21.5 C
Auckland
Tuesday, November 25, 2025

Contribute

Home Blog Page 1976

Gender Equal NZ supports steps by new Govt – Gender Equal NZ

The Daily Blog
-
0

Gender Equal NZ supports steps by new Govt to improve pay equity legislation

The National Council of Women President and Gender Equal NZ Spokesperson, Vanisa Dhiru says “we are pleased to hear that the new Government is throwing out the current equal pay Bill – and will be working to introduce new legislation that better meets the needs of all New Zealanders.”

“The fact that we have a persisting pay gap in New Zealand is absolutely unacceptable”, says Vanisa, “and it’s worse for some groups of women than others, because of racism, transphobia and other forms of oppression”.

“As New Zealanders we like to tell ourselves that we are equal – in fact, we pride ourselves on it. But there’s a gap – between what we think happens and what actually happens. The pay gap is proof of this.”

“The reality is, the Equal Pay Act 1972 needs to be modernised. The Employment (Pay Equity and Equal Pay) Bill introduced earlier this year would actually have made it significantly more difficult for workers in female-dominated occupations to pursue pay equity claims by placing new and unreasonably onerous requirements on claimants” says Vanisa.

The Minister for Women spoke this morning on Morning Report about needing to adhere to the Working Group on Pay Equity Principles – Gender Equal NZ wholeheartedly supports this. The Working Group’s recommendations will rely on the commitment and resourcing of government.

“Sexism in our society causes structural inequality, which creates barriers for many women to have the same employment outcomes as men. We commend the Minister for Women for recognising these issues” says Vanisa.

“Let’s move forward and up from this, with legislation that will make it much easier for claimants to get the outcome they deserve.”

Guyon Espiner asked the Minister for Women this morning, ‘what kind of society do we want to live in?’

Our answer: a Gender Equal New Zealand.

NZ Joins the Trend for Countries to Say No to ISDS

The Daily Blog
-
1

‘Yesterday’s announcement that the new government has heeded widespread concerns and taken investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) off the table in future trade and investment negotiations is a major step forward’, says University of Auckland law professor Jane Kelsey.

‘New Zealand joins a growing number of countries who have rejected the controversial process whereby foreign investors can enforce special protections against governments in private offshore tribunals and claim huge compensation for new regulations or even court decisions that significantly affect their commercial interests’.

‘The Prime Minister’s stronger language regarding the exclusion of ISDS from the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement is also welcome, but leaves too much wriggle-room to claim it has failed to convince others, and proceed with the original deal’, Professor Kelsey warns.

Both Viet Nam and Canada are known to want changes to the investment enforcement rules in the TPPA. There are plenty of precedents and mechanisms available.

The government would also have strong support from the legal community. In 2012 more than a hundred jurists, including senior retired judges from Australia and New Zealand, signed an open letter calling for ISDS to be excluded from the TPPA. (https://tpplegal.wordpress.com/open-letter/)

The main rationale for leaving the TPPA intact has been to make it easy for the US to re-join.

While no one currently thinks that likely, Professor Kelsey points to a deeper irony: ‘if the current US administration did re-engage with TPPA, it would require the ability to exempt itself from ISDS!’

‘In the current renegotiation of NAFTA, the US has proposed that each party should be able to opt out of ISDS altogether. The US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer told US corporations they should act like all other business and take out risk insurance to protect their commercial interests.’

Professor Kelsey called on the new government to stand firm in excluding ISDS from the Agreement, but points out there are many other aspects that remain problematic, including Labour’s own recognition before the election that the economics of the TPPA did not stack up, and that a broader review of the costs and benefits of the TPPA was necessary.

NZNO Welcomes Minister for Women’s Fast Move

The Daily Blog
-
0

NZNOs Welcome Minister for Women’s Fast Move

NZNO applauds the first big move by Minister for Women, Julie Anne Genter to stop the current Employment (Pay Equity and Equal Pay) Bill in its current form and to refer back to the recommendations of the pay equity working group for a redraft.

Industrial Service Manager Cee Payne says the Bill was a step backwards and disheartening after such great progress was made following the Kristine Bartlett Equal Pay Case.

“The flawed Bill put the onus on women to prove inequity and introduced extra barriers for women to be paid fairly for their work. Thousands of working women will be relieved to see it thrown out,” said Cee Payne.

“The Bill gave no opportunity for outstanding pay equity claims to be assessed the same way as Kristine Bartlett’s was. Nurses haven’t established the best pay equity comparison for them yet but this Bill is off the mark as nurses deserve to establish this without having to jump through hoops.

“It was deeply unfair to introduce a new law that makes it harder for women to achieve pay equity,” she said.

“The previous equal pay legislation, which passed its first reading with a one vote majority, would have created unnecessary hurdles for women seeking equal pay.

“New Zealanders deserve law that upholds their right to take equal pay claims in the most efficient and least costly wayr. The struggle by Kristine Bartlett for the right for women to have equal pay needs to be honoured by ensuring we have the best legislation possible,” said Cee Payne.

Unions relieved to see swift action on better equal pay law – CTU

The Daily Blog
-
0

Unions relieved to see swift action on better equal pay law

The New Zealand Council of Trade Unions (CTU) is congratulating the Government’s announcement they are scrapping National’s flawed equal pay and pay equity bill. CTU Vice President Rachel Mackintosh said that the move is in line with working people’s expectations of the new coalition, and an opportunity to remove barriers to women being paid fairly for the work they do.

“The Employment (Pay Equity and Equal Pay) Bill was used by the Government to throw further hurdles under the feet of women who have been legally entitled to equal pay since 1972. Instead of implementing the principles agreed by the Joint Working Group, that Bill introduced unnecessary delays and unfair barriers” she said.

“The announcement that the bill won’t go ahead is a particular relief for groups of women in paid work who were faced with a deadline of today to submit to the Select Committee. We are rejoicing that the Government is reassuring women they won’t have to justify again why they are worth the same as men.”

“Women in paid work have been denied their legal right to equal pay for over 40 years. What we’re expecting is a ‘no surprises’ law that does exactly what it says it’s going to do – pay women for their skills, effort, responsibilities and conditions of work, as quickly as possible. The easiest way to do this is to simply amend the 1972 Act to incorporate the principles agreed by the Joint Working Group. Genuine equal pay is the campaign promise this Government was elected on, so we look forward to seeing it happen for all women very soon” she said.

Foreign Buyers – The Villain or the Scape Goat – TOP

The Daily Blog
-
3

Does anyone seriously think that Labour’s first loud policy initiative is anything but window-dressing for the masses, a solution chasing a problem that hasn’t even been evidenced? Sure, Phil Twyford doesn’t like Chinese-sounding names, but that is hardly evidence.

Where is the evidence that foreign absentee owners are the fundamental driver of the soaring house value to income ratio in New Zealand? It makes for a great conspiracy and maybe for a politician seeking accolades for slaying the dragon, but otherwise Labour’s witchhunt is little more than populist candy. And the government’s foreign buyer register will hardly be difficult to circumvent. Are we heading back to a world of reactionary, populist politics that seek to blame anyone but ourselves for our dilemma?

Bans and taxes on foreign buyers have been tried and failed overseas where there is much better evidence that foreign buyers are a problem. Vancouver’s much vaunted foreign buyer levy did little more than stall the market for a while, much like our own Loan to Value Ratios did. Now prices are on the rise again, and that measure is now under review. Meanwhile Australia has done exactly what the Labour-led Government is doing and house prices have continued to rise.

Why? Maybe foreign buyers aren’t the real problem, or maybe they can find a way around the regulations. The rational response for a businessperson is obvious. Entrepreneurs out there will create businesses that set up legal NZ entities to purchase residential housing, one entity per dwelling with each one funded by raising debt finance from a foreigner. This should nicely circumvent the intent of Labour’s attempt to remove foreigners from the residential property market and business as usual will be restored.

Regardless, banning foreign buyers doesn’t deal with the real issue. The last two Tax Working Groups identified the fundamental issue with housing, and TOP promoted their advice as our flagship policy. There is a hole in the income tax regime that makes it rational for us all to invest as much as we can into owner occupied housing. Investors, foreign or domestic, know this and throw all their money into housing too knowing you and I will keep buying houses.

Why should the annual benefit from owning a bank deposit or a business be taxed, while the annual benefit from owning & occupying a house is not? Fix the income tax loophole and see – a rise in productivity, more employment and higher wages; and a reduction in inequality. Not to mention the realignment of house prices with the demand for accommodation as opposed to being driven by the tax-free investment return.

Neither National nor Labour are prepared to follow evidence-based policy and instead they opt to either do nothing or chase shadows. This beginning from Labour in the economic policy arena is inauspicious to be kind.

House prices may stall for a while, but it won’t be because of this change. The market was inflated under National, and will now be very wary of a shaky international economy and a new Government that will restrict immigration and review the tax settings around property speculation. But unless the Government has a second term and finds the will to implement tax reform with some real teeth the long term pattern of unaffordable housing should continue.

WaateaNews: Māori Home Ownership in Tāmaki Makaurau: Is Auckland’s future an economically gated Pākeha community?

Martyn Bradbury
-
13

Could the largest Pacific Island and Maori city in New Zealand be unintentionally white washed by Labour’s new affordable housing KiwiBuild project?

Banning foreign buyers will reduce demand and building 100 000 new houses is all very good for the children of the middle classes who have been squeezed out of home ownership, but the ugly truth is that Labour’s definition of ‘affordable’ at $600 000 is completely out of the grasp of most Māori and Pacific Islanders in Auckland.

Why does that matter?

Well with Labour in such a dominant position in terms of the political voice of Māoridom, the expectations and demands upon them are far greater and building 50 000 ‘affordable’ houses in Auckland that are out of reach for most Māori isn’t a solution.

Some Iwi are involved in social housing in Auckland, but they are falsely invested meaning they are mostly invested in the prime profit motives of the fully priced properties with a tiny pittance carved out for ‘social housing’.

This isn’t solving or helping ease the problem of housing affordability, it is actually exacerbating it and to date the previous Government’s social housing projects using profit as its motive have all been terrible and embarrassing failures.

What we need is an urban Māori Authority mandate for getting more Māori into home ownership. Over 25 years between 1991 and 2013, Māori and Pacific Island home ownership rates have plummeted 25% in Auckland. The Government Stats are grim…

Between 1986 and 2013, the proportion of New Zealand’s population living in dwellings not owned by the household increased from around one-quarter to over one-third of the population (24.8 percent to 36.3 percent) – up 46.4 percent. As home-ownership rates have declined, Māori and Pacific people have also been increasingly living in properties rented from private landlords, businesses, or a trust, rather than from other sources.

Since 1986, the proportion of Māori living in private rentals has increased more than for the total population (up 88.3 percent and 42.7 percent, respectively). The increase for Pacific people was 58.5 percent.

The falls in home ownership did not just occur in our largest cities. For Māori, falls were close to 40 percent in the Whangarei, Southern Auckland, Tauranga, Rotorua, and Hastings urban areas.

The decline in home-ownership rates for all Pacific people in Auckland was similar, down over 40 percent in Western and Southern Auckland.

…what we have here is a systemic poverty issue deeply rooted in colonialism which have left Māori and Pacific Islanders with less economic certainty than Pākeha.

Building more houses for the children of the middle classes is fine, and we should want those children to be able to buy homes in the city they live in, but Labour has a moral mandate to do far more for Māori and building $600 000 ‘affordable’ homes is not and can not be the solution to that mandate.

 

First Published on WaateaNews.com

TWITTER WATCH: – Jacinda’s cat has more followers than the Deputy Leader of the National Party

Martyn Bradbury
-
11

Can there be a more wonderful humiliation?

Paddles the cat, the twitter account for Jacinda and Clarks’s pet, now has more followers after being active only a month than the deputy leader of the National Party, Paula Bennett, who has been on Twitter since 2009.

Jacinda’s pet has more media followers than Bill’s.

Ouch.

Is The Government’s TPP “Solution” Too Good To Be True?

Chris Trotter
-
26

WHAT WORRIES ME MOST about the proposed “No Foreign Buyers” amendment to the Overseas Investment Act (OIA) is its apparent simplicity. Nothing in politics is ever that easy! And isn’t it remarkable, the way the proposal just happens to solve Labour’s primary objection to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)? It’s almost as if somebody at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) had the relevant file tucked away in a draw somewhere, ready to be presented to the incoming Trade Minister, David Parker, with a Yes Minister-style flourish, at just the right moment.

Come to think of it, exactly when did the foreign-buyer problem become Labour’s primary objection to the TPP? More importantly, when did it become a more important issue than the Investor/State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions of the agreement? How did the latter end up as a sort of secondary issue? When did it become what Bill English used to call a “Nice To Have”. An outcome the Prime Minister and her Trade Minister will do their utmost to achieve, but for which neither of them is willing to die in a ditch.

It makes no sense. The ISDS provisions of the TPP are the ones permitting foreign investors (a.k.a huge multinational corporations) to sue the New Zealand Government for imposing legislative and/or regulatory restrictions on their existing or proposed investments. Such litigation to occur not in a New Zealand courtroom, in front of a New Zealand judge, but before an international tribunal staffed and adjudicated by the sort of lawyers more usually to be found working for – you guessed it – “huge multinational corporations”.

How does that work? Well, a government pledged to uphold the provisions of a multilateral trade agreement might decide that, in order to secure its people’s right to access affordable housing, it will legislate to prevent foreign buyers from bidding-up the price of private dwellings beyond their reach.

“Oh no you don’t!”, objects the huge multinational corporation dedicated to acquiring foreign real estate on behalf of its fabulously wealthy international clients. And before that government can say “goodbye national sovereignty”, it finds itself in front of an ISDS tribunal.

I know, I know! The Trade Minister, David Parker, has assured us that providing the OIA is amended before the TPP comes into force, then New Zealand will be protected from the ISDS provisions of the agreement.

To which I offer the following two objections.

My first, is that David Parker’s “solution” logically foresees New Zealand being bound, in all other respects, by the TPP. Why else would he bother using this rather convoluted way of banning foreign property speculators? There must be simpler ways. The only logical answer is: because the new Labour-NZ First-Green Government is committed to signing the TPP – with the ISDS provisions still applying to us – and Parker’s “solution” is the only way it can keep its big election promise to end foreign property speculation.

My second, is that the new Government’s “solution” may prove to be not a solution at all. Even if the OIA is amended prior to the TPP coming into force, I believe that those foreign property investors affected might still have a crack at New Zealand under the ISDS provisions.

They could argue that the legislation banning them amounts to a pre-emptive circumvention of the agreement. The OIA’s original purpose of protecting “sensitive” land was to ensure that sites of environmental, historic and cultural significance remained in New Zealand hands. They could, therefore, argue that the amendment’s redefinition of “sensitive sites” to include private dwellings represents a deliberate perversion of the OIA’s original intention. As the victims of a pre-emptive circumvention of the TPP, they could demand that the ISDS tribunal award them billions of dollars by way of reparation. And what guarantee do we have that the corporate lawyers sitting in judgement of the New Zealand state’s actions wouldn’t find in favour of the plaintiffs?

That’s why I’m so uneasy about this amazing, eleventh-hour “solution”. I can’t help seeing it as too good to be true. Yes, it is acting as a superb distraction from what I consider to be the most dangerous aspect of the TPP – its ISDS provisions – but why? The arguments in favour of refusing to sign the TPP until New Zealand is exempted from those provisions are very easy to make – hell, they’re core NZ First and Green policy! – so why aren’t Jacinda and David making them?

What would make me a whole lot happier, is a rock-solid guarantee from the Prime Minister and her Trade Minister, that a TPP agreement containing ISDS provisions applicable to its own actions will not be entered into by the New Zealand Government.

Aotearoa must not surrender its tino rangatiratanga.

The Daily Blog Open Mic – Thursday 2nd November 2017

The Daily Blog
-
1

Announce protest actions, general chit chat or give your opinion on issues we haven’t covered for the day.

Moderation rules are more lenient for this section, but try and play nicely.

EDITORS NOTE: – By the way, here’s a list of shit that will get your comment dumped. Sexist language, homophobic language, racist language, anti-muslim hate, transphobic language, Chemtrails, 9/11 truthers, climate deniers, anti-fluoride fanatics, anti-vaxxer lunatics and ANYONE that links to fucking infowar.  

Can the NZ Herald explain how this is breaking news?

Martyn Bradbury
-
18

Ummmm. How is THIS breaking news?

Since when was Mike Hosking’s bullshit hot takes on any subject ‘Breaking News’.

Are NZ Herald using it as an example of opinion pieces that break the news and make it worthless or are they honestly suggesting to New Zealanders that Mike Hosking’s privileged take on the current affairs issues of today honestly considered ‘breaking news’.

Let’s instead remember the look on Mike’s face the night NZ First went with Labour…

…again, from another angle…

…and while we are at it, who is being more grumpy than Mike over Labour’s win, why this clown…

 

Mainstream media claim no Youth Quake (cough, cough – bullshit)

Martyn Bradbury
-
12

Remember all those msm political pundits who claimed there hadn’t been a Youth Quake and that the Left had failed to rouse them to the ballot boxes?

Mike Hosking: There is no ‘youth quake’

Political Roundup: Youthquake unlikely to shakeup NZ politics

No youthquake, youth tremor needs phenomenal turnout

Winston in box seat as ‘youthquake’ fails to fire

7pm: A hot take on the youthquake

Here’s the final count by the NZ Electoral Commission

It was the late surge of special votes from young voters that put a Labour led Government into serious consideration.

Lesson? Don’t listen to mainstream pundits.

GUEST BLOG: Stephen Parry – It’s Our Future:  Now is the time for Labour to make good on its criticism of the TPPA

The Daily Blog
-
3

 

Over the last 6 years tens of thousands of New Zealanders have hit the streets in opposition to the TPPA.  Hundreds of thousands have signed petitions, and polling has consistently shown that the public were against the agreement.

It is easy to see why there has been so much opposition.  First, the TPPA was negotiated behind closed doors, and any criticism of this secrecy was met with contempt from the National-led government.  Second, while the agreement was framed as being about “free trade” (dropping tariffs and subsidies for the import and export of goods), the bulk of the agreement was about rewriting or freezing the rules about what the government could or could not do so as to suit the interests of overseas investors (i.e. big corporations).  The government’s ability to pass laws or regulate to protect the public interest (affordable healthcare, workers’ rights, regional development), and the natural environment (climate change, clean rivers) would all be compromised by these changes. Third, the rights of Maori under te Tiriti would be subordinated to an economic agreement for the benefit of big business.  Finally, the agreement would allow corporate investors from the other TPPA countries to directly sue the New Zealand government in unaccountable investment tribunals if actions taken in the public interest were to cut into their profits.  This process is called Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS).

In a nutshell, the TPPA was about New Zealand trading away the broader public interest in the hope that our dairy exporters could get better access to the US market.

Fortunately, the original TPPA effectively died when the United States pulled out of the agreement.  Unfortunately, the agreement has crept back to life in zombie form as the TPPA-11.  The National-led government pushed hard — right up until the election — to get that agreement across the line in a near-identical form to the original deal.  The plan was to have the political leaders announce the new deal at the sidelines of the APEC meeting in Vietnam next week.

Where does the TPPA-11 stand under the new government?

The announcement that Labour, New Zealand First and the Green Party would form a coalition was great news for New Zealanders concerned about the TPPA-11.  While Labour’s position on the TPPA has historically been hot and cold, the party’s position became more clear in their minority view in the Select Committee report on the agreement.  The Party criticised the secrecy under which the agreement was negotiated, and strongly questioned the economic arguments in favour of the agreement, particularly in light of the potential downsides.  The position concluded by stating:

“The TPPA will have ramifications for generations of New Zealanders. For their sake, we should not so lightly enter into an agreement which may exacerbate long-term challenges for our economy, workforce, and society.”

We at It’s Our Future could not have said it better, nor when our new Finance Minister, Grant Robertson, said while debating the TPPA Amendment Bill in Parliament, that former Trade Minister Todd McClay had “let down New Zealand with the way [the TPPA negotiation] was undertaken: in secret, without conversation with New Zealanders, and without bringing New Zealanders along with him.”

Despite what Labour has said in the past, we are concerned and disappointed that Jacinda Ardern and the new Trade Minister, David Parker, now seem enthusiastic about concluding a deal on 11 November 2017.  If this happens, it would be a slap in the face for New Zealanders who rightly expect that the Labour Party will make good on its previous criticisms and give the public a chance to have their say on the agreement with the benefit of transparency and consultation.  There is no rush to sign on to the mess National has created, whatever the trade bureaucrats in Wellington might think.  Labour, New Zealand First and the Greens were elected by the New Zealand public with a mandate for change, and our approach to trade should change accordingly.

 

This week, It’s Our Future and our friends at ActionStation have launched an open letter to Jacinda Ardern urging her to hold off on the TPPA-11 until New Zealanders’ voices have been heard.  We were encouraged yesterday to hear Jacinda Ardern take a tougher line on ISDS (“We remain determined to do our utmost to amend the ISDS provisions of TPP”), but she will need to go further if New Zealanders are to be given the respect they deserve on the TPPA-11.

 

Senior doctors commend Health Minister for seeking answers in dubious Waikato process – ASMS

The Daily Blog
-
0

“The new Health Minister is to be commended for seeking answers to Waikato District Health Board’s dubious decision to spend millions of dollars on a virtual health strategy,” says Ian Powell, Executive Director of the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists (ASMS).

He was commenting on reports that Health Minister David Clark has expressed concern about the rapid approval process for the virtual health strategy, HealthTap.

“The approval process for this initiative has been driven managerially, rather than clinically,” says Mr Powell.

“It has taken place without the normal clinical scrutiny that would occur over the use of new health technology, especially one that has been developed in a fundamentally different health system, and without apparent regard to a similar new technological device developed by GPs in Waikato.

“It’s also not clear whether the DHB’s management and Board investigated other issues in the course of the rapid approval process, such as the potential for conflict of interest and so on, and this is something the Minister might also like to be reassured about.”

The Liberal Agenda – AUCKLAND SHOW COMMEMORATES RUSSIAN REVOLUTION

The Liberal Agenda
-
2

As Russia’s political leaders and oligarchs struggle with how to commemorate the centenary of the 1917 workers’ revolution, Auckland actors and activists will be assembling in Karangahape Road on Guy Fawkes’ Day in November for a show that examines one of the most significant moments of the 20th century.

Reds is a two-hour play looking at the events and personalities that shook the world a century ago.

It will be given a reading at the Thirsty Dog, on Karangahape Rd, home of Auckland’s world-renowned Bloomsday show.

Top-line actors Stuart Devenie (Braindead), Jennifer Ward-Lealand (Dirty Laundry), Elizabeth McRae (Shortland St), Stephen Lovatt (Pleasuredome), Donogh Rees (Shortland Street) and Charlie Bleakley (Scarfies) will be joined by former Greens MP Sue Bradford, Unite Union organisers M Treen and Joe Carolan, and Mangere East Community Centre director Roger Fowler.

Jennifer Ward-Lealand will be playing the English Communist Sarah Pankhurst, one of a remarkable group of women we meet in the course of the show.

Union organisers Mike Treen and Joe Carolan will be playing Bolshevik leaders Trotsky and Lenin.

On piano will be Grey Lynn’s Hershal Herscher who has a special affinity with the show: his mother’s relatives were Bronsteins, Trotsky’s family. He will be playing the music of Prokofiev, Beethoven, Rossini, Kenny Ball and his Jazzmen, the Russian Red Army Choir and Blondie.

Reds is written by Dean Parker (Came A Hot Friday) and will be at the Thirsty Dog on Karangahape Rd on Sunday November 5, Guy Fawkes’ Day, 2pm.

E tū welcomes demise of National’s pay equity bill

The Daily Blog
-
0

E tū has welcomed the Government’s decision to scrap the former National Government’s pay equity bill.

E tū took the pay equity case, Bartlett v Terranova which ultimately led to the equal pay settlement for 55,000 care and support workers.

The Employment (Pay Equity and Equal Pay) Bill passed its first reading in August by just one vote and was opposed by most political parties.

E tū’s Equal Pay Coordinator, Yvette Taylor says women rallied in their thousands against the bill which would have increased the obstacles faced by women seeking equal pay.

“Had this bill proceeded, these women would have been forced into a long process of identifying comparators and proving merit,” says Yvette.

“We were given a strong commitment on the campaign trail that the bill would be scrapped and we’re delighted that has been honoured.”

Yvette says any new legislation needs to respect the Court of Appeal judgement in the case of Bartlett v Terranova as well as the recommendations of the Joint Working Group on pay equity.

Care worker, Kristine Bartlett who took the case says the equal pay settlement wouldn’t have happened under the terms of this bill.

“It’s great news,” says Kristine.

“That bill was going to affect so many other low-paid women in low-paid industries which was totally unfair. We fought hard for five years to get what we deserve and then we get a bill that would make it so much harder for everyone else.

“I’m so glad it’s gone and we look forward to a replacement that makes it easier for women to gain pay equity,” she says.

E tū’s submission on the bill supports retaining the Equal Pay Act 1972 with changes to accommodate the Court of Appeal judgement as well as the Joint Working Group recommendations.

Meanwhile – the planet is melting

Martyn Bradbury
-
4

There is no other issue that looms over us with the totality of mass extinction quite like human made climate change.

The latest UN report notes the catastrophic gap between the words spoken at the Paris agreement and the reality…

UN releases warning about ‘catastrophic’ lack of action on climate change
There is a “catastrophic” gap between what needs to be done on climate change and what governments and companies are actually doing, the UN has warned.

Despite pledges to work to mitigate and deal with climate change, current plans still lead to a 3-degree Celsius rise in temperatures by the end of the decade, a major new report warns. If that happens, it will not only break through the 2-degrees target set in the Paris agreement, but also lead to deadly changes in the climate across the world.

In its latest “Emissions Gap” report issued ahead of an important climate conference in Germany next week, the program takes aim at coal-fired electricity plants being built in developing economies and says investment in renewable energies will pay for itself — and even make money — over the long term.

…this comes on the heels of new scientific research that shows we have under-estimated the speed of sea level change…

New science suggests the ocean could rise more — and faster — than we thought
Climate change could lead to sea level rises that are larger, and happen more rapidly, than previously thought, according to a trio of new studies that reflect mounting concerns about the stability of polar ice.

…while new research suggests that sea level rise could produce devastating storms…

Ancient storms could have hurled huge boulders, scientists say – raising new fears of rising seas
The new study, though, could hardly be called good news for those who will live with the consequences of climate change. It uses the boulders to underscore the lesson that as seas rise once again in our future, they will be able to unleash even more of the ocean’s destructive power upon present-day human structures. Storms won’t even need to have stronger winds — the oceans will do much of the work.

…the current political template that us focused on quarterly profit margins simply can’t produce policy to protect us from this new reality.

Radical Green Socialism still seems like the only means of countering the free market excesses of Capitalism and its unending destruction of our biosphere.

1...1,9751,9761,977...2,410Page 1,976 of 2,410