After watching the Children's Commissioner performing on Campbell Live just days ago I am somewhat gobsmacked to learn she last year laid a complaint against the same show for unbalanced broadcasting over the matter of removal of section 59. She complained in four areas. 2 were not upheld, a third the board declined to determine and the fourth was upheld. CamWest has to broadcast a statement and pay costs of $1,500.
Last week's show featuring Kiro versus Robert Larzelere was most certainly unbalanced thanks to the Commissioner's domination and attacks on Larzelere's credentials. Ms Kiro is clearly of the 'do as I say, not as I do' school.
Monday, May 07, 2007
Youth offending - worse or not?
Is youth offending worsening or is it just a matter of perception?For each of the three years 2002, 03 and 04 Principal Youth Court Judge Andrew Becroft published a paper called, "Youth Offending: Putting the Headlines in Context".
It asked, Is violent offending by under 17 year olds increasing?
Yes. And no.
Violent offending attributed to 14-16 year olds has increased since 1991 but much less so since 1995.
And, each edition concluded;
It has been rightly said that each generation unfavourably compares the young people of today with previous golden ages. However an analysis of the available statistics shows that the popular belief that youth offending is rapidly increasing and out of control is not actually accurate, and does not accord with the experience of those working with young people.
But today the Taranaki Daily News has the following report;
Urgent research is needed to find out why a small percentage of teen boys and girls are becoming increasingly violent, says New Zealand's chief Youth Court judge.....
Visiting New Plymouth last week, Judge Becroft said that as a member of the judiciary he was unable to comment on law changes because they were Parliament's responsibility.
But, as a member of the Government's Youth Justice Advisory Group, he was calling for urgent research into the reasons why top-end serious offending by a small number of 14 to 16-year-olds was becoming more serious.
It was a trend in Western countries.
So, sadly, the answer is yes - straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.
Sunday, May 06, 2007
Child murder and what will ensue
Do you have the feeling this, the drive-by murder of a two year girl in Wanganui, is just the start of another sickening circus? We are going to see wailing, wringing of hands, a huge tangi, gang members on bikes escorting a hearse, and finally court scenes where people hurl threats of utu or pledges to stand by thugs and murderers.
The prospect is sickening. I hope I am wrong.
The prospect is sickening. I hope I am wrong.
Sound advice
Sound advice from Matthew Hooton writing in today's Sunday Star Times. Let's hope a fair few people take it;
Saturday, May 05, 2007
What's going on in Flaxmere?
Rick Barker claims there is no-one on the dole in Flaxmere, but nobody believes him.
Officially there were 6 people on the dole at the end of March 2007. And according to Work and Income's general manager of national operations, Janine Dowding, Other benefit statistics for Flaxmere were also good, she said.
Oh really.
There are 1283 people registered on benefits at the Flaxmere office. Since 2002, Flaxmere has managed to reduce its total beneficiary caseload by a mere 156. It is by far the worst performing office in the region. In the past year DPB numbers have gone up, against the national trend. In the past five years, sickness benefits are up 39 percent and invalid's 8 percent.
Work and Income's general manager of national operations employs a very generous definition of "good".
Officially there were 6 people on the dole at the end of March 2007. And according to Work and Income's general manager of national operations, Janine Dowding, Other benefit statistics for Flaxmere were also good, she said.
Oh really.
There are 1283 people registered on benefits at the Flaxmere office. Since 2002, Flaxmere has managed to reduce its total beneficiary caseload by a mere 156. It is by far the worst performing office in the region. In the past year DPB numbers have gone up, against the national trend. In the past five years, sickness benefits are up 39 percent and invalid's 8 percent.
Work and Income's general manager of national operations employs a very generous definition of "good".
Friday, May 04, 2007
"Human rights" - garbage
Just in case you ever wondered what a "human right" is, look no further. The Ministry of Social Development's Social Policy Journal spells it out;
What Is A “Human Right”?
In essence, a rights-based approach to policy is one that ensures that policy is formulated within the parameters set by New Zealand’s human rights obligations, as found in domestic and international law. Before examining that body of law, however, it is helpful to think more generally about what is meant by a “human right” and, in particular, how a focus on “rights” might differ conceptually from, for example, the focus on “needs” that is invited by the yardstick of “wellbeing”.
Needs-based and rights-based approaches inevitably have much in common. However, the language of “rights” emphasises particular dimensions of the interests, entitlements and duties that are at stake. Thus we say that “John needs food” if we believe that in the absence of food, John’s wellbeing will suffer in some way that we regard as fundamental. We are identifying the predicament (neediness) that John will face if deprived of food (Waldron 1996:105). A similar assessment of John’s neediness may well also underlie the statement “John has a right to food”. The idea of rights, however, complements the idea of neediness in a number of respects.
First, the language of “rights” is the language of demand or entitlement. To say that “John needs food” tells us nothing about the moral or legal obligations of others in relation to John’s need. In contrast, the statement “John has a right to food” means that someone else (in the case of international human rights law, the state) has a duty to ensure that John’s right is protected (White and Ladley 2005:6, Waldron 1996:94).
This also has implications for how we view the rights-bearer. To say that John “needs” food is to present John as a passive victim and potential recipient of charity. To say that John has a “right” to food is to conceptualise John as a holder of entitlements. The language of rights is thus the language of empowerment. John is cast as a self-sufficient and independent rights-bearer whose assertion of rights amounts to a vindication of his autonomy, personhood and dignity (Waldron 1996:96 and 104). Further, John the autonomous rights-bearer does not have to “earn” his right to food. As a “human right” it is owed to him by virtue of his humanity. The concept of “deserving” and “undeserving” poor is largely absent from human rights thinking.
If John was "self-sufficient and independent" he would be "earning" his own blasted food. He is not made "self-sufficient and independent" by law that says other people have an obligation to buy food for him. Or clothes or cars or Ipods.
Is it any wonder this country is replete with whingers and moaners who think they are owed a living when we fill their heads with this sort of garbage.
What Is A “Human Right”?
In essence, a rights-based approach to policy is one that ensures that policy is formulated within the parameters set by New Zealand’s human rights obligations, as found in domestic and international law. Before examining that body of law, however, it is helpful to think more generally about what is meant by a “human right” and, in particular, how a focus on “rights” might differ conceptually from, for example, the focus on “needs” that is invited by the yardstick of “wellbeing”.
Needs-based and rights-based approaches inevitably have much in common. However, the language of “rights” emphasises particular dimensions of the interests, entitlements and duties that are at stake. Thus we say that “John needs food” if we believe that in the absence of food, John’s wellbeing will suffer in some way that we regard as fundamental. We are identifying the predicament (neediness) that John will face if deprived of food (Waldron 1996:105). A similar assessment of John’s neediness may well also underlie the statement “John has a right to food”. The idea of rights, however, complements the idea of neediness in a number of respects.
First, the language of “rights” is the language of demand or entitlement. To say that “John needs food” tells us nothing about the moral or legal obligations of others in relation to John’s need. In contrast, the statement “John has a right to food” means that someone else (in the case of international human rights law, the state) has a duty to ensure that John’s right is protected (White and Ladley 2005:6, Waldron 1996:94).
This also has implications for how we view the rights-bearer. To say that John “needs” food is to present John as a passive victim and potential recipient of charity. To say that John has a “right” to food is to conceptualise John as a holder of entitlements. The language of rights is thus the language of empowerment. John is cast as a self-sufficient and independent rights-bearer whose assertion of rights amounts to a vindication of his autonomy, personhood and dignity (Waldron 1996:96 and 104). Further, John the autonomous rights-bearer does not have to “earn” his right to food. As a “human right” it is owed to him by virtue of his humanity. The concept of “deserving” and “undeserving” poor is largely absent from human rights thinking.
If John was "self-sufficient and independent" he would be "earning" his own blasted food. He is not made "self-sufficient and independent" by law that says other people have an obligation to buy food for him. Or clothes or cars or Ipods.
Is it any wonder this country is replete with whingers and moaners who think they are owed a living when we fill their heads with this sort of garbage.
Thursday, May 03, 2007
Incapacity Benefits
Incapacity benefits are sickness and invalid's combined. The de facto dole in many cases. But never fear. The good news is the rate of growth is slowing "significantly".
That positive trend leads to this;
Disappointed?
The percentage growth rate will drop by necessity if the absolute numbers climb at a steady rate, allowing a good news story to be spun from a bad news one.
Perhaps you should bear this in mind. In 1953, when the population of New Zealand was half of what it is now, there were only 13,000 people on these benefits and some were there as a consequence of WW11. The increase since has been nearly ten-fold. With improved medical technology and the advent of ACC, who would have predicted it?
(Postnote; If you follow my posts regularly you may wonder why I have argued previously that the Minister shouldn't continue to claim the growth rate was reducing. This is because tracking December to December there was an increase during 2006).
That positive trend leads to this;
Disappointed?
The percentage growth rate will drop by necessity if the absolute numbers climb at a steady rate, allowing a good news story to be spun from a bad news one.
Perhaps you should bear this in mind. In 1953, when the population of New Zealand was half of what it is now, there were only 13,000 people on these benefits and some were there as a consequence of WW11. The increase since has been nearly ten-fold. With improved medical technology and the advent of ACC, who would have predicted it?
(Postnote; If you follow my posts regularly you may wonder why I have argued previously that the Minister shouldn't continue to claim the growth rate was reducing. This is because tracking December to December there was an increase during 2006).
Good news
The Stuff Poll I referred to earlier has swung around. Now a clear majority are saying the amendment is bad law.
The Police are calling for 'inconsequential' to be defined (we just go around in circles) and Stephen Franks gives his estimable opinion.
The Police are calling for 'inconsequential' to be defined (we just go around in circles) and Stephen Franks gives his estimable opinion.
It's not all about you!
What does it take for New Zealand to get a mention in an American newspaper?It has to be about them and it has to be something they can skite about.
The LA Times reports that their population has passed the 4 million mark which means their population is now as big as the whole of New Zealand's!
Actually, hate to burst their bubble, but, this isn't news. Our populations have mirrored each other's since we began counting them although they started a bit sooner.
We'll never know
Harking back to yesterday's suggestion by Larry Baldock that Clark was facing a caucus revolt, here's where Harry Duynhoven was at;
Transport Safety Minister Harry Duynhoven last night revealed how close he came to crossing the floor over the Bradford bill.
Mr Duynhoven is one of Labour's more conservative MPs, and was frequently challenged by National MPs to vote with opponents of the bill.
"On this issue I have been more torn than any other issue we have debated in this House," he said.
"I have seriously considered whether I fitted still, whether my views and the basis of my value system were appropriate for the party I am in."
Personally I don't think he was on his own. But now we will never know.
With the amendment we will have the police defining what is acceptable. If they don't want to make that call they can refer the case to CYF. What is CYF's directive? As always they will be using their discretion based on evidence and testimony. So what happens before a case reaches court is pretty much the same.
Thereafter, the accused will have no defence of reasonable force and the court will have to decide what is and isn't 'inconsequential'. Things have just become a lot murkier. What was bad legislation has been turned into worse legislation and so it will be passed.
There will be more reports because the population, thanks to this extraordinary debate, is charged up about the moral rights and wrongs of smacking.
And given the result, it's a debate that has been a waste of time. Except for the CIR petition that asks govt to do something meaningful about child abuse.
Transport Safety Minister Harry Duynhoven last night revealed how close he came to crossing the floor over the Bradford bill.
Mr Duynhoven is one of Labour's more conservative MPs, and was frequently challenged by National MPs to vote with opponents of the bill.
"On this issue I have been more torn than any other issue we have debated in this House," he said.
"I have seriously considered whether I fitted still, whether my views and the basis of my value system were appropriate for the party I am in."
Personally I don't think he was on his own. But now we will never know.
With the amendment we will have the police defining what is acceptable. If they don't want to make that call they can refer the case to CYF. What is CYF's directive? As always they will be using their discretion based on evidence and testimony. So what happens before a case reaches court is pretty much the same.
Thereafter, the accused will have no defence of reasonable force and the court will have to decide what is and isn't 'inconsequential'. Things have just become a lot murkier. What was bad legislation has been turned into worse legislation and so it will be passed.
There will be more reports because the population, thanks to this extraordinary debate, is charged up about the moral rights and wrongs of smacking.
And given the result, it's a debate that has been a waste of time. Except for the CIR petition that asks govt to do something meaningful about child abuse.
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
What does the amendment mean?
Taking stock, what do we have now with the Key/Clark amendment?
I have no legal knowledge.
If a police officer can be persuaded that more than 'inconsequential' force has been used he or she will decide a prosecution is warranted.
What happens when the parent arrives in court? There is no longer a defence of reasonable force but can his lawyer then argue that the force used was in fact 'inconsequential' and his client wrongly prosecuted? Can the parent still request a jury trial? Are we back where we started from?
(I think I have just listened to Larry Baldock calling Newstalk ZB. He suggests Clark was facing a caucus revolt. Opposers of the bill were on the point of winning but thanks to John Key the legislation will now pass with the amendment.)
Update; From Stuff about the amendment, At the same time it did not define an acceptable level of violence against children, which would have pushed Ms Bradford to withdraw the bill completely.
Well, it does. The new acceptable level of violence will be whatever a cop decides is 'inconsequential'.
I have no legal knowledge.
If a police officer can be persuaded that more than 'inconsequential' force has been used he or she will decide a prosecution is warranted.
What happens when the parent arrives in court? There is no longer a defence of reasonable force but can his lawyer then argue that the force used was in fact 'inconsequential' and his client wrongly prosecuted? Can the parent still request a jury trial? Are we back where we started from?
(I think I have just listened to Larry Baldock calling Newstalk ZB. He suggests Clark was facing a caucus revolt. Opposers of the bill were on the point of winning but thanks to John Key the legislation will now pass with the amendment.)
Update; From Stuff about the amendment, At the same time it did not define an acceptable level of violence against children, which would have pushed Ms Bradford to withdraw the bill completely.
Well, it does. The new acceptable level of violence will be whatever a cop decides is 'inconsequential'.
Sweden's ban on smacking a failure
Media Release
SWEDEN'S BAN ON SMACKING A FAILURE
Wednesday, 2 May, 2007
Sweden's ban on smacking, introduced in 1979, has been widely cited by supporters of Sue Bradford's bill as having successfully reduced child abuse.
Welfare commentator Lindsay Mitchell is not persuaded. "Sweden's Ministry of Health and Social Affairs continues to express considerable concern about the levels of violence towards children and women. According to Sweden's Strategy Report For Social Protection And Social Inclusion 2006- 2008 the Committee against Child Abuse says around ten percent of all children have at some time experienced this type of violence. Additionally, reported violence against women had climbed 20 percent in recent years."
"It is notoriously difficult to gauge levels of child abuse with under-reporting, false reporting, under-diagnosing and under-coding in hospital admissions. In New Zealand CYF found 20,110 instances of abuse in 2006. In the same year 16,173 child clients were receiving CYF services. That number represents approximately 1.9 percent of 0-14 year-olds."
"The Christchurch Development Study found that 4 percent of participants had experienced physical abuse by the age of 16 and a study by the Office of the Children's Commissioner found that 10 % of intermediate-aged children had been punched, kicked or beaten by an adult in the previous 12 months."
"It would appear that Sweden and New Zealand have comparable rates of child abuse despite Sweden's ban on smacking for the past 28 years."
SWEDEN'S BAN ON SMACKING A FAILURE
Wednesday, 2 May, 2007
Sweden's ban on smacking, introduced in 1979, has been widely cited by supporters of Sue Bradford's bill as having successfully reduced child abuse.
Welfare commentator Lindsay Mitchell is not persuaded. "Sweden's Ministry of Health and Social Affairs continues to express considerable concern about the levels of violence towards children and women. According to Sweden's Strategy Report For Social Protection And Social Inclusion 2006- 2008 the Committee against Child Abuse says around ten percent of all children have at some time experienced this type of violence. Additionally, reported violence against women had climbed 20 percent in recent years."
"It is notoriously difficult to gauge levels of child abuse with under-reporting, false reporting, under-diagnosing and under-coding in hospital admissions. In New Zealand CYF found 20,110 instances of abuse in 2006. In the same year 16,173 child clients were receiving CYF services. That number represents approximately 1.9 percent of 0-14 year-olds."
"The Christchurch Development Study found that 4 percent of participants had experienced physical abuse by the age of 16 and a study by the Office of the Children's Commissioner found that 10 % of intermediate-aged children had been punched, kicked or beaten by an adult in the previous 12 months."
"It would appear that Sweden and New Zealand have comparable rates of child abuse despite Sweden's ban on smacking for the past 28 years."
Creative Cubans
Apparently Cuba has been distorting its life expectancy and infant mortality statistics. Babies who die within 24 hours of birth are sometimes not counted in infant mortality rates and Cuba's abortion rate is 7 in 10 pregnancies.
Apparently, Cubans are often pressured into abortions if there is a chance a baby might require extra medical care.
Apparently, Cubans are often pressured into abortions if there is a chance a baby might require extra medical care.
Maori, marijuana and schizophrenia
An international conference on mental health has had new papers about marijuana presented to it. It is reported in today's Dompost;
Doctors at Yale University in the United States tested the impact of THC on 150 healthy volunteers and 13 people with stable schizophrenia. Nearly half of the healthy subjects experienced psychotic symptoms when given the drug. Though the doctors expected to see marijuana improve the conditions of their schizophrenic subjects - since their patients reported the drug calmed them - they found the reverse was true. The study stopped early because the impact was so pronounced that it would have been unethical to test it on more people with schizophrenia.
Late last year a paper investigating the growth of numbers on the invalids benefit was published. Here is an excerpt;
The rate of growth in inflows was most rapid for Māori and Pacific peoples (41% and 36% respectively, compared with 24% for the New Zealand and other European grouping). It is likely that significant changes in the recording and coding of ethnicity in benefit administration data partly account for this.26 Variations in the rate of population growth or in the rate of population ageing between ethnic groups may also be important.
Most of the growth in the number of Māori and Pacific entrants is explained by incapacities other than the five that generated most of the overall growth.
* For Māori, this reflects larger contributions from schizophrenia (accounting for 12% of the growth in Māori inflows at ages 15–59), cancer (7%), respiratory (6%), circulatory (5%) and nervous (5%) conditions.
* For Pacific peoples, it reflects larger contributions from circulatory conditions (accounting for 23% of the growth in Pacific inflows at ages 15–59), endocrine conditions (17%) and cancer (10%).
Interestingly there was no growth in inflows due to schizophrenia for NZ and other European yet it isn't just Maori using marijuana. There is something else predisposing Maori to schizophrenia. I'm not arguing that dope isn't a factor but there is something else as well.
There is a theory that suggests schizophrenia is caused by a virus which arose hundreds of years ago and swept across Europe. Because Europeans have had centuries of exposure some evolutionary defence has developed. Maori, however, have not had that same length of exposure. It's a possibility they are still more susceptible to schizophrenia for that reason.
Doctors at Yale University in the United States tested the impact of THC on 150 healthy volunteers and 13 people with stable schizophrenia. Nearly half of the healthy subjects experienced psychotic symptoms when given the drug. Though the doctors expected to see marijuana improve the conditions of their schizophrenic subjects - since their patients reported the drug calmed them - they found the reverse was true. The study stopped early because the impact was so pronounced that it would have been unethical to test it on more people with schizophrenia.
Late last year a paper investigating the growth of numbers on the invalids benefit was published. Here is an excerpt;
The rate of growth in inflows was most rapid for Māori and Pacific peoples (41% and 36% respectively, compared with 24% for the New Zealand and other European grouping). It is likely that significant changes in the recording and coding of ethnicity in benefit administration data partly account for this.26 Variations in the rate of population growth or in the rate of population ageing between ethnic groups may also be important.
Most of the growth in the number of Māori and Pacific entrants is explained by incapacities other than the five that generated most of the overall growth.
* For Māori, this reflects larger contributions from schizophrenia (accounting for 12% of the growth in Māori inflows at ages 15–59), cancer (7%), respiratory (6%), circulatory (5%) and nervous (5%) conditions.
* For Pacific peoples, it reflects larger contributions from circulatory conditions (accounting for 23% of the growth in Pacific inflows at ages 15–59), endocrine conditions (17%) and cancer (10%).
Interestingly there was no growth in inflows due to schizophrenia for NZ and other European yet it isn't just Maori using marijuana. There is something else predisposing Maori to schizophrenia. I'm not arguing that dope isn't a factor but there is something else as well.
There is a theory that suggests schizophrenia is caused by a virus which arose hundreds of years ago and swept across Europe. Because Europeans have had centuries of exposure some evolutionary defence has developed. Maori, however, have not had that same length of exposure. It's a possibility they are still more susceptible to schizophrenia for that reason.
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
Unbelievable
I cannot believe what I just heard. The Prime Minister is taking questions on NewstalkZB and was attempting to describe to a caller what happens to children after a parent is prosecuted for abuse and faces a prison sentence. (The caller was concerned about what would happen to children after the passage of the Bradford legislation and presumably more parents are prosecuted). She then said not to forget that Sue Bradford had another bill in the wings which would allow mothers to have their children in prison with them for longer which would ensure the bond isn't broken.
What?? So now we are going to send child abusers to prison but let them take their victims with them?? How far backwards are we prepared to bend to keep children with their biological mothers?? Is anybody thinking about the kids?? How bad is the situation in this country when the best we can offer a child is being incarcerated with her abusive mother??
What?? So now we are going to send child abusers to prison but let them take their victims with them?? How far backwards are we prepared to bend to keep children with their biological mothers?? Is anybody thinking about the kids?? How bad is the situation in this country when the best we can offer a child is being incarcerated with her abusive mother??
The truth about beer
(PC's secret)
Yesterday, scientists suggested that men should take a look at their beer consumption, considering the results of a recent analysis that revealed the presence of female hormones in beer. The theory is that drinking beer makes men turn into women.
To test the finding, 100 men were fed 6 pints of beer each. It was then observed that 100% of the men gained weight, talked excessively without making sense, became overly emotional, couldn't drive, failed to think rationally, argued over nothing, and refused to apologize when wrong.
No further testing is planned.
Yesterday, scientists suggested that men should take a look at their beer consumption, considering the results of a recent analysis that revealed the presence of female hormones in beer. The theory is that drinking beer makes men turn into women.
To test the finding, 100 men were fed 6 pints of beer each. It was then observed that 100% of the men gained weight, talked excessively without making sense, became overly emotional, couldn't drive, failed to think rationally, argued over nothing, and refused to apologize when wrong.
No further testing is planned.
Key on Working for Families
John Key said National would not touch Labour's original Working for Families programme, which was targeted at lower-income earners, but there was no reason why higher earners should receive a handout from the state."It's always been my view that it has never been a well-designed system. It was never the intention of Working for Families to reach so far up the income scale," he said.
Ironically it is the lower income workers who get the "hand-out from the state" because they receive more in tax credits than they pay. High income earners get tax credits but are still nett contributors. The language around Working for Families distorts and misleads. Another reason for a fair, unambiguous, transparent flat tax system.
Appalling performance
Cindy Kiro's performance on John Campbell's show was appalling. To use a hackneyed but useful expression, she played the man instead of the ball. After opening remarks by Dr Robert Larzelere, Kiro launched into an attack on his credentials and his christian beliefs, holding up a periodical in which one of his paper's had been published. She was thuggish and overbearing. If Sue Bradford was watching I don't think she would have been best pleased. Sue has better manners and sense of fairplay. And she has tried hard to persuade people to her viewpoint. If Sue took two steps forward Kiro took three steps back.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
