"Act warns about growing benefit roll"

Out early pamphleteering this morning, to avoid the nasty weather predicted for later, it was a surprise to hear my press statements being picked up by NewstalkZB. They ran one about the growing DPB numbers during the 9am news and the other about the Invalid Benefit blow-out at 11am. I was surprised because I had issued the statements as 'welfare commentator' but they went to air as ACT party releases.

Act warns about growing benefit roll

25/10/2008 12:32:01

The Act Party is predicting a growing roll of people on the invalids benefit, if Labour gets back into office.

Figures from the Ministry of Social Development show there were 78,000 people on the benefit a year ago, but more than 83,000 now claim support.

Act candidate Lindsay Mitchell says it is the biggest single annual rise since Labour came to power. She is concerned that the length of time people remain on the benefit is also growing. Mrs Mitchell says there is a steady input of people going on the benefit and fewer people coming off.

Trigger happy Hutt City Council

Today in the mail I received this;



Never before have I received such a document. I had recently incurred a $12 fine for overstaying two hours outside the Petone Library that had now incurred court costs of $30.

But as I read through the notice from the court warning me about the possibility of arrest, that I must contact them immediately if I plan to travel in the next 48 hours, etc, I thought, that fine is not overdue. It is in my pile of bills awaiting payment.

On checking I found sure enough it wasn't due until 28 days after October 7.


So how often are people sent extra fines before time and the payee doesn't realise the court has acted prematurely? How often are people bailed up at airports for not paying fines that are not overdue?

I rang the Justice Department who are blaming the Hutt City Council who have sent it through to the courts before time. It's hard to imagine mine was on its own. This sort of stuff really pisses me off. Not because they nearly got $30 extra dollars out of me but because there is the potential for this process to cause huge inconvenience and embarrassment to people who are fully intending to pay their fines by the due date. I can just picture how angry my husband would have been with me if we were prevented from getting on a plane because I had allegedly not paid a fine. What an unholy row that would have been. Never mind the District Court. It would have been the Divorce Court.

The failure of Labour's 'welfare reforms'

The September quarter benefit statistics have just been released. Ruth Dyson is being very quiet. I have a issued two statements below.

INVALID'S BENEFIT - ANOTHER BLOW-OUT
Thursday, 23 October, 2008

Just released Ministry of Social Development figures show a large rise in Invalid Benefit recipients.

"The previous Minister of Social Development, David Benson-Pope, assured the public more than once that the growth in this benefit was slowing. Yet the numbers have risen from 78, 268 to 83, 618 in the year to September 2008 - a 7 percent rise. In fact, this is the biggest single-year increase since Labour has been in government, " welfare commentator , Lindsay Mitchell, said in response to the news.

"Their much touted plans for reducing the numbers reliant on an invalid's benefit have made no impression. What we are seeing is further evidence of 'welfare reforms' that have failed."

DPB NUMBERS ON THE RISE AGAIN
Thursday, October 23, 2008

Newly released figures from the Ministry of Social Development show that over the past year numbers on the DPB have climbed from 96,673 to 98,473 - a rise of 1,800.

Welfare commentator Lindsay Mitchell is not surprised. "I have predicted that the Labour's so-called reforms would run out of steam once those most likely to take up the In Work payment had moved into paid employment."

"What we are now seeing with the DPB is growth in the young uptake, continual gradual growth in Pacific and Maori uptake and in the numbers of women who have children aged 14 and older. Treasury are not forecasting falling numbers either."

"Labour missed a golden opportunity to do something bold with this benefit. From its peak the United States managed to decrease numbers on their equivalent benefit by 70 percent during the prolonged period of good economic growth and low unemployment. Since 1999 Labour have managed a mere 10 percent reduction."

"Let's hope that the next government has a really hard look at what the benefit system is doing to young women and their children by continuing to offer an welfare lifestyle which commonly leads to so much lost potential."

David Garrett - ACT's number 5

I attended one of Maxim's election panel discussions last night primarily to listen to ACT's number 5 David Garrett. I thought I better have a look at and listen to who I am voting for with my Party Vote.

This is a man who doesn't suffer fools. During the discussion about abortion a poor quality heckler suggested Roger Douglas ought to be aborted. Garrett responded to the elderly man, "I think you are confusing the words abort and euthanase. At your age that could be a very dangerous thing Sir."

On the role of the state he was very good. This came up when a question was put about the importance of non-governmental leadership. Garrett exhorted people to lead themselves. We need very little government, he said. (I noted Darren Hughes can't tell the difference between the state and the non-government sector saying that leadership in the community sector, in organisations like the Women's Refuge and Plunket, is very important and that's why Labour wants to fully fund them. What is the difference between a government agency and a fully-funded-by-government agency?)

Mr Garrett upset Hughes when he described a claim by him as a 'lie'. Hughes didn't like the "big bad ACT Party" language, so Garrett repeated it. I approved. I can't stand mincing words. If Garrett knew what Hughes was saying was a lie he has every reason to describe it as such. And it is ironic that the Labour candidate should object to what he sees as unpleasant language when the hecklers supporting Labour are amongst the most rude. (I spoke later with the Rimutaka United Future candidate who is quite upset at the level of nastiness from Labour hecklers she had been witnessing at Upper Hutt meetings. The same wasn't happening at the Hutt South meetings she and I have done together).

The touchiest subject was yet again the anti-smacking legislation. I thought Garrett needed to take a little more care here. We mustn't fall into the trap of using the left's words. Avoid 'beating' and use 'smacking' - always. In response to that hackneyed objection that children should have the same protection as adults he made the point that the reason you don't beat your wife is she knows not to run out onto the road.

Of course that leaves the inference that it is okay to beat your children. Actually Chris Finlayson described the distinction legalistically very, very well. So well I cannot repeat it word for word. (I was impressed with Finlayson who has improved immensely since I last heard him speak on the campaign trail in 2005.)

But I liked too Garrett's directness, his slightly rough edge by comparison (both are barristers). This contrast helped add weight when Garret closed saying ACT would provide the spine in a National government.

Given Garrett was the only non-MP on the panel his performance was credible and creditable.

(My own liberalism still has me feeling slightly uneasy about the three strikes policy. I back it because I agree that ultimately victims and potential victims must be protected. But I can still imagine situations where somebody's circumstances might explain their violent offending - it may be against the same person and they pose no danger to others - or they might be wrongly convicted of a violent offence, and applying a blanket law may produce a miscarriage of justice. But I am not well-versed in this area and Garrett is.)

Campaigning , Catholic meetings and near calamities

Last night I took a punt and went back to basics. Candidates had been given a joint statement from Catholic Bishops to respond to and then take questions. The church was fairly full. The questions were mainly relating to personal and private matters and taking what I will describe as a 'negative' position on abortion, same-sex marriage, voluntary euthanasia, embryo stem cell research, etc. You get the picture.

This is my speech (without the electioneering tagged on the end). I knew we would have plenty of time to talk policy during question time;

We were asked to provide a response to this collective statement by Bishops . I don't much like the word collective. Neither do other members of the ACT Party if they are true to ACT's philosophy. Unlike other parties ACT actually has a defining philosophy. That of individual rights and responsibility. We put the rights of the individual above the rights of the collective because we believe people own their own lives and should be free to live them as they choose providing they inflict no force or harm on others. Of course there are grey areas about what constitutes harm or force, for example Libertarian views can differ on abortion, but in the main we can agree on quite a lot. We can certainly agree that currently the state interferes far too much in our lives.

It seems to me that the Bishops want too much from government and too much from candidates. ACT was formed on the idea of personal responsibility. Look at most of today's problems, some described in here, and the solution to them could be found in the individual taking responsibility and making the right decisions. For instance, if people produced only children that they want and can provide for , much of the New Zealand's child poverty would be resolved. I often muse that if people had and used three things - common sense, commitment and conscientiousness, their lives, and the lives that touch theirs, would be simpler, happier and more effective. Of course, we all make mistakes. The key is to learn something from those mistakes. Unfortunately when the state collective picks up the pieces and buffers the individual from the consequences of their mistakes, many fail to learn anything.

The idea of individual rights should not be confused with selfishness or a culture of 'me first'. Exercising personal responsibility doesn't preclude one from exercising responsibility for someone else. But that care for others, and the acting on it , should be a voluntary matter. We shouldn't mandate governments to exercise social responsibility on our behalf. Because when we do that we are reliant on the government of the day's goals and values matching our own and of course, as many of you have discovered, there is no guarantee of that.

So the best way to ensure that doesn't happen is to reduce the government to as small a role as possible. Unfortunately I sense that the Bishops would like to use the state to serve their values and determinations, as much as any other collective attempts to. That can lead to more conflict than harmony.

In a largely secular, free society, there will always be individuals who have moral values not embraced by the greater community , and you know how that feels. But when that happens the solution is not to ask govt to step in and use organised force but to use moral persuasion and example to change the views of other.

To sum up forcing the collective interests of one group on another doesn't provide a successful blueprint for society. That's what I believe and certainly ACTs current MPs would share the view that individuals should enjoy , and respect I might add, having as much individual freedom as possible.

A number of people approached me after the meeting to thank me for my honesty. I can't think of a better compliment. Two elderly ladies in particular were delighted that I had "said 'no' to the Bishops" and said until then they had never known what ACT actually stands for.

But my gut instincts about honesty are right. People are crying out for honesty (as distinct from somebody simply mirroring their own thoughts) yet get increasingly less of it. I stood in the last two elections because I believe in Rodney Hide. He never evades the hard questions and he never lets down people like me who believe deeply, almost achingly, in the rights of the individual. The world is overflowing with people who want to run other people's lives for them and they fill the ranks of politicians, bureaucrats and religious authoritarians. I can't stand them. But the good news is they are still in a minority and many of the silent minority can't stand them either - although I wouldn't presume to include Catholics.

Low light of my campaign so far came yesterday when I lost my trailer frame to an almighty wind gust. Thankfully nobody was behind me. It must have made a hell of a racket. As luck would have it - my second most welcome dose - an ACT supporter lived nearby. He heard the racket and came to my aid, driving the trailer around the block and back to where I was hanging on to the corflutes madly flapping in the wind and threatening to fly away with me in tow. We managed to bundle the signs into my slightly damaged car and get the frame back onto the trailer. I realised then what had happened. We had put a sign on the back and it had created a build up of pressure inside. That combined with the gale force winds Wellington experienced yesterday was just too much. Last election I towed a trailer for many weeks with no problems but we changed the design. Bad mistake. Today we rebuild it - better and stronger than ever before.

As my good Samaritan waved me off he chortled, "Thank goodness it was you and not a Green Party candidate I had to help. Keep up the good work!"

Sunday campaigning

A different kind of Sunday drive....

What a neat bunch of people. Especially Alwyn who not only supplied his labour and van for the day but had prepared a lunch of pasta and home-made bread (and Doreen left scones) for us to stop off to at midday.

For years Hutt South has had some very generous and loyal volunteers. Thank you all.

DUMPING THE DOLE AVOIDS THE BIGGER ISSUE

Media Release
DUMPING THE DOLE AVOIDS THE BIGGER ISSUE
Friday, October 17, 2008

The Maori Party has announced it wants to abolish the unemployment benefit.

Welfare commentator Lindsay Mitchell said in response today, "While this policy has brought commendation from many quarters little analysis has been done on what it would actually achieve."

"In June 1999 there were 42, 074 Maori receiving an unemployment benefit. By June 2008 that number had plummeted to 6,588."

"Over the same period Maori receipt of the domestic purposes benefit has risen from 35,615 to 40,119. "

"While co-leader Tariana Turia is happy to talk about Maori men and their damaging reliance on welfare, she told election commentator, Gordon Campbell , just months ago, that reform did not apply to Maori women. This means it doesn't apply to Maori children either."

"Right now the DPB is a much bigger problem for Maori than the dole. That is because it encourages very young women to have babies they cannot financially or emotionally support; it keeps thousands of Maori children relatively poor; it deprives Maori men of their defining role as provider; it makes women vulnerable to free-loaders who do not want to support a family, preferring to spend the money they earn on themselves; it causes intergenerational welfare dependence, with female children more likely to depend on the DPB in turn and it increases the likelihood that children will suffer neglect and abuse."

"Only 8 percent of the 81,369 working-age Maori on welfare are on the dole. As it stands the Maori Party needs to focus on how to wean their people off those benefits where the numbers are still heading in the wrong direction. "

Charter schools succeed where state schools fail

In the United States charter schools exist and succeed where others fail. They are still publicly funded but run more like businesses. To paraphrase Wikipedia, charter schools have been freed from some of the rules, regulations, and statutes that apply to other public schools in exchange for some type of accountability for producing certain results. (You've got to wonder why state schools aren't accountable). Charter schools are able to specialize and emphasise uniqueness.

Sounds like the results a voucher system could provide. Schools like KIPP, and in Sweden, Kunskapsskolan could operate here if we could get vouchers introduced. Given the results these organisations are achieving it beggars belief that anyone would oppose similar reform.

The demand for more educational choice in predominantly minority South Los Angeles is pronounced. The waitlist for existing Inner City Education Foundation (ICEF) schools has at times exceeded 6,000 kids. And no wonder. Like KIPP, Green Dot and other charter school networks that aren't constrained by union rules on staffing and curriculum, ICEF has an excellent track record, particularly with black and Hispanic students. In reading and math tests, ICEF charters regularly outperform surrounding traditional public schools as well as other Los Angeles public schools.

ICEF has been operating since 1994, and its flagship school has now graduated two classes, with 100% of the students accepted to college. By contrast, a state study released in July reported that one in three students in the L.A. public school system -- including 42% of black students -- quits before graduating, a number that has grown by 80% in the past five years.

Despite this success, powerful unions like the California Teachers Association and its political backers continue to oppose school choice for disadvantaged families. Last year, Democratic state lawmakers, led by Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez, tried to force Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to sign a bill that would have made opening a new charter school in the state next to impossible. Mr. Nunez backed down after loud protests from parents in poorer neighborhoods.

School reformers in New York, Ohio, Florida, Connecticut, Utah and Arizona have faced similar challenges of late. Last year in Texas, where 81% of charter school students are minorities (versus 60% in traditional public schools), nearly 17,000 students had to be placed on charter waiting lists. Texas is currently bumping up against an arbitrary cap on the number of charters that can open in the state. Unless the cap is lifted by state lawmakers, thousands of low-income Texas children will remain stuck in ineffective schools.

Back in California, ICEF says that its ultimate goal is to produce 2,000 college graduates each year, in hopes that the graduates eventually will return to these underserved communities and help create a sustainable middle class. Given that fewer than 10% of high-school freshmen in South Los Angeles currently go on to receive a college diploma, this is a huge challenge. Resistance from charter school opponents won't make it any easier.

Turia still off the mark on welfare

Yesterday Tariana Turia was speaking in Flaxmere;

"I'm opposed to the dole. I don't think it is healthy for the spirit of our people, to be getting money for doing nothing."

Good. I agree.

But in May she had this exchange with Gordon Campbell;

Campbell: You’re saying welfare is bad for Maori, so we have to break the cycle by introducing a compulsory element -

Turia : We’re talking Maori unemployed. We’re not talking about Maori women on benefits.

There are 7252 Maori on the dole. Around two thirds are men.

However, there are around 73,000 Maori on other benefits. I estimate almost two thirds are women, most on the DPB.

There is a very clear line in Turia's mind between being paid to 'do nothing' without kids and being paid to do nothing with kids. So the message is clear. If you want to be paid to do nothing, make sure you have a child who is dependent on you. Hence the disproportionate incidence of child neglect amongst Maori. That neglect gives rise to later problems like learning difficulties, truancy, early pregnancy, alcohol and substance abuse and problems with the law. (None of which is exclusive to Maori but Tariana talks exclusively about Maori).

I cannot take her seriously until she acknowledges that the problem of welfare extends beyond just the dole and Maori men.

If it was only the dole causing the kind of social dysfunction experienced disproportionately by Maori then matters would have improved dramatically over the past decade. They haven't.

Serious debate or big-time brawl?

Some readers will be old enough to remember a popular New Zealand TV show called 'On The Mat'.

It featured bawdy big-time wrestlers and was full of faux anger, irate indignation and pretend pain. But audiences loved it. People bought it. People believed it.

I wonder if tonight's debate between Clark and Key will satisfy the same shallow emotions? After all the two main parties are essentially caricatures of true opponents. They'll strut and glower, feign animosity and moral superiority; one may even take a pummelling, but at the end of the night they'll walk off together, with our money in their pockets.

Extending the welfare mentality

My son will turn up at university the year the parental income threshold goes completely. That's $153 a week for you, young man. What for? To vote Labour, that's what for.

We understand the concept of debauching beneficiaries with easy money, and easy credit, yet are so quick to extend the process. This is a mind-numbingly foolish policy.

First sign goes up

Disability and benefits

Reading about health issues or listening to people wax on about them bores me witless. The Dominion Post has a resident health columnist by the name of Chris Kalderimis. He knows how boring health is so he gets people's attention by rather cynically using photos of dead guys - recently dead - to discuss what killed them. Last week it was Paul Newman, to discuss lung cancer and smoking (even though we don't know whether Paul Newman smoked) and today it is Rob Guest and stroke. Casting a reluctant eye over the text (only slightly less reluctant than the one I cast over political news) I noticed this statement;

"In New Zealand stroke is the leading cause of disability..."

Being reasonably familiar with the leading reasons why people rely on disability benefits this rather floored me.

More recent figures are most certainly available but the following are those I can quickly lay my hands on.

At July 2004 1,435 people were receiving a sickness or invalid's benefit due to having suffered a stroke. That's 1.2 percent of all the people on those benefits.

Either there is a massive number of people who have suffered strokes who are not relying on welfare or there are thousands of people who are on benefits who do not suffer from what this doctor would class as genuine disabilities.

It's not a politically easy business questioning the number of people who rely full time on a sickness or invalid's benefit but given there are now over 130,000 whereas in the 1940s (post-war),1950s,1960s and 1970s there were never more than 20,000 some serious attention is overdue.

Early puberty in the NZ context

I believe this guy, Professor Peter Gluckman, is onto something. Not necessarily with his collectivist call for action - parents need to take more responsibility - but with his theory that the earlier onset of puberty is a fairly significant problem.

A Swiss study showed that children who went through puberty earlier were more likely to abuse drugs and alcohol, be more anxious and depressed and have sex earlier. "In boys, the attempted suicide rate was five times higher in those who went through early puberty than those who went through it at a normal age, which is a frightening statistic. Nothing I know of comes close as a risk factor for teen suicide," said Gluckman.

Being Maori also presents a much higher risk factor than being non-Maori, but not 5 times higher. Look around you and it is pretty obvious that Maori and Pacific males and females often develop younger. I hadn't thought of it in terms of a 'national crisis' but greater awareness of it can only be good. I know of two Maori boys who took their own lives - both over a girl. Such a sad, sad waste. And if it isn't suicide, it is some other response which lands them in trouble.

There is a theory - I read about it in a James Belich book - that many of our contemporary social problems stem from the time education became compulsory and teenage boys and girls were put together in secondary schools. Until then they hadn't routinely mixed on a day-to-day basis.

Well, we can't go putting that one back in the bottle. But with ever-increasing early puberty and day-to-day exposure to the opposite sex the potential for problems is heightened. Yes. I definitely think he is onto something.

Flatter and fairer is what we need

These guys want politicians to essentially put aside their differences and resolve how to ride out the economic crisis.

If politicians can't put aside their differences in the good times, how are they going to do it in a crisis, when the outcomes riding on their decisions are even more crucial? Having said that, there is no real difference between Labour and National and they should be able to concur on some nutty statist 'solutions' like enticing ex-pats home with tax breaks those of us who stayed here won't get.

It's all a bit holier-than-thou to slag off tax cuts to middle New Zealand but then suggest targeted tax cuts as one of their own silver bullets. More state manipulation of the tax system and bestowal of privilege should be avoided now as much as at any other time.

Flatter and fairer is what we need. (And I wish economists would stop referring to subsidies as tax credits. In my dictionary a tax credit is only possible if an entity or individual has paid some tax. Soon we will hear social welfare benefits referred to as 'tax credits'. The language is intended to neutralise emotions and sanctify receipt of other people's money.)

Suspend the sex education lessons - now

Remember this wee baby?



And people say children grow up so fast.

Daisy is on heat. Forgive my naivety but I haven't had the privilege of sharing a house with a cat on heat before. And this cat rivals Cactus Kate in the over-abundance of testosterone stakes.

Unfortunately the kids have realised they can get her going simply by simulating her "I'm ready, boy am I ready " mewls. The first few times we watched her wiggling her arse and lifting her back legs at anything that moves it was hilarious. But I am so over it.

We all need to get some sleep at night - her included.

Anyone for a kitten?

Labour has widened income gaps

There is significant disparity between the growth rate of average weekly income (for all people, from all sources) between Auckland and Wellington.

Auckland has seen the lowest increase of 16 percent in the five years to June 2008, whereas Wellington has enjoyed a 35 percent increase, the second highest in the country. I have charted the various regional increases below;

Taranaki 41 percent
Wellington 35
Nelson/Tasman/Marl/West Coast 33
Southland 31
Otago 30
Gisborne/Hawke's Bay 26
Bay of Plenty 25
Canterbury 24
Manawatu-Wanganui 19
Waikato 19
Auckland 16
Northland 16

In 2004 the difference in the regions between the highest incomes (Auckland) and lowest (Otago) was $169

In 2008 the difference in the regions between the highest incomes (Wellington) and lowest (Northland) is $246

Isn't it ironic how the great equaliser's - the Left - through ever-increasing government, have only managed to widen income gaps.

Coro St trumps candidates?

Yesterday evening saw the local Rotary-organised meet-the-candidates assembly which is traditional and held in the Muritai School hall. It usually pulls the biggest crowd of the campaign at 2-300. Last night 60 people showed up to hear 9 candidates. Theories as to why ranged from it being Coro night to people having already made their minds up. I tended towards the second. Or is it simply that meetings have had their day?

The memorable moment for me was when a member of the audience asked what each party intended to do about the continuing persecution of cannabis users? NZ First's Ron Mark leapt quickly to his feet, strode to the mike and said, "Nothing" and sat back down. Trevor Mallard followed suit, "Nothing", and finally the National Party candidate stood and said he would be the "third stooge" and agree with both. I saw red. So I walked to the edge of the stage, carefully confirmed that ACT had no policy to decriminalise but that, being at the socially liberal end of the party, I opposed prohibition. Then turning to the aforementioned candidates I lambasted their position, describing the worsening, highly destructive affects of prohibition, and their collective refusal to abandon the status quo, as negligence. To be honest I can't remember quite what I said but to my surprise the audience enthusiastically cheered. I am not sure whether it was because I was angrily dressing down the three stooges or because they agreed.

But I do believe the ground is shifting on this one. Not before time.

(The Green candidate later thanked me for what I had said and even forgave me for my remark about their billboards which she had waxed lyrical about during her speech. Responding in my address I pointed out that every party could justify having children saying Vote For Me on their billboards and if it was a choice between Sue Bradford and children, they probably would.)

"The pain of bureaucracy"

Fortunately the Hutt News is still publishing letters from submitters who are also temporarily candidates. The Dominion Post will not while the election campaign is on. I had an amicable conversation with their letters editor about their policy and she confirmed this. At least I now know not to waste my time.

I like the title this one was given.

Treasury costs ETS

Now where would you go to find the projected cost of the Emissions Trading Scheme?

Well, I sure as hell wouldn't have looked for it under Culture and Heritage. But there it is. Projected to cost the taxpayer a mere $billion within 5 years. But that's just the direct costs....

It's not over yet for Helen

Here's what Helen Clark told the Maori Women's Welfare League 56th Conference on Friday;

You have my word : under Labour, the Maori electorates will stay as long as Maori want them to stay.

Every five years, the Maori electoral option gives Maori that choice.

It would be wrong, wrong, wrong for a Pakeha majority to take that choice away.

Yet under National Party policy, there would only be one more election with Maori seats after this one.

In electoral terms, that’s gone by lunchtime.

"You have my word". Intimate and compelling. Clark now has a powerful tool to pull the Maori party vote (and the Maori Party support.)

A tool possibly powerful enough to win another term.

What will Turia do? Turn her back on the party that stole their property rights to support a party that will steal their electoral power-base?

It's going to be fascinating.

Gazumped

Today's Dominion Post features the front page headline "National plan for life to mean life - two strikes policy for violent crimes".

Ye Gods. Gazumped. ACT's policy is only three strikes.

Clever move by National. Makes ACT irrelevant on the very ground they chose to fight the election on.

Where ACT should have gone - publicly - is to the root of most crime and the best way to prevent it. Serious and radical welfare reform. National would never follow them there.

It's OK to lock up high risk violent offenders for life but what about the next generation of criminals being bred every day under our policy of paying people without the means - either material or emotional - to have babies? Under our obsessive state-backed anti-adoption stance? Under our 'the child is always best with its biological mother' policy? Under our 'if you have an addiction you can live off the taxpayer' policy? Under our 'being a victim of ongoing domestic violence but staying with the perpetrator qualifies you for the DPB' policy? Under our 'men are alienated and neutered by the anti-male bias of the welfare system but we don't give a shit' policy?

No. National wouldn't go there.

A day with the MP for Epsom

Steve Braunias (I thought he had retired?) spends a day with Rodney Hide on the campaign trail. Steve's writing is always to the point; sharp bordering on lethal. But I think he has spared Rodney. It mightn't be a winner for ACT but certainly won't harm the high-profile MP for Epsom.

'Dole towns'

The great and good welfare state.

“Gordon Brown and his ministers try to sound tough on welfare reform. But the facts show that after 11 years in power, Labour has failed to make the radical changes this country needs.”

A report by MPs last month found that six million Brits are living in homes where no one works and benefits have become a way of life.

The Sun previously revealed 101,000 people get sickness benefits because they are drug addicts or alcoholics — more than double the number ten years ago.

What 'social inclusion and participation' looks like.

In the pocket of government

Under National, funding to hospices will be significantly increased. John Key promised this yesterday.

Pause. Remember that just recently the government foisted on an unwilling (understatement) public the anti smacking law. They were aided and abetted in this by organisations who work with children like Barnardos, Plunket, Save the Children - all of whom receive government funding and constantly lobby for more. Their advocacy machines worked overtime trying to convince the public of the necessity and desirability of this most unpopular legislation. The issue should have been a conscience vote but the ruling government forbade its MPs from exercising that option.

Fast forward to a time when institutions working with the terminally ill are largely government funded. The Death With Dignity bill is back in the house. The government of the day wants it passed. You can see where I am going with this.

I am in favour of voluntary euthanasia but legislation must never be subjected to the kind of in-the-government's-pocket lobbying the anti-smacking law saw.

My advice to hospices is to retain their independence by relying on private fund-raising as much as possible. My conjecture is an ugly, and some will say unthinkable scenario, but I am less sure.

Slaves to 'education' programmes

The headline, Booze, drugs kill more drivers, is not news to anyone following trends. The number of drug and alcohol related road deaths is increasing. So I read this story with no other purpose than finding the predictable, almost guaranteed, response from a bureaucrat. I wasn't disappointed. Here it is;

"Were it not for the significant investment in enforcement and education targeting drink-driving, the figures would be much worse," he said.

Of course the above statement can never be proved or disproved. So once set in motion 'education' programmes that spend taxpayer money are almost impossible to get rid of. There are too many interested parties.

It's similar to the anti-family violence campaign. Violence is going up but that's good. The campaign is working. More people are reporting violence. If violence starts going down, then that's good. The campaign is working.

In fact I can think of no reason a bureaucrat might offer as to why any programme should be discontinued. Hence the machinery of the state just hammers on ...

National touting for Maori Party Votes?

Now the claimant is hardly reliable but somebody else must be able to confirm this. Hekia Parata, standing in Mana, is asking people to give their party vote to the Maori Party according to Winston Peters. If so, isn't it saying something that National would rather deal with the Maori Party and their fantastic policy planks, than ACT?

"Who can I turn to?"

"If I can't trust Winz who else can I turn to for support?"

How tragically pathetic. The speaker is a Maori girl who doesn't look more than twenty. She buried her last baby after its death from SIDS and she has a one year-old and five year-old she can't afford to feed.

Where is the whanau? That all-famous, all-loving extended family? Somewhere, I suspect, because she sent the kids "away for the school holidays". Is there a father or fathers of her children she can turn to? Quite probably not. Lame ducks no doubt.

Look, I'm not angry about the taxpayer having to support this girl. That comes a long second. I am angry at the bloody stupid institutionalised practice of letting young women, a majority of them Maori, make their own situations progressively harder. This kid looks like a baby herself. Yes, she makes stupid decisions; yes, she gets used by men not prepared to make an iota of commitment to her because the so-called safety net let's them off the hook. They can play at life, making babies they don't really want and shooting through.

This is the face of lifestyle welfare. And it is not a happy or unusual one. Last year 5,277 babies were added to an existing benefit. Think on that.

Work and Income deputy chief executive Patricia Reade said .... the agency would make sure Ms Kihi received all the support it could give. "I am devastated that this has happened and that Ms Kihi had to go through such an appalling ordeal. I am deeply sorry we got it so very wrong."

Work and Income does get it very wrong but not in the way Ms Reade thinks.

How Labour contributed to the increased family violence

Notice three things;

1/ A ban on smoking in bars

2/ The growth of local retail liquor outlets

3/ An increase in family violence

They are connected.

Thanks

Thanks to you all for continuing to read this blog. Last month visits went over 5,000 for the first time!



Building blog readership is a hard road but I guess it's a bit like losing weight. If you do it gradually the results are more secure. And at least the overall trend is in the right direction.

Send a message to TV3

Go here to tell TV3 what you think about them kowtowing to Clark and Key.

Borrow my message if you haven't the time to write your own.

Tell Clark and Key you will not give them airtime if they refuse to participate in a debate with the leaders of other minor parties. Don't let them run the show. This is exactly why New Zealanders voted for MMP. Because they wanted the diversity and representation that the two main parties couldn't deliver. Stand up to Clark and Key and make it known you are. Who knows what it would do for your reputation and ratings. Show us why private ownership in the media is so important.

Criticising the public service

The good judge speaks out again. Principal Youth Court judge Andrew Becroft makes an occasional habit of grabbing some headlines. But this is a departure from his usual message.

In 2002, 2003 and 2004 he produced statistical reports, the third being largely an update on the data contained in the first two. In all three he comments;

Is violent offending by under 17 year olds increasing?

Yes. And no.

Violent offending attributed to 14-16 year olds has increased since 1991 but much less so since 1995.

Now he is saying;

"Violent offending is increasing. There has always been severe violence, but it is hard to get an accurate picture. We need to have much better statistics from the Ministry of Justice. We need to know [what is happening] early and the extent it's happening."

He is complaining about the lack of information from a government department. This was at the heart of a conversation I was having with a friend last evening as we prepared to listen to an address by David Parker, Minister of State Services, about (and to) the public service. I have appealed to the Ombudsman twice over the past three years (to no avail) because requests previously met under the Official Information Act have been denied.

Parker referred to the OIA saying that it "put a curb on a lack of transparency" but then in a more jocular fashion quipped that it was something of a "curse" because it meant "a lot more work" for departments. Well, no, actually. It doesn't mean a lot of work because the common response is a refusal to generate the requested information under section 18(g) or 18(f) which lets them off the hook. But, as my friend points out, we have paid for them to do exactly this through our taxes.

I discern a distinct closing down on information release over the past three years. Yet Parker waxed lyrical about how independent, efficient, professional, accountable and transparent the public service is. There are, apparently, no "excesses". Oh really. According to the NZ Herald, In Wellington, the public sector workforce leapt from 11,940 in 2000 to 18,530 last year. A 55 percent increase isn't excessive? Then Parker had the gall to claim that "The public service has grown at a slightly lower rate than the private sector as a whole." To put that into some kind of perspective the total number of people employed in NZ has grown from 1.88 in December 1999 to 2.17 million - 15 percent.

It leaves one wondering, if New Zealanders are so delighted with their public services why has Labour failed to cement itself as the natural party of government? That was their overriding ambition. To become like the Social Democrats of Sweden which has held power for most of the last 70 years.

Looks like the damned public just don't appreciate the swag of public servants trying to run their lives for them. Even the judiciary is seeing fit to criticise their performance.

Confused?

15 March 2007

Sue Bradford has confirmed parents will not be able to smack their children after her bill is passed.

When questioned again today about the effect it would have on parents, she was asked whether it would be possible to smack children after her bill becomes law - and she said no.....she says it is *already illegal to smack children* but her bill removes a defence of reasonable force for the purpose of correction.

29 September 2008

Today's Herald poll on attitudes to the Section 59 law change shows just how confused next year's referendum question is, Green Party Children's Issues Spokesperson Sue Bradford says.

"While this survey shows that many of the people polled believe 'a smack should not be a criminal offence', the question fails to recognise that *smacking has never been a criminal offence*, and still isn't..... No offence of smacking or spanking was created, and I believe the proponents of the referendum have deliberately confused the issue. (My emphasis added.)

It is no wonder the pulic is confused. It isn't the proponents of the referendum's fault. The woman is impossible.

Large rise in child maltreatment deaths?

I used this graph recently to discuss the claim that the economic reforms had caused an increase in child deaths from maltreatment. Unfortunately I didn't have statistics post 2003 although Family First has claimed there have been around 7 deaths per year over recent years which sounds plausible.

The Dominion Post magazine, Your Weekend, featured an article about Cindy Kiro. In it was this statement;

Of 88 children killed between 2002 and 2006, 48 were Pakeha, 28 were Maori and the remainder were Pacific Island and Asian.

Do the maths. That would mean child deaths averaged 17.6 per year over that five year period. Far higher than any earlier period.

I will attempt to find the source of these statistics but as the article was about the Children's Commissioner I would expect her office is the source.

It is possible the figures include young people (over 14) as well as children (14 and under) but this wouldn't make a great deal of difference as child deaths are clustered in the younger ages.

Perhaps police data differs substantially from NZHIS.

Police priorities disgust

Last Sunday morning we woke to find David's car had been broken into, along with five others in the street. This is our third experience of vehicle break-ins/theft/vandalism since we have lived in what is a dead-end street. It's bloody annoying having the car out of commission for a week while glass is ordered in. The local cop came but little can be done, as we have come to expect. Anyway the episode hadn't prompted me to write a blog post until today.

One week later I am running Robert out early to Plimmerton in my car. Along the Esplanade in Petone, which has a 50km speed limit even at the industrial end, a cop is pointing his speed gun thingy at traffic and offending cars were being pulled up and ticketed by another three cops about 100 metres on. I wasn't stopped but my blood started boiling as I considered that 4 cops were being paid to harass citizens out and about on a quiet Sunday morning doing nothing more 'criminal' than going a few kilometres over a speed limit which is already too low.

Now I am a simple person. But it strikes me that these taxpayer-funded agents of the state could be far better utilised patrolling the streets in the small hours of the morning attempting to detect but more importantly, DETER, real criminals. Or are they too afraid to do some real policing?

From the smack-free utopia of Aoteoroa...

(Robert's photo-shopping)

Trotter attacks ACT

Chris Trotter has probably done ACT a favour today by attacking them in his Dominion Post column. His point of objection - ACT's slogan to "turn back the clock", as expressed by ACT's number 5 candidate David Garrett. Trotter insists that to turn back the clock to the low crime, full employment New Zealand of the 50s ACT would need to restore the cradle-to-grave welfare state that it rails against. Let's examine that.

Welfare creates a cycle. Just as the economic cycle exists and seasonal cycles exist. But the cycle is far more protracted than either of these. The 1830s in the Britain saw a peak of the welfare cycle, that is, it was at its most destructive. Reforms were instituted which essentially abolished outdoor relief - cash payments to the unemployed and others unable to make their own living. The choice was work or workhouse.

This was the mood that prevailled as the early settlers left Britain and other European countries of origination. When they arrived in New Zealand they resisted calls for establishing rate-payer funded welfare although provinces funded what was called charitable aid through hospitals. The rightful provider of welfare was considered to be the family.

But as the cycle progressed and advocacy for an old age pension and thereafter more and more benefits won the day, dependency and slowing productivity started to grow. Societies gradually buy into what's on offer. Values are changed as in the transformation from the morals-based non-abused welfare state (up to the 60s) to the entitlement based highly-abused welfare state, where everyone wants a slice because they are owed. And when their slice isn't big enough resentment and a breakdown in cohesion results. Dysfunction and crime grow.

So I contend we are at another destructive peak in the welfare cycle and have been since the early nineties. Which is why we need to pare it back. And soon.

Trotter is mistaken. More welfarism won't improve matters. But I do agree that we cannot turn back the clock either. Values have changed too much. We can however go forward by acknowledging how much conditions for women have improved (the DPB is unnecessary) how private insurance for unemployment tends to build in fewer disincentives (the dole should go) how the best results in helping the poor come from voluntary one-on-one efforts (harness the potential of our active and youthful ageing population). What we don't want is a reintroduction of tariffs, subsidies, and all the other protectionist facets of phoney job creation Trotter moots.

Yes. Being attacked by a luddite like Trotter shouldn't hurt at all.

Inner Strength

If you can start the day without caffeine,

If you can always be cheerful, ignoring aches and pains,

If you can resist complaining and boring people with your troubles,

If you can eat the same food every day and be grateful for it,

If you can understand when your loved ones are too busy to give you any time,

If you can take criticism and blame without resentment

If you can ignore a friend's limited education and never correct her/him,

If you can resist treating a rich friend better than a poor friend,

If you can conquer tension without medical help,

If you can relax without liquor,

If you can sleep without the aid of drugs,















...Then You Are Probably The Family Dog

National's lost opportunity

Katherine Rich delivered her valedictory speech to parliament yesterday after three terms as a National MP.

Rich said her "annus horribilis" was 2005, when her disagreement over Brash's views on welfare led to her sacking as welfare spokeswoman and her temporary demotion from the front bench. "Demotion clearly wasn't a career highlight but it was preferable than trying to explain why I, a well-paid mother with all the supports in the world, intended telling a DPB (domestic purposes benefit) mum to leave her baby in childcare to net less than half the minimum wage," she said.

And in making the issue about herself she lost the battle.

Katherine's circumstances were, in fact, irrelevant.

At a recent Grey Power meeting two women talked to me afterwards. They broached the subject. We agree with the letters you write about the DPB, they said. We were both in favour of the DPB when it was brought in. We thought it would be good for mothers and their children. But it has gone too far. Too many are now choosing it as a lifestyle, they said. And that is not good for their children.

Simply put society cannot have it both ways. Unless the DPB incentives are removed the problem of child poverty - spiritual and material - will persist.

There is no need to punish those already on the DPB. But there is a desperate need to tell those who are not, that lifestyle welfare is no longer an option. We have to turn off the welfare tap as the first and most urgent action.

In Katherine's 2004 welfare paper, Saving the next generation from welfare dependency, she wrote;

National is the only party that can make and implement difficult welfare decisions.

Unfortunately she couldn't. Brash could have but that is now all a tragically lost opportunity.

But I wish her all the best for life post-parliament. I am sure she is relishing the prospect.

Politics sans policy

People I talk with or listen to are heartily sick of politics without policy. There is no sense of enjoyment or participation about the coming election. Most just want to see the back of it. The common complaint is, what about the important stuff? What about the things that matter? I've commented before about the media's role in that dearth.

So last night's debate about ICT policies was a refreshing experience and congratulations to TV7. It almost reinvigorated me. But why aren't we seeing more of this kind of debate? The contest of ideas instead of the interminable he said, she said, he did, she did stuff. A friend said to me yesterday about 90 percent of the New Zealand electorate is dysfunctional when it comes to governance and politics and thought they no longer deserved the time he had been putting in for years trying to spread better ideas.I hope he saw last night's debate. What a great result for ACT, especially after the supercilious, smarmier-than-smarmy-from-Palmie, David Cunliffe said nobody cares about what the leader of a 1 percent party thinks. Clearly they did.

Quote of the night from Nanny National;

Question; "Why should the taxpayer who can't even afford a PC pay for broadband to every home"

Maurice Williamson; "Because that's the way we deliver the new citizen of the future."

Life in New Zealand

Somewhere a teacher works in an extremely high risk industry by night. Her health and her safety are however her business and so is how she chooses to earn an extra buck. By day she takes photographs of kid's lunch boxes and makes phone calls to parents warning them of the dangers of peanut butter sandwiches and fat-saturated chippies. At least that is what the Ministry of Education tells her to do.

When I was a kid I just couldn't get into Alice in Wonderland. Its preposterousness went beyond entertainment. So does this.

A line in the sand

It seems to me that nobody would willingly argue with the Sensible Sentencing Trust's championing of victim's rights. However also given consideration must be potential victims and their rights to be safe.

Drugs are involved in a great deal of crime, whether they create an unquenchable thirst for money to fund habits leading to burglary and dishonesty crimes or they induce behaviour changes that lead to crimes of recklessness and/or violence or they are a mix of both. The traditional western response is to attempt to eradicate drugs, except where a majority also enjoy indulging in them ie alcohol. That attempted eradication is causing more crime than it is preventing.

If you don't believe me look at the one case whereby we have de facto legalising of a highly addictive drug - heroin. The methadone programme is accepted not as a great success in weaning people of heroin but as a effective deterrent to crime. This programme, which caters to over 4,000 addicts, sticks out like dog's. It is the one exception to the overriding rationale behind the war on drugs. But it would appear lawmakers refuse to learn anything from it.

Instead we continue to create more crime rather than reduce it by acceptance and accommodation of drug use. Hell's bells. What a wet liberal I will be labelled as. One of those pesky ACT liberals who cause problems for the ACT conservatives.

ACT appears to have linked itself to the SST. I have never seen or heard the Sensible Sentencing Trust back an end to prohibition. And any failure to do so actually condones the creation of more victims. Upping the ante will only worsen crime in New Zealand. Add to that the insane welfare policies NZ pursues (ACT's opposition to which is the main reason I support them) and we are never going to see the kind of safety and security alluded to at their law and order launch yesterday.

Maori Party policy - dreamland

According to the NZ Herald today;

The Maori Party, meanwhile, reiterated its hopes of removing gst on food and scrapping tax on income under $25,000. Speaking on TV One's Agenda programme yesterday, Maori Party MP Hone Harawira dismissed suggestions that those two policies alone would cost $5 billion and said they could be funded by the tax on cigarettes.

I have blogged before about the flight of fantasy that masquerades as Maori Party policy.

The tax on cigarettes, last time I checked, is around $1 billion. A black market already exists. Massively hike up current taxation on cigarettes and tobacco and all that will happen is less tax will be collected. And the gangs will get another gift.

Perhaps Hone could arrange for that to be their Waitangi Tribunal settlement.

Campaigning

Yesterday I represented ACT at the Wellington Wairarapa School Trustees conference in Wellington. Other candidates on the panel were Allan Peachey, National MP and Education spokesperson, Grant Robertson, Wgtn Central Labour Candidate and Vaughan Smith, United Future Wgtn, who is the son of Murray Smith, Hutt South UF Candidate. Something of a breakthrough occurred for me when I was asked to speak for around 5 minutes and had nothing prepared. We were advised earlier it was a question and answer format but the chair, ex Listener writer Dennis Welch changed that.

Having two children in the education system - one in the state and one in the private system - and being a keen advocate for vouchers, made the task fairly easy. When I touched on the subject of secondary schools and lack of choice, namely the not uncommon reluctance to send one's child to Hutt Valley High, I was loudly interrupted by a school trustee from that board. It's a great school, she countered. The bad reports are all a media beat up, she said. I responded that I hadn't said it wasn't but it is TOO BIG. It does not suit every child's needs. That is the crux of the problem. State high schools take no account of children's individuality, needs and strengths.

Which took me into Rodney's championing of the Corelli School for Arts right down to accepting a part in their school production (when was the last time anyone wanted Trevor Mallard in their school play?) and why ACT's voucher policy would see schools like this flourish. As always there was considerable interest in the idea. Some cynicism, some approval but no hostility.

The ERO got a right royal drubbing and I now doubt their ability to provide the kind of vital information parents need. The decile rating system is still controversial with trustees worried about the low expectations decile 1,2 and 3 schools build in teachers. Low achievement was raised which I pointed out (at some length) is not going away while long term welfare dependence continues (which elicited some agreement). The lifting of the school leaving age wasn't sitting easily.

But the significant aspect of the 2 hour event was the leaning to the National MP. The Labour candidate was pushing it uphill. Allan Peachey is of course an expert in education given his background. He tackled the questions personally rather than as a party mouthpiece and was credible and sincere.

The mood for change goes beyond the poll indications.

Teaching twaddle

Check out the following NCEA question. It is apparently a compulsory question from a Geography exam. Sounds more like Gender Studies - twaddle from twats.

Thing is I can't even begin to answer it. Perhaps NotPC can help out. Would seem to be rather more up his alley than mine. Yikes. There's a thought.

Do alleys have genders?

The not-so-good-news about young Maori

Just over two weeks ago Labour were talking up a Ministry of Social Development report that showed the gap between rich and poor is shrinking (what else would you expect when more attention is paid to dividing up the pie than growing it?) Trevor Mallard turned up at a meeting waving a chart from said report and Ruth Dyson waxed lyrical.

This week a further report has been released which contains some good news but plenty of not so good. The media seem to have missed it. Perhaps Simon Collins is away.

The not-so-good news pertains largely to young Maori. According to the report;

The teenage birth rate for Maori fell by 26 percent between 1997 and 2002 before increasing by a similar amount between 2002 and 2007.

Just over half of all women who have children in their teens are Maori.

There has been a slight fall in the proportion of Maori staying on at school to the age of 17.5 years since the early 90s

Truancy rates increased for all ethnic groups between 2004 and 2006. The largest growth occurred for Māori students, with an increase of 17 percent in the percentage of unjustified absences. [The Maori truancy rate is more than 4 times the NZ European rate.]

Young Mäori are also over-represented in youth justice statistics, accounting for almost half of all police apprehensions of 14–16 year olds and over half of all cases proved in the Youth Court involving 14–16 year olds.

Road deaths for Mäori under the age of 25 increased between 2001 and 2005. By comparison with the total population under 25 years, young Mäori are at greater risk of dying from assault, unintentional injury and motor vehicle accidents.

The Maori youth suicide rate which, after falling between the periods 1996–1998 and 1999–2001, increased by nearly as much in the years up to 2003–2005.

Maori secondary school students were almost 4 times more likely to witness adult violence in the home than NZ European.

I do not need to spell out the implications of all the above. There is a group of young Maori who are living under-achieving, unproductive and often unhappy lives. The group out of which most crime emanates is growing.

Parallel Grey Power meetings

While the Prime Minister was speaking to Grey Power yesterday in Lower Hutt, the Hutt South candidates were speaking to Grey Power over the hill in Wainuiomata, including Trevor who (I suspect) had the meeting moved forward half an hour so he could dash off the be with the PM later. Wainui is Trevor's home and he pulls the strings. The format was strange with each candidate getting 3 mins to speak followed by 5 mins of audience questions just to them. I got grilled on climate change, gst and the economy by local Grey Power hierarchy. That's OK. I like criticism. Stirs the blood. The United Future candidate from Rimutaka remarked to me they were particularly hard on me but that I'd handled it well. And the feedback after the show, as I handed out the 20 Point Plans, was encouraging, especially from men who are climate change agnostics and others worried about the economic effects of the ETS.

The hot button issue for this group seemed to be crime, with a number calling for the return of the death penalty. Unfortunately I didn't get chance to get involved in that discussion but Maori Party candidate, Derek Fox, asked the woman calling for it if she would flick the switch and she replied gladly. Then she made a strange remark. Even if we never used it we should bring it back, indicating she thought it would be a successful deterrent. Has she looked at the crime in those US states that still use it? Another man said he didn't think we should be paying to keep people in prison and we should just 'trash' them. Emotive, unreasoning stuff.

This is my short speech;

For ACT this election is primarily about the economy. Say ‘economy’ to some people and their eyes glaze over. They shouldn’t because the economy has a huge effect on all our lives regardless of our age.

Our average income from working in New Zealand is now NZ$450 behind Australia’s. NZ$450 per week.

ACT has a plan to bridge that gap over the next ten years and we have laid it down here. Please read it.

What would bridging that gap mean for you?

For a start Super would go up because Super is indexed to average after-tax earnings. Cutting income tax would also have a similar, more immediate but smaller effect.

Instead of waiting for a slightly bigger slice of the cake that may or may not come your way, the chances of your super income rising are much greater with strong economic growth.

But it isn’t just about the money going into your bank account every week. It’s about far more.

A number, possibly even a majority of you have children and grandchildren now living overseas. That is because NZ is slipping in international competitiveness. Our people leave for better incomes, sometimes as a short-term measure to repay a loan sooner. Many do not return. And that is an enormous emotional cost to their families.

We are also seeing the effects of losing international economic competitiveness in skill shortages in the health area. Most health care is consumed in our older years. By 2050, the portion of the population that is 65 plus, is going to double. If we carry on letting NZ drop down the OECD income ladder – we used to be third and are now 22nd – our ability to care for the aged will get far worse than it is today.

National will win this election, but because they have bought into Labour’s major economic policies, have little hope of achieving the economic growth we so desperately need. If you believe the economy matters you need to give your Party Vote to ACT so more MPs can join Rodney Hide, who is going to win Epsom, in achieving a real change of direction for this country and the people who live in it.

The Maori Party method

Last night a friend and I attended a Maori Party hui in Lower Hutt. The candidate for Te Tai Tonga was launched - a youngish lawyer who has a pleasant way about her but waffles a fair bit - and Derek Fox, Te Ururoa Flavell and Pita Sharples all spoke. Tariana was a no-show but I wasn't disappointed.

The Maori Party is seeking the electorate vote only. That was the first message. Seven candidates in the Maori seats seeking only the electorate vote.

But then that changed as the meeting went on and they began explaining the MMP system quite extensively (including an innovative slide show presentation) and decided they were trying to grow their Party Vote in the general electorates as a basis for future growth. This seeming switch may come about because they speak to two different audiences at once. The handful of Ngati Pakeha present may have been noted.

The Maori Party take a long term view. The past three years has been all about building credibility and they are very proud of having spoken to every bill that has passed (and so they should be), their conduct in the house (and so they should be) and their expanding array of policy positions.

But unlike other political meetings little was talked of policy. Their catchcry is being a voice for Maori, BUT an independent voice. They do not want to be in a formal coalition with either party because they fear being swallowed up and losing their ability to vote for their constituents when their constituents may disagree with the passage of certain legislation. Sharples believes that Key will reach out to them for support if he wants to form more than a one-term government. Much scorn (good naturedly) was heaped upon the Maori Labour MPs but certainly supporting Labour was not ruled out either. (Winston is now smiling at them but he is smiling too late.)

So the method is very much emotion-based. The tribal identification is subsumed by the new tribe - the Maori Party. The Flags, the Identity, the Family, the Celebration. The vibe is a good one. There is humour aplenty. They are a young party despite having older MPs (Pita can't wait for someone younger to come along and replace him) and brimming with enthusiasm.

It would be very easy to be seduced by the newest political gang, especially when one sympathises with their big issue - trying to hold on to their property rights (which goes beyond just the seabed and foreshore legislation). But I do not see separatism as good for New Zealand. Factionalism of the fighting-over-resources kind is anathema, it is a divisive and destructive feature of socialism. Although the mood was very upbeat the overriding message is still one of Maori difference and Maori need and from what I could discern the really tough issues never got a look in.

Let's talk about trust

Clark says this election is about 'trust'.

What about trusting the people?

Never before has a government demonstrated less trust in people to run their own affairs.

If it's about trust, Labour must be the last choice.

Gang ban - the wrong road to go down

We do not need a ban on gangs.

A good deal of what gangs do is illegal (thanks, in the main, to drug prohibition).

The police cannot control their criminal activities so their best response is to ban presently legal and overt activities - freedom of movement and association.

Police Association president Greg O'Connor wants Australian banning legislation copied here,

"We don't like coming second to Australia in anything, but if there was a Bledisloe Cup for anti-gang laws, they would clean up," Mr O'Connor said.

Gangs will always exist. They are a facet of the human impulse to group for mutual advantage. Prohibition provides some of them with a more than lucrative means of support (welfare provides them with a less than lucrative means). If we want rid of the resulting criminal gangs then we have to destroy their revenue source on both counts.

Ask yourself, are gangs selling home-brewed wine and beer? Why not?

No stone unturned

The volunteers who deliver election material frequently ask about which letterboxes they should put material in. I put it in all letterboxes. Took the boy and the dog and we covered Lowry Bay yesterday. Even got a bit sunburned. Beautiful day.

Fostering

I know the caregivers in one of the foster homes this young man lived in and they are very good people. Apparently they have stood by him and supported him during the trial.

I don't much care what happens to this young murderer. The caregivers would be appalled to hear me say that no doubt. But comes a point when forgiveness is no longer an option. Maybe they still haven't and won't ever reach it.

What I do care about is how hurt and betrayed they must be feeling. Helping people with hard backgrounds involves a huge amount of trust and you convince yourself - you have to - that it is warranted and flows both ways.

With the vocation they have, the only way you keep at it is to accept, you win some, you lose some. What cost the loss though.

Child death claims don't stack up

Here we go again with the claim that it is somehow the fault of Roger Douglas and Ruth Richardson that children die through maltreatment;

Kerre Woodham writes;

He [Mike Doolan] says international experience shows that economic conditions are closely associated with levels of child abuse, and any group that suffers more from social and economic changes are found to be over represented in child abuse and other antisocial statistics.

The effects of the economic reforms of the 1990s can be seen in the higher rate of child killings during that decade. The lower death rate between 2000 and 2005 can be partially attributed to low unemployment levels and much greater prosperity, he says.

The problem with this theory is that journalists conveniently ignore statistics prior to the 90s.



Do the 1990s stand out particularly?

The rate of deaths does not anyway have a hard and fast correlation to the amount of abuse. And trying to measure abuse is even more troublesome. Definitions, awareness of, willingness to report, child justice approaches, have all changed. It would for example appear there was little Maori child abuse pre the 60s (statistically speaking). That is because Pakeha society largely ignored Maori society. Maori ex-nuptial rates of birth (which have a strong association with child abuse) were not even included in general statistics until the 1960s.

Here's another thought. The medical fraternity is progressively more able to save life. How many more children are invalided through maltreatment who would previously have died? The child death figures are very small and consequently very volatile. I would be reluctant to use them to illustrate any theory, as unsatisfactory as I find that.

(2003 was an aberration - according to Family First statistics, deaths have averaged about 7 per year over the past five years. They are not routinely published by the police.)