Healthy eating hogwash

A new study shows that it isn't much more costly to eat healthy food than unhealthy. We needed a study to tell us that? The guinea pig shoppers were confined to certain products and one outlet. What about markets, discount stores and growing or picking your own produce? Or are low income people too stupid to shop around? Of course they aren't.

But this is what caught my eye.

The study appears in the latest New Zealand Medical Journal. An accompanying editorial by public health researchers at Otago University urges for action to reduce the price of healthy foods.

It suggests the Government consider schemes such as providing vouchers for fruits and vegetable discounts for low-income families and a mandatory traffic light system for foods as a simple way of indicating a food's health benefit or detriment.

Next month, Dr Ni Mhurchu will start recruiting 1200 supermarket shoppers for a Wellington trial looking to see if a discount of 12.5 per cent (the rate of GST) on healthier foods will spur people to buy more healthy foods.

First, voucher schemes can and will get ripped off. The voucher has a value to A but not to B. This alone shows it is B who really needs to use it. But B sells it to A for a smaller amount of cash than the voucher's redeemable value. Both parties are happy. And the desired result has not been achieved.

Second, GST off healthy food? What a bun fight that would be. For instance only last year Food Standards Australia New Zealand questioned whether fruit with over a certain amount of sugar was in fact healthy.

Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) has released draft guidelines governing nutrition and health claims made about food.

Under the draft, foods with more than 16 grams of sugar per serve can not be advertised as healthy, ruling out fruits like mangoes, grapes and apples.

Again I shake my head at what we get served up from (some) academics. The 'solutions' are generally to be driven by government action, involve costly redistribution and administration and inevitably cannot be demonstrated to improve matters.

"Dead people given benefits"

That's the headline in a DomPost story today.

The DomPost got figures under the OIA showing 600 people had continued to receive social security payments four weeks after their death.

National Welfare spokesperson, Judith Collins picks up on it and puts out a release saying, New figures show that 600 deceased beneficiaries wrongly received $380,000 from the taxpayer in the first 10 months of last year.

What Collins doesn't mention is that 90 percent of them were superannuitants, who, to my mind, are not beneficiaries - they receive Super, not a benefit. Others included veterans who are also not beneficiaries but pensioners.

That aside, data matching has improved the problem and as welfare problems go, it doesn't keep me awake at night.

Some meaningful welfare criticism (and policy) from National wouldn't go amiss. Problem is, with their current centrist approach there is nothing to offer beyond management quibbles.

Come to think of it, with their be-nice-to-everybody philosophy, this could be the best policy we get. No more Super for dead guys. Would you vote for that?

Privatising health the wrong way

Health funding is a huge yawn. But it's one of the biggest political problems the world over. Now Germany has come up with a novel way for the state to get out of the difficult dilemma of facing greater health needs than available funds. Pass it on to the private sector and legislate their mandatory acceptance. That's what the latest plan entails. The insurance company cannot refuse people and cannot control the premiums they charge. Result - the insurer will have to subsidise policies for some by charging others more and some insurers will simply bite the dust (very good for competition).

And when you think about what our government did to Telecom, well it's not inconceivable they might find this idea very attractive.

Paternity testing

I have never blogged about the Jayden Headley case because it saddens me to see the child dragged through the court and splashed all over the media. This morning's revelation about a false DNA sample did trigger some thoughts however.

DNA testing for paternity is a bit of a minefield. I know at least one father's group want mandatory testing at birth. Given so many partnerships do not last and child support can cost men thousands of dollars, sometimes with no corresponding 'rights' to father, I would support voluntary DNA testing. It could be offered as routine at birth (as part of the heel prick sample?) if the mother and father request it. If the mother refuses then so be it. BUT that will certainly leave a large question mark over his paternity, at which point he may want to do what others have done and send a sample to an overseas lab. It sounds awful. I know. But a male has the right to know he is the father of a child.

Think of it like a pre-nuptial agreement. Nobody has to have, or agree to sign one, but it protects one or possibly both parties. At the same time however, asking a partner to sign a pre-nup could have the same negative effect as asking for a DNA test to be run on a newborn. What about trust? A lack of trust is not a sound basis for a relationship.

In the end it is up to the individuals involved. DNA testing for paternity should be more accessible.

Key tells Maori they have "special status"

According to Radio Live, John Key is at Ratana telling Maori they have "special status" in this country.

When government accords one group special status they are by necessity taking from another. There can be no privilege without some corresponding disadvantage. If one individual or group is "special" then others are not. Unless of course we are all special (the sort of gobbledy gook you hear these days) in which case there is no point in pointing it out.

This is not the way forward. Integration and intermarriage are good. Assimilation or separatism are not. Certainly people should be able to preserve their culture and beliefs but that is not for the government to control.

Brash was hugely misunderstood by many Maori and many non-Maori. He simply espoused equal and individual rights. No more and no less. Until we understand and embrace this concept we will continue to have strife and division.

Aussie men not at work

Australia's Productivity Commission has found that half of the 900,000 men outside the workforce and not trying to get in, are on disability benefits. It claims, however, that most are not severely disabled and could find work if they had the motivation and the opportunity.


The Commission, in the first government inquiry into the huge increase in male joblessness, found that 9 percent of men aged 25 to 44 are not even looking for work - up from 2 percent in the seventies.

How does New Zealand compare?

Comparative figures at June 2005;

NZ Sickness and Invalid benefits 118,362
Male 55%
Female 45%

Australia Disability pension 706,800
Male 59%
Female 41%

NZ Unemployment benefit 50,714
Male 65%
Female 35%

Australia Newstart 453,700
Male 66%
Female 34%

New Zealand has a slightly lower percentage of people aged 15-64 at 66.1 percent compared to Australia's 67.3 percent but, for the purpose of comparison, roughly speaking the Australian caseloads should be 5 times more than NZ's. In fact their incapacity benefits are 6 times greater and unemployment, 9 times greater.

I suppose we should be celebrating our better performance. Does it make up for the cricket?

Ministry will shut down critical website

Apparently Ministry Of Social Development CEO Peter Hughes has instructed lawyers to work 24/7 doing whatever they have to, to shut down the CYFS Watch blogsite. This should be interesting.

Update; Police called in over CYF blog (damn e-link function broken again. The report is at www.newstalkzb.co.nz)

Update 2; Just listened to Larry Williams talking to MSD CEO Peter Hughes about the CYFS Watch blog and the threat it apparently poses to the safety of his staff.

The people most likely to pose any threat to a social worker would be those immediately involved and who could get the information , eg car registration number, directly - not from a blog site.

I have some sympathy for My Hughes' view that CYFS are "damned if they do and damned if they don't", but I think pushing the angle that this site poses a threat to the safety of his staff is a red herring. His actions are about containing a potential (and very public) avalanche of angry and bitter disgruntlement with his agency.

Secret to longevity?

You could joke about people feeling like they live longer in prison ...... but surprisingly, in the US, they actually do, at least blacks do and they skew the average.

State prison inmates, particularly blacks, are living longer on average than people on the outside, the government said Sunday.

* Inmates in state prisons are dying at an average yearly rate of 250 per 100,000, according to the latest figures reported to the Justice Department by state prison officials.
* By comparison, the overall population of people between age 15 and 64 is dying at a yearly rate of 308 per 100,000.
* For black inmates, the rate was 57 percent lower than among the overall black population -- 206 versus 484.
* But white and Hispanic prisoners both had death rates slightly above their counterparts in the overall population.

"You must help yourself"

Recalcitrant drink-driving is now the fault of the courts because of a lack of addiction treatment resources. That's pretty much the message inherent in the lead story in today's DomPost. This will come as great news to the 'it's not my fault, I'm a victim too' brigade.

The e-link doesn't show you the character below the main story, a 46 year-old recovering alcoholic who says, "you must help yourself", which appears as a sub-heading. Now I am not clear whether this is a complaint or sage advice but as headlines go it makes a welcome change.

What does National mean?

Reading an interview with Jackie Blue, newly appointed National spokesperson for Women's Affairs, this caught my eye;

Does the party need to be more centrist and if so why?

I think it does need to be more centrist. I think John has already taken away all ambiguity that there was with the previous leadership and I think that's a good thing. I know we will be staying true to our National values and core beliefs.

So what are they?


• Loyalty to our country, its democratic principles and our Sovereign
as Head of State
• National and personal security
• Equal citizenship and equal opportunity
• Individual freedom and choice
• Personal responsibility
• Competitive enterprise and rewards for achievement
• Limited government
• Strong families and caring communities
• Sustainable development of our environment

Reinstating a spokesperson role pushing for more resources for a particular group is the antithesis of limiting government. That is exactly how governments get so big. So already National is not "staying true" to their values, unless of course they mean limited to the status quo, in which case I am being uncharitable.

What exactly does National mean by 'limited government'?

Anti-CYF internet action

A group has set up an anti-CYF website which is the subject of this news report.

The report obviously doesn't advertise the name of the website and the only one I am aware of is PANIC

Does anybody know of a new website? Again we see the synergistic power of the internet at work. To what end I am unsure.

They can't be swept under the carpet

One of the reasons youth offenders are not detained in custody is there is nowhere to detain them. As recently as 2003 (and I am sure the rate will not have dropped) there were 215 apprehensions per 10,000 14-16 year-olds for violent offences. There are roughly 180,000 14-16 year-olds so almost 4,000 apprehensions in total.

Add to this violent offending of 10-13 year-olds (40 per 10,000 so roughly 1,000 in total).

5,000 violent offences.

CYF has a grand total of 102 beds available in its three Youth Justice residences. Hence young people spent 1,766 nights in police cells during 2006. Locked up with god knows who else. The approach to youth justice seems underpinned by a philosophy of denial. And it has been for at least 30 years. Or since the passage of the Children and Young Persons Act 1974, the broad objective of which was to deal with young people out of Court.

Giving the offender the benefit of the doubt appears to take precedence over any concerns for public safety. It also sits comfortably alongside the practical constraints.

The massive growth of income tax

In 1900 the government had a revenue of £6.195 million

Income tax provided only 2 percent of the revenue, slightly more than beer duty at 1.3 percent. The big ticket items were;

Customs duties 34%
Railways 26%
Stamps 14%

In 2005 Government revenue was $50.858 billion

Income tax provided 63 percent.

In 1900 the government played a constructive and very limited role. Today ...(add your own conclusion).

Public vs private charity

There is a debate going on at Cactus Kate's site about private vs public charity, charity being the giving of resources to the poor or needy. Some people want the government right out of it. Others want the government to continue on being the main provider through the welfare state.

There is risk in every life. Risk of sickness, disability, death of a partner, unemployment, etc. And so individuals feel they must make provision for these possibilities, even though the risks have lessened over time rather than increased.

In the early part of last century the debate was about whether the government should be the insurer. The 1938 Social Security Act developed a plethora of benefits which were all funded from one social security tax (absorbed into general taxation in the 60s). People were delighted with it. A great deal of suffering was alleviated. As there existed a commonality of values the scheme was appreciated, not abused. (Although there were problems with the then quite separate rural Maori society with benefits supposed to be for the indivual or children, being abused by the wider whanau).

But, as long as the numbers stayed low and the recipients were genuine, society was reasonably pleased with the set up. And government was just as suited to fill the role as any private charity or friendly society.

Unfortunately, as values changed, the permissive society evolved, sexual liberation proliferated, feminisim raged, non-judgementalism became the new religion, people demanded more rights, more welfare and the government had to loosen eligibility. For instance, before the sixties a person who had themselves caused the condition that prevented them from working eg an alcoholic, wasn't eligible for a sickness benefit. Before the sixties single mothers were helped by the state but didn't automatically qualify for a benefit.

So what we now have (as in all welfare states) is a group of people who have retained values like honesty, a work ethic, those sometimes called judeo-christian and they are clashing with others' values or lack of. The first no longer want to pay for the welfare of the second although they would still be happy to help the genuine.

So the question arises, is government the best agency to provide charity, given what has developed?

The answer as it stands is no. Not only because of the fact it takes money for welfare off people who no longer want to 'buy-in' but also because of the diversity of opinion about just who is deserving and who isn't.

Here's the thing though. As long as the government continues to insist on being the major player using taxpayer money, people are not inclined to further support private charities - and even some of those have become socialist enclaves constantly advocating for more government redistribution from 'rich' to 'poor' instead of doing the work of getting people back on their feet.

Ultimately the answer will have to come from government. It'll take a very brave one (and they aren't unheard of) prepared to do a number of things.

A/ Close down working-age welfare to newcomers except in a tightly specified cases eg people whose disabilies or illnesses genuinely prevent them from working and have no other source of income eg immediate family
B/ Allow people to opt-out of the existing welfare system. No tax - no benefits
C/ Make donations to private charities fully tax deductible
D/ Make insurance premiums for loss of earnings or loss of partner (including separation) policies tax deductible
E/ Put considerably more money into Law and Order
F/ Encourage adoption ahead of fostering

Unlike absolutist libertarians I am not overly concerned with banishing government from any charitable role or constantly focusing on it as the sole source of our social problems. Let those who can (most), make their own provisions and make it easier for them to support private organisations that will work with those the government no longer supports.

There is no utopia. Things will get worse before they get better. Society is constantly changing and policy causes those changes as well as responds to them. We are dynamic beings individually and collectively. And in states older than ours, historically, the provision of welfare has swung between public and private. We are merely repeating that pattern. The pendulum is possibly at the extreme point in its trajectory but will by necessity and nature soon change direction.

Not an isolated case

Through volunteer work I occasionally come across a woman like this. They are perfectly nice, well-meaning, sociable and reasonable beings until they start drinking and they they turn into nasty, brawling bingers who can stay drunk for days. And the trick with the beer bottle is pretty typical.

Clarification

'Of course, a positive correlation by itself is not enough to deduce a causal relationship, but certainly one would be very foolish to conclude from the evidence that "the link between maltreatment and heart disease is NOT CAUSED by growing up in poorer families..."

This is a comment from Rose in response to a post yesterday. She admits not reading the newspaper report and then questions whether I have. Rose, I wouldn't write a post without checking my facts.

Are you saying the researchers are "very foolish"? Quote;

The study also showed that the link between maltreatment and inflammation was not caused by growing up in poorer families or with a less healthy lifestyle.

Do you know what that means? They controlled for those factors. They must have found the link existed even where families were more affluent and had healthier lifestyles.To me that is the most interesting aspect of this particular paper.

And it is notable that the Public Health Association chose to ignore this aspect and instead talk about child maltreatment and smacking (as if they are one and the same thing) in order to further promote Sue Bradford's bill.

Just for good measure here is what the actual paper says (with my emphasis).

Abstract;
Stress in early life has been associated with insufficient glucocorticoid signaling in adulthood, possibly affecting inflammation processes. Childhood maltreatment has been linked to increased risk of adult disease with potential inflammatory origin. However, the impact of early life stress on adult inflammation is not known in humans. We tested the life-course association between childhood maltreatment and adult inflammation in a birth cohort followed to age 32 years as part of the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study. Regression models were used to estimate the effect of maltreatment on inflammation, adjusting for co-occurring risk factors and potential mediating variables. Maltreated children showed a significant and graded increase in the risk for clinically relevant C-reactive protein levels 20 years later, in adulthood [risk ratio (RR) = 1.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.26-2.58]. The effect of childhood maltreatment on adult inflammation was independent of the influence of co-occurring early life risks (RR = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.08-2.31), stress in adulthood (RR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.12-2.39), and adult health and health behavior (RR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.23-2.51). More than 10% of cases of low-grade inflammation in the population, as indexed by high C-reactive protein, may be attributable to childhood maltreatment. The association between maltreatment and adult inflammation also generalizes to fibrinogen and white blood cell count. Childhood maltreatment is a previously undescribed, independent, and preventable risk factor for inflammation in adulthood. Inflammation may be an important developmental mediator linking adverse experiences in early life to poor adult health.

Dunne in high dudgeon

If there is a politician that can elicit a laugh completely devoid of humour it is Peter Dunne. Here he is today sanctimoniously upbraiding the Greens;

"In my opinion it is extremely short-sighted of the Greens to criticise others and take the moral high ground when the fact of the matter is that the only way they will be able to significantly contribute to future solutions will be to work alongside other parties......scorecards are not the way to foster cooperation"

Hilarious. From the man who keeps a scorecard on the behaviour of his fellow MPs like, as the Waikato Times once pointed out, a "school boy snitch."

This is also the man who vowed not to be part of any coalition Government if a Green MP held a cabinet post.

Personally I would take the Greens over United Future any day of the week.

"Kia kaha, stay strong"

According to a NewstalkZB reporter those were the words called out to the 15 year-old accused killer of 77-year-old Doreen Reed. The family stood for the duration of his appearance and while there was much expression of sorrow from both parties there was seemingly none of shame.

Perhaps they do not believe their kid did it. Maybe he didn't. But is this how you would behave in their position?

Last night I heard he was out on bail and under curfew when he allegedly committed the crime. I see no reports confirming this. But if it is true, and he is the killer, then I can only go back to my post of just two days ago. Build the facilities. Lock them up. Stop the leniency. The first duty of a government is to protect its citizens. They are failing miserably. And it isn't just the direct victims and their families who suffer. There will be elderly people living alone unable to sleep at night. We can't keep on accepting the further erosion of our quality of life.

Spin by ommission

Yesterday newspapers reported the release of another paper from the ongoing Dunedin Multi-disciplinary Health and Development Study. It found that child maltreatment was linked to heart disaese in later life due to the body's inflammatory reaction to stress. Here is one response from the Public Health Association, who spin it as another reason to ban smacking;

"Gay Keating of the Public Health Association says the report is a wake-up call for families, politicians, health services and society in general. She says it highlights the impact hitting children as a form of discipline can have. Ms Keating says the law regarding smacking needs to be changed and parents must learn how to exercise discipline without causing damage."

Of course one couldn't expect Gay Keating to put out the following;

"A new report shows that the link between maltreatment and heart disease is not caused by growing up in poorer families or with less healthy lifestyles therefore the policies we have been promoting, increasing benefit levels for example, are not the answer after all."

Fewer husbands in situ

OVER HALF OF WOMEN ARE NOW LIVING WITHOUT SPOUSE

For what experts say is probably the first time, more American women are living without a husband than with one, according to a New York Times analysis of census results.

* In 2005, 51 percent of women said they were living without a spouse, up from 35 percent in 1950 and 49 percent in 2000.
* In 2005 married couples became a minority of all American households for the first time.

The above is from the US National Center for Policy Analysis (sorry, links down again). In NZ the single person household is the fastest growing type. In 2006 51.5 people (15 years+) were never married or separated.

Of course there is more behind this than women simply rejecting men (or vice versa) although I seem to know truckloads who have. Now that females are no longer necessarily economically dependent on males it would appear many are staying out or getting out of marriages. The article cites women marrying later and living longer as factors. Low marriage rates amongst Blacks and Hispanics (and here, Maori) are also adding to the trend.

Perhaps this trend is merely a reflection of less permanence in our lives. In partnerships, jobs and homes. As one who values security I don't think it is a positive trend. But then I am probably just an old fuddy-duddy (a word I heard Richard Branson using the other day but have forgotten in what context.)

Good on Rodney Hide

"And I'm buggered if I know what the Nats stand for other than doing whatever Labour does but promising to do it better."

Good to see the gloves off.

Apparently Bill English thinks ACT are now irrelevant. There was discussion of this on Radio Live yesterday after an interview with English appeared in Investigate.

Under Don Brash and pushing ACT policies National did manage to make ACT irrelevant.

Under English ACT was relevant.

He can't now swan back onto the stage with the same centrist agenda and hope that ACT will stay irrelvant. Saying it will not make it so.

The rapist

After some further thought, the rapist already referred to said he "just wanted to have sex". Pretty much like he just wanted pizza except he didn't steal that.

People like this are emotionally stunted. They have the thought processes of very young children but the needs and drives of adults, which makes them unpredictable and dangerous.

Beyond the remand facilities being full, I cannot understand why he was granted bail. Add to that, he has now seen himself portrayed in the media being 'staunch' (making foul gestures) and with his severely limited moral capacities is probably feeling quite pleased with himself. Soon he will be wanting more attention.

It seems to me that justice officials are constantly taking unacceptable risks with public safety. The unavoidable conclusion is we must build more lock- up facilities, especially for young offenders. Whatever follows that is a secondary consideration.

Work-testing "draconian"

The following are excerpts from an article about Australian welfare reform posted at the World Socialist Web Site;

The new, far more draconian, system also affects single parents and the disabled, many of whom have been placed on Newstart Allowances (unemployment benefits), rather than Parenting Payments or Disability Support Pensions, for the first time from July 1. Those now being subjected to the “work test” include single parents whose youngest child has turned eight, partnered parents when their youngest child turns six, and disabled people deemed able to work between 15 and 29 hours per week.

...In addition to these measures, Family Services Minister Mal Brough recently unveiled a planned voucher scheme to restrict welfare benefits where the government alleges that children are being neglected.

Up to 40 percent of payments will be denied to drug and alcohol addicted parents, parents who allegedly gamble and parents whose children regularly skip school. Instead they will receive vouchers that can be used only on food, rent, clothing and essential bills. Brough said discussions with retailers and software companies had come up with a plan to issue a debit card that could not be used to buy certain items such as junk food or cigarettes.

This system will lead to discrimination and public humiliation, with those on vouchers assumed to be neglectful or drug-addicted.

By now I should be used to socialist views but ...I'm not. They don't accept any obligation on the behalf of people on benefits, they reject any kind of alternative work as demeaning, they express no concern about children having drug and alcohol-addicted parents but worse, all the usual suspects come out supporting them. Many of today's charities have lost their way. Traditionally charity theorists understood the principles of helping people help themselves and the value of reciprocity. Now they just indulge and manage and demand the government funds them to do it. And I could say something platitudinous about being part of the problem...

Updated blog

Just updated my artist blog. I was going to post my gorgeous niece here but didn't want to put her on the same page as below scumbag.

It was dashed off as a last minute Xmas present for my brother. The other painting is of my friends daughter, the enigmatic Katie, also a present.

Senator's small-mindedness

The suggestion that Condoleezza Rice is incapable of understanding the anguish caused by American losses in Iraq because she has never had children has triggered a feminist firestorm.

Having to put up with this sort of waspishness at least means Condoleezza Rice and our PM have something in common.

I wonder what box Senator Barbara Boxer would put Helen Clark in?

This is rape

This is rape.

So many murders

Does anyone know how many murders there have been in 2007? If the Christchurch child is included, 6.

A woman was heard on the TV saying when she was a child one could recite the names of all the people murdered in a year. Some skepticism was expressed about this but I countered, she is right. In the sixties you could count the murders on one hand. As it stands we have already equalled the total for 1968 and 69 combined.

To vaccinate or not?

A US debate we will soon be having here - http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID
=42093

Should the vaccine against cervical cancer be compulsory for adolescent girls? It's a relative question for our family. One I haven't given much thought to as yet. I would oppose compulsion naturally but that still leaves a decision which is beyond a 11 or 12 year-old to make. This is tricky stuff.

'Rape' education

Oh Crikey has drawn my attention to the type of programme Rape Crisis is running for students. It seems to me they are redefining what constitutes rape. Not legally of course, but by suggestion. Sorry if you find the following a bit off but this is an important subject. This is copied from the PDF file they use;

Is this rape?

Jo is a Year 13 Student at XX High School. She is at a party on a Saturday night. Jared is going to be there and she’s been trying to hook up with him for awhile. She’s wearing a short skirt, boots, and a low cut top –she’s sure to catch his attention –She looks great. Jo and her friends drink a few bottles of wine before
they get to the party and she feels pretty drunk by the time they arrive. At the party she starts talking with Jared, he asks if she wants to go up to one of the bedrooms –they walk up the stairs followed by comments from Jared’s mates as they close the door.

In the room they start kissing, and Jared is putting his hands up her top and down her pants, she likes it and starts touching Jared. Jared then takes off his pants and hers. Jo starts to feel uncomfortable and pulls back a bit, and pulls her underwear back up. She doesn’t want to have sex with Jared but doesn’t know how to stop it. Everyone at the party thinks they’re having sex, and she doesn’t want Jared to think she’s tight. Jared pulls her knickers back down and they have sex.

Apparently under students responses one says, "...I didn’t know the things I do are rape.”

What is your answer? I say no it isn't. Neither is it sexual abuse.

(Links still not working)

When self-esteem is more important than the truth

Sometimes we tell little white lies to spare people's feelings. I have found myself trying to explain why this is OK to my children. Maybe it isn't. This sort of censorship certainly isn't.

(Hat tip Reason.com)

Madame Secretary

What a stunning photo this is from The Times UK. It contrasts strongly with the images we usually get of Condoleezza Rice. There is a rawness about it I find utterly compelling. What a god-awful job.

Rewriting history

The NZ Herald is running a series of extracts from a book, New Zealand as it might have been. This one is from Jon Johansson. The words are those of Jim Bolger in a speech where he rejects Ruth Richardson's budget and we all live happily ever after.

"I utterly reject having my Government driven by ideologues who know the value of nothing other than the purity of their imported theories. I completely reject these obsessed purists who put the balancing of the country's books ahead of balancing the nation's needs."

That caught my eye because it's pretty much what Richard Randerson was saying earlier in the week. As a commenter pointed out, without resources nobody's needs will be catered to.

Luxury offices

The new Ministry of Health offices are extremely nice, better than any recently visited in the private sector and there are wall-to-wall people. Quote from my nearest and dearest.

The Cancer Society chief describes them as "amazing" and "at the premium end of the accommodation scale". (See Stuff - links still not working).

They cost $6 million.

The cost of settling the radiologists strike?

$150,000

(The MOH bureaucrats probably held a meeting and made the decision thus; if we give the DHBs enough to settle the radiologists pay claim that'll open the floodgates to all manner of health professionals and we will be up for millions. So we may as well spend what we've got on ourselves.)

Health system 'morally deficient'

The Anglican Church is having a go at the government over the radiologists strike.

Bishop Richard Randerson says, "A system that fails to discern the priority of the importance of human wellbeing ahead of finance is morally deficient."

Isn't this a bit naive? Human wellbeing and economic wellbeing are intrinsically tied to each other, albeit not always exclusively.

The public health system is immoral because it takes money off people under the pretext of providing 'free health' and then it fails to deliver.

But as it monopolises the NZ health sector the government must meet the radiologists claims. We are stuck with it long term and if we fail to pay health professionals competitively then we won't keep or attract them.

(The release is a www.scoop.co.nz but now blogger links are not working. One thing after another.)

Growth in invalid's benefit under spotlight

Media Release
GROWTH IN INVALID'S BENEFIT UNDER THE SPOTLIGHT
Tuesday, January 9, 2007

In the 1970s around 1% of working age people were receiving a Sickness benefit, an Invalid's benefit or ACC. The percentage climbed to 5% by June 2002. So finds a new report which analyses reasons for the rapid growth of invalid benefit receipt.

Welfare commentator Lindsay Mitchell says, "The report confirms my own observation, that the large increase in numbers on the invalid's benefit cannot be fully explained by growth or ageing of the population, even though those are the reasons most commonly cited by the Minister of Social Development."

"The report finds that more than half of the growth is explained by an increase in the proportion of people aged 15-59 taking up the invalid's benefit. The inflow in all age groups was higher in 2002 than in 1993. Within the 15-59 age group around 60 percent came from other benefits, mainly the sickness benefit. (How many of these had originally been transfers from the unemployment benefit is not examined)."

"The numbers grew, in part, due to the long duration of stay associated with the invalid's benefit, transfers from other benefits and the gap between grants and cessations widening."

"When examining the types of incapacities experienced by people moving onto an invalid's benefit, the report finds that around two-thirds of the growth in inflow rates at ages 15-59 between 1996 and 2002 was associated with mental disorders. Of the total mental disorders, depression accounted for 29 percent. (Doctor's assessment forms have included tick boxes for 'stress' and 'depression' since 1995.) Substance abuse was the highest-ranked incapacity for almost 8 percent. (An individual can have up to four incapacities listed). Musculo-skeletal incapacities, which may be associated with obesity, account for most of the remainder. Cancer and circulatory and nervous system conditions did not contribute to the overall growth of inflow rates."

"The report also finds the rate of growth in inflows was most rapid for Maori and Pacific people - 41% and 36% respectively, compared to 24% of NZ European and other European grouping, although changes in recording and coding may partly account for this. "

"For Maori and Pacific people the growth has been associated with a wider range of incapacities, with schizophrenia being the largest additional contributor for Maori and for Pacific people, circulatory conditions. These ethnicities are also experiencing a greater share of the growth due to chronic disease."

"There is also speculation that the high unemployment of the early nineties contributed as people with ill health and disabilities remained 'at the back of the queue' for new jobs and gradually migrated from an unemployment benefit to an incapacity benefit. My own research has shown this is consistent with other countries which experienced high unemployment during the early nineties, including the UK and Australia."

"Quoting other work, the report suggests that over time joblessness would be measured less as unemployment and more as 'incapacity-related non- participation'."

Mitchell notes, "This, in part, explains our record low 'unemployment' rate while around 11 percent of the working aged population remain on benefits."

Additional information; There are currently around 78,000 people receiving an invalid's benefit. 21 percent are Maori, 4 percent are Pacific people, 53 percent are male. 67 percent are aged 54 or younger.

Sentencing

A poll in the NZ Herald asks what sentence a convicted killer should receive and gives four options;

1/ 10-20 years
2/ 20-30 years
3/ Life - without the possibility of parole
4/ The death sentence

The major problem is of course there are killings and there are killings. Someone who kills in defence or under extreme provocation is not the same kettle of fish as the character who has prompted this poll.

But even in his case should the first sentence he received be exactly the same as the next one?

That said, I am assuming the respondents have his case in mind - at least I hope they do. The results so far are respectively 5, 20, 48 and 27 percent.

Based on this poll, the current sentencing laws are well out of step with what the public wants. (This is not an endorsement of what they want - merely an observation).

My irksome irrationality

Having grown up a risk-taker I find my increasing and irrational caution very irksome. The latest murder attributed to Graeme Burton reinforces a decision I made after Kate Alchemer was murdered by the Hutt River. I decided not to take the kids (then quite young) walking in isolated places anymore. The eastern hills firebreaks for instance, which we'ed been up previously.

I know, I know. What are the chances?? Probably safer there then in the car or at home. But I just don't feel at ease walking the reserves and hills now so the pleasure has gone.

Earlier in the year my son and I cycled out to Pencarrow on a week day. It is very remote. A motorboat appeared just offshore and I made a game of hiding us behind some rocks. My boy thought I was being funny. I was...and I wasn't. Neurotic? Probably.

Not long ago I had to haul some mongrel off my dog. It was deadly serious and it took repeated thumps on its muzzle, with me straddling it, to get the animal to release her. All the while the stupified owner gaped on. I'm over that episode and back to regarding other dogs as innocuous beasts once more. Griffy can have a decent walk, off the leash and free to roam the beach.

It's just a struggle sometimes finding the right balance between being carefree and over-careful.

Anyway, off to the garden centre. Should be out of harms way there I reckon.

Laws on the 'underclass'

In his Sunday Star Times column today, Michael Laws predicts more violence for 2007. I would agree if for no other reason than there is nothing happening to reverse the trend.

Reviewing the much-proffered causes, he lists media violence, a decline in moral standards and even consumption of KFC.

"But the truth is a little more prosaic. Simply, we have bred an underclass in New Zealand. They are disproportionately brown, uneducated, and habitues of Income Support. And we have no idea what to do with them.

They were nascent in 1987, entrenched in 1997. And they are now legion in 2007. And they are almost wholly responsible for the sharp increases in murder and violent crime statistics and child abuse reports, the spike in truancy and incarceration rates.

Indeed remove the underclass from this country's social statistics and we would be a paradise on earth. Admittedly a cold and pluvial paradise but at least your television news would feature outrages from overseas rather than some devilish deeds done domestically."

Couple of points. Any first world country would be 'a paradise on earth' if they removed their underclass statistics. We are not unique.

Law's also claims that the underclass was 'nascent' in 1987 which links its birth to the economic reforms. That is a myth.

The underclass has always been there but we didn't pay it much heed until government and academia - like modern day missionaries - decided it was a problem, something to be corrected.

It started to expand rapidly from the 60s. Maori urbanisation and Pacific migration (the second to a much lesser extent), the rise in single parent births leading to loss of family links (particularly corrosive for Maori), increasing availability and consumption of drugs and alcohol, and, of course, welfare as a 'right', all contributed to its significant growth.

Finally, "We have no idea what to do with them". He's right. But we are going to have to figure it out soon.

We could do little better than looking to the past and admitting that some practices and philosophies worked better - they weren't perfect - just better.

'Free' counselling

Advice for everybody (except Oswald who never stops) returning to work next week. Read it. After all, you are, in part, paying the salaries of these agony aunts.

Societal self-delusion

Apologies for the quality of this scan but enlarging the image will render it readable. It is an excerpt from a book published in 1977, Social Welfare and New Zealand Society. A series of contributions, this is from Family and Community, and written by A Webster, a (then) Senior Lecturer in Education, Massey and L Williams, a researcher/honorary probation worker.

It is, in a way, quite shocking, especially given the kind of policy they are criticising has developed substantially in the subsequent thirty years, as have the consequences;




And later in the same chapter;




And finally on what type of philosophy should inform policy;

Stupid statist 'solution'

Here's the problem;

A survey in November 2005 found that three out of four British companies actively discriminated against women of child-bearing age who applied for jobs. The report found a growing trend of rejecting women applicants because they might leave to have babies. Recent research suggests that more than a third of employers believe pregnancy is "an undue cost burden" and many pregnant women face pay cuts or hostile treatment on their return to work.

And here's the solution;

Every pregnant woman in Scotland will receive an employment "bill of rights" at her 12-week scan as part of a campaign to stamp out sex discrimination at work, The Scotsman has learned.

The scheme, to be introduced by the Equal Opportunities Commission Scotland early this year, is designed to bolster the rights of pregnant women across the country.

The document will provide a comprehensive guide to an employer's responsibilities, and includes a tear-off section for women to give to their bosses.

It explains how employers must conduct a risk assessment to protect the woman and her unborn baby while at work. She is also guarded against unfair treatment, including dismissal, connected with the pregnancy.

What's a bet the solution compounds the problem. Asinine stuff.

"Beyond the spin-doctoring democracy is at work"

That's the title of this column by Nicky Hager in today's DomPost;


Refusing to financially support Hager I haven't purchased and read his book but have a couple of responses to this.

First, it further serves to highlight the urgent need to find out exactly how Hager got the information on which his book is based. His story continues to strongly contradict National's.

Second, the people who write best about any subject are those passionate about it. I can only think of one writer I can't place politically, whose work I read with interest, Colin James. And even he is now under attack from the left.

'Independence' is actually a construct of Hager's as I pointed out in this letter published earlier in the DomPost ;

That Michael Bassett is such a frank, no-holds-barred writer means we know exactly what he thinks and where he stands. He has long championed the same causes as Don Brash; welfare reform, one law for all, a resolution to the treaty settlement process and free market economics. The man can hardly, then, be accused of some sort of deception because, as Nicky Hager puts it, he presents himself as "an independent writer and commentator". That is a construct of Mr Hager's invented to suit his purposes.

Finally, if Hager's claims about the source of his material are true, and if securing democracy is a goal worthy of theft and deceit, having achieved the end by now justifiable means, why don't those "decent" and "concerned" people reveal themselves?

Let's have gender before merit

If there is one thing I can't stand it's gender politics. National has a new champion of the cause, Jackie Blue. Here she is demanding an answer:

While my heartfelt congratulations goes to all those New Zealanders who received a New Year Honour, I’m personally disappointed that women were under represented says, National's Women's Affairs spokeswoman, Dr Jackie Blue.

"While women make up just over half of the population, a little over one third of the awards went to them. We need to know why this is the case."

Because, whoever compiles the list didn't sit down with a quota saying, give her an award over him for no other reason than we need to dish them out 50/50.

Perhaps this is how National plans to attract women voters from the left.

New Year activities

A Stuff Poll;

How did you spend your New Years?

A few quiet drinks with the family and friends (1152 votes, 40.2%)

Partying up large (319 votes, 11.1%)

In bed (1398 votes, 48.7%)

I started off doing the first early, to accommodate my parents who were off to do the second till late, and I ended up doing the third. No resolutions either. I enjoy my vices.

Digging 'dirt' on dancer

If I say I have sympathy for the subject of this witch hunt I suppose it will be misconstrued as supporting the Far Right. I DO NOT. I do however support people's right to freedom of belief and privacy. This high profile (probably naive) British ballerina has been 'outed' as a member of the British political party, the BNP. What if she was a member of the equally objectionable British Socialist Party? Who would have bothered to uncover that?

"As far as I'm concerned my conscience is clear. As for the journalist who spent months snooping around, he'd find more dirt under his fingernails than he'd ever find on me."

Which brings to mind Hager's book and how it was produced. Another case of immoral 'snooping' sanctioned by people who should know better.

(Note the membership fee to join the BNP - wow)

New Year message from Pita Sharples

According to Radio New Zealand,

Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples has called 2006 "the year of murders" and says all New Zealanders have to turn things around next year.

He says there is too much tolerance of violence in New Zealand society and a tendency to blame other groups for the problem.

Just what is he saying here? As a New Zealander, with a piece of paper to prove it, I must give some thought to who I am not going to murder next year? And I should also stop relaying facts about where most of the violent crime comes from as that could be construed as a "tendency to blame other groups" instead of the obvious culprit - myself?

Did you have a reaction to this admonition?

Welfare Highlights 2006

To wrap for the year, here are a few of the government's welfare highlights;

- Labour convinces a majority of NZers (using their money) that welfare is for everyone - including Ipod and cell phone owners - as opposed to Micky Savage's vision of welfare meeting only the most basic needs

- the unemployment rate stays near the top of the OECD , but 1 in 8 homes has nobody employed

- sickness and invalid benefit numbers don't grow as fast but continue to grow

- the number of 16-19 year-old welfare-dependent single parents creeps up guaranteeing a permanent DPB caseload for decades to come

- the number of people on the DPB drops due to part-time workers moving to a higher welfare subsidy - the 'In Work' payment

- NZ gets its first 'Super Ministry' after MSD remerges with CYFS

- CYFS receives a record number of child abuse and neglect notifications

- The Canadian MSD Deputy Chief Executive finishes his two year stint without causing the government any embarrassment (think Paula Tyler and John Davey)

- The Minister, Benson-Pope, repeatedly shows ignorance of his portfolio and does cause embarrassment (but is a forgiven 'conscientious and hard-working' Minister)

- The Minister, Benson Pope, manages to evade parliamentary questions about how much the Kahui whanau was receiving in benefits and national anxiety about taxpayers being forced to fund murderer's lifestyles eventually recedes

- For a change, WINZ doesn't experience any high profile staff fraud but an Auckland electrician makes up for it big time

- the Maori Party starts their term slamming welfare but are soon asking for more, proving they are still a reliable coalition partner for Labour

- shifting welfare expenditure into the IRD jurisdiction cleverly disguises growing redistribution

- welfare spending reaches an all-time high and receives no criticism



Feel like celebrating?

Transmission resumes

Um. The mysterious ways of blogger.com Unable to publish anything since 25 December, I was just beginning to think I would throw it away. It's so liberating. If no output is required neither is input.

My bones and muscles are aching from the unusual amount of physical activity, the skip is almost full, the steep pathways up behind the house are once more navigable (note to myself worst gardening error ever - don't let a thorny rose go wild), my TAB account is looking very healthy thanks to their computer picking me a trifecta headed by the outsider of the field (note to myself - go and withdraw the winnings today thus avoiding any temptation to reinvest them), a jigsaw is completed (only 9 more to go - what a nightmare - a box of ten jigsaws), the Te Papa Egyptian Exhibition has been seen (and dismissed by son and me as 'crap' - daughter and dad disagreed) and the dog is bathed (what Christmas means to a dog - bugger - a bath)

test

Merry Xmas

...from the girlfriends

Being a snowman sucks

Which is it Ruth?

It's no surprise that a new report says actual child abuse is 3 to 5 times higher than the notification rate. The Christchurch Health and Development Study produced one paper which showed 4 percent of children had been physically abused by age 16.

The problem is simple. Too many people have children they can't or won't look after. Seems like a good idea at the time and not a difficult decision to make when the state is going to pay you to keep them.

I find it interesting that Ruth Dyson is now making noises about too much state interference being "unhelpful" and even "damaging, as families step back from their responsibilities and say 'that's the state's job.' "

Well, Ruth, it is left-wing ideology that got us into this mess. Do you believe in the almighty state or don't you?

There has always been a degree of child abuse but since we turned our backs on adoption and started paying completely inadequate mothers to keep their babies, established cases of abuse or neglect have increased fifty fold, at least.

It should have been me!

Fifth Columnist of the Year – Michael Bassett

In 'The Hollow Men' - a book filled with skull-duggery and political intrigue Fairfax's former supposedly independent columnist Michael Bassett certainly stands out. When the good Dr Bassett is not sticking the knife into then National leader Bill English whilst advising the man gunning for his job Dr Don Brash, he's off busily attempting to make life miserable for New Zealand's poorest citizens. According to Mr Hager's tome Dr Bassett added inflammatory phrases to Dr Brash's Orewa II speech regarding beneficiaries 'ripping off the system' and using 'stand-over tactics' to get benefits. For this Dr Bassett receives a special additional honour:

Louis 17th medal For Hatred of the Poor – Michael Bassett

Hey. That's not fair. I deserved that award. I mean, Michael might be more widely read them me but I blog everyday about the exploitation and failure of welfare!! I mean, I wasn't even invited to accept it on his behalf!

Look. I know people who are 'ripping off the system' and I am not going to describe them in any other terms. It doesn't follow that I hate them. If I did I would dob them in. Neither does it mean I have to approve of them abusing the system. Is that what Scoop wants from writers? Craven, chickenshit platitudes? PC politeness or worse - peddling the old Kiwi me-tooism - everybody does it mate, so what's the fuss?

What a pathetic attempt at a putdown. Whoever dreamt up this award deserves their own for mental mediocrity. Wake up.

....and the rest

Stuff reports from 1996 to 2005, total crime committed by youths remained static at about 31,000 recorded offences according to the report titled Conviction and Sentencing of Offenders in New Zealand.



The Stuff figure obviously omits 'child' crime, that committed by under 14 year-olds. Current youth and child offences number around 48,000 per year and that is only what the Police resolve (resolution rate is 44%)

(BTW. Any 'old' blogger not able to access their blog, use the 'new' blogger link. It has only taken me 24 hours to figure this out:-()

Bad legislation

The NZ Law Society has slammed the amendments to Sue Bradford's repeal of section 59 bill saying they create more uncertainty and appear to be a hasty political compromise.

Making the meth problem worse

The government's having a hard time solving the meth problem because the government helped create it.

So says Radley Balko of Reason in this piece from Fox News

(Some of the measures adopted in the US are also in place here.)

Too fat to father

China has imposed new restrictions on prospective foreign adopters. They can't be too old, too fat, too depressed or too ugly. (It's a shame Americans can't or are unable to adopt some of their own hapless babies).

Stretching it

Reading about the proposed ban on party pills on the front page of the DomPost I learn that they are used by one in five New Zealanders.

Oh really. That's over 800,000 people. The population aged 15-29 is only 813,618. Sure, there will be people older than that (and a few younger) using party pills but I figure the concentration of use will be in that age group.

Where did these figures come from? Let's see. Massey University researchers.

The survey consisted of a random national household sample of 2,010 people aged 13-45 years old collected using the Centre for Social and Health Outcomes Research and Evaluation (SHORE) and Whariki’s in-house computer assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) system.

Prevalence and patterns of use
One in five (20.3%; 18.4-22.3) of the sample had ever tried legal party pills, and one in seven (15.3%; 13.6-17.1) had used legal party pills in the preceding 12 months. Levels of last year use of legal party pills were highest among the 18-24 year old age range with 33.9% (25.3-43.6) of 18-19 year olds and 38.0% (31.3-45.2) of 20-24 year olds having used legal party pills in the preceding year.

So run that past me again. One in five surveyed 13-45 year-olds had tried party pills at some time, has become, one in five New Zealanders use party pills. Brilliant.

Fantastic....if you are looking for alarmist figures to persuade the gullible that they must be banned.

(Xmas just came right on time for the Mob.)

DPB to In Work Payment

An anonymous commentor has suggested I lodge an OIA request under "code 38" to find out how many people have moved off the DPB and onto the In Work payment. As I cannot directly comunicate with anonymous I will have to do so through my blog.

The following are the questions and replies already sent to and received rom MSD. I do not know what "code 38" is but the Ministry claims the information I seek does not exist. Are you saying it does? (I am pursuing more information from the IRD).

"Fewer on dpb" - more on WFF

Dear Editor,

You report a fall in DPB numbers (DomPost, Dec 19) to below 100,000 "for the first time since 1993". The reasons why are not given.

One is, those people who were on a partial DPB payment due to working part-time have transferred onto the new In Work payment, some with no change to their hours worked. Change the name, change the numbers.

But more worrying than this smoke and mirrors exercise is that numbers have only fallen this far. In 1993, the unemployment rate was 9.2 percent. Today it is 3.8 percent yet we have the same number of people claiming the DPB. That is the real story.

Knee jerk reactions

According to NewstalkZB, in the wake of the Ipswich murders,UK Minister for Constitutional Affairs, Harriet Harman, is considering making it illegal for men to pay for sex. In the wake of Columbine perhaps attending high schools should have been made illegal or in the wake of Aramoana, developing small comunities should have been banned.

Set for life

Massey University researchers find that in poor schools as many as one in four children are incapable of learning.

"Where there is a lot of stress on a family or there has been neglect or they have been misguided in some way, they don't have the resources to do any thinking at all, because everything is focused on personal survival and getting to the next day."

This applies to grown-ups in the same environment. How else would we expect their children to be?

Anyway, who needs an education when you can live off the state.

What is "Far Right"?

From Richard Long's DomPost column today;


The media frequently refer to ACT as "Far Right". I remember vividly my own mother saying to me, "You never used to be a right-winger". One can get tired of trying to explain oneself. But I will try again.

What would a "Far Right" party look like?

Here's my list;
Xenophobic, anti-immigration, authoritarian, anti-democracy, pro-drug prohibition, anti-freedom of speech, anti-individual rights, militaristic, anti-gay, anti-prostitution, pro dictatorship control of production and wealth through taxation.

Such a party would be an anathema to me.

What I am against is force, the rights of the collective overriding those of the individual, and state redistribution of wealth.

ACT is the parliamentary party that best matches my views.

Richard Long is lazy. It is easier to dismiss what it takes time to explain. Especially when it suits his purpose.

Best-by date past

Middle-aged male? You're a suspect.

In profiling rapists who use drugs to sedate their victims an expert says;

Mr Henwood says drug-rapes are committed for many different reasons.

Other offenders resort to drugs because they are unable to attract a partner.

For example, they could be past their prime, perhaps in their 40s or 50s, "so they are going to be on the list".

It's gonna be a long list.

Internet lie detectors

Would you want to have a conversation with someone whose computer just told you it was monitoring your call for lies? I have Skype but if I get this message I'll hang up.

Purple policies

I think I will start of list of "purple policies" - those that are a combination of, or common to, both the red and blue parties. Look out for this breath-takingly boring emblem which will alert you to new additions. Contributions welcome. For instance;

The Sunday Star Times reports on the Working For Families package. A single mum working part-time can now afford to get her hair done at the hairdresser and buy luxury food items.

Along comes an intrepid individual who said, he and his wife, who chose not to have children, were being forced to support those who choose to reproduce.

"I wouldn't disagree with having a safety net, my gripe is the very high thresholds at which it is set. People who are earning very good levels of income are now getting welfare simply because they have children, which is silly."

"Why should I be buying her high priced items of food?"

But National think he should.

Already there are signs that National realises it will be difficult to unwind what has been a revolution in family assistance. Revenue spokesman Lockwood Smith said any changes would not leave anyone worse off.

"Unlimited access to drugs" in prison

What d'you know? "Unlimited access to drugs" in prison. Not long ago I raised this subject and was told by Crasster that, "Drugs in prisons are not tolerated by any prison officer."

Just yesterday I spent too long sitting in the sun talking about this very subject with someone who has firsthand experience. It was easier to get drugs inside than outside, they said. The "top dog, head honcho"(not a fellow inmate you understand) could get you anything you want. That was twenty years ago, I offered. Could have changed. Maybe.....

Perhaps this report is based on a tissue of lies. If not, perhaps Rimutaka is a one-off. Would you put money on it?

Recorded crime and victimisations

When you read or hear about recorded crime continuing to trend down, as publicised by Statistics New Zealand today, bear the following in mind; (It is tucked away within the report released today).

Victimisations

The data is not designed to establish how many people have been victims of crimes, or the number of crimes committed. This type of information is best obtained through victimisation surveys that include crimes that were not reported to the Police. Research indicates that many crimes are never reported to the Police in the first instance. The 2001 New Zealand National Survey of Crime Victims (NZNSCV) showed that the number of offences recorded in police statistics in 2000 represented 15 percent of the estimated number of victimisations. Crimes most likely to be reported include those that involve insurance claims, those where injuries require medical treatment, and crimes discovered by the Police as a result of police practice (eg policing of liquor bans).

UPDATE; See how the headlines misreport, Crime Falls Overall - Long-term crime statistics show overall criminal offending has fallen in the past 10 years, due largely to a big fall in dishonesty offences.

Where is the word, "recorded"?

The "gorilla" in the room

In NZ we ignore it too. In fact we positively encourage the "huge gorilla" in the room by aiding and abetting it.

It's for your own good

If you still enjoy your butter and full milk, STOP, right now. That's today's message from one of Nanny's little helpers. For your own good you must start consuming synthetic spreads and manipulated milk. Then you too could eke out a few more years on this planet of busybody, anti-smoking, anti-drug, anti-alcohol, anti-billboards, anti-cars, anti-christmas, anti-travel, anti-shopping bags, anti-gambling, anti-hunting, anti-fishing, anti-swimming pools, anti-exotic trees, anti-dogs, anti-cats, anti-hydro, anti-wind turbine, anti-nuclear, anti-soft drink, anti-taser, anti-gun, anti-profit, anti-GE, anti-cows, anti-smacking, anti-party pills, anti-noise, anti-speedway, anti-immigrant, anti-foreign ownership whiners.

Pass me the butter please.

National - authoritarian and illiberal

Here's National being more authoritarian and illiberal than even Jim Anderton. Does Otago National MP Jacqui Dean really think that banning party pills will get rid of them? What evidence is she basing that on?

More phoney excuses

The soon-to-be-introduced roadside testing for impairment from drug-taking is quite extraordinary. I don't accept what the police are saying.

"If someone is tired or has a medical condition they won't exhibit the same signs as someone who is under the influence of an illegal drug."

Here's just one of the tests;

MOTOR SKILLS TEST:

A driver must maintain his balance while standing upright, with his hands at his sides, head tilted back and eyes closed.

But be assured,

Random tests will not be conducted but if police believe a driver is impaired they must initiate a drug test.

For now but you can bet that will be the next step.

But it's how they justify these things that really rankles. The road toll has come down significantly so that won't work as a reason.

Ministry of Transport figures showed drugs were suspected in 36 crashes in the year to December 31, 2005. Drugs were proven in three whereas alcohol was suspected in 383 crashes.

The evidence of drug-use causing accidents isn't compelling.

So the agent of the state sets an arbitrary target road toll, 300 by 2010, and then complains about looking like we are not going to reach it.

Repressive government

It's true I have been feeling grumpy and gloomy since Brash was dumped. While there was a glimmer of hope he would make PM there was something to feel slightly optimistic about. So maybe I am being supersensitive but it seems every which way I turn, the damn government is sticking it's nose in. Switching on Parliament to catch Brash's speech yesterday I got the whining NZ First MP Barbara Stewart telling those protesting about regulation of the natural health products and dietary supplements industry "no regulation is not an option". This morning I see the anti-scalping bill, Major Events Management Bill, will outlaw the sale of tickets to a major event for more than the original sale price.

And of course these odious acts are accompanied by the justification that, the rest of the world does it. NZ was once a radical country. Historically, it has often led the world, sometimes, I admit, in ways I may not have agreed with. As an excuse for meddling and squashing entrepreneurship, it doesn't wash.

Who said it?

As a Minister in a new government almost ten years ago.....and still a Minister today.

"We want to create an environment which encourages NZers to move away from welfare dependence to employment. And for those who still need welfare support, we want to move away from a welfare mentality to a greater acceptance of social obligations. This govt will instil greater levels of parental responsibility. Breaking the cycle of dependency means taking primary responsibility for our own welfare and the welfare of our families."

Barring unemployment, in 1997 there were 191,500 people on the three other main benefits - today there are 223,000.

"Bloggers out for the count in MSM contest"

From today's DomPost, there isn't much here I'd argue with;

We can beat that!

There is a lot of fuss about the US rate of unmarried births right now. Here is more coverage;

The National Center for Health Statistics, the statistical arm of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has released a report, "Births: Preliminary Data for 2005," that shows the nuclear family is in meltdown:

* Out-of-wedlock births reached 1.5 million last year, or 36.8 percent of the total.

* Among non-Hispanic blacks, the illegitimacy rate reached a staggering 69.5 percent.

* Among non-Hispanic whites, the rate is up to 25.4 percent.

* The illegitimacy rate for Hispanics increased by 1.5 percent in just one year, and now stands at 47.9 percent.

* Of these nonmarital births, 52 percent were to women without a high school diploma vs. just 9 percent to women with a graduate or professional degree.

You may be confused here by the two apparently different Hispanic illegitimacy rates. The first mentioned is the rate of illegitimate births per 1,000 unmarried females and the second is the percentage of all Hispanic births.

According to the NZ Yearbook 2004, ex-nuptial births comprised 44 percent of all births in 2003 and 75 percent of all Maori births were ex-nuptial accounting for nearly half of NZ's ex-nuptial birth rate.

The stereotypical American loves to be biggest and best at everything but I'm afraid we have outdone them in this particular contest.

Sycophantic babble

Whoever wrote today's DomPost editorial (a homage to John Key) is illogical. He or she criticises the government's plans to "clamp down" on third party advertising as "undesirable". This is straight after praising National for promising to support such legislation, "to be part of the solution rather than just a critic in the wilderness." (The writer obviously wants monopoly on that position).

As well, "He has put his stamp on the party and he has shown he knows where he wants to go and how he wants to get there."

The people who would persuade us to hitch our star to Mr Key's wagon are either hearing things or reading between lines. I've been paying attention and there is no 'getting' to where John Key wants to be. We are already there. Anti-nuclear, soft on welfare, and paternalistic toward Maori.

Teenage Benefits Passport To Long-Term Dependency

Teenage Benefits Passport To Long-Term Dependency
Friday, 8 December 2006, 5:11 pm
Press Release: Lindsay Mitchell

At least 37,600 or 37 percent of current domestic purpose beneficiaries first received a benefit as a teenager.

In 1999 the equivalent figures were 17,723 or 16 percent.

Welfare commentator, Lindsay Mitchell said, "Because the Ministry of Social Development can only supply data from January 1993 the actual numbers are likely to be much higher. But the significant increase between 1999 and the present shows clearly that people starting on benefits as teenagers are very likely to stay on welfare long-term."

"Additionally, many of these parents did not start their benefit careers on the DPB. Most started on the unemployment benefit."

Across all benefits there are currently 39,259 single parents with dependent children who first received welfare as a teenager. 53 percent are Maori, 34 percent NZ European and 9 percent are Pacific Islanders. 6 percent are male.

"Having children as an alternative to completing an education or finding a job should not be financially feasible. It is time for the government to look at closing this gateway to dependency and poverty."

Name and shame Dads

The agency that will replace the failed UK Child Support agency is called C-Mec (that should make a difference) and they plan to publish the names of fathers, who have been prosecuted for not paying their liability payment, on the internet.

I've blogged before about the escalation and the size of the child support problem. Welfare is at the heart of it. We continue to focus on an effect rather than the cause.

Methadone for prisoners from today

Can't help but wonder if these two issues are related. From today all NZ methadone programme offenders who go to prison will still be able to receive treatment. Last month the UK government was forced to pay substantial compensation to prisoners who had been refused methadone in prison. There may still be a retrospective problem.

And here's a thought. What about the heroin addicts who were on the waiting list to get on the methadone programme? An addict who committed a crime because he couldn't get on the programme gets no treatment but the one who committed a crime despite being on the programme does. Hardly seems fair.

Manslaughter verdict "appals"

A man who killed his wife by hitting her 4 or 5 times with a cricket bat received a manslaughter sentence. I am assuming this is due to the extreme provocation he experienced. Read about it here and here.

Brian Gardiner from the National Network of Stopping Violence Services is appalled.

"It's not this woman's fault that she is dead, it's his. People experience provocation every day of their lives and do not assault and murder," he said.

I beg to differ. She is, in part, responsible for what happened. In absolving her of any blame Brian Gardiner shows his bias. If the roles had been reversed I doubt Mr Gardiner would be saying anything.

Foreshore and Seabed mess

The Foreshore and Seabed Act is back in the news with John Key looking at supporting the Maori Party's repeal bill (which some Maori are not even happy with). Does anybody properly understand the Foreshore and Seabed Act? I usually stay away from topics I don't. But it seems I am not alone.

The Maori Party says its repeal bill would mean, groups could also pursue aboriginal title claims in the High Court.

Writer Ruth Berry says, they can take the latter path now and if the court finds a territorial - or ownership - right exists, it directs the claimants to the Government to negotiate redress.

Russell Fairbrother believes, the act explicitly ruled out the possibility of aboriginal title claims.

And several lawyers said, the bill was badly drafted and the legal position was unclear.

The advantage for Labour is obvious. If the public can't understand the issue they can turn it into something highly emotive. And people will believe what they want to believe. Should play out well for the government.

Hispanic "family values"

Fascinating, full and frank article here about Hispanic "family values". The Hispanic unmarried birth rate (per 1,000) has over taken that of blacks. This is an exploration of what that will mean for the future. There is still a "lingering work ethic" but more are turning to welfare.(California is one of the poorly performing states in the welfare reform league.)

Every 1,000 unmarried Hispanic women bore 92 children in 2003 (the latest year for which data exist), compared with 28 children for every 1,000 unmarried white women, 22 for every 1,000 unmarried Asian women, and 66 for every 1,000 unmarried black women.

Don't quote me on this but I reckon the 2003 Maori rate to be between 125 and 130 per 1,000 unmarried females aged 15 and over.

The fathers of these illegitimate children are often problematic in even more troubling ways. Social workers report that the impregnators of younger Hispanic women are with some regularity their uncles, not necessarily seen as a bad thing by the mother’s family. Alternatively, the father may be the boyfriend of the girl’s mother, who then continues to stay with the grandmother. Older men seek out young girls in the belief that a virgin cannot get pregnant during her first intercourse, and to avoid sexually transmitted diseases.

I'm from the council and I'm here to help

Like ----. Here's another council horror story. Risk assessment on mince pies ordered.

I seriously considered (for all of two minutes) running for council to try and stem the bureaucracy but apparently the beast just churns away, much of the activity unbeknown to councillors until it hits the fan and they cop the flack.

Race-based funding persists

I was under the impression the government had moved away from race-based funding. The Otago DHB has awarded a contract for a Maori-focused health service in Central Otago.

Southlink Health Maori Health project manager Wayne Smith said cost, transport and a problem accessing doctors during work hours were all issues for Maori.

The new service would provide a necessary link between health services and Maori, many of whom were "uncomfortable" in that environment, he said.

The justification goes, this is needs-based funding, but is there anything in the above that isn't true of many low-income non-Maori?