15.1 C
Auckland
Tuesday, November 25, 2025

Contribute

Home Blog Page 1981

Jacinda’s incredible speech to the Council of Trade Unions

I want to start by saying thank you

During the election campaign, my rallying cry was “Let’s do this’

We wanted to capture both that there was a huge amount we needed to change to place NZ on a better path. But we also wanted to capture the sentiment, that, together, change was possible.

With your help, and the support of voters, change is not just possible, it’s real.

Now, we have the opportunity to deliver on our commitments.

We can deliver affordable, healthy homes.

We can deliver properly resourced public services.

We can deliver an environment we can be proud of.

And – delegates – we can also have decent work and wages for all New Zealanders.

The CTU and your member unions formed a crucial part of our campaign for positive change. Thousands of union members supported Labour’s campaign and took part in our effort to talk to voters about the issues, win their support, and get them to turn out to vote.

Thank you for everything you’ve done.

You know, during the campaign I said, more than once I should add, that:

We have the opportunity at this election to turn the page to New Zealand’s future.

It’s the point where we will either continue to be a country that leaves the next generation better off than the last, or where for the first time, we will see a generation that starts to go backwards. 

No one wants that. Not our grandparents. Not our parents. Not anyone. Not when we know we can do better. 
We can be better than a country that is ranked amongst the worst in the developed world for homelessness, and where our homeownership rates continue to slide. 

We can be better than a country where child poverty is starting to become normalised, and where we barely flinch when we hear the number – 290,000. 

We can be better than a country where half a million Kiwis didn’t go to the doctor because they couldn’t afford it, and where our mental health statistics are staggering. 

And we can be better than a country where you can’t even swim in our rivers without getting sick. 

We can be better. 

And now is our chance to prove it.

 

Governing, together

Building a better New Zealand for all our people won’t be easy. It will require all of us, working together.

Just like we needed to work together to win the election, we now need to work together to make the changes we need.

I can’t fix the housing crisis alone but we can, together.

I can’t end child poverty alone but we can, together.

I can’t generate higher incomes alone but we can, together.

Together, we can make this country the best place in the world to live.

Unions, NGOs, businesses, councils, iwi, and other community groups all have their role to play, with our government, to build a better New Zealand.

I have always said that I believe what unites us is stronger than what divides us. And the campaign has only confirmed that belief to me, and so did the negotiations.

During those talks it was clear to me that despite our position as individual parties, we had a strong consensus on major issues of importance.

This government is backed by a higher percentage of voters than the average MMP government, and a higher share of the vote than any First Past the Post government managed after 1949. There will of course, as is the case with any election, people who didn’t choose to support the parties who make up the Government

Here is my promise to them and every New Zealander: whether you voted or not, and no matter who you voted for, I will be a Prime Minister for all.

A very important part of my job as Prime Minister transcends party politics. I know my job is to fight for every New Zealander’s rights; every New Zealander’s interests; and every New Zealander’s quality of life.

I take that part of my role very seriously. My job is to have every New Zealander’s back, and I will.

As part of that commitment, I also want a more inclusive and transparent Parliament. That’s why I invite opposition parties to be part of building a better, fairer New Zealand.

I know that they, too, want a better future for New Zealand.

I hope they will help drive forwards our plan for positive change, rather than attacking MMP from the sidelines. I hope they will choose to focus on what unites us, rather than what divides us.

Because there is so much to do.

 

Our first hundred days

We are going to hit the ground running, and we’re starting with a suite of issues that really matter to working New Zealanders. 

In fact, we’ve already ticked off one of our 100 day commitments. Andrew Little will be Minister Responsible for Pike River Re-entry, in keeping with the commitment I made to the families in August.

Justice for Pike is not just about those 29 men and their families. It is about all working people, and the right to return home safe to your loved ones at the end of the day.

We will also push ahead with other quick initiatives for working people in our first hundred days.

Our wages need to keep moving, s

o we’ll increase the minimum wage to $16.50 to take effect on the First of April. 

That will be the first step to raising the minimum wage to $20 an hour.

We’ll restore the right to meal and rest breaks, and we’ll reverse attacks on work rights by taking important steps, such as:

restoring the duty to conclude bargaining,

restoring the right of union access to members at their workplace,

removing the ability of employers to deduct pay for work to rule and other low-level protest action,

tightening the rules regarding pass-on

and bringing back the right of workers to initiative collective bargaining.

We’ll also work to pass the legislation to extend Paid Parental Leave to 26 weeks – a Bill that Parliament has already passed once and was unfairly vetoed.

We’re also getting moving on housing.

We will introduce a law to ban overseas speculators from buying existing homes, and we’ll do it by Christmas.

Too many kids are living in homes that make them sick, so we’ll pass the Healthy Homes Guarantee Bill to ensure every rental home is healthy, warm, and dry. 

We’ll stop the state house sell-off and begin work on the KiwiBuild programme.

Education needs to be more accessible, so we’ll focus on passing our education package by 1 January 2018.

Too many families and older New Zealanders are struggling, so we’ll pass into law our families package.

To help secure super at 65, we’ll resume contributions to the Superannuation Fund.

We need to take action on the environment, so we will lock in our goal of zero carbon emissions and begin setting up the independent climate commission – while ensuring a Just Transition for working people and their communities.

We need to look after the health and wellbeing of our people, so we will set up a ministerial inquiry into the mental health crisis, and also, into the abuse of children in state care.

And all of that, all of it, we will get on and do in our first 100 days.

It is the start of our programme to make this a better country for everyone. A country that gives everyone a shot at achieving their dreams and doesn’t let anyone fall through the cracks.

 

Work rights plan

I’m am thrilled to announce that Iain Lees-Galloway will be Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety. He brings with him an enormous positivity and can-do attitude. He has a record of building bridges and finding common ground which is going to be central to our approach.

I know that Iain will work together in a spirit of positivity and partnership – with both unions and business – to establish a fairer set of employment policies that deliver jobs, higher wages, and a more productive economy.

It is in everyone’s interest for families to have higher incomes, for working people’s lives to be better, for our economy to be more efficient and productive.

There will always be those that oppose change – who are comfortable in a status quo that is delivering for fewer and fewer people. But I know they are not the majority. I know most businesses want a fair set of employment policies.

They know that we need decent wages if they are going to have customers for their products. They know that we need to boost our productivity, and low wages are a barrier to that because they discourage investment in training and capital. They know that we need a government that invests in skills and education.

I am aware that, while the majority of workers are employed by big, profitable companies, that some small businesses will feel the effects of larger staff costs more acutely. That’s why one of the tasks for the Tax Working Group will be to look at models overseas for lower taxation for small businesses.

For too long, a line has been pushed that decent wages and strong economic growth don’t go together. I simply don’t buy into baseless claims that paying people well means there will be fewer jobs. In fact, the overwhelming weight of evidence is that strong wages for all working people help to boost growth and create jobs.

We only need to look to our own history. Over the past 30 years, the share of the economy going to wages and salaries has declined by billions of dollars. Yet, this hasn’t produced a robust economy and the trickle-down effect that was promised.

Instead, we have GDP per capita which is barely growing, we have unemployment stuck stubbornly at 5% when it should be below 4%, and our economy has become more geared towards speculation and extraction, rather than value-added exports.

We know that, when business and workers join together, we can achieve great things. Just look at the Air New Zealand agreement – the model of high performance, and high engagement cooperation between workers and employers. Unions and the ,business took a situation where a company was losing money and looking to cut jobs, and turned it around so that jobs were saved, they were made more productive, and the future of the business was transformed.

Low wages aren’t simply a problem for low-wage workers, they are a problem for businesses and the economy as a whole.

 

Fair Pay Agreements

I want to see an end to the race to the bottom on wages. Our plans for Fair Pay Agreements are the start of changing that.

I know so many businesses are frustrated that if they pay their staff well, they are constantly at risk of being undercut by the few businesses who make their way by paying as little as possible. Businesses should be competing on innovation, on offering the best product, not by keeping wages low.

Instead, right now we have bus drivers in Wellington set to lose their jobs or take pay cuts. The company they work for has lost the contract to a different firm, which has offered a lower cost to the regional council on the basis of reducing staff pay packages. That’s not the way forward for New Zealand.

I look, instead, to the care and support workers’ agreement – which is really a de facto Fair Pay Agreement – that has ended decades of wage discrimination against a low-pay, overwhelmingly female workforce. This was a success, one to be celebrated.

There is a lot of detail to be worked through – to ensure Fair Pay Agreements deliver meaningful improvements in wages, while also maintaining the flexibility that employers and workers want.

We purposely did not seek to lock in the details of these agreements from opposition. It is work that must be done by government, businesses, and unions, sitting around the table together. That is exactly the way I intend to work as Prime Minister. And it’s a relationship I look forward to deepening even further.

 

Conclusion

One of the great things about the way we do politics in New Zealand is we no longer have a single party, governing alone with as little as 35% of the vote, as happened before MMP.

MMP has forced a culture of cooperation into politics and ensured the will of the majority of voters is reflected in the incoming government.

I want this government to take that culture of cooperation to the next stage. Every sector of New Zealand society, every party, every organisation, every individual, can play their part in helping with our positive plan to make this an even better country.

We will build a better New Zealand – with decent homes for all, with the schools and hospitals we need, with an environment we can cherish, and with decent, well-paying work for our people – and we will build it together.

Let’s do this.

The 5 images that best sum up NZs new Government

The magnitude of change that this new government actually represents hasn’t sunk into the mainstream media yet. Most of them believed National would win, hence their bitter shock and they have barely caught their breath on what Labour, NZ First and the Greens truly represent.

While they stumble into comprehension of actually how far this new Government intends to go, here are the 5 images that sum up the change best.

5: The new net and old net both go fishing

The respect and warmth of relationship between Jacinda and Winston is real. He sees himself as the elder statesman and she the fresh new face of a generational political change. It is the values of NZ pre neoliberalism with the children who grew up under its yoke. Those who remember a better NZ and those who yearn for one.

 

4: A revolution in the billiards room

The Billiards room in Parliament, that most exclusive and elite of old boys networks have two of the youngest new Green MPs playing.

“Corner pocket, Matthew Hooton’s Face”.
“Side pocket, Sean Plunket’s Face”.

 

3: Paddles the First Cat

Jacinda and Clarke’s cat Paddles has been on Twitter for a mere week. In that time Paddles has gained half the social media following of National’s Deputy Leader Paula Bennett who has been on Twitter since 2009. If Paddles manages to overtake Paula, Jacinda’s pet will have a larger Twitter following than Bill English’s Deputy Leader.

Oh we will laugh and laugh.

 

2: A tale of two calls

Nothing managed to sum up the new Government’s view of the world than these two reactions by Prime Minister Ardern. On the left she is meeting and talking via Skype to the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on the right she is talking with Donal Trump.

The difference in perspective says more about what New Zealand’s new foreign policy will look like than any policy announcement.

 

1: This is the best image that sums up NZs new Government

A refugee human rights lawyer and the youngest candidate in the Auckland Mayoralty standing in the most powerful chamber of NZ politics. They are the face of the new power and the face of a New Zealand that have suddenly found their voice.

 

Abatement rates must be restored for working families to thrive – Child Poverty Action Group

A formal agreement between Labour and Greens may spell long sought after improvements to Working for Families (WFF), says Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG).

The agreement document says that an “overhaul” of the welfare system must “ensure access to entitlements, remove excessive sanctions and review Working For Families so that everyone has a standard of living and income that enables them to live in dignity and participate in their communities, and lifts children and their families out of poverty.”

This is a significant commitment and CPAG commends the efforts of the parties to improving the lives of all children who are experiencing income poverty.

If many of the changes in Budget 2017 are maintained in principle, then there will be a noticeable improvement for many families on the lowest of incomes. But changes to the WFF abatement rate under Budget 2017 would reflect sharply on the ability of low-income working families to get ahead with their earnings.

Under its Families Package policies, Labour said it would:

Adopt the Budget 2017 changes to the Family Tax Credit base rate for subsequent children and new abatement rate.

While the promise to raise the threshold for maximum WFF eligibility to $42,700 is a much welcome and needed change, the abatement rate for any money received over that amount will increase to 25% in 2018. This reduces the value of each dollar earned over the threshold by reducing Working for Families entitlements by 25 cents for every dollar earned over the threshold. The abatement rate was originally 20%, increased to 22.5% under National in 2012.

CPAG urges the new government to make a firm commitment to the low-income working families, by ensuring that their ability to earn extra is not compromised by higher abatement rates, which sharply reduce the needed child tax credits intended for the wellbeing of their children.

Senior doctors welcome David Clark as new Health Minister – ASMS

Senior doctors will welcome the appointment of Dr David Clark as the new Minister of Health, says Ian Powell, Executive Director of the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists (ASMS).

“He has already shown a good grasp of the portfolio while an Opposition MP and we have high hopes that he will be willing to tackle the challenges facing public health. These include years of significant under-resourcing of public hospitals, longstanding shortages of senior medical specialists, a high level of unmet need in our communities, and disruptive privatisation moves.

“Our members look forward to working with the new Minister to rebuild the public health system and ensure equitable, quality access to health care for all.”

Mr Powell also welcomed the appointment of Associate Health Ministers Jenny Salesa and Julie Anne Genter as bringing additional expertise to the health portfolio.

Eyes of the world on Turkey as show trial of human rights activists begins – Amnesty International

Eyes of the world on Turkey as show trial of human rights activists begins 

 

  • Trumped up charges against the 11 arrested in Istanbul exposed
  • Forensic analysis shows Amnesty Chair did not download Bylock
  • Spokespeople available on the ground for trials on October 25 & 26

Trumped up charges against 11 human rights defenders, including Amnesty International’s Turkey director and chair, do not stand up to the slightest scrutiny, said Amnesty International as court proceedings begin in Istanbul and Izmir.

The charges against them – carrying jail terms of up to 15 years and set out in two indictments to be heard in two separate trials – are entirely baseless.

 

“From the moment of their detentions, it has been clear that these are politically motivated prosecutions aimed at silencing critical voices within Turkey,” said John Dalhuisen, Amnesty International’s Europe Director.

 

“Without substance or foundation the Turkish authorities have tried and failed to build a case against İdil, Taner and the other nine human rights activists. It took the prosecutor more than three months to come up with nothing. It should not take the judge more than half an hour to dismiss the case against them.”

 

Ten activists, including İdil Eser, the Director of Amnesty Turkey, were arrested on 5 July, whilst Amnesty International’s Turkey Chair, Taner Kılıç, was arrested a month earlier. They are accused of “membership of a terrorist organisation”.

The charges against the 11 include outlandish claims that standard human rights protection activities amount to assisting terrorist organisations. These include appealing to stop the sale of tear gas, making a grant application, and campaigning for the release of hunger-striking teachers. According to the indictment, İdil Eser is linked to three unrelated and opposing terrorist organisations and some of the allegations against her refer to two Amnesty International documents which were issued before she even joined the organisation.

 

The prosecution unsurprisingly offers no evidence to support their allegations that the Büyükada workshop, where the arrests took place, was a “secret meeting to organise a Gezi-type uprising” or that any of the defendants were engaged in wrongdoing. Amnesty International has made a detailed analysis of the indictment, addressing each of the allegations made against the 11 defendants.

 

As well as the hearing against the 11 which begins in Istanbul today, Taner Kılıç will also appear at a hearing tomorrow in Izmir on a separate charge of “membership of the Fethullah Gülen Terrorist Organisation”.

 

This charge is based on the allegation that he downloaded and used the ByLock messaging application, claimed to have been used by the Gülen movement to communicate. However, two independent forensic analyses of Taner’s phone commissioned by Amnesty International found that there is no trace of Bylock ever having been on his phone.

 

The trials come as international pressure mounts on Turkey to release the human rights defenders. Worldwide protests marked 100 days imprisonment for ten of those arrested and the birthday of Idil Eser and last week, the secretary-general of the Council of Europe, Thorbjørn Jagland, the president of the European Parliament, Antonio Tajani, and the Chair of the Human Rights Committee in the European Parliament, Pier Antonio Panzeri, all called for their release.

They join a long list of governments, institutions and political figures that have demanded their release including European Commission, the US State Department, UN officials, Angela Merkel and the German government as well as the Austrian, Irish and Belgian governments.

“These two trials will be an acid test for the Turkish justice system and will demonstrate whether standing up for human rights has now become a crime in Turkey,” said John Dalhuisen.

 

“If justıce can be subverted by a dystopian fiction woven from absurd and baseless allegations, it will be a dark day for Turkey’s justice system and a grim omen for the future of human rights in the country. With the eyes of the world on these courtrooms in Istanbul and Izmir the time has come for the long overdue unconditional release of our colleagues.”

Welfare group challenges Labour to build a progressive welfare system – Auckland Action Against Poverty

Auckland Action Against poverty is celebrating the success of its campaign to end the sanction on solo-mothers who do not name their children’s father. “Jacinda Ardern’s announcement that this sanction will end is the only solid commitment she has made on welfare”, says AAAP spokesperson, Vanessa Cole.

“Other than that we have a vague commitment to overhaul the welfare system and to remove “excessive sanctions” from the new Prime Minister.”

“All sanctions must go. It is excessive to reduce someone’s benefit by either 50 or 100%. It is excessive to prevent someone from receiving a benefit for 13 weeks.  All sanctions are excessive.”

“Work and Income’s ability to punish people is a major part of its toxic culture.”

“An overhaul of the welfare system is not the same as fundamental change. Both Winston Peters and Jacinda Ardern have acknowledged that capitalism has failed many New Zealanders. The current focus from Work and Income on work as the only way out of poverty has failed.”

“The previous government ignored issues around the quality and nature of work. Low pay and no regular hours are features of the poverty trap.”

“AAAP has developed a policy framework which includes, providing a living wage for all, building a culture at Work & Income based on respect and redistribution, a mass build of state housing, and taxing wealth.”

“A new government provides an opportunity to implement progressive policies to support the people capitalism has failed, to support unemployed and low-waged workers and their children. What is yet to be shown is the political will to do so.”

“If Labour is truly committed to ending poverty and homelessness, they need to commit to a major increase in benefits, end the toxic culture of Work & Income and commit to a major state house build,”

“Jacinda Ardern speaks frequently of child poverty, but if there is no commitment to massively increasing the income of adults in poverty, then ending child poverty is simply not possible.”

“Challenging capitalism does not just involve tweaking policies to make them more fair. It requires challenging the legitimacy of the market and redistributing wealth.”

“These demands are a first step in addressing blatant failure of capitalism. We challenge Labour to read our demand policy document and make a real commitment to improving the lives of beneficiaireis and the unemployed.”

Workers get welcome boost in Government’s first priorities – PSA

Working New Zealanders will be better off under the new Labour-Greens-New Zealand First government, the PSA says – with fairer pay and well-funded public services front and centre in the coalition agreements released today.

PSA National Secretary Glenn Barclay said today’s agreements speak to the real and pressing need for higher wages.

“The Government’s plan to increase the minimum wage will significantly improve life for low-paid workers,” Mr Barclay said.

The Government’s commitment to reverse National’s nine-year spiral of health underfunding will also make a tangible difference.

“Health workers have been bearing the burden of underfunding for almost a decade,” PSA National Secretary Erin Polaczuk said.

“Today’s commitment to properly-fund health, including establishing a Mental Health Commission and ensuring people can access free counselling, offers a much-needed reprieve.”

Today’s agreements also reflect a Government willing to tackle systemic inequality.

Ms Polaczuk says the commitment to eliminate the gender pay gap in the core public sector will set a precedent women in workplaces everywhere can be sure of.

“Women have been calling for fair and equal treatment in the workplace for over a century.

“This Government is already demonstrating it will champion women’s rights at work and that support can’t come soon enough,” Ms Polaczuk said.

Other priories including the establishment of an independent climate commission, a housing commission and investment in regional economies support the PSA’s own agenda to create better working lives for its members.

“We look forward to seeing more from this Government,” Mr Barclay said.

NZEI welcomes Govt support for children with extra needs

NZEI Te Riu Roa welcomes the education policies outlined today in the agreements between Labour and New Zealand First and the Greens.

NZEI President Lynda Stuart said parents and educators would be especially pleased that the Labour-Green confidence and supply deal included ensuring that children with special needs and learning disabilities can fully participate in school.

“Too many children are missing out on the support they need because the current funding for specialists, teacher aides, professional support and other learning resources is so inadequate.

“To enable full participation in school, we’ll need to see a huge boost to special needs funding. That will make a world of difference for our students,” she said.

The education aspects of the Labour and NZ First coalition deal are also welcome, she said. They are: Restore funding for gifted students and Computers in Homes, pilot counsellors in primary schools, free driver training for all secondary school students and restarting Te Kotahitanga teacher professional development.

Ms Stuart said the improvement in family incomes from the increase in the minimum wage up to $20 BY 2020 would have a positive benefit for children and their learning, as well as helping low-paid education workers such as teacher aides.

Ms Stuart said the three parties agreed on a number of key education policies beyond today’s deals that educators wanted to see speedy progress on.

“We’re looking forward to the immediate scrapping of National Standards and charter schools, and the restoration of funding for 100% qualified teachers in ECE,” she said.

“Labour, the Greens and New Zealand First have all promised to restore funding for schools and early childhood education.

“The biggest challenges that schools and ECE services are facing are underfunding and a teacher supply crisis. A funding jolt for schools and ECE services, pay equity for school support staff and a significant pay rise for teachers are needed to rebuild New Zealand’s public education system into a world class one.

“The incoming minister and coalition government have the opportunity to make children a priority once again. Our children deserve the best education in the world, and New Zealand can afford to provide it.”

Public Health Association welcomes new govt

The Public Health Association of New Zealand (PHA) welcomes the new government’s commitment to health as a priority for increased investment.

“The PHA congratulates Jacinda Ardern, Winston Peters and James Shaw on the creation of a coalition that will measure its success on the basis of how its policies improve people’s lives,” says PHA CEO Warren Lindberg.

“DHBs, primary care practitioners and the NGO sector urgently need relief from the financial pressures that are demoralising staff, increasing treatment errors and prolonging staff shortages.

“We are especially pleased that the new government will prioritise determinants of health, such as poverty, housing, water quality and environmental damage from climate change.

“New Zealand is internationally recognised for leadership in quality professional care, but also for its failure to ensure access to services for people who are poor, culturally and linguistically different, or otherwise disadvantaged.

“Our DHBs are struggling with avoidable hospitalisations – especially children with preventable conditions – as health promotion and prevention services have been systematically de-funded over the last decade.

“The Prime Minister’s focus on investing in wages, housing and education, and on environmental issues such as water quality and public transport, gives us all reason to hope for a healthier future.”

Great start from new government for low paid workers – Unite Union

The planned increases to the Minimum Wage to $20 are a major step forward for workers, equality and the economy overall according to Unite Union, which represents thousands of low paid workers in food and hospitality workplaces.

As minimum adult wage moves towards the Living Wage then workers will simply be able to make ends meet after a weeks work, according to Unite National Secretary Gerard Hehir.

“It will make a huge difference to hundreds of thousands who most desperately need help. Over four years it is a 6.75% average increase per year. That is not excessive when we currently have full-time workers relying on welfare support, state subsidies and charity – and still struggling. Employers need to pay their workers enough to live – it really is that simple”

There are almost 700,000 workers earning less than the Living Wage (currently $20.20) – over a third of all employees (see the CTU’s Shrinking portions to low and middleincome earners: Inequality in Wages & SelfEmployment 19982015).

“Winston Peter’s was spot on when he said many who felt capitalism was working against them were “not wrong”. The starkest measure is the Labour share of GDP in New Zealand which has fallen from nearly 59% in 1980 to only 50% in 2015 – 5% below the OECD average. Where has it gone? Corporate profits as a share of GDP have gone from 10% in 1980 to almost 25% in 2015. We shouldn’t be afraid of asking businesses to start reversing that trend – it is well overdue and only fair.”

The scaremongering around loss of jobs is just that according to Unite: “When Unite successfully campaigned to abolish youth rates in 2008 there were dire predictions of mass youth joblessness. Youth employment actually increased in the years that followed. Recent research has consistently shown that hysterical claims of minimum wage increases causing rampant inflation and unemployment are simply wrong” (see Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment? by John Schmitt ).

“Everyone will benefit from the increases. Those wages will be overwhelmingly spent in local communities – benefitting local businesses. That will particularly help regional economies. Low paid workers won’t be jetting off overseas or importing expensive cars and luxury goods – they will be looking after their families, paying down debt and maybe even saving some money. The biggest barrier to getting into kiwisaver is actually not being able to afford the weekly contributions”.

“Employers who don’t think their workers are worth $20 an hour should look at their business model . New Zealand has a productivity problem. Rather than relying on low wages and low skills they should be looking to make their employees more productive. Investing in skills, training and new technology is the answer – not paying your workers the least the law allows you and complaining that it is too much.”

“Taxpayers will be better off as well. The huge rental and income subsidies to low paid workers will actually reduce. This exposes who these government payments are really subsidising – low wage employers rather than their low paid employees. It is absurd that the loudest voices against minimum wage increases are also often the loudest in demanding tax cuts and complaining about government subsidies.”

“On behalf of our members and all low paid workers in New Zealand Unite congratulates the NZ First, Labour and the Greens for making a real difference. There is alot more to do – but it is a great start”.

E tū welcomes lift in minimum wage but goal is Living Wage

The union E tū has welcomed today’s announcement of a lift in the minimum wage but says its goal remains the Living Wage for all workers.

The increase from $15.75 an hour to $16.50 will mean more than $20.00 extra a week for minimum wage workers doing a 40-hour week.

The minimum wage will gradually increase to $20.00 by April 2021.

E tū’s National Secretary, Bill Newson says the extra money will be very welcome for these workers.

“It might not sound a lot for the privileged elite who have got a lot from the Government over the past few years. But it means a lot to ordinary working people trying to support families on low pay,” says Bill.

“Let’s remember we’re talking about a minimum and there’s a lot of evidence that shows a Living Wage today needs to be $20.20 so there is still a way to go,” he says.

Bill says the increases announced today surpass the movement in the minimum wage achieved under the previous National Government.

“It took National five years to lift the minimum wage by $3.00 an hour and it will take this Government 3 years to lift it another $4.00 – we can live with that.”

Bill says businesses might not be happy but in fact they will benefit as workers spend the extra money on local goods and services.

“Good business is about employing good people. Good business is about retaining good people. And good business is about paying people a decent wage, so this new minimum wage is good for business and workers.”

Labour-Green agreement brings Just Transition – CTU

“The Labour-Green confidence and supply agreement gives both to working people,” says CTU Secretary Sam Huggard.

“It brings real confidence to working people that the transition to a net zero emissions economy can be achieved and achieved justly with their working interests in mind.

“It also supplies the muscle to the equal pay process – with clear commitments in the public sector in this term of Government.”

The agreement contains a number of positive changes for working people. Among them, it commits to eliminate the gender pay gap within the core public sector with substantial progress within this Parliamentary term, and focus on establishing just transitions for exposed regions and industries in the move to a net zero emissions including up to $1 billion of new investment in low carbon industries by 2020 supported by a Government-backed Green Investment Fund of $100 million.

“There is strong support across New Zealand for paying women fairly and the equal pay measures are significant. We are also pleased that the new government is made up of three parties who have committed to better equal pay laws which would see the already agreed-on Pay Equity Principals, as negotiated through the Joint Working Group, put into law.

“Having a more assertive plan to address climate change must be coupled with initiatives to create opportunities for decent work in the green economy, and the clear commitment to just transition and the investment fund is important and welcome to working people.

“This document is further evidence of what the new Government can achieve and the value the Green party brings to the partnership. These are great initiatives and they are heading in exactly the right direction.”

Workers pleased with incoming government’s employment policy – First Union

FIRST Union, the union representing 27,000 working people across New Zealand, welcomed the incoming government’s employment relations policy this afternoon.

“These policies show Labour, New Zealand First and the Greens acknowledge the huge economic pressure working people, especially low paid workers, have been facing for the last decade,” said FIRST Union General Secretary Robert Reid.

“Today marks a sea change. We now have a Government showing respect for working people.”

“We’re especially pleased to see the minimum wage will move to $20.00 per hour by the end of 2020,” said Reid.

“Business leaders often say the main thing they need is certainty. This announcement gives them that certainty and now they need to start factoring in significant wage increases for all their workers over the next three years.”

“The era of 2% per year wage offers is over. Employers, especially those who employ minimum wage workers, will need to be looking at increases of around 8% per year to stay at or ahead of minimum wage rises.”

“The scaremongering around job losses due to an increase in the minimum wage is just that. Around the world Reserve Banks and even the IMF and World Bank are calling for significant increases in wages to support the economy, not to destroy it.

“Our reading of the coalition agreement on employment relations is that Labour’s election policy remains either intact or is enhanced by NZ First and Greens Policy.

“FIRST Union went into the last election with its slogan of “Workers FIRST for a change”. The announcement of the Employment Relations Policy of the Coalition Government is a great start to achieving our goal,” said Reid.

New Vision for the Minimum Wage a Great Tonic – CTU

“This is just the sort of change working people voted for,” says CTU President Richard Wagstaff. “It is great to see the Labour-New Zealand First Coalition Government putting people first and it is a really good first step on the path to a fairer Aotearoa”.

The Government has committed to a minimum wage of $20. Recent research by the NZCTU shows that between 1998 and 2015 hourly wages rose twice as fast for those at the top of the wage range, compared to those below the average. And the big driver of any increases for those on the lowest wages was increases to the minimum wage.

“This will make a huge difference to the dignity of the many, many people who are working hard for low wages in this country – many more than there should be. And it is a much-needed tonic for the broken wage-setting process we have endured for so many years in this country.”

“It also shows what this new Government can achieve in coalition and the value New Zealand First brings to the partnership. There are plenty of things to be done and this is a great start”.

A reminder to Labour about the TPPA

Many will, like me, be disappointed that there is no commitment on the TPPA in Labour’s agreements with New Zealand First and the Greens.

To date, Labour has confirmed that it will seek to amend New Zealand’s investment schedule to allow the ban on non-residents buying residential property. In response to a question yesterday, Jacinda Ardern said the question of foreign investor’s rights to sue the government in controversial offshore tribunals, known as the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), is still being discussed.

Q: [re position on TPPA] 

A: I found a huge amount of consensus, actually in talks with NZ First around our position on TPP and TPP-11.  And that consensus particularly sits around our view on banning foreign overseas buyers from purchasing existing homes, and also ongoing concerns with ISDS clauses.  We’ll go into negotiations with that view in mind, of course we don’t want to undermine our negotiating position, but it was very clear from the talks that we have the same concerns, but at the same time we both support increasing exports and export growth for New Zealand, and representing those who are exporting to the best of our abilities. 

Q: Will you walk away from the deal if you are not able to get those concessions?

A: I’m not undermining our negotiating position by answering that question. 

Winston Peters said the same when he announced he was choosing Labour.

That’s not strong enough for some of us. But we should also not panic. This is a time to remind all three parties in Government – especially Labour – that they said in their select committee minority reports that they would not vote in favour of ratifying the original TPPA. It is also an opportunity for them to build and sustain a sense of legitimacy and credibility, as well as optimism and enthusiasm, among those who voted for change.

Beyond that, we need to remind the rest of the country that the world is changing. The TPPA model is no longer the norm; it is increasingly the outlier.

Supporters of the deal with warn the Government against revisiting the deal, because trade ministers or leaders from the remaining 11 TPPA countries are supposed to decide its future when they meet from 9-12 November on the margins of APEC in Da Nang, Vietnam.

In reality, there is no such urgency. The pressure to conclude the deal is politically driven and artificial. It’s almost inconceivable that the TPPA-11 can be sorted before the Vietnam meeting.

Next Monday officials from the eleven remaining TPPA parties will reconvene in Japan. They will continue working through a list of 50 items that different countries want to put on ice unless and until the US re-joins. Relatively few of those items have been settled.

Some countries reportedly want to go further and change aspects of the text. New Zealand under National, with Japan and Australia, previously said that reopening text was impossible. A newly elected New Zealand government has every right to reverse that position, and insist on meeting its commitments to the people who voted for it and serving the interests of the country.

The new Government should also insist on taking its time for the kind of detailed economic and employment analyses, health impact assessments, and proper processes of public consultation they said was needed for the original TPPA.

It is common among negotiating countries for new governments to take some time to review their position after an election. The Obama administration did it, Canada did it, Japan took some time to decide how to respond to Trump’s withdrawal.

Let’s remember what the parties that make up the current Government said.

Labour objected that the economic evidence produced by National was based on ‘a wildly optimistic scenario’, whose assumptions ‘are not credible, nor are they a basis for any responsible government to proceed in signing a binding agreement with consequences as far reaching as the TPPA.’  There was a potential for job losses as jobs were offshored to lower cost centres.

They said National should have ‘adopted a model of rigorous consultation with opposition parties, academia, unions, and business, [and] commissioned modelling and developed policy responses to address concerns about employment, income distribution, and public health impacts.’ Labour explicitly joined with other submitters and opposition parties in calling for new studies that addressed those questions.

Of course, National ignored them, and proceeded with the TPPA-11 without even bothering to update its flawed National Interest Analysis to take account of the US exit.

On top of this came Labour’s concerns about sovereignty: ‘The Labour Party believes the ability to act in the interests of New Zealand residents and citizens is a principle that builds faith in participative democracy. Unnecessary weakening of sovereign State powers achieves the opposite. … The current laissez-faire economic approach to economic management speaks to a level of resignation about an expected long-term decline in our nation’s financial security.’ Signing away the right to ban non-resident foreign investors from purchasing residential property was one element of that.

The Greens went further, condemning the TPPA as ‘a regressive document reflecting the ideological excesses of late-20th-century free-market neo-liberalism’

New Zealand First led the demands to abandon ISDS and it still seems committed to that position. These days, that’s hardly a radical position. Despite its current protests, Business New Zealand told the OECD in 2012 that ISDS wasn’t necessary where other parties had sound judicial systems. We don’t have it in the investment protocol with Australia and it wasn’t in the P-4 that supposedly formed the basis of the TPPA.

Other countries with which New Zealand wants to negotiate, like India and Mercosur, have jettisoned ISDS and developed their own alternatives. The EU has a proposal for a standing investment court, although that’s more of a trap as it leaves in place the pro-investor rules that ISDS is the mechanism to enforce.

Most significantly, the US equivalent of a trade minister, Robert Lighthizer, has slammed the US corporate lobby for expecting special protections and ISDS in these agreements, when they should be taking insurance to protect their profits. If the US did want to re-join the TPPA in the foreseeable future, its current position would be to demand the removal of ISDS!

So there are numerous views among countries, large and small, about how to deal with investment in ‘trade’ agreements, if at all. The new Government has ample room to choose its own path.

If there was to be one message to the new government it is to reiterate Labour’s final sentence in the select committee report:

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. 

These words should be written in neon lights above the entrance to the beehive.

 

Will Winston Peters be Israel Lobby’s Trojan Horse?

The Israel Institute of New Zealand, in an article entitled Post Election outlook for New Zealand’s relationship with Israel, noted with pleasure that Winston Peters was now in the position of ‘king maker’. The article considered it was likely that a number of long-time National supporters had voted for Peters in this election because of his support for Israel. The Israel Institute hoped to see what it called clearer leadership on Israel if Bill English were to be in a position to form a government with support from Winston Peters. The Israel Institute’s New Zealand co-director Paul Moon was quoted as follows: Whichever party is put into power, the almost inevitable alliance with New Zealand First presents an opportunity for New Zealand to recalibrate its relations with Israel. Effectively, the government could draw a line under its disastrous sponsorship of UN Resolution 2334, and look to strengthen its ties with Israel.

International Law

Never mind the fact that Resolution 2334, incontrovertibly, brands Israel’s actions as being in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions. The Israel Institute regards the Resolution as disastrous because it exposes Israel’s violations of international humanitarian law. Even Israel’s most ardent ally, the United States of America, felt unable to vote against the Resolution, which confirms the fact that Israel’s behaviour has no legal validity.

The imposition of Israeli settlements on belligerently-Occupied Palestinian land constitutes a war crime under the provisions of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Israel’s settlement programme violates international law and a number of conventions, including United Nations Security Resolutions 446 (1979), 452 (1979), 465 (1980), and, most recently, 2334 (2016). Israel is intent upon using its extremist settlers to superimpose its Zionist rule over the whole of historic Palestine. Statements and actions by Israel’s leaders demonstrate clearly that they are bent on both the annexation of the whole of Jerusalem and irreversible destruction of Palestine’s territorial contiguity.

NZ First’s foreign-affairs and trade policy opposes the previous government’s sponsorship of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334. NZ First’s website claims that the party promotes diplomacy as the first option in resolving international conflict. Yet it opposes the National-led Government’s sponsorship of UNSC2334. Considering that the Security Council Resolution quite rightly condemns Israel’s inhumane, armed violations of international law, New Zealand First needs to explain where the diplomacy might be in opposing a Resolution against such violence. This is a Resolution, after all, that passed without a single vote against. Will Labour and the Greens tolerate any attempt by New Zealand First to soften the pressure brought upon Israel through the adoption of UNSCR 2334?

Israel, the only Western state supplying weapons to Myanmar

Last month, the Zionist state’s lawyer, Shosh Shmueli, responding to a petition in the High Court of Justice from human rights activists demanding an end to the arms sales to Myanmar, told Israel’s High Court that it shouldn’t interfere in the country’s foreign relations. An earlier statement by the Israeli Defence Ministry, in March, had referred to the matter as purely diplomatic. The violence against the Rohingya has intensified and, in the past month, some 421,000 members of the Muslim minority have been forced to flee to neighbouring Bangladesh. The UN has also raised allegations of ethnic cleansing. Eitay Mack, the petitioners’ lawyer, noted that the European Union and the United States had imposed a trade embargo on Myanmar, formerly known as Burma. The junta’s leaders are boasting of their ties with Israel, the world’s most militarised nation, on their Facebook pages and the top US diplomat for refugees and migration, Simon Henshaw, has called on Suu Kyi to take action to protect the Rohingya. As annual UN General Assembly meetings continued, he expressed concern about reports of attacks, extrajudicial murders, rapes, burning of villages. Now Israel, the only country to have introduced nuclear weapons to the Middle East, plans to leave UNESCO.

UNESCO

True to its founding objectives, this month the UNESCO Director-General welcomed the awarding of the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize to ICAN, the International Campaign for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons. It is a resounding call to global responsibility and a stronger diplomacy for peace, she declared. This, of course, is anathema to Israel, which refuses to sign the treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Neither will Israel co-operate with the IAEA. For Israel, the United Nations is nothing but a hindrance to its ambitions. Thirty-seven countries founded the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation – UNESCO. New Zealand signed up to the Constitution of UNESCO, on 16 November 1945, which came into force on 4 November 1946. The world was seeking to create an organisation that would embody a genuine culture of peace. There was belief in the need to establish an organisation that would further the intellectual and moral solidarity of mankind in order to prevent the outbreak of yet another world war.

UNESCO and education

UNESCO is responsible for co-ordinating, among other things, international co-operation in education so that each child and citizen has access to good quality education; a basic human right and an indispensable prerequisite for sustainable development. Israel has a dismal record of disrupting education for Palestinians, both within Israel and in the Occupied territories. On 27 September, Israeli forces closed the tunnel created to control movement between 16 towns and villages in north-west Jerusalem. The move disrupted study for more than 4,000 students in some 50 schools. On 7 October, the Israeli Army raided the Abu Nour Al-Badawi Bedouin Community in al-Eizariya and broke into a school under construction that was intended for the education of 58 children. Israeli troops then robbed the site of construction equipment in order to prevent the school being built. There have been many complaints from European Union member states over the destruction by Israel of donated schools and educational facilities.

Post-election – moral responsibilities remain

New Zealand’s Palestine Solidarity Network is concerned that Israel may use our taxpayer money to fund its illegal Occupation. The New Zealand and Israeli governments may sign an innovation agreement that would see technology firms from both countries fast-tracked to receive funding from their respective government grants agencies. Far from bringing Israel to account for its violations of international law, outlined in UNSC Resolution 2334, the agreement would reward Israel, with both New Zealand and Israel jointly funding companies and universities in both countries, sharing research and information and engaging in joint ventures.

Palestine Solidarity Network spokesperson, Debbie Abbas, reminds us that in 2012, our SuperFund withdrew from some investments in Israeli companies because of Israel’s behaviour but now . . . we are backing off from the international legal consensus of making Israel accountable for its actions against Palestinian civilians, she says, adding that our Government has refused to provide a copy of a film production agreement made last year with Israel. She noted that Israel goes into these bilateral deals for political reasons, to make it appear there is business as usual and divert attention away from Israel’s apartheid structure. It’s a strategy not dissimilar to apartheid era South Africa when it used international sport to divert attention away from its repression of the black majority in South Africa.

Last June, Israel hosted an ISDEF military exhibition it claims is recognised as the summit of business and defence enterprises that are, for Israel, a top national priority. Israel is looking for military solidarity because, it claims, the strategic realities that Israel faces dictate the need for close co-operation, communication and innovation. Yet, as ISDEF’s mission statement also says, 86% of attendees have buying power making ISDEF a highly effective platform for rapid business growth. That is where wealth is directed, and that is how modern science and technology are being harnessed. Israel leads the world in population-control for profit and it would be nothing less than complicity if New Zealand were to ignore Israel’s intransigence regarding UNSC Resolution 2334 and take part in joint ventures.

Foreign policy

On 4 January 2017, the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade (MFAT) website carried the following announcement that began:

UN Security Council adopts historic resolution on Israeli settlements

The United Nations Security Council has reaffirmed that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace. In passing Resolution 2334, the Security Council reiterated its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard.

The announcement ended with a comment by New Zealand’s Permanent Representative, Gerard van Bohemen:

every settlement creates false hope for the settlers that the land will one day be part of a greater Israel. Every settlement takes land away from Palestinians needing homes or farmland or roads.

In anger at the UN Security Council approval of Resolution 2334, the Israeli Foreign Ministry has announced a determination to withhold US$6m from payments due to the United Nations.

In 1967, Theodor Meron, the Israeli Government’s chief legal adviser at the time, warned his government that, according to international law, a nation may not settle its citizens on land that it has gained by conquest to usurp the rights of the original residents.

The world’s most intractable conflict

The Balfour Declaration, the origin of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, has had many tragic consequences. The greatly increased support for the Zionist ideology led to the creation of Mandatory Palestine, which later became Israel and the Palestinian territories. The British Government’s lack of consideration for the indigenous Palestinian people was uncompromisingly expressed in the following remarks made by Balfour himself: . . . in Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country…. Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long traditions, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land………. In short, so far as Palestine is concerned, the Powers have made no statement of fact which is not admittedly wrong, and no declaration of policy which, at least in the letter, they have not always intended to violate.

Questions for Winston Peters and the incoming government:

On 3 July this year, New Zealand MPs were sent an email that drew attention to Israel’s criminal behaviour towards Palestinian children. Does Winston Peters accept that these gross violations of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, ratified by New Zealand on 13 March 1993, are a matter for world community concern?

On Wednesday morning, 28 June, the Israeli Occupation Army raided Jubbet al-Dhib, plundering the village of 96 solar panels and destroying items that were less easy to remove. They had all been donated by the Netherlands. The New York Times reported that the Dutch Foreign Affairs Ministry was furious. But there was nothing extraordinary about Israel’s conduct. Israel had similarly plundered the village of a solar-powered public lighting system in 2009. The purpose of the Zionist state’s military Occupation of the West Bank is not for the benefit of the Palestinian people, quite the reverse – Israel’s presence there is plainly malevolent and self-serving. Does Winston Peters believe that collaborating with Israel, even as it continues to behave thus, would in any way help to modify its behaviour?

Jubbet al-Dhib lies in the shadow of two illegal Israeli settlement colonies, El David and Noqedim. The Noqedim settlement is home to Israeli Defence Minister, Avigdor Lieberman. On top of these oppressive settlements, Palestinian villagers have to cope with the fanatical presence of a number of additional Israeli colonial outposts that exist in violation of both Israeli and international law. Nevertheless, the outposts still enjoy connection to the Israeli power grid and access to other Occupation infrastructure. Israel demolished more than 300 Palestinian buildings and infrastructure facilities in 2016. According to The Jerusalem Post, all of them had been installed with the support of international organisations or with the financial help of the European Union. The Israeli Government’s decision to prevent the use of solar energy technology in Jubbet al-Dhib can have only one purpose, and that is to increase the villagers’ suffering so that they will give up and leave their homes, thus making it easier to expand settlements. Does Winston Peters believe that Israel has any respect for the Palestinian people? We ask Mr Peters to please explain whether he approves or disapproves of Israel’s present and past behaviour.

Sanctions

Security Council Resolution 2334 passed 14-0. Now clearly isolated, Israel’s response was far from promising. Israeli PM Netanyahu expressed fury over UNSC 2334, threatening that: If you continue to promote this resolution from our point of view it will be a declaration of war. It will rupture the relations and there will be consequences. Netanyahu believes he can afford to be scornful because UN Resolution 2334 has no sanctions with which to call Israel to account. The Israeli Government did believe it had the right to impose sanctions of a sort upon New Zealand though because, after relenting a little following the withdrawal of its ambassador, the Israeli Embassy said, until further notice no more sanctions would be imposed against New Zealand.

MFAT has the following to say about UN sanctions:

Sanctions apply pressure to countries that threaten peace, have harmful policies or don’t co-operate with international law.

MFAT also informs us that:

Sanctions are a common measure that the United Nations Security Council takes to enforce its decisions. As a UN member, New Zealand is bound to follow the Security Council’s decisions. The United Nations Act 1946 means our Government can respond quickly where necessary and impose or remove sanctions when the Security Council makes a decision. While we don’t have standalone legislation to impose our own sanctions independently of the Security Council, we can impose other sanctions such as travel bans on people entering our country. We ask Winston Peters, in view of Israel’s determination to defy the world community, is he willing to support moves to request the Security Council to impose sanctions upon Israel until it ceases to violate international humanitarian law? And would New Zealand First consider the imposition of travel bans upon Israeli individuals responsible for committing such crimes? If not, would he please explain why not.

Remember that MFAT also declares:

The protection of human rights is fundamental to achieving peace and stability, and New Zealand is known for its work to promote human rights internationally.

As the New Zealand First Leader will see, included among the sources for the information provided for these questions are The New York Times and Israeli newspapers Haaretz and The Jerusalem Post. This is reality, not opinion. Mr Peters, would you deny that requiring the Palestinian people to negotiate with Israel while, at the same time, they remain subject to belligerent, military Occupation, actually amounts to coercion? If you do not accept that observation we ask you to explain your reasoning in terms of the Fourth Geneva Convention.

The passing of UNSC Resolution 2334 is a timely reminder that the Israeli Occupation of Palestine lies at the epicentre of the growing Middle East crisis. The continuing failure to bring Israel to account puts at risk the very survival of international law, peace and stability. Given New Zealand First’s declared position regarding UNSC Resolution 2334, are Labour and the Greens prepared to oppose any attempt by Winston Peters and New Zealand First to reverse New Zealand Government support for international humanitarian law and Resolution 2334?