Home Blog Page 2113

Extreme Whanganui flooding a glimpse of our global warming future

24

Skepticism-global-warming-10

The byproduct of super heating our planet in a manner never seen before in our 4.5billion year history is only starting to become apparent to even the most wilfully blind.

Normally the increasing heat would take hundreds of thousands of years to build up to create a ‘tipping point’ which would see sudden climate change, but we as humans have done that in a mere couple of centuries.

The ramifications for that are unknowable, but catastrophic is a good start.

As the planet warms, extreme weather becomes the norm. That once ever 100 year weather event starts becoming every decade, our ability to rebuild from natural disasters becomes more difficult as weather event after weather event cascade upon one another. Extreme floods like those seen in Whanganui this week are an entree of what we can expect.

If we don’t do anything meaningful about climate change, if NZ doesn’t lead on action and solutions, welcome to your future and the future of your children.

The Pope is right, Cameron Slater, David Farrar and the other right wing climate deniers are wrong and the sooner we accept that, the better.

John Key is in denial, the rest of us shouldn’t be.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

The Daily Blog Open Mic Wednesday 24th June 2015

1

openmike

 

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.

 

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

UPDATE: Dear TV3, now Heather du Plessis-Allan has turned down your new 7pm show, PLEASE appoint Rachel Glucina to work with Duncan Garner

14

Glucina

Rachel Glucina and David Farrar sharing a joke about poor people.

Heather du Plessis-Allan has turned down TV3’s offer to host their new 7pm show with Duncan Garner so I think management should just go the whole hog and appoint Rachel Glucina to work as Duncan’s co-anchor.

If TV3 are trying to imitate the hate crime against public broadcasting that is ‘Seven Sharp’, then they may as well be totally open to being as sycophantic as ‘Seven Sharp’ and put Rachel in there. She pretends to be a PR person, so she may as well pretend to be a broadcaster as well.

If TV3 were serious about trying to get back their credibility they would put the incredibly talented Paula Penfold in the role, but I fear that’s not what they are aiming for.

My God TV broadcasting has become a ruined nightmare under a Government that wants the people distracted rather than informed.

 

BREAKING NEWS: Heather has said YES to MediaWorks and will be joining Garner. They obviously REALLY needed her for credibilities sake. Unfortunately the comments from Duncan sounds like the show will be awful…

“’I see this as a great chance to be part of a programme that will reflect our country and our lives – no matter where we live. I expect us to have fun, to laugh, to entertain and to tell your stories,” Duncan Garner says.

If I want fun, laughter and entertainment I’ll read NZ Herald editorials, but I’m not looking for a comedy show at 7pm, I’m looking for some actual journalism. Sounds like ‘Story’ will be as vapid as Seven Sharp.

The big question now is what will happen to poor Rachel?

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

The incredible changes to Mike Hosking show since Paul Henry Show started

6

This is hilarious…

CIIyewZUcAAracp

…so instead of the cuddle and kiss Mike gives Key in the morning, it’s straight to the patsy questions is it?

You can’t actually make this shit up.

Christ our media are pathetic aren’t they?

11393114_10152977227352992_5854058749472466075_n

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

A Real Estate Agent boasts about his sales to overseas buyers

51

John-Key-Swimming-Pool-Metro-20062

Property bubble? What property bubble?

This Harcourts real estate email was forwarded to me by a reader, look at how the real estate agent (whose details I won’t post here) boasts about selling houses to overseas buyers…

Latest Real Estate News Letter
20/06/2015 28 Cantora Avenue, Northpark Sold for 1.19M
10 Parramatta Pl, Botany Downs Sold for 1.081M
16/06/2015 9 fernloche place flat bush sold under the hammer for 1.09 million dollars
16/06/2015 15 oakridge way northpark sold under the hammer for 985k.
9/6/2015 13 Travers place Northpark was sold under the hammer for 1.04 million dollars.

On 7/6/2015,auction took place onsite. 1 Cantora Avenue was passed in. it is now under offer.
70 Golfland Dr, Golflands was passed in on 6/6/2015. It’s now under negotiation.
8 Caldbeck Rise was sold under the hammer on 4/6/2015 for 1.258 Million dollars. Overseas Chinese buyer won the auction.
On 27 May, 2015, 1/25 Millhouse drive was sold under the hammer for 930K. It has 4 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms, 180 Floor and half share of 1216.
Friday night 22/05/2015 27 Ambleside Drive, Northpark with 3 bedrooms and 2 bathroom, 180 Floor and 661 Land. It was sold under the hammer with a shocking price of 1.1 million dollars.

(Tuesday 19/05/2015)Without any surprise,Chinese buyers were still dominating the auction on Tuesday. Two were sold to Chinese buyers.
7 Laings Road, Bucklands Beach 190 Floor 855 Land CV 1.2M Price: 1.64M
3 Campian Place, Northpark 260 Floor 751 Land CV 970K Price: 1.34M
8 Sligo Place was passed in and under negotiation with the top bidder who was also Chinese.

In the past several weeks, we had some properties sold through auctions around the neighborhood.
8 Taiko Court, Northpark. 220 Floor 698 Land CV 820K Price: 1.298M
Our Chinese buyers helped us Harcourts Flat Bush push the house price even higher in East Auckland yesterday 08/05/2015 and set a new record high price.
At 2PM, many buyers gathered the on site auction at 5 Duntrune road, Flat bush. As again, dominated by Chinese buyers. Finally the price was set the at 1.31 million dollars. After helping translate, I’m fairly confident after chatting with them that they had a much higher budget and were determined to win.

5 Duntrune Road1, 182 floor 513 land, cv 720K Price: 1.31M
43 Matterhorn Cres, 220 Floor 801 Land CV 890K Price: 1.2M
1/27 Crescent Hill Court, 130 Floor, half share of 820 land, CV 650k Price: 750K
1/125 Millhouse Drive, 170 Floor, half share of 937 Land, CV 720K Price: 930K

If you need a free no obligation appraisal for your property, Please don’t hesitate to text, ring or email me at any time, I’ll pop over ,provide you with the most up to date market information ,share with you my expertise and help you understand East Auckland house market
Yours Sincerely

Bachelor in Economics Hohai University 2001
GradDip in Commerce specializing in Marketing University of Auckland 2002

…the Government refuses point blank to deal with the demand side issues inflating the Auckland property market because the middle classes who are property owners now are earning more from their housing valuations going up than they are from their actual jobs.

The property bubble creates the illusion of economic growth and is the main reason the middle classes vote National, pop that bubble and the entire facade crumbles. The political backlash is the reason Labour are too frightened to take on a capital gains tax.

We need to stop all foreign owners from buying NZ property – it’s as simple as that, unfortunately the boomer generation who are benefitting most from this speculation will never allow that to happen meaning every generation post them have been locked out of property ownership.

Welcome to the world of vested political interests.

CFwWSecVIAA6CRa1

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

New Doco Sets Sights On NZ In 5 Eyes

1

THE 5th EYE preview from CUTCUTCUT Films on Vimeo.

 

The makers of the critically acclaimed documentary Operation 8 are now deep in the edit of new film The 5th Eye, targeting New Zealand’s role in the global Five Eyes spy network.

 

Independent filmmakers Errol Wright and Abi King-Jones have launched a crowd-funding campaign on Givealittle to raise essential funds to help finish the film – which they hope to release later in the year.

 

A short preview of the film has been released online and can be viewed via the Givealittle campaign page.

 

Shooting began in 2008, around the Ploughshares action at the Waihopai spy base in Blenheim, and has continued since as local and international events have revealed more to the story of the Five Eyes alliance.

 

The raid and arrest of Megaupload founder Kim Dotcom lead to the revelation that the GCSB had illegally spied on the New Zealand resident on behalf of the FBI. A further 88 Kiwi’s were then found to have been spied on by the agency. As the government subsequently pushed through controversial spy laws, NSA contractor Edward Snowden blew the whistle on global mass surveillance programs undertaken by the USA. All the while the War on Terror continues, both at home and in the Middle East.

 

Wright and King-Jones have produced three feature-length documentaries together: Te Whanau o Aotearoa – Caretakers of the LandThe Last Resort and the recent Operation 8about the ‘anti-terror’ raids of 2007.

 

The filmmakers say; “Independent documentary-making remains an underfunded yet increasingly necessary part of an informed society – especially in light of the ever-diminishing current affairs content on television. Events in recent years have shown that the public is deeply concerned about mass-surveillance and the threat it poses to their rights and democratic processes.”

 

The 5th Eye features interviews with leading intelligence and surveillance experts, including Nicky Hager, Jane Kelsey, Paul Buchanan, Murray Horton and others.

 

http://www.givealittle.co.nz/cause/the5theyefilm

www.cutcutcut.com

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

Dolphin Defenders join IWC’s call for better protection of homegrown dolphin

0

Screen Shot 2015-06-23 at 11.09.37 am

New Zealand based conservation groups are supporting the call for better protection of Māui dolphins after the International Whaling Commission reiterated the need for the Government to do more, at its meeting this week.

The homegrown group ‘Māui and Hector’s Dolphin Defenders’ echoes the IWC’s sentiment. Long-time ‘Dolphin Defender’ and organisation chair Christine Rose says, “Scientific evidence shows Māui dolphins cannot sustain a single human induced fatality in the next few decades if the species is to survive. But the current government is negligent and failing to address these risks”.

“Scientists estimate that the Māui dolphin population has dropped from about 1800 since the 1970s to its current population of about 55 today. But despite the fact that fishing activities account for 95% of Māui dolphin mortalities, trawl fisheries continue to overlap most of the Māui dolphin range”.

Mrs Rose says “In 2013 Nick Smith, then Minister of Conservation, committed to 100% trawler observer coverage within four years in the core Māui habitat, apparently to address the known risk of trawl net entrapment and to appease critics”. But his promises have come to very little, says Mrs Rose. “The promised 100% observer coverage has resulted in only 11% of trawl days with an observer”. “That was only 51 out of 479 trawl days that actually had an observer to pick up on bycatch which is a proven cause of dolphin death”.

Mrs Rose says “A high standard of proof is required to close areas of fisheries to protect these dolphins. But verified reports of live dolphins outside the current protection areas, even as far away as East Cape, have prompted no action. And no wonder we’re not seeing the inevitable instances of bycatch, there are no observers on board”. ”Clearly the Ministers of Conservation and Primary Industries (responsible for fisheries enforcement), and the industry themselves, are failing the world’s smallest and rarest dolphin”. “No wonder that’s a cause for such local and global concern.”

“It’s the third year in a row New Zealand’s apathy has been condemned on the international stage of the IWC” says Mrs Rose. “They rightly call for proper protection, within the whole dolphin habitat including harbours. The current regime is a half-hearted mishmash of policies that are failing to protect the dolphins from their biggest threats.” “In fact, this government adds to these risks with its permissive approach to seismic testing and deep sea mining”.

Mrs Rose says “Every Māui dolphin needs to be safe, if the subspecies is to survive. With only about 55 or less left, that’s not too much to ask”.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

Death at Horse Race Leads to Call for Shake Up

1

safelogo

Singapore Girl died Sunday at Te Aroha

A horse has died after a jumps race at Te Aroha, prompting fresh calls from animal activists for an end to jumps racing.

Singapore Girl, a five year old mare, was euthanised after fracturing a hind leg during the Wealleans Bay of Plenty 1600 race. The news follows at least 18 deaths from race-related injuries in New Zealand in the previous three years.

Animal rights group SAFE says the death and injury rate in jumps racing is unacceptable and is calling for the ‘sport’ to be banned.

SAFE Head of Campaigns Mandy Carter says it has been only a matter of time before the first reported death this season. “Lives are being gambled with every single race. It is cruel and dangerous and more deaths are expected before the end of the season. It’s time to stop the carnage.”

“Jumps racing has a high rate of deaths and injuries, because horses are pushed to jump barriers at speed – something they would never do naturally. There is a constant risk to the horses,” says Ms Carter. “Horses routinely die merely for the sake of ‘entertainment’, and profit for the racing industry.”

Jumps racing is already banned in New South Wales, Australia. SAFE says the government should move to ban all future jumps racing.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

Saudi sheep bribe could cost NZ more???

9

Unknown

OH COME ON!

Saudi farm deal could cost more taxpayer money
More taxpayer money could be spent on a controversial demonstration farm in Saudi Arabia but nothing is planned at present, Prime Minister John Key says.

Over $11 million on the private farm deal, partly to resolve a dispute and clear the way for a regional free trade deal.

The latest controversy surrounding the deal came after revelations that lambs born to ewes that were air-freighted from New Zealand to Hmood Al Khalaf’s farm suffered an extremely high death-rate.

After Primary Industries Minister Nathan Guy said a sand storm could be to blame for the deaths, it was confirmed that heavy rain and illnesses were the cause.

They couldn’t even get their story right on what caused all the lambs to die, and now we are told this bribe to get a free trade deal with a country that treats woman slightly better then that are treating our sheep will cost us MORE?

FFS.

This is an outrageous waste of cash, clearly we haven’t bribed the Saudi’s enough, that’s what Key’s comment really means. We’ve thrown them $11m and they obviously consider that chump change.

Why bribe a country with the kind of horrific human rights record the Saudi’s have for a free trade deal, I mean if there is a candidate for ‘we won’t trade with you, because you are pretty awful’, it’s the bloody Saudi’s.

Seeing as the Saudi’s originally funded and resourced ISIS, the same ISIS we are now fighting in Iraq, bribing the Saudi’s for a trade deal seems like the least of the issues we should be discussing.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

GUEST BLOG: Dr Joshua Freeman – why TPPA hurts public health

11

mat_bradysatire_comp

There’s more than a little irony in the fact that the least transparent trade deal in history contains an “Annex on Transparency”. After all, before Wikileaks published it last Wednesday, the plan was to keep this draft (along with all the others) from the public for four years after the deal was signed.

But the apparent double-standard makes more sense when we consider the annex isn’t intended to apply to political leaders or profit-driven corporations, but rather to national agencies responsible for brokering the best deals possible on pharmaceuticals for the public. In other words, lack of transparency appears to be a real concern when it gets in the way of pharmaceutical industry profit, but not so much when it gets in the way of informed public debate.

Among different nations’ purchasing agencies, Pharmac stands out as being particularly effective. It’s estimated it saved NZ $5 billion dollars between 2000 and 2012 – money made available to reinvest in health that would have otherwise been pharmaceutical industry profits. But the major concern for industry – and the reason Pharmac has been described as “an egregious example” of bad practice – is that it sets a precedent for other countries to follow. For example it’s been estimated that if the Australians adopted the Pharmac model they would save $1.6 billion dollars a year. All of this has led the US trade representative to report:  “With respect to NZ, US industry has expressed serious concern about the policies and operation of NZ’s Pharmaceutical Management Agency (Pharmac), including among other things the lack of transparency, fairness and predictability of the Pharmac pricing and reimbursement regime…”

So on the face of it, the main purpose of the Transparency Annex is to undermine Pharmac, but what does the annex actually show?

On superficial reading it looks relatively benign. The “Principles” section contains lots innocent-sounding expressions like “high quality health care”, “competitive markets” and “accountable procedures”. But when all the underlying changes are added together, the picture becomes more concerning. To sum it up: Pharmac would be forced to make decisions within shorter time frames, with more intense input from industry and with more onerous requirements to release information that could then be used by industry to challenge its decisions, either through a beefed up review or appeal process or more worryingly, an investor state dispute.

Each of these changes may not seem like game changers when used alone but when systematically used in combination they have the potential to neutralise many of the features of Pharmac that have made it so successful. It would be naïve to assume that industry would not systematically leverage any new powers in order to undermine Pharmac and maximise profits. In other words, as a colleague closely familiar with Pharmac processes said to me: “don’t expect the industry to play by gentleman’s rules”.

Particularly concerning is the threat of investor state disputes (that is the initiation of multi-million dollar lawsuits against the government in an off-shore tribunal). Although state to state dispute processes have been expressly excluded by the annex, the investor to state process (ISDS) would still apply. The Australians are clearly concerned about this because they’ve proposed a clause that expressly excludes their equivalent of Pharmac from being subjected to ISDS (although it hasn’t yet been accepted). Yet for some reason NZ has not done the same, which means the threat of ISDS would loom heavily over each Pharmac decision. This would have an intimidating and restraining influence, particularly when contentious decisions are hanging in the balance.

So while it could be argued that the fundamental structure of Pharmac would remain intact, on a practical level it would make Pharmac’s operating environment much more challenging. When combined with changes in the Intellectual Property Chapter, the net result would be more of the health budget spent on medicines and more financial pressure on the NZ health system. Even if, as the Prime Minister promised, co-payments for medicines did not increase, the increased cost nationally would very likely have to be offset by cutting other areas of health spending. As a result, real patients would suffer, in particular those with the greatest health needs. This would lead to existing health inequities becoming more deeply entrenched.

It’s not too difficult to imagine that if the Transparency Annex (along with the rest of the TPP) comes into force, then before long we would be hearing that the growing cost of healthcare is making our public health system financially unsustainable. Perhaps we would be told that our expectations have become unrealistic and that we need to settle for less. Perhaps we would then be told that we need to allow multinational medical insurers to come to our rescue and cover the shortfall, opening up the way for a “two tier” health system in NZ.

That’s why it’s so important to anticipate where all this is heading before it’s too late. But in order to do this we need informed public debate. In fact, we need the same kind of “transparent … and accountable procedures” from our political representatives that the leaked annex reveals they are quite willing to concede to the Pharmaceutical Industry.

 

 

 

Doctors for Healthy Trade

Doctors for the Protection of Health in Trade Agreements  (known as Doctors for Healthy Trade) is a growing informal coalition of New Zealand doctors and colleagues in health in New Zealand and elsewhere with over 150 supporters.

The members of our core group are predominantly full-time clinicians, although some of us have university attachments that have allowed a little scope for research and writing on this topic. The doctors who support the protection of health in trade are clinicians in all medical specialities, with strong representation from paediatricians, public health specialist and psychiatrists. For more information see https://www.facebook.com/DrHealthyTrade.

 

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

Exclude Gareth Morgan From Political Process And End His War On The Elderly

12

Screen Shot 2015-06-23 at 4.58.58 am

One thing I really, really hate in this world … is the certain sort of economist or business-person who blithely assumes that just because they’ve demonstrated an alleged competency in *one* field of human endeavour, that this means we are all axiomatically beholden to listen to them in their parsimonious if not pugnacious opinions on just about everything else.

Fresh from his resounding successes at abolishing housecatsincome taxunhealthy eating habits, and the economically progressive wing of the Green Party (otherwise known as “The Green Party”), Gareth Morgan‘s at it again.

This time, apparently declaring war on some of our most vulnerable citizens (and perhaps not coincidentally, the mainstay of the stereotypical NZ First voterbase), The Elderly.

Now let’s get one thing straight. I’m biased. I *like* many of our older citizens – and not just because they’re often appreciative of the work my Chief has done for them.

When it comes to my political values, I’ve often found myself absolutely bowled over and surprised by how much there is in common between people of my generation and our illustrious forebears. I still remember the first time I addressed an NZF meeting, I went on a bit of a rant about how we were going to Unmake Neoliberalism in New Zealand and restore some sort of Social Democratic Sanity to both our economy and our society. A “fair go” kind of ethos wherein we didn’t just close our eyes and blindly trust in the market and hope that things would get better. Where The State was an active, interventionist and CARING one that stepped in both to curb the market’s excesses – and, more importantly, to protect its citizens and boost up and bolster their prospects.

Now, this met with resounding applause. Not because I’m any great orator (at least, I wasn’t, then) … but because to these people I wasn’t describing some mythical Camelot or City on a Hill.

I was describing exactly the sort of New Zealand they felt they’d grown up in – and then watched cruelly ripped asunder from them during the Rogernomics and Ruthanasia economic reforms of the 1980s and early 1990s.

So this is why many of that generation GO OUT AND VOTE at EVERY ELECTION. Not because of some high-minded idealist rhetoric about how they were also literally the same generation who not infrequently put life and limb on the line to fight for YOUR right to vote here and now in the future. They did that too – and to the veterans who’ve fought for this country, rest assured you have my eternal and enduring gratitude for what you have done for me and my people.

But instead, because they KNOW that a better society – a fairer society … hell, one where you can even swim in the rivers like they used to do – is possible. And they’re generally hella, hella pissed at the fact that a rogue generation of economists like Gareth Morgan have seen fit to fundamentally distort this in favour of “market equilibriums” and “the state should not interfere”.

That rhetoric’s evil. And these elderly voters … they’re not afraid to call it out for what it is.

Now into this fray rides our very own Man from La Mancha on a motorbike, Gareth Morgan.

Morgan has some very, very funny ideas. One of those is his cat-astrophic campaign to eliminate the main predator of rats and mice within New Zealand (you’ll note those are devourers of Kiwi bird-life at a rate that outstrips cats), apparently heedless of the ecological consequences of same. Another is his ongoing quixotic crusade to destroy the Green Party by vainly shouting from the sidelines about how it ought to coalesce with National, and ditch most of its values in the process.

A third, is his continual effort to overhaul the pension system.

Now let’s be clear about this. Contra to Morgan’s assertions, the New Zealand state pension is not “Fat”.

It is, in fact, between $295.41 and $431.10 a week. A minimum wage job, by contrast, is $590 a week. And we already, as a society, acknowledge that the latter figure is not exactly enough to live on.

So when Morgan breathlessly claims that our senior citizens don’t “deserve” to be looked after in their old age because they’re effectively, in his view, creaming a “fat” income off all of the rest of our common backs … I find this absolutely repugnant.

Hard-working New Zealanders who’ve hit retirement in the last few years and decades have spent the best years of their lives paying taxes – in the case of income generated before Neoliberalism, often quite HIGH taxes – in order to provide the infrastructure, services and support systems which subsequent generations have been lucky enough to enjoy. They’ve also done this on the implicit – if not outright explicit in some cases – promise that we would ALSO look after THEM when the time came that they were no longer up to earning their own income in the work-force.

That’s the social compact (or contract) in action, pure plain and simple.

Now to be fair, the state COULD have been a bit smarter about moving to provide for the needs of its citizens in their retirement – and Morgan is quite right when he points out the lamentable folly of Key’s government suspending contributions to the Cullen Fund while also negligently divesting itself of an income-earning state-asset base which might have helped to pay for future state services and social spending.

But his dual, forked-tongue proposed alternative solutions are abominable.

Quite apart from placing the welfare and income-streams of our elderly under threat … he wants to ensure a lack of opposition to his dastardly scheme by straight-up disenfranchising the elderly! I’m not going to stoop to the depths of rhetoric entailed by his luridly phrased metaphor about “financial genocide” – but it’s not particularly hard to think of other instances wherein entire classes of people have been robbed of their democratic rights in order to mete out a discriminatory injustice against them.

The logic for this is, apparently, that only by removing the voices and the votes of our senior citizens from our democracy can the country prosper. This is in spite of the fact that the fiercest resistors of neoliberalism – and ultimately, the generations that gave us MMP in the first place – are still some of the most active and engaged contributors to the protection of same. I fully agree that more needs to be done to encourage and engage young potential-voters by giving them a stake in our democracy (it’s one of the reasons why I’m in politics) … but getting rid of the elderly so that young people have more of a relative say seems highly sketchy if not outright spurious reasoning at best. You might like to phrase it as “excluding one of the most politically active and experienced generations in order to engage the one that often can’t be bothered voting”.

But I have more faith in the social conscience of young voters than Gareth Morgan himself seems to possess or appears to think we have. The obvious testament to this is the number of people my age I met who’ve said they were voting New Zealand First not just because of their nationalistic streak, or our kick-arse policies for youth … but because they respected and admired the job we did of looking after their grand-parents, too.

We recognize that a stable, sane and fair society is not one in which – Logan’s Run style – you wind up being excluded and marginalized just because of your age. But rather, one in which both the previous contributions and the present needs of our citizenry are acknowledged, respected, and engaged with appropriately.

Not least because, as in the case of our older New Zealanders, they’ve often lived through the mistakes of the past and come through them with the wisdom which we can learn from if we wish to repeat them.

Having said that, there’s one older New Zealander who, through their ongoing fruitcake contributions to our public sphere (and I *don’t* mean Alison Holst), has potentially demonstrated they’re no longer worthy of a say.

I think it’s high time we let Gareth Morgan take his own advice and disregard his self-appointed political role in our society.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

Malcolm Evans – Kauri logs

5

Screen Shot 2015-06-23 at 4.48.38 am

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

TDB Political Caption Competition

4

Screen Shot 2015-06-21 at 5.01.21 pm

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

The Daily Blog Open Mic Tuesday 23rd June 2015

2

openmike

 

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.

 

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

Discretion Is Part Of Natural Policing, On Licenses And Elsewhere – Ron Mark

3

Screen Shot 2015-06-23 at 4.37.55 am

Once again, Ron Mark perfectly encapsulates my views. ANYONE on the roads who’s unlicensed or driving outside the conditions of their restricted is a potential hazard. Helping to ensure they get their license can be a positive step – but if this policy of non-ticketing unlicensed Maori drivers in South Auckland is a good one, then its benefits ought not be restricted on the basis of race.

Not least because, as some have pointed out, an officer might have a hard time working out who is and who isn’t Maori for the purposes of the scheme. As Ron Mark – NZ First MP notes, there are a not insignificant number of blonde haired and blue eyed Maori these days. And surely if the argument behind the policy is that it’s geared toward reducing offending and criminalization of an underclass, then Pasifika New Zealanders and hell, any Kiwi from a lower socio-economic background ought to qualify too.

Also, the way the Police Minister has handled this – by simply turning on those officers under his management and making out like it’s their fault exclusively rather than fronting up and taking responsibility for the conduct and policy of the Ministry he’s nominally in charge of – is just not on.

We saw the same thing with the dangerous “Zero Tolerance” speeding policy over Summer. When the heat went on, the Minister washed his hands rather than do his job.

Finally, and arguably most importantly, Ron raises the very sensible point that the terms being discussed – “Police Discretion” and “Diversion” used to be far more common hallmarks of “natural policing” than they are today.

There was nothing abnormal in the 1970s about a policeman using his discretion to frog-march a young (minor) offender back to their parents rather than insisting on charging him or her and putting them through the wringer of the official (even criminal) justice system to emerge with a black mark against their name.

As the host points out – not a few of our politicians would, today, be living lives *very* different to the ones they’ve got had they been in receipt of a conviction rather than a somewhat kindly disposed and understanding police officer. And our Nation would be all the poorer for it.

The use of discretion in community policing is sensible, and can do a power of good. But only if it’s available to be applied across the board rather than exclusively on the basis of race; and further, as a matter of individual circumstance rather than top-down ham-fisted imposition.

Speaking of top-down ham-fisted impositions, it’s a shame the Parliamentary boys in blue are so quick to throw the *real* boys in blue who protect our streets under the bus with such alarming regularity.

Mark my words – if this keeps up, there will be many a policeman voting NZF come Election Day 2017.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

STAY CONNECTED

11,996FansLike
4,057FollowersFollow

Foreign policy + Intel + Security

Subscribe | Follow | Bookmark
and join Buchanan & Manning LIVE Thursdays @ midday

MIL Public Webcast Service