the Israeli blockade of Gaza so Palestinians can bring in the medical supplies, equipment and personnel they need to deal with the looming human catastrophe of Covid 19 spreading in this densely populated area with run down medical services.
Prominent New Zealanders have written to the government asking for action but the government is so far unmoved.
Speakers on the rally from Palestine will include:
Dr Medhat Abbas: Ministry of Health Gaza, Director General of Primary Health Services. Basman Elashi, Executive Director of El Wafa Hospital and General Director of El Wafa Elderly Nursing Home. Wafa Aludaini: is a Palestinian activist and journalist. Sabreen Annajjar: Mother of Razan Al-Najjar. Razan (pictured below) was the 21-year-old female paramedic killed by an Israeli sniper in the March of Return in 2018 – Wafa will translate Sabreen’s words. Raed Shakshak: representing young Palestinians in the group WANN (We Are Not Numbers)
We hope New Zealand media representatives will take part. Palestinian voices are rarely reported through our media and they desperately need countries like New Zealand to take notice at this time of Covid 19 and the Israeli threat to annex vast swathes of Palestinian land.


thedailyblog--2020-05-10--EXCLUSIVE: Dr Liz Gordon – We have been ZoomBombed by CyberNazis!

This Saturday just gone , we held the annual meeting of QPEC , the Quality Public Education Coalition .
QPEC was formed in the late 1990s by a group including John Minto and the late Ivan Snook .
The only thing unusual about this year ’ s meeting was that it was held by Zoom , rather than our usual face to face meeting .
Very good online attendance – 65 people .
The morning session started .
There were three speakers , but before they got a chance to start , we had an unwelcome visitor .
Those of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that there is a ‘ share screen ’ function that puts the sharer ’ s screen on to everyone else ’ s , at full size .
Essentially what happened was that a neo-Nazi swastika-bearing person attacked our meeting and used ‘ share screen ’ to display his objectionable images and messages , thus hijacking the whole meeting .
ZoomBombing is a new phenomenon that has arisen from the dependence of people on video-conferencing as an important form of communication while in lockdown .
In March and April , it was used in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jewish religious services being run via Zoom .
It has been reported that images of Jewish people being raped and murdered were shown , along with all the usual Nazi imagery .
As the anti-defamation League ’ s Oren Segal notes , “ Extremists never miss an opportunity to leverage a crisis for their hatred ” .
Zoom was , in some ways , a soft target , because no-one predicted that it would be used to storm meetings .
Recent articles on white supremacists note that , since the 2019 Mosque attacks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ internet where their identity can be protected .
They use sites such as 4chan and 8chan ( favourites of the Mosque shooter ) to communicate .
Paul Spoonley and others have warned that “ the internet has allowed the far Right to become more international in reach and influence ” .
And , according to Jarrod Gilbert , the internet is the new home of far right supremacist activity .
We also must not forget that the Mosque shooter live-recorded his rampage .
So in the future , instead of stormtroopers smashing homes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may be more likely concentrated on cyber attacks to disrupt and , I suspect , destroy .
I am not sure whether this is the first cyberattack in New Zealand , but I am certain it will not be the last .
Zoom has quickly put in place a range of services to protect against ZoomBombing .
A few simple things will protect your organisation .
First , control who is coming on your call .
Open or public meetings are easy to get into and disrupt .
Second , have one clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person can stop or restart screen sharing at will , mute all or individual participants , put individuals on hold , stop file transfer and disable private chat .
Third , don ’ t panic .
Trace as much as you can find out about the person , use screenshots , hit ‘ record ’ if you are not already recording the meeting , note their Zoom ‘ name ’ .
It is unfortunate that organisations like ours are going to have to start using these tactics as a matter of course .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , disabled , Muslim and so on will have to learn that they are targets .
Organisers should know who gets the email invitation – in the QPEC case , it may ( or may not ) be worth trying to trace how the fascist recipient found out about the meeting .
This is worrying .
The person must have received the invitation from one of our contacts .
These are practical steps , but the more interesting question is why on earth the fascist right was interested in disrupting a meeting of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are a number of potential reasons .
It may be they thought they would try out Zoombombing and the QPEC meeting was a useful opportunity , a sort of practice session .
Or , this may be the beginning of a new wave of activism .
Disruption can be upsetting but can be managed .
Increasingly , organisations will learn how to prevent such attacks .
What is more worrying is the potential for escalation into other forms of cyberattack .
The internet in all its forms is a powerful tool .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now marching through the internet looking for opportunities to recruit , disrupt , oppose and promote their cause .
The final issue is whether what happened on Saturday is illegal .
It is a criminal offence to incite racial disharmony .
But at the same time , it is perfectly legal for someone to enter a ‘ public ’ meeting ( which this essentially was ) and protest .
There is also the Harmful Digital Communications Act , which makes cyber bullying and harassment illegal .
I think on balance people disrupting Zoom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offence .
And , Zoom traces all participants .
So finding them should not be hard .
Keep yourselves safe online .

This Saturday just gone, we held the annual meeting of QPEC, the Quality Public Education Coalition. QPEC was formed in the late 1990s by a group including John Minto and the late Ivan Snook. The only thing unusual about this year’s meeting was that it was held by Zoom, rather than our usual face to face meeting. Very good online attendance – 65 people.
The morning session started. There were three speakers, but before they got a chance to start, we had an unwelcome visitor.
Those of you who know Zoom will be aware that there is a ‘share screen’ function that puts the sharer’s screen on to everyone else’s, at full size. Essentially what happened was that a neo-Nazi swastika-bearing person attacked our meeting and used ‘share screen’ to display his objectionable images and messages, thus hijacking the whole meeting.
ZoomBombing is a new phenomenon that has arisen from the dependence of people on video-conferencing as an important form of communication while in lockdown. In March and April, it was used in the USA by anti-Semitist activitists to disrupt Jewish religious services being run via Zoom. It has been reported that images of Jewish people being raped and murdered were shown, along with all the usual Nazi imagery.
As the anti-defamation League’s Oren Segal notes, “Extremists never miss an opportunity to leverage a crisis for their hatred”. Zoom was, in some ways, a soft target, because no-one predicted that it would be used to storm meetings.
Recent articles on white supremacists note that, since the 2019 Mosque attacks, they have been driven onto the internet where their identity can be protected. They use sites such as 4chan and 8chan (favourites of the Mosque shooter) to communicate. Paul Spoonley and others have warned that “the internet has allowed the far Right to become more international in reach and influence”. And, according to Jarrod Gilbert, the internet is the new home of far right supremacist activity. We also must not forget that the Mosque shooter live-recorded his rampage.
So in the future, instead of stormtroopers smashing homes and workplaces in person, fascist activity may be more likely concentrated on cyber attacks to disrupt and, I suspect, destroy. I am not sure whether this is the first cyberattack in New Zealand, but I am certain it will not be the last.
Zoom has quickly put in place a range of services to protect against ZoomBombing. A few simple things will protect your organisation.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
First, control who is coming on your call. Open or public meetings are easy to get into and disrupt.
Second, have one clear host who controls the levers. That person can stop or restart screen sharing at will, mute all or individual participants, put individuals on hold, stop file transfer and disable private chat.
Third, don’t panic. Trace as much as you can find out about the person, use screenshots, hit ‘record’ if you are not already recording the meeting, note their Zoom ‘name’.
It is unfortunate that organisations like ours are going to have to start using these tactics as a matter of course. Groups representing people of colour, gay, disabled, Muslim and so on will have to learn that they are targets.
Organisers should know who gets the email invitation – in the QPEC case, it may (or may not) be worth trying to trace how the fascist recipient found out about the meeting. This is worrying. The person must have received the invitation from one of our contacts.
These are practical steps, but the more interesting question is why on earth the fascist right was interested in disrupting a meeting of educationists on a Saturday morning?
There are a number of potential reasons. It may be they thought they would try out Zoombombing and the QPEC meeting was a useful opportunity, a sort of practice session.
Or, this may be the beginning of a new wave of activism. Disruption can be upsetting but can be managed. Increasingly, organisations will learn how to prevent such attacks. What is more worrying is the potential for escalation into other forms of cyberattack.
The internet in all its forms is a powerful tool. It is worrying that bands of neo-Nazis are now marching through the internet looking for opportunities to recruit, disrupt, oppose and promote their cause.
The final issue is whether what happened on Saturday is illegal. It is a criminal offence to incite racial disharmony. But at the same time, it is perfectly legal for someone to enter a ‘public’ meeting (which this essentially was) and protest. There is also the Harmful Digital Communications Act, which makes cyber bullying and harassment illegal. I think on balance people disrupting Zoom meetings with objectionable material are committing an offence.
And, Zoom traces all participants. So finding them should not be hard. Keep yourselves safe online.


Matthew Hooton’s Selectivity

A good communicator and propagandist uses the pretence of reasoned argument to obscure their ulterior motives and manipulative persuasion techniques .
A critic of propaganda shows how these techniques undermine the very principles of reason itself .
The validity of any claim to ‘ reasoned argument ’ can be legitimately challenged , but only on the grounds of logic , evidence and/or verifiable scientific knowledge .
Matthew Hooton is very skilled communicator and propagandist who sometimes over-reaches .
When this happens , the absence of reasoned argument can be laid bare .
His latest NZ Herald political column is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
The headline ‘ Government Abusing Lockdown Powers ’ begs the obvious question – why is the government doing this ?
Hooton ’ s answer is unequivocal .
But make no mistake ; the government has now crossed the line from using its lockdown powers to maintain public health to cynically promoting its electoral interests .
The keyword here is ‘ cynically ’ .
It rules out the possibility that non-cynical electoral interests might be in play , i.e.
, that the government is very interested in winning the election and that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ principles of public health .
The two options need not be mutually incompatible .
On this matter , we are entitled to ask : • None a ) Are the electoral interests of government cynically promoted , such that public duty , democratic responsibility and other governing ideals are never relevant ?
Or • None b ) Is cynicism only a shortcoming of If Hooton answers yes to a ) , then he needs to say so explicitly with arguments to support that position .
If the answer is yes to b ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be made .
If , from Hooton ’ s perspective , other governments also ‘ crossed the line ’ into cynical machinations for re-election , he needs to cite examples in order to properly evaluate the current New Zealand government ’ s motives .
Not doing so leaves him open to the charge of selective bias .
I will return to this point later .
Any democratically elected government with legal obligations confronts a logical paradox during a crisis .
It may be necessary to suspend democratic freedoms in order to defend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actions may undermine the rule of law as well as individual rights .
During World War II , for example , Japanese military expansion triggered a crisis of national security .
Prime Minister , Peter Fraser introduced compulsory conscription and strict censorship rules .
These draconian measures were justifiable because democratic freedoms and the rule of law were existentially threatened ( by fascism ) .
Of course , such a justification was not so applicable after the Japanese military threat receded .
Historians can legitimately criticise Fraser ’ s abuse of executive power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , draconian measures during a public health crisis also present a logical paradox .
An overwhelming spread of sickness and fatalities nationwide will damage the social cohesion necessary for a functioning political democracy .
Avoidance of this scenario requires at least some rules of law to be suspended .
Yet to do so might be deemed unlawful .
How , then , can draconian measures be justified on legal and constitutional grounds when the long-term health of democracy is the objective ?
The danger here for defenders of democracy is that suspension of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and normalised even after the crisis has passed .
At that point , public vigilance is imperative .
My point here is that Hooton attacks the government for abusing its powers without ever acknowledging the inescapable logical paradox of crisis governance .
The recent legal debates have indicated how the lawfulness or otherwise of executive action is not an easy matter to resolve .
This controversial matter must be considered in relation to one brute fact .
The Covid-19 public health crisis is still with us , and the government has to deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would ( paradoxically ) necessitate the re-enactment of ‘ Level 4 ’ powers to defend the legal basis of our democratic freedoms .
Now , allow me to identify what a real abuse of lockdown powers looks like .
Paul Krugman ’ s recent New York Times article ‘ The Other Pandemic : The One Infecting US Democracy ’ ( NZ Herald , 9 May 2020 ) details how Hungary ’ s Victor Oban has used the coronavirus crisis as an excuse to abandon constitutional conventions and rule by decree .
Krugman then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Republican appointees to the Supreme Court insisted on holding a state election during lockdown .
…the state ’ s shutdown had a more severe impact in Democratic-leaning urban areas , where a great majority of polling places were closed , than in rural or suburban areas .
So the state GOP was nakedly exploiting a pandemic to disenfranchise those likely to vote against it .
What we saw in Wisconsin , in short , was a state party doing whatever it takes to cling to power even if a majority wants it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the US Supreme Court backing its efforts .
Now this , in stark terms , is how a truly cynical promotion of electoral interests operates .
New Zealand ’ s Adern government is not beyond criticism against the criteria of democratic governance .
However , Hooton ’ s claim that the government has ‘ crossed the line ’ between crisis management and abuse of power for cynical re-election purposes is not supportable , logically or comparatively .
In short , this is not reasoned argument , but specious propaganda .

A good communicator and propagandist uses the pretence of reasoned argument to obscure their ulterior motives and manipulative persuasion techniques. A critic of propaganda shows how these techniques undermine the very principles of reason itself. The validity of any claim to ‘reasoned argument’ can be legitimately challenged, but only on the grounds of logic, evidence and/or verifiable scientific knowledge. Matthew Hooton is very skilled communicator and propagandist who sometimes over-reaches. When this happens, the absence of reasoned argument can be laid bare. His latest NZ Herald political column is a case in point (8 May 2020). The headline ‘Government Abusing Lockdown Powers’ begs the obvious question – why is the government doing this? Hooton’s answer is unequivocal.
But make no mistake; the government has now crossed the line from using its lockdown powers to maintain public health to cynically promoting its electoral interests.
The keyword here is ‘cynically’. It rules out the possibility that non-cynical electoral interests might be in play, i.e., that the government is very interested in winning the election and that the government is interested in defending the principles of public health. The two options need not be mutually incompatible. On this matter, we are entitled to ask:
a) Are the electoral interests of government always cynically promoted, such that public duty, democratic responsibility and other governing ideals are never relevant? Or b) Is cynicism only a shortcoming of this particular government?
If Hooton answers yes to a), then he needs to say so explicitly with arguments to support that position. If the answer is yes to b), then comparison with other governments needs to be made. If, from Hooton’s perspective, other governments also ‘crossed the line’ into cynical machinations for re-election, he needs to cite examples in order to properly evaluate the current New Zealand government’s motives. Not doing so leaves him open to the charge of selective bias. I will return to this point later.
Any democratically elected government with legal obligations confronts a logical paradox during a crisis. It may be necessary to suspend democratic freedoms in order to defend democracy. In this context, executive actions may undermine the rule of law as well as individual rights. During World War II, for example, Japanese military expansion triggered a crisis of national security. Prime Minister, Peter Fraser introduced compulsory conscription and strict censorship rules. These draconian measures were justifiable because democratic freedoms and the rule of law were existentially threatened (by fascism). Of course, such a justification was not so applicable after the Japanese military threat receded. Historians can legitimately criticise Fraser’s abuse of executive power beyond the security crisis period.
Similarly, draconian measures during a public health crisis also present a logical paradox. An overwhelming spread of sickness and fatalities nationwide will damage the social cohesion necessary for a functioning political democracy. Avoidance of this scenario requires at least some rules of law to be suspended. Yet to do so might be deemed unlawful. How, then, can draconian measures be justified on legal and constitutional grounds when the long-term health of democracy is the objective? The danger here for defenders of democracy is that suspension of legal and constitutional safeguards may become permanent and normalised even after the crisis has passed. At that point, public vigilance is imperative.
My point here is that Hooton attacks the government for abusing its powers without ever acknowledging the inescapable logical paradox of crisis governance. The recent legal debates have indicated how the lawfulness or otherwise of executive action is not an easy matter to resolve. This controversial matter must be considered in relation to one brute fact. The Covid-19 public health crisis is still with us, and the government has to deal with it. A resurgent second-wave outbreak would (paradoxically) necessitate the re-enactment of ‘Level 4’ powers to defend the legal basis of our democratic freedoms.
Now, allow me to identify what a real abuse of lockdown powers looks like. Paul Krugman’s recent New York Times article ‘The Other Pandemic: The One Infecting US Democracy’ (NZ Herald, 9 May 2020) details how Hungary’s Victor Oban has used the coronavirus crisis as an excuse to abandon constitutional conventions and rule by decree. Krugman then outlines how Republican legislators in Wisconsin backed by Republican appointees to the Supreme Court insisted on holding a state election during lockdown.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
…the state’s shutdown had a more severe impact in Democratic-leaning urban areas, where a great majority of polling places were closed, than in rural or suburban areas. So the state GOP was nakedly exploiting a pandemic to disenfranchise those likely to vote against it. What we saw in Wisconsin, in short, was a state party doing whatever it takes to cling to power even if a majority wants it out – and a partisan bloc on the US Supreme Court backing its efforts.
Now this, in stark terms, is how a truly cynical promotion of electoral interests operates. New Zealand’s Adern government is not beyond criticism against the criteria of democratic governance. However, Hooton’s claim that the government has ‘crossed the line’ between crisis management and abuse of power for cynical re-election purposes is not supportable, logically or comparatively. In short, this is not reasoned argument, but specious propaganda.


thedailyblog--2020-05-10--The two Jacinda’s and hoping for a radicalism befitting our age

When historic Covid-19 ‘ Level Four ’ containment measures were lifted in New Zealand and we entered Level Three with more freedom of movement , and takeaways – the apex of modern culture , there were queues for McDonalds , KFC and takeaway coffee .
A vegetarian friend of mine bought bacon .
I couldn ’ t wait to swim .
Our priorities were basic , somewhat inexplicable , and surprising parts of our identities were exposed .
Elsewhere Covid-19 exposed other identities – the conspiracy theorists and science deniers on the one hand , and the community builders , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ emergent food sharing networks and friendships as neighbourhoods became filled with people who usually just sleep in the area before leaving for another suburb for work , school and sports .
The home baking and gardening renaissance took us back generations .
Places in the South Island that had been heaving with visitors B.C -Before Coronavirus , such as Punakaiki and Tekapo , were as quiet as they were in the 1990s , before we sold New Zealand to the world .
Riding my bike in times of Coronavirus took me back to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same quiet country roads I pedaled as a kid .
Then , as now , what few drivers there , were fast and loose .
As we get closer to emerging from lockdown , people are getting restless .
My neighbours have been partying like it ’ s 1999 too .
In the day they build new vege beds , and by night they wash down the dust .
Come morning they collect all their empties and load them into their recycling bin , and it echoes down the valley like church bells @ @ @ @ @ @ @ noticing Sunday drivers escaping local confines and heading out here to the west – including the lip-sticked ladies who called to cows , as they toured along , leaving scented perfume in their wake .
Day by day , the sound of the State Highway a few k ’ s away , increases its hum .
Covid-19 has already given us a new life as usual .
Most obviously , our grocery shopping habits have already changed – though the first time I went to the supermarket since lockdown , last week , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ touched by what a simple act of solidarity it was , an unspoken commitment to public health , to stand in a queue to enter .
I work from home anyway .
My husband is out of work , but we know he ’ s not alone .
30,000 new people registered unemployed here in the last few weeks , though that ’ s dwarfed by the 20+million registered in the States since April – at 14.7 % , it ’ s the worst level since the Great Depression .
There are suggestions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worst drop in GDP since the 17th Century .
The life ’ s work for many people is in the balance as they wonder if their businesses will ever be viable again .
I wonder how shops with high rents will outlast lockdown .
Jobs held for years have been lost , with minimal or no redundancy .
Sometimes people have lost their jobs , and their accommodation .
Contracts have been cancelled , work hours reduced , plans aborted .
But while the sun still shines it feels like we got off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of good management and luck .
Our deaths from Covid-19 were less than the yearly flu .
But I also feel for those now overdue cancer treatments and surgeries , when DHBs say it may take a year to catch up .
That ’ s a year that some people don ’ t have .
The Covid-19 response is destroying the chance of life saving treatments – such as Keytruda for lung cancer patients which , in absence of the drug , is killing prematurely 30 patients a week .
The Counties-Manukau DHB @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Island tragedy , it has leaky and rotten buildings , where apparently effluent runs down the walls .
Other DHBs are so underfunded that new mums must use outside portable showers ; and cancer treatment is a postcode lottery .
Heather Simpson ’ s inquiry into the health and disability sector found that the structure and funding of our health system needs an overhaul .
But that overhaul has been put on hold because of Covid-19 .
Other important projects and plans have also been put on hold as the response to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be challenges aplenty as the Government seeks to ‘ respond , rebuild , and recover ’ .
It ’ s a big week ahead , as we hear whether we will go to Level Two – a bit less social isolation , a bit more ‘ business as usual ’ .
But a new world of social distancing .
And then later in the week , we head to the Budget .
There are indications that fast tracking ‘ shovel ready ’ infrastructure projects to stimulate the economy , will reduce some rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and speedy consenting processes through a reformed Resource Management Act .
New Zealand First are making it clear they want extractive regional economies to have a smoother ride and higher priority for investment – more mining in conservation stewardship areas to make up for the loss of tourism .
Tourism Minister and Deputy Prime Minister ( not that you ’ d know it ) , Kelvin Davis , seems dangerously out of touch when he ’ s reported of having the view that we didn ’ t have too many tourists before Covid-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a tourism concern .
Personally , I ’ m looking forward to revisiting the South Island and being welcomed , instead of being treated like I ’ m a resented source of income , unwelcome but necessary , with my tourism money and my freedom camping- a way of life for me and part of my identity as a New Zealander .
Now those communities want me back .
I ’ ll be glad to have space in my own country again .
Political progress usually occurs incrementally .
And in New Zealand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to today , we ’ ve been characterised by glacial incrementalism .
We ’ ve been too slow in undoing the changes of the 1980s and 1990s even when we wanted to , and ineffective at addressing the pathologies that resulted from deregulated neo-liberalism – growing homelessness , poverty , the wealth gap , suicide , high imprisonment rates and personal debt .
Until the market and labour intervention of Covid-19 , we ’ ve sat almost as far to the right of the political spectrum as ever here .
But periods of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for radical change .
These are times of – when usually stable , incremental policy and budget processes are instead characterised by dramatic change .
April 2019 seems a long time ago , when Leader of the House , Labour Minister Chris Hipkins argued for radical incrementalism – small steps , to a transformative goal .
The path the Labour Government has taken to deliver on its pre-election promises , has been winding , halting , and has in many ways , failed to deliver .
But it has also been interrupted by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has excelled .
As Barrister Cat McLennan wrote this week , it ’ s been ‘ a tale of two leaders ’ – ‘ Courageous Jacinda ’ , when catastrophe has allowed compassionate leadership and Jacinda has taken the country with her .
And ‘ Cautious Jacinda ’ , when it ’ s come to delivering on Labour ’ s initial policy promises and hopes and goals .
At this time of punctuated equilibrium with all eyes on the national ‘ rebuild ’ , and ‘ recovery ’ , the lockdown exit , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for substance as well as the stardust that is Jacinda ’ s mètier .
As well as accolades for our PM ’ s leadership on the spot , in the immediate aftermath to the Covid crisis , ( and her other achievements ) , dare we dream that Courageous Jacinda will make the radical , systematic reforms necessary to address modern capitalism ’ s structural faults , and will take the country with her – and be a model for the world ?
Too often Governments are cautious followers , not leaders of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ change happens at grass roots and gives the mandate for institutional change .
This week , and at the election in September , many of us will look to Jacinda for the radical leadership befitting of her popularity and of our times and age .
Because out here in the community , life has already changed , and we hope it will be never the same again .

When historic Covid-19 ‘Level Four’ containment measures were lifted in New Zealand and we entered Level Three with more freedom of movement, and takeaways – the apex of modern culture, there were queues for McDonalds, KFC and takeaway coffee. A vegetarian friend of mine bought bacon. I couldn’t wait to swim. Our priorities were basic, somewhat inexplicable, and surprising parts of our identities were exposed.
Elsewhere Covid-19 exposed other identities – the conspiracy theorists and science deniers on the one hand, and the community builders, the latent walkers and cyclists, the emergent food sharing networks and friendships as neighbourhoods became filled with people who usually just sleep in the area before leaving for another suburb for work, school and sports.
The home baking and gardening renaissance took us back generations. Places in the South Island that had been heaving with visitors B.C -Before Coronavirus, such as Punakaiki and Tekapo, were as quiet as they were in the 1990s, before we sold New Zealand to the world. Riding my bike in times of Coronavirus took me back to the 1990s too – these are the same quiet country roads I pedaled as a kid. Then, as now, what few drivers there, were fast and loose.
As we get closer to emerging from lockdown, people are getting restless. My neighbours have been partying like it’s 1999 too. In the day they build new vege beds, and by night they wash down the dust. Come morning they collect all their empties and load them into their recycling bin, and it echoes down the valley like church bells calling a reckoning. I’m noticing Sunday drivers escaping local confines and heading out here to the west – including the lip-sticked ladies who called to cows, as they toured along, leaving scented perfume in their wake. Day by day, the sound of the State Highway a few k’s away, increases its hum.
Covid-19 has already given us a new life as usual. Most obviously, our grocery shopping habits have already changed – though the first time I went to the supermarket since lockdown, last week, I was slightly disturbed, and slightly touched by what a simple act of solidarity it was, an unspoken commitment to public health, to stand in a queue to enter.
I work from home anyway. My husband is out of work, but we know he’s not alone. 30,000 new people registered unemployed here in the last few weeks, though that’s dwarfed by the 20+million registered in the States since April – at 14.7%, it’s the worst level since the Great Depression. There are suggestions that the United Kingdom will have its worst drop in GDP since the 17th Century.
The life’s work for many people is in the balance as they wonder if their businesses will ever be viable again. I wonder how shops with high rents will outlast lockdown. Jobs held for years have been lost, with minimal or no redundancy. Sometimes people have lost their jobs, and their accommodation. Contracts have been cancelled, work hours reduced, plans aborted. But while the sun still shines it feels like we got off lightly here, with the magic mixture of good management and luck. Our deaths from Covid-19 were less than the yearly flu. But I also feel for those now overdue cancer treatments and surgeries, when DHBs say it may take a year to catch up. That’s a year that some people don’t have. The Covid-19 response is destroying the chance of life saving treatments – such as Keytruda for lung cancer patients which, in absence of the drug, is killing prematurely 30 patients a week. The Counties-Manukau DHB already has a deficit from the Whakaari/White Island tragedy, it has leaky and rotten buildings, where apparently effluent runs down the walls. Other DHBs are so underfunded that new mums must use outside portable showers; and cancer treatment is a postcode lottery. Heather Simpson’s inquiry into the health and disability sector found that the structure and funding of our health system needs an overhaul. But that overhaul has been put on hold because of Covid-19. Other important projects and plans have also been put on hold as the response to the pandemic becomes all consuming.
There will be challenges aplenty as the Government seeks to ‘respond, rebuild, and recover’. It’s a big week ahead, as we hear whether we will go to Level Two – a bit less social isolation, a bit more ‘business as usual’. But a new world of social distancing. And then later in the week, we head to the Budget. There are indications that fast tracking ‘shovel ready’ infrastructure projects to stimulate the economy, will reduce some rights to public participation, with enabling legislation and speedy consenting processes through a reformed Resource Management Act. New Zealand First are making it clear they want extractive regional economies to have a smoother ride and higher priority for investment – more mining in conservation stewardship areas to make up for the loss of tourism. Tourism Minister and Deputy Labour Leader (not that you’d know it), Kelvin Davis, seems dangerously out of touch when he’s reported of having the view that we didn’t have too many tourists before Covid-19 and that climate change isn’t a tourism concern.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Personally, I’m looking forward to revisiting the South Island and being welcomed, instead of being treated like I’m a resented source of income, unwelcome but necessary, with my tourism money and my freedom camping- a way of life for me and part of my identity as a New Zealander. Now those communities want me back. I’ll be glad to have space in my own country again.
Political progress usually occurs incrementally. And in New Zealand, from the rule of Helen Clark to today, we’ve been characterised by glacial incrementalism. We’ve been too slow in undoing the changes of the 1980s and 1990s even when we wanted to, and ineffective at addressing the pathologies that resulted from deregulated neo-liberalism – growing homelessness, poverty, the wealth gap, suicide, high imprisonment rates and personal debt. Until the market and labour intervention of Covid-19, we’ve sat almost as far to the right of the political spectrum as ever here. But periods of stasis can be interrupted and provide opportunities for radical change. These are times of punctuated equilibrium – when usually stable, incremental policy and budget processes are instead characterised by dramatic change.
April 2019 seems a long time ago, when Leader of the House, Labour Minister Chris Hipkins argued for radical incrementalism – small steps, to a transformative goal. The path the Labour Government has taken to deliver on its pre-election promises, has been winding, halting, and has in many ways, failed to deliver. But it has also been interrupted by major crises in which the Prime Minister has excelled. As Barrister Cat McLennan wrote this week, it’s been ‘a tale of two leaders’– ‘Courageous Jacinda’, when catastrophe has allowed compassionate leadership and Jacinda has taken the country with her. And ‘Cautious Jacinda’, when it’s come to delivering on Labour’s initial policy promises and hopes and goals.
At this time of punctuated equilibrium with all eyes on the national ‘rebuild’, and ‘recovery’, the lockdown exit, and the Budget, offer a chance for substance as well as the stardust that is Jacinda’s mètier. As well as accolades for our PM’s leadership on the spot, in the immediate aftermath to the Covid crisis, (and her other achievements), dare we dream that Courageous Jacinda will make the radical, systematic reforms necessary to address modern capitalism’s structural faults, and will take the country with her – and be a model for the world?
Too often Governments are cautious followers, not leaders of the public mood, and organic societal change happens at grass roots and gives the mandate for institutional change. This week, and at the election in September, many of us will look to Jacinda for the radical leadership befitting of her popularity and of our times and age. Because out here in the community, life has already changed, and we hope it will be never the same again.


thedailyblog--2020-05-10--“We have put them on ice” – the climate crisis, child poverty, mental wellbeing & lifting Maori/Paci

“We have put them on ice” – the climate crisis, child poverty, mental wellbeing & lifting Maori/Pacific incomes

If the first casualty of war is truth , then the first policy casualty of an economic crisis is support for the most helplessly exposed of our citizens .
Last Thursday Minister of Finance Grant Robertson gave a speech to the Wellington Chamber of Commerce in which he said : Just as will have been the case for countless businesses , important work has had to be slowed or postponed , and resources have had to be reprioritised in light of the fight against COVID-19 .
The Budget is no exception .
The new spending packages planned on our five @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Policy Statement have been re-assessed .
Unless they are meeting a core cost pressure , we have put them on ice .
So what are the five priorities which are the first policy casualties of the economic crisis ?
The government ’ s budget policy statement for the 2020 budget lists them as : • Creating opportunities for productive businesses , regions , iwi and others to transition to a sustainable and low-emissions economy • Supporting a thriving nation in the digital age through innovation , social and economic opportunities • Supporting mental @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a special focus on under 24-year-olds .
The signs are dire for the large section of New Zealanders who want to see new priorities emerge in economic and social policy as we come out of the pandemic .
The irony in Robertson putting “ on ice ” what was to be the first well-being ” budget tells us all we need to know about the neo-liberal priorities of the coalition government .
Once again the most helplessly exposed of our citizens – those locked in generational deprivation in a land of plenty – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the queue .
“ We are a little people ” said the late New Zealand writer Dean Parker referring to New Zealanders supposed belief in giving everyone a fair go .
Perhaps in this context we should say “ we have little politicians ” .

If the first casualty of war is truth, then the first policy casualty of an economic crisis is support for the most helplessly exposed of our citizens.
Last Thursday Minister of Finance Grant Robertson gave a speech to the Wellington Chamber of Commerce in which he said:
Just as will have been the case for countless businesses, important work has had to be slowed or postponed, and resources have had to be reprioritised in light of the fight against COVID-19.
The Budget is no exception. The new spending packages planned on our five priorities that were announced in the Budget Policy Statement have been re-assessed. Unless they are meeting a core cost pressure, we have put them on ice.
So what are the five priorities which are the first policy casualties of the economic crisis?
The government’s budget policy statement for the 2020 budget lists them as:
Creating opportunities for productive businesses, regions, iwi and others to transition to a sustainable and low-emissions economy
Supporting a thriving nation in the digital age through innovation, social and economic opportunities
Lifting Māori and Pacific incomes, skills and opportunities
Reducing child poverty and improving child wellbeing, including addressing family violence
Supporting mental wellbeing for all New Zealanders, with a special focus on under 24-year-olds.
The signs are dire for the large section of New Zealanders who want to see new priorities emerge in economic and social policy as we come out of the pandemic.
The irony in Robertson putting “on ice” what was to be the first well-being” budget tells us all we need to know about the neo-liberal priorities of the coalition government.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Once again the most helplessly exposed of our citizens – those locked in generational deprivation in a land of plenty – have been sent to the back of the queue.
“We are a little people” said the late New Zealand writer Dean Parker referring to New Zealanders supposed belief in giving everyone a fair go.
Perhaps in this context we should say “we have little politicians”.


thedailyblog--2020-05-11--The Crowd That Booed

The Crowd That Booed

IT WAS THE LARGEST CROWD I had ever addressed – and it booed me .
In 1990 the Labour Government of Geoffrey Palmer ( look him up ! )
announced that university tuition fees would rise from $ 129.00 to $ 1,250.00 per year – an eye-wateringly 969 % increase !
Unsurprisingly , the news was not well-received by New Zealand ’ s 100,000 university students .
In Wellington , the then Education Minister , Phil Goff , was mobbed by hundreds of angry students from Victoria University who followed him all the way down The Terrace hurling abuse .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Otago turned out to protest Labour ’ s fee increase in unprecedented numbers .
I was one of a large number of people invited to address them .
Why ?
Because less than a year before the Labour Party had split .
Jim Anderton , followed by thousands of others , had abandoned the party of Rogernomics to form the NewLabour Party .
The students ’ association wanted to know NewLabour ’ s policy on user-pays education – and I – naïve fool that I was – told them .
It started @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told them that the NewLabour Party was committed to providing a free tertiary education to every young New Zealander who wanted one : that Goff ’ s hated $ 1,250.00 fee would be scrapped .
A more sensible aspiring politician would have stopped right there .
For better or for worse , however , I did not fall into that category .
Promising to abolish tuition fees was only part of the story , I told the assembled thousands .
In order to fund free tertiary education for all , New Zealand would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tax which the Fourth Labour Government had dismantled .
To make the first promise without making voters aware of the second would be dishonest .
Zero student fees could only be paid for by higher taxes .
That ’ s when the booing started .
I quit while I was behind – a sadder but a wiser man .
I was 34 years-old in 1990 – roughly fifteen years senior to the crowd in front of me .
People were just beginning to refer to these youngsters as “ Generation X ” – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s generation .
Many of these kids would fight the good fight against user-pays education with energy and dedication right through the 1990s .
Grant , himself , was elected President of the Otago University Students Association in 1993 and would go on to co-lead the national student organisation three years later .
That said , I couldn ’ t forget those Gen-Xers ’ cheers for free education , nor their boos for higher taxes .
Neither , it would appear , could Grant .
Few economists and even fewer political journalists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will feature a sharp rise in taxes .
Envisaged instead is a massive increase in Government borrowing .
Some younger commentators have worked out that the burden of repaying the enormous foreign debt this government is racking-up will be borne by them and their children – and they ’ re not happy about it .
There is talk about extracting at least some of the repayment from older New Zealanders .
After all , they argue , all of this uniting against Covid-19 has been for their benefit .
The least they can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ generations who will bear the brunt of the economic crisis which combatting the virus has precipitated .
One of the Aussie bank economists has even , in the finest Shock Doctrine style , called for drastic action on superannuation , the retirement age , and untaxed capital gains .
Not wanting to provoke the election-compromising boos that such measures would elicit – not least from New Zealand ’ s most assiduous voters , the Over-60s – Grant is most unlikely to do any of those things .
He , at least , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the election-victory-enhancing cheers which his Thursday promises to spend whatever it takes to get New Zealand out of trouble are certain to produce , by idiotically going on to explain how he intends to pay for them !
Instead , he will reassure us of just how much scope for borrowing his prudent fiscal management of the New Zealand economy has provided .
And there ’ s plenty of money on offer !
In the immortal words of John Clarke ( aka Fred Dagg ) “ If we stand in the queue with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a few billion more.
” Verily , we don ’ t know how lucky we are to have such a government .
Few New Zealanders see as clearly as John Minto what will be sacrificed to pay the vastly expanded mortgage that Grant is negotiating with overseas lenders .
All the fine ideas about overcoming child poverty , humanising the welfare system , building state houses , tackling mental illness and doing something real about global warming will , to use Grant ’ s own words : “ be put on ice ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ priorities , then almost without exception it speaks with a middle-class accent .
Because , in the subsequent hours and days – and years – in which I relived the humiliation of that booing crowd , I was finally blessed with the consoling insight that , big as it was , it represented only a very narrow slice of the New Zealand population .
Moreover , it was not a slice that was ever going to welcome the news that its parents and , eventually , itself , would be called upon to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the maintenance of the sort of society that offered all its young people a free tertiary education .
That consolation came when I remembered that I was not the only speaker to be booed that day .
The young Maori woman who spoke of the needs of her people , and of their just historical claims upon the resources of the Pakeha nation – they booed her , too .
The bourgeoisie , you see , has always been extremely keen on getting into heaven ; but it ’ s damned if it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get there .
Always , that ’ s been somebody else ’ s job – somebody poor .

IT WAS THE LARGEST CROWD I had ever addressed – and it booed me. In 1990 the Labour Government of Geoffrey Palmer (look him up!) announced that university tuition fees would rise from $129.00 to $1,250.00 per year – an eye-wateringly 969% increase! Unsurprisingly, the news was not well-received by New Zealand’s 100,000 university students. In Wellington, the then Education Minister, Phil Goff, was mobbed by hundreds of angry students from Victoria University who followed him all the way down The Terrace hurling abuse. In Dunedin, students from the University of Otago turned out to protest Labour’s fee increase in unprecedented numbers. I was one of a large number of people invited to address them.
Why? Because less than a year before the Labour Party had split. Jim Anderton, followed by thousands of others, had abandoned the party of Rogernomics to form the NewLabour Party. The students’ association wanted to know NewLabour’s policy on user-pays education – and I – naïve fool that I was – told them.
It started well. There were cheers when I told them that the NewLabour Party was committed to providing a free tertiary education to every young New Zealander who wanted one: that Goff’s hated $1,250.00 fee would be scrapped. A more sensible aspiring politician would have stopped right there. For better or for worse, however, I did not fall into that category. Promising to abolish tuition fees was only part of the story, I told the assembled thousands. In order to fund free tertiary education for all, New Zealand would have to re-introduce the sharply progressive income tax which the Fourth Labour Government had dismantled. To make the first promise without making voters aware of the second would be dishonest. Zero student fees could only be paid for by higher taxes.
That’s when the booing started. I quit while I was behind – a sadder but a wiser man.
I was 34 years-old in 1990 – roughly fifteen years senior to the crowd in front of me. People were just beginning to refer to these youngsters as “Generation X” – Jacinda Ardern’s and Grant Robertson’s generation. Many of these kids would fight the good fight against user-pays education with energy and dedication right through the 1990s. Grant, himself, was elected President of the Otago University Students Association in 1993 and would go on to co-lead the national student organisation three years later. That said, I couldn’t forget those Gen-Xers’ cheers for free education, nor their boos for higher taxes. Neither, it would appear, could Grant.
Few economists and even fewer political journalists are predicting that Thursday’s Budget will feature a sharp rise in taxes. Envisaged instead is a massive increase in Government borrowing. Some younger commentators have worked out that the burden of repaying the enormous foreign debt this government is racking-up will be borne by them and their children – and they’re not happy about it. There is talk about extracting at least some of the repayment from older New Zealanders. After all, they argue, all of this uniting against Covid-19 has been for their benefit. The least they can do is give something up for the generations who will bear the brunt of the economic crisis which combatting the virus has precipitated. One of the Aussie bank economists has even, in the finest Shock Doctrine style, called for drastic action on superannuation, the retirement age, and untaxed capital gains.
Not wanting to provoke the election-compromising boos that such measures would elicit – not least from New Zealand’s most assiduous voters, the Over-60s – Grant is most unlikely to do any of those things. He, at least, is not so naïve as to waste all the election-victory-enhancing cheers which his Thursday promises to spend whatever it takes to get New Zealand out of trouble are certain to produce, by idiotically going on to explain how he intends to pay for them! Instead, he will reassure us of just how much scope for borrowing his prudent fiscal management of the New Zealand economy has provided. And there’s plenty of money on offer! In the immortal words of John Clarke (aka Fred Dagg) “If we stand in the queue with our hats off, we can borrow a few billion more.” Verily, we don’t know how lucky we are to have such a government.
Few New Zealanders see as clearly as John Minto what will be sacrificed to pay the vastly expanded mortgage that Grant is negotiating with overseas lenders. All the fine ideas about overcoming child poverty, humanising the welfare system, building state houses, tackling mental illness and doing something real about global warming will, to use Grant’s own words: “be put on ice”. If politics is the language of priorities, then almost without exception it speaks with a middle-class accent.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Because, in the subsequent hours and days – and years – in which I relived the humiliation of that booing crowd, I was finally blessed with the consoling insight that, big as it was, it represented only a very narrow slice of the New Zealand population. Moreover, it was not a slice that was ever going to welcome the news that its parents and, eventually, itself, would be called upon to pay, and pay handsomely, for the maintenance of the sort of society that offered all its young people a free tertiary education. That consolation came when I remembered that I was not the only speaker to be booed that day. The young Maori woman who spoke of the needs of her people, and of their just historical claims upon the resources of the Pakeha nation – they booed her, too.
The bourgeoisie, you see, has always been extremely keen on getting into heaven; but it’s damned if it’s ever been willing to die to get there. Always, that’s been somebody else’s job – somebody poor.


thedailyblog--2020-05-11--Unite still enforcing workers rights in fast food industry

McDonald ’ s in New Zealand has signed a new three-year collective agreement with Unite Union after union members voted 97 % in favour .
The agreement was concluded after the Covid-19 crisis had started enveloping the world and the Unite Union bargaining team decided to focus bargaining around getting as strong a guaranteed hours clause as possible .
The new agreement provides for guaranteed hours for all staff but even more importantly it has an enforceable mechanism to improve hours over time if a worker wants that to happen .
In the new agreement , every time a worker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be offered to existing staff to take up and be added to their guaranteed hours ’ number if they want .
Since the end of zero-hour contracts in New Zealand in 2015 , many managers and franchisees employed new staff on very low minimum hours as a way to circumvent the new law .
While a court case confirmed that a worker could turn down any hours rostered above the minimum , the company relied on the fact that few workers would be able to do that out of fear or need .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ collective agreement to improve minimum entitlements were difficult to enforce .
We needed to make the process as transparent as possible .
The new agreement comes into effect as a new app is being used throughout the company for communications , rosters , and wage information .
This app will be used to offer the new shifts to all staff whenever someone leaves and workers can simply click to accept .
If more than one wants the extra work then it is allocated according to length of service in the first instance .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ noticeboards each week .
This was asked for to allow workers themselves to see what hours were being freed up when people leave so they had tools to enforce their own rights .
The union can also request reports on how the hours of those leaving are being allocated .
The app will also allow workers to simply click “ yes ” to join the union after an agreed notice is sent to them after 30-days of employment .
Unite has been fighting for something like this at McDonald ’ s for many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we have achieved it for the whole company .
One disappointment in this year ’ s agreement was that the margin above the minimum wage for the start rate was trimmed from 30 cents an hour to 10 cents an hour .
But this has to be seen in the context of a significant increase in the minimum wage having been achieved over the last few years .
In the early 2000s , the legal minimum wage was much less for young people up to 20 years of age .
The adult minimum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ average wage and the youth minimum only 26 % of the average .
Unite has campaigned for improvements in the minimum wage since that time and it has increased from $ 9 an hour for an adult and 7.20 an hour for younger workers to $ 18.90 an hour for everyone this year .
In the new agreement , it is $ 19.00 an hour for McDonald ’ s workers .
Today the start rate in the industry is equal to 58 % of the average wage and applies to everyone from 16 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have promised another increase to $ 20 an hour next April 1 but there is pressure in the crisis conditions to not deliver on that .
An election is scheduled for September and the opposition National Party has indicated it may not proceed with that scheduled rise .
Unite Union currently has about 7000 members and the majority are fast-food workers .
We have union collective agreements at all the major fast food chains including McDonald ’ s , Burger King , Restaurant Brands ( covering KFC , Pizza Hut and Carl ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We remain committed to building our union and improving conditions for all workers in the industry .
We hope to extend our coverage to other brands and build our density within the existing brands .
We have been fighting to make sure fast food workers were protected as the industry was allowed to reopen drive-throughs from April 28 , after a 4-week lock-down under what was labeled “ level 4 ” due to the coronavirus epidemic .
Restaurants could operate at Level 3 with drive-thrus permitted at fast food companies but with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ away .
Re-opening restaurants saw huge queues and most companies were reckless in operating safe social distancing inside and outside the stores .
Unite went on campaign mode to expose wrongdoing and improve conduct .
We were successful in attracting significant media attention and this has helped in forcing companies to introduce changes , which will lead to true “ contactless ” service , with effective barriers in place where 2-metre distancing is not possible .
But there is still much more to be done , especially around distancing inside busy stores where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Moving to Level 2 from this Thursday will allow some seated service and take away counters used .
Social distancing and hygiene will remain critical .
One advantage now is that the workers will no longer be behind closed doors and the union and the public can help workers maintain safe practices .
It has been proven and accepted around the world that one of the most effective ways to create , implement and enforce effective workplace health and safety is by involving employees from the very start .
This has been an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ food industry .
But Unite will be seeking changes in law to ensure workers , delegates , health and safety reps and unions be empowered in new health and safety laws to require safe practice forever , not just during a crisis .

McDonald’s in New Zealand has signed a new three-year collective agreement with Unite Union after union members voted 97% in favour.
The agreement was concluded after the Covid-19 crisis had started enveloping the world and the Unite Union bargaining team decided to focus bargaining around getting as strong a guaranteed hours clause as possible.
The new agreement provides for guaranteed hours for all staff but even more importantly it has an enforceable mechanism to improve hours over time if a worker wants that to happen.
In the new agreement, every time a worker quits their job then their guaranteed hours number must be offered to existing staff to take up and be added to their guaranteed hours’ number if they want. In the past, new staff would simply be hired to replace staff quitting without existing staff being given the chance to increase their minimum guaranteed hours first. This will allow workers to increase their guaranteed minimum hours number over time to reflect what they actually want.
Since the end of zero-hour contracts in New Zealand in 2015, many managers and franchisees employed new staff on very low minimum hours as a way to circumvent the new law. While a court case confirmed that a worker could turn down any hours rostered above the minimum, the company relied on the fact that few workers would be able to do that out of fear or need.
The mechanism’s in the previous collective agreement to improve minimum entitlements were difficult to enforce. We needed to make the process as transparent as possible. The new agreement comes into effect as a new app is being used throughout the company for communications, rosters, and wage information. This app will be used to offer the new shifts to all staff whenever someone leaves and workers can simply click to accept. If more than one wants the extra work then it is allocated according to length of service in the first instance.
Rosters must also be placed on crew noticeboards each week. This was asked for to allow workers themselves to see what hours were being freed up when people leave so they had tools to enforce their own rights. The union can also request reports on how the hours of those leaving are being allocated.
The app will also allow workers to simply click “yes” to join the union after an agreed notice is sent to them after 30-days of employment. Unite has been fighting for something like this at McDonald’s for many years and this is the first time we have achieved it for the whole company.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
One disappointment in this year’s agreement was that the margin above the minimum wage for the start rate was trimmed from 30 cents an hour to 10 cents an hour. But this has to be seen in the context of a significant increase in the minimum wage having been achieved over the last few years.
In the early 2000s, the legal minimum wage was much less for young people up to 20 years of age. The adult minimum was worth around 40% of the average wage and the youth minimum only 26% of the average.
Unite has campaigned for improvements in the minimum wage since that time and it has increased from $9 an hour for an adult and 7.20 an hour for younger workers to $18.90 an hour for everyone this year. In the new agreement, it is $19.00 an hour for McDonald’s workers.
Today the start rate in the industry is equal to 58% of the average wage and applies to everyone from 16 years of age.
The government parties have promised another increase to $20 an hour next April 1 but there is pressure in the crisis conditions to not deliver on that. An election is scheduled for September and the opposition National Party has indicated it may not proceed with that scheduled rise.
Unite Union currently has about 7000 members and the majority are fast-food workers. We have union collective agreements at all the major fast food chains including McDonald’s, Burger King, Restaurant Brands (covering KFC, Pizza Hut and Carl’s Jr) and Wendy’s.
We remain committed to building our union and improving conditions for all workers in the industry. We hope to extend our coverage to other brands and build our density within the existing brands.
We have been fighting to make sure fast food workers were protected as the industry was allowed to reopen drive-throughs from April 28, after a 4-week lock-down under what was labeled “level 4” due to the coronavirus epidemic. Restaurants could operate at Level 3 with drive-thrus permitted at fast food companies but with service “contactless” and customers two-meters away. Re-opening restaurants saw huge queues and most companies were reckless in operating safe social distancing inside and outside the stores.
Unite went on campaign mode to expose wrongdoing and improve conduct. We were successful in attracting significant media attention and this has helped in forcing companies to introduce changes, which will lead to true “contactless” service, with effective barriers in place where 2-metre distancing is not possible.
But there is still much more to be done, especially around distancing inside busy stores where a one metre distancing is required.
Moving to Level 2 from this Thursday will allow some seated service and take away counters used.
Social distancing and hygiene will remain critical. One advantage now is that the workers will no longer be behind closed doors and the union and the public can help workers maintain safe practices.
It has been proven and accepted around the world that one of the most effective ways to create, implement and enforce effective workplace health and safety is by involving employees from the very start.
This has been an “overlooked” priority in the fast food industry. But Unite will be seeking changes in law to ensure workers, delegates, health and safety reps and unions be empowered in new health and safety laws to require safe practice forever, not just during a crisis.