Soap Box - New Zealand

King's College and Alcohol

2011-06-16T10:27:00.000+12:00

King’s College has had its fourth student death in 18 months.

Four dead students is an inexcusable disgrace. Once again the school fails to show leadership in its handling of its alcohol issues. Blame is deflected by the school on to parents, and society in general. They fail to acknowledge that the death rate at King’s is exceptional when compared to other New Zealand schools.

Last year, following an alcohol overdose death of a King’s student, some of King’s richest parents tried hard to find ways to give their underage children alcohol in connection with the school ball. King’s headmaster's pathetic response was “I really can't answer for what people are trying to do”.

This year a prominent business man, Craig Norgate, arranged a pre ball drinking gathering for many King’s students. The dead boy died just hours after attending the Norgate function. There were reports of students getting drunk at Norgate’s function and of widespread drunken, drugged behaviour at the ball. Despite the ball being a school event, and knowing that there were drunken children at the ball, it seems that the school took far too little responsibility for those in its care. After the death, the chairman of the King’s board tried to minimise the school’s responsibility: "Schools clearly can't be 24-hour babysitters of their students".

It appears that some King’s parents encourage their children to believe that it is not possible to enjoy social events without the presence of large quantities of alcohol. If parents in poor areas showed such poor judgment, society would brand their actions as child abuse.

With parental encouragement of drinking, and a school that does not provide proper leadership in this area, what chance do vulnerable students have?

Three strikes bill will promote violence

2010-03-31T13:55:00.001+13:00

The Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill ("Three Strikes Bill") is designed to imprison offenders for the maximum sentence for their crime on the third conviction, for any of a wide variety of offences. If murder is the third offence, the punishment will be life imprisonment with no parole. For manslaughter, a minimum term of imprisonment of 20 years will be imposed.

Serious sentences for serious crimes are a good idea, however, we need to ensure that in making legislative changes we are doing so for the right reasons and that the changes proposed will lead to the desired result. Let's not pretend, for example, that the three strikes law will act as a deterrent to crime. It is accepted that it will not. Overseas experience with similar three strikes laws is that it makes offenders more violent. An increase in violent crime in California of 9% has been noted as the result of their three strikes law. It is easy to see why this would be the case if you put yourself in the shoes of a violent criminal. If the criminal is already facing a life sentence for one violent offence (on the third strike) there is no disadvantage to them in increasing the number of crimes committed at that time as the additional crimes will probably be "free". In addition, committing crimes that lessen the risk of detection will improve the criminal's chance of escaping punishment with no additional downside if they are caught. For example, a bank robber who accidentally kills a teller might be motivated to kill everyone in the bank as the additional murders will attract no additional punishment and will remove witnesses.

Manslaughter is another problematic area. Some types of manslaughter are almost as bad as murder and they should be punished on the same basis as murder. Other types of manslaughter are at the accidental end of the scale where something has gone horribly and unintentionally wrong. Such offenders are unlikely to be repeat criminals and punishing them harshly serves little purpose. The three strikes law makes no distinction between types of manslaughter.

Time limits are also an issue. Take for example a young offender who accumulates two strikes from youthful offending involving fight related violence or from discharging a firearm unwisely. Those strikes will stay on that person's record forevermore in most circumstances. That person could lead a blameless adult life and then commit an offence years later that should not attract overly harsh punishment - for example another firearms offence or a manslaughter at the lower end of the scale. Under the three strikes law this person would receive a sentence of a minimum of 20 years if they committed manslaughter, even though they had led a blameless adult life.

Firm sentencing does have a role to play, as it keeps serious criminals away from the public, at the very least. However, most criminals are released at some stage and they have to live somewhere. Wouldn't it be better for society to invest real funds into rehabilitating those who want it so that there is a chance of a better future? If it is deterrence we want, the three strikes law is not the answer, and we should instead use resources on creating certainty of apprehension and conviction. New Zealand, with its resolution rates for some categories of crimes being around 20%, has a long way to go.

NZ Law Society fails to promote the rule of law

2010-03-29T13:58:00.000+13:00

It is reported that lawyer Chris Comeskey has been charged with professional misconduct for daring to criticise judicial processes. Comeskey's "guilt" appears to have been predetermined with the chairman of the Law Society, John Marshall, decreeing that Comeskey's comments were "not appropriate".

Section 14 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act provides that "everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form."

Freedom of expression and transparency are factors that underlie the concepts of natural justice and the rule of law. Judges are human like everyone else. They make mistakes and inevitably some of them will be unsuited for their role. Lawyers are better placed than most to bring relevant matters to the attention of the public. Criticism of judges may improve the judicial system and also places matters fairly in the public domain. It is abhorrent that the Law Society seeks to chill the freedom of speech by punishing lawyers. Let's not return to the days of Star Chamber.

The Law is an Ass

2010-03-26T12:08:00.001+13:00

The role of the Courts is to uphold the rule of law. That job will be easier, and respect will more easily accrue to legal decision makers, if the law is applied in a consistent and fair manner. Fail to do so and disrespect for the law creeps in, resulting in a slow slide towards anarchy. It also casts doubt on New Zealand's credibility in criticising the short comings of the justice systems of other countries.

It is generally thought that crimes against the person are more serious than crimes against property. This aspect of the social contract is not upheld by the Courts. We have seen that the systemic failure to properly prosecute drink/drive killers for manslaughter leads to these killers receiving sentences of between 6-18 months for taking a life.

Child pornography is another category of offending that is treated as a joke. Child pornography records the sexual abuse of vulnerable small children. By viewing such material, the viewer is directly encouraging child rape and may engage in such acts themselves. Anything other than a lengthy jail term is an inappropriate punishment. Unfortunately our judicial system treats these serious offences with the levity also shown to drink drive offences. Today it is reported that a man who possessed thousands of images of child pornography, including of a three-year-old girl being raped, and where there were aggravating factors, has not been sentenced to prison.

Kill someone when you are drunk and you might only go to jail for 6 months. Support the systemic sexual abuse of small children and you probably don't have to worry about going to jail. There are many other crimes against the person where examples of lenient sentences could be given. In contrast, if you defraud you can expect a long prison term, with the length depending on who you are, not what you have done.

Taito Phillip Field was jailed for 6 years on bribery and corruption charges that related to his use of cheap labour in exchange for assisting the labourers with their immigration applications. The labourer involved planned to sue Field for $200,000 so we can assume that this is the maximum monetary value involved. What Field did was wrong, but aspects of that wrongness are not so different from some of the abuses by Members of Parliament that go unpunished. Field's sentence was also grossly disproportionately heavy in comparison to that of Stephen Versalko who stole nearly $18 million and who also received a 6 year jail sentence. In contrast, sports' celebrity Brent Todd received only home detention for stealing $2 million.

If New Zealand wants to retain its status as supposedly the least corrupt nation, build respect for the law, and maintain its ability to fairly criticise other countries for their failings, action needs to be taken.

Tony Blair and the Middle East peace process

2010-03-23T18:45:00.000+13:00

The search for a humane, peaceful solution to the conflict between Israel and Palestine is an ongoing one. The stakes are higher than before with the increasing tension between Israel and Iran.

The prospect of the latest mission securing a lasting outcome seems unlikely given Prime Minister Netanyahu's announcement of the building of 1,600 new Israeli homes in disputed territory. Not only was the timing of this announcement bad (during US Vice President Biden's visit to Israel) it increases Palestinian grievances making a successful peace process less likely and boosting the cause of extremists.

Tony Blair the former British Prime Minister is the "peace" envoy for the Middle East Quartet (UN, Russia, EU and the US). This is the same Tony Blair who through lies and deceit facilitated the illegal invasion of Iraq, leading to over a million violent deaths and a country in disarray. Blair has failed to criticise the Israeli housing decision.

What is Blair's real purpose for being in the Middle East? He is a tainted partisan and has no credibility with many of the key parties that will need to be brought to any negotiating table. He is the most hated man in the Middle East. Lucky then for Blair that his financial well being doesn't depend on this crucial work. After all, he has earnt £20 million since 2007, including a lucrative deal with a multinational oil giant which has extensive interests in Iraq. Can it be a coincidence that Blair's friend George Bush made plans to invade Iraq and take its oil, well before the 9/11 attacks?

If Israel and the West really want peace a new emphasis is needed.

New Zealand Police demand respect

2010-03-15T11:09:00.000+13:00

The New Zealand Herald reports that the Police are unhappy with a lack of respect. In order to force the respect that the Police feel is their due, the Police Association's Greg O'Connor says that the Courts should enforce trivial offending against the Police (for example low level insults). Prime Minister John Key says that offences against Police should be treated more seriously than offences against other members of the public.

The Police have played a substantial role in the lack of respect afforded to them by sections of the public. Many examples could be given, but these are just a few:

Brutality during the Springbok tour.
Multiple allegations of Police rape and related cover ups.
Systemic problems in the Police communications centres. This resulted in the death of Iraena Asher after Police pathetically sent a taxi to the wrong address in response to a 111 emergency call.
Multiple proven allegations of excessive force being used by Counties Manukau Police.
Misguided vehicle pursuits leading to death or injury to innocent parties.
The Police having to pay $2.4 million to settle numerous complaints against them including ones alleging wrongful arrest or imprisonment, breach of privacy, unlawful search and seizure, police negligence and defamation
The killing of innocent man Halatau Naitoko with the Police showing they believe that they are above the law by failing to charge the officer responsible.
Police trying to usurp the role of Parliament by making gun control laws that they were not entitled to make.

Obedience to Police power can be obtained through fear; however, this is not respect. Respect is a two way process. In order to obtain greater respect, from the public they serve, Police need to remember that respect must be earned and not taken.

Iranian President Ahmadinejad and US destabilisation of the Middle East

2010-03-12T13:37:00.000+13:00

Today Iranian President Ahmadinejad has warned that the US and its allies have destabilised the Middle East. Before we dismiss this statement as the ranting of a mad man, let's remember that senior US figures have said the same.

James F. Dobbins (Director, International Security and Defense Policy Center, RAND Corporation; Former assistant secretary of state and special envoy to Afghanistan) confirmed that in the 30-40 years when Western troops were not interfering in the Middle East that the area was relatively peaceful and in equilibrium.

Iran's sabre rattling has a defensive element in response to the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, threats from Israel and the US, and now the increase in US Navy capability in the Gulf and the stationing of US missiles in the UAE (in response to the perceived threat from Iran).

It would be self destructive for Israel, or the world, not to be vigilant in the face of a real threat, however, provoking an Iranian reaction or overreacting to the actuality is equally dangerous.

When will NZ start treating drink/driving seriously?

2010-03-12T12:41:00.001+13:00

The New Zealand Herald asks what needs to be done to make our roads safer. We should start by taking drink/driving crimes seriously .
People who kill while under the influence of alcohol are treated disproportionately leniently, in New Zealand, in comparison to other killers.

Recent examples of drink/drive killers include Roy Nathan who was sentenced to a prison term of 18 months for killing a 57 year old nurse. Alison Downer was sentenced to prison for 2 1/2 years for killing a cyclist. She had 3 previous convictions for drunk driving. A drunk driver who merely abused police (he didn't hurt anybody) was sentenced to 1 year in jail. On this basis we can see that the "tariff" for drunk/drive killing is between 6 and 18 months.

Many other countries take drink/driving seriously. In Norway, drink driving (without killing) is likely to result in an instant fine, vehicle confiscation and prison. That this is effective can be seen from the comparative road deaths for New Zealand and Norway. In 2008 Norway had a road death rate of 5.5 per 100,000 population. New Zealand's was 8.9.

Although New Zealand tends to deal with most drink driving offences by taking a wet bus ticket approach, simple and quick action could be taken to deal with drink/drive killers by prosecuting these people for manslaughter (or murder in appropriate cases) rather than for a lesser, and inappropriately lenient, driving offence.

In New Zealand the average sentence length for non drink/driving manslaughter is over 5 years. Prosecuting drink drive killers on this basis would be a start and would send a better message of deterrence.

Will New Zealand be drawn into a war in Iran?

2010-03-11T14:05:00.000+13:00

How long until there is a war on Iran?

There is concern that Iran is on the path to acquiring nuclear weapons. A military strike by Israel to prevent this is likely if diplomatic pressure on Iran is unsuccessful in the short term. US support for Israel's security has been reaffirmed as "absolute". Any attack by or on Israel will involve the US, and will provoke conflict with Lebanon and Syria, as well as increasing attacks against Israel from Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran would respond by attacking Israeli and US targets. Chaos will reign in the Middle East and the price of oil will escalate dramatically. Not only will this precipitate a depression in the West, the world will become a much less safe place as a result of the increase in terrorism. The possibility of an unwinnable world war 3 type scenario would be on the table. Even under a best case scenario how could the US expect to achieve an easy victory given the drawn out failures in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Iran has been dismissed as a real military threat by Admiral William Falloon. In contrast, Tony Blair, a "peace" envoy to the Middle East, urges firm action on the basis that Iran is as serious a threat as Saddam Hussein's Iraq. This is the same Tony Blair who as Prime Minister was accused of lying and misleading the public about the threat from Iraq in order to justify an illegal invasion. An invasion that has resulted in massive loss of life, destabilisation of the country, an increase in terrorism, and the US arming and paying Iraqi Sunni groups linked to Al Qaeda at a reported cost of $16 million per month.

Would New Zealand troops be drawn into a war with Iran? The National Party's previous prime ministerial contender, Don Brash, is on record as saying that he would have supported the Bush invasion of Iraq with New Zealand troops. Current deputy prime minister Bill English has said that New Zealand should have backed the invasion. Interestingly, both Brash and English later denied their statements (with Brash stating that it was "crap" that he would send NZ troops to Iraq). The National Party has shown a willingness to increase troop numbers in Afghanistan in response to US requests. If National is in government, if there is war with Iran, it seems likely that New Zealand will be drawn in.

To oppose a war with Iran, or to urge caution, does not imply support for the regime. Instead it indicates awareness that the consequences of action could be far worse than those of inaction.

Afghanistan and border security: Do we need a war on terrorism?

2010-03-09T15:08:00.000+13:00

Australia is about to tighten its border security because of the perceived threat from terrorism. The death of more than 100 Australians from terrorism since 2001 is given as an example in support. The New Zealand National government says that we need to have troops in Afghanistan because this makes the world a safer place.

The September 11 attacks were vile acts of terrorism. At the time the Taleban ruled Afghanistan with an iron fist. Taleban repression and genocide went undealt with by the rest of the world. The Taleban were politically and economically supported by the West. This support went as far as the encouragement of jihad as a tool against the Russians.

Al Qaeda, the perpetrators of the attack, had been primarily funded from Saudi Arabian sources. We don't recall seeing a call for a US led invasion of Saudi Arabia in response to the 9/11 attacks. Instead, the United States led an invasion of Iraq, despite there being no credible evidence of links between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. It is however well known that the influence of Al Qaeda in Iraq has increased exponentially since the invasion.

There are documented links between the Taleban and Al-Qaeda, however, the Afghani invasion seems to have failed as stability has not been restored, Osama Bin Laden has not been captured, and the Taleban is resurgent.

Some suggest that oil is the real reason for the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. Regardless of the real reason we should ask if we are overreacting to the perceived threat of terrorism. Yes terrorism is real and we should take rigorous steps to prevent it, however, should we go so far as using the threat of terrorism to justify the increasing denial of civil liberties, thousands of deaths in invaded countries, and the spending of trillions of dollars on the military?

The 100 Australian deaths due to terrorism in nearly 10 years is vastly overshadowed by the deaths of approximately 1,000 Australians overseas every year from all causes.

In the 29 OECD countries deaths from road accidents every year are on average 390 times greater than the number of deaths from international terrorism. During 2001 there were the same number of road crash deaths in the US every 26 days as the numbers that died in the September 11 attacks. On average, in the 15 year period from 1994 to 2008, double the number of Americans were killed every year by weather events than by terrorism. For most people the risk of dying from a terrorist attack is less than the risk of being killed by an asteroid. Nobody says that we should have a war on the weather or on asteroids.

Research indicates that terrorism related deaths have dropped considerably in the last few years.

Before we commit more lives and dollars to the war against terrorism let's make sure that that commitment is actually necessary and justified.

Kiwisaver rules to be tightened

2010-03-09T08:54:00.000+13:00

The Herald reports that:

The Government is set to fast-track tougher regulations for KiwiSaver providers after Huljich Wealth Management's alleged manipulation of its performance measures.

Huljich had no track record of managing money and used celebrity endorsements by John Banks and Don Brash to gain the confidence of prospective investors. When Huljich broke the rules the trustee failed to take firm action. Brash states that he did not know that the misleading cash injection had been made. As Chairman of the Board was it not Brash's responsibility to have such knowledge?

Despite the Huljich revelations neither of the celebrity endorsers have severed their connection.

There is a history of celebrity endorsements being used to lure investors to bad investments. Examples include Colin Meads and Provincial Finance, and Richard Long and Hanover Investments. Investors should not rely on celebrity endorsements but the reality is that they do. In effect celebrity endorsers certify the product being endorsed. If celebrities endorse companies that cause loss of money to investors is there not a case for them to be held partly liable?

It is unlikely that tightening financial regulations will in itself better protect the public. What will make a difference is reliable enforcement of proper rules, greater barriers to entry to becoming a KiwiSaver provider, and the public making investment decisions on the basis of reliable, understandable information.

Auckland Super City and the American Revolution

2010-03-08T08:49:00.000+13:00

"No taxation without representation" was the slogan of the American revolution. American colonists felt deeply aggrieved that taxes were imposed without their involvement and without proper democratic representation. Colonists expressed their feelings by tarring and feathering tax collectors. They were so aggrieved that they went to war over the issue.

ACT leader Rodney Hide is responsible for ramming through legislation establishing the Auckland "Super City" and for the shape of the planned structure. The ACT party received a tiny 3.65% of the party vote in the 2008 elections, however, it has been enabled to control the structure and direction of New Zealand's largest city and economic powerhouse.

The Herald reports that much of the power in the new Super City will be held by council controlled organisations. These organisations will be responsible for approximately 75% of Auckland services and their unelected directors will have free rein to make important city decisions. The organisations will have no obligation to consult and no responsibility to the public if things go wrong. The existence of these powerful organisations will deny the people of Auckland fair democratic representation and water down the power of the elected mayor.

War is not an appropriate response to this dictatorial imposition; however, it is to be hoped that Aucklanders will not have forgotten who is responsible, for giving them rates taxation without proper representation, at election time.

Destiny Church - legitimate Christianity or false idol?

2010-03-07T12:45:00.001+13:00

We are told that "Bishop" Brian Tamaki of the Destiny Church has a $1.25 million home and a $75,000 car, that he receives a $500,000 gift every year from money given by predominantly lower socioeconomic church members, as well as receiving a six figure salary, and that "the Bible [is] being used to manipulate people to give money for his personal use to fund [Tamaki's] flashy lifestyle". Tamaki himself says that the Church has a "company.. vision statement" .

Tithing is commonplace in many religions. Muslims are commanded to give zakat, the first purpose of which is to help the poor. Jews may give a tithe for temple upkeep and for charity. Whether Christians are required to tithe is a contentious issue with some saying that there is no obligation to do so as Christians are not under Old Testament law.

In Christian denominations, that have stood the test of time, vows of poverty are common. For clergy where this is not required, any significant material wealth is usually owned by the parish or has been acquired independently of church duties (for example from prior business activities or from an inheritance).

Greed for money is inconsistent with serving God. It is not possible to serve two masters – God and money. The focus of a genuine church should be to serve God, and to assist the needy. Not to be a business.

Although it is traditional for Bible based religions to encourage some form of giving, it is usual for this to be in accordance with the financial ability of the giver and with the focus of the gift being on helping the parish as a whole and those less fortunate. A religion that requires money that people probably cannot afford to give and then uses that to enrich the leader shows its true purpose.

Maori Party and a smoke free New Zealand

2010-03-06T10:50:00.000+13:00

Members of the Maori Party have taken a principled stance by urging a ban on the production, sale and manufacture of tobacco in New Zealand. There is a good level of public support for prohibition.

British American Tobacco which supplies 75% of the tobacco market in New Zealand (and which must therefore be responsible for about 75% of smoking related deaths) justifies itself because it "manufactures a legal product". Make it illegal and the tobacco industry's own justification disappears.

Every year about 5,000 New Zealanders die as a result of tobacco smoking. This is far more than the numbers killed on the roads each year. The road safety message is a very important one, however, the anti tobacco message is comparatively more muted. Imagine if 5,000 New Zealanders were killed by terrorists every year. The country would be in an uproar and we would work together tirelessly until the evil was stopped. We would certainly not sit back and allow the situation to carry on. I wonder if we would tolerate the self justificatory message of those responsible for such deaths?

Today's New Zealand Herald has a story of a family orphaned by the loss of their mother from smoking related causes. This shows the nasty effect of tobacco on a much wider pool than merely the 5,000 who die each year.

Some will say that prohibition will not work. Laws never work 100%. If they did we would not have any criminal offending, however, this is not a reason to oppose a ban. We wouldn't repeal murder laws just because some people still murder. A prohibition on tobacco will most certainly reduce the social and personal harm and it will hit at the profits of the purveyors of death. There is no reason to delay taking action.

ACT's clown David Garrett

2010-03-04T18:47:00.000+13:00

Every party needs a clown.

David Garrett is an ACT MP and his performances include an allegation that he threatened physical violence, drunk and offensive behaviour, equating homosexuals and paedophiles, sexual harassment, threatening the freedom of speech of prison officers, a lack of concern for human rights, and we now have his suggestion that abusive parents be given a gift of $5,000 to be sterilised. The sterilisation suggestion does nothing to address the root causes of child abuse and would fail to protect children already born.

Garrett is a threat to democracy and unfit to hold public office.

Perhaps the ACT party thinks we will not notice. After all, ACT supporter Don Brash contemptuously states that many ordinary people are “venal and ignorant”, a statement not dissimilar to Adolf Hitler’s comment that the masses were stupid.

Garth George, gay males and intolerance

2010-03-03T18:04:00.001+13:00

Recently Garth George expressed that he could not understand male homosexuality and then mentioned gay males in the same sentence as "child abuse, paedophilia and cruelty to domestic animals". The juxtaposition of the word homosexual with the other words was unfortunate but it is important to note that George did not actually say that homsexuality was the same as the evils mentioned.

George probably does have a problem with gay people and some of his columns are offensive, however, nowhere in the article does George speak in an expressly offensive manner.

The response to the George article was however offensive and indicated a lack of careful study.

GayNZ.Com said that George was "sleazy", "abhorrent" and that he was a "notoriously homophobic conservative Christian". Apparently his failure to mention lesbians amounted to onanism.

In the last 30 years gay rights have advanced and tolerance has, rightly, increased enormously in Western society. Many religious groups that were previously openly derogatory towards gay people have changed their stance, or at least toned down their rhetoric. But doesn't tolerance work both ways? If it isn't open season on gays why is it so on Christians?

Don Brash, Rogernomics and Huljich

2010-03-03T12:55:00.001+13:00

The New Zealand economic reforms of the 1980s and 1990s were largely a failure. This can be seen from the large negative divergence post 1984 in New Zealand's real output per capita in comparison to Australia, our usual benchmark. New Zealand's comparative position vis-à-vis unemployment also worsened. Poverty and social inequality increased.

Australia undertook various reforms, however, these were moderate and measured in comparison to the evisceration that took place in New Zealand. The author of many of the New Zealand reforms was Roger Douglas, now a prominent ACT party MP.

Recently Don Brash's taskforce spent $400,000 of taxpayers' money recommending that New Zealand's path to economic salvation lay in embracing the failed policies of Rogernomics. This is the same Don Brash who expressed to the ACT party's annual conference the view that many voters are "venal and ignorant".

Huljich is the country's largest KiwiSaver provider. Don Brash is the chairman of the Huljich KiwiSaver Scheme. Brash claims that the scheme has a "committment to socially responsible investment", it offers "open and honest communication", and that it has a "track record that speaks for itself".

In 2009 Huljich was investigated for the illegal door to door marketing of its schemes. We now have the revelation that Huljich returns were manipulated. Gareth Morgan goes so far as to say that Peter Huljich, the Managing Director/Chief Investment Officer told "lies", is "not fit to make financial offers to the public" and that the Huljich schemes should be wound up.

Don Brash is reported as saying that the non reporting is "regrettable" after previously failing to recall aspects of the transaction. It is noted that Brash's high standing and standards are used to promote Huljich:

As well as his financial and economic wisdom, Don brings a reputation for financial probity, prudence and commitment to Huljich Wealth Management.

Given Brash's failure to resign from Huljich, his muted public response to the serious allegations made against Huljich, and his intemperate outbursts against his fellow citizens, why does anyone still listen to him?

Alcohol abuse and Air New Zealand

2010-03-01T11:03:00.000+13:00

Employees in some occupations have higher standards imposed on them than those imposed on the general population. Those higher standards are required because of the particular potential for harm associated with particular occupations. So for example, we have bans on relationships between teachers and students and the application of insider trading laws to company directors.

Many workplaces have bans on alcohol use. For some occupations the ban should be inflexible and absolute given the potential for harm. These occupations should include anyone involved in airline operations.

The Police have revealed several cases of Air New Zealand employees being caught drink driving. These cases include a mechanic and a flight attendant caught on their way to work and a pilot caught four times. If someone has so little self control over their use of alcohol that they break our drink driving laws then they have no business being anywhere near an aeroplane.

Air New Zealand's attitude to these revelations is worrying. Instead of displaying a zero tolerance to drinking employees they try to shoot the messenger by expressing anger at the Police and by denying that there is a problem. One on duty employee with alcohol in their system is a problem. Several indicates a systemic failure.

The Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union has attacked the Police for releasing this vital information to Air New Zealand on the grounds that the employees are penalised twice. But that's too bad, the safety of thousands of people is at stake and airline employees are certainly not the only occupational group that can rightly face both criminal and professional consequences for the one act.

If Air Zealand fails to deal with this issue properly we won't have to worry about terrorists seizing control of planes.

New Zealand government funds prostitution recruitment

2010-02-28T16:35:00.000+13:00

In 2003 New Zealand decriminalised prostitution. Decriminalisation was not supposed to be taken as an endorsement or moral sanctioning of prostitution.

Many people tolerated the proposed law change on the basis that it would help prevent the spread of disease and lessen exploitation. And since prostitution is supposedly the oldest "profession" why not accept this and regulate the trade, to lessen the harm, instead of pretending it doesn't exist? Tolerance does not mean that the majority accept that prostitution is a good thing or that it should be encouraged.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean that you should. Most people find prostitution undesirable and certainly not something that should be encouraged - especially not with public money.

The New Zealand Prostitutes Collective ("NZPC") is a lobby group for prostitutes. It receives tax payer funding, via the Ministry of Health, of reportedly more than $1,000,000 per annum.

Is this acceptable given that the NZPC is involved in promoting the entry of new recruits to the sex industry? As evidence of this we have the NZPC's own publication:

New Workers Kits -These kits provide information for people who are thinking about working in the sex industry.

The New Zealand Herald reported that (27/2/10):

Sex workers are using a bilingual sex information leaflet to recruit... into the industry. Speaking on the condition of anonymity, a 20-year-old Chinese international student told the Weekend Herald she decided to become a sex worker after being given the Working in New Zealand leaflet, which is produced by the New Zealand Prostitutes Collective...Young Asian girls are being recruited by older sex workers, who use us to get new customers...

Not only is it wrong for tax payer money to be used to recruit new prostitutes, or to promote prostitution as an acceptable life choice, this news supports the arguments of many conservative groups that no good would come of New Zealand's law reform experiment (Maxim Institute for example opposed the law reform and instead recommended other law changes that would minimise the harm done by prostitution to society and the vulnerable people engaged in the industry).

Prostitution is not just another career choice. Promoting health and safety in an unsavoury profession is one thing. Promoting the unsavoury profession is another. Let's not misuse public money in a way that turns the government, indirectly, into a pimp.

Gastric bypass surgery, obesity and Deborah Coddington

2010-02-26T14:29:00.000+13:00

Funding stapling is a kick in the guts for taxpayers
By Deborah Coddington

...lazy, irresponsible, sly and greedy folk seem to get the treats...Take the current push from certain politicians for taxpayers to increase public funding of stomach-stapling operations...Whenever I write a column on overweight people I get hammered, but we all know what leads to obesity - eating too much. I don't care if people are happily overweight, it's their business. But can the country afford to pay for surgery to correct it? In the year to last June, public hospitals performed 233 stomach-stapling operations - three times the number of people who had the procedure in 2007. It doesn't sound a lot, but we paid around $6.5 million for those 233 operations...If someone else takes responsibility for your over-eating and under-exercising, why bother? A stomach-stapling operation costs around $28,000. We're talking billions of dollars worth of surgery here. Roger Douglas says give everyone big tax cuts so they buy health insurance, but I told him they'll just buy pies and fizzy drinks unless you make health insurance (yes Deborah, you can say it) "compulsory". So maybe that's the answer, wash my mouth out. Then at least healthy people might be rewarded with lower premiums. If overweight people had to pay more, just as smokers are penalised, then they might think twice before they tuck into three square meals and too much alcohol every day. Because isn't it time the good guys lobbied politicians for treats

(Sunday Herald 14/2/10)

It's open season on those of above average weight (Coddington implies that there are 800,000 in New Zealand). According to Coddington fat people are lazy, irresponsible, sly, greedy and not "good". Are fat people the last acceptable group of people who can be abused at will? I bet Coddington wouldn't dare refer to someone of a different race or religion as lazy or sly, even though nasty words like that were commonly used in the recent past to justify discrimination against, and other unpleasant treatment of, Jews and black people. These days most of us know better.

Let's have rational debate rather than taking the easy way out with abusive words. That debate must start with a cost benefit analysis of the cost of public treatment via gastric bypass surgery, versus the costs of allowing an untreated obese peson to become a burden on the health system through illness. The cost of treatment is likely to be substantially less at very high BMI levels. We need to know the break even point at which the cost scales swing the other way.

It defies belief that anyone could believe that someone would deliberately eat their way to a stage of morbid obesity, a very different situation from putting on a few extra kilos at Christmas. Severe obesity can have many causes, however, wanting to become that way in order to take advantge of free surgery is not one of them.

National party - Mining on conservation land

2010-02-25T11:15:00.002+13:00

Key signals mining on conservation land

By Maggie Tait - NZPA

The Government is looking at removing protection for some areas of conservation land so they can be mined, Prime Minister John Key said today. Energy Minister Gerry Brownlee last year controversially started a stocktake of valuable minerals in conservation land protected under Schedule Four of the Crown Minerals Act. The estimated value of untapped minerals has been put at about $140 billion - about 70 percent of that in the conservation estate…"There is ... extraordinary economic potential in the mineral estate residing in Crown-owned land. (Stuff.co.nz 9/2/10)

No doubt there is money in mining conservation land, but at what cost? Most of the money will fall into the hands of overseas companies with no loyalty to New Zealand. The cost will be the destruction of New Zealand's clean, green image and our children's futures. Once the land is destroyed what will we have then? Pollution and long term environmental and health effects with the political and business culprits long gone.

By this decision, the National Party shows its true colours as being a government of visionless expediency.

Lack of accountability - OPC

2010-02-24T14:26:00.001+13:00

Fatality, near-misses preceded gorge deaths
By Kim Knight - Sunday Star Times. A string of serious near misses – and one fatality – had already been recorded by Sir Edmund Hillary Outdoor Pursuits Centre staff working in the Mangatepopo Gorge when six teenagers and their teacher were trapped and killed there in 2008...Murray Burton, Elim's principal, said his school had knowledge of prior incidents before it chose to send students to the centre. (21/2/10)

The ability of OPC to continue to operate when it had clearly been shown to be deficient shows the sickness of of New Zealand's no accountability culture. A lax enforcement regime, bloated ACC bureaucracy, and the inability to sue for personal injury means that there is little financial incentive to act properly when other's lives are at stake. For most businesses money talks and the lack of accountability has led to this disgrace. Can anyone seriously imagine that OPC would have been able to carry on like this in a country where failure of this nature equals a meaningful financial penalty?

And what of Murray Burton, voted New Zealander of the year by North and South magazine in 2009? The reasoning behind the award was that:

The compassion, grace and humanity with which Murray Burton faced the terrible loss of seven lives - a teacher and six senior students - in the Mangatepopo Gorge, Turangi, last April reached out not only to those directly affected by the tragedy but to the entire country. In the most challenging and heartbreaking of circumstances, he showed true leadership and, by his example, brought people together without anger or blame.

If it is true that Burton had knowledge of prior incidents did he make parents aware of that when they were asked to consent to sending their children to a dangerous place? If not, that represents a failure of leadership and his responsibility for those children.

HMU9WJ8NGTWT