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!"
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Sunday, October 19, 2008
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.
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.
Friday, October 17, 2008
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. "
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. "
Thursday, October 16, 2008
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.
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.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
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.
"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.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
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.
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.
Monday, October 13, 2008
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.
"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.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
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.
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.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
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.)
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.)
Friday, October 10, 2008
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?
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.
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
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 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.
I like the title this one was given.
Monday, October 06, 2008
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....
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.
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.
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.
Sunday, October 05, 2008
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.
Saturday, October 04, 2008
'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.
“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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
