More state intervention on the way

This is from the Maxim newsletter. One of the more concise descriptions of the consequences of repealing section 59.

Supporters of repeal say that their intention is not to criminalise parents for what they call "trivial" smacking. Their intentions however are, to put it bluntly, irrelevant.

What matters is what the law will say.

Currently, section 59 gives parents, or those in the place of parents, a defence to charges that could result from a parent's use of physical force to discipline their child. The defence is a limited one; any force used must be "reasonable in the circumstances" and used "by way of correction". If section 59 is repealed, the law will say that ordinary smacking constitutes an assault to which parents will have no defence. The Police have confirmed that this will be the case. This is because the law defines "assault" very widely. Assault is a criminal offence for which parents could be charged if they do not have the protection of section 59. Other occasions in which parents touch their children for disciplinary reasons, such as putting an unwilling child into a chair for a five minute "time-out", will also constitute assault.

Many of those supporting repeal also say that the defence needs to be removed to prevent child abuse. However, child abuse is already illegal and is not protected by section 59. An analysis of cases involving section 59 shows that in the vast majority of cases, the limits of the defence are applied sensibly.

Hobson's choice

Researchers ask are we medicating away romantic love? Anti-depressents alter brain chemicals which blunt the emotions and interfere with the abiltity to feel romantic love and sustain long-term attachments. But if you are depressed, do you have the capacity anyway?

John Plewes, a medical adviser to Eli Lilly -- which manufactures Prozac -- says, "Patients who suffer from depression aren't in a position to make decisions about partners and life choices." Plewes added that antidepressants "allow the person to experience normal emotions when they get better from depression."

More bad behaviour at select committee

National MP, Nick Smith got rather excited at the Local Government and Environment select committee yesterday, when questioning officials about the costs of the Oceans Policy. Marion Hobbs is complaining about his "aggressive" questioning. Not to the chairperson but to the speaker. Now, will Margaret Wilson take a leaf out of Shane Jones book and rip up the complaint?

Hardly front page news...

...but the DomPost thinks so.

Wellington High School present kids who have a 100 percent attendence record with a $50 prize at the end of the year. Good idea. But some think not.

One parent said she was angry the school was spending money, including parents' $300 donations, on "bribes".

"I will be deducting the $50 that the school seems to think it can afford from my kids' school fees...It is outrageous."

What a whinger.

Sick of state worshippers

That's it. I'm laying a complaint. Hearing about Sweden is definitely bad for my health and I want a ban on the word - NOW.

Here are three references in the last couple of days alone.

1 Some countries, such as Sweden, had put a total ban on all advertising during children's television viewing times, while other countries had placed restrictions on the promotion of unhealthy foods.

2 ....Joan Durrant, a child clinical psychologist from the University of Manitoba, .... cited the example of Sweden, which removed the criminal defence in 1957 - nearly 50 years ago - and followed that up in 1978 with an explicit statement in the Civil Code to say children should not be hit.

So far 17 countries - including the Pitcairn Islands (infamous for a massive historic abuse case, which ended in the conviction of six men last year) - have followed Sweden's lead in explicitly banning physical discipline in their civil codes.

3 Sweden hopes to end its oil dependency within 15 years according to a new government initiative.

With oil prices fluctuating and the resource dwindling, the Scandinavian country plans to develop a range of bio fuels so that, according to government minister Mona Sahlin; 'No driver should need to use only gasoline' by 2020.

So has the Swedish state delivered nirvana?

Newsweek investigates; "An increasing number of Swedes do not recognize the socialist paradise-cum-economic wunderkind of Guardian headlines. The model is showing "visible cracks," says Klas Eklund, the Stockholm-based chief economist of SEB bank. Among them: the lack of incentive to work, resulting in a real unemployment rate roughly three times the official 6.3 percent; the failure to foster entrepreneurship (Swedes are the Europeans least likely to consider starting businesses), and the "total inability to handle the integration of immigrants," who face an unemployment rate one third higher than native Swedes. The disparity is among the widest in Europe."

Counting the hidden unemployed, including those on disability, paid leaves or "perpetual students" at tuition-free universities, more than 20 percent of the working-age population is out of work, according to some estimates.

However, Newsweek concludes, "Right now the Swedish model, for all its shortcomings and no matter how heavily questioned at home, looks about as good as it gets."

Aaaah. Definitely ban the mere mention of this place. It reminds me too much of New Zealand

Is this Maori Party policy?

Hone Harawira wants the manufacture and sale of tobacco made illegal.

That will make all the difference. We will then be able to control tobacco as effectively as we control cannabis.

It's not about Rodney Hide

New Labour MP, Shane Jone's treatment of Rodney Hide's letter of complaint is worthy of more than the flippancy Jane Clifton accords it in today's DomPost. I always read Jane Clifton. She's more astute and talented than most journalists. And given the undeniable antipathy some people feel towards Rodney Hide it's a piece of writing that won't go unappreciated.

But it's not about Rodney. This issue is about not just avoidance of process but a voluble contempt for it. Going before a select committee is tough. Members who don't like the content of your submission make it abundantly clear in a variety of ways. From direct personal attack through to an exaggerated display of boredom or indifference.

But I go knowing what to expect. Nobody can make me go - unlike Mr Fraser.

So there needs to be some constraints on the behaviour of committee members and submitters. If the chairman himself steps beyond the limits, and what Shane Jones said about Ian Fraser was extremely denigrating and highly public, then we have a problem.

Jane Clifton suggests that "ripping up" Rodney's letter of complaint is the way most New Zealanders deal with politics. She is probably right. And the more evidence they see of a process that is presided over by people who are a law unto themselves, the more they will keep well away.

Hone Harawira's challenge to all Maori MPs

"My challenge to you is to recognise that you were Maori before you were a parliamentarian, and that you will be Maori after parliament has no further use for you.

That is what should determine your position. Not the politics of your Party."

This, in a nutshell, is what shackles many Maori. Being Maori is more important than anything, anything, else. Even honesty. Watch Maori, at many levels and in different situations, draw in around a wrong-doer because whatever the misdemeanour, being Maori takes precedence. Loyalty to race is transcendent.

Think of the implications.

"(Being Maori) is what should determine your position. Not the politics of your Party. "

The Maori Party said they were a party for everybody. That's not true. They cannot be because their politics are based on race. No more, no less.

Harawira was bemoaning the poor Maori stats - higher unemployment, half the prison population, 25 percent of the drop-out rate. The quickest way to reduce those numbers is to stop the separatism. Stop the tribalism. Stop the excuses. Stop blaming racism one day and promoting it the next.

If Parliament is to be no more than an arena for fighting over group interests (who can get the most out of the state) then why not an Asian Party, a Muslim Party, a Gay Party, a Feminists Party (which many would say we already have.)

All the law needs to do is protect individuals, all with the same and equal rights. Think how much smaller the government would be. Think how much freer we would all be.

Indian giver

Looks like I won't get to open my packet of chewing gum afterall.




The Government's widely mocked plan to increase tax thresholds might not be implemented at all, Finance Minister Michael Cullen hinted today.

Crime is a growth industry

Astonishing. Some rehab programmes are making inmates more likely to reoffend.

WFF drives WINZ Crisis

Oh those unintended consequences. Government policies always throw them up yet nobody ever seeks to anticipate them. This one is the perfect example of the self-perpetuating welfare state. Where do you think some of those staff will end up? (I had a friend who worked for WINZ. She had a debilitating physical condition which required treatment. Her employer told her to go on a sickness benefit because they couldn't accommodate the treatment she needed to keep her on her feet. Go figure.)

The Government's Working for Families benefit scheme has resulted in heavy workloads for Work and Income staff, who are seeking counselling and resigning in droves, workers claim.

Almost two dozen Canterbury staff have undergone counselling in the space of five months, figures provided by Work and Income show.

"Frustrated and overworked" Canterbury staff have sent a letter to management saying the department is in crisis and staff morale at an all-time low.

Easy-to-understand economics

Good article here explaining the virtues of, indeed the necessity of self-interest.

It is fashionable to decry selfishness as responsible for every societal ill. But without the natural motivation for personal gain our economic system might fall down around us, or at the least produce much less prosperity for all.


This constant effort by everyone to get the best deal they can creates the productivity that fuels the economy. And that explains why people can both dislike Wal-Mart yet shop there.


Remember, those societies that have sought to ban such normal human impulses have been the worse for it. Just ask the billions of Russians, Chinese and Indians who have only relatively recently forsaken various forms of socialism, which sees self-interest as evil.

TV turn off

A group of influential grey power elites want a fully-funded public telly channel. One that would be advertising free and run quality programmes like "Close to Home" and "McPhail and Gadsby."

The group is led by former broadcaster Ian Johnstone.

There was a feeling of regret at the loss of such programmes as Close to Home, McPhail & Gadsby, Gallery and scores of other local programmes.

"I realise we are a bunch of old men and women saying it used to be better. But it was," Mr Johnstone said.

I'd rather watch the ads over that line-up.

Another signatory, Sir Douglas Graham, said the hours might be up, but quality was down.

New Zealand television seemed "designed for the lowest common denominator" and the news was too focused on crime and court stories.

TV designed for the great unwashed, the masses. Horrors!

Author Dame Fiona Kidman said public broadcasting "is an act of service to the viewers in this country" and should fund relevant programmes.

"A lot of the content now is cheap and easy. Quality drama requires quite a commitment of funding, and if everything is a commercial imperative to make money to keep the Crown-owned company afloat, it makes it much more difficult."

Somebody who knows what "quality" is wants to put their hand even deeper into your pocket.

National's state-owned enterprises spokeswoman, Katherine Rich, said New Zealand could not continue to look backwards to the "television experience" of the 1970s when there was first one channel, and then two.

"People are getting their media fix from a wide range of sources, not just Television One. It is unfair to burden a state broadcaster with meeting the needs of everyone."

It is unfair to burden the taxpayer with meeting the needs of a few. Which is exactly what these highbrows want.

Delusions of grandeur

Belusconi compares himself to Jesus
14 February 2006

ROME: First it was Napoleon. Now it is Jesus Christ.

Italian Prime Minister Silvio Belusconi has compared himself to both, prompting the open scorn of his political opponents and even the quietly raised eyebrows of his coalition partners.

"I am the Jesus Christ of politics," Italian media quoted him as saying at a dinner with supporters on Saturday night. "I am a patient victim, I put up with everyone, I sacrifice myself for everyone."

Hey. At least he is still talking about himself in the first person.

What business thinks

84 percent of surveyed businesses agree with the statement that New Zealand has too many bureaucrats. The following is a breakdown of the areas considered to be the biggest offenders.


Area | Percentage saying yes |
|----------------------------------------+----------------------------------------|
|Social Policies | 81.0% |
|----------------------------------------+----------------------------------------|
|Welfare | 77.8% |
|----------------------------------------+----------------------------------------|
|Environment | 61.0% |
|----------------------------------------+----------------------------------------|
|Health | 59.5% |
|----------------------------------------+----------------------------------------|
|Education | 52.4% |
|----------------------------------------+----------------------------------------|
|Trade & Enterprise | 31.7% |

"The strong reaction against welfare bureaucracy was probably also indicative of built-up annoyance and perceptions about the number of people given welfare payments of various types."

Notice though that business was less unhappy about corporate welfare bureaucracy. Somewhat self-serving. The principle behind corporate welfare is the same one that's behind social welfare. The government redistributes taxpayers money to suit its own agenda and to buy votes.

Green agendas

Earlier this month Green MP Sue Bradford said, "...we accept the forecasts of rising unemployment over this year and the years ahead."

With that knowledge the Greens, along with UNITE, have chosen to target fast-food industry workers to agitate for higher wages. The outcome of their actions will have one of two results.

1/ A rise in minimum adult and youth rates will be forced by legislation which will lead to either fewer jobs (which they can claim was going to happen anyway); and/or reduced company profitability and/or higher prices to the consumer.

Fewer jobs won't really bother the Greens who embrace social security as a lifestyle for whoever wants it. And if Bradford can get the youth rate raised she will then move onto bringing benefit rates for 16 and 17 year-olds in line with adult rates.

Reduced profitability of any multi-national is highly desirable.

And increased prices will mean reduced consumption of fast-food. Kedgley will be delighted about this. Kedgley hates the food and Nandor hates the packaging.

2/ The campaign will fail but not without causing major disruption and agitation. Some consolation.

So ask yourself. Why the fastfood industry?

The extreme left are exploiting these particular workers to promote a number of their own agendas. Those workers need to know that if this campaign succeeds, on balance, they will find themselves no better off. Some will lose jobs, some will lose income support due to a larger pay packet, all will end up paying more as the costs of products and services goes up to meet higher wage bills across the board. They are just the meat in the sandwich - or the burger in the bun .....

Anti-feminist barred

Newly-qualified Wainuiomata father, Peter Zohrab, has been told he is not a fit and proper person to practice law. His role as a radical men's activist has provoked this criticism.

"His website also included a copy of his complaint to the United Nations human rights committee, that the body for training New Zealand judges, the Institute of Judicial Studies, indoctrinated judges against men.

The website quoted him as saying: "The law is not an ass – the law is a sexist bitch!"

Having met Mr Zohrab briefly, a couple of times, I found him extremely quiet and mild-mannered. I will watch this wrangle with interest.

Bradford finds a buddy

Canadian psychologist Joan Durrant will wade into New Zealand's sensitive smacking debate today with a Government-funded speech about the success of Sweden's anti-smacking law. She said Sweden provided education for all new parents on alternative ways of handling stress caused by children.....

When she lived in Sweden with her baby son, now aged 9, the state provided protective rings to put around the stove to stop her child getting burned.

"Parent education is universally accessible and universally accessed. It's not just for at-risk parents. The Swedes recognise that all parents are at risk because of the stresses of life."

The Herald's Simon Collins looks at both sides of the argument.

Another one bites the dust

One of the last pharmaceutical manufacturers in New Zealand has just announced its closure. Two hundred people work for Pacific Pharmaceuticals. Some administration and marketing staff will remain but up to 180 Auckland employees will lose their jobs.

In the last fifteen years thousands of jobs have been lost in NZ due to Pharmac's monopoly on pharmaceutical purchasing. I explain why in this article published in the NBR in 2003.

Sharple's split-personality

This speech, from Pita Sharples, is a real disappointment. It's back to the old "blame somebody else" business.

"The poor are not the creators of poverty, the poor do not have an investment in being poor. If the poor did not create poverty we all need to ask each other, than who did?"

People who literally create poverty are those who keep having children while on a benefit, some 5,000 a year. People who smoke, drink or gamble away their benefit money create poverty. People who won't take a low-paid job to get on the ladder create poverty. Politicians who tell them not to take "dead-end" jobs create poverty. Politicians who tell people they are not the master of their own destiny create poverty, Pita.

"What sort of Government puts in policies which act against the 250,000 poorest children in Aotearoa? We know that more than one in five children live in low-income families - which is nearly twice the level of the late 1980s. What do we currently have - a ‘Working for Families’ policy which discriminates against beneficiary parents....That is why the Maori Party supports the Child Poverty Action Group for their landmark case to bring legal action against the Government over its discriminatory policies."

Why did I know these guys were going to go down this path? Exactly like the Greens and Sue Bradford. While the government is at least attempting to make working pay more than being on a benefit, these guys want to subvert that.

Remind me what Pita Sharples was saying just the other day? Something about vowing to wage war against welfare dependency;

Dr Sharples said there was too much dependency on welfare in Maoridom - something Labour had not addressed.

"It's like a kid - if you keep giving your kids everything, at the end of the day they don't have the skills and knowledge to do it themselves."

This man has a different tune for each audience.

Late last year he told parliament,"I need to remind this House that Maori have always questioned the handout mentality.

I recollect a song of protest by one of my Ngati Porou whanaunga, Tuini Ngawai, who in the 1950s, wrote a song of protest at the introduction of a universal benefit.

She said at the time, 'he patu tikanga, he patu mahara, he patu mauri'; that the benefit would undermine our customs of self-help, our concern for each other, and the very essence of our lifeforce. When I look around to some of our people, I can see the wisdom of the words of Tuini Ngawai. She warned against dependency, and she would turn in her grave if she knew that what she warned against, has now happened."

Sharples, sharpen up. One day you tell Maori they are "benefit-mad" and the next you demand more money for them. Decide what it is you really believe because at the moment you aren't helping anybody.