n a rare live speech from the Oval Office Sunday night, President Obama called Wednesday’s mass shooting in San Bernardino, California, an act of terrorism. The shooting killed 14 people at the Inland Regional Center, a facility that provides services to people with disabilities. Obama said, in response, he would increase airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, even though he acknowledged there was “no evidence” that ISIS had directed the attack.
President Obama: “So far, we have no evidence that the killers were directed by a terrorist organization overseas or that they were part of a broader conspiracy here at home.”
Obama also cautioned against Islamophobia and vowed not to get pulled into a ground war in Iraq or Syria.
President Obama: “We should not be drawn once more into a long and costly ground war in Iraq or Syria. That’s what groups like ISIL want.”
The ministry runs employment mediation services from seven centres nationwide.
In October, RNZ reported the pending restructure would result in the dispute resolution centres in Napier, Dunedin and Palmerston North being axed.
The ministry said a review has shown the location of its centres did not always correspond to demand.
The proposal said permanent employee mediators will continue in Auckland, Hamilton, Wellington and Christchurch, while contractors will cover the regions.
Labour Party economic development spokesperson David Clark said the ministry’s plans were economically reckless.
Dr Clark said New Zealanders in the regions deserved the same level of service as those in urban centres.
Beijing has issued its first pollution red alert as acrid smog enveloped the Chinese capital for the second time this month.
The alert will begin at 7am on Tuesday and should see millions of vehicles forced off the roads, factories and construction sites shut down and schools and nurseries advised to close.
“It is history – this is a precedent set,” said Ma Jun, director of the Institute of Public an Environmental Affairs in Beijing. “This is extremely important to stop children from being exposed to such a high level of pollution.”
Chinese authorities faced fierce criticism last week when they failed to issue a red alert even as Beijing’s residents choked on smog levels that in some areas rose to 40 times those considered safe by the World Health Organisation.
Major defense contractors Raytheon, Oshkosh, and Lockheed Martin assured investors at a Credit Suisse conference in West Palm Beach this week that they stand to gain from the escalating conflicts in the Middle East.
Lockheed Martin Executive Vice President Bruce Tanner told the conference his company will see “indirect benefits” from the war in Syria, citing the Turkish military’s recent decision to shoot down a Russian warplane.
The incident, Tanner said, heightens the risk for U.S. military operations in the region, providing “an intangible lift because of the dynamics of that environment and our products in theater.” He also stressed that the Russian intervention would highlight the need for Lockheed Martin-made F-22s and the new F-35 jets.
And for “expendable” products, such as a rockets, Tanner added that there is increased demand, including from the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia because of the war in Yemen.
A series of air strikes killed three Syrian soldiers in the country’s east, Syria’s government said on Monday, accusing the US-led coalition of responsibility for the attack.
The US military denied any involvement.
If confirmed, it would be the first time coalition warplanes had hit Syrian government forces.
Air strikes hit the Saeqa military camp near the town of Ayyash in Deir Ez Zor province, according to the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights monitoring group. The observatory earlier reported that four soldiers were killed.
It was impossible to confirm which of the many air forces operating in the country was responsible for the attack.
The area is largely under the control of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), and the US-led coalition has regularly targeted the group in the eastern province.
Syria’s air force is active in the region and its ally Russia also began launching strikes in the country in late September.
Syria’s foreign ministry said on Monday four fighter jets from the US-led coalition targeted a Syrian army camp with nine missiles – killing three soldiers and wounding 13 others.
As TDB suggested, Crusher Colins replaces Serco Sam.
The ironies of Crusher Collins being allowed to become Minister of Corrections are numerous.
How can someone who was associated to a conspiracy to attack the head of the Serious Fraud Office become the Minister of Corrections? How can the Minister who started Secro actually stop them now and how can a Minister who was so deeply involved in Dirty Politics be trusted to be in charge of the Police?
Judith Collins and blogger Cameron Slater appeared to have frequent contact over the entire time she served in John Key’s Cabinet, according to electronic files obtained by the hacker Rawshark.
The Herald has seen email records which appear to cover 2009 through to 2014.
The files purport to include a discussion about the editing of Mrs Collins’ Wikipedia page with the then-minister sending Slater a new image with the note: “Cam, any chance of a better photo going up?? Eek it looks really bad.”
The records and the level of detail in the records are a stark contrast to earlier claims Ms Collins and Slater made about Facebook conversations being faked.
Ms Collins said the previously released information were “likely forgeries” and threatened a complaint to the police. Police have confirmed no complaint has yet been made — and Ms Collins has not responded to subsequent inquiries from the Herald.
Requests to Slater resulted only in an obscenity.
The information supplied to the Herald by the hacker Rawshark show a range of contact, from personal messages to discussion about government information – and appear to include incidences in which Ms Collins passed on information which Slater then used to attack political opponents.
Nicky Hager’s book Dirty Politics, based on the hacked exchanges, allege the National Party used Whaleoil to carry out “attack politics” to drive others out of the debate.
Instances include the mocking of NZ First leader Winston Peters in February 2012, after he raised questions in Parliament about spending by the Department of Corrections.
Mr Peters tabled a letter in Parliament shortly before 3pm — but by 3.42pm the letter was on the Whaleoil blog. That day, the hacker’s collections of records shows Ms Collins sent Slater the “document tabled by Rt Hon Winston Peters in House”.
Slater’s commentary on the blog post — one of a number that day — made derogatory comments about Peters.
Ms Collins also appears to have sent to Slater an email she received from Labour’s Trevor Mallard. The email had been sent accidentally by Mr Mallard using “reply all” when responding to someone who had emailed dozens of MPs.
Ms Collins sent it on to Slater with the subject line: “Note to self Trev, don’t reply to all.” It appeared on Slater’s site with the headline: “Note to self trev, don’t hit reply to all,” poking fun at a perceived lack of technical ability.
In September 2013, Slater received another misfired email meant for Labour MPs which had gone to Cabinet minister Amy Adams. It appears to have been copied, sent to Ms Collins and then to Slater who used it to make fun of the party’s new leader David Cunliffe.
The records also show discussion about information which could be obtained under the Official Information Act.
Questions have already been asked about two other OIA requests made by Slater. There is an inquiry into a fast-tracked release of information from the Security Intelligence Service. In a separate release, Slater was sent a letter from David Bain’s first lawyer containing damaging allegations against his former client by Ms Collins’ office on the same day it was received.
The Herald’s review of material appear to show other discussions about the OIA.
In 2009, while Ms Collins was Corrections minister, she appears to have told Slater “re the OIA” that she had been ” alerted to the fact that Corrections domestic travel seemed very high”.
In November 2010, Slater is said to have asked Collins: “Any news on those dates for my OIA? Really want to catch those Labour guys out.”
In September the following year, according to the Facebook records questioned by Ms Collins and Slater, she was asked by the blogger: “Have you got those details for my OIA about annette’s briefings.”
The records also appear to show Slater’s contact was not just with Ms Collins. In June 2010, the blogger, Ms Collins and then-press secretary Stefan Herrick appear to have been part of an email chain discussing the prospect of gaining early access to Ministerial expenses.
Other staff were also brought in during Slater’s work on behalf of a Russian immigrant couple. Through 2010, Slater appears to have passed on references to Ms Collins, handled inquiries from her on their behalf and also arranged a meeting with her through the blogger.
News events were discussed — Ms Collins appears to have sent on press releases and links to news articles. In March 2010, the Herald ran a story about a mother’s heartbreak after her baby drowned during a bath. The following day’s story, which stated the mother had been visited by CYFS, saw an email purporting to be from Ms Collins to Slater saying: “How embarrassing for nzherald.”
Correspondence seems to have been occasionally driven by press releases. One from the NZ Maori internet Society in late 2013 had Ms Collins purportedly ask Slater: “So how is Maori internet different from the rest of our internet.”
There were apparently also jokes at the expense of the Opposition, who were often called by their nicknames. In August 2010, Ms Collins appears to have told Slater “Pluggie (Clayton Cosgrove) now beaten up by Geoff Robinson”, sending on a Radio NZ link to an interview with the Labour police spokesman.
…that’s our new Minister of Corrections. Put aside working with a crypto-facist for a moment and also add…
– Using her position as part of the Government to lobby a Chinese border-control official for preferential access to a premium export market for her husband’s company;
Toby Manhire has managed to articulate the end of the year horror from a liberal perspective perfectly…
As far as political drama is concerned, 2015 has felt like a thudding bloody hangover. The election of 2014 was an unprecedented, unimaginable binge on every available intoxicant, a blurred phantasmagoria of a campaign, peopled by unhinged attack bloggers, outlaw internet tycoons and even – down one of the psychedelic side-alleys – Eminem.
After the brief March excitements of the Northland byelection – hair of the dog, call it – it’s been one of the years where you want to nurse your exhausted self under the duvet, watching boxset television, occasionally recalling things that seem barely plausible. Edward Snowden live from Russia on the big screen in the Auckland Town Hall? Surely not
The 2015 hangover has been painful, too: a half-sleeping fever dream filled with blasts of garish, headache-inducing colours waved in your face, as if there were some sort of malevolent, ceaseless amateur flag design contest under way.
…I still can’t dream in colour since the 2014 loss. The sudden impact of knowing the majority of those who bothered voting rallied to the political sadism of Key makes you feel like a stranger in your own home.
I had no idea inflated housing valuations could excuse so much.
2015 has been a year of full spectrum dominance for the National Party. Privatisation of social services are now at full speed. Private Prisons, Charter Schools and State House sales are being ramped up while CYFs, Health and Local Councils are next on the chopping block.
As the economy continues to tank, unemployment climb and the property bubble expand at an eye watering pace, National’s ability to con NZers that the nations budget is the same as the household budget means cutting back on social services by privatising them becomes an obvious solution.
TINA (there is no alternative) becomes TIOA (there is obvious alternative).
Renters, Maori, beneficiaries, prisoners, students, women, the poor, refugees, NZers in Australian Detention, 305 000 kids in poverty and the 5.9% unemployed were all left behind by National this year while the property speculators, the corporates who benefit from the TPPA, Serco, Charter schools and the rich prospered as luxuriously as John Key’s son on Spring Break.
The harshest blow was reserved for those who held the Government to account. 2015 was the Year of Silencing Journalists.
Nicky Hager had his home raided and his rights abused.
Campbell Live was killed off for politically motivated reasons
Dita De Boni and 3D were axed
Resignations from Native Affairs s for editorial interference
Jon Stephenson’s out of court settlement with the NZDF who had defamed him to weaken his criticisms of the SAS in Afghanistan.
Bradley Ambrose’s defamation case against the PM.
By losing so many critical voices on broad media platforms lessens the quality of our democracy and makes it far easier to manipulate the electorate. When our watchdogs are lapdogs, a Government can push through anything.
Without further ado, here are TDB’s political and media awards 2015.
Worst Current Affairs Panel: The Nation & Paul Henry
On The Nation, they have a remarkable talent of selecting really weak representatives of the left wing and put them up against really strong commentators on the right. It’s about as fair as a 3 year old baby facing off against Art Green in the boxing ring. Paul Henry on the other hand only has 3 left wing people on his panel in an entire month of shows so its a tie between the unbalanced and nonexistant.
Fran O’Sullivan, hardly a card carrying member of the Communist Party, acknowledges that ending Campbell Live was politically motivated…
Campbell Live’s producers — and the MediaWorks news hierarchy — have stood staunchly by their star during the periods of occasional outright Government hostility.
But with new management at MediaWorks, the driving considerations have changed. Within the senior commercial world, it is said that when Mark Weldon applied for the top job at MediaWorks he drew on his relationship with Key and the public-spirited work he did outside of his prior role as chief executive of the stock exchange such as chairing an economic summit after the GFC to help build credibility for a role in a sector in which he had no prior experience.
He was also passionate about the role media could play in ensuring success of the broader New Zealand Inc.
The issue is whether his strong — and very loyal — relationship with Key has clouded his view as to the extent to which a strong media protagonist like Campbell should challenge a personal friend.
There will be those who claim this is just commercial. Seeing the huge amount of help the Government has given this private foreign owned media company, and seeing the dominance lax media regulation has given MediaWorks in our media landscape, one would argue their obligation to providing a critical fourth estate is higher to us than their profit share for their corporate overlords.
The neoliberalism Weldon aspires to demands the public broadcasting sphere is splintered and fractured so individualism and fake choice kill off any actual critical space that threatens to highlight the inequalities that choke democracy. Corporate Feudalism requires the next generation are brainless consumers, not aware citizens.
“We put news on, but only because it rates. And we sell advertising around news. This is what this is all about.”
Not, ‘we put on news because it’s a fundamental part of our fourth estate responsibilities to the free democracy we enjoy’, oh no. We just put it on to rate, so TV3 would then presumably play to the bigotry and ignorance of the largest percentage of that audience to make money right?
The network bosses decision to give Weldon another year’s contract after the meltdown that has become Scout suggests a level of management at a Titanic magnitude. Story has failed to rate, Paul Henry has failed to rate and their current affairs is seen as a joke. MediaWorks are a candidate for self-mutilation of the year.
Worst Journalist 2015: Rachel Glucina
This was Amanda Bailey’s comment to Rachel Glucina’s exclusive scoop for the NZ Herald the day after her blog on the Prime Minister touching her was posted on TDB…
Earlier today, in good faith, I agreed to meet with my employers to address a side of this I hadn’t previously considered in too much detail, besides the obvious nuisance of reporters – the speculation that they failed to take appropriate action to protect me in my place of work. They asked me to meet with them at their home and join a conversation, via speaker-phone, with a concerned friend of theirs who worked in Public Relations. Their friend, Rachel, was concerned with how seriously this would effect their business, and wanted a better understanding of the situation, so that, together, we could proof and agree upon a statement to be released to the media by my employers themselves. A statement clarifying that I took issue with John’s behaviour, and that only, and not with them as my employers; that I had no intention of claiming any negligence on their part. We agreed that it would also be good to have a photo together to show that we had a good relationship and harboured no ill feelings, and for this sole purpose only.
Out of respect for my employers, and what seemed like their genuine concern for my well-being along with the future of their business (a business doing good things which I fully support), they introduced me to Rachel, by name as the employee behind the story, and Rachel said she would put together a statement for us to proof. We then waited for the e-mail she had promised so that we could look over what she had penned and discuss it further. Eventually a final statement would be agreed upon and my employers would personally forward that to any media. We waited. And waited. And waited. Questions were asked of me by Rachel, under the guise of a Public Relations expert working confidentially for my employer, and all responses given were with the effect of trying to separate clearly that the issue was a personal issue (personal, not political) with the way I had been treated by John, and not at all an issue with my employers, or their management of the situation, which they had not even been made aware of prior to Wednesday. ALL ANSWERS WERE GIVEN TO THE EFFECT OF TRYING TO HIGHLIGHT THIS DIFFERENCE.
As we waited for Rachel to e-mail the draft proof one of my employers read aloud to the other Rachel’s e-mail address. It began… RACHEL.GLUCINA and alarm bells went off. Sounded familiar, and I felt sick to my stomach – more than you’d ever imagine, a feeling I simply could not ignore. I gave in to my instinct and googled the name on my phone and one of the leading headlines that came up read “Who is Rachel Glucina and why is John Key always phoning her up?”. I questioned my employers over her name and they admitted that, yes, she works for the New Zealand Herald, but she was doing this as a favour for them for their personal use and not in her capacity as a journalist. I asked how well they knew her, if they trusted her, and they claimed they were confident in their judgement of her character, yet everything about this felt so so wrong. Rachel contacted them again and we expressed that I felt extremely uncomfortable with the discussions that had taken place as any comments I had made were made in confidence and good faith under the understanding that I was discussing an employment issue with a public relations specialist and had absolutely no knowledge whatsoever that the person my employers had requested I speak with, who was so determinedly trying to put the word “political” in my mouth, was a “feared” and “loathed” journalist from the New Zealand Herald.
Rachel’s story changed. RAPIDLY. Now she couldn’t possibly supply us with a proof because she would lose her job. She was absolutely acting in her capacity as a journalist for the New Zealand Herald and claimed that my employers had known all along, which they denied. I made it absolutely clear that all and any comments I had made were given under false pretences, not to mention completely out of context, and questioned whether her supposed story would still be published if I withheld my permission. Rachel simply responded that she would come back to us and read to us what was to be published, although she had no control over editors and sub-editors, and that she had to get in touch with the Prime Ministers office, and then they quickly ended the conversation. I later contacted my employers reiterating that I revoked any permission to use my photo or comments for any press release, and my disappointment that I had been mislead to such a gross degree whilst having my identity knowingly confirmed with the New Zealand Herald at the same time.
This must have been the “fun and games” that John was referring to; and as for the credibility of the New Zealand Herald if this is how they obtain their ‘exclusive interviews’ – no comment.
A long long time ago
I can still remember how
John Campbell made me smile
And I knew if he had his chance
He could make those politicians dance
Even after they had left spitting bile
But last April made me quiver
When Julie Christie began to slither
Poor ratings on the Throng Blog
and Rachel Glucina being an attack dog
I can’t remember if I cried
When I read that the show was being fried
Something touched us all deep inside
The day Campbell Live died
So
Bye, bye Aotearoa Pie
Drove my Mazda to NZ on Air but NZ on Air had died
Walden and Joyce were thinking risky goodbye
Singin’ this’ll be the way real news dies
This’ll be the way real news dies
Did you watch his show on GE?
When Helen Clark called him a little creep?
Even Russell Brown said so.
Did you believe that John Key Troll
claiming no Mass Surveillance role
And Campbell rolling his eyes real slow
Well, I know that we’re in love with him
‘Cause we’ve donated cash beyond the brim
We’ve all kicked off our blues
Whenever he’s followed the 6pm news
We were a lonely nation, a sitting duck
With the rich screwing us out of luck
But I knew we were really fucked
The day Campbell Live died
It’s started stingin’
Bye, bye Aotearoa Pie
Drove my Mazda to NZ on Air but NZ on Air had died
Walden and Joyce were thinking risky goodbye
Singin’ this’ll be the way real news dies
This’ll be the way real news dies
Now, for ten years he’s been in our home
Christchurch earthquake, Child poverty and combat zones
But, that’s not how the CEO want’s it to be
When Mark Walden sang for his king John Key
With a loan he got from the Ministry
He denied the voice that came from you and me
And while king John was looking down
Jono and Ben stole Campbells crown
The audience felt burned
No respect was earned
And while Henry read a book on hate
Hosking practiced for a slave state
And we all realised it was too late
The day Campbell Live died
It’s started stingin’
Bye, bye Aotearoa Pie
Drove my Mazda to NZ on Air but NZ on Air had died
Walden and Joyce were thinking risky goodbye
Singin’ this’ll be the way real news dies
This’ll be the way real news dies
Helter skelter in a ratings smelter
Key’s friends feed the rumour centre
3 terms long and falling fast
National started to harass
The viewers feared what was to pass
With Slater on the sidelines to lambaste
Now the 6 week review saw ratings bloom
but Mark Weldon wanted the show doomed
We all got up to dance
But Campbell Live never had a chance
‘Cause the management wanted to keep concealed
truths John Campbell continued to reveal
do you recall what fate we’ve sealed
the day Campbell Live died?
It’s started stingin’
Bye, bye Aotearoa Pie
Drove my Mazda to NZ on Air but NZ on Air had died
Walden and Joyce were thinking risky goodbye
Singin’ this’ll be the way real news dies
This’ll be the way real news dies
There we were, all in one place
an entire Generation misplaced
with no voice to call our own
Key was nimble and Key was quick
killing public broadcasting off with a flick
cause silence is National’s only friend
I watched Key on the election stage
my hopes and dreams chained in a cage
no press gallery journalist could yell
and break this Satan’s spell
And as the public sphere sank beneath the waves
replaced with the voices of right wing slaves
I saw National laughing amongst the graves
the day Campbell Live died
Key was singin’
Bye, bye Aotearoa Pie
Drove my Mazda to NZ on Air but NZ on Air had died
Walden and Joyce were thinking risky goodbye
Singin’ this’ll be the way real news dies
This’ll be the way real news dies
I met a child who’d eaten no food
and I asked her for some happy news
but she just cried and turned away
I went down to Pike River Mine and Gore
Where I’d heard people’s pain years before
But they said no one would speak for them anymore
And in Christchurch the people screamed
the insured wept and the buildings leaned
but not a word was spoken
all the hopes there had been broken
And the three journalists I admire the most
Nicky Hager, Jon Stephenson and Glenn Greenwald are toast
for a right wing media who have shifted all the goal posts
the day Campbell Live died.
And we were singing
Bye, bye Aotearoa Pie
Drove my Mazda to NZ on Air but NZ on Air had died
Walden and Joyce were thinking risky goodbye
Singin’ this’ll be the way real news dies
This’ll be the way real news dies
Best News: One Network News
One News has gone from strength to strength. Straight shooting journalists like Corin Dann, Katie Bradford, Barbara Dreaver, Michael Parkin and Greg Boyed are now joined online by Andrea Vance and Dita De Boni to produce some of the best and most balanced journalism in the country. Their ability to hold the powerful to account has been professional and respectful with none of the blood sport feeding frenzy Brooke Sabin and Patrick Gower bring to the profession.
Best News Presenter: Mike McRoberts
Mike has all the charm of George Clooney with the intelligence of Edward R Murrow. He is respected and a leader in his craft. As a journalist Mike brings to the role a credibility you can’t buy. If TV3 can’t see that they are truly doomed.
Best Current Affairs: Q+A
With the obvious bias of TV3 you can’t take The Nation seriously any longer. Why any politician would risk going on The Nation to be ripped to pieces by Patrick Gower makes no sense because very few people watch the program. Far better to be on Q+A and face direct but fair questions. Straight shooting by Dann has built a real respectability and quality.
Best new feature of NZ media landscape: Spinoff & Villainesse
There was much to mourn in the media, but two glimmers of hope were Spinoff and Villainesse. Both are intelligent must read daily blogs.
Best columnist: Andrea Vance & Dita De Boni
TVNZ have intelligently picked up Andrea Vance and Dita De Boni as columnists, and they are this years best. Every column by each of them contain more genuine insight than most of the other news media combined.
Worst Column: John Roughan
There were no doubts the worst columnist for 2015 was Roughen, trying to work out which one was his worst however was near impossible. There was the time that John thought this about climate change…
if the worst that can happen is a rise of a metre in sea levels and a few degrees in mean temperatures over a century, I think we’ll cope.
The climate does seem to be changing. Auckland’s past two summers have been unusually long and lovely, this winter is unusually cold. Droughts and floods we can handle.
Science says otherwise, but not the sort of science that sends a probe to Pluto. Climate science is on a political mission.
That may be more exciting, more lucrative possibly, but I find all sciences more credible when their mission is the endless one into the unknown.
Only a man so welded to the current system of privilege could wilfully claim climate change will only lead to a meter rise in sea level and a few degrees increase in heat.
How this dinosaur manages to use a keyboard is beyond me. The science says no such thing John, the science says there is a growing possibility of catastrophic climate change and trying to determine ‘political science’ from ‘good science’ in the manner you have only further succeeds in highlighting your total disconnection from reality.
Pluto is more grounded to down town Auckland than John Roughan managed in that column.
His worst column of the year though had to go to his weird hatred of Sonny Bill Williams. Why anyone would want to rain on Sonny’s magnanimous gesture by handing his medal over to a young fan who was tackled by security is beyond all reasonableness. You read that column and the naked anger Roughan dished out said far more about the way Roughen views Muslims than any disingenuousness on SBWs side.
Best Party Leader: Andrew Little
Little has managed to hold the Labour team together tightly enough so that they are all more frightened of him than each other. The demotion of Cunliffe was as much a warning to everyone else as much as it was a fear Cunliffe’s oratory talents would overshadow Little’s. Little ended a very successful year for Labour’s rebuild. Polls have them at 31% (internal says 33%) and the infighting has been cauterised. The significance of Little’s first year is that instead of Key sleepwalking to a fourth term it will be a challenge. Little has done better than members, media and pundits expected and that has helped build him. While some could argue that Winston should have been awarded Best Party Leader for his win in Northland, it would be a one sided review of that by-election. Winston was always going to wipe the floor with the local chump they got to front the National Party campaign and Key’s taking of the provinces for granted was always ripe for political harvest. The only people this seemed a surprise to was the National Government.
Worst Party Leader: James Shaw
Dr Invisible hasn’t had much impact post a series of blunders. He tried to force the Greens to vote for pub opening hours so as to not seem like fun police, only to have a minor revolt by his caucus vote against it. He soured relations with Labour over the Red Peak shanking and he’s made very little impact in Parliament. Caucus has taken back some of the power however and strong ties between Labour and the Greens are apace despite it clouding Shaw’s Blue-Green aspirations. Needs to spark in 2016 or risks spluttering out.
Best NZ comedy: Funny Girls and that Jaquie Brown TV advert:
Funny Girls is easily the best comedy of 2015. The wave of angry reviews from boys not enjoying being the butt of the joke for once was almost as funny. More of this please. Jaquie Brown’s advert for gravy is also the funniest thing ever broadcast this year.
Performer of the Year & Best TV Show: Parris Goebel
Wow. Just. Wow. Amazing! Parris moves bodies in a way that is utterly unique. A national treasure – her TV show on Maori TV is the best of the year.
Best Commercial Radio Station: Hauraki
Matt Heath, Jeremy Wells, Angelina Boyd, Mikey Havoc and the Late Night Breakfast crew mixed with alt 90s rock. Heaven really.
Worst Commercial Radio Station: The Edge
The Edge are a depoliticised wasteland where a multi-millionaire money trader can waltz onto a youth station and rather than face the wrath of youth being betrayed, he gets to wear a T-Shirt mocking Cunliffe’s statement on domestic violence and sexual abuse while the gormless hosts grin on. The Edge is to quality radio what I Love Ugly is to feminism.
Best TV comedy: Soul Mates & Kinne
The two funniest comedies that you need to be watching right now are new Australian comedy shows, Kinne and Soul Mates on Comedy Central.
All we’ve had in terms of recent Australian comedy in NZ is Housos which manages to be as offensive as it is gross as it is racist as it is sexist so the bar has been set pretty low, but the genius of Kinne and Soul Mates manages to forgive at least a century’s worth of bad Australian comedy.
Kinne is bewilderingly funny. His ‘what if life was like Facebook’ is genius and his unfortunate bets gag is a joy. I’ve never laughed so much in 30minutes, Kinne is an Ozzie adonis with a wit larger than Tasmania.
Soul Mates is very clever humour, their time travelling story, their prehistoric Australians gag is brilliant and their hipster characters are so hipster it hurts but their ‘Kiwi Assassins’ from the Munistry of Defence is so perfectly Nu Zilind I laughed so hard I cried.
Comedy shows like Kinne and Soul Mates are very rare.
Best Twitter 2015: Hamish Keith
Simply one of the most decent human beings on Twitter if not the world. Always punches up.
Best News Story: Matt Nippert
A standing ovation to Matt Nippert in the NZ Herald for this astounding story of abuse at the hands of a state backed boot camp…
‘Forced to dig their own graves’ Young people sent to a state-run boot camp on Great Barrier Island were made to dig what they were told would be their own graves and concerned staff blowing the whistle were ignored, according to a Weekend Herald investigation.
Residents of the camp were allegedly subjected to a culture described as akin to Lord of the Flies that resulted in one boy circumcising himself with a blunt knife in order to leave the island.
The incidents have come to light following long-delayed High Court claims by nearly 40 residents of Whakapakari Youth Trust alleging horrific mistreatment between 1988 and 2004 at the Child, Youth and Family-contracted facility.
The claims, brought by Wellington law firm Cooper Legal, have languished for nearly ten years in the legal system and are still without a court date, sparking claims the Government is trying to cover up the serious mistreatment of children.
…the idea that as little as a decade ago we were funding abusive boot camps where children were hurt and abused is as jaw dropping as the Government’s constant attempt to bury this case and hide how badly treated these kids were.
Bootcamps don’t work, they merely sate the anger of the ill educated to give younger generations a kick up the bum to satisfy their own insecurities and chips on shoulder.
The lack of care we subject the young and damaged to should be a national shame, the fact that a stupid flag debate has been allowed to take so much media attention away from the way we are treating them is an indictment upon us as a community.
I very rarely have anything pleasant to say about the NZ Herald, but their coverage of those two stories are surely some of the best journalism the paper has done this year.
TDB Activist of the Year 2015: Helen Kelly
Helen Kelly has been a human rights crusader all her life. She is a hero in the Union movement and does more to stand for worker rights than most Governments ever have. Her battle against the constant war on workers waged by John Key and the National Government over the last 7 years has been tireless and her call for real safety legislation so workers can come home after a long day at work makes her a national treasure.
She has done more than most Union Presidents to reach out and engage and her activism to highlight how the Government watered down the recent health and safety laws demands respect.
News that she is fighting Cancer shook the activist world in NZ, but in the usual Helen Kelly style, she is taking a new battle in her stride and that battle is to demand change in NZs ridiculous cannabis laws…
Terminally ill Council of Trade Unions (CTU) president Helen Kelly plans to ask the government for permission to legally access cannabis oil for cancer pain relief.
“I’m actually going to write to Peter Dunne, who’s got permission to give me cannabis oil, and I’m going to ask him to do that,” Kelly told TV3’s The Nation on Saturday.
Having exhausted legal pain relief medicines, she was “brassed off” about having to go onto the black market for cannabis oil because “you don’t know what you’re getting”.
…we are almost alone now in the developed world to refuse to acknowledge the medical benefits of cannabis. Our denial at the harm cannabis prohibition creates borders on the delusional. Apart from criminalising people like Helen seeking pain relief via cannabis oil, we lock NZers up for pipes, bongs and cannabis for personal use like never before.
It is time to end this nonsense, that Helen has the honesty and courage to tackle this while fighting cancer is just another reason why she is such a legend.
TDB New Zealander of the Year 2015: Jane Kelsey
Jane’s leadership against the TPPA has been extraordinary. She has re-engaged the responsibilities of public academics. In an environment where political interests are threatening academic freedom, her courage to take a stand for NZ is even more impressive. The manner in which she destroyed Mike Hosking in less than 8minutes was one of the most popular blogs TDB did this year.
Best Political Story 2015: The Waitress and the Prime Minister
I think the young woman at the centre of the Prime Minister’s bewilderingly abusive and arrogant privilege is a hero. Amanda Bailey showed courage and fortitude that is pretty rare. To tell the Prime Minister to his face to stop touching her took enormous strength when you consider the power dynamics.
I would offer the story of the Waitress and the Prime Minister as the most important political story of 2015 because it did three important things.
The first thing it did was show the Prime Minister acting like a bully. Enjoying his power over an obviously resistant worker who made it clear she didn’t want to be touched on over 10 separate occasions isn’t just a quirk, it’s a mindset.
The authenticity of Amanda’s story touched a nerve with the many women and men who go to work daily and are bullied. They knew what she had written was true because it merged so seamlessly with their own experiences.
Before this story broke, Key was always in the 40s for preferred PM, after this story he sunk into the 30s and never recovered. Amanda’s courage to stand up to bullying did more to damage John Key than the entire Political Opposition combined.
The second thing this story did was spark a fierce debate by women for women about their experiences of being bullied in the work place. The realisation that this is so widespread and that males also experience bullying managed to expand the debate and find common cause in a unique way.
The third thing this story did was highlight the manner in which some in the mainstream media operate and manipulate news. Rachel Glucina’s deception mixed the already murky world of journalist/pr consultant while managing to paint Amanda out as an extremist. The Herald knew this and did nothing. Mike Hosking attacked Amanda for going to a blog, yet we saw what credibility the mainstream had when they got hold of the story. The communication between the owners of the cafe, Rachel and the Prime Minister’s Office on the day the blog broke is a story yet to be told.
It also showed the power of blogs to not only unearth stories, but get them out to readers minus the tainted interests of gatekeeper media.
With critical Journalists being driven from the mainstream, we here at TDB are considering launching our own weeknightly live streamed current affairs show next year. We are thinking 7.01pm Monday-Friday so that you all have a chance to see what weak sauce Story & 7 Sharp are serving up before switching us on. It’ll be a progressive politics show reviewing the news of the day because this year proved a large chunk of intelligent viewers are being utterly ignored by TV.
Shortly after the horrific Charlie Hebdo attacks in France, Professor Anne Salmond, penned a powerful article criticizing the erosion of democracy in New Zealand and the unacceptable pressure that is brought to bear on journalists, media outlets, universities, Crown Research Institutes, independent statutory bodies and civil services.
Salmond wrote:
“While our leaders do not shoot people, they work with others to try to ruin the lives and careers of those who disagree with them. The means may be different, but the intent is the same. One way or another, their critics (however valid their points of view might be) must be silenced.”
The erosion of democracy by stealth in New Zealand includes the undermining of people’s right to self-determination.
The Law Society’s submission on the new Environment Canterbury Transitional Governance Bill, which proposes to suspend the return to full democracy for nine and a half years, contains the following quote from a letter written by Professor Josef of Canterbury University:
“Democratic decision-making in local government is ingrained in the national psyche and a legitimate expectation of the citizenry. Its suspension in Canterbury for a period in excess of three and a half years is, itself, a rule of law issue”.
In 2010, the Government decided to sack the democratically elected Environment Canterbury (ECan) officers over what they perceived as a poor management of water. The Law Society then expressed their concern that the Government’s reaction was not proportional because Ecan officers were responsible for more than just managing water in Canterbury.
The Government introduced the 2013 Ecan Amendment Act to extend the denial of Cantabrians’ democratic rights to six and a half years.
The new Ecan Transition Bill’s proposal of a 7:6 ratio means that almost half of ECan officers (6 members) will be appointed by the Government.
There is no justification for these appointments. Ecan has had plenty of time to prepare for transition which was the justification for suspension of ECan elections in 2103.
The submission by the Law Society on the Bill , in its conclusion, says: “Representative democracy is a fundamental principle that gives legitimacy to government and the exercise of state power. Lord Cooke of Thorndon identified it as one of the “unalterable fundementals of our legal system (the other being independent courts). The proposed further suspension of full democracy is inconsistent with one of New Zealand’s core constitutional values, namely a “free and democratic society”.”
Ecan Transition Bill is not the only rushed Bill that undermines people’s right to self-determination. Political scientist, Professor Bronwyn Hayward believes the new Christchurch Regenration Bill is a new social contract between Government, Business & Ngai Tahu that excludes citizens.
The disregard for citizens’ democratic right to participate in decision-making, also extend to other areas: asset sales (most recently the Christchurch City Council’s decision to sell 100% of City Care), the TPPA, child poverty, deployment of troops to Iraq, flag change, GCSB spying etc.
The list of bills passed under urgency that effectively shortcut the democratic process, are mind-boggling.
In the first two years alone, National pushed 17 laws through without allowing public submissions. Where submissions are allowed, the time frames are not always practical. My own experience of submitting to Countering Terrorist Fighters Legislation Bill, and ECan Transitional Governance Bill, are perfect examples of this.
December is one of the busiest times of the year especially for working mothers.
I was informed of my time slot to speak to the Select Committee on the ECan Bill only the day before.
I opened my submission by criticizing the time frames around submission and reporting back to the House. I continued by saying:
“This government claims that they know what we need. They want us to trust them to deliver what’s best for us. This sounds awfully familiar to me. It sounds familiar because I’m originally from Iran where pretend democracy reigns supreme.”
Select committee member Paul Foster-Bell, previously a First Secretary and Consul in Iran, mentioned that others had also made references to undemocratic societies and asked if extreme comparisons were helpful.
I responded by pointing out that those of us who had lived under dictatorship, unlike many New Zealanders, did not take democracy for granted. We realised that democratic erosion happened gradually and there was a need for people to stay vigilant and defend their democratic rights at all times.
I value living in one of the most open and democratic societies in the world but New Zealand’s democracy is under attack.
I believe that Prime Minister John Key and his Government’s most toxic legacy will be their systematic undermining of free speech, freedom of thought, and democratic rights of people.
As the year draws to a close, I hope we can all work together to bring the attack on our democracy to a halt.
Donna Miles-Mojab is a feminist British-born, Iranian-bred, New Zealand citizen with a strong interest in politics and justice
Given Collins’ own personal record with being an unaccountable monster who evidently believed herself to be outside the law during, for instance, the Oravida scandal … I guess she’d know, wouldn’t she. It’s been her standard M.O. for pretty much the last half-decade.
Let’s remember. This is the same former Minister who:
– Used her position as part of the Government to lobby a Chinese border-control official for preferential access to a premium export market for her husband’s company;
Despite all of this, she refused to resign as an MP … had to be pressured hugely (including the infamous “final final warning” from John Key) into resigning as a Minister … and now sets her sights as her number one goalon getting back into Cabinet.
How’s *that* for an “unaccountable monster” who seemingly has no compunctions about operating outside the bounds of legality and propriety.
For the record, I do think there is an issue with any organ of local governance picking a fight with the Ombudsman. I also have an issue with unelected statutory boards generally … which is why it’s so peculiar that Collins in the same speech talked up the role of unelected public-private partnerships – like the mess we’ve got down at the Ports of Auckland – as having a greater contribution to make when it comes to service provision and asset ownership. I note those aren’t particularly accountable to the public, either – yet I cannot seem to recall a whiff of opprobrium from Collins meted out towards these quasi-privatized-in-all-but-name shambolic walking imbroglios. Either she wants democratic and accountable public institutions and amenities … or she doesn’t. (And given what happened with, say, Environment Canterbury – I think it’s a fair enough assumption to state that National definitively *doesn’t*)
But let’s remember: who gave us the SuperCity structure in the first place? This is what this is ultimately about, after all.
Who let slip the dogs of rampantly unaccountable local governance into our midst way back in 2010?
Why, it was the ACT Party under then-Minister of Local Governance Rodney Hide – and the National Party which Judith Collins was then part of the preening upper echelons of.
So really, what’s happening here, is the two architect-parties of the present Auckland local governance quagmire have gotten together to po-facedly decry the natural and eminently predictable results of the local governance legislation which THEY created and then implemented half a decade ago.
I would have said that this sort of blame-dodging by National and ACT was rather rich … but considering the nature of the two parties in question, there’s very little about them that *isn’t*.
All in all, this entire “SuperCity” fiasco has been one drawn-out half-decade-long Tour de Farce from National & Friends.
There are serious and legitimate issues with local governance in Auckland. It just seems rather curious how National and ACT only started piping up about some of them once it became clear that they’d be unable to beat Phil Goff for the Mayoralty.
P.S. How is ACT still a large enough “party” to warrant having a “regional conference”. It wasn’t so long ago they were so desperate for numbers to show to the cameras at their conventions that they’d bus in Young Nats from as far afield as Wellington to make up the seat-warming numbers as part of an illusory show of strength.
Is ACT’s “Auckland South” grouping just what it calls a half-a-dozen members going out to the Manurewa Golf Course…?
Ever since he won the British Labour leadership, Jeremy Corbyn has been under constant attack from every UK newspaper. The right-wing media can’t stand his progressive policies. Every week they manufacture another Corbyn scandal. Most times they are laughable. On one occasion Corban apparently committed the capital crime of not bowing low enough when laying a wreath at a war memorial!
Unfortunately, instead of defending Corbyn some “left” papers like the New Statesman and the Guardian have echoed the right-wing line that Corbyn is too far left and will make Labour “unelectable”.
Now they’ll have to eat their words. On Friday Labour not only won handsomely in the Oldham by-election. It also significantly increased its vote share – to 62%.
This victory makes sense if you actually look at Corbyn’s platform. His Keynesian policies are considerably more popular than the austerity championed by Cameron and the Labour Right.
So is Corbyn’s antiwar stance. Less than half (48%) of British voters approve of “the RAF taking part in air strike operations against Islamic State/ISIS in Syria.” [YouGov]. Among Labour voters that percentage drops to 35%.
By campaigning against the bombing Corbyn was able to help swing public opinion, inside and outside the Labour Party, in his direction. The YouGov poll showed support for the bombing dropping from 59% to 48% from November 17 to December 1.
To my mind it was a major victory, in a free vote, for Corbyn to get Labour MPs voting 2 to 1 against the bombing, when so few of them voted for Corbyn to become leader.
Of course many of the new, young party activists also played a role. According to the Guardian, many Labour MPs (presumably the pro-war ones) “are exasperated by Corbyn’s attempts to mobilise members behind him in order to force MPs into line over Syria and other policy.” Amazing. Party members actually trying to make their representatives accountable!
The Corbyn supporters are not daunted. As Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell wrote in the Guardian: “The message is clear: unite around the principles of the new politics and we can be the most powerful force for progressive change in generations.”
This “new politics” will also mean working closely with the Scottish National Party, Plaid Cymru and the Greens, who also voted against Cameron’s motion to bomb Syria.
Ben Peterson explores NZs far right. Deranged but Dangerous is a two-part article looking into the threat of White Nationalist extremists in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Part One will look at the preeminent White Nationalist organisation – the Right Wing Resistance (RWR). Part Two looks at the ways this organisation and its politics interact with the New Zealand state and government.
Pakeha New Zealand doesn’t seem the most obvious place for a militant terrorist organisation. Mainstream Kiwi culture doesn’t lend itself to fire and brimstone. The closest thing to a national injustice for Pakeha is the ongoing contested claim to authorship of the Pavlova (bloody Australians!). But, behind the stoic silence and suburban sprawl, there does lurk a more dangerous element. Men dressed in black gather in lounge rooms and backyards. Their record is proven. They’ve organised attacks on public places and institutions before. Many have been to prison for their cause and they are planning a war.
These are not Jihadi sleeper cells. They are New Zealand’s White Nationalists .
The Right Wing Resistance
New Zealand has an organised and active movement of extreme racists. While they are small and on the fringes, they are real. Far from being driven underground, you can find contact numbers online and be friends with their leaders on Facebook. The Right Wing Resistance (RWR) is New Zealand’s preeminent White Nationalist organisation. RWR have networks and members across the country. As part of researching this article, I called their current National Director, “Colonel” Vaughan Tocker.
This is Vaughan Tocker.
Vaughan is exactly the kind of cliche of a man that you would expect to be running a white pride group. His Facebook posts alternate between rants against the threat of Sharia law, and graphic pictures of dismembered bodies from warzones. Something about the gore seems to be exciting to Vaughan. He regularly posts videos and pictures of workplace injuries, they seem to be self inflicted. Vaughan originally became a white nationalist after his wife left him and began a relationship with another man. This new partener was Egyptian. Most people are hurt by the departure of a partner; many can be resentful. Most people, however, wouldn’t see their relationship breakdowns as part of a global pattern of a racial war on white people. Vaughan Tocker is not most people.
I spoke to Vaughan when I called the RWR contact number. I said I was writing an article and asked if I could have a chat to him about the RWR. Vaughan was at a BBQ for Resistance members. He was clearly wasted, but to Vaughan the opportunity to talk to another white man (“you are a white man, right?”) was too good to miss. Vaughan ranted down the phone on a range of topics. There were the obvious nonsensical arguments: “Indian dairy owners are a threat to white culture” and “Helen Clark is flooding the country with Jihadis”. But at times his arguments seemed (briefly) sophisticated and detailed, at one point making a critique of industrial export agriculture’s effect on the environment.
His rants were many and varied, but one point was central to everything Vaughan had to say. He was at war. He is a soldier for the white race, and in his mind the common denominator to all the evils of the world was inter-racial conflict. It’s a white man’s world, and Vaughan intends to keep it that way.
After about 15 minutes of increasingly angry ranting, Vaughan’s phone cut off mid-sentence. When I called back the call couldn’t get through. It seems his battery had died. It was almost as if even technology only has a limited tolerance for bullshit.
Are they really dangerous?
After ending the call, my first impulse was to thank the Universe that this man and his group are largely an inept group of misfits on the fringes of society. Some might argue that because they are small and isolated, talking about RWR is counterproductive. Shouldn’t we just ignore them and not give attention to the crazies? Unfortunately, just because they are marginal does not mean they cannot be a terrifyingly dangerous force.
The RWR having mass appeal is not an immediate threat. While it is possible that over time this may change (see Golden Dawn in Greece) the RWR lacks the coherent message and articulate leadership to develop any significant constituency.
Matt and Angela Goodman, with Vaughan, celebrating with Nazi-cake.
Their use of swastikas and military style uniforms is unlikely to get traction with middle New Zealand. RWR does want to achieve higher public support, but that is not central to their political project. Their political project is not contingent on winning a majority to their side.
To understand their political project, it is necessary to understand that RWR’s central belief is that there is a coming global race war. They don’t need to win the vote, they need soldiers, and RWR organises accordingly. Training up young men and indoctrinating them to believe that they are the front line in a global race war has the potential for these individuals to take matters into their own hands. This has already happened overseas.
On July 22, 2011, Norwegian Anders Behring Breivik set off car bombs in Oslo and attacked the youth camp of the Norwegian Labour Party, killing 77 and wounding 300. He operated as an individual for his attacks, but had a long history of collaborating with right wing extremists before this point. Tackling these right wing organisations may have stopped Anders from receiving the moral and political encouragement necessary for him to make those deadly decisions.
RWR helps to create the conditions for these attacks to happen in the future. Angry boys, guns and racism are a dangerous mix.
The war could start at home
The central point of Vaughan’s politics was his belief in the inevitable global race war, and his ideas on political organising flowed from this. RWR organise militarily. When I called, Vaughan openly bragged about the militia structure of RWR. “You see, I run a militia. I am aColonel and we are training guys up. When the war comes we are going to be ready.”
This militarism is central to everything RWR does. Members pledge to “fight for their family, race and nation”, and videos of these pledges are uploaded to Facebook. Members pose with guns and other weapons. They organise on quasi-military lines, with ‘divisions’ and local commanders. Members are expected to follow orders of the local Führer, and in return may be given higher rank themselves.
The central project of RWR is their planned “landbase”. The group is saving money to buy land and relocate many of their members to this site. Once secured, they intend to fortify the site and use it to provide “training” to new members and host gatherings of their supporters. Vaughan tells me that they have so far raised $42,000 dollars for this project, which is a significant resource.
For most members of RWR, this will never escalate beyond an elaborate game of dressup for angry white boys. Even if RWR as a group made a decision to attempt an armed putsch, their military capacity is very questionable.The threat isn’t that RWR as a whole will overtake the New Zealand state. The threat is that the RWR creates a space where angry young men can receive the moral and logistic support to launch individual attacks on immigrants, Māori and/or leftist activists. In the Right Wing Resistance there is a bragging macho culture. This kind of culture can lead to a feedback loop, where extreme ideas and actions are encouraged. This logic leads to escalating rhetoric, and it only takes one member of RWR to move from words to actions for this to have dire consequences, as we have seen overseas.
To stop similar attacks in New Zealand/Aotearoa RWR needs to be challenged.
Not on our watch
There are two ways in which right wing extremists can be challenged- challenging racist politics in general, and targeting Right Wing Resistance and its members.
The point is not to argue with the true believers. It is unlikely that Vaughan will be convinced that brown people aren’t out to get him, so refuting his arguments point by point would be a waste of energy. At the same time, it is essential that we isolate racist ideas.
Most racists do not get swastika tattoos or read Hitler. Most racists are just worried that ‘the chinese’ are the cause of Auckland’s housing crisis, or believe racist myths about Islam spread by governments in advance of wars overseas. If those racist ideas are allowed to be acceptable in the mainstream, this gives credibility to the white pride brigade.
Challenging racist government policies and media stereotypes are as important as challenging the Right Wing Resistance itself.
(This political aspect will be investigated further in part two)
While the RWR does not need to win mass support – it does seek some respectability. It seeks to build a small community, and wants to reach out to disengaged white youth and provide a space of belonging. For RWR it would be a significant advance to be able to openly recruit and fundraise.
Disrupting RWR undermines their ability to function. When their events are picketed by counter protesters their ability to gain momentum and integrate new recruits is limited. Many of their members lead double lives. Someone who might appear “normal” on a day to day basis may be Heiling Hitler on their weekends. RWR is dependent on these people’s income and community networks for finance its activities and bring in new recruits.
Political groups (such as the anti-TPPA campaign- Vaughan was very proud of his attendance at these rallies) can and should seek to exclude RWR and its members from their events. Community groups, including sports clubs or social groups should take a stance against RWR being involved and cancel the membership of known racists. Anti Racists should avoid doing trade with businesses that are run by or employ known RWR members- and should actively encourage others in the community to do so to. Targeting the sources of RWR funds can go a long way to undermining the organisation.
Below is a list of names and pictures of known RWR members. I hope that this can help some communities be aware of the activities of some within their midst.
A second article will look closer at the political aspects to Right Wing extremism and the relationship between Nationalist Militia and the New Zealand Government/State.
Vaugh Tocker- Masterton
Ash “Phatboy” Cleve and partner Ashley Cleve- Palmerston North
Rob (Upper Hutt)
Beau Allen
Kyle Chapman ( RWR Founder- also known as Kyle Kerry and Roberto W Right on Facebook)
Many many more pictures, names and general areas to come-
Ben Peterson works for Unite Union on the South Island. He’s a long time socialist and a member of the Mana Movement.
“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.” So said Winston Churchill. This week, the world witnessed the best and worst of a grand old democracy in action. Should Britain bomb ISIS in Syria was the question?
The unexpected star of the marathon debate was the Shadow Foreign Secretary Hilary Benn. AS John Grace reported in The Guardian: “Syria may not be liberated, but Hilary Benn has been. Freed from the burden of his father’s shadow. Freed from the necessity of toeing a party line. Free to be himself. Free of doubt. Where others – both for and against extending air-strikes on Syria – had spoken with hand-wringing angst of the torment they had suffered in squaring their consciences, Benn knew only moral certainty. The vote to go to war had never been in question. What had been lacking was a leader the House of Commons could unite behind. Now they had their man.”
Here’s what their man had to say: “As a party, we have always been defined by our internationalism. We believe we have a responsibility, one to another. We never have and we never should walk by on the other side of the road. And we are here faced by fascists. Not just their calculated brutality, but their belief that they are superior to every single one of us in this chamber tonight and all of the people we represent. They hold us in contempt. They hold our values in contempt. They hold our belief in tolerance and decency in contempt. They hold our democracy – the means by which we will make our decision tonight – in contempt. And what we know about fascists is that they need to be defeated and it is why, as we have heard tonight, socialists and trade unionists were just one part of the international brigade in the 1930s to fight against Franco. It’s why this entire House stood up against Hitler and Mussolini. It’s why our party has always stood up against the denial of human rights and for justice and my view, Mr Speaker, is that we must now confront this evil. It is now time for us to do our bit in Syria and that is why I ask my colleagues to vote in favour of this motion tonight.”
Fascists. Calculated brutality. Superiority. Contempt for values, tolerance, decency and democracy. Denial of human rights and justice. Fascists. Hitler. Mussolini. Franco. Evil.
Benn’s speech, widely lauded as the best of the night, lacks for nothing in moral certainty. Sadly, the issue was not about dropping morals on Syria, it was about dropping bombs. Military certainty was the crux of the matter: would dropping bombs on Syria have any effect? Would it make the world a safer place? Or would it make things worse? Benn was silent on these crucial points. For him, invoking Hitler, Mussolini and Franco was sufficient.
For a leading light of the Left to claim the current crisis in any way resembles the Spanish Civil War or Nazi aggression in WWII applies Godwin’s Law in the most egregious, dark and dangerous way. ISIS has no army, navy or air force. It is not amassing two million troops on an international border. It is not using a nation’s vast industrial complex to make bombs and bullets. It has no Strategic Command and Control Centre, no NORAD, no Wolf’s Lair. There is no Fuhrer huddling in a Bunker in Raqqa. Today, there is no easily defined fascist-nation-state-enemy as Germany or Italy once were. This enemy attacked Paris with 8 suicide assassins. It did not invade France with an army of occupation.
In The Art of War, Sun Tzu wrote “It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.” Reductio ad Hitlerum. By comparing ISIS to Hitler, Benn proves he does not know his enemy.
Surprisingly, some of the most compelling and coherent arguments against the motion came from David Cameron’s own party.
Conservative MP John Baron: “The short-term effect of British airstrikes will be marginal. But as we intervene more, we become more responsible for the events on the ground and lay ourselves open to the unintended consequences of the fog of war. Without a comprehensive strategy, airstrikes will simply reinforce the west’s long-term failure in the region generally, at a time when there are already too many aircraft chasing too few targets. And I suggest, just as in previous ill-advised western interventions, a strong pattern emerges. Time and time again the executive makes a convincing case, often with the support of intelligence sources, and time and time again it turns out to be wrong. We have stood at this very point before. We should have no excuse for repeating our errors and setting out on the same tragic, misguided path once more.”
Conservative MP Andrew Tyrie: “The ruling out of western ground forces is very significant. It tells us that, after Iraq and Afghanistan, the west appears to lack the will, and perhaps the military strength, to commit the resources that might be needed to construct a new order from the shaken kaleidoscope of Syria. As in Libya, it would be relatively easy to remove a brutal dictator from the air, and perhaps also to suppress Isil, but it would be extremely difficult to construct a regime more favourable to our long-term interests. We do not need to look into a crystal ball to see that; we can read the book. The result of over a decade of intervention in the Middle East has been not the creation of a regional order more attuned to western values and interests, but the destruction of an existing order of dictatorships that, however odious, was at least effective in supressing the sectarian conflicts and resulting terrorism that have taken root in the middle east. Regime change in Iraq brought anarchy and terrible suffering. It has also made us less safe. Above all, it has created the conditions for the growth of militant extremism. We should be under no illusions: today’s vote is not a small step. Once we have deployed military forces in Syria, we will be militarily, politically and morally deeply engaged in that country, and probably for many years to come.. That is why the government’s description of the extension of bombing to Syria as merely an extension of what we were already doing in Iraq is misplaced. We simply have not heard enough from the government about exactly what the reconstruction will mean. The timing of this vote has everything to do with the opportunity to secure a majority provided by the shocking attacks in Paris. Everybody feels a bond with the French, but an emotional reflex is not enough. Military action might be effective at some point, but military action without a political strategy is folly. We have yet to hear that strategy, so I cannot support the government’s motion tonight.”
Conservative MP Dr Julian Lewis : “Honourable members are being asked to back airstrikes against Daesh to show solidarity with our French and American friends, yet a gesture of solidarity – however sincerely meant – can’t somehow be a substitute for hard-headed strategy. Indeed, the fact that the British government wanted to bomb first one side and then the other in the same civil war in such a short space of time illustrates to my mind a vacuum at the heart of our strategy. At least we are now targeting our deadly Islamist enemies rather than trying to bring down yet another dictator with the same likely results as in Iraq and in Libya.”
In the House of Lords, even the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, warned against doing “the right thing in such a wrong way that it becomes the wrong thing”: “The just war criteria have, to my mind, been met. But while they are necessary, they are not by themselves sufficient, in action at this time… Our bombing action plays into the expectation of Isil and other jihadist groups in the region, springing from their apocalyptic theology. The totality of our actions must subvert that false narrative because by itself it will not work. If we act only against Isil globally and only in the way proposed so far we will strengthen their resolve, increase their recruitment and encourage their sympathisers. Without a far more comprehensive approach we confirm their dreadful belief that what they are doing is the will of God.”
David Cameron assured there were “around 70,000 Syrian opposition fighters who do not belong to extremist groups and with whom we can coordinate attacks on Daesh. The House will appreciate there are some limits on what I can say about these groups, not least that I can’t risk the safety of these courageous people who are being targeted daily by the regime, or by Daesh, or by both. But I know that this is an area of great interest and concern for the House, so let me try and say a little more. The 70,000 is an estimate from [the] independent joint intelligence committee based on a detailed analysis updated on a daily basis and drawing on a wide range of open source and intelligence. Of these 70,000, the majority are from the Free Syrian Army. Alongside the 70,000, there are some 20,000 Kurdish fighters with whom we can also work. I am not arguing – and this is a crucial point – that all of these 70,000 are ideal partners. Some though left the Syrian army because of Assad’s brutality and they clearly can play a role in the future of Syria and that is actually a view that is taken by the Russians as well, who are prepared to talk with these people.”
A British Prime Minister cites military intelligence as grounds for military action. Sound familiar? Does anyone truly, madly, deeply believe there are 70 000 Syrian opposition fighters who will join the West in its fight against ISIS? Or are such claims, today as in 2003, as ever, the vacuum at the heart of our strategy?
Having slurred those opposed to bombing as ‘terrorist sympathisers’, David Cameron sent out a victory tweet: “I believe the House has taken the right decision to keep the UK safe – military action in Syria as one part of a broader strategy.” Orwell would be proud.
IT HAS BEEN HAILED as one of the best speeches delivered to the House of Commons in 50 years. Having urged his fellow MPs to support the Prime Minister’s motion in favour of bombing Syria, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, Hilary Benn, resumed his seat to resounding cheers from both sides of the aisle. The Labour Leader, Jeremy Corbyn, his face a picture of both puzzlement and exasperation, did not join in the applause. No one from the Labour Party, himself included, had managed to deliver so passionate a speech on behalf of peace.
The emotion missing from Corbyn’s countenance was fear. It speaks well of the man that Benn’s noisy standing ovation did not frighten him. Someone more steeped in the realities of politics would have heard, behind the cheering of the Commons, the dull rattle of the tumbril. He should have known that his opponents weren’t just applauding the impassioned speech of a bellicose social imperialist, they were applauding the fact that, at last, they had found the person to replace the despised Member for Islington North.
It’s been the biggest problem of the Blairites all along that among their ranks there was no one who could hold a candle to Corbyn. When set against the sincerity and plain-spokenness of the front-runner, the bland contributions of the other three leadership contenders came across as utterly unconvincing. Liz Kendall, the candidate most closely associated with the Blairite rump, attracted just 5 percent support from the party membership. What’s more, in the aftermath of the membership’s resounding endorsement of Corbyn, the Labour Right’s petulant refusal to accept that Blairism had been rejected only added to the new leader’s lustre.
Yes, Labour’s parliamentarians had the advantage of a sympathetic press. United in their disdain for Corbyn the journalists and columnists of the allegedly “left-wing” newspapers – The Guardian, The Observer, and The New Statesman – never missed a chance to tell their readers that Labour could not hope to win with Corbyn at the helm. But, increasingly, the left-wing media’s hostility was being written off by the Labour rank-and-file as yet further proof that the whole “mainstream” political establishment was rotten to the core.
What they needed was a challenger untainted by all the petulance and back-stabbing; someone who cleaved to his or her principles with the same sincerity and passion as Corbyn himself. Someone who had served time in the trade union movement. Someone unafraid to summon-up the ghosts of the men and women of the International Brigade who died fighting Franco’s fascists in Spain. Someone who was a teetotaller and a vegetarian. Someone who never fiddled his parliamentary expenses claims,. Someone whose father was, for more than 50 years, one of the towering figures of the Labour Left. Someone, in short, called Hilary Benn.
That Benn the Younger had made a point of telling his constituents that he was “a Benn – not a Bennite”, and had been an enthusiastic supporter of Tony Blair’s “New Labour” from Day One, serving in the Cabinets of both Blair and Gordon Brown, well, that only made it all the more delicious.
Not that the Blairites will be celebrating too loudly. The more intelligent among them understand that Corbyn has shoved “Overton’s Window” decisively to the left. Indeed, when History assesses the (now almost certainly brief) leadership of Corbyn, breaking the neoliberal stranglehold on the British Labour Party will be cited as his greatest achievement. If Benn wants to be Prime Minister he will have to run on a clear anti-austerity platform and to offer the voters policies that are recognisably social-democratic in tone, content and purpose.
But if Paris, as Henry of Navarre is said to have quipped “is worth a mass”, Number 10 Downing Street is worth the renationalisation of British railways and a sharply more progressive tax system. Hilary Benn has only to signal to Labour’s rank-and-file that Corbyn’s vision (minus the pacifism and all that baggage from the 1980s) is safe in his hands, and the incumbent’s already difficult position will become impossible.
As the Andrew Finney character (played by Ian McShane) says in the TV series Ray Donovan: “If you see a man getting ready to take on the world – bet on the world.” After weeks of relentless media and political assault (not least from his own side) even Corbyn’s staunchest supporters know, deep in their hearts, that the British Establishment is never going to allow their hero to become Prime Minister. One way or the other, Corbyn is going to be driven from the Labour Leadership.
But the United Kingdom is an old and devious state, and both its public and not-so-public protectors know that if they are seen to have taken out one Labour Leader, then it is not in their interest to be seen putting too many restrictions on his replacement. In return for Trident, the “Special Relationship” with the USA, and a light hand when it comes to reforming the financial system (i.e. The City of London), the Left will be given their moment in the sun. The protectors of Britain’s Deep State understand that the Westminster System requires two parties of more-or-less equal strength if it’s to go on working. Allow that myth to fail, and who knows what the long-suffering British people might replace it with?
The King is dead (or soon will be). Long live the King!
While the Greek debt crisis was dominating the world news in late June and early July, another equally significant crisis began to unfold, and is now at its second major stage. Puerto Rico’s government owes US$72 billion dollars “next Tuesday“; money that it cannot pay. (See The GuardianPuerto Rico’s governor tells US Senate the island cannot repay debts, 1 Dec 2015.) Puerto Rico, with 3.5 million people, is of comparable population size to New Zealand, and one-third of the size of Greece. Yet Puerto Rican have fallen through the cracks of world attention and sympathy.
In November the BBC Windows on the World documentary Puerto Rico: The Have Nots and the Have Yachts played on Radio New Zealand (or ‘rnz’ as we are now supposed to call it). Puerto Rico is neither a sovereign nation nor an equal part of a larger sovereign entity. Its people have become denizens (the ‘have nots’) in their own land, much as New Zealanders across the ditch are denizens who have no effective civic rights. Puerto Rico is being bought up lock stock and barrel by rich Americans, the ‘have yachts’.
The specific problem is that the world is organised into a nation state system (the Wilsonian system) that is too rigid, though which has a fuzziness that we find difficult to deal with because we assume too easily that everyone is a citizen of one or other mutually exclusive nation state. In the case of the United States, the main overseas territories in which the people are quasi-Americans rather than actual Americans are Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, Northern Marianas, and the US Virgin Islands.
The European Union itself is a form of fuzziness, with variations of fuzziness linked to the Eurozone and the Schengen agreement for open borders. The United Kingdom is extremely fuzzy. Indeed, some of us may have just discovered that parts of Cyprus – Akrotiri and Dhekelia – are a UK overseas territory; an aircraft carrier in the Middle East.
New Zealand retains much fuzziness. We have our own overseas territories: Cook Islands, Tokelau and Niue. (Together these, with the lands Australia covets as its 7th and 8th states, formally formed the Realm of New Zealand in 1983.) New Zealand embraced its own nationhood in many small steps: 1769, 1835, 1840 (2 steps, the second being independence from New South Wales), 1846, 1852, 1857, 1865, 1867, 1876, 1894, 1900, 1907, 1926, 1931, 1934, 1947, 1950, 1972, 1982, 1983, 1986, 1990, 1996, 2001, 2003. 2016 could be another step.
The global solution is not to further entrench the Wilsonian system by removing the fuzziness. The Wilsonian system has already facilitated a form of very lazy thinking on the part of westerners who like to talk about places like Iraq and Syria as if they are nice neat and ordered sovereign entities: country IQ and country SY in the same list as countries US, UK, NZ and SA. (Of course state-Americans, while they impose this structure on the rest of the world, reject it for themselves, on the grounds of entrenched American “exceptionalism”. And why Puerto Ricans – as territory-Americans – do not have the same status as Hawaiians remains a mystery.)
The solution is to embrace the fuzzinesses of identity and ethnicity and nationality. New Zealand residents should be treated as equals in Australia. And Catholics – with their caliph in Rome – should be treated the same as people of other faiths. (Anti-Catholic discrimination has been widespread in the English-speaking world.) Sectarian differences will always create a fuzz-factor that could be seen as a positive rather than as a negative.
Puerto Ricans should be treated as equals to other Americans, in Puerto Rico and elsewhere. They should have the same rights to default on debt as anyone else, and their government likewise should be treated like any other defaulting government (with general reform needed with respect to sovereign debt default).
We introduced limited liability for businesses in the nineteenth century. Most westerners are able to default by becoming bankrupt; rotting in debtors’ prisons is now too Dickensian for most of us to contemplate. Indeed, without these institutions that accept debt-default as a regular and necessary part of life, the economic development of the twentieth century could never have taken place.
Identity is a great thing. We all have multiple identities, including our financial statuses (debtor/creditor, tenant/mortgagor/freeholder) and our various political and cultural affiliations. But under God – whatever or whoever It may be – we are shareholders in our planet, whether we are from Valparaiso, Pago Pago, San Francisco, San Juan, Saipan, Guam, Gundagai, Tubuai, Tangiwai, Chennai, Chengdu, Cebu, Cairo, Christchurch, Wexford, Westport, West Bromwich, Cape Town, Townsville or Palmerston North. We have private identities and public equity. With public equity properly ensconced, we cannot fall through the cracks.
