Placebo politics

On opposite pages of the DomPost this morning we have two very different minds. One which sees the problem and another which thinks it does. The first is Michael Bassett with his column "Taming the feral breed". Bassett attacks the dog micro-chipping strategy as "placebo" politics and goes on to the broader picture in which the same sort of politics is now routinely practiced by our "student" politicians; "But till such time as the great welfare recruiting ground for under-achievement and consequent anti-social behaviour is faced up to, nothing offers more than temporary relief."

Then we have the benefit of the wisdom of Murray Edridge, Barnado's CE, urging the repeal of section 59 to "save lives". "The sooner NZ society stops giving ambiguous legal signals on violence in the home, the better it will be for our children. Our laws set a standard, and ensuring that standard is clear and unambiguous is the first step in social change. The standard in itself does not change behaviour. Our law is very clear and unambiguous, for example, about murder or theft. These crimes continue to occur, but in the knowledge they are wrong. In the same way, repeal of section 59 will make an unambiguous statement about the use of violence against children."

Convincing, isn't it? This guy likes to spend his time fawning around the likes of the Children's Commissioner, the Families Commission and the CPAG, all hand-wringing do-gooders whose careers turn on rhetoric and dalliance.....or, if I can borrow Mr Bassett's phrase, "placebo" politics.