The worst form of racism perpetrated against Maori is that "they all think the same way."
They don't. Never have and never will.
I was just watching this Billy Te Kahika episode from Christchurch today.
Yet another freedom of speech issue. Another case of 'social media' quashing real life gatherings.
We all have to rally behind the freedom to speak and be heard.
If we allow ourselves to be divided racially by political manipulation (current modus operandi), we get weaker - not stronger.
Is it interesting that of those people convicted of breaching covid 19 restrictions
- most were men
- around half were under 30
- around half were Maori.
Pretty much the same story as other crime.
Proves yet again the justice system is institutionally sexist, ageist AND racist!
(And before anyone thinks I am condoning people being convicted of breaching covid 19 restrictions, I fully expect that they were concurrent charges to some other law-breaking offences).
Great column from Damien Grant this morning. It nails the frustration that those of us older than most current MPs feel.
"One of the economic lessons we are determined not to learn is that government cannot regulate prosperity. Each generation must learn, from scratch, this lesson. Helpfully, we already know the script.
A successful economy is, over time, corroded by a growing layer of restrictions. Each set of regulations imposes an unintended and unanticipated cost or outcome. This necessitates further rules and government oversight. Eventually the entire system becomes so overwhelmed that it either grinds to a halt or there is a sudden and dramatic economic liberalisation."
According to today's Economist
A commission in Britain that was created after last year’s Black Lives Matter protests to investigate racial disparities concluded that race is less important than social class and family structure in explaining inequality. On schooling, the report found that most children from ethnic-minority groups did as well or better than their white peers. It added that the catch-all term BAME (black, Asian and minority ethnic) was not very useful. The report contradicted the claims of critical race theorists, some of whom claim that white privilege is the prime cause of most disparities.
It's lengthy and I have only scanned through it but the conclusion, which I've reproduced here in full gives some idea of the clarity of thought and open-mindedness demonstrated by the commissioners. You can download the report from:
"We have tried in this report to present a new race agenda for the country, relevant to people from all backgrounds.
Rather than just highlighting minority disparities and demanding the government takes action, we have tried to understand why they exist in the first place.
That has meant some challenging conversations about today’s complex reality of ethnic advantage and disadvantage, a reality no longer captured by the old idea of BAME versus White Britain.
We have focused not just on persistent race-based discrimination but on the role of cultural traditions, including family, within different minority groups, the overlap between ethnic and socio-economic disadvantage, and the agency we have as individuals and groups.
And we believe that perhaps more than previous reports on these issues a degree of optimism is justified. Our agenda is rooted in the significant progress we have made as well as the challenges that remain.
We were established as a response to the upsurge of concern about race issues instigated by the BLM movement. And we owe the mainly young people behind that movement a debt of gratitude for focusing our attention once again on these issues.
But most of us come from an older generation whose views were formed by growing up in the 1970s and 1980s. And our experience has taught us that you do not pass on the baton of progress by cleaving to a fatalistic account that insists nothing has changed.
And nor do you move forward by importing bleak new theories about race that insist on accentuating our differences. It is closer contact, mutual understanding across ethnic groups and a shared commitment to equal opportunities that has contributed to the progress we have made.
Too many people in the progressive and anti-racism movements seem reluctant to acknowledge their own past achievements, and they offer solutions based on the binary divides of the past which often misses the point of today’s world.
We have paid close attention to the data and tried to avoid sweeping statements or over-ambitious targets and recommendations. Instead, our recommendations have tried to account for the messy reality of life and have been aimed, where possible, at everyone who is disadvantaged, not just those from specific ethnic groups.
Many of our recommendations, on Class B drugs or extending school hours for example, are aimed especially at the COVID-blighted generation of young people. Others focus on better use of data and the development of digital tools to promote fairness at work or for keeping young people out of trouble.
We have also acknowledged where we do not know enough and called for further research on what works in promoting fairness at work, and the role of the family and the reasons behind the success of those minority groups that have been surging forward into the middle class and the elite.
We focused our recommendations on the 4 broad categories of change that the Commission wishes to affect – build trust, promote fairness, create agency, and achieve inclusivity – and never assumed that minorities are inert victims of circumstance. As mentioned in the foreword the fact that most of us are successful minority professionals has no doubt shaped this thinking. And our experience of ethnic minority Britain from the inside makes it obvious to us that different groups are distinguished in part by their different cultural patterns and expectations, after all that is what multiculturalism was supposed to be about. It is hardly shocking to suggest that some of those traditions can help individuals succeed more than others.
Beneath the headlines that often show egregious acts of discrimination, the Windrush scandal most recently, incremental progress is being made as our report has shown beyond doubt. Through focusing on what matters now, rather than refighting the battles of the past, we want to build on that progress.
Finally, a thanks to all those individuals and organisations from across the country who gave us their time to to share their perspectives and evidence, and explain how their inspiring projects are helping to build a fairer Britain.
The year 2022 promises to be a special one: a new energy as we are fully released from COVID captivity, The Queen’s 70th Jubilee and the Commonwealth Games in Birmingham. And we hope it will be infused with the spirit of British optimism, fairness and national purpose that was captured by that 2012 Olympic opening ceremony, and has animated this report."
Indexing benefits to wages last year set a precedent. They've been indexed to inflation since 2001 but indexing to wages had always been resisted.
For many people the margin between income from a benefit and income from work is a cost they are prepared to pay. Fix that margin and they will always be prepared to pay it. Increase the margin and work becomes attractive.
Covid highlighted NZ's heavy reliance on imported workers in areas where benefit dependence is also high. With benefits linked to wages, that's the way it will stay.
The previous Labour government (a godsend compared to this lot) understood the importance of keeping a margin:
"...it is desirable to create a margin between being dependent on a benefit and being in employment....
The Labour Party isn’t the party that says living on a benefit is a preferred lifestyle. Its position has always been that the benefit system is a safety net for those who are unavoidably unable to participate in employment. From its history, the Labour Party has always been about people in employment."
Not Jacinda's Labour Party.
Having a bit of a tidy up when I came across these photos which show the development of one of my favourite subjects and paintings, Herbie:
The PM's office was trying to get data to show that rents have risen in line with wage increases apparently. PM's chief press secretary Andrew Campbell asks in an email mistakenly sent to Stuff:
“Can we get a table rent increases year on year since been in Govt year on year compared to increase in wages and house prices [sic]. My understanding rents have been in line with average wage growth and obviously a lot less than house price growth...Do we know if our rent increases have been in line with increases under National? If they have been that would be good to point out,” he said.
Well you definitely cannot point it out for Auckland or Wellington:
A media report yesterday talked about landlords "threatening" to hike rents in response to to Labour's closing the "loophole" of loan interest deductibility.
Both of those terms are misleading. The first is an effort to paint landlords as thugs. The second, as tax dodgers.
Landlords with mortgaged properties will have no choice but to hike rents or sell. They cannot simply absorb further expenses. For instance, the government never mentions how quickly insurance has escalated. And rental property insurance is more expensive than owner occupied insurance. Meanwhile rates continue to grow over and above the inflation rate. Not to mention the significant property maintenance costs imposed by this government.
Over the ten year period to 2018, births of NZ European babies were reasonably evenly spread across the economic deciles with the fewest being born in the least deprived decile - the poorest neighbourhood.
For Maori babies the reverse is true. The highest percentage are born in the poorest decile.
More than one in four Maori babies is born in the poorest area compared to one in twenty NZ European babies.
What a stark contrast.
Statistics New Zealand compiled a report called Housing in Aotearoa 2020 which is full of interesting data. This graph painted a slightly different picture from what might be expected.
She wrote me, "...we’ve come so far, and I know that we can make it through together."
She did. The PM. Tonight. Just now. Personally addressed to ME.
At fifteen, I wanted to be a song writer. I lacked Jacinda's brilliance though.
Who cares if it doesn't rhyme?
It's so salvational. So reassuring. So, Up Where We Belong.
Jacinda. I believe in you. I Believe I Can Fly.
You might have taken away my freedom, controlled my economy, exercised your power over mine and triumphed.
But I knew all along that you, magnificent leader, would write a better song lyric than I ever could.
(Left click on image to enlarge)
Note a marked reversal in a number of positive trends since 2017.
A reader kindly sent me a response she received yesterday from MSD. She'd asked if any cost benefit analysis has been made of Temporary Emergency Accommodation versus paying market rental. The answer was 'no'. Hardly surprising.
But MSD did supply a document containing some data from March 2020 quarter. Under a heading 'Analysis' the following observation appears:
"The spend on Emergency Housing does not represent value for money."
That's the understatement of the year.
I've charted the three main spends:
National is at last complaining about an issue I (and probably others) was blogging about over a year ago.
National’s Housing spokesperson Nicola Willis says the Government is relying too much on using hotels and motels as emergency housing, which has seen the owners of these establishments charge prices as high as $440 a night.
In relation to one Olive Tree Motel OIA questions were asked about accommodation payments:
"Clients are granted an amount which is paid directly to the motel.
In the June 2019 quarter the motel was receiving $265 per night.
But nightly charges per unit range from $145 to $165 according to their website. Charges reduce for longer stays"
Right now most academics, politicians, public servants, pundits and media maintain that the colonisation of New Zealand was a coercive and negative process for Maori. Moreover, that colonisation is an ongoing process.
I differ. I think much of the colonisation occurred with consent.
Take just one aspect of our shared history - social security.
While Maori were not wholly locked out of earliest social security provision, they were disadvantaged. It was harder to secure the Old Age Pension due to difficulty in procuring proof of birth. Then, authorities vested with the power of granting shied from issuing pensions to elderly Maori ensconced in communal living lest younger members misappropriated the funds. There was also debate about how much money an elderly Maori person living communally needed to live versus a retired European living independently. Neither of these considerations would be brooked today. And these discriminations quickly fell by the wayside.
Post 1938 Maori increasingly enjoyed the fruits of social security. They were moving to the cities for work and wanted the same unemployment safety net. They were having large families and wanted the same family assistance. They aspired to own homes and wanted the same family benefit capitalization opportunity and access to state-advanced mortgages.
Colonisation provided a population large enough to supply the funds required for a universal safety net. Maori contributed and benefited willingly - or as willingly as non-Maori. (Willingness wasn't unamimous. I'm still no fan but recognise I am in a tiny minority. There are downsides to social security and they have disproportionately harmed Maori.)
Readers can doubtless think of other examples of how colonisation has been a positive process not least, the hundreds of thousands of life-long intimate individual unions between Maori and non-Maori.
I believe the term 'consentual colonisation' could be very powerful. Right now those who would angrily reject the idea are winning the debate and driving division.
Next time someone raises the matter of colonisation perhaps I'll ask, "Do you mean consentual colonisation?"
Social Development Minister Carmel Sepuloni has been crowing about people coming off benefits recently. I said to nobody in particular, "People always come off benefits at this time of year."
But don't take my word for it. Here's the Jan - Feb change 2021:
In total there was a drop from 389,601 to 377,907 - a 3% reduction.
And this is the same period in 2020:
A good deal of the change is driven by students moving from JS Student Hardship (categorised in 'other main benefits') back to student allowances. This is an older graph from my files but it serves to clearly show the annual December spike.
I don't know much about this guy Piers Morgan. His face is recognisable from a British talent show I watched for maybe a season? I live in New Zealand and don't follow social media - or barely - so am unfamiliar with his views.
Verity Johnson's column Stop shouting, Piers Morgan, we're not listening in today's DomPost presented the perfect opportunity to hear them.
She begins, "...he’s basically just been that drunk dude outside a pub who yells at you when you walk past."
Then , "...he constantly, publicly, screams at successful, opinionated young women like Meghan Markle, Greta Thunberg and Ariana Grande..."
No example of what he screams at them though.
Regarding Meghan Markle, "She continued to ignore him, causing ever more acidic outbursts, to the point where, on Monday, he trashed her mental health confessions (subsequently crossing a line that made even Meghan’s detractors draw in their breath sharply)."
I didn't watch the Oprah interview. What did Meghan say and what did Piers subsequently say?
Again no dialogue forthcoming.
Historically Piers' offensive statements have apparently been made "so openly and for so long" they are "part of the script that we as young women always struggled with."
I scrutinise Johnson's own script but still no examples.
She continues, "No-one stopped his ranting on Monday. And it took a calling out by his weatherman on Tuesday, the devastatingly rational Alex Beresford, for him to shut up and flounce off."
Rational! I love rational. At least we are going to hear what the rational weatherman had to say...
No such hope.
"A good 40 per cent of social media is predicated on the formula of angry man rants about something a woman has said and gets increasingly annoyed when she ignores his @s and invitations to “enter into a rational debate”. I’ve had it myself when male broadcasters have loathed columns I’ve written, repeatedly trash talked me on air, and been infuriated when I consistently won’t engage with them to “defend my position”.But why would we? We know the difference between rational debate and a drunk outside a pub."
Verity might yet grow up to be a Prime Minister who declares that Mike Hosking is the 'drunk outside the pub' simply because she preferred not to debate the ideas.
Whatever happened to the fearlessness of feminism?
From Scoop:
Women’s Wellbeing Survey Launched
Monday, 8 March 2021, 10:40 am
Press Release: New Zealand National Party
In recognition of International Women’s Day, National’s spokesperson for Women Nicola Grigg, has launched a survey looking into the wellbeing of women in the Selwyn electorate.
“We know that women have been disproportionately impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic in terms of job losses, but what we don’t seem to have a full understanding of is the overarching psycho-social impact the lockdown and enduring stress has had on our wāhine.
More (if you can stand it)
Continuing with Stuff's 'Our Truth' crusade Michelle Duff has a piece profiling five good Maori Dads to show that they do exist.
We all know there are good Dads - Maori and non-Maori - everywhere. The reason it isn't reported is that it isn't news. It's abiding fact.
She goes on to bemoan Once Were Warriors - "the spectre of Māori fatherhood, ground into New Zealand’s cultural fabric like a long stain of Double Brown on a pub carpet" - and some sensationalised 2006 research about the 'warrior gene' reinforcing stereotypes that sadly, "Māori start to believe".
Inevitably the narrative moves on to how Maori child-rearing practises were so much better in pre-European times. Duff lifts this 1840 quote from a writer called Polack:
“The father was devotedly fond of his children and they were his pride and delight”, wrote Polack, a Jew and a trader for some years.
I went to the source and found that the immediately preceding sentence reads, "Child prisoners were greatly prized and lived with the whanau but they remained slaves for life." That part of the quote was naturally excluded. The practise of slavery - so abhorred internationally today - was ended by colonisation.
Stuff's obsession with selectively re-educating the audience is utterly patronising.
I form my views from a mix of: what I see with my own two eyes, reading, statistics,and anecdote.
If 47 percent of those on the Sole Parent Support benefit (for caregivers with children up to 14 years-old) are Maori, commonsense dictates that the degree of contact Maori fathers have with their children is lower than for non-Maori.
Yes, I accept that not all of the fathers of mothers on SPS would be Maori, and some of the SPS recipients would acually be the fathers of the dependent children. Some of the claims will even be fraudulent - Mum claims despite Dad being ever-present.
However, from a PHD thesis held at the University of Waikato:
During the 1990s Yeoman and Cook (2008) estimated that around 40% of Māori children lived in a single parent household, predominantly with the mother. In other words, 2 out of every 5 Māori children were raised in homes with only one parent; a trend that is likely to keep increasing (Hutton, 2001). This also means that a large majority of fathers are absent from the everyday lives of their children or have limited contact with them. It also poses a question, where are all the fathers?
Asked, I believe, by a young Maori man.
