15.1 C
Auckland
Tuesday, November 25, 2025

Contribute

Home Blog Page 1984

PSA Welcomes Progressive New Coalition Government

The Daily Blog
-
0

The Public Service Association warmly welcomes the 40th Prime Minister of New Zealand, Jacinda Ardern, and congratulates Labour, New Zealand First and the Green Party on the formation of a new Government.

“We’re looking at an exciting new progressive partnership between three parties that have campaigned on commitments to deal with the biggest issues affecting New Zealanders,” says Glenn Barclay, PSA national secretary.

“This Government has a real opportunity to tackle those issues head on, and to challenge the orthodoxy that has left many of our members feeling left behind over the last nine years.”

The PSA hopes for significant action from the new Government on issues key to its 64,000 members: slow wage rises and underfunding in the public sector, housing shortages and affordability issues, growing unmet need in the health system, and equal pay for women and those working in historically female-dominated industries.

“We’re looking forward to a real MMP partnership that brings together the best from each of the three parties and builds consensus both inside and outside of Parliament,” says Erin Polaczuk, PSA national secretary.

“We can choose to see the very real structural problems in our society as daunting, but I’m confident that our next Prime Minister has the experience and skill to see the task ahead as an opportunity to build a better country that benefits the many, not just the few.”

The PSA commends all of New Zealand’s political parties for their participation in the electoral process, and thanks its members for helping to set the agenda for politicians during the campaign by making their voices heard.

“We have always worked collaboratively with whoever is in power, and we intend to continue under the next Government – we will be advocating for our members, raising their issues and whenever possible, partnering with politicians on progressive solutions,” says Ms Polaczuk.

GUEST BLOG: Arthur Taylor – Prisoners react to Labour winning

The Daily Blog
-
3

Not since the Rugby World Cup have I heard a cheer as loud in the unit as when the new Labour government was announced last night . Nowhere is the difference between National & Labour as distinct as in justice and corrections policy. We have great expectations of Kelvin Davis in reforming the prisons along more humane lines.

 

Arthur Taylor is TDBs Prisoner Rights blogger who is currently in prison. 

New Zealand Democracy; looking backwards and forwards

Keith Rankin
-
2

The new government got off to a pretty good start – indeed a few minutes before it was announced – when Winston Peters indicated that its mission is no less than to humanise capitalism in New Zealand. This reminds us that Winston Peters is by far the most qualified person in this government to be Minister of Finance, and that it’s Finance Ministers that make or break governments.

The ‘make’ scenario is an exciting one; a programme to move on from neoliberalism without waiting for a new ‘great depression’ to precipitate such progress. Forward-looking people have to get behind that ambition, and not to undermine it by bringing austerity politics or identity politics to the fore.

On the ‘break’ scenario, we need to note that voters desert composite governments’ support parties. So, if Labour proves to be a weak link in the new government, it’s likely that both New Zealand First and Green will be ejected from Parliament in 2020, leaving only Labour and National and Seymour in parliament after 2020. That would be a very sad outcome for a country that has proved it likes to have genuinely independent parties in the Parliamentary mix (though not necessarily ‘at the table’). While few people voted for the independent Māori Party, many people regretted its passing.

In the United Kingdom in 2015, an unpopular Conservative-LiberalDemocrat government was replaced by a Conservative (Tory) government with a Parliamentary majority. The LibDems were punished (and the Tories rewarded) for the failings of the Tories.

National, under its veneer of acceptance, is quite bitter. Bill English noted that ‘only MMP’ could deny a 44% party the right to rule. Well National got 44% in 1987 and in 1957, and they were not able to rule in those pre-MMP years. In 1946 they even lost with 48% of the vote (but possibly only because the Labour government had removed the country quota). Labour also missed out on a number of occasions with 44% or more of the vote. We should never allow ourselves to believe that 44% is a mandate to rule.

Chris Trotter has varied in his views, from seeing a Labour government today as being a forerunner to a great Labour government in 2020, to showing concern about Labour’s austerian instincts. He said, to have a ‘1938’, you must first have a ‘1935’. But the context of 2017 is quite different to that of 1935. 1935 was a post-slump election. 2017 may be a pre-slump election. Indeed Winston Peters has signalled as much.

The years we can fruitfully look back to are 1928 and 1929. 1928 was the first New Zealand election in which Labour became a party to Government. The story is not as well known as it should be.

Before going back to that story, we should note that in 1929 Labour governments were elected in the United Kingdom and in Australia. (We should also not that the Great Depression is conventionally dated as 1930-34, though its severity was different at different times in different countries.) Neither Labour government lasted full term; like the New Zealand government, both of these fractured in 1931. In both of these cases – but for different reasons – the weak link was the Minister of Finance. In the United Kingdom, Philip Snowden became the Roger Douglas of his time. In Australia, Ted Theodore was a radical populist, who ‘frightened the horses’ big-time. In Australia, after 18 months of Labour, former Labour MP Joseph Lyons (the Peter Dunne of his day) led a competent but uninspiring United Australia Party into power for the rest of that decade. Australia missed out on the reforms associated with Labour in New Zealand in 1938. In the United Kingdom, Labour Prime Minister Ramsay McDonald in 1931 led the new ‘National’ (ie united) government, this time with a moderate Tory (Neville Chamberlain) as Chancellor of the Exchequer.

In New Zealand before the 1928 election, Reform (led by Gordon Coates) was the governing conservative party and Liberal (renamed United) should have been the Opposition. But Liberal was falling apart, and Labour leader Harry Holland (a traditional socialist) was Leader of the Opposition.  Liberal, led in 1925 by George Forbes, had been a lacklustre opponent to Reform and reform. Liberal ‘reinvented’ itself in 1927 by bringing back Joseph Ward (who had first been Finance Minister in 1893). New Zealand had had an early pre-depression depression in 1926 and 1927; voters were disillusioned with the Coates government.

Ward excited the electorate on the hustings in 1928, by promising a £70 million public works loan. (The story is that it was meant to be £7 million, but that Ward misread his speech notes. Thus Joseph Ward invented what the world now knows as Abenomics; governments must act as borrowers of last resort, and substantially so if necessary.) The hitherto moribund Liberal (United) party increased its vote from 21% to 30%. And, under ‘First Past the Post’, the seats rolled in. United (30% of the vote) got one more seat than Reform (36% of the vote).  (In 1919, when the voter percentages were very similar, Reform had vastly more seats. FPP indeed was a lottery.) United ‘won’ the election, and formed a government with Labour support on confidence and supply. Actually, 1929 wasn’t a bad year for New Zealand; the pre-depression depression was over.

The United and Labour match had been under strain however; United was more conservative than it had been in its Liberal heyday. Ward – not in good health – resigned as Prime Minister in May 1930. The rest of that party were conservative nobodies. The United-Labour ‘coalition’ (small-c) died in 1931, having lasted more than two years. It was replaced in mid-1931 by a United-Reform arrangement, with recycled United leader Forbes assuming the Prime Ministership. Forbes contested three elections as party leader. His party came third in all three (1925, 1931 and 1935).

In the 1931 election, Labour got more votes than any of the other parties (34%). But United and Reform had made electoral accommodations for each other. They went to the people as a Coalition (big-C); thus, they won. Forbes, having been Prime Minister for six months, was ‘re-elected’ as such, despite his party coming third in both votes and seats. (In mid-1931, Forbes also inherited Ward’s second role, Minister of Finance. So, in New Zealand as in Australia and United Kingdom in 1931, a Finance Minister – this time an incompetent one – broke a Labour-participating Government.) Forbes would continue as Prime Minister until 1935, even postponing the 1934 election by a year, ostensibly on account of the economic ’emergency’.

Winston Peters cannot be compared to George Forbes. Rather, although Peters has never been Prime Minister, he is a similar political character to Joseph Ward. Indeed Peters is the same age in 2017 that Ward was in 1928. The newly formed government now, in 2017, gives similar hope to basically the same sections of people as the new 1928 government did. Let’s hope that the end story this time will be more positive. The good news is that Peters’ health is clearly much better than Ward’s was.

Progressive governments have to be progressive to survive. And they have to reach out to constituencies much wider than their voter base. Ward had that reach, to some extent. Michael Joseph Savage had it, much more so. Harry Holland, Labour’s leader in 1928 and 1931, did not.

Juan and Evita Peron, in Argentina, also had ambition and reach. Elsewhere I have called New Zealand’s new government the “Peronista” option. The Perons burned out in the early 1950s; more excess than success. Like Ward, they made a comeback (Juan and Isabella Peron in the 1970s). Like Ward. I guess all will not be lost if his first stint in real power comes to a sudden halt. (Ward was personally bankrupt in 1896, and, as a result, resigned as Finance Minister. He got back up.)

If things turn really pear-shape for Jacinda Ardern in 2020 (or sooner) she could always make a comeback in 2051 (or even 2066 if Generation-Y women really do have the projected life-expectancy that some of our demographers claim) after many years in the political wilderness. In 2051 she will be younger than Winston Peters is today.

Let the interesting times begin.

Dark Transactions: Winston Peters Decision To “Go Left” Has Already Set His Enemies In Motion

Chris Trotter
-
76

IN ALL ECONOMIES, and in every political system, there are roped-off areas of shadow and hidden places swathed in deliberate darkness. In these light-starved locations all kinds of disreputable economic and political transactions take place.

If there’s one politician in New Zealand who is familiar, to the point of intimacy, with this unmapped and unacknowledged territory, it’s Winston Peters. The man who broke the Winebox Scandal; wheeled and dealed with the big fishing companies; wined and dined the princes of New Zealand’s bloodstock industry; and took private calls on secluded New Zealand beaches from the US Secretary of State; knows better than just about any other New Zealander how the business of this world gets done.

That Peters, with bitter personal experience of just how dark our politics can get, nevertheless persuaded NZ First to throw in its lot with Labour and the Greens, is astonishing. He must have known that the formation of a government unwilling to settle for “a modified status quo” but determined to usher in “real change”, would instantly mobilise all the initiators and beneficiaries of New Zealand’s neoliberal revolution against him.

Like Franklin Roosevelt before him, however, Peters appeared not to fear the enmity of the nation’s wealthiest and most powerful individuals and institutions, but to welcome it. Without the slightest hesitation, he lifted up the banner of resistance to the red-in-tooth-and-claw Capitalism that, since 1984, New Zealanders have grown to fear and detest:

“Far too many New Zealanders have come to view today’s capitalism, not as their friend, but as their foe. And they are not all wrong. That is why we believe that capitalism must regain its responsible – its human face. That perception has influenced our negotiations.”

Such an open declaration of war against the neoliberal establishment was bound to draw an equally belligerent response. And who better to lead the charge than one of the prime movers of the neoliberal revolution, Richard Prebble. Never one to mince words, Prebble began his opinion piece to the NZ Herald with the following, extraordinary, accusation:

“Let’s not beat about the bush: There has been a coup.

“The political scientists can tell us it’s legal but the fact remains – it is undemocratic. For the first time in our history who governs us is not the result of an election but the decision of one man.”

That there is not a word of truth in any of this (as Prebble, an experienced lawyer and politician must surely realise) matters much less than the deep emotional impression such an inflammatory charge is likely to make on all those New Zealanders bitterly disappointed to see the National Party denied the parliamentary majority it needed to remain in government.

What Prebble is setting up here is a politico-historical narrative alarmingly akin to the Dolchstosslegende – the “stab-in-the-back” legend concocted by far-right German nationalists to explain the Fatherland’s defeat in World War I. According to this “Big Lie”, the German army wasn’t defeated on the field of battle, but by the treachery of the “November Criminals” – Jews and Socialists – who signed, first, the armistice that ended the war, and then, the hated Treaty of Versailles, which imposed a Carthaginian peace on the German nation.

Prebble is nothing if not inventive – embellishing his delegitimising narrative with a vivid political metaphor drawn from Japanese history:

“New Zealand is now a Shogunate. In Japan the Emperor had the title and the Shogun had all the power.

“Jacinda has Premier House and Shogun Peters sets the policies.”

This is highly sophisticated political writing. Not only is Peters cast as the new government’s eminence grise, the power behind the throne, but the status of Jacinda Ardern, New Zealand’s new Prime Minister, is also reduced to that of a naïve puppet. It is “Shogun Peters” who gets to wield the real power.

As if Prebble’s historical musings weren’t insulting enough in themselves, they are heavy with an additional, if unspoken, menace. Those familiar with modern Japanese history know that in 1868 the Shogunate was overthrown by forces determined to restore the power of the Emperor by making him Japan’s ruler in fact as well as in name. In other words, although Peters is in no way guilty of staging a coup, Prebble, himself, is implying that should the new Labour-NZ First-Green Government be successful in installing an anti-neoliberal “shogunate”, a restorative coup-d’etat may be in order.

Prebble is quite explicit about how such coup might begin:

“I predict bureaucratic opposition to this government will be significant. It will start leaking from day one. Everyone knows this coalition of losers has no mandate to implement Winston Peters’ interventionist policies.”

None of this will come as any surprise to Peters. He has had to weather similar attacks many times before in his political career. To Jacinda Ardern and James Shaw, however, such reckless mendacity is likely to be received with a mixture of alarm and dismay. Both leaders are going to need Peters hard-won knowledge of how New Zealand’s “Deep State” operates if they are to mount an effective defence against the Neoliberal Establishment’s dark transactions.

And not only Peters’ protection will be needed. Every progressive New Zealander who understands the magnitude of the fight which Peters’, Ardern’s and Shaw’s decision to pursue “real change” has made inevitable, must be prepared to come to the aid of the three parties – Labour, NZ First and the Greens – which have committed themselves to fulfilling the hopes and dreams of the 50.4 percent of the New Zealand electorate who voted for them.

Political Caption Competition

The Daily Blog
-
12

The Daily Blog Open Mic – Saturday 21st October 2017

The Daily Blog
-
3

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.  

What I want from a Labour/NZ First/Green Government

Mike Treen
-
13
First I want to congratulate myself that my prediction two weeks ago that Winston Peters and NZ First would choose to do with Labour has proved correct.
Of course, when there are only two choices the chances are quite high of being correct.
However, it was a judgement, not a guess. I tried to put myself into the shoes of Winston Peters, the politician and party leader, and think like I thought he actually would – not as I wanted him to think.
I am glad I have been proved right.
In the short term at least there is more chance of squeezing some small concessions in some areas that will advance the position of the low paid workers that I represent.
In particular, we want to push the minimum wage up from just over half the average wage to two-thirds of the average wage which is about $20 an hour in today’s dollars. Winston has said he wants that number to be reached by the end of the first three-year term. Labour and the Green’s both also officially support the goal of two-thirds of the average wage although Labour had the escape clause of “if economic conditions permit”. There is a good chance we will be close to that number within three years.
The current level of the minimum wage is $15.75 an hour. To go up to $20 an hour in three years is an increase of $4.25 or $1.42 an hour each year. That is almost double the 75 cents an hour increase being promised by Labour in the first year. Let us hope a more ambitious goal becomes part of the deal that has been done with NZ First and the Greens.
The other changes I think the union movement should concentrate on are those that strengthen our ability to organise working people.
It was one of the mad failures of the nine-years of the last Labour-led government that union membership density as a percentage of the working class was lower at the end than the beginning. The changes to industrial and other laws were too inconsequential to allow unions to grow easily – especially in the private sector which covers fewer than 10% of the private sector workforce. The goal should be to double or treble that percentage.
To do that we need tools t allow us to do the job more effectively. Much of the current policy Labour has put forward in the industrial relations sphere is simply rolling back the negative changes made by National. This is welcome but insufficient. As I said no real progress was made under the old regime before those changes so more needs to be done.
I am not sure that the policy of Labour for new “Industry Standards” will do that. This may establish better minimum employment standards in certain industries but I want changes that help strengthen unions to do that job.
I have sixteen simple and practical actions based on Unite Union’s organising experience that could be done easily and quickly that would make our work a hell of a lot easier. They are “reasonable” in the sense that right-wingers would find it hard to argue against them. I know that with these changes unions could organise hundreds of thousands more workers into unions and they could use their collective power to significantly improve their lives.
Some small changes that we could use to rebuild working class power in Aotearoa/NZ
1) All employees should have a clear choice to join a collective agreement and the union when being employed by a company where a collective agreement exists. This needs to be a single form that all employees must complete that is an “either/or” option. If the employee elects to become a union member the employer must process the form as a membership application and deduct fees. The employer must also forward the employee’s contact details to the relevant union. Where there is no collective agreement employees should have the choice of applying to join a union that is responsible for that industry. Application forms should be forwarded to the appropriate union.
2) Promote Multi-Employer Collective Agreements (MECA). Where a union initiates for a MECA the employers must meet within two weeks and appoint a bargaining team and an advocate. The advocate and team must make themselves available to meet and bargain in good faith within 30 days. When there has been a failure to conclude a collective agreement where bargaining has become protracted or a breach of good faith has occurred the union party can ask to attend facilitation through the Authority. If an agreement still cannot be reached by the parties the union can request that the Authority member to make a determination on the issues in dispute to conclude the collective agreement.
3) Master Franchise holder shall be deemed to be the employer party for all employers that operate as sub-franchisees.
4) An employee has the right to take a personal grievance against a  party who is not the direct employer which has caused unjustified disadvantage, discrimination, harassment, bullying and unjustified dismissal. For example, when a security guard loses their job because the company they have been assigned to objects to their continued presence on a site.
5) An IEA has a maximum term of 2 years and the employer must propose changes in advance and meet with each employee in good faith to discuss and give the employee the opportunity make proposals. If the matters are unresolved the employee can access mediation services to assist any unresolved issues. Alternatively, the employer may choose to put the employee on the same terms and conditions as the collective agreement without individual bargaining for the payment of an agreed fee to the union.
6) Unions have the right to communicate with their members including access to a union-controlled noticeboard in a workplace that has members of the relevant union.
7) At the union’s request, the employer must provide a list of all employees, their work locations and positions and facilitate the unmonitored access of those employees by union representatives, including adequate meeting facilities. If an employee does not wish to meet the union representative, the employee needs to communicate directly with the union representative. The initial meeting with employees who are not members of the union shall have a reasonable time, not less 15 minutes, to discuss membership of the union.
8) Union access to union members can be conducted individually or collectively. Collective discussions need be facilitated to allow members of the union to fully engage in the meeting. Wherever practical the union meeting can be in the workplace concerned.
9) All employers must allow deduction of union fees from pay. (At present there is an exemption where it is stipulated in an employment agreement that there is no deduction allowed. This is used by labour-hire companies.)
10) Regular patterns of work shall be deemed to be agreed hours of work unless there are genuine reasons based on reasonable grounds for the regular pattern of work to not to be recognised.
12) Part 6A (transfer of undertakings) rights provided under this section to be extended to all employees.
13) The pay and conditions of workers supplied by Labour-Hire companies shall not be less than that paid by the employer to which labour is being supplied.
14) All Labour Inspector powers and penalties should be available to workers/unions/at the ERA.
15) Stop migrant workers visas being tied to their jobs, or an amnesty to find another when exploited. Migrant worker employment agreements to be lodged with MBIE and all wages paid directly to a bank account.
16) There are also there issues of broader working class rights that could be done to bring this country into the 21st Century that would also be hard for right-wingers to argue against.
– Overtime rates of time and a half shall apply to all hours worked in excess of 8 hours a day or 40 in a week.
– Sick Leave increased to 10 days
– Redundancy pay of at least “4&2” to be a legal right

A breath of (almost fresh) air

John Minto
-
22

The most interesting aspect of Winston Peter’s announcement of a coalition deal with Labour was his acknowledgement that capitalism had become the enemy of so many people. He said he wants a government of change which, among other things, will do something real about poverty.

That’s very good news for the new government because while Jacinda Ardern has talked the talk on poverty and inequality she didn’t bring any new policies into the election campaign which would have made a significant difference. In fact she backed down on even considering a capital gains tax for at least another three years. Her “captain’s call” was to cut the opportunity for a fairer tax system which would take the heavy tax burden from the poor and shift it to the feckless rich who don’t pay tax.

She compounded the idea she didn’t really stand for change by surrounding herself with the likes of Michael Cullen and Annette King during the campaign and in coalition negotiations.

These are the people who, despite nine years of strong economic growth and big budget surpluses, left 175,000 children in poverty when Labour lost the 2008 election.

In his (probably) last term as an MP. Winston Peters has returned to his economic roots. He came into parliament as a young MP when Muldoon was at the height of his powers. He was Muldoon’s protégé. Muldoon, despite the fact half the country hated him with a deep passion, fended off the new right within National and refused to implement economic policies he knew would increase poverty and inequality.

Labour unfortunately was captured by the new right in 1984 and the rest is a history which continues to repeat within the party and its policies.

It seems to me Winston Peters could well be the driver of policies to reduce poverty and inequality. Muldoon – despite his conservative, anti-women and anti-union attitudes – would have approved.

RIP Neo-Liberalism in New Zealand: 1984 – 2017

Frank Macskasy
-
55

.

.

Peters has called it: NZ First will go into coalition with Labour-Greens.

In reality, it was the only decision he could possibly make.

Firstly, National has a scary reputation for devouring it’s coalition partners:

  • Peter Dunne – falling electoral support at each election until he faced a potentially humiliating defeat by Labour’s Greg O’Connor. Instead, he chose to resign and leave Parliament voluntarily rather than being turfed out by the voters of Ōhāriu.
  • ACT/David Seymour – a shadow of it’s hey-day in 2002, when it had nine MPs, it is currently hooked up to perpetual political life-support. Seymour is  tolerated by the Nats as a cute mascot rather than as a useful partner. No one has the heart to flick the “off” switch to end Seymour’s tenacious grip on parliamentary life.
  • The Maori  Party – it’s close alliance with successive National governments took it from five seats in 2008 to losing everything at this election. Coalition with the Tories was the proverbial “kiss of death” for the Maori Party.

NZ First has dodged that party-killing-bullet by declining to join with the National ‘Black Widow’ Party.

Secondly, a National-NZ First Coalition would have meant taking on the baggage of failed policies; knee-jerk rush from crisis-to-crisis,   and bad headlines from the last nine years of mis-management from the Key-English Administration;

  • increasingly polluted waterways
  • families living in cars
  • under-funded health system
  • stretched mental health services
  • increasingly unaffordable housing
  • rising greenhouse gas emissions
  • low wages
  • economic growth predicated on housing speculation and immigration
  • etc, etc, etc.

A coalition with National would have meant taking ownership of nine years of worsening statistics and bleak media headlines.

How would that benefit NZ First? The answer is self-evident.

National has had nine years to address the critical problems confronting us as a nation. The sight of families with children living in cars or rivers that are toxic with urban and rural pollution and unfit to swim in is not the New Zealand we wanted to leave future generations. Yet that is precisely the legacy bequeathed by the Nats and their neo-liberal, market-driven ideology. That would have been the poisoned chalice from which Peters would have supped from.

As Shakespeare might  have said, “fuck that shit!”

A coalition with Labour and the Greens offers a fresh start. It puts NZ First into a brand new government, with a fresh  leadership, new ideas, and none of the baggage offered by a tired government that had simply run out of ideas.

It also accords Winston Peters with the legacy he sought: the Kingmaker who put the sword to thirtythree years of the neo-liberal experiment.

The nightmare of Roger Douglas and Ruth Richardson is over. Neo-liberalism is dead.

Thank you, Winston Peters.

And as I promised: I offer my apologies for doubting that you would make the right decision. This is one of those occasions where I am happy to have been proven 100% wrong.

.

.

.

Related blogposts

Once Upon a Time in Mainstream Media Fairytale Land

An Open Letter To Winston Peters

.

 

.

.

.

.

= fs =

Political Caption Competition

The Daily Blog
-
14

The Daily Blog Open Mic – Friday 20th October 2017

The Daily Blog
-
7

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.  

ALRANZ Welcomes Promise of Law Reform under Labour

The Daily Blog
-
0

ALRANZ welcomes the announcement this afternoon of a Labour-led coalition forming the next government. During the campaign, Labour leader, now Prime Minister-elect Jacinda Ardern pledged to decriminalise abortion in New Zealand, saying pregnant people should have access to abortion as a matter of right.

ALRANZ National President Terry Bellamak said abortion law reform has been a long time coming.

“Pregnant people in New Zealand have suffered under our ridiculous abortion bureaucracy for too long. After forty years of scrambling to get the approval of certifying consultants, and being forced to lie about the fragility of their mental health so they can access the medical care they need, finally Kiwis can see the light at the end of the tunnel.

“Abortion is a safe medical procedure that one in four Kiwi women access at some point in their reproductive lives. Abortion is health care. It has never belonged in the Crimes Act. We look forward to the coming discussion on reforming the law.

“It is vital Parliament carries out the task of abortion law reform in a manner that is evidence-based and patient-focused.”

Under New Zealand’s abortion laws, two certifying consultants must approve every abortion under a narrow set of grounds set out in the Crimes Act. Those grounds do not include rape, nor the most common reasons cited overseas: contraception failure and the inability to support a child.

Poll results show a majority of New Zealanders support the right to access abortion on request.

Students congratulate Labour-led Government – NZUSA

The Daily Blog
-
0

The New Zealand Union of Students’ Associations (NZUSA) says that student issues should be a top priority in the first 100 days of the new Labour-led Government.

‘We congratulate the New Zealand Labour Party on forming a Government with New Zealand First and the Greens. All three parties have pledged increases in student financial support and free tertiary education, and we look forward to seeing that become a reality’, says National President Jonathan Gee.

Prime Minister-elect Jacinda Ardern pledged to introduce one free year of tertiary study and a $50 raise to allowances and living costs from 2018 if elected. NZ First’s Up Front Investment policy introduces free tertiary education, a universal living allowance and student loan debt write-off for those who work in New Zealand. The Greens’ policy introduces free off-peak public transport and universal postgraduate allowances for students.

Although NZUSA is resolutely non-partisan, and works with all parties, students overwhelmingly supported the policies of the new coalition. Students cast over 70% of their votes at on-campus voting booths for one of Labour, Greens or NZ First. They naturally expect to see what they were promised delivered.

‘These policies are good for students, and good for the country. We all benefit from greater participation and support in tertiary education, through producing New Zealanders who are well-placed to succeed in their careers and make a positive contribution to society.’

NZUSA looks forward to working with the incoming Government, and incoming Minister of Tertiary Education, to achieve a barrier-free education for all New Zealanders.

‘Over the next parliamentary term we will be working hard to ensure this Government makes continued progress on improving the lives of students. This includes financial support, but also healthier homes, addressing the stresses affecting students’ mental health, and taking action on grand challenges such as climate change.’

Feds ready to engage new coalition government – Federated Farmers

The Daily Blog
-
3

Federated Farmers says it is ready to engage and work with the new coalition government.

New Zealand First has chosen to go into partnership with Labour and the Greens for the next three years and the Federation believes there is room of opportunism for its’ members, wider primary sector, and all New Zealanders.

“We congratulate new Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and the coalition partners on finding a consensus to lead the country,” says Katie Milne, Federated Farmers National President.

“Federated Farmers is looking forward to getting around the table and talking about the issues which affect our members and farmers. The primary sector is the backbone of the New Zealand economy so we anticipate the new government will be mindful of that when formulating policy.”

Katie says it was time to cast aside the division which fuelled the election campaign and remember that the country’s future prosperity and economic health depended on all New Zealanders sharing a common ground.

“Whether you’re a townie or cockie when it comes down to it, we all have the same hopes and aspirations for our families and communities. Let’s give the new government a chance and let’s hope they can make decisions based on unity and mutual trust.”

The Federation was willing to share its industry influence, expertise and insight with the new government and is encouraging members and farmers to look ahead with a positive outlook.

“There’s undoubtedly challenges ahead for those tasked with governing the country. One thing the new government can be sure of is; Federated Farmers is ready to play its part as a primary sector leader and voice of New Zealand farming,” says Katie.

Campaign is over, now the real work begins – CTU

The Daily Blog
-
0

“On behalf of working people, I can say how excited we are to have a coalition Government who have committed to lifting incomes, to women actually getting equal pay and to ending poverty in New Zealand” said CTU Secretary, Sam Huggard.

“New Zealand asked for a different approach, and we’re confident that Labour, New Zealand First and the Green Party can deliver a fairer, more equal country with a better quality of life for all.”

“Let’s not kid ourselves, as well as a fiscal deficit, there is a social and infrastructure deficit after 9 years of austerity. It might not be properly measured, but it’s visible in the state of our housing, our rivers and stagnant productivity in our workplaces.

The high election turn-out was a sign that New Zealand is re-energised by a change to our political landscape. Working people finally have hope that their time and energy will be better valued by those in power.”

Chamber welcomes the Labour-NZ First negotiation outcome

The Daily Blog
-
2

The Wellington Chamber of Commerce welcomes the outcome of the negotiations to form the new government, and congratulates Labour, says Wellington Chamber of Commerce Chief Executive John Milford.

“Throughout the election campaign the Chamber has been an advocate on three key issues the business community would like addressed: a skills and talent pipeline that delivers for employers, building infrastructure to ensure resilience and growth, and ensuring the right platform for business by reducing red tape.

“These are vital issues for the Wellington regional and wider New Zealand economy.

“The incoming government must ensure that New Zealand remains open for business as a trading nation. It must remain committed to free trade, including the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, and it must remain open to investment.

“Businesses are wary of the impact of anything that could tip the balance in their cost structure, such as changes in infrastructure costs, taxes on water, increases in power prices, obstruction of the flow of immigrants, or increases in labour costs and disruptions.

“While we have some reservations about the impact of Labour’s immigration, trade, and employment relations policies, we welcome the beginning of a conversation with the new government to ensure we get the outcomes that New Zealand needs. We trust that pragmatic dialogue will trump ideological rhetoric.

“We will watch over the coming days as the details of vital policies, ministerial positions and the final government arrangements are announced.

“There are also other local issues that the Chamber is keen to pursue, and we welcome commencement of a conversation on these. The Chamber will continue to advocate on our members’ behalf to ensure a strong platform for business to invest grow and employ.

“It is timely to acknowledge the outgoing National Government. They have done a great job over nine years, getting us through the Global Financial Crisis and the Canterbury earthquakes and delivering one of the strongest economies in the world.”

1...1,9831,9841,985...2,410Page 1,984 of 2,410