thedailyblog--2020-06-25--MUST READ: Election Campaign Looms: Is It Time For Labour To Abandon NZF?

With the New Zealand General Election campaign looming , parties in the Labour-led coalition government are openly parading their differences ( rather than common-ground ) before the voting public .
It ’ s a situation that can be interpreted as being typical of MMP politics .
But it also causes voters to rethink its record-level support for its most favoured party Labour , and , Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern .
This week ’ s June 25 Colmar Brunton poll reveals what we suspected : New Zealand First has collapsed , down a further 1.1 % to 1.8 % , while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
National has rebounded from a bruising 29 % in the May Colmar Brunton to 38 % support .
The Green Party is up 1.3 % to 6 % .
ACT is up 0.9 to 3.1 % , and , of the parties outside of Parliament , the Maori Party is on 0.9 % .
It is clear , that battle for the political centre-ground shows New Zealand First has been squeezed out by National – this under the new leadership of social-conservative and traditional stakeholders ’ choice , Todd Muller .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Winston Peters this week began tactically to signal that his political mongrel is back .
Peters ’ has unleashed a determination to create distance between his party and those of his coalition partners Labour and the Greens .
Peters exits the week openly antagonistic toward articles of the coalition Government ’ s legislative agenda – a move that ’ s caused Labour to file plans for its 2017 election promise ( to build light rail in Auckland ) and to further negotiate with New Zealand First points of its ‘ fair commercial rent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The latter is an important cog in the Government ’ s post-Covid stability plan .
The former is simply a kick in the guts from New Zealand First – a party that Labour has often resisted irritating through this three year term .
But considering Muller ’ s and National ’ s rising fortunes ( and it must be said , the collapse of New Zealand First ) is it time for Labour to abandon Peters to the proverbial wolves ?
Is there political currency in calling a spade a spade – to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is destabilising the coalition Government and that disloyalty must be dealt with before a largely supportive public gets fed up and votes accordingly on Polling Day ?
IT ’ S ALL ABOUT THE STRATEGY Normally , early in an election year , we would expect smaller parties in the Labour-Greens-New Zealand First coalition to begin speaking loudly to their base .
But the Covid-19 lockdown poured water over that .
Now there ’ s desperation among the Greens and New Zealand First MPs .
They will be well aware that political history involving @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lose their political voice and , on election day , are bypassed by the voting public .
New Zealand First , in particular , is demanding to be heard .
I spoke about this on Radio New Zealand today .
When you stand back and observe the coalition , its dynamic , its purpose , its stability ( up until now… ) it is clear , Peters ’ actions are strategic while destabilising .
Winston Peters insists his party is principled with commonsense as the central premise .
But the reality is , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( and conservatives who believe Labour is going to win the 2020 General Election ) that he and New Zealand First will be their insurance policy .
That he , post-election , will stop any non-centrist/conservative policies from getting off the ground .
His tactics soak up attention-time when explaining his party ’ s behaviour .
His stance demands to be heard , to be relevant through the election campaign – despite the 2 % poll showing .
The goal is for Peters to re-emerge this September as a King or Queen maker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ juncture , should Labour tolerate this destabilisation ?
Should it permit Peters to play his strategy out ?
Or , should Labour create outcasts of Peters and his MPs ?
That strategy , as does Peters ’ , comes with risk .
Labour could be seen to fail its post-Covid recovery plan and elongate the insecurities that election campaigns create .
New Zealand First risks being regarded as a destructive element in an otherwise popular Government – where some see Labour as having been kept back by New Zealand First and desiring of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be a true natural-born leader without being shackled by coalition sensitivities .
The Greens , if they play their hand well , may counter New Zealand First by demonstrating its loyalty to Ardern ’ s style of leadership and campaign as a necessary and true friend of Labour ’ s .
When the cards fall , New Zealand First risks standing alone as a political irrelevance – but it ’ s a risk that Peters is prepared to take .
Some will say , at 1.8 % he has nothing to lose .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and New Zealand First came out of lockdown to realise Labour had become a political juggernaut .
Their respective voices were drowned out by the Labour machine .
As we emerged from Alert Level 4 : • • Labour , was well on the way toward eliminating Covid-19 from our communities • Labour had delivered HUGE financial support to people and business • Labour had initiated fiscal stimulus programmes ( many favourable to NZF ) • Jacinda Ardern became the most popular Prime Minister in a generation .
BUT… as National slowly got @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of well-documented stumbles , National ’ s new leadership team put its running shoes on and , suddenly , competition for New Zealand ’ s centre-votes intensified .
From June 17 , National created in some measure the perfect storm ( please see last week ’ s EveningReport editorial : Snakes and Mirrors which lays bare how National placed politics ahead of the public ’ s health ) .
Since then , it has continued to create a sense of chaos , insisting its old foe , the Labour-led Government had bungled its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ isolation and quarantine facilities .
In effect , National successfully politicised the handling of the pandemic – a certain danger that overseas experience shows is at odds with the public interest when fighting against Covid-19 .
But among the political noise , National did expose a relaxed culture among those officials , the gatekeepers , charged with ensuring our Covid-19 testing regime was robust .
Politics aside , it was clear , the country and the Government had been let down .
But National was able to juxtaposition Labour as the cause of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jacinda Ardern immediately transferring management of isolation and quarantine facilities to the military – a move that was swift , decisive , and characteristically Ardern – the perfect political storm created uncertainty and fear among the population .
Remember , politics is a commodity and day after day for over a week , the public has heard calls from National that the Minister of Health David Clark should resign .
Many media , scenting controversy and political blood , polished up their competitive-bias to seize the moment too .
After all , political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in town .
That is the backdrop to New Zealand First ’ s advance .
HAS LABOUR HAD ENOUGH ?
Labour , for its part , has decided enough ’ s enough .
This week , Labour revealed New Zealand First was opposing legislation destined to advance before The Parliament AFTER it had supported it through Cabinet .
With New Zealand First acting contrary to its interests , Labour ’ s leadership has decided a passive-aggressive bare knuckle fight is necessary .
As the party with its political hand firmly on the Government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ openly identifying legislation that can be filed until after the election while pushing legislation that SHOULD be addressed with urgency .
If Labour does believe New Zealand First has gone beyond the Rubicon , and it appears it is moving toward that position , then it will be in Labour ’ s and the nation ’ s interests to paint Winston Peters and his party as disruptive and disloyal to a handshake made in good faith .
If it does , it will likely be New Zealand First , not Labour , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And frankly , in the public ’ s interest , the General Election can ’ t come soon enough .
Selwyn Manning is the editor of Evening Report .

With the New Zealand General Election campaign looming, parties in the Labour-led coalition government are openly parading their differences (rather than common-ground) before the voting public.
It’s a situation that can be interpreted as being typical of MMP politics. But it also causes voters to rethink its record-level support for its most favoured party Labour, and, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.
This week’s June 25 Colmar Brunton poll reveals what we suspected: New Zealand First has collapsed, down a further 1.1% to 1.8%, while Labour holds impressively above 50% support. National has rebounded from a bruising 29% in the May Colmar Brunton to 38% support. The Green Party is up 1.3% to 6%. ACT is up 0.9 to 3.1%, and, of the parties outside of Parliament, the Maori Party is on 0.9%.
It is clear, that battle for the political centre-ground shows New Zealand First has been squeezed out by National – this under the new leadership of social-conservative and traditional stakeholders’ choice, Todd Muller.
It also explains why New Zealand First leader Winston Peters this week began tactically to signal that his political mongrel is back. Peters’ has unleashed a determination to create distance between his party and those of his coalition partners Labour and the Greens.
Peters exits the week openly antagonistic toward articles of the coalition Government’s legislative agenda – a move that’s caused Labour to file plans for its 2017 election promise (to build light rail in Auckland) and to further negotiate with New Zealand First points of its ‘fair commercial rent reductions and compulsory arbitration plan’. The latter is an important cog in the Government’s post-Covid stability plan. The former is simply a kick in the guts from New Zealand First – a party that Labour has often resisted irritating through this three year term.
But considering Muller’s and National’s rising fortunes (and it must be said, the collapse of New Zealand First) is it time for Labour to abandon Peters to the proverbial wolves? Is there political currency in calling a spade a spade – to admit to voters that New Zealand First is destabilising the coalition Government and that disloyalty must be dealt with before a largely supportive public gets fed up and votes accordingly on Polling Day?
IT’S ALL ABOUT THE STRATEGY
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Normally, early in an election year, we would expect smaller parties in the Labour-Greens-New Zealand First coalition to begin speaking loudly to their base. But the Covid-19 lockdown poured water over that.
Now there’s desperation among the Greens and New Zealand First MPs. They will be well aware that political history involving MMP shows small parties in government often lose their political voice and, on election day, are bypassed by the voting public.
New Zealand First, in particular, is demanding to be heard. I spoke about this on Radio New Zealand today.
When you stand back and observe the coalition, its dynamic, its purpose, its stability (up until now…) it is clear, Peters’ actions are strategic while destabilising.
Winston Peters insists his party is principled with commonsense as the central premise. But the reality is, Peters is sending a signal to centre-voters (and conservatives who believe Labour is going to win the 2020 General Election) that he and New Zealand First will be their insurance policy. That he, post-election, will stop any non-centrist/conservative policies from getting off the ground.
His tactics soak up attention-time when explaining his party’s behaviour. His stance demands to be heard, to be relevant through the election campaign – despite the 2% poll showing. The goal is for Peters to re-emerge this September as a King or Queen maker in post-election negotiations.
But at this juncture, should Labour tolerate this destabilisation? Should it permit Peters to play his strategy out? Or, should Labour create outcasts of Peters and his MPs?
That strategy, as does Peters’, comes with risk. Labour could be seen to fail its post-Covid recovery plan and elongate the insecurities that election campaigns create.
New Zealand First risks being regarded as a destructive element in an otherwise popular Government – where some see Labour as having been kept back by New Zealand First and desiring of a government post-election where Jacinda Ardern can be a true natural-born leader without being shackled by coalition sensitivities.
The Greens, if they play their hand well, may counter New Zealand First by demonstrating its loyalty to Ardern’s style of leadership and campaign as a necessary and true friend of Labour’s.
When the cards fall, New Zealand First risks standing alone as a political irrelevance – but it’s a risk that Peters is prepared to take. Some will say, at 1.8% he has nothing to lose.
THE CAUSE AND EFFECT
The Green Party and New Zealand First came out of lockdown to realise Labour had become a political juggernaut.
Their respective voices were drowned out by the Labour machine. As we emerged from Alert Level 4:
Labour, was well on the way toward eliminating Covid-19 from our communities Labour had delivered HUGE financial support to people and business Labour had initiated fiscal stimulus programmes (many favourable to NZF) Jacinda Ardern became the most popular Prime Minister in a generation.
BUT… as National slowly got its act together, after a series of well-documented stumbles, National’s new leadership team put its running shoes on and, suddenly, competition for New Zealand’s centre-votes intensified.
From June 17, National created in some measure the perfect storm (please see last week’s EveningReport editorial: Snakes and Mirrors which lays bare how National placed politics ahead of the public’s health).
Since then, it has continued to create a sense of chaos, insisting its old foe, the Labour-led Government had bungled its Covid-19 controls at the border and at isolation and quarantine facilities. In effect, National successfully politicised the handling of the pandemic – a certain danger that overseas experience shows is at odds with the public interest when fighting against Covid-19.
But among the political noise, National did expose a relaxed culture among those officials, the gatekeepers, charged with ensuring our Covid-19 testing regime was robust. Politics aside, it was clear, the country and the Government had been let down. But National was able to juxtaposition Labour as the cause of the fiasco.
Despite the Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern immediately transferring management of isolation and quarantine facilities to the military – a move that was swift, decisive, and characteristically Ardern – the perfect political storm created uncertainty and fear among the population.
Remember, politics is a commodity and day after day for over a week, the public has heard calls from National that the Minister of Health David Clark should resign. Many media, scenting controversy and political blood, polished up their competitive-bias to seize the moment too. After all, political relevancy isn’t the only show in town.
That is the backdrop to New Zealand First’s advance.
HAS LABOUR HAD ENOUGH?
Labour, for its part, has decided enough’s enough.
This week, Labour revealed New Zealand First was opposing legislation destined to advance before The Parliament AFTER it had supported it through Cabinet. With New Zealand First acting contrary to its interests, Labour’s leadership has decided a passive-aggressive bare knuckle fight is necessary.
As the party with its political hand firmly on the Government’s tiller, Labour is now openly identifying legislation that can be filed until after the election while pushing legislation that SHOULD be addressed with urgency.
If Labour does believe New Zealand First has gone beyond the Rubicon, and it appears it is moving toward that position, then it will be in Labour’s and the nation’s interests to paint Winston Peters and his party as disruptive and disloyal to a handshake made in good faith.
If it does, it will likely be New Zealand First, not Labour, that will be further punished at the polls. And frankly, in the public’s interest, the General Election can’t come soon enough.
Selwyn Manning is the editor of Evening Report.


thedailyblog--2020-06-25--Sack Him, Jacinda. Sack Him Now!

Sack Him, Jacinda. Sack Him Now!

IF DAVID CLARK hasn ’ t been sacked by the time you read this , then Jacinda isn ’ t doing her job .
His point-blank refusal to accept responsibility for the multiple institutional failures of his Health portfolio more than justifies Clark ’ s dismissal .
Ministers of the Crown only have one job : to be responsible .
As members of both the legislature and the executive they are a living bridge between citizen and state .
A ministerial refusal to accept responsibility for failures occurring on his watch is also a refusal to uphold the essence of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doesn ’ t get this , then she should be given a swift tutorial by someone who does .
Jacinda needs to get rid of Clark for another , much less high-falutin – but no less politically compelling – reason .
He was unforgivably disrespectful of Ashley Bloomfield – and Newshub ’ s cameraman , Billy Paine , captured Bloomfield ’ s reaction for the whole world to see .
That should not be a survivable offence .
Week-in , week-out , like Jacinda herself , Ashley has stood behind a lectern in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ only informed , but also calm .
Has he let the ball fall through his hands of late ?
Yes , he has .
But , for Christ ’ s sake , the guy has been carrying half New Zealand on his shoulders ( with Jacinda carrying the other half ) for months .
That he hasn ’ t been able to catch every single operational curve-ball , thrown at him by every delinquent player in the New Zealand health system , is forgivable – isn ’ t it ?
If anything is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it must surely be the callous treatment meted out to him by the guy who thought the Level 4 rules were only there for the “ Team of Five Million ” to follow .
The guy who went mountain-biking during Lockdown .
The guy who took himself off to Dunedin instead of insisting that – as the responsible minister – he be allowed to stand at his boss ’ s side for the duration of the Covid-19 emergency .
The guy who owned-up on nationwide television to being “ a bit of an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t get to be mean to Ashley Bloomfield – and survive .
Surely , Jacinda , you see that ?
Surely you ’ re not guilty ( as one outspoken right-wing gentleman suggested to me this morning ) of having questioned , in the finest Machiavellian style , whether it might not be advisable , during the heroic phase of the Covid-19 war , to have Clark sequestered in Dunedin ; bringing him back to Wellington only when all the inevitable blunders , committed by the exhausted employees of our understaffed and under-resourced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
I told him firmly that you weren ’ t that sort of politician .
Don ’ t you dare prove me wrong !
New Zealanders need to be shown , Jacinda , that you genuinely understand how pissed-off they are .
It ’ s not just the sheer , mind-numbing dumbness of the mistakes that the people supposedly in charge have been making that ’ s got us yelling at the television .
Underneath it all there ’ s the sneaking suspicion that , once again , we ’ ve been played @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; washing our hands ; socially distancing ; coughing into our elbows : doing all the things we were told to do ; while the people in charge , the people paid more than the prime minister , were fucking everything up .
If you want to remain prime minister , Jacinda , you have to give us some sign that you get all this .
Because if you don ’ t , then we , the voters , might start joining a few dots .
You know what I ’ m talking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ young woman who stood in front of us and asked us to join her in transforming New Zealand through the “ politics of kindness ” .
The young woman of “ relentless positivity ” and “ practical idealism ” , who said : “ Let ’ s do this !
” – and , God help us , persuaded Winston Peters to give her the chance .
But then what happened , Jacinda ?
After we had given you our votes , what happened next ?
Were the promises of transformation fulfilled ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the changes give us anything that looked even remotely like genuine reform ?
Or , were the voters forced to endure one disappointment after another ?
Were the only tangible results produced by the general incompetence of your ministers the derisory snorts and disillusioned sighs from the electors they had let down ?
Your government ’ s consistent failure to deliver might have been forgiven if it had led to a radical shake-up of the entire coalition .
If you had gotten tough with Winston and his NZ First colleagues : warning them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who voted for the governing parties were not met , then you would simply jump in a government car and make the short trip from the Beehive to Government House .
If the numbers aren ’ t there for real change , Jacinda , then the only right move is to go out and win yourself some new numbers !
Sadly , Jacinda , you haven ’ t followed that course .
Instead , and exactly as happened in relation to the failure of our health services to deliver secure defences against the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and arrogance have gone unpunished .
Just like his colleague , Phil Twyford – of KiwiBuild fame – David Clark juts out his chin and shamelessly apportions blame to everybody but himself .
Even worse , he has turned viciously on Ashley Bloomfield , the nearest approximation to a competent , decent , humble and accountable public servant that this country possesses .
And still , Jacinda , you do nothing .
New Zealand ’ s self-confessed “ idiot ” of a Health Minister is still in possession of his warrant .
Why @ @ @ @ @ @ @

IF DAVID CLARK hasn’t been sacked by the time you read this, then Jacinda isn’t doing her job. His point-blank refusal to accept responsibility for the multiple institutional failures of his Health portfolio more than justifies Clark’s dismissal.
Ministers of the Crown only have one job: to be responsible. As members of both the legislature and the executive they are a living bridge between citizen and state. A ministerial refusal to accept responsibility for failures occurring on his watch is also a refusal to uphold the essence of our Westminster-style representative democracy. If Jacinda doesn’t get this, then she should be given a swift tutorial by someone who does.
Jacinda needs to get rid of Clark for another, much less high-falutin – but no less politically compelling – reason. He was unforgivably disrespectful of Ashley Bloomfield – and Newshub’s cameraman, Billy Paine, captured Bloomfield’s reaction for the whole world to see.
That should not be a survivable offence.
Week-in, week-out, like Jacinda herself, Ashley has stood behind a lectern in the Beehive Theatrette and kept us not only informed, but also calm. Has he let the ball fall through his hands of late? Yes, he has. But, for Christ’s sake, the guy has been carrying half New Zealand on his shoulders (with Jacinda carrying the other half) for months. That he hasn’t been able to catch every single operational curve-ball, thrown at him by every delinquent player in the New Zealand health system, is forgivable – isn’t it?
If anything is likely to provoke such forgiveness, then it must surely be the callous treatment meted out to him by the guy who thought the Level 4 rules were only there for the “Team of Five Million” to follow. The guy who went mountain-biking during Lockdown. The guy who took himself off to Dunedin instead of insisting that – as the responsible minister – he be allowed to stand at his boss’s side for the duration of the Covid-19 emergency. The guy who owned-up on nationwide television to being “a bit of an idiot”.
That guy doesn’t get to be mean to Ashley Bloomfield – and survive.
Surely, Jacinda, you see that? Surely you’re not guilty (as one outspoken right-wing gentleman suggested to me this morning) of having questioned, in the finest Machiavellian style, whether it might not be advisable, during the heroic phase of the Covid-19 war, to have Clark sequestered in Dunedin; bringing him back to Wellington only when all the inevitable blunders, committed by the exhausted employees of our understaffed and under-resourced health system, started coming to light? I told him firmly that you weren’t that sort of politician. Don’t you dare prove me wrong!
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
New Zealanders need to be shown, Jacinda, that you genuinely understand how pissed-off they are. It’s not just the sheer, mind-numbing dumbness of the mistakes that the people supposedly in charge have been making that’s got us yelling at the television. Underneath it all there’s the sneaking suspicion that, once again, we’ve been played for fools. Staying in our bubbles; washing our hands; socially distancing; coughing into our elbows: doing all the things we were told to do; while the people in charge, the people paid more than the prime minister, were fucking everything up.
If you want to remain prime minister, Jacinda, you have to give us some sign that you get all this. Because if you don’t, then we, the voters, might start joining a few dots. You know what I’m talking about. We might just recall the young woman who stood in front of us and asked us to join her in transforming New Zealand through the “politics of kindness”. The young woman of “relentless positivity” and “practical idealism”, who said: “Let’s do this!” – and, God help us, persuaded Winston Peters to give her the chance.
But then what happened, Jacinda? After we had given you our votes, what happened next? Were the promises of transformation fulfilled? Did the people charged with rolling out the changes give us anything that looked even remotely like genuine reform? Or, were the voters forced to endure one disappointment after another? Were the only tangible results produced by the general incompetence of your ministers the derisory snorts and disillusioned sighs from the electors they had let down?
Your government’s consistent failure to deliver might have been forgiven if it had led to a radical shake-up of the entire coalition. If you had gotten tough with Winston and his NZ First colleagues: warning them that if the expectations of the people who voted for the governing parties were not met, then you would simply jump in a government car and make the short trip from the Beehive to Government House. If the numbers aren’t there for real change, Jacinda, then the only right move is to go out and win yourself some new numbers!
Sadly, Jacinda, you haven’t followed that course. Instead, and exactly as happened in relation to the failure of our health services to deliver secure defences against the re-entry of the Covid-19 virus, incompetence and arrogance have gone unpunished. Just like his colleague, Phil Twyford – of KiwiBuild fame – David Clark juts out his chin and shamelessly apportions blame to everybody but himself. Even worse, he has turned viciously on Ashley Bloomfield, the nearest approximation to a competent, decent, humble and accountable public servant that this country possesses.
And still, Jacinda, you do nothing. New Zealand’s self-confessed “idiot” of a Health Minister is still in possession of his warrant.
Why? And for how much longer?


thedailyblog--2020-06-25--A Brief Timeline Of Events Pertaining To Schrodinger’s Homeless Man

2 .
Government carries out full-scale investigation to determine whether they have , in fact , housed a homeless man for two weeks 3 .
Despite putting huge resources into the above , including manually reviewing a whole lot of CCTV footage , the Government can find no evidence that this has , in fact occurred 4 .
Government writes to Michael Woodhouse formally requesting his assistance in investigating the matter 5 .
Woodhouse starts to umm and err and claims his source , while “ reliable ” , is unlikely to want to co-operate … and that he ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his claim wasn ’ t “ verified ” 6 .
Woodhouse then turns the attack back on the Government , claiming that the fact that they ’ ve put significant resources into investigating HIS CLAIM made as a Member of Parliament that somebody got into Quarantine and stayed there for a full two weeks … means they believe their own system ’ s immensely flawed and it could have happened and that ’ s what ’ s important .
7 .
Or , phrased another way – “ IT WAS JUST A PRANK @ @ @ @ @ @ @ HAVE TAKEN IT SO SERIOUS ” … and , of course , if they hadn ’ t .. he ’ d have attacked them for that as well .
Some things are too important to “ cry wolf ” over .
Unless you ’ re National .

1. Michael Woodhouse alleges Government has inadvertently housed the homeless
2. Government carries out full-scale investigation to determine whether they have, in fact, housed a homeless man for two weeks
3. Despite putting huge resources into the above, including manually reviewing a whole lot of CCTV footage, the Government can find no evidence that this has, in fact occurred
4. Government writes to Michael Woodhouse formally requesting his assistance in investigating the matter
5. Woodhouse starts to umm and err and claims his source, while “reliable”, is unlikely to want to co-operate … and that he’d always been careful to emphasize that his claim wasn’t “verified”
6. Woodhouse then turns the attack back on the Government, claiming that the fact that they’ve put significant resources into investigating HIS CLAIM made as a Member of Parliament that somebody got into Quarantine and stayed there for a full two weeks … means they believe their own system’s immensely flawed and it could have happened and that’s what’s important.
7. Or, phrased another way – “IT WAS JUST A PRANK, BRO, YOU SHOULDN’T HAVE TAKEN IT SO SERIOUS” … and, of course, if they hadn’t .. he’d have attacked them for that as well.
Some things are too important to “cry wolf” over. Unless you’re National.


Depths of Iniquity

From 10-23 June , inclusive , there was one Palestinian Gaza ceasefire violation in which a missile was fired across the Green Line .
Israeli ceasefire violations over the same period numbered 30 , including an air strike on Rafah and three incursions .
Fifteen minors , aged 14 to 17 , were abducted by Israeli soldiers .
Several homes were destroyed and there were 64 raids , with homes invaded , many of them at night .
In Khan al-Ahmar , Israeli settlers severely beat and hospitalised a resident , Muhammad Musa Kaabneh .
In Nablus , settlers raided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tent dwellings and sheep-pens , variously destroying or stealing the contents .
The settlers went on to destroy solar panels , also robbing a family of the batteries charged by the solar panels .
Just some of the misery Palestinians must accept , day and night !
At night on 10 June , Israeli settler militants assaulted a Palestinian man in Khirbet Tana village , as well as etting on fire a motor vehicle and spray-painting racist messages in the village of Zeita .
Settler arson attacks on Palestinian agriculture are on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agricultural land , severing the branches off 36 olive trees and setting fire to wheat crops .
Israelis , from the Yitzhar Occupation settlement , raided Madma village farmland and set fire to crops .
Militants from the Barakhah settlement , supported by Israeli troops firing rubber-coated steel bullets , stun grenades and tear gas canisters , set fire to a Palestinian olive grove in Burin village .
A gang of settlers destroyed , and set fire to the remains of a house under construction on the outskirts of Burin and more settlers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grenades and tear gas canisters , invaded Qusra village farmland , setting fire to a large wheat crop .
There is increasing despair among Palestinian farmers , especially as , even though the Israeli Army is known to be supporting the settlers in their criminal acts , the world community does nothing to restrain the Zionist regime .
Israeli forces , in al-Mazra ’ a al-Gharbiya , seized five bulldozers , rock-mining equipment and an electricity generator .
Israeli troops also destroyed a car-wash business in al-Manshiyat village .
Armed Israeli soldiers raided @ @ @ @ @ @ @ robbed the owner , Thaer Aziz Halahla , of his computer .
Israeli troops also forced a halt to work on farmland , south of Nahalin , and robbed farmers of a bulldozer .
The Israeli Army attacked a 15-year-old boy , Mus ’ ab Atta , on the main road near Deir Abu Masha ’ al village , shooting and wounding him , then abducting him .
A gang of Israeli settlers severely beat up and hospitalised another 15-year-old boy , Wadih Fadi Khader Salah , close to his home in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 23 June , Israeli forces , manning the Al-Container checkpoint , opened fire on and killed a resident , Ahmad Mustafa Eriqat ( 26 ) , who was on his way to Bethlehem to pick up his mother , in preparation for his sister ’ s wedding that evening .
The man had been waiting in a queue at the checkpoint but , on moving forward , had run into a traffic island .
He posed no threat to the soldiers who immediately opened fire on his vehicle , wounding him with several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They pulled him out of the vehicle , threw him onto the ground and prevented the Palestinian Red Crescent Society ( PRCS ) medical crew from approaching or providing first aid , leaving him instead to bleed to death at the checkpoint .
According to Ahmad ’ s relatives , he was looking forward to attending his sister ’ s wedding and he , himself , was looking forward to getting married next month .
While , Palestinian suffering grows ever grimmer under a venomous military dictatorship that is so generously unopposed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has seen growing global grass-roots resistance to Zionism ’ s self-centred inhumanities .
One of New Zealand ’ s Five Eyes partners , Canada , has failed for a second time to win a seat at the UN Security Council , losing out this time to Norway and Ireland , whose support in defence of Palestine has been welcomed worldwide .
The Washington Post lamented that the loss was “ embarrassing because of Canada ’ s stature as an economic powerhouse , part of the G7 and a member of NATO ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it comes to voting at the United Nations , especially by a secret ballot , governments have many other considerations.
” The Canadian Foreign Policy Institute , on the other hand , is campaigning for Canada to adopt an independent foreign policy , free from Washington .
The Institute believes that Canada should end its support for “ controversial mining companies , indifference to International treaties , climate policies and militarism ” and asks why it is that Canada has “ isolated itself from world opinion on Palestinian rights rather than standing for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Canada ’ s failed bid for a seat on the United Nations Security Council , a poll conducted by EKOS Research Associates , published on 16 June , showed that 74 % of Canadians want their government to express opposition to Israeli annexation in some form , while 42 % supported the use of economic or diplomatic sanctions against Israel .
UK Foreign Office at the service of the Israel Lobby On 18 June , the British Government ’ s Foreign Office ( FO ) replied to questions regarding what representations it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about ( 1 ) the killing of Iyad Khairi Hallaq , ( 2 ) the raiding of his parents ’ home , and ( 3 ) the physical assault on his sisters by Israeli forces .
The FO response began : “ As the UK Consul General in Jerusalem and the UK Ambassador in Tel Aviv stated on 31 May , we are deeply saddened to hear about the death of Iyad Khairi Hallaq after he was shot by Israeli police in East Jerusalem .
Our heartfelt condolences go out to his family.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on a defenceless invalid , the FO reply went on : “ We urge restraint in the use of live fire by the Israel Defense Forces.
” Restraint ?
The British Government should listen to itself .
Shamelessly , its spokesman immersed himself even more deeply in the playing-down of the callousness of the crime by stating : “ In instances where there have been accusations of excessive use of force , we have advocated swift , transparent investigations and if wrongdoing is found , that those responsible be held to account.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who is to “ investigate ’ ?
Should it be the Israeli police themselves – or should the enquiry be conducted by the very Zionist regime that is imposing military dictatorship over the Palestinian people in the Occupied West Bank ?
Heaven forbid that Israel itself should be brought to account !
In an appalling attempt to spread blame and hide Israel ’ s responsibility , the FO ended its answer with the words : “ The perpetual cycle of violence must end.
” The ministerial replies to the Written Questions from Lord @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same sentence : “ The perpetual cycle of violence must end.
” If you look at the statistics for the month of February 2020 compiled by the Negotiations Affairs Department of the Palestine Liberation Organisation , you will see that there were 50 Palestinian rocket attacks during that month .
Ask yourself whether these might , just might , have been provoked by and in response to the sum total of Israeli ceasefire violations , acts of economic or agricultural sabotage , settler attacks , demolitions , deportations , shootings , suffered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 162 in February .
According to statistics which colleagues in New Zealand receive from the Palestinian Monitoring Group , there have been no further Palestinian attacks since February .
Israeli ceasefire violations , acts of economic or agricultural sabotage , etcetera , have continued apace at the rate of 106 in March , 111 in April , 95 in May , and 30 up to 12 June .
The language used by the Foreign Office to describe this state of affairs is an insult to truth .
You can not describe what is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of violence ” unless you deny that victims have the right to resist the violence perpetrated against them .
You can not pretend not to know that the violence began in February 1917 when the British Government gave to secular European Jews the green light to immigrate to Palestine , 90 % of which was inhabited at that time by religious Moslems and Christians .
Ever since then the Palestinians have been victims of violence committed against them , initially by the British Mandatory and Jewish terrorists , and subsequently by the racist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pursuing a relentless ethnic cleansing of non-Jews with total impunity before the eyes of all the world .
Palestinians have also become the sacrificial victims of governments around the world which are complicit with one of the most evil regimes that have ever been .
Shame on the British Government !
Shame on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office !
Shame on the Prime Minister !
Shame , shame , shame !
I have copied in my MP .
Over 100 international law experts have signed a letter against West Bank annexation , calling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the West Bank , warning that it would “ constitute a flagrant violation of bedrock rules of international law , and would also pose a serious threat to international stability in a volatile region.
” Published by Kevin Jon Heller , Associate Professor of Public International Law at the University of Amsterdam , the letter was addressed to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu , Defence Minister Benny Gantz , Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi , Justice Minister Avi Nissenkorn and Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit .
Among those who signed the letter were several academics from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
it matters not whether such actions would be effected through ‘ extension of sovereignty , ’ ‘ extension of law , jurisdiction , and administration , ’ or explicit annexation , ” the letter confirmed that unilateral annexation of any part of the West Bank “ would be null and void , entail consequences of international wrongfulness , and – under certain circumstances – lead to individual international criminal liability.
” Israeli Control of the Jordan Valley Is Non-Negotiable .
Had the international community held Israel to account for its criminal acts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be facing this latest threat to international peace and stability .
On 15 June , Israel ’ s government approved funding for the expansion of the Bruchim settlement in the Golan Heights and its re-naming as Ramat Trump ( Trump Heights ) .
The re-naming is in gratitude for Trump ’ s decision last year to grant US approval of Israel ‘ s claim to sovereignty over the Golan Heights .
The Israeli Government has approved the spending of eight million Shekels ( about US $ 2.3 million ) towards new building development @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Syrians who fled or were forced from their homes in the 1967 Israeli invasion of the Syrian territory continue to live in exile .
With their farms and villages destroyed , their ruined houses can still be seen from across the fields .
On 12 June , the US announced its decision to sanction International Criminal Court ( ICC ) court officials following the March authorisation by ICC judges to begin an investigation into allegations of war crimes committed by US military and intelligence personnel , Afghan forces and the Taliban in Afghanistan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ website celebrates what it describes as “ stand out examples of successful economic co-operation between Israel and New Zealand.
” While Israel boasts of its economic success , ignoring the plunder and abuses of human right that underpin it , it also draws attention away from its spectacular failure to respect its own people .
Last year , the National Economic Council on poverty in Israel reported that 1.8 million Israelis , half of them children , live in poverty .
The Israeli Government ’ s National Insurance Institute also ranks the country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bottom in the OECD .
In 2012 the Israeli newspaper , Haaretz , reported on a poll indicating that at least one-third of Israelis would consider emigrating abroad if the opportunity presented itself .
In 2018 a Newsweek article stated that : “ Spurred by the high cost of living , low salaries , and political and demographic trends , Israelis are leaving the country in droves.
” The reason ?
“ Israel has one of the highest poverty rates and levels of income inequality in the Western world.
” The reality of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the territories it Occupies and terrorises , makes nonsense of US Vice-President Joe Biden ’ s claim that Israel is “ absolutely essential ” to the security of Jews around the world .
New Zealand ’ s Foreign Affairs Minister , Winston Peters , has a deep-seated commitment to co-operating with Israel .
As far back as 2006 he had this to say : “ Without Israel ’ s support for economic development , it is difficult to imagine how an enduring resolution to the conflict [ ending the military Occupation of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] will be possible .
Institutional linkages , through the New Zealand-Israel Trade Association , have a valuable role to play in facilitating closer trade ties between our two countries .
We have much to look forward to as the New Zealand/Israel relationship deepens and strengthens .
Expanding bilateral trade has a crucial role in this development.
” Both Peters and NZ Defence Minister , Ron Mark , are long-standing members of the Parliament ’ s Friend of Israel Group .
Peters is critical of New Zealand ’ s support for UN Security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the coalition agreement a clause noting the “ lack of process ” and failure to seek cabinet approval as the cause of New Zealand ’ s sponsorship of the Resolution .
It is Peter ‘ way of declaring opposition to the resolution altogether .
Labour ’ s concession to Peters is lamentable .
NZ ’ s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade ( MFAT ) informs us that it believes : “ Sanctions apply pressure to countries that threaten peace , have harmful policies or don ’ t co-operate with international law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for seeking to influence foreign governments and individuals to change their behaviour .
The United Nations Security Council ( UNSC ) can impose sanctions in response to a threat to international peace and security .
As a UN Member State , New Zealand is bound by the UNSC ’ s decisions .
“ We implement sanctions imposed by the UNSC in regulations made under the United Nations Act 1946 .
Implementing UN sanctions by creating regulations means that we can respond quickly when necessary to impose or remove sanctions .
While we don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our own sanctions independently of the UNSC , we can impose other measures such as travel bans on people entering our country.
” In a Press Release on 24 June , the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa ( PSNA ) called for measures to end co-operation with Israel and an end to what amounts to aiding and abetting the Zionist state ’ s violations of human rights .
The PSNA demands the suspension of our bilateral agreements with Israel and prohibition of the importation of illegal Israeli Occupation settlement products .
PSNA also calls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any Israeli company complicit in settlement activities or land confiscation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories .
At the same time , the PSNA makes it clear that ending the purchase of arms and military equipment from Israeli companies is essential in the support of peace and justice .
Finally , the Press Release also calls for the closing of the Israeli Embassy “ as we did when Israeli Mossad agents stole New Zealand passports in another breach of international law ” .
Janfrie Wakim , writing in The Daily Blog , also calls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responsible for war crimes/crimes against humanity ” who assist and profit from association and business with Israel to be “ brought to justice ” .
Time to choose – do we join our 5-eyes ‘ allies ’ in covering for Israel or do we follow the rational rules of international law and respect for human rights ?

From 10-23 June, inclusive, there was one Palestinian Gaza ceasefire violation in which a missile was fired across the Green Line. Israeli ceasefire violations over the same period numbered 30, including an air strike on Rafah and three incursions. Fifteen minors, aged 14 to 17, were abducted by Israeli soldiers. Several homes were destroyed and there were 64 raids, with homes invaded, many of them at night.
In Khan al-Ahmar, Israeli settlers severely beat and hospitalised a resident, Muhammad Musa Kaabneh. In Nablus, settlers raided the Lafjam area of Aqraba, invading tent dwellings and sheep-pens, variously destroying or stealing the contents. The settlers went on to destroy solar panels, also robbing a family of the batteries charged by the solar panels. Just some of the misery Palestinians must accept, day and night! At night on 10 June, Israeli settler militants assaulted a Palestinian man in Khirbet Tana village, as well as setting on fire a motor vehicle and spray-painting racist messages in the village of Zeita.
Settler arson attacks and Israeli Army complicity
Settler arson attacks on Palestinian agriculture are on the increase. Israeli settlers invaded Burin village agricultural land, severing the branches off 36 olive trees and setting fire to wheat crops. Israelis, from the Yitzhar Occupation settlement, raided Madma village farmland and set fire to crops. Militants from the Barakhah settlement, supported by Israeli troops firing rubber-coated steel bullets, stun grenades and tear gas canisters, set fire to a Palestinian olive grove in Burin village. A gang of settlers destroyed, and set fire to the remains of a house under construction on the outskirts of Burin and more settlers, supported by Israeli troops firing stun grenades and tear gas canisters, invaded Qusra village farmland, setting fire to a large wheat crop. There is increasing despair among Palestinian farmers, especially as, even though the Israeli Army is known to be supporting the settlers in their criminal acts, the world community does nothing to restrain the Zionist regime.
Israeli Army plunder and economic/agricultural sabotage
Israeli forces, in al-Mazra’a al-Gharbiya, seized five bulldozers, rock-mining equipment and an electricity generator. Israeli troops also destroyed a car-wash business in al-Manshiyat village. Armed Israeli soldiers raided Hares village, searched a home and robbed the owner, Thaer Aziz Halahla, of his computer. Israeli troops also forced a halt to work on farmland, south of Nahalin, and robbed farmers of a bulldozer.
Attacks on children
The Israeli Army attacked a 15-year-old boy, Mus’ab Atta, on the main road near Deir Abu Masha’al village, shooting and wounding him, then abducting him. A gang of Israeli settlers severely beat up and hospitalised another 15-year-old boy, Wadih Fadi Khader Salah, close to his home in the Abu al-Sud area of al-Khadr.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Cold-blooded killing
On 23 June,Israeli forces, manning the Al-Container checkpoint, opened fire on and killed a resident, Ahmad Mustafa Eriqat (26), who was on his way to Bethlehem to pick up his mother, in preparation for his sister’s wedding that evening. The man had been waiting in a queue at the checkpoint but, on moving forward, had run into a traffic island. He posed no threat to the soldiers who immediately opened fire on his vehicle, wounding him with several live bullets in his upper body. They pulled him out of the vehicle, threw him onto the ground and prevented the Palestinian Red Crescent Society (PRCS) medical crew from approaching or providing first aid, leaving him instead to bleed to death at the checkpoint. According to Ahmad’s relatives, he was looking forward to attending his sister’s wedding and he, himself, was looking forward to getting married next month.
Resistance
While, Palestinian suffering grows ever grimmer under a venomous military dictatorship that is so generously unopposed by Great Power leaders, the past fortnight has seen growing global grass-roots resistance to Zionism’s self-centred inhumanities.
Canada fails to gain seat at UN Security Council
One of New Zealand’s Five Eyes partners, Canada, has failed for a second time to win a seat at the UN Security Council, losing out this time to Norway and Ireland, whose support in defence of Palestine has been welcomed worldwide. The Washington Post lamented that the loss was “embarrassing because of Canada’s stature as an economic powerhouse, part of the G7 and a member of NATO” and went on to complain that “when it comes to voting at the United Nations, especially by a secret ballot, governments have many other considerations.” The Canadian Foreign Policy Institute, on the other hand, is campaigning for Canada to adopt an independent foreign policy, free from Washington. The Institute believes that Canada should end its support for “controversial mining companies, indifference to International treaties, climate policies and militarism” and asks why it is that Canada has “isolated itself from world opinion on Palestinian rights rather than standing for universal human rights?”
Majority of Canada’s citizens oppose Israel‘s annexation plan
Released ahead of Canada’s failed bid for a seat on the United Nations Security Council, a poll conducted by EKOS Research Associates, published on 16 June, showed that 74% of Canadians want their government to express opposition to Israeli annexation in some form, while 42% supported the use of economic or diplomatic sanctions against Israel.
UK Foreign Office at the service of the Israel Lobby
On 18 June, the British Government’s Foreign Office (FO) replied to questions regarding what representations it had made to the Government of Israel about (1) the killing of Iyad Khairi Hallaq , (2) the raiding of his parents’ home, and (3) the physical assault on his sisters by Israeli forces. The FO response began:
“As the UK Consul General in Jerusalem and the UK Ambassador in Tel Aviv stated on 31 May, we are deeply saddened to hear about the death of Iyad Khairi Hallaq after he was shot by Israeli police in East Jerusalem. Our heartfelt condolences go out to his family.”
Instead of condemning the unprovoked attack on a defenceless invalid, the FO reply went on:
“We urge restraint in the use of live fire by the Israel Defense Forces.”
Restraint? The British Government should listen to itself. Shamelessly, its spokesman immersed himself even more deeply in the playing-down of the callousness of the crime by stating:
“In instances where there have been accusations of excessive use of force, we have advocated swift, transparent investigations and if wrongdoing is found, that those responsible be held to account.”
The obvious question raised here is, who is to “investigate’? Should it be the Israeli police themselves – or should the enquiry be conducted by the very Zionist regime that is imposing military dictatorship over the Palestinian people in the Occupied West Bank? Heaven forbid that Israel itself should be brought to account! In an appalling attempt to spread blame and hide Israel’s responsibility, the FO ended its answer with the words: “The perpetual cycle of violence must end.”
A Jewish voice calls shame on UK:
Dear Foreign Office,
Re:
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Lords/2020-06-11/HL5608
and:
https://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Commons/2020-06-18/61457
The ministerial replies to the Written Questions from Lord Lothian and Virendra Sharma MP ended with the same sentence: “The perpetual cycle of violence must end.”
If you look at the statistics for the month of February 2020 compiled by the Negotiations Affairs Department of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, you will see that there were 50 Palestinian rocket attacks during that month. Ask yourself whether these might, just might, have been provoked by and in response to the sum total of Israeli ceasefire violations, acts of economic or agricultural sabotage, settler attacks, demolitions, deportations, shootings, suffered by Palestinians: 139 in January, 162 in February.
According to statistics which colleagues in New Zealand receive from the Palestinian Monitoring Group, there have been no further Palestinian attacks since February. Israeli ceasefire violations, acts of economic or agricultural sabotage, etcetera, have continued apace at the rate of 106 in March, 111 in April, 95 in May, and 30 up to 12 June.
The language used by the Foreign Office to describe this state of affairs is an insult to truth. You can not describe what is happening in Palestine as a “cycle of violence” unless you deny that victims have the right to resist the violence perpetrated against them. You cannot pretend not to know that the violence began in February 1917 when the British Government gave to secular European Jews the green light to immigrate to Palestine, 90% of which was inhabited at that time by religious Moslems and Christians. Ever since then the Palestinians have been victims of violence committed against them, initially by the British Mandatory and Jewish terrorists, and subsequently by the racist expansionist state of Israel which has been pursuing a relentless ethnic cleansing of non-Jews with total impunity before the eyes of all the world. Palestinians have also become the sacrificial victims of governments around the world which are complicit with one of the most evil regimes that have ever been.
Shame on the British Government! Shame on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office! Shame on the Prime Minister! Shame, shame, shame!
I have copied in my MP.
Yours sincerely,
Elizabeth Morley
Aberystwyth
Law experts warn against Israel’s annexation of West Bank
Over 100 international law experts have signed a letter against West Bank annexation, calling on Israel not to annex parts of the West Bank, warning that it would “constitute a flagrant violation of bedrock rules of international law, and would also pose a serious threat to international stability in a volatile region.” Published by Kevin Jon Heller, Associate Professor of Public International Law at the University of Amsterdam, the letter was addressed to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, Defence Minister Benny Gantz, Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi, Justice Minister Avi Nissenkorn and Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit. Among those who signed the letter were several academics from Israel. Noting that “ . . . it matters not whether such actions would be effected through ‘extension of sovereignty,’ ‘extension of law, jurisdiction, and administration,’ or explicit annexation,” the letter confirmed that unilateral annexation of any part of the West Bank “would be null and void, entail consequences of international wrongfulness, and – under certain circumstances – lead to individual international criminal liability.”
Israel ‘s militaristic determination to possess the Jordan Valley
Israeli Control of the Jordan Valley Is Non-Negotiable. Had the international community held Israel to account for its criminal acts decades ago, we would not now be facing this latest threat to international peace and stability.
Israel approves funding for ‘Trump Heights’
On 15 June, Israel’s government approved funding for the expansion of the Bruchim settlement in the Golan Heights and its re-naming as Ramat Trump (Trump Heights). The re-naming is in gratitude for Trump’s decision last year to grant US approval of Israel‘s claim to sovereignty over the Golan Heights. The Israeli Government has approved the spending of eight million Shekels (about US$2.3 million) towards new building development in the settlement. Up to 130,000 Syrians who fled or were forced from their homes in the 1967 Israeli invasion of the Syrian territory continue to live in exile. With their farms and villages destroyed, their ruined houses can still be seen from across the fields.
Israel’s self-alienation from the International Criminal Court
On 12 June, the US announced its decision to sanction International Criminal Court (ICC) court officials following the March authorisation by ICC judges to begin an investigation into allegations of war crimes committed by US military and intelligence personnel, Afghan forces and the Taliban in Afghanistan.
No business with Israel!
The Israel Trade Commission’s website celebrates what it describes as “stand out examples of successful economic co-operation between Israel and New Zealand.” While Israel boasts of its economic success, ignoring the plunder and abuses of human rights that underpin it, it also draws attention away from its spectacular failure to respect its own people. Last year, the National Economic Council on poverty in Israel reported that 1.8 million Israelis, half of them children, live in poverty. The Israeli Government’s National Insurance Institute also ranks the country’s child poverty rates second to bottom in the OECD.
In 2012 the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, reported on a poll indicating that at least one-third of Israelis would consider emigrating abroad if the opportunity presented itself. In 2018 a Newsweek article stated that: “Spurred by the high cost of living, low salaries, and political and demographic trends, Israelis are leaving the country in droves.” The reason? “Israel has one of the highest poverty rates and levels of income inequality in the Western world.” The reality of Israel, both at home and in the territories it Occupies and terrorises, makes nonsense of US Vice-President Joe Biden’s claim that Israel is “absolutely essential” to the security of Jews around the world.
New Zealand’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Winston Peters, has a deep-seated commitment to co-operating with Israel. As far back as 2006 he had this to say: “Without Israel’s support for economic development, it is difficult to imagine how an enduring resolution to the conflict [ending the military Occupation of the West Bank and the blockade of Gaza] will be possible. Institutional linkages, through the New Zealand-Israel Trade Association, have a valuable role to play in facilitating closer trade ties between our two countries. We have much to look forward to as the New Zealand/Israel relationship deepens and strengthens. Expanding bilateral trade has a crucial role in this development.”
Both Peters and NZ Defence Minister, Ron Mark, are long-standing members of the Parliament’s Friends of Israel Group. Peters is critical of New Zealand’s support for UN Security Council Resolution 2334 and insisted on inserting in the coalition agreement a clause noting the “lack of process” and failure to seek cabinet approval as the cause of New Zealand’s sponsorship of the Resolution. It is Peters‘ way of declaring opposition to the resolution altogether. Labour’s concession to Peters is lamentable.
MFAT on Sanctions
NZ’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) informs us that it believes:
“Sanctions apply pressure to countries that threaten peace, have harmful policies or don’t co-operate with international law.
“Sanctions are a common tool for seeking to influence foreign governments and individuals to change their behaviour. The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) can impose sanctions in response to a threat to international peace and security. As a UN Member State, New Zealand is bound by the UNSC’s decisions.
“We implement sanctions imposed by the UNSC in regulations made under the United Nations Act 1946. Implementing UN sanctions by creating regulations means that we can respond quickly when necessary to impose or remove sanctions. While we don’t have standalone legislation to impose our own sanctions independently of the UNSC, we can impose other measures such as travel bans on people entering our country.”
Time to choose
In a Press Release on 24 June, the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) called for measures to end co-operation with Israel and an end to what amounts to aiding and abetting the Zionist state’s violations of human rights. The PSNA demands the suspension of our bilateral agreements with Israel and prohibition of the importation of illegal Israeli Occupation settlement products. PSNA also calls for the Superannuation Fund to disinvest in any Israeli company complicit in settlement activities or land confiscation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. At the same time, the PSNA makes it clear that ending the purchase of arms and military equipment from Israeli companies is essential in the support of peace and justice. Finally, the Press Release also calls for the closing of the Israeli Embassy “as we did when Israeli Mossad agents stole New Zealand passports in another breach of international law”.
Janfrie Wakim, writing in The Daily Blog, also calls for those “individuals and corporate actors responsible for war crimes/crimes against humanity” who assist and profit from association and business with Israel to be “brought to justice”.
Time to choose – do we join our 5-eyes ‘allies’ in covering for Israel or do we follow the rational rules of international law and respect for human rights?


thedailyblog--2020-06-28--Alternative Aotearoa Election 2020 Seminar update

The day is shaping up extremely well with all the key positions/roles sorted and just waiting to hear back from some organisations to confirm their speakers .
We are delighted to have such an incredible line up of people and groups .
Thank you all .
The Social Solutions section has been extended by half an hour due to the wide range of groups keen to contribute .
The seminar will be live-streamed on The Daily Blog .
Alternative Aotearoa – a one-day seminar to provide solutions for the environmental , social and economic transformation of Aotearoa .
Greenpeace , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Climate , Extinction Rebellion , Child Poverty Action Group , State Housing Action Network , Unite Union , Council of Trade Unions , Migrant Workers Association , Just Speak , Pacific Climate Warriors , Quality Public Education Coalition , Action Station , Auckland Action Against Poverty , People Against Prisons Aotearoa and more… Registration is free but people need to register for catering purposes .
A koha will apply for lunch .
Register via email to bronwensummers @ gmail.com Media will be invited to attend all day but a specific media conference will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presentation of the final summary will be made to the media .
All political parties will be specifically invited to attend and we are also looking to provide individual briefings to the policy committees of all the main political parties ( National , Labour , Greens , New Zealand First etc ) following the seminar .

Kia ora everyone,
The day is shaping up extremely well with all the key positions/roles sorted and just waiting to hear back from some organisations to confirm their speakers.
We are delighted to have such an incredible line up of people and groups. Thank you all.
The Social Solutions section has been extended by half an hour due to the wide range of groups keen to contribute.
The seminar will be live-streamed on The Daily Blog.
Alternative Aotearoa – a one-day seminar to provide solutions for the environmental, social and economic transformation of Aotearoa.
Saturday 25 July, 8.30am Pipitea Marae, Wellington
Keynote speakers:
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
Laura O’Connell Rapira – Director of Action Station
Efeso Collins – Pasifika community activist and Auckland City Councillor
Co-chairs:
Julia Whaipooti – Justice Advocate
Recorders/Collators/Final presenters
Tamatha Paul – Wellington City Councillor
Jane Kelsey – Law Professor University of Auckland
Organisations presenting include:
Greenpeace, Better Futures Forum, School Strike for Climate, Extinction Rebellion, Child Poverty Action Group, State Housing Action Network, Unite Union, Council of Trade Unions, Migrant Workers Association, Just Speak, Pacific Climate Warriors, Quality Public Education Coalition, Action Station, Auckland Action Against Poverty, People Against Prisons Aotearoa and more…
Registration:
Registration is free but people need to register for catering purposes. A koha will apply for lunch. Register via email to bronwensummers@gmail.com
Media will be invited to attend all day but a specific media conference will be organised for keynote speakers and a presentation of the final summary will be made to the media.
All political parties will be specifically invited to attend and we are also looking to provide individual briefings to the policy committees of all the main political parties (National, Labour, Greens, New Zealand First etc) following the seminar.


thedailyblog--2020-06-28--Dr Liz Gordon – Up your nose

Dr Liz Gordon – Up your nose

I am not , in general , a person who goes along with things because I am told to .
I have a bad attitude towards being told to do things .
This can be completely annoying at times to other people !
But , I am a pussycat if handled properly .
If convinced of the rightness of a course of action , I am out front leading the charge , rallying the troops , getting things done .
Although the intensity of my reaction might be a bit extreme , I don ’ t think I am that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us will accede to reasonable requests and , in times of need , direct instructions .
Appeals to the greater good usually work .
During level 4 , the vast majority of people responded really well to requirements to stay in their bubbles .
I am pretty sure that if the need re-emerged , we would do so again – because we have seen that it works .
So now I want to think about 71 people , as reported on Friday by the Herald : The Ministry of Health on Friday revealed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from June 9 to 16 , 71 let out without being tested had since been contacted but refused to be tested .
If we can agree with the formulation that reasonable people will accede to reasonable requests if they are not too onerous , then one of the following must be true .
• These are not reasonable people .
As they are New Zealanders repatriating to their home country , one would like to think they are reasonable people .
They may feel they have some grievance , perhaps around forced isolation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasonable .
• The request was not presented as reasonable .
I wonder how these people were contacted and what was said to them .
One can imagine hackles going up if a person was ordered to present their nostril for testing , rather than being asking to be tested for the public good .
• The request was onerous .
It is possible that , due to work requirements , transport , family duties and so on , that that person found they could not make it to the testing site , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to remember that many of these people have spent months in Covid 19 hot spots .
They may fear going to a testing site , and their confidence would not have been bolstered by the slack treatment of their isolation by officials .
They may be quite critical of what they have seen .
They may also just think that , having spent a fortnight in isolation , and been out for some time without symptoms , there is no necessity for them to be tested .
We have a tendency to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in ways we don ’ t understand .
As I have written before , we all owe a debt of gratitude to the two women who drove from Auckland to Wellington with the covid .
By revealing the parlous state of our isolation system , and the perfidy and desperation of National MPs , they did us several favours .
If any of those 71 nostrils are in hiding because the owner suspects they have the virus , then that would be blameworthy .
But it is much more likely that a range @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nose swabbing .
We have been extremely fortunate to have escaped the border failures with no new community transmission and no doubt everyone is keeping their fingers tightly crossed .
Perhaps not everyone .
The National Party is in an interesting position .
It would be highly in their political interests for the border failures to have brought community transmission back to New Zealand .
But are they wishing for such an evil to fall upon our nation ?
I do hope not .
Just briefly on the health minister and health reforms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ David Clark is that he is not a very hands-on minister , In fact , very detached .
Should this be a sackable offence ?
I think that his replacement on the isolation front with Megan Woods , who is definitely a hands-on minister , was a good move .
In terms of David Clark , I am more worried about him leading any health reforms that emerge from Heather Simpson ’ s report .
The poor health system has been subject to three big neo-liberal phases , each worse than the one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just another version of rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic .
It is full of failed principles such as separation of policy from operations ( another new national agency to be developed ) , top-down accountabilities and so on .
We have seen it all , oh so very many times before .
Is David Clark , and indeed , is the Labour Government , up to rejecting this blueprint and seeking a more democratic and effective response ?
I hope so but fear not .
Dr Liz Gordon is a researcher and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ neo-liberalism in all its forms and moving towards a socially just society .
She usually blogs on justice , social welfare and education topics .

I am not, in general, a person who goes along with things because I am told to. I have a bad attitude towards being told to do things. This can be completely annoying at times to other people! But, I am a pussycat if handled properly. If convinced of the rightness of a course of action, I am out front leading the charge, rallying the troops, getting things done.
Although the intensity of my reaction might be a bit extreme, I don’t think I am that much different from others. Most of us will accede to reasonable requests and, in times of need, direct instructions. Appeals to the greater good usually work. During level 4, the vast majority of people responded really well to requirements to stay in their bubbles. I am pretty sure that if the need re-emerged, we would do so again – because we have seen that it works.
So now I want to think about 71 people, as reported on Friday by the Herald:
The Ministry of Health on Friday revealed of the 2159 people in managed isolation from June 9 to 16, 71 let out without being tested had since been contacted but refused to be tested.
If we can agree with the formulation that reasonable people will accede to reasonable requests if they are not too onerous, then one of the following must be true.
These are not reasonable people. As they are New Zealanders repatriating to their home country, one would like to think they are reasonable people. They may feel they have some grievance, perhaps around forced isolation. Or they may just be… not reasonable.
The request was not presented as reasonable. I wonder how these people were contacted and what was said to them. One can imagine hackles going up if a person was ordered to present their nostril for testing, rather than being asking to be tested for the public good.
The request was onerous. It is possible that, due to work requirements, transport, family duties and so on, that that person found they could not make it to the testing site, and therefore refused.
It is important to remember that many of these people have spent months in Covid 19 hot spots. They may fear going to a testing site, and their confidence would not have been bolstered by the slack treatment of their isolation by officials. They may be quite critical of what they have seen.
They may also just think that, having spent a fortnight in isolation, and been out for some time without symptoms, there is no necessity for them to be tested.
We have a tendency to get very angry and annoyed when people act in ways we don’t understand. As I have written before, we all owe a debt of gratitude to the two women who drove from Auckland to Wellington with the covid. By revealing the parlous state of our isolation system, and the perfidy and desperation of National MPs, they did us several favours.
TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com
If any of those 71 nostrils are in hiding because the owner suspects they have the virus, then that would be blameworthy. But it is much more likely that a range of other factors explain the absence of nose swabbing. We have been extremely fortunate to have escaped the border failures with no new community transmission and no doubt everyone is keeping their fingers tightly crossed.
Perhaps not everyone. The National Party is in an interesting position. It would be highly in their political interests for the border failures to have brought community transmission back to New Zealand. But are they wishing for such an evil to fall upon our nation? I do hope not.
* * *
Just briefly on the health minister and health reforms.
I think the main thing about David Clark is that he is not a very hands-on minister, In fact, very detached. Should this be a sackable offence? I think that his replacement on the isolation front with Megan Woods, who is definitely a hands-on minister, was a good move. In terms of David Clark, I am more worried about him leading any health reforms that emerge from Heather Simpson’s report.
The poor health system has been subject to three big neo-liberal phases, each worse than the one before, and the Simpson report is just another version of rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. It is full of failed principles such as separation of policy from operations (another new national agency to be developed), top-down accountabilities and so on. We have seen it all, oh so very many times before. Is David Clark, and indeed, is the Labour Government, up to rejecting this blueprint and seeking a more democratic and effective response? I hope so but fear not.
Dr Liz Gordon is a researcher and a barrister, with interests in destroying neo-liberalism in all its forms and moving towards a socially just society. She usually blogs on justice, social welfare and education topics.


thedailyblog--2020-06-30--When will Labour get it right for the worst-off children?

At last there will be attention to the divisive issue of the In Work Tax Credit ( IWTC ) .
From today ( 1st July ) parents no longer have to meet rigid fixed weekly hours of work to qualify for this weekly payment of at least $ 72.50 made to the caregiver for the support of their children .
At least there is some small progress , after many years of fighting the shortcomings of this tax credit which is supposed to provide support for children and simultaneously alleviate child poverty and yet is denied to around 170,000 of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ insecure and variable hours of paid work will not continue to have that uncertainty compounded by the loss of the $ 72.50 of IWTC .
But it is expected to help just 19,000 families at a tiny cost of $ 32 million .
It is a surprisingly timid reform in light of the government ’ s own projections of increased child poverty in this crisis .
Doubtless , some families will be helped , but the requirement that there must be some hours of paid work to qualify for the IWTC may rule @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the paid work requirement and will make it complicated to administer .
All of this adds to the confusing muddle of measures implemented since lockdown .
Parents not in paid work on the wage subsidy have been counted as ‘ working ’ and they can receive the IWTC .
On the other hand the new COVD19 income relief payment ( CIRP ) has a requirement for there to be no paid work at all , so the children of these recipients can not have the IWTC .
However , if the partner of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will qualify .
Sole parents on CIRP are clearly at an unfair disadvantage .
And what of those poor parents working say 20 hours a week on a part-benefit ?
Their children are denied the $ 72.20/week value of the IWTC .
These parents ’ paid work is clearly not ideologically acceptable only because being ‘ off-benefit ’ is another requirement .
Absent is any recognition of parenting as valuable though challenging work as many families registered during lockdown Intensifying the muddle , additional legislation is being introduced to protect the IWTC in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being out of work in the case where is no paid work undertaken .
But what happens then ?
The worst off will end up on a welfare benefit and their children will lose the benefit of the IWTC .
The concept that a child tax credit is magically a work incentive just because it is called an ‘ in work ’ tax credit was flawed from the start and proven to be ineffective .
As CPAG and others have called for over a very long time period – it must be joined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ families support and paid on the same basis to all families with children The cost will be about $ 450 million but there is no more cost effective expenditure that could be made immediately to show the government is serious about the surge in child poverty that is expected .

At last there will be attention to the divisive issue of the In Work Tax Credit (IWTC). From today (1st July) parents no longer have to meet rigid fixed weekly hours of work to qualify for this weekly payment of at least $72.50 made to the caregiver for the support of their children.
At least there is some small progress, after many years of fighting the shortcomings of this tax credit which is supposed to provide support for children and simultaneously alleviate child poverty and yet is denied to around 170,000 of the poorest children.
Families that have insecure and variable hours of paid work will not continue to have that uncertainty compounded by the loss of the $72.50 of IWTC. But it is expected to help just 19,000 families at a tiny cost of $32 million. It is a surprisingly timid reform in light of the government’s own projections of increased child poverty in this crisis.
Doubtless, some families will be helped, but the requirement that there must be some hours of paid work to qualify for the IWTC may rule out others who can’t fulfil the paid work requirement and will make it complicated to administer.
All of this adds to the confusing muddle of measures implemented since lockdown. Parents not in paid work on the wage subsidy have been counted as ‘working’ and they can receive the IWTC. On the other hand the new COVD19 income relief payment (CIRP) has a requirement for there to be no paid work at all, so the children of these recipients cannot have the IWTC. However, if the partner of a CIRP recipient is working the family will qualify. Sole parents on CIRP are clearly at an unfair disadvantage.
And what of those poor parents working say 20 hours a week on a part-benefit ? Their children are denied the $72.20/week value of the IWTC. These parents’ paid work is clearly not ideologically acceptable only because being ‘off-benefit’ is another requirement. Absent is any recognition of parenting as valuable though challenging work as many families registered during lockdown
Intensifying the muddle, additional legislation is being introduced to protect the IWTC in the first two weeks of a parent being out of work in the case where is no paid work undertaken. But what happens then? The worst off will end up on a welfare benefit and their children will lose the benefit of the IWTC.
The concept that a child tax credit is magically a work incentive just because it is called an ‘in work’ tax credit was flawed from the start and proven to be ineffective. As CPAG and others have called for over a very long time period – it must be joined up to the rest of working for families support and paid on the same basis to all families with children The cost will be about $450 million but there is no more cost effective expenditure that could be made immediately to show the government is serious about the surge in child poverty that is expected.


thedailyblog--2020-06-30--Green Party election promises and prospects for a new government

The Green Party has done us all a favour by bringing the issue of wealth taxes and improved income support for those not working onto the agenda .
They have also correctly done it as a two-pronged strategy that says we can afford to give non-working New Zealanders more money in the world we are facing if we are willing to impose a very modest wealth tax .
I would have preferred a base rate equivalent to at least the new Covid payment of $ 490 a week rather than $ 325 they have proposed but it is still a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Greens are constricted in what they feel they can offer by the fact that New Zealand has almost no taxation of wealth or capital gains at all so starting with a more modest system at least gets us on the right road .
They should be applauded for this .
It seems clear that the Greens and Labour will be part of the next government .
This will be true whether or not New Zealand First makes it .
With Labour on 50 % they could govern alone but are unlikely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this term of government .
Whilst the Greens have been between 5 and 7 % in most polls it is still worryingly close to the 5 % threshold needed to get into parliament without an electorate seat .
But , unless something goes terribly wrong they should make it .
My hope is that the Greens make at least 9 % in the election as that will bring in four more long-time social and environmental campaigners ranked 8-11 that have been good friends of Unite in our own campaigns over many years – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ricardo Menéndez March , and Steve Abel .
National and their Act Allies are at least 15 % behind and that seems an impossibly large hurdle to get over before September 19 .
With luck , New Zealand First will not make the 5 % barrier and be eliminated from parliament .
On current polling that would be the result but Winston peters has always been the great escape artist and will no doubt have a few tricks up his sleeve for this campaign .
On most issues , they have been a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government .
Even if they are returned to parliament they will not be in a position to keep the Green party out of their desired place around the Cabinet table as they did last election .
I personally don ’ t think that a party that wants fundamental change should necessarily be in the position of trying to co-manage the system .
A party like that would be happy to sit outside of government and use their votes to push for more fundamental changes .
But the Green ’ s seem determined to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make it over the 5 % barrier they will be invited to be part of the Labour-led government again .
Strategically , Labour know they have needed NZ first in the past and will probably need them again in the future , and they can use them to balance off against the Green Party .
Ideally , Labour would want to be in a position to have enough votes to govern alone , but even if they do they will invite both the Greens and NZ First to be part of the government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If Labour doesn ’ t get enough votes to govern alone they will invite both the Greens and NZ First to be part of the government even if they only need one of them to get a majority .
Again the best situation for Labour would be if they only needed one of the two support parties for any particular vote .
That way they could lean to the right and use NZ First when they wanted ( for example to tighten immigration ) and then lean to the left to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NZ First may not like .
This is how the last National party-led government used their support parties at the time – Act and the Maori party .
But the system any government is managing today is a system called capitalism .
That system is based solely on the pursuit of profit and serves the economically dominant 1 % who call the shots in our society .
Capitalism inevitably leads to periodic crises of overproduction with attendant mass unemployment , environmental degradation , and uses race and sex discrimination to oppress and exploit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including New Zealand , are also part of a global system of imperial rule and exploitation of the developing world through military alliances like Nato , spying agencies like the 5-Eyes network and endless wars like those in Afghanistan and Iraq .
The problem working people have is that this system is almost impossible to turn from the course it has already established .
The production of more and more commodities to sell for a profit on the market is its be all and end all .
Humanity ’ s relationship with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ endangered by this reality .
At the moment , Labour and the Green ’ s don ’ t want to challenge this system .
They want to tinker with it and try and make it work a bit better for everyone .
That is why , for example , they have limited themselves to a system of taxes and price signals called the Emissions Trading System to try and fix the environment crisis but what the signals they have put in place have no hope of doing so in the foreseeable future .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ reconstruction of the system away from producing exchange values for sale for profit to meet the manipulated and artificial desires , towards the production of use values based on human needs .
We already largely do that in health care and education and we should also do that with finance , transport , energy , and communications .
I know there are many unionists and members of both Labour and the Greens who want these parties and any government they form to do much more to meet the needs of working people and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Their efforts inside those parties need support and encouragement .
But we also have a job to to develop our own programme of fundamental change can confront the multiple crises we face today .
This programme must appear realistic and necessary for the times we are in .
Internationally this programme is being dubbed the Green New Deal and we need ours own version to provide the steps needed now to start the transition to a new society of solidarity not competition , human need not private profit , climate justice and peace @ @ @ @

The Green Party has done us all a favour by bringing the issue of wealth taxes and improved income support for those not working onto the agenda.
They have also correctly done it as a two-pronged strategy that says we can afford to give non-working New Zealanders more money in the world we are facing if we are willing to impose a very modest wealth tax.
I would have preferred a base rate equivalent to at least the new Covid payment of $490 a week rather than $325 they have proposed but it is still a major improvement for many.
I think the Greens are constricted in what they feel they can offer by the fact that New Zealand has almost no taxation of wealth or capital gains at all so starting with a more modest system at least gets us on the right road. They should be applauded for this.
It seems clear that the Greens and Labour will be part of the next government. This will be true whether or not New Zealand First makes it. With Labour on 50% they could govern alone but are unlikely to do so and ignore their allies from this term of government. Whilst the Greens have been between 5 and 7% in most polls it is still worryingly close to the 5% threshold needed to get into parliament without an electorate seat. But, unless something goes terribly wrong they should make it. My hope is that the Greens make at least 9% in the election as that will bring in four more long-time social and environmental campaigners ranked 8-11 that have been good friends of Unite in our own campaigns over many years – Teanau Tuiono, Dr. Elizabeth Kerekere, Ricardo Menéndez March, and Steve Abel.
National and their Act Allies are at least 15% behind and that seems an impossibly large hurdle to get over before September 19.
With luck, New Zealand First will not make the 5% barrier and be eliminated from parliament. On current polling that would be the result but Winston peters has always been the great escape artist and will no doubt have a few tricks up his sleeve for this campaign. On most issues, they have been a conservative and regressive brake on the coalition government.
Even if they are returned to parliament they will not be in a position to keep the Green party out of their desired place around the Cabinet table as they did last election. I personally don’t think that a party that wants fundamental change should necessarily be in the position of trying to co-manage the system. A party like that would be happy to sit outside of government and use their votes to push for more fundamental changes. But the Green’s seem determined to be in Cabinet.
If NZ First make it over the 5% barrier they will be invited to be part of the Labour-led government again. Strategically, Labour know they have needed NZ first in the past and will probably need them again in the future, and they can use them to balance off against the Green Party.
Ideally, Labour would want to be in a position to have enough votes to govern alone, but even if they do they will invite both the Greens and NZ First to be part of the government again if those parties make it back.
If Labour doesn’t get enough votes to govern alone they will invite both the Greens and NZ First to be part of the government even if they only need one of them to get a majority.
Again the best situation for Labour would be if they only needed one of the two support parties for any particular vote. That way they could lean to the right and use NZ First when they wanted (for example to tighten immigration) and then lean to the left to get a vote through on the environment that NZ First may not like. This is how the last National party-led government used their support parties at the time – Act and the Maori party.
But the system any government is managing today is a system called capitalism. That system is based solely on the pursuit of profit and serves the economically dominant 1% who call the shots in our society. Capitalism inevitably leads to periodic crises of overproduction with attendant mass unemployment, environmental degradation, and uses race and sex discrimination to oppress and exploit us all.
The richest capitalist countries, including New Zealand, are also part of a global system of imperial rule and exploitation of the developing world through military alliances like Nato, spying agencies like the 5-Eyes network and endless wars like those in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The problem working people have is that this system is almost impossible to turn from the course it has already established. The production of more and more commodities to sell for a profit on the market is its be all and end all. Humanity’s relationship with the planet we live on has been endangered by this reality.
At the moment, Labour and the Green’s don’t want to challenge this system. They want to tinker with it and try and make it work a bit better for everyone. That is why, for example, they have limited themselves to a system of taxes and price signals called the Emissions Trading System to try and fix the environment crisis but what the signals they have put in place have no hope of doing so in the foreseeable future. What is actually needed is a radical reconstruction of the system away from producing exchange values for sale for profit to meet the manipulated and artificial desires, towards the production of use values based on human needs. We already largely do that in health care and education and we should also do that with finance, transport, energy, and communications.
I know there are many unionists and members of both Labour and the Greens who want these parties and any government they form to do much more to meet the needs of working people and Papatūānuku than is currently on offer. Their efforts inside those parties need support and encouragement.
But we also have a job to to develop our own programme of fundamental change can confront the multiple crises we face today. This programme must appear realistic and necessary for the times we are in. Internationally this programme is being dubbed the Green New Deal and we need ours own version to provide the steps needed now to start the transition to a new society of solidarity not competition, human need not private profit, climate justice and peace for the globe.