Home Blog Page 1202

Candidates for Solomon Islands PM announced amid ‘political turbulence’

November 14, 2017

Candidates for Solomon Islands top job … Central Honiara MP Rick Houenipwela (left) and Small Malaita MP John Moffat Fugui. Image: Solomon Star News

Amid continued “political turbulence” in the Solomon Islands, candidates for the position of prime minister have been announced, the Solomon Islands Broadcasting Corporation reports.

MP for Central Honiara John Moffat Fugui will go head-to-head with Small Malaita MP Rick Houenipwela for the position on Wednesday morning.

Solomon Star News reports Fugui and Houenipwela were the only two candidates, nominated by the Honiara Hotel camp (opposition) and Heritage Park Hotel camp (caretaker government) respectively.

SIBC reports Houenipwela is considered the better candidate by the public.

In government for seven years, Houenipwela’s top priorities if elected are political and fiscal stability.

He told Solomon Star News these were the fundamental reasons the Democratic Alliance Party switched from the opposition to the caretaker government.

Houenipwela also told SIBC the DAP made the move in an effort to form a new coalition which would provide the nation with desperately needed political stability.

-Partners-

‘Never accepted’ money
“Political and fiscal stability underpin the general stability of any nation and these were the fundamental reasons for switching sides.

“We did not join the caretaker government in search of positions or in search of money. We were never offered any money because everyone in Parliament knows that when we were offered money, we never accepted them,” Houenipwela said.

Houenipwela’s DAP walked away from the opposition due to a lack of consultation over a proposed cabinet line-up, he said.

The DAP’s move comes amidst a three week period which has been marked by changed allegiances and moves to consolidate power.

Solomon Star News reports the Heritage Park Hotel camp is now comprised of the Kadere Party, People’s Alliance Party, People’s First Party and the DAP, bringing their numbers up from 23 to 30.

Houenipwela confirmed the caretaker government coalition partners consist of the two political parties that formerly made up the opposition and three political parties of the former Sogavare-led Democratic Coalition for Change Government (DCCG).

The opposition’s numbers have dwindled to 20 MPs, reports Solomon Fresh Beat Online.

Fugui announces policies
Opposition candidate for prime minister, Fugui, told SIBC the value leaders placed on their duty to the nation was more important than setting political and fiscal stability as priorities, as good governance and a stable economy result from leaders valuing their role.

Fugui’s policies included greater support of rural people and beefing up the country’s foreign reserves, SIBC reports.

The group which nominated Houenipwela included former Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare, who was ousted last week following a 27 to 23 no-confidence vote, after initially refusing to resign.

During the nine hour debate in parliament, Sogavare defended his strong stance on West Papua, following criticism from Fugui, Solomon Star News reports.

Fugui said Sogavare should withdraw support of the Indonesian-ruled region and not waste the Solomon Islands time, as Papua New Guinea had not been advocating for West Papua.

Sogavare hit-back in his rebuttal and said the government’s position must be consistent with its position on New Caledonia’s independence, French Polynesia’s decolonisation agenda and Taiwan’s bid for United Nations membership.

He added the Solomon Islands must stand beside its Melanesian brothers and sisters, as they did not enjoy the same basic rights.

Sogavare survived a no-confidence motion in October 2006 despite deteriorating relations with Australia, but did not survive a vote of no-confidence in December 2007.

The election of Houenipwela or Fugui to the top post of prime minister takes place on Wednesday, November 15 at 9.30am.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

Australia accused of ‘bullying’ Pacific neighbours out of climate compo

By Pacific Media Centre -

November 14, 2017

Greenpeace political message to COP23 on fossil fuels. Image: Greenpeace

Pacific Media Report Newsdesk

Australia has picked up a second Fossil of the Day award at COP23 in Bonn for seeking to twist, water down and delete references to finance from the loss and damage decision text, Greenpeace reports.

Loss and damage refers to impacts of climate change including slow onset events such as sea level rise, and extreme weather events, such as tropical cyclones, which may both result in loss of lands, livelihoods and in small island states, coastal areas.

“Australia has long lacked many things – sympathy, support, and solidarity among them – with its Pacific Island neighbors, but these bullying tactics are over the line, even for them,” the Climate Action Network, which presented the award on day six of COP23, said in a statement.

Australia’s reported hypocritical behaviour also appears to contradict the comments it made in its opening statement on behalf of the Umbrella Group of non-EU developed countries to current COP President, Fiji’s Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama.

“We are mindful that this is the first time a Small Island Developing State has held the presidency and we are committed to providing our full support for your successful presidency, including to bring the Pacific consciousness to this COP which we know to be an important aspect of your presidency,” Australia said in its opening statement to the COP plenary.

“Australia’s domestic policies, such as support for the fossil fuel industry through subsidies, is insult enough to the Pacific. Couple that with blocking financial mechanisms for the highly affected, and you do not have a recipe for friendship,” Greenpeace Australia Pacific head of Pacific Net Matisse Walkden-Brown said.

-Partners-

The Pacific Island Climate Action Network (PICAN) condemned Australia’s reported obstruction, saying the region is already experiencing loss and damage from climate change.

“Support is necessary and deserved from countries who have caused this problem. Developed countries’ fossil fuels is the Pacific’s loss and damage. The issue of Loss and Damage finance needs to be advanced not continuously pushed to the next session,” PICAN said.

Australia was awarded the Fossil of the Day along with Canada, the EU and the US.

Australia, through the Umbrella Group, also argued in 2015 that there be no reference to loss and damage in the Paris Agreement, reportedly driven by fear of being forced to pay compensation for climate damage caused by their emissions.

On day two of COP23 Australia received the Fossil of the Day for its support of the Adani Group’s plans to build the world’s largest export coal mine.

Activists from Greenpeace in Germany and Pacific Island representatives have sent a message to leaders meeting at the UN climate talks in Bonn, projecting an image of faces onto a coal power plant and calling for an urgent phase out of fossil fuels, Greenpeace reports.

The message “No future in fossil fuels” and #COP23 was projected onto the polluting Neurath coal power plant alongside faces from the Pacific Islands and around the world to put a spotlight on the impact the emissions from climate summit host nation Germany have on the Pacific.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: Labour’s remarkable CPTPP

By Bryce Edwards -

November 13, 2017

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: Labour’s remarkable CPTPP

[caption id="attachment_13635" align="alignright" width="150"]

Dr Bryce Edwards.[/caption] Last year, Labour MPs were amongst the 72,000 who marched in the streets against the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement. Now in Government, Labour appears to have made major progress in ensuring the TPP should happen. Below are 20 of the most important items from recent days about the progress of the deal. [caption id="attachment_15386" align="aligncenter" width="1600"]

New Zealand Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, at the APEC leaders’ summit, November 2017 (Image courtesy of APEC.org).[/caption] 1) The TPP is now the CPTPP! Vernon Small explains: “It might be near unpronounceable as the CPTPP (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for the Trans-Pacific Partnership), and loom on paper like an abbreviation of something from the former Soviet Union, but apparently the rebranding will help Trudeau sell it to his voters” – see: Jacinda Ardern passes Apec test. See also, Audrey Young’s TPP not dead but needs more work – PM. 2) Many former critics of the TPP are now happier with the agreement that seems to be emerging. Bryan Gould says “If the reports coming out of the negotiations are correct… the problems many had with the TPPA will have been substantially resolved” – see: Is the TPPA now fit for purpose? Gould gives credit to Ardern: “We will be able to judge how successful she has been when we see the full amended text. But the early reports are that substantial progress was made on these points of difficulty, and if that is so, it is entirely because she dug in her heels.” 3) The deal has been improved largely thanks to Canada, says blogger No Right Turn – see: Saved by Canada. He’s more positive about the deal than previously, but says, “Whether the deal is still worth it for New Zealand without US market access remains to be seen, but in the previous analysis the US bullshit was a significant cost, so it might be”. 4) The Labour-led government is winning the praise and support of business and the National Party for their progress on the trade deal – see Craig McCulloch’s Exporters welcome revamped TPP, critics have doubts. However, former Trade Minister Todd McClay is also quoted suggesting that the deal isn’t so different to National’s version: “We can give it a different name, but ultimately it substantially is the same”. 5) On RNZ’s Nine-to-Noon today, Matthew Hooton praised Ardern and Parker, pointing to the difficult ideological terrain for the Labour leadership: “I think that the Government has handled this well. They do have this fringe, including within their own party, which has got themselves into an absolute lather over this issue. And Jacinda Ardern, I think, has done enough to keep that extreme left, at least if not happy with what she has done, but at least not going to man the barricades” – listen here: Political commentators Mike Williams & Matthew Hooton. 6) How has David Parker managed to walk the tightrope of placating so many critics and fans of the TPP? For the best answer to this, see Sam Sachdeva’s interview with the Trade Minister: David Parker plots a new approach to trade. Partly, it seems that the Minister is much more determined to make gains that the political left might appreciate. Parker is also very sensitive to the need to be more transparent and communicative over the negotiations. 7) David Parker’s attempt to make trade deals more progressive is dealt with in Sam Sachdeva’s The fight for multilateral trade. According to this, “Parker said the CPTPP was good for New Zealand not just in terms of market access, but by providing enforcement mechanisms to hold countries to account if they didn’t meet labour and environmental standards.” 8) For details of the effort Jacinda Ardern and David Parker have been going to in order to keep their party onside with them over the negotiations, see Richard Harman’s Labour Party on side with new TPP – so far. Harman says that the issue of how Ardern now deals with getting an agreement supported by her colleagues “is going to be real test of Jacinda Ardern’s political management skills.” 9) The National Party has clearly indicated they will help Labour get any TPP legislation passed in Parliament. But Richard Harman argues that relying on National “would almost certainly damage Labour among its base who generally ardently oppose the TPP” – see: National tries to drive wedge into coalition. 10) A long-time observer and critic of free trade deals, Gordon Campbell seems relatively happy with progress made in the weekend – see: On the TPP outcome, and the Hobbit law. His main concern has been the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS), and he says: “if we couldn’t remove ISDS measures entirely, what we could do was make it harder for foreign firms to access them. The Ardern/Parker aim in Vietnam has been to severely restrict the conditions under which foreign firms could trigger ISDS measures, and Parker took at least three different routes to that goal.” 11) How have the ISDS provisions changed? The improvements are outlined by Sam Sachdeva: “Ardern said they had been successful in narrowing the ISDS provisions in three areas: they no longer apply to investment screening (which will protect the Government’s restriction on foreign buyers from challenge), will not allow a company that takes up a contract with a government to sue through the ISDS, and changes to the way it applies to financial services” – see: New TPP text brings change, outstanding issues. See also, Vernon Small’s Renamed TPP ‘a damned sight better’, could be in place in a few months. 12) Jane Kelsey has been the leading opponent of the TPP, and she gave her strong verdict against the latest deal on TV3’s AM Show this morning. You can watch her interview with Duncan Garner, along with other interviews on the topic here: Greens will go against Labour in TPP vote. 13) For more of Kelsey’s analysis, see her Herald opinion piece, Signing TPPA-11 would break Labour’s word, and Leith Huffadine’s Why is the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement back on the table? 14) Many leftwing bloggers aren’t convinced that the TPP has been modified enough. At The Standard, Lynn Prentice warns Labour: “The new government, if it is interested in proceeding with something like the TPPA, should at the very least stop hunting for momentum and concentrate on transparency and analysis. Because if you can’t convince me that this agreement is anything other than a scam, then you won’t be able to convince many on the ‘left’.” – see: TPP: A slight improvement but deservedly still a zombie. 15) It’s not clear if Jacinda Ardern has managed to fix the TPP or not, but writing before the weekend, Chris Trotter said that if she hasn’t done so, then for many people, “Jacinda” will have become “just another f***ing politician” – see: TPP: Fix It, Jacinda, Or Forget It. Trotter paints a picture of the new government selling out its core activists. 16) Laura O’Connell Rapira of ActionStation is far from convinced about what the new government is doing on trade. Writing last week, she suggested the public is being manipulated by Jacinda Ardern and Labour – see: Don’t fall for the government’s spin on the TPPA. She also points out that Labour had previously run a petition against the TPP, but when you go to the party’s website now, all you see is: “A big ol’ blank page”. 17) The Labour Party is out of sync with the labour movement over the new trade deal, with the Council of Trade Unions coming out to say the TPP is still “structurally biased towards the commercial sector and downplayed issues such as health, safety and human rights”. CTU secretary Sam Huggard says that unions would like to “be part of a conversation with government about what a better agenda for trade could look like for working people” – see RNZ’s TPP critics unmoved by new negotiation wins. 18) The Green Party has announced, unsurprisingly, that they will vote against the new deal. Trade spokesperson Golriz Ghahraman admits the new agreement is an improvement, but says the Government should have pushed harder for a better agreement – see Claire Trevett’s Greens will not support revised TPP trade deal. 19) How could Labour go from opposing the TPP to negotiating what appears to be its near-conclusion? According to Rob Hosking this can easily be explained by the fact that politicians often say one thing in opposition and then another in government, and he calls this “‘the Maharey Rule”. He explains: “Steve Maharey, newly appointed Social Development Minister under Helen Clark, excused one of that government’s changes of tack when challenged about the mismatch between his opposition rhetoric and his actions by breezily saying it was ‘just the sort of thing you say in opposition’. It was a burst of admirable frankness, and as such has been celebrated ever since” – see: Labour TPP stance harks back to Maharey. 20) Finally, for humour about the trade negotiations over the years, see my blog post, The history of NZ’s TPP negotiations via cartoons.]]>

Critical Politics Newsletter: New Zealand Politics Daily – 13 November 2017

By Bryce Edwards -

November 13, 2017

Critical Politics Newsletter: New Zealand Politics Daily – 13 November 2017 – Today’s content

Editor’s Note: Here below is a list of the main issues currently under discussion in New Zealand and links to media coverage. [caption id="attachment_297" align="aligncenter" width="1600"]

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: The story of the ‘far-right takeover of New Zealand’

By Bryce Edwards -

November 13, 2017

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: The story of the ‘far-right takeover of New Zealand’

[caption id="attachment_13635" align="alignright" width="150"]

Dr Bryce Edwards.[/caption] Political analysts are still trying to work out what the new Labour-led government means for New Zealand. There are a variety of different views on the ideological nature of the new administration, especially because it involves three very interesting political parties, all of which have recently been in a state of flux. [caption id="attachment_2959" align="aligncenter" width="637"]

New Zealand Deputy Prime Minister and New Zealand First leader Winston Peters.[/caption] On Thursday, a highly controversial analysis of where this government is going was published, claiming that the new coalition government might appear to be progressive but is actually controlled by the far-right – by which the writer meant the New Zealand First party. The piece gained particular notoriety because it was published by the Washington Post – see: How the far right is poisoning New Zealand. Author Ben Mack writes: “while Ardern may be the public face, it’s the far right pulling the strings and continuing to hold the nation hostage. What’s happened in New Zealand isn’t just horrifying because of the long-term implications of hate-mongers controlling the country, but also because it represents a blueprint that the far right can follow to seize power elsewhere. Appealing to ethnically homogenous, overwhelmingly cisgender male voters with limited education and economic prospects who feel they’re being left behind in a changing world is nothing new for the far right. But what is new is its savvy at exploiting democracy by doubling down on these voters”. The article concludes by calling for Labour to dissolve the government: “it would be best for Ardern to end her unholy alliance with New Zealand First and the far right, even if it meant she might not return as prime minister. As long as the far right has power, bigotry and hate will continue to fester in Middle-earth.” For more on Mack’s view of Peters see the recent Herald column As an immigrant, I’m terrified of Winston Peters. The dismayed reaction in New Zealand After being painted as a far-right villain, New Zealand First leader Winston Peters hit back on TVNZ1’s Breakfast yesterday: “Can I just say, I’m writing to the Washington Post to suggest that someone’s escaped from a lunatic asylum about 2.30 in the morning and writing an article in the name of that person, because no sound, sane person could have written that malicious, totally false statement” – see: Winston Peters launches scathing attack on article that called NZ First a far-right party poisoning New Zealand. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern was apparently more diplomatic, laughing off the report: “I’d suggest that the Washington Post probably hasn’t interviewed anyone from New Zealand First, or potentially even a voter, before making those assumptions”. On social media, the reaction has been ferocious, scorning the writer’s understanding of New Zealand, and asking what on earth the Washington Post was playing at publishing the piece. For example, @NZleftrightout said “I’ve never written anything longer than a tweet, but i now believe I could get insanely drunk & write for the @washingtonpost on NZ politics. #nzpol #thisisreallybad”. For more, see my blog post, Top tweets about the Washington Post article on NZ politics. Duncan Greive ridicules the article on The Spinoff: “New Zealand has been living a lie”, and “It would be easy to brush this off as scaremongering, or a shockingly ill-informed column which mischaracterises everything it touches on. This is exactly what the far right wants you to do” – see: The shocking truth: Washington Post reveals the ‘far right agenda’ of the new Labour-led government. And today David Slack also mocks the Washington Post piece – see: That’s not a tiki torch, it’s a tiki. Fact checking the “fake news” There has been widespread astonishment that any newspaper, let alone the fabled Washington Post, would publish such a bizarre and inaccurate article. Media commentator John Drinnan blogged to say “the lack of fact checks raises questions about how much the paper that broke Watergate cares about its reputation” – see: Muddled facts on Middle Earth. Similarly, former Reserve Bank economist Michael Reddell, exclaimed, “how one of the world’s major media outlets, and serious newspapers, fell for this nonsense is a rather bigger puzzle. It might be the age of ‘fake news’, but generally serious newspapers are supposed to be guardians against it, not the purveyors of nonsense to the world” – see his blog post, The Washington Post falls for Ben Mack. Reddell is one of many bloggers who have valiantly attempted to “fact check” the Washington Post story. He focused in particular on Mack’s arguments that New Zealand First has pushed the new government to implement immigration cuts, and the ban on foreign house buyers: “New Zealand First didn’t get any of its immigration policies (such as they were) adopted at all. The new government says it is adopting the centre-left Labour Party’s policy. And that ban on foreign purchases, well it was supported – going into the election – by all three parties in the government, including the rather left-wing Greens.” On New Zealand First’s orientation to race issues, Reddell correctly points out that “like them or not, New Zealand First gets a larger share of its votes from Maori than many other parties. In fact, Peters himself is Maori.” For other fact checking, see Michael Daly’s Washington Post contributor says in NZ ‘real power lies with the far right’, Pete George’s Out of whack Mack on the ‘far right’, and Emma Gorowski’s No, the Far Right is not holding power in New Zealand. RNZ’s Tim Watkin got the Washington Post to publish his own rebuttal to Mack’s piece – see his excellent response: No, New Zealand is not in the ‘poisonous grip’ of the far right. Here’s Watkin’s core point about New Zealand First: “no one with any political sense would call the party ‘far right.’ Indeed, many of its economic policies are quite interventionist and arguably its most surprising win in coalition talks was to get the minimum wage increased to $20 per hour by 2020. More importantly, it’s simply incorrect to say Peters and his party have ‘seized power’. The fact is that New Zealand First won very little in its coalition negotiations with the main parties.” He concludes: “So rest assured Post readers. New Zealand remains a liberal democracy. If we are stuck with those Middle earth analogies, let’s just say that the orcs remain far from the levers of power.” How could someone get it so wrong? So, who is the writer of the Washington Post article? Ben Mack is an American who moved to New Zealand a few years ago, and trained in journalism at the University of Canterbury. Mack’s university profile states, “Since graduating, Ben has gone on to a variety of other writing roles, including with Idealog Magazine, feminist blog Villainesse, and the New Zealand Herald”. Mack’s main role at the moment seems to be running Lizzie Marvelly’s Villainesse blog site, which describes itself as “No filter, no bullshit media for young women” and has written extensively on gender issues, including a personal account of gender identity in this New Zealand Herald column: Misgendering in New Zealand. Mack is quoted saying “I love journalism because of the importance of fighting for positive change, holding power to account, and empowering communities and marginalised people.” And this is the key to understanding where the journalist is coming from: socially liberal, politically passionate and wanting to change the world for the better. For a sense of Mack’s political worldview it’s also worth reading the recent Herald column, Jacinda Ardern won’t change a thing, in which they outline “the problems of misogyny, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, racism, xenophobia, bigotry, hatred and systematic oppression” in New Zealand. Martyn Bradbury blogs about Mack’s identity politics lens, joking that “In the radical fringe world of Twitter Identity Politics, binary gender and immigration controls are hate crimes, militant veganism is the only dietary option, polyamorous coupling is the only ethical sex and masculinity is a disease ranked somewhere between cancer and ebola” – see: What Duncan Greive misses and why Ben Mack is National’s best chance of winning 2020. This view of the world is one in which social conservatives are the biggest enemy of the oppressed and marginalised. Economic oppression is less of a focus than oppression on the basis of ethnicity, gender, and sexual orientation. Bradbury suggests that the leftwing programme of the new government is easily overlooked if the focus is on social conservativism: “For the Ben Mack’s of NZ, paid parental leave, free education and 100 000 more new houses are pitiful facades that hides the new Government’s true hatred of immigrants.” Coming from a similar perspective, one blog commenter at The Standard, says that Mack “provides us all a glimpse into the liberal identity politics mindset of the US culture wars. it is a pretty bleak, polarised and hysterical place replicated in kind from the right” – see: Can Ben Mack please make his mind up. In this sense, liberals who are horrified at Winston Peters having political power are akin to those in Labour who tried to have Willie Jackson ejected from their party because of his “toxic” views – see my column from earlier in the year: The liberal vs left divide over Willie Jackson. And a similar notion was advanced by the Greens a few months ago, when then co-leader Metiria Turei went on a campaign against what she called Winston Peters’ racism – see my column from the time: Green anxiety about being locked out of government. This discussion of racism led to a number of commentators pointing out how toxic they think Peters is. For example, see Hayden Donnell’s Revealed: Winston Peters has never had a racist approach to anything. Such a blog post could be even used as a defence of Ben Mack’s article. Similarly, other New Zealand politicians from across the political spectrum have been charged with having reactionary views. For an examination of this, see Tess McClure’s For the Record: What Have NZ Politicians Done For Race Relations? Finally, for a much more robust examination of the reality of the far right in this country, it’s well worth reading the recent investigative report by the Herald’s Kirsty Johnston – see: How NZ’s growing alt-right movement plans to influence the election.]]>

Bentley Effect doco aims to ‘inspire’ NZ fight against oil, gas exploration

By Pacific Media Centre -

November 12, 2017

inal-greet-the-dawn-by-rj-poole_preview_680-553pxls-jpg — ]]>

The Bentley Effect … “inspiring celebration of the power of community”. Video: The Bentley Effect Movie

By Kendall Hutt in Auckland

In 2010, gas exploration in Australia’s Northern Rivers region of New South Wales sparked protest and rallied a community into becoming a broad-based social movement.

The exploration by Sydney-based company Metgasco faced a five-year long opposition from the community of Bentley, where a 2km deep well was to be drilled on an old dairy property.

Several weeks before the planned drilling operation in 2014, thousands set up camp on a neighbouring property in a protest which made headlines and was dubbed the Bentley Blockade.

The blockade is the subject of multi award-winning feature-length documentary The Bentley Effect.

The Bentley Blockade … “We don’t want to live in a gas field”. Image: Brendan Shoebridge

“The documentary chronicles my community’s response to the threat of unconventional gas mining and the industrialisation it brings.

-Partners-

“Although gas mining is the vehicle, it’s more about what community can do when it comes together.

“In this case, the community drew a line in the sand, came together en masse and said ‘No we don’t want to live in a gas field’.

Power of community
“It’s an inspiring celebration of the power of community,” says director Brendan Shoebridge.

Shoebridge has been in New Zealand since late September screening his documentary across the country.

He spoke to Asia Pacific Report ahead of the documentary’s last screening in Auckland at an event organised by Greenpeace, 350 Aotearoa and Fossil Free UoA.

Shoebridge said he hoped the spirit behind The Bentley Effect inspired a similar stand in New Zealand.

“New Zealand’s unique and precious beauty holds a special place in everyone’s hearts and I’m hoping the film will inspire local audiences to keep it safe and pure,” he said.

Asked why this was the case, Shoebridge told Asia Pacific Report it was due to “massive threats” to the country and its “brand”.

These threats included prospecting by New Zealand Oil and Gas in a massive gas field more than 60km off the coast of Oamaru and proposed oil and gas exploration off the coasts of Canterbury and Taranaki in the habitats of endangered Hector’s dolphins and blue whales.

Risk versus profit
“Really the last thing we need is more methane and another fossil fuel industry.

“Locals here have to ask the question ‘Who is going to bear the risk and who is going to take the profit?’ These are the questions we all have to start asking,” he said.

However, Shoebridge said New Zealand’s response to the documentary had been “fantastic” and it seemed to resonate with Kiwi audiences.

“New Zealand has a rich, proud heritage of protest.

“There is so many examples of successful non-violent civil disobedience.

“I think the story really does resonate quite powerfully here” he said.

Shoebridge said The Bentley Effect built on the threat posed by natural gas exploration in Josh Fox’s 2010 documentary Gasland.

Bentley Effect ‘solution’
The Bentley Effect not only showed the problem of exploration, it showed what the world could do about it, he explained.

“What viewers will see is a social movement from start to finish.

“It’s on a smaller, localised scale but what was achieved was a fully-fledged social movement, a broad-based social movement which involved everybody, all walks of life.

Protester Robert Morton … “Don’t gas Bentley Bungabee”. Image: Brendan Shoebridge

“Audiences can see for themselves how people mobilise. How ordinary, everyday people took a lead and made massive contributions in their own way.

“That was a key aim in showcasing what happened in Bentley – communities aren’t powerless, they can push back on these things.”

Shoebridge said at the time of the blockade, 50 wells had already been drilled.

However, due to the broad-based social movement’s opposition, Shoebridge said, the State Government was not prepared to pay the political price, despite earlier being “hell-bent” on pushing its gas plan through.

Exploration licences suspended
In May 2014 the State Government suspended Metgasco’s gas exploration licence and in October 2015 it bought back petroleum exploration licences covering more than 500,000 hectares across the Northern Rivers region.

“To get that overturned and those wells decommissioned and the licences removed was a real achievement,” Shoebridge said.

Shoebridge said Bentley’s stand against big business and its own government had set an “amazing” precedent in the war against natural gas.

“I think a lot of communities around the world will draw strength from what was achieved” he said.

Bentley’s story was also “universal”, Shoebridge said, as similar battles were happening across the globe.

“These battles are happening everywhere and they’re playing out on all sorts of different fronts, but it’s essentially the same battle.

“When people come and see the film, I think they are drawing a lot of strength and probably seeing that the same strategies can be superimposed onto any of our battles, whether it’s the fight for clean water against big dairy, 1080, fluoridation, or logging.”

Youth involvement key
Shoebridge said a “big chunk” of the solution in battling such environmental and social injustice issues was people taking a lead with their skill set in their landscape.

“I think if everyone did that we’d smash our problems pretty quickly.”

Youth have a particular role in “smashing” problems in a world where political will on “climate chaos” was lacking, Shoebridge added.

“From our experience politicians don’t respond to education they only respond to pressure.

“That’s where the youth can come in. They can talk from the heart and talk about what it feels like to have your future robbed from you.

“Naturally the youth are going to feel varying degrees of despair and powerlessness, but we can’t afford to give up hope and we mustn’t.

“Anything that tops up their tanks and inspires meaningful action is a good thing,” Shoebridge said.

Although his work is largely about hope, Shoebridge warned the world needed to come together in order to face the “tough times” ahead.

“I know we all have to start thinking in terms of a global village rather than national borders because we’re all in this together and we’re all going to pay the same price if we don’t meet those challenges.”

The Bentley Effect screens tomorrow 4pm to 7pm at LibB28 at the University of Auckland and includes a Q+A with Shoebridge and key members of the documentary.

Protester Jarmbi of the Githabul … “community drew a line” before police. Image: Brendan Shoebridge

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

‘Healers, not harmers’ – Climate Warriors present COP23 declaration

By Pacific Media Centre -

November 10, 2017

“We all stand together as one family” … Pacific Climate Warriors Declaration on Climate Change presented at COP23. Image: 350 Pacific

Climate activists from across the Pacific region have presented a declaration on climate change to key Pacific environmental leaders at COP23.

The Pacific Climate Warriors Declaration on Climate Change, part of 350’s Have Your Sei campaign, was signed by more than 23,000 people and called on world leaders to take effective action on climate change by placing the voice of the people above that of the fossil fuel industry.

350 Pacific’s Pacific Climate Warriors made the bold call in September to ensure the region’s leadership on climate change was recognised and the Pacific’s voice heard.

Similar calls were made at the talanoa gathering place in the Bonn Zone.

The Samoa Planet reports the group’s Tokelauan representative challenged the rest of the world to follow the nation’s example of the first to be powered by 100 percent renewable energy, a transition which is called for in the declaration.

“We all stand together as one family,” they said, and continued with a call to “Kick the big polluters out of climate talks,” Lani Wendt Young reports.

The call echoed a plea made by the Pacific Climate Warriors on the eve of COP23 to end the era of fossil fuels.

-Partners-

‘Healers, not harmers’
The declaration was printed on tapa cloth, with framed copies presented to key Pacific environment leaders, including Francois Martel, the Secretary-General of the Pacific Islands Development Forum and the former President of Kiribati and global advocate and climate warrior, Anote Tong on Wednesday.

The presentation opened with a lotu and blessing offered by climate warrior, Reverend James, who prayed for an increased spiritual awareness of the earth and ocean.

“May we be healers, not harmers.”

Pacific leadership on climate change and its recognition called for by the Pacific Climate Warriors, has been symbolized in the Bonn Zone’s talanoa space and the renaming of the facilitative dialogue process to “talanoa dialogue”.

The Fiji Times reports the “talanoa spirit” which characterises Fiji’s presidency of COP23 has extended into open dialogue between the COP parties and non-state actors.

“This is the first open dialogue between parties and non-parties in the history of the COP process. It’s not a side event. It has been mandated by the parties and is designed to bring state actors and non-state actors together in the Bula Zone.

“I’m delighted as COP23 president that we have been able to connect in this manner. Because it goes to the heart of the grand coalition concept that Fiji has been promoting all year.

Adopting talanoa spirit
“We will not be negotiating. We will be talking to each other. And we will be listening. This is the perfect setting for adopting the talanoa spirit that is so much a part of what Fiji brings to the presidency.

“Together, we should learn how to engage all levels of government, civil society, the private sector and billions of ordinary citizens in the formation of the national plans for climate action,” Fiji’s Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama said.

Bainimarama also called for frank and open discussions around what was and was not working in the fight against climate change, FBC reports.

“We must also be honest about what is not working. Because the Talanoa Spirit isn’t just about being nice to everyone, although respect is essential.

“It is about contributing to a solution that requires a degree of straight talking. And whoever you represent today, I encourage you to embrace that spirit, honest, constructive dialogue for the common good,” he said.

COP23 continues until November 17.

[embedded content]

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

Critical Politics Newsletter: New Zealand Politics Daily – 10 November 2017

By Bryce Edwards -

November 10, 2017

Critical Politics Newsletter: New Zealand Politics Daily – 10 November 2017 – Today’s content

Editor’s Note: Here below is a list of the main issues currently under discussion in New Zealand and links to media coverage. [caption id="attachment_297" align="aligncenter" width="1600"]

The Beehive and Parliament Buildings.[/caption] Below are the links to the items online. The full text of these items are contained in the PDF file (click to download). Trade Vernon Small (Stuff): TPP ‘agreed in principle’ as Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern arrives in Vietnam Audrey Young (Herald): We have a deal? TPP ‘agreed’ as Jacinda Ardern lands for Apec Sam Sachdeva (Newsroom): Jacinda Ardern: TPP talks ‘down to the wire’ Corin Dann (1News): Winston Peters hits the world stage in group photo with APEC Foreign and Trade ministers in Vietnam Gordon Campbell (Werewolf):On Ardern’s trade battles at APEC Audrey Young (Herald): Jacinda Ardern’s top priority at Apec will be survival of TPP Audrey Young (Herald): Make-or-break time for TPP deal Vernon Small (Stuff): PM Jacinda Ardern is putting even odds on the Trans-Pacific Partnership getting the tick Patrick O’Meara (RNZ): 50-50 chance of TPP deal – Ardern 1News: Jacinda Ardern heads to APEC summit for first big test on international stage Gerald McGhie (Stuff): How our diplomats can come up trumps Parliament John Armstrong (1News): Opinion: Ardern needed Peters at her side when National went for the jugular Chris Trotter (Bowalley Road): Chris Hipkins’ Mistake. Press Editorial: the prime minister’s positive way forward Toby Manhire (Herald): The minister whose homework was eaten by a dog Jo Moir (Stuff): Question Time: Confusion, chaos and comedy as MPs face-off for first time Claire Trevett (Herald): Speaker Trevor Mallard’s left ear the hero of the Opposition Jane Clifton (Stuff): More mirth than menace at Parliament’s first Question Time Jane Patterson (RNZ): Parliament gets off to stumbling start Jane Patterson (RNZ): Jesus, Queen dropped from Parliament prayer No Right Turn: Progress David Farrar (Kiwiblog): Good innovations from Speaker Mallard 1News: ‘They’ll be held hostage by lobbyists and laziness’ – Bill English’s scathing first speech as Leader of the Opposition Watch: Labour’s Kiri Allan lays down some slick spoken word poetry and praises Jacinda Ardern in maiden speech to Parliament Denis Welch (Opposable thumb):Real thing Laura Walters (Stuff): Breastfeeding babies in the debating chamber becoming normalized Holly Walker (Spinoff): I left parliament because I couldn’t be an MP and a mother. This week has given me hope Government Stacey Kirk (Stuff): Row erupting over level of expert scrutiny on early Government decisions Mike Hosking (Herald): This government is specialising in window-dressing, not reform Lindy Laird (Northern Advocate): Acting PM Kelvin Davis expects a bit of stick from Tai Tokerau cousins Washington Post article on govt 1News: Watch: Winston Peters launches scathing attack on article that called NZ First a far-right party poisoning New Zealand Duncan Greive (Spinoff): The shocking truth: Washington Post reveals the ‘far right agenda’ of the new Labour-led government Michael Reddell (Croaking Cassandra): The Washington Post falls for Ben Mack Martyn Bradbury (Daily Blog): What Duncan Greive misses and why Ben Mack is National’s best chance of winning 2020 Pete George (Your NZ): Out of whack Mack on the ‘far right’ Winston Peters legal action 1News: Video: Deputy PM Winston Peters stonewalls journalists when grilled over pension leak legal action Mai Chen (Stuff): No quick resolution in Winston Peters superannuation leak case Dan Satherley (Newshub): Winston Peters ‘not genuine’ in coalition talks – Judith Collins Benedict Collins (RNZ): Peters’ attempts to obtain journalists’ phone records over leak ‘wrong’ Listener: We deserve better than Winston Peters’ legal stunt TOP RNZ: TOP party candidate told to resign Dan Satherley (Newshub): Gareth Morgan fires ‘pain in the arse’ candidate Stuff: ‘You’re a pain in the arse – ka kite ano, Gareth’ Laura Walters (Stuff): Gareth Morgan calls TOP candidate ‘pain in the a…’, tells her to resign National Tom Sainsbury (Spinoff): Kiwis of Snapchat: Simon Bridges, opposition MP Matthew Hooton (Metro): Auckland’s National voters were largely immune to Jacindamania Chris Bishop (Spinoff): Prouder, wealthier, more confident: 10 of the National government’s big achievements Herald: Paula Bennett impersonator returns with grim ‘confession’ about Ardern’s cat Paddles Mitch Harris (Radio Live): National Grief Cycle Environment RNZ: Govt to block new mining on conservation land Herald: Minister says no more mines on conservation land Eric Frykberg (RNZ): Mining industry caught off guard by ban No Right Turn: Orcs not welcome David Williams (Newsroom): NZ getting close to ‘peak cow’ says Minister Herald: New Zealand wants to take lead on climate change, minister to tell conference RNZ: Winter is 30 days shorter, Niwa research finds Alexia Russell (Newstalk ZB): Peters picking a fight with Japan over whaling No Right Turn: Are there too many farmers? Refugees Herald: Leading Aussies plea with PM Jacinda Ardern to save Manus refugees RNZ: Manus Island refugees given two days to move Herald: Amnesty pleads for medical care for about 90 sick Manus Island refugees Donna Miles Mojab (Herald): Refugees have no need to be grateful Employment Gerard Hutching (Stuff): Landcorp to pay 1400 workers $2.4m following seven-year pay slip up RNZ: Working group formed for ‘Hobbit law’ replacement Simon Smith (Stuff): Minister Iain Lees-Galloway says replacing Hobbit law will be ‘a joint solution’ 1News: Government reaffirms commitment to scrap ‘Hobbit Law’ which saw an end to collective negotiations for film industry workers Reserve Bank and economy Brian Fallow (Herald) : Why the long faces about the economy? Hamish Rutherford (Stuff): New Government spending will boost NZ economy, says Reserve Bank Richard Harman (Politik): Reserve Bank doubts Labour’s Kiwibuild plans Bernard Hickey (Newsroom): RBNZ wary of Robertson’s jobless target Education John Gerritsen (RNZ): Teachers, principals worried about restraint rules John Gerritsen (RNZ): Teacher censured for carrying struggling child Justin Stevenson (Stuff): Here’s why removing tertiary fees will make inequality worse John Boynton (RNZ): Māori academics gather to present research Justice and police Herald Editorial:Pora case strengthens argument for criminal cases review commission RNZ: Police unveil online alert system for missing children Housing RNZ: Hope turns to frustration as homeless men wait for housing Robin Martin (RNZ): Builders worried best timber sent overseas John Boynton (RNZ): Tūhoe prepare housing plan for tribe’s future Health Katie Kenny and Laura Walters (Stuff): Mental health inquiry in ‘preliminary stages’, minister says Aaron Leaman and Florence Kerr (Stuff): Waikato DHB won’t release Nigel Murray email Don Rennie (Werewolf): Is It Time To Take ACC Back To First Principles? Media Tom Pullar-Strecker (Stuff): RNZ television no direct competition to commercial stations, minister says Phil Pennington (RNZ): New Zealand’s television history archive under threat Tess Nichol (Herald): ASA rules Facebook ad implying Ardern would end child poverty with abortion misleading Helen Clark Laura Walters (Stuff): Helen Clark takes job at Global Commission on Drug Policy Herald: Helen Clark appointed to Global Commission on Drug Policy RNZ: Clark joins global drug commission Other Susan St John (Newsroom): A good start on tackling child poverty Joel Ineson (Stuff): Renewed calls for Royal Commission into abuse of people in state care Herald: Minister of Forests Shane Jones targets timber ‘shysters’ Andre Chumko (Stuff): Napier City councillors vote against establishing Māori wards Derek Cheng (Herald): Defence Minister Ron Mark requests briefing on Hit & Run issues Laura Dooney (RNZ): Shutter buildings that miss quake deadline – investor Te Aniwa Hurihanganui (RNZ): ‘We are never going to let the memories of our unique tribe fade’ Deborah Coddington (Spinoff): Book of the Week: The wild life and times of ex-junkie, ex-Green MP, constant hero Sue Bradford RNZ: Sport: ‘Samoa rugby will die’ warns Leo]]>

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: Winston Peters’ fight against “filthy” politics

By Bryce Edwards -

November 9, 2017

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: Winston Peters’ fight against “filthy” politics

[caption id="attachment_13635" align="alignright" width="150"]

Dr Bryce Edwards.[/caption] No one should have been surprised by Winston Peters taking legal action this week over what he calls “filthy politics”. After all, he signaled before the election that he was determined to use the law to get justice. And although most of the media reaction has been very negative, it really is understandable that he is still seeking answers. [caption id="attachment_15332" align="aligncenter" width="800"]

Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters (left), the Governor General of New Zealand Dame Patsy Reddy (centre), with Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern – image taken at the swearing in of the new Labour-led Government, October 26, 2017.[/caption] The new deputy prime minister is taking the action against nine individuals, including former National prime minister Bill English, the head of the Ministry of Social Development, and Newshub political reporter Lloyd Burr. It’s all because he believes that the personal information about his superannuation overpayment was deliberately made public at the height of the election campaign. For more details of the legal action, see Nicholas Jones’ Winston Peters’ legal action a ‘personal matter’, Ardern says. Newsroom co-editor Tim Murphy was also served legal papers by Peters’ lawyers, and he details the court action in Winston goes fishing. Murphy explains that Peters is seeking a judgement related to a “breach of privacy”, and is requesting those served provide all sorts of records of communications relating to the Peters superannuation scandal in order to discover who is responsible for the breach of his privacy. The best discussion and examination of the law around this case is by Mai Chen, in her article published today, No quick resolution in Winston Peters superannuation leak case. She explains how the court process is supposed to work, and concludes: “The likelihood is that it will take several months for the court to determine the matter – longer if there are appeals. If the court grants Peters’ applications, and he finds what he is looking for, then the substantive claim for breach of privacy will then be determined against the alleged leakers.” Much of the case revolves around the fact that Peters’ superannuation information was provided to Government ministers by the Ministry of Social Development under the so-called “no surprises” policy, in which officials make politicians aware of anything that might affect their job. And it is the decision by the Ministry’s boss, Brendon Boyle, to inform ministers that Peters is also challenging. Tracy Watkins reports what Peters’ affidavit has to say on this: “The briefing, while required by the National Party government, has to the best of my knowledge no basis in law. The no surprises policy is considered by myself and counsel to be both a breach of the Privacy Act requirements and the duty of care to protect my client’s private information held by the MSD” – see: Winston Peters looks to sue over pension leak. No surprises in Peters’ fight Although the legal action has been portrayed as a surprise, Peters was very clear during the election campaign that he intended to pursue the issue after the election. For example, Claire Trevett reported at the time: “Peters said he would speak to his lawyer about his options and was determined to get to the bottom of the matter so people could have confidence when dealing with Government departments” – see: Winston Peters calls in the lawyers, claiming character assassination attempt. The same article reported “Labour leader Jacinda Ardern said there was a need to get to the bottom of it to ensure people’s privacy was protected by Government departments” and said the episode fed the “perception that dirty politics was rife”. And Peters was inclined to use even more colourful language to describe what had happened, claiming that he was the victim of “filthy politics”, and that “it’s deceitful, it’s duplicitous, it’s all the worst elements of dirty politics.” Peters supported by left and right bloggers If Peters is correct and there was an orchestrated attempt to turn voters against him by using state-provided information to the media, then surely Peters is to be encouraged in his bid to find justice. However, it’s hard to find much published support for his endeavour. The exception is Lynn Prentice, writing at The Standard, who says Suck it up political sleazers. Prentice argues that the leak of Peters’ private information was “clearly politically motivated”, and the whole operation was “a classic Dirty Politics ploy”. Therefore Peters’ legal fight is to be supported: “Frankly win or lose, it is just another round in the continuing battle to reduce the garbage in local politics that National and Act seem to like adorning themselves in. It should also be a round in making public servants accountable for who they choose to share private information with, and that includes with their current political masters. I wish Winston Peters and his legal team the best of luck with cleaning this kind of trash out of our local politics. I’m sure that there will be a lot of other people cheering him on in his search for personal responsibility and liability over politically motivated privacy breaches.” From the opposite side of the political tracks, blogger Cameron Slater is also in solidarity with Peters against this “dirty politics”. He has written comprehensively about the case on his Whaleoil blog – see: Winston starts dropping lawsuits on media and Nats. Slater points the finger at National’s current leadership: “This also shows that the deliberate leaked attack against Winston Peters, those involved, and the subsequent actions show where the election was lost. No doubt the discovery process will find that it was in fact a deliberate strategy of National, and one which ultimately backfired. It was a poorly executed and ultimately short-sighted smear job on Winston Peters by the so-called ‘brains trust’ of National’s campaign team. It also shows that the real dirty politics players inside National, who have never appeared in any of Nicky Hager’s books, are in fact those aligned with Bill English.” Bad blood with National The launch of legal action is a sign that Winston Peters is in revenge mode, according to Patrick Gower: “Winston Peters search for ‘utu’ is now clearer than ever before. Not only has he dispatched National into Opposition – now he has targeted them with legal action over leaking his pension details. It will now be obvious to most New Zealanders that there was way too much bad blood between National and Winston Peters for them to form a Government together” – see: Winston Peters deepens ‘utu’ with legal action over pension leak. Of course Lloyd Burr reported at the time of the superannuation scandal: “Winston Peters is on the warpath over who leaked details of his pension over-payments. The New Zealand First leader says he’s the victim of a privacy breach, claiming it’s dirty politics orchestrated by the National government – and he’ll ‘lodge a serious action’ when his lawyer returns from an overseas holiday today” – see: Winston Peters accuses National of ‘filth and dirt’. Despite the fact that Peters had clearly signaled his intentions to pursue legal action, some political journalists are now suggesting that this week’s legal move is an indication that New Zealand First never would have chosen to go into coalition government with the National Party. Here’s what Newstalk’s Barry Soper says: “It was just over a week later that the same three Nats filed into the coalition casino with the gambler Peters, who unknown to them, or anybody else for that matter, had already laid his cards on the table. The dealing had been done. Like all good gamblers, Peters kept a stony face, letting them believe they were still in the game whereas in reality they’d been dealt out when the court papers were filed against them. The notion that he could now be sitting at the same Cabinet table with them is beyond comprehension. But they were playing blind, so for that matter was Labour. If they’d known of the court papers they might not have been so generous. But Peters played on, playing one side off against the other until he struck the jackpot with Jacinda” – see: Pension papers is why Wily Winston Peters went with Labour. The New Zealand Herald has published an editorial today, along similar lines, saying “the main reason this lawsuit is unwise is it discredits his post-election negotiations and inevitably reflects on the Government he has chosen. It is now obvious there was extremely little possibility he could work with Bill English, Paula Bennett, Steven Joyce and Anne Tolley since he had initiated legal action against them the day before the election. Why he put them and the public through three weeks of uncertainty only Peters knows. It is hard to avoid the conclusion it was to increase his leverage on Labour” – see: Peters’ suing of ex-ministers discredits negotiations. The latest Listener magazine is also extremely critical of Peters’ legal action, saying “for him to proceed with this action now does far more to lower his reputation than the pension controversy” – see: We deserve better than Winston Peters’ legal stunt. The main point of the editorial is to say: “legal action confirms he harboured a material distrust of National. How can we not believe he simply used those talks for bargaining leverage, with no intention of doing a deal with National?”. The Listener thinks the action is somewhat bullying: “It’s also appalling that he has included a senior public servant and two former political staffers in his discovery claims, knowing, as he must, how hard it is for such employees to defend themselves in a politically charged situation. And it’s an ogreish and futile act for any politician, as Peters as done, to demand that journalists disclose sources.” Media freedoms under threat? The Herald editorial above provides a further argument against Peters taking legal action over the scandal: “It is disturbing that Peters seeks to have journalists reveal their sources through court discovery procedures. He evidently wants the court to order them to hand over phone records, notes and emails relating to his superannuation overpayment. His attitude to news media going about their job leaves a lot to be desired and may come to pose a threat to press freedom if he now uses his position to try to put his antagonism into law.” This is another aspect of the case that Mai Chen discusses in her article, suggesting that the journalists involved might attempt to “claim privilege under section 68 of the Evidence Act 2006, which allows them to withhold information that might disclose the identity of an informant”. Additionally, she says they “may try to argue that there should be no discovery because Peters’ substantive claim will fail, either because disclosing the information about his superannuation was not highly offensive to start with, or because the disclosure was in the public interest having regard to Peters’ position as leader of the NZ First Party.” Finally, Toby Manhire has also expressed his concern about media freedoms – see his article on The Spinoff: The brand new Deputy PM just served papers on the media and that is not good at all. After expressing disappointment in the deputy prime minister starting his new job in this way, he reminds him of the other lawsuit he has promised against a broadcaster: “And if he’s determined to continue waging war on the media, hasn’t he got enough on his plate already, what with that lawsuit he promised he’d filed against Mark Richardson, for comparing him to pus?”]]>

Critical Politics Newsletter: New Zealand Politics Daily – 9 November 2017

By Bryce Edwards -

November 9, 2017

Critical Politics Newsletter: New Zealand Politics Daily – 9 November 2017 – Today’s content

Editor’s Note: Here below is a list of the main issues currently under discussion in New Zealand and links to media coverage. [caption id="attachment_297" align="aligncenter" width="1600"]

The Beehive and Parliament Buildings.[/caption] Today’s content Below are the links to the items online. The full text of these items are contained in the PDF file (click to download). Parliament Dominion Post Editorial: National wins a battle but winning the war is different ODT Editorial: High expectations for new Parliament Finlay Macdonald (RNZ): Political football: Labour and National tied at 2-all Chris Trotter (Daily Blog): Settling The Stardust: The Grim Logic Behind National’s Opposition Tactics Liam Hehir (Medium): How the Chris Hipkins thing shows that politics isn’t fun anymore Tim Watkin (Pundit): In defence of discord Fiona Kennedy (Newsroom): Why coalition friction could be a good thing Laura Walters (Stuff): Why did Labour give National the tools it wanted to frustrate legislative progress? Talisa Kupenga (Māori TV): National’s tactics a “wake-up call” for PM – Shane Jones Claire Trevett (Herald): National puts Speaker’s Trev-O-Meter to the test RNZ: Fractious exchanges over Assistant Speaker election Herald: Anne Tolley elected deputy Speaker as Nats test Mallard’s patience David Farrar (Kiwiblog): The Speakers Chris Bramwell (RNZ): Govt puts Parliament into urgency to start 100-day plan Newswire/Newshub: Paid parental leave Bill passes first reading Anna Bracewell-Worrall (Newshub): National to back Government’s Parental Leave Bill – tonight Jane Patterson and Benedict Collins (RNZ): 52nd Parliament opens with traditional ceremony Herald: Parliament kicks off: Government agenda set out in opening of Parliament Stacey Kirk (Stuff): It was the PM’s turn to strike – and she did not hold back Dene Mackenzie (ODT): Ardern’s ‘government of inclusion’ Alexia Russell (Newstalk ZB): Ardern attacks National’s record as Parliament gets underway Herald: Labour introduces first bill after rough start Derek Cheng (Herald): Bill English delivers fiery first speech as Opposition leader Derek Cheng (Herald): Maiden speeches pay tribute to regional NZ Stu Oldham (Timaru Herald): Rangitata-based MP Jo Luxton’s maiden speech pitches for regional development and education Spinoff: WATCH: Everything you missed during the swearing in of parliament Nicholas Jones (Herald):Labour MP Willow-Jean Prime breastfeeds in Parliament: ‘I see it as role-modelling’ Laura Walters (Stuff): New Zealand’s new baby-friendly Parliament Newshub: Willow-Jean Prime breastfeeds in Parliament debating chamber Derek Handley (Herald): Nearly a quarter of MPs are under 40 Eileen Goodwin (ODT): Woodhouse battling ‘extremely red lobby’ Bob McCoskrie (Christian Life): Three Key Issues In The Next Three Years Christina Persico (Stuff): Dual citizenship saga ‘demands people’s careers for no good reason’ Government Andrew Dickens (Herald): Has Gareth Morgan no feelings at all? Ben Mack (Washington Post): How the far right is poisoning New Zealand Finlay Macdonald (Paperboy): Jacinda Ardern on being prime minister: ‘You can be empathetic and have steel’ Trade Richard Harman (Politk): National tries to drive wedge into coalition Herald: Ardern hoping to return from Vietnam with a trade deal Sam Sachdeva (Newsroom): Ardern’s Asia trip a major international test Patrick O’Meara (RNZ): PM Jacinda Ardern heads to APEC hoping to win concessions on TPP Barry Soper (Herald): Jacinda Ardern’s broken the mould Newshub: Fears NZ’s TPP demands could sink it Mike Hosking (Herald): Let’s not get too picky about our trade partners The Standard: TPP, Corporate Coup or “Free trade”? The Standard: This TPP… Reserve Bank and economy Vernon Small (Stuff): Reserve Bank move sees Ardern cast as ‘canary in the mine’ of central bank reform Hamish Rutherford (Stuff): Reserve Bank says impact of new Government initiatives is “very uncertain” Michael Reddell (Croaking Cassandra): The Robertson reviews of the RB Act Dene Mackenzie (ODT): New finance minister says Govt will stick to pledges Capitalism and inequality Peter Skilling (Impolitikal): On inequality and market ‘realism’: Why do we want what we’ve got? Andrew Callander (Taranaki Daily News): Free market capitalism – friend or foe for society? Winston Peters legal action Herald Editorial: Peters’ suing of ex-ministers discredits negotiations Karl du Fresne: Were the coalition talks skewed by Peters’ secret utu plan? Cameron Slater (Whaleoil): You bet it’s personal, real personal Paddles Charles Anderson (Guardian): Paddles, First Cat of New Zealand and social media star, dies after being hit by car BBC: Paddles, New Zealand PM’s ‘first cat’, dies in car crash Ella Predergast (Newshub): Tributes flow into SPCA after the death of Jacinda Ardern’s cat Paddles Employment Emile Donovan (RNZ): Migrant workers: Visa conditions linked to exploitation RNZ: Govt to investigate better protection for workers Herald: Film industry heavy-hitters meet as axe hangs over ‘Hobbit law’ Jonathan Handel (Hollywood Reporter): New Zealand Poised to Repeal Anti-Union ‘Hobbit Law’ Greg Presland (The Standard): The new Pay Equity Legislation Herald: Opposition MPs say it’s a sad day – but Labour hits back over pay equity legislation Shane Cowlishaw (Newsroom): You can’t use the past to predict the future of work Matt Stewart (Stuff): Wellington could become digital security hub as global cyber attacks ramp up Tax Nita Blake-Persen (RNZ): Super Fund dealt with Paradise Papers firm Tom Pullar-Strecker and Reuters (Stuff): NZ Super documents may have been leaked in ‘Paradise Papers’ Andrea Black (Let’s talk about tax):‘It’s a long way to paradise from here’ Andrea Black (Let’s talk about tax): Cold as charity Justice and police Edward Gay (RNZ): Teina Pora: ‘Thank the Andrew guy that’s fixing it all’ Sam Hurley (Herald): Teina Pora ‘happy and free’ after compensation adjusted for inflation by Government Mike Hosking (Herald): National’s abysmal handling of David Bain, Teina Pora cases Teuila Fuatai (Newsroom): New Zealand’s 340 teenage prisoners Martyn Bradbury (Waatea News): Combating the racist Prison Industrial Complex: Short term, medium term & long term Farah Hancock (Newsroom): Police confirm agreement with spyware seller Education Lynda Stuart (Herald): Now teachers can assess what children can do RNZ: NZ children of Asian parents risk losing heritage – report Jessica Long (Stuff): Call for a national languages policy to preserve children’s bilingual skills Alwyn Poole (Stuff): Enhancing the whole NZ education system Max Towle (Wireless): An Aussie university is just hiring women for jobs in its Maths department Environment Matt Burrows (Newshub): Zero Carbon Act to give businesses ‘a pathway’ to investment – James Shaw Newswire: Government rules out new mining projects on public land Dave Frame (Spinoff): I’m sorry, activists – but NZ’s climate target is actually fine Liz Mcdonald (Stuff): Industries fear effects of new Government’s environmental stance Lois Williams (RNZ): Water worries as avocado industry spreads to Far North Alexa Cook (RNZ): MPI considering Canterbury rabbit virus application Gareth Morgan David Farrar (Kiwiblog): Why TOP will never make 5% Aziz Al-Sa’afin (Newshub): Outrage at Gareth Morgan’s dead cat jibe after death of Jacinda Ardern’s pet Stuff: Gareth Morgan launches ongoing tirade after PM’s cat Paddles’ death Herald: Cat hater Gareth Morgan: ‘Was it out and about wandering?’ Refugees and immigration 1News: Watch: ‘For me it’s a slight’ – Jacinda Ardern rejects comparisons between herself and Donald Trump over immigration Ian Telfer (RNZ): Big hole in Dunedin refugee support – advocate Lesley Deverall (Newstalk ZB):Ardern: No cuts to immigration coming just yet Damon Rusden (Daily Blog): The politics of principle RNZ: PNG PM threatens Manus Island intervention RNZ: 100 days of protest on Manus Island RNZ: 24 Manus refugees quit detention centre Health Eric Frykberg (RNZ): Increase in children with ‘severe’ dental issues Pam Jones (ODT): Past time to tackle male suicide: expert Jim Tucker (Taranaki Daily News): Doing their best with a flawed system Defence Nicholas Jones (Herald): Government to talk to NZDF about Hit & Run allegations Jo Moir (Stuff): Government to look into the allegations about SAS actions in Afghanistan Emma Hurley (Newshub): Will the Government investigate the Hit & Run allegations? Transport Ian Telfer (RNZ): Latest petrol increase ‘not justified’ as price hits new high Barney Irvine (Herald): We need to know a fuel tax for Auckland will be put to good use Miri Schroeter (Manawatu Standard): Passenger train through the gorge still on the agenda Todd Niall (RNZ): National’s election promise derails train plans Other Russell Brown (Public Address): How harm happens Philip Barry (Herald): An electricity price review should look at network operators RNZ: CID expects refocus of NZ aid effort]]>

‘The world must act now’ on climate change, calls Bainimarama

By Pacific Media Centre -

November 9, 2017

voreqebainimarama_cop23_pcvdp_680-525pxls-jpg — ]]>

Fiji’s Prime Minister and COP23 President Voreqe Bainimarama … “do everything we can to make the Paris Agreement work”. Image: Vanuatu Daily Post

By Anita Roberts in Bonn, Germany

The Paris Climate Agreement must be implemented swiftly as backing away will expose people to more risks, Fiji’s Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama has told world leaders.

Representing Pacific Island countries, Bainimarama, President of the 23rd Conference of Parties (COP23) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), pleaded for collective action from world leaders to tackle climate change after taking up the position of president from Morocco in Germany yesterday.

The future of life on earth depends on everyone’s choices – everyone must act on climate change, he said, when opening the Climate Planet in Bonn City.

“Our world is in distress from extreme weather events caused by climate change as destructive hurricanes, fires, floods, droughts, melting ice, and changes to agriculture which threaten food security.

“Thus, the need for urgency is obvious.

-Partners-

“All over the world, vast numbers of people are suffering – bewildered by the forces ranged against them.

“Our job as leaders is to respond to that suffering with all means available.

‘We must not fail our people’
“This includes our capacity to work together to identify opportunities in the transition we must make.

“We must not fail our people.

“That means using the next two weeks and the year ahead to do everything we can to make the Paris Agreement work and to advance ambition and support for climate action before 2020,” Bainimarama said.

Fiji Broadcasting Corporation (FBC) reports Bainimarama also called for climate negotiations to agree to limiting global temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

“By aiming for 1.5 degrees, we are setting ourselves a serious challenge.

“But it provides us with a mission. It engages our capacity for ingenuity, for organisation and sheer hard work.

“The only way for every nation to put itself is to lock arms with all other nations and move forward together.

Assist the vulnerable
“We must appeal for a lot more resolve to assist the more vulnerable to adapt to climate change,” he said.

Bainimarama also announced the launch of an ocean pathway to ensure the ocean is an integral part of the UNFCCC process by 2020, the Vanuatu Daily Post reports.

COP23 officially opened on November 6 with a traditional Fijian ceremony and ‘Bula Spirit’.

‘Drua’, a Fijian ocean going canoe in the foyer of the world climate conference serves as a powerful symbol of resilience and unity during the meeting.

It also signifies the resilience of the ancient culture of the Pacific in the face of adverse impacts of climate change.

Climate talks in Bonn continue until November 17.

Anita Roberts is a reporter with the Vanuatu Daily Post. She is among ten journalists from the Pacific invited by the German Foreign Affairs Ministry to COP23 as part of a competition reflecting the importance of this year’s COP to small Pacific Island countries.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: Government’s spinning out of control

By Bryce Edwards -

November 8, 2017

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: Government’s spinning out of control

[caption id="attachment_13635" align="alignright" width="150"]

Dr Bryce Edwards.[/caption] The Labour-led coalition got off to a disastrous start in parliament yesterday, with the first day spiralling out of control for them and resulting in farcical scenes of capitulation to the Opposition over select committee details and the election of the Speaker. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Leader of House Chris Hipkins then doubled down on the error with the absurd way they tried to spin the episode. It looks like this administration could be as bad as the last one in terms of disingenuous spin-doctoring. [caption id="attachment_3483" align="aligncenter" width="614"]

New Zealand Parliament.[/caption] Labour’s out-of-control shambles The best explanation of what went wrong for the new government yesterday is Claire Trevett’s news report, National makes Government look like fools as it blackmails Labour for Speaker vote. She explains that National called into question whether Labour MP Trevor Mallard would have the numbers to be elected as the new Speaker of the House, which led to the Government quickly agreeing to an embarrassing deal with National in order to get their support to elect him. Trevett followed this up with a further explanation, saying “there was initially confusion because Labour had believed it could cast proxy votes for the five missing MPs, who included NZ First leader Winston Peters and Trade Minister David Parker who were at Apec. However, because those MPs had not yet been sworn in, their votes could not be used” – see: Nats fire warning shot on day one. As Stuff political editor Tracy Watkins put it, “It’s a fair bet that this is not what Labour’s strategists and senior ministers wanted day one of the rest of the next three years to look like” – see: Red-faced Government needs to bury first-day farce, fast. Watkins calls Labour’s Speaker episode “shambolic”, and stresses how it projects a picture of the coalition’s lack of control, and these “are just the sort of images Labour doesn’t need. Those images have catapulted what would normally be an in-house, procedural stoush, into a defining moment. They fit the Opposition narrative – the narrative being that this is the same party that only a few months ago was divided, and defeated, that Labour wasn’t ready for power, that the next three years are going to be a shambles.” So, in the end National obtained a surprising compromise out of Labour – an agreement to allow 109 MPs to be allocated to select committees, instead of 96. Up until this time, Labour had signaled its utter intransigence in accommodating National’s very strong preference. Shadow Leader of the House, Simon Bridges, went on TVNZ1’s Breakfast today to say the maneuver in the house was about “making it very clear” to Chris Hipkins that National was unhappy over the select committee MP numbers, which would limit their “ability to scrutinise the government” – see: ‘Yesterday was a day of incompetence by the Government’ – Simon Bridges’ dramatic move in Parliament just ‘vigorous testing’. On whether Bridges’ had bluffed to Labour about them not having the numbers to elect Mallard, he says “It wasn’t a bluff, but I didn’t know [the numbers] exactly”, and “I could tell it was close one way or another”. Bridges says “You can call it a bluff.. I’d call it vigorous testing.” Of course, National is milking Labour’s farce for all it’s worth. But many of their criticisms – although self-serving – aren’t unfair. Opposition leader Bill English was quoted saying, “I’ve never seen that happen on the day of electing a Speaker where the proceedings of Parliament were stopped because the government didn’t know what numbers it had, didn’t know whether it could elect the Speaker and essentially sought our support” – see Sarah Robson’s Govt denies being hoodwinked over Speaker election vote. In the same article, English says: “They’ve got three parties, they didn’t know their own numbers – every day they’re going to have challenges being organised enough to run the Parliament properly.” Labour’s spin control has been out-of-control When politicians suffer setbacks and make mistakes, it’s usually best that they just admit the problem, thereby allowing everyone to move on from it. Unfortunately for Labour, they have taken the opposite strategy and tried to deny it all – which has merely made the situation worse for them. Both Jacinda Ardern and Chris Hipkins have gone on the attack, blaming National for the incident, and challenging the accounts of political reporters. Claire Trevett reports: “Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern denied it was embarrassing and described the set-back as a ‘minor irritation’ and ‘sadly, a bit of politics’.” – see: Nats fire warning shot on day one. According to Ardern, Labour simply reached out to National out of a desire for consensus, because “I wanted to show … this was going to be a Parliament that was different. So it was [my hope] we wouldn’t have that vote and we didn’t.” Chris Hipkins repeated these lines today on TVNZ1’s Breakfast, and denied he had worried that the coalition didn’t have the numbers to elect the Speaker. According to TVNZ, “he said they knew they had the numbers but didn’t want Parliament to get off on the wrong foot.” And in terms of the compromise over the select committee MP numbers, Hipkins indicated that they had always planned to give National the additional numbers. He also went on the AM Show this morning – see Newshub’s Chris Hipkins blames ‘shambolic’ Parliamentary opening on National. However Bridges also appeared on this, disputing the Labour MP’s account: “There’s a bit of post-event rubbish already by Chris Hipkins. It was quite clear to me from the way they acted they didn’t know the rules, they’re confused about that and they didn’t know their numbers and they’re confused about that”. And for Hipkins’ most challenging media interview, you can listen his six-minute interview with an exasperated Guyon Espiner, who says to Hipkins: “Do you really expect us to believe that?!” – see RNZ’s ‘First day farce’ for new govt in Parliament – Hipkins. I also went on the AM Show today to discuss the matter, and expressed my disappointment that the new government was so quickly moving into heavy spinning mode: “That’s one of the worst things about this story for Labour. Not just that it was such a shambles for them and they lost this manoeuvre by National, but they then tried to spin it… And the public hate politicians that are just so obviously spinning it. So Jacinda Ardern had the first day of Parliament going from Saint Jacinda to being seen as a liar” – see Newshub’s Labour’s ‘unprecedented disorganisation’ shows spin and shambles – Bryce Edwards. The NBR’s Rob Hosking also clearly doesn’t believe the Government’s account of yesterday’s debacle: “The claim now that it only made the concession, to give National another 13 select committee places than planned for the rest of the Parliament, just so there could be a nice vibe around Mr Mallard becoming Speaker, shows either an odd set of political priorities or a belief the rest of us are idiots. Take your pick” – see: Silly parliamentary games and some bigger worries (paywalled). Hosking makes the point that, ultimately, the story doesn’t matter that much: “Few will pay much direct attention. It is yet another example of politicians playing silly beggars, and few New Zealanders really care who sits where in what committee room in Wellington. But it shows a government which is having trouble doing the political equivalent of walking and chewing gum at the same time. Any more examples of slipshod organisation and the impression of a shambolic, amateur approach to government will start to bed in.” Finally, we’ve already had the coalition government’s formation explained via the analogy of buying a pie (see my previous roundup: The legitimacy of the Labour-led government, and now Liam Hehir updates the analogy to explain yesterday’s farce in Parliament – see This pie analogy is the most Kiwi way of explaining electing the speaker ever.]]>

Critical Politics Newsletter: New Zealand Politics Daily – 8 November 2017

By Bryce Edwards -

November 8, 2017

Critical Politics Newsletter: New Zealand Politics Daily – 8 November 2017 – Today’s content

Editor’s Note: Here below is a list of the main issues currently under discussion in New Zealand and links to media coverage. The full text of these items are contained in the PDF file (click to download). [caption id="attachment_297" align="aligncenter" width="1600"]

The Beehive and Parliament Buildings.[/caption] Opening of Parliament RNZ: Parliament’s opening ‘a first day farce’ Claire Trevett (Herald): National makes Government look like fools as it blackmails Labour for Speaker vote Newshub: Chris Hipkins blames ‘shambolic’ Parliamentary opening on National Newshub: Labour’s ‘unprecedented disorganisation’ shows spin and shambles – Bryce Edwards Liam Hehir (Medium): This pie analogy is the most Kiwi way of explaining electing the speaker ever Liam Hehir (Medium): Labour denies falling for second trick Claire Trevett (Herald): Nats fire warning shot on day one 1News: ‘Yesterday was a day of incompetence by the Government’ – Simon Bridges’ dramatic move in Parliament just ‘vigorous testing’ Tracy Watkins (Stuff): Red-faced Government needs to bury first-day farce, fast Herald Editorial: Opposition will keep the Government on its toes Sarah Robson (RNZ): Govt denies being hoodwinked over Speaker election vote Sarah Robson (RNZ): House trading: Nats bluff Labour on day one Anna Bracewell-Worrall (Newshub): National’s first show of power: Grinding Parliament to a halt Gwynn Compton (Libertas Digital): Hipkins’ creates omnishambles on first day as Leader of the House David Farrar (Kiwiblog): Labour fails to have numbers for Speaker so caves in on select committees Martyn Bradbury (Daily Blog): New Government meltdown on first day Nicholas Jones (Herald): Labour and National face-off in Parliament opening over Speaker vote Jo Moir (Stuff): Government forced to do a deal with National after failing to have the numbers in the House 1News: Watch: Confusion in Parliament during less than smooth swearing in of new Speaker Trevor Mallard 1News: MPs sworn in as New Zealand’s 52nd Parliament opens for business RNZ: MPs sworn in to 52nd Parliament Emma Hurley (Newshub): Record level of women in New Zealand Parliament Isobel Ewing (Newshub): Trevor Mallard sworn in as Speaker Gordon Campbell (Scoop): On the battle over select committees Liam Hehir (Medium): Does National have a majority? No Right Turn: The triennial reminder Winston Peters legal action Barry Soper (Newstalk ZB): Pension papers is why Wily Winston Peters went with Labour Richard Harman (Politik): Peters fingers English as architect of conspiracy to ruin his reputation Patrick Gower (Newshub): Winston Peters deepens ‘utu’ with legal action over pension leak Tim Murphy (Newsroom): Winston goes fishing Nicholas Jones (Herald): Winston Peters’ legal action a ‘personal matter’, Ardern says Lynn Prentice (Standard): Suck it up political sleazers. Cameron Slater (Whaleoil): Winston starts dropping lawsuits on media and Nats Toby Manhire (Spinoff): The brand new Deputy PM just served papers on the media and that is not good at all David Farrar (Kiwiblog): Winston goes fishing Herald: Winston’s legal action a ‘fishing expedition’ Barry Soper (Newstalk ZB): Winston Peters suing over superannuation scandal RNZ: Peters launches legal action over superannuation leak Tracy Watkins (Stuff): Winston Peters looks to sue over pension leak Patrick Gower (Newshub): Winston Peters takes legal action against National Party over leak ‘plot’ Paddles dies Herald: The last moments of Paddles, the First Cat Herald: Jacinda Ardern’s cat Paddles has died after being hit by a car Newshub: Jacinda Ardern’s cat Paddles has died after being hit by car 1News: Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s cat Paddles dies after being hit by car RNZ: Jacinda Ardern’s cat Paddles has died Stuff: Paddles, Jacinda Ardern’s cat, has been killed, apparently run over Government Fran O’Sullivan (Herald): Eyes of world on our Coalition of Change Brian Easton (Pundit): How Have We Changed? Tim Watkin (Pundit): A very MMP election… & a manicured mandate 1News: ‘So much emotion in the room’ – Clarke Gayford on the moment Jacinda Ardern learned she would be PM Trade Sam Sachdeva (Newsroom): David Parker plots a new approach to trade 1News: Jacinda Ardern plans to negotiate ‘best interest’ for NZ in TPP negotiations Matthew Brockett (Blooberg): New Zealand’s PM Sees Benefits for Her Country in the TPP Trade Deal Economy and Reserve Bank Bernard Hickey (Newsroom): Robertson faces his toughest choice Nicholas Jones (Herald): Overhaul of Reserve Bank outlined: Employment to be added as objective Jane Patterson (RNZ): ‘We want New Zealanders to be in work and to be paid well’ Liam Dann (Herald): Market relieved as Govt sets out Reserve Bank plan Shane Cowlishaw (Newsroom): Robertson announces details of Reserve Bank review BusinessDesk: NZ govt’s operating deficit in line with expectations Employment Joshua Hitchcock (Spinoff): Māori unemployment is a national crisis Jessie Chiang (RNZ): Exploited staff numbers ‘tip of the iceberg’ – lawyer Susan Hornsby-Geluk (Stuff): Shocking number of New Zealand workers who pay to work Gordon Anderson (Newsroom): Four key principles of NZ labour law Laura Baker (Stuff): How NZ paid parental leave compares to the rest of the world Susan Edmunds (Stuff): Parental leave boost is welcome, but it could be better Rachel Clayton (Stuff): New Zealand’s big healthcare gender pay gap Mathew Brockett and Paul Allen (Bloomberg): The World’s Youngest Female Leader Targets Equal Pay for Women The Wireless: ‘Inequality will grind you down’ Steve Deane (Newsroom): The problem with equality for NZ footballers Bev Cassidy-Mackenzie (Stuff): A swelling sea change in attitude towards diversity Manus Island refugees RNZ: Court rejects restoration of services to Manus detention centre Gareth Hutchens (Guardian): Turnbull says Manus detainees aren’t scared, just manipulated by ‘activists in Australia’ Health Kirsty Johnston (Herald): Child tooth decay soars as kids have to share toothbrushes Amy Wiggins (Herald): Commissioner critical of care given to man found living in squalor Education Dominion Post Editorial: How to fix the problems with charter schools Camilla Highfield (Stuff): National Standards – let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater Housing Peter Lyons (ODT): Reality bites: housing’s heady days are over Jennifer Eder (Stuff): Ministry makes ‘no single men’ offer to push through emergency housing plan Liam Hehir (Medium): Does Labour’s workaround work? Farming and environment Russel Norman (Spinoff): Let’s untie Fonterra’s hands, and see what they can do for NZ rivers Richard Swainson (Stuff): The science of water pollution should be taken seriously Eric Frykberg (RNZ): Are there too many native birds? Alexa Cook (RNZ): Calls for a national standard for organics Tax Rebecca Stevenson (Spinoff): Offshore trusts are pretty legal – until they’re not ODT Editorial: If I had a little money… Leith Huffadine (Stuff): The Paradise Papers explained: What you need to know Mike Hosking (Herald): Do you support tax-dodging Apple? Justice Jarrod Gilbert (Herald): Boot camp idea robbed Bill English of a legacy Herald: Andrew Little confirms Teina Pora’s compensation to be increased Jo Moir (Stuff): Government announces extra compensation payout for Teina Pora, adjusted for inflation Inequality, poverty and welfare John Minto (Press): Agrees with Winston Peters: capitalism delivers for the wealthy Michael Fletcher (Herald): Welfare system needs radical shake up Stacey Kirik (Stuff): New Government puts Social Investment approach for vulnerable Kiwis under review Daniel Walker (Newstalk ZB): Data for those using social services safe, Government confirms No Right Turn: Good riddance Kelvin Teixeira (Dominion Post): Rising living costs seeing more families turning to food banks Other Charlie Dreaver (RNZ): 13,000 military-style semi-automatic weapons in NZ 1News: It is not obvious how Government will ‘crack the problem’ of Pike River re-entry, says Bill English Brian Rudman (Herald): Guy Fawkes pointless exercise in burning money Māmari Stephens (E-Tangata): Just what are we really commemorating with Rā Maumahara? Dominion Post Editorial: Mayor saves the day – for now]]>

Critical Politics Newsletter: New Zealand Politics Daily – 7 November 2017

By Bryce Edwards -

November 7, 2017

Critical Politics Newsletter: New Zealand Politics Daily – 7 November 2017 – Today’s content Editor’s Note: Here below is a list of the main issues currently under discussion in New Zealand and links to media coverage. The full text of these items are contained in the PDF file (click to download ). [caption id="attachment_297" align="aligncenter" width="1600"] The Beehive and Parliament Buildings.[/caption] AUS-NZ relations and Manus refugee crisis Gordon Campbell (Werewolf): On Ardern’s refugee non-deal Grant Bayldon (Spinoff): Seeking asylum is a legal right. Could somebody tell Mike Hosking? Jessie Anne Dennis (Spinoff): Words are cheap. Now Ardern must take real action to save the Manus Island refugees Chris Trotter (Daily Blog): Australia: Seeing What We Have To See. Brent Edwards (RNZ): Manus Island refugees: Jacinda Ardern likely to come under more pressure to do more Herald Editorial: New PM does well in first outing Jane Patterson (RNZ): Trans-Tasman tension gives way to smiles No Right Turn: Rolling over for Australia RNZ: Emergency exposes Manus Island healthcare deficit Newstalk ZB: Manus Island asylum seekers losing hope after Australia rejects NZ offer Anna Bracewell-Worrall and Isobel Ewing (Newshub): Australians will be entitled to a free year of tertiary education in New Zealand 1News: Watch: Government’s threat of tertiary fee retaliation against Australia ‘irrelevant’, says Bill English Laura Walters (Stuff): NZ taxpayers shouldn’t be paying for Australians’ education, Bill English says 1News: ‘It’s only fair if we respond’ – Australian tertiary policy to triple Kiwi fees stuck in Senate Trade and international relations Vernon Small (Stuff): Jacinda Ardern seeking TPP concessions at first appearance on international stage Jane Kelsey (Herald): Signing TPPA-11 would break Labour’s word Jane Kelsey (Daily Blog): Jacinda says ISDS is a dog. So let’s put it down Catherine Beard (Herald): New Government needs to land TPP Benedict Collins (RNZ): Trade deal ‘top of mind’ at APEC Alexia Russell (Newstalk ZB): Jacinda Ardern picks EU over Russia in trade talks Nicholas Jones (Herald): Russia free trade agreement not the priority: PM Talisa Kupenga (Māori TV): German President and NZ Prime Minister discuss trade and science opportunities Stacey Kirk (Stuff): German President touches down in New Zealand for high-level meetings Craig Hoyle (Stuff): Meet Boots, New Zealand’s ‘Depcatty High Commissioner’ in London Parliament Andrew Geddis (Pundit): Simon Bridges thinks that Simon Bridges is eroding parliamentary democracy Graeme Edgeler (Public Address): Despite Simon Bridges’ idiocy, does he have a point on overall (subject) select committee membership? Richard Harman (Politik): Bridges planning to logjam Parliament RNZ: Select committee changes ‘anti-democratic’ – Bill English Sam Sachdeva (Newsroom): Battle brewing over select committee cuts David Farrar (Kiwiblog): Labour freezing National MPs out of select committees No Right Turn: Hypocrisy all round Jane Patterson (RNZ): Labour and National spat over MP representation Nicholas Jones (Herald): National clashes with Labour: ‘erosion of democratic rights’ Laura Walters (Stuff): National calls Government’s plans for select committee ‘undemocratic’ Liam Hehir (Stuff): National should avoid being too negative too early Tracy Watkins (Stuff): Parliament will now be in session and Labour should not expect an easy ride Phil Smith (RNZ): The Commission Opening: What to expect Herald: Parliament opens: Guide to the week’s ceremony 1News: MPs to be sworn in, Speaker elected as 52nd Parliament opens Gwynn Compton (Libertas Digital): The political week ahead – 6 November 2017 Paid Parental Leave Nicholas Jones (Herald): Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern confirms paid parental leave increased to 26 weeks by 2020 Ellen Read and Stacey Kirk (Stuff): Paid parental leave to increase to 26 weeks RNZ: Parental leave increase ‘right thing to do’ – PM Anna Bracewell-Worrall (Newshub): Jacinda Ardern commits to extending paid parental leave by a month Newshub: Parent advocates applaud 26-week leave Bil Herald: Paid parental leave: Dad leaves job after snarky comments Chris Bramwell (RNZ): Fears over extended paid parental leave for small businesses Newshub: National does U-turn on paid parental leave Government Hamish Rutherford (Stuff): Wellington Mayor ‘not losing sleep’ over Government relocation pledge Jo Moir (Stuff): Jacinda Ardern is taking the government back to Waitangi after a two year hiatus Colin Williams (Stuff): Hipkins looks to change for the better Katee Shanks (Rotorua Daily Post): Waiariki MP Tamati Coffey confident ahead of maiden speech Jared Nicoll (Stuff): New minister Kris Faafoi wants more compassion for the vulnerable David Farrar (KIwiblog): What sort of poll boost should the new Government get? Claire Trevett (Herald): Greens meeting to set election date to replace Metiria Turei as woman co-leader Herald: Ever wondered what the Prime Minister’s office looks like? Clarke Gayford (Spinoff): Nothing is different, everything is different: Clarke Gayford on his first days as first gent Herald: DNA detectives delve into Jacinda Ardern’s family tree Whananui Chronicle: Jacinda Ardern as Mona Lisa wins Mangaweka art competition Tax Colin James (ODT): Tax will be the ultimate reform test Ric Stevens (Press): Paradise Papers show tax dodgers will be found out RNZ:IRD works with international agencies on tax haven leak Greg Presland (Standard): Paradise lost Education Jody O’Callaghan (Stuff): Low decile schools have double the trouble hiring staff John Gerritsen (RNZ): Govt funding inadequate, principals say Herald: High stress levels, not enough funding and staff struggles, NZCER report finds Jo Moir (Stuff): Education minister to review all charter schools after threatening some with closure Employment Teuila Fuatai (Newsroom): More labour inspectors: a return to the past? Mike Hosking (Herald): Why pay parity doesn’t work in sport Newstalk ZB: Living wage advocates praising govt decision Health Eileen Goodwin (ODT): Health authority in Ronald McDonald damage control Bronwyn Howell (Newsroom): Reducing GP fees not so simple Nikki Preston (Herald): Mumps outbreak: Vaccination catch-up campaign floated for 10-29 year-olds Newswire: Govt warned not to ask for DHB resignations Hawke’s Bay Today: Hastings Health Centre offers free visits for under-18s Pike River Sam Strong (Press): Families of Pike River victims says Government is ‘on the same page’ with them over mine re-entry Ryan Boswel (1News): ‘This is important to all NZ’ – Govt must make amends for handling of Pike River aftermath, says Andrew Little Benedict Collins (NRZ): Andrew Little meets Pike River families Herald: Pike River families meet with Andrew Little over possible re-entry Anna Bracewell-Worrall (Newshub): Pike River families put faith in Andrew Little Guy Fawkes Bruce Munro (ODT): A place for peace ODT Editorial: Do we really need Guy Fawkes? Martyn Bradbury (Daily Blog): In defence of Guy Fawkes – let’s take it back for the Activist Left Megan Gattey (Stuff): Why New Zealand should consider ditching Guy Fawkes for Matariki Justice Herald: Gang influence in prisons in Corrections Minister’s sights after string of serious assaults David Farrar (Kiwiblog): Good and bad ways to reduce the prison population David Garrett (Stuff): Why Labour wants to repeal ‘three strikes’ Environment Gerard Hutching (Stuff): Dairy farming critic Alison Dewes appointed Landcorp environment head Lyn Webster (Stuff): Cows not the only dirty things finding their way into rivers Ged Cann (Stuff): Endangered hawksbill turtle dies after eating 106 pieces of plastic Immigration Catherine Hutton (RNZ): Immigration public counter closures sparks warning Sophie Christie (Telegraph): New Zealand looks to woo thousands of British bricklayers in lead up to Brexit Maori Party Herald: Tuku Morgan’s resignation as Maori Party president turned down Carrie Stoddart-Smith (Ellipsister): It’s looking like a rewind not a reset Housing Amber-Leigh Woolf (Stuff): Amateur property investment is ‘going to disappear’, but could be a good thing, say experts Interest: Think tank welcomes Housing Minister’s suggestions of simplifying planning rules and abolishing Auckland’s rural urban boundary David Farrar (Kiwiblog): Labour threatens land confiscation Defence Newshub: No auto-renewal for Kiwis in Iraq – PM Laura Walters (Stuff): Defence chiefs from NZ, Australia and UK discuss countering violent extremism Kirsty Lawrence (Stuff): Taxpayers have forked out for 99 courts martial to be held in the past 17 years Other Sarah Robson (RNZ): Controversial data-for-funding plan scrapped Adriana Weber (RNZ): Daughter forced to forgo mum’s funeral, says she had ‘no support’ Duncan Greive (Spinoff): Gareth Morgan is shutting down the Morgan Foundation to double down on TOP Newshub: David Seymour finds euthanasia hope in Australia Don Rowe (Spinoff): ‘The battle now is with ourselves’: Tūhoe declare war on drug dependence Laura Dooney (RNZ): Wellington council still owed $50k from failed fashion week]]>

Sogavare voted out as no confidence motion passes after ‘fierce’ debate

By Pacific Media Centre -

November 7, 2017

solomonspm_manassehsogavare_680-536pxls-jpg — ]]>

PM Sogavare out … no confidence motion passes 27-23 after “vitriolic” day in Parliament. Image: SIBC

The Solomon Islands is without a formal Prime Minister tonight after the motion of no confidence against Manasseh Sogavare passed Parliament this evening after more than nine hours of debate. It means a new government – and almost certainly a new Prime Minister – is set to take control of the country following a frantic lobbying period which expected following today’s vote. A vote on the new Prime Minister will eventually take place after the Governor-General is notified by Sogavare. No specific time frame has been set, however. Independent group leader and member for Northeast Guadalcanal Dr Derek Sikua was singled out – by Sogavare himself, who accused him of treachery – as the potential next Prime Minister, however as many as five names have been thrown into the mix. An emotional Sogavare said he would walk out with his head up “because I have done nothing wrong against the people of this country”. The motion passed 27-23 following a vitriolic session of Parliament today, where fierce debate centred on the integrity of projects, and accusations of corruption were flung across the floor. Accusations of kickbacks involving projects such as the Tina River Hydro Scheme, the Skyline Housing project, the fibre optic cable were central to the debate.

-Partners-

PM integrity questioned The integrity of the now deposed Prime Minister was questioned multiple times during the session, and Sogavare, referring to himself in the third person as “the Prime Minister” throughout his speech, addressed almost all of them in a sprawling 90 minute oration. Sogavare said he had been targeted by a group motivated by “deliberate lies” to “assassinate” his leadership. He singled out Dr Sikua, and accused him of wanting to become the next Prime Minister. “It is sad that innocent members of Parliament have become hopeless victims in this plan,” he said. Sogavare also accused MPs of knowingly misleading the public about their intentions surrounding the anti-corruption bill, and its delay, and using it as a tactic to undermine him. “My only mistake is that I stood up against corruption and corrupt leaders. “A vote for yes is a vote for corruption,” he said. Sogavare hits back He said concerns over the issue of hiring his nephew as chief of staff screamed of hypocrisy, and questioned why it was an issue that would trigger the move on his leadership. “We need to clean up our own backyard before we start pointing the finger. “If you vote “I” you vote with a guilty conscience, because it’s not right,” Sogavare said. In response Dr Sikua said he was not simply opportunistic and was doing it for the right reasons. He said all he needed was the numbers. The marathon session ended at 6.45pm after Parliament opened at 9.30am. The Solomon Islands Broadcasting Corporation (SIBC) reports Sogavare refused to resign this morning after being asked by Dr Sikua on the floor of Parliament. Consolidation efforts fail The motion of no-confidence was received on Sunday, October 29, following the sudden resignations of several MPs and backbenchers who switched allegiance to the Opposition. The successful motion comes despite efforts last week by Sogavare to consolidate his power and the return of MPs Moses Garu and Dickson Mua to the ranks of the Democratic Coalition for Change Government (DCCG).

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz]]>

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: Has Jacinda Ardern failed her first international test of leadership?

By Bryce Edwards -

November 6, 2017

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: Has Jacinda Ardern failed her first international test of leadership?

[caption id="attachment_13635" align="alignright" width="150"]

Dr Bryce Edwards.[/caption] Is our new government doing enough about the Manus refugee crisis? Well, it’s hardly doing anything. Instead of putting pressure on the Australian Government to allow New Zealand to take refugees from Manus Island, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern seems to have capitulated entirely to Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull on the issue. Former Labour Party leader Andrew Little has said the New Zealand Government needs to “cause international embarrassment” to Australia for not accepting New Zealand’s offer. Little says “This is a time to step up and say, in an age of world-wide humanitarian crises, one that is on our doorstep, one that involves our nearest neighbour physically and diplomatically then we need to be applying a bit of a stiff arm on it and say, ‘we can help’.” Similarly, James Shaw has said the New Zealand Government has “a lack of spine” in dealing with the refugee crisis. But that was then, and now Labour is leading the government. Ardern seems determined to do the opposite of what her colleagues were strongly advocating for a year ago. Instead of openly criticising and pressuring the Australian government over the humanitarian crisis they have caused at Manus Island, Ardern has mostly been running Malcolm Turnbull’s arguments for him in the New Zealand media. New Zealand won’t call out Australia over the refugee crisis [caption id="attachment_15325" align="aligncenter" width="800"]

The Prime Minister of New Zealand, Jacinda Ardern, was officially sworn in on October 26 2017 by the Governor General Dame Patsy Reddy.[/caption] Jacinda Ardern has embarrassed herself by being too meek with the Australian Government, according to political commentator John Armstrong – see his column: Jacinda Ardern will find ‘doing the right thing’ gets harder the longer she’s PM. Armstrong says Ardern needs to “slam” the Australians’ for their “morally bankrupt treatment of the Manus Island refugees”. He criticises her for “meekly saying that New Zealand was in the ‘lucky position’ of not having to struggle with the refugee issue, unlike Australia. Arden will have to do better than that. She can do better than that.” Instead, the Prime Minister has returned to New Zealand from her meeting with Turnbull, and has been parroting his lines about the need to deal with the so-called “people smugglers”, and how the US first needs to take its agreed number of refugees before New Zealand gets involved. She told RNZ today, “I have to accept that Prime Minister Turnbull is prioritising the agreement that substantially resolves the issue at this point.” And in terms of people smugglers, she said “I agree that those who are the instigators of trying to exploit people’s fear and vulnerability by encouraging them to take to the seas should be prosecuted and should be pursued” – see: PM says she’ll keep tabs on Manus Island. The problem is Turnbull has essentially told Ardern that, in terms of the current crisis at least, Australia retains the right to decide New Zealand’s refugee policy on who is accepted into the country. And she has simply agreed to this. Ardern could be accused of failing her first test on the world stage – one in which she could have made a real difference. Claire Trevett reports the advice of the lawyer for the Manus Island refugees, Greg Barns, who argues this crisis “provided Ardern with a chance to stamp her mark” – see: Manus could be PM Jacinda Ardern’s ‘Tampa moment’: Australian lawyer. Barns is quoted as saying “Helen Clark did the right thing and it would be great if Jacinda Ardern did the same. It’s a chance for New Zealand to show moral leadership, which Australia has lacked now for 20 years.” New Zealand has been fobbed off Some journalists are suggesting Jacinda Ardern made progress in getting the Australian Prime Minister to take New Zealand’s offer of accepting refugees more seriously. Tracy Watkins says that “Replacing a flat ‘no’ with ‘maybe later’ is a clear – if subtle – softening of the earlier rejections of the New Zealand offer” – see: Turnbull’s warm welcome for Ardern underscores continuity in trans-Tasman relations. Another perspective is that Turnbull has simply become more diplomatic in his rejection of help from New Zealand. After all, he is now under huge pressure, with the UN condemning the situation, and even his own former Minister of Immigration, Kevin Andrews, breaking ranks to say that the Australian Government needs to more seriously consider the offer. And furthermore, the bi-partisan consensus has also broken down, with the Labor leader, Bill Shorten, also calling for the government to let the refugees go to New Zealand. With such intense pressure to yield to New Zealand, Turnbull’s change in language was really the bare minimum of what he needed to do, while at the same time not changing his actions. As Claire Trevett writes, “it was effectively a No Delayed” – see: Key bromance haunts Jacinda Ardern’s first Australia visit. Australia continues to justify declining New Zealand’s offer to take refugees on the basis that the US has previously agreed to take 1,250 and therefore Turnbull wants to negotiate this first before considering New Zealand’s offer. Ardern therefore suggests that New Zealand’s offer is under “active consideration” by Australia, and she has been quoted as saying “I absolutely understand the priority that has been placed around the agreement with the United States” – see Michael McGowan’s report, Turnbull says he will consider NZ refugee deal only after US resettlements. But according to Manus refugee Behrouz Boochani, the US agreement shouldn’t be believed: “They announced the deal a year ago but only 25 people sent to America. They are only playing with us and media, it’s a fake deal to waste time” – see Newshub’s US deal a lie, choose NZ – Manus refugee. Similarly, Gordon Campbell suggests negotiations with the US will take a very long time, and therefore concludes that “Sooner rather than later, New Zealand has to stand up to Australia over its refugee policy. Otherwise, our silence and inaction will be taken as tacit acceptance, and we will be seen (accurately) as enabling Canberra’s systematically inhuman treatment of hundreds of the world’s most vulnerable people, and their families. The clock is now ticking on Ardern’s personal timetable” – see: On Ardern’s refugee non-deal. Doing nothing of any substance about the crisis raises questions about whether the new Labour-led coalition government is complicit in Australia’s abusive operations. New Green MP – and former refugee – Golriz Ghahraman has been outspoken about the issue, being reported as saying “New Zealand’s silence has made it complicit in human rights abuse in Australian offshore detention” – see RNZ’s MP calls NZ’s Manus Island silence ‘complicity’. And blogger David Farrar says this criticism could equally be applied to her own government – see: Is a Green MP calling Labour complicit in human rights violations? New Zealand won’t take the refugees directly from Manus Island Many are now suggesting that because Australia has abandoned the refugees, the New Zealand government should be able to simply rescue them without getting Australia’s prior approval. This is best expressed by Brian Rudman in his column, Time for a little gunboat diplomacy. He says, “It’s time to shame our Australian cousins by dispatching a naval vessel to Manus Island to rescue the 600 or so refugees trapped on Australia’s very own Devil’s Island.” But Jacinda Ardern ruled this out today, because of New Zealand’s formal offer to the Australians: “No, no, because the offer is still under active consideration by Australia so there is no need to do so” – see Jane Patterson’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern won’t bypass Australia over Manus. On this, Gordon Campbell says: “For her part, Ardern has chosen not to confront Australia and has agreed to delay making the NZ resettlement offer directly to Papua New Guinea. Given the glacial pace of the US response, and the urgency of the humanitarian crisis on Manus, there is no justification for not proceeding with an approach to PNG right now.” It also has to be pointed out that the current offer to Australia isn’t particularly radical, given the circumstances. Lawyer Felix Geiringer‏ (@BarristerNZ) has tweeted: “There is a humanitarian crises happening on our doorstep. It is time for more drastic action. Merely repeating John Key’s offer is not enough.” For other examples of social media reaction, see my blog post, Top tweets about the Australia-Manus-NZ situation. Leftwing blogger Daphna Whitmore also points out that the current offer really isn’t generous: “It is the smallest of gestures from a country that does very little to extend a welcome to refugees. There are over 22 million refugees in the world and New Zealand is ranked at the bottom of the developed world when it comes taking refugees. Overall New Zealand is 110th in the world for refugees per capita adjusted for GDP. The offer to take 150 refugees is not in addition to the modest annual 1000 refugee intake. Ardern, like Key before her, made it clear this to be within the quota” – see: Manus Island: “It’s f******* disgraceful”. RadioLive talkback host Alison Mau is advocating that New Zealand take all of the Manus Island refugees, saying “I can’t think of a nobler, more important contribution for our Prime Minister to make as her first political legacy, something that would be remembered as a source of pride for generations to come” – see: Tampa rescue is point of pride – but we’re too gutless to do it again. Finally, for the brave speech that the New Zealand Prime Minister should have made if she wanted to truly make a principled stand in the weekend, see Toby Manhire’s Hey mate, this Manus thing’s got to stop. It includes the line: “Talk is cheap, I get that, and my government will be judged on the extent to which it all adds up to more than warm fuzziness.”]]>

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: “Youthquake” fails to shake NZ

By Bryce Edwards -

November 3, 2017

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: “Youthquake” fails to shake NZ

[caption id="attachment_13635" align="alignright" width="150"]

Dr Bryce Edwards.[/caption] In the lead-up to this year’s election there was conflict amongst political pundits and activists about whether a “youthquake” was set to rattle the foundations of the status quo. And the debate has been reignited with the Electoral Commission releasing contentious data this week about voter turnout of different age groups. [caption id="attachment_15103" align="aligncenter" width="594"]

General Election 2017.[/caption] The original debate was parodied after the election in the National Business Review, which published its own piece of fake news about the lack of a youthquake. Titled, “Quake recovery work continues”, the earnest news report stated: “There were frantic scenes this week as pundits worked around the clock to reach the victims of a devastating seismic shock that never happened. As many as no bodies are now understood to have been recovered. The so-called youthquake was scheduled to hit New Zealand last weekend, with its epicentre located around most of the country’s university campuses. The sudden surge had been expected to knock out National’s power system. To date, though, the only bodies recovered appear to have been well-known pundits.” Youthquake forecasts “vindicated” On Wednesday, the Electoral Commission released its official Voter turnout statistics. These appeared to show that voter turnout had increased significantly amongst younger age groups. This is best conveyed in Laura Walters’ Young voter turnout up by 6.5 per cent. Looking at the official figures, Walters reported “The turnout for the 18-24 age bracket rose from 62.7 per cent in 2014, to 69.3 per cent in 2017.” Similarly, the turnout figures for Maori voters were reported to have increased, with Susan Strongman saying “Maori voter turnout increased by 3.5 percentage points across both the Maori and general rolls this year – from 67.6 percent in 2014 to 71.1 percent in 2017” – see: Youth voter turnout gets a big bump. These reports had some activists buoyant and Martyn Bradbury proclaimed that the lesson was: “Don’t listen to mainstream pundits” – see: Mainstream media claim no Youth Quake. Gordon Campbell expressed his satisfaction with the results, saying “youth turnout in New Zealand among the under 30s would be the envy of most other developed countries. Our millennials rocked the vote this year” – see: New Eyes on Trade. The real story about youth voter turnout However, as Massey University political scientist Grant Duncan told the AM Show, “You have to remember the commission’s figures are a percentage of the enrolled voters”. Duncan pointed out that the picture of youth turnout is actually very different when you take into account the fact that a huge proportion of young eligible voters didn’t enrol this year – in fact, these statistics went backwards – see Newshub’s Election ‘youthquake’ a myth, figures show. According to this report, “While turnout for 18 to 24-year-olds on the electoral roll jumped from 62.7 percent to 69.3 percent, there were actually fewer in that age group enrolled to vote in 2017 than in 2014.” The overall result is that voter turnout amongst youth hardly increased at all, and stayed at incredibly low levels – only about half of young people in the 18-24-year-old category voted. I’ve carried out my own analysis of the figures, which suggests that, roughly, “the 18-24-year-old age group went from 48% turnout in 2014 to 50% turnout in 2017. This was a 2 percentage point increase. For the 25-29-year-old range, there was a 3-percentage point increase, from 51% to 54%. And in the next band, 30-34-year-olds, the increase was 5 percentage points – from 59% to nearly 64%. The other age bands didn’t change much” – see my blog post, No real youthquake in 2017. Similarly, once you take into account adult New Zealanders who don’t enrol, the overall voter turnout for the election amongst all age groups was about 73 per cent. This was up only about 1 percentage point, from 72 per cent in 2014. Hence, the turnout appears to be the third lowest since women got the vote. Therefore, the so-called “missing million” voters – or 963,854, by my calculations – were still absent from the electoral process. Using a similar approach, blogger David Farrar says there was No youthquake. And Gwynn Compton also declares there “wasn’t a youthquake, but a youth tremor”, and that “those aged 18-24 made up a lower percentage of overall enrolments than they did in 2014” – see: Greying population and youth tremor sees middle age voter squeeze. It’s also worth checking out Compton’s excellent number crunching of age statistics in his latest blog post, Youngest, oldest, most & least representative electorates. Why is youth participation so low? RNZ’s Brent Edwards looks at the turnout statistics for youth, and also concludes that “in the end only just over half of all young people – including those who didn’t enrol – voted” – see: More young people voted, but no youth quake. He interviews “Five first-time voters from Aotea College in Porirua” to find out “why so many of their peers did not vote or enrol to vote”. Overall, he says, “They believe for a number it might have been because they did not understand the parties’ policies.” You can also listen to their explanations in the three-minute interview: More young votes in Election 2017, but no ‘youthquake’. The low voter turnout of youth needs to be contextualised amongst bigger changes in society in recent decades. This is where Canterbury University political scientist Bronwyn Hayward is focused in her diagnosis. She is reported as believing “compared with the baby boomers, millennials have lost a lot of the traditional institutions – churches, trade unions, even sports teams – that used to foster a sense of social solidarity”, and atomised individuals don’t participate in politics like they used to – see Steve Liddle’s article, Election leaves plenty to improve in democracy. This article also focuses on local attempts that have been made to increase voter turnout via publicity and social campaigns. For example, “Founded in 2014, RockEnrol, adopted a ‘sizzle and steak’ approach aimed at empowering 18- to 29-year-olds to vote… RockEnrol organised music, parties, celebrities and shareable content as the ‘sizzle’ to attract sign-up pledges, with the ‘steak’ the later follow-up calls.” Do these awareness and marketing campaigns have an impact on voter turnout? Victoria University of Wellington sociologist Jack Foster thinks not. Based on his research, he says that such outreach campaigns and the inevitable call for more civics education misses the point. There are bigger societal, economic and political changes that impact on political participation – see his article, The Trauma of the Non-Voter. Foster’s main point is this: Non-voters “are perhaps not some apathetic, disinterested subject who shirks their citizen duties, but rather a symptom of a wider democratic malaise; a morbid symptom of a civilisation in which democracy has been ‘hollowed out’.” Of course, it’s not only younger people who are voting in lower numbers than the rest of society. According to Grant Duncan, “electorates with a large number of poor and immigrants also have lower turnouts” – see Newshub’s Election ‘youthquake’ a myth, figures show. Duncan says, “There’s really quite a kind of social inequality and an economic inequality in relation to who turns out, as well as the age issue.” Maori, too, are voting in much lower numbers – about 10 percentage points lower than non-Maori. And to explain this, Laura O’Connell Rapira, of Rock Enrol, says it’s about colonisation: “research shows that one of the main reasons that Maori don’t vote in higher numbers than Pakeha, is because of historical distrust towards the Crown because of our colonial history” – see Susan Strongman’s Youth voter turnout gets a big bump. The best post-election discussion about why youth didn’t vote in greater numbers is the Herald article written by young lawyer Christian Smith – see: What happened to the youthquake? While Smith’s whole article is well worth reading, his conclusion is important. He argues that, although this year’s election campaign involved many crucial issues for youth voters, the differences between what the parties were offering simply weren’t great enough to mobilise large numbers of young people to participate. Here’s his conclusion: “by the end of the New Zealand election the gap between Labour and National’s youth policies, while not small, was no longer decisive. For many, the difference eventually came down to whose plan would work better, not who understood the issues better. The irony for Labour is that Jacindamania and Labour’s policies on youth forced National to engage on issues they had been happy to ignore for nine years. Consequently for young people, the difference between a National-led future and a Labour one became less dramatic.” Finally, it’s worth considering whether all this focus on youth turnout is actually so important. After all there are many other ways of being political. And this is what political science student Brodie Fraser argues in her opinion piece, Screw parliament: how you can create political change right now.]]>

Sogavare appoints eight new ministers in effort to consolidate government

By Pacific Media Centre -

November 3, 2017

solomonislands_eightnewministers_680-504pxls-jpg — ]]>

PM Sogavare’s efforts to consolidate government after political instability … eight new ministers appointed. Not pictured: Duddley Kopu. Image: Solomon Star News.

Following the resignation of nine ministers last weekend Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare has made moves to consolidate the coalition government.

The Solomon Islands Broadcasting Corporation (SIBC) reports Sogavare has sworn in eight new ministers.

Ishmael Avui, Minister for Development, Planning and Aid Coordination; Augustine Auga, Minister for Agriculture and Livestock Development; Nestor Ghiro, Minister for Provincial Government and Institutional Strengthening; Bradley Tovosia, Minister for Forestry and Research; Moses Garu, Minister for Home Affairs; Jimson Fiau Tanagada, Minister for Police, National Security and Correctional Services; Dickson Mua, Minister for Mines, Energy and Rural Electrification; and Duddley Kopu, Minister for Agriculture and Livestock Development took their oaths Wednesday afternoon.

Sogavare’s assistant press secretary, Alex Akwai, said the government is trying to maintain stability in the current political situation.

He told SIBC: “Political stability is one important thing for the government in terms of progress and development.”

Among those who resigned last weekend, Garu and Mua told Solomon Star News they returned to the ranks of the Democratic Coalition for Change Government (DCCG) coalition as joining the Opposition to remove Sogavare would make no positive difference to national development.

Mua added there was no justified reason for removing Sogavare as it would only cause uncertainty and was not in the national interest.

-Partners-

Sogavare hits out
Sogavare has hit-out at the ministers who resigned and the motion of no confidence against him, stating the defectors were apprehensive about the country’s anti-corruption bill, which is to be introduced in parliament on Monday.

“Some of these resignations come as no surprise based on the fact that some of these same Ministers were responsible for undermining the progress of the ACB and the Opposition and Independent Parliamentary Groups have inadvertently aligned themselves with this agenda,” a statement from the prime minister’s office said Sunday.

Sogavare said that despite the ministers provoking political instability, the DCCG remained “confident” the national interest would prevail over personal agendas.

Sogavare added the return of Garu and Mua was a testament to this.

However, former deputy prime minister Manasseh Maelanga has rejected such accusations concerning the ACB, labelling them a cheap attack strategy, SIBC reports.

Maelanga said the ministers and backbenchers resigned due to personal convictions and on individual grounds.

“When we resigned, it shows that there is no trust and confidence in the Prime Minister, and that is why we resigned,” he said.

Continued ACB work
Maelanga stated both himself and those who had resigned would continue and complete the work to get the ACB through parliament, which he had initiated as acting prime minister following a petition by civil society representatives to have it brought back.

“It’s a clear picture that it is not the anti-corruption bill that we resigned from.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

RSF condemns ‘gag’ of Tonga’s state broadcaster ahead of general election

By Pacific Media Centre -

November 1, 2017

viola-ulakai-and-laumanu-petelocc84-kt-680wide-png — ]]>

RSF condemns government ‘gag’ of TBC … transfer of senior journalists Laumanu Petelō (right) and Viola Ulakai. Image: Kalino Latu/Kaniva Tonga

Pacific Media Watch Newsdesk

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has condemned moves by Prime Minister ‘Akilisi Pōhiva’s government to “gag” the Tonga Broadcasting Commission prior to the general election on November 16.

RSF says it joins those who have criticised a decision to deprive two senior public broadcasting journalists of all editorial responsibility in what it says is an “apparent government move to seize control of the state media”.

“Ever since it took office in late 2014, the Pōhiva administration has been trying to intimidate those within the TBC who don’t toe the line,” said Daniel Bastard, the head of RSF’s Asia-Pacific desk in a statement.

“The prime minister needs to understand that public service broadcasting does not mean government propaganda.

“If guarantees of media independence are not given quickly, international bodies, including the Commonwealth, will have to reconsider the aid they provide to Tonga,” Bastard added.

RSF’s condemnation comes after TBC’s chief editor Laumanu Petelō and news manager Viola Ulakai were controversially transferred out of the newsroom and into a marketing and sales department known as “NGO Services”, as reported by Pacific Media Watch.

-Partners-

The decision was made by TBC’s new chairman Dr Tevita Tu’i Uata, who has said the broadcaster’s restructure came due to a news failure.

Uata Pohiva’s ‘ally’
“The problem is that the content is not popular, that’s why it ran at a loss,” he told Kaniva News.

RSF states Dr Uata’s appointment a month ago was the “first step” to seize control of the TBC, which oversees two state TV channels and two state radio stations, as he is an “ally” of Pōhiva.

Petelō and Ulakai’s lawyer, Clive Edwards, said the transfer was illegal as it violates their contracts.

Edwards said the move was also dangerous due to Dr Uata’s attitude of using his position for campaigning and accused the government of “trying to control the media”, RSF reports.

Both Petelō and Ulakai had had run-ins with Pōhiva, with his administration launching several legal actions against the senior journalists in the past three years.

Ulakai was suspended in April 2015 on the recommendation of the minister of public enterprises after asking Pōhiva “too many tough questions”.

Petelō told the prime minister during a press conference in March “we are not your enemy” following comments by Pōhiva the role of the media was to “facilitate the work of government”.

Tonga is ranked 49th out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2017 World Press Freedom Index, after falling 12 places in the space of a year.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: The Coalition’s very clever ban on foreign house sales

By Bryce Edwards -

November 1, 2017

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: The Coalition’s very clever ban on foreign house sales

[caption id="attachment_13635" align="alignright" width="150"]

Dr Bryce Edwards.[/caption] The new coalition government looks set to record a big political win with its very clever plan to ban house sales to foreigners. Previously Labour’s policy of banning foreigners from buying houses in New Zealand had appeared to be a difficult promise to achieve – mainly because of the government’s responsibilities under existing and upcoming trade deals. The main problem was with the looming Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) deal, which Labour may well sign New Zealand up to. But it now seems that the coalition government can avert any conflict between the ban and the trade deal, simply by introducing the ban before the TPP is signed and implemented. Patrick Gower explains it like this: “Ardern has got into power, asked the officials and they have come up with a very simple ‘hack’ – bring in the ban before the trade deal is signed off. If this is true, it was a damn easy fix” – see: Jacinda Ardern goes for 2-for-1 ban and TPP deal. What will the foreign buyer ban achieve? [caption id="attachment_35" align="alignleft" width="300"]

Auckland housing market.[/caption] Obviously the intention of the ban is to reduce competition for buying houses, therefore limiting price increases. But will this really work? Not according to former National staffer Gwynn Compton, who says the effect of the ban will be “None. Zilch. Nada” – see: The pointlessness of a foreign buyer ban. He says “Australia implemented the same thing in December 2008 it had no impact there either. In fact, much like New Zealand’s prices, house prices in Sydney and Melbourne have nearly doubled since 2008.” Referring to the fact that foreigners will still be allowed to buy new houses, Compton says that the only impact of the new rules will be to shift “the two or three per cent of property investment that comes from overseas from existing homes to new builds instead. The small resulting increase in prices there pushes citizens and residents back into the existing home market, and thus increases competition there by the same amount. The overall result? You’re no better off than you were before, unless you’re a property developer.” Property Institute CEO Ashley Church also emphasises that the main impact will be to push investment towards new builds. He was quoted on TVNZ Breakfast saying, “It’s not a ban, it’s a redirection of investment… Foreign investors who want to invest in New Zealand residential property they can still do so, but they’ve got to invest it in the construction of new buildings. That’s a good thing for the economy, with 40,000 houses in Auckland required almost straight away” – see: Foreign buyer ban ‘more symbolic’, effect on first home buyers ‘almost none’, says Property Institute CEO. Real estate agents also think the ban will have little impact on their business – see Adriana Weber’s Foreign home-buyer ban: will it make any difference? The same article cites economist Gareth Kiernan saying that “many foreigners had already been squeezed out of the market by the banks toughening up restrictions on foreign investors.” Kiernan is also quoted on the slowdown of overseas investment in housing in Susan Edmunds’ article, Foreign buyer ban will affect small proportion of property sales. He says “the major banks have stopped approving mortgages based on overseas income” and the “Chinese government has also tightened the restrictions around the ability of Chinese nationals to move money out of China”. In the same article BNZ chief economist Tony Alexander warns “we don’t know to what extent buyers will find ways around the rules, such as getting friends and relations already here to purchase on their behalf, as has apparently been happening in the Asian communities, according to anecdotes”. The foreign buyer ban is politically powerful [caption id="attachment_4843" align="alignleft" width="300"]

David Parker, New Zealand’s Minister for Economic Development, Minister for the Environment, Minister for Trade and Export Growth, and Attorney-General.[/caption] The coalition government has stepped back from suggesting that the change will make a huge difference to housing affordability. Instead, David Parker is emphasising that the ban is an “important point of principle” – see Laura Walters’ How much of a difference will the foreign house buyers ban make? Parker has been focusing on the more ideological aspect of how the ban fits into the fight against inequality, saying the ban is aimed at the rich elite and will affect the “one per cent” – see Sarah Robson’s Foreign home buyers to be banned – PM. Parker explains: “Just about everyone who buys who’s a foreign person buying into New Zealand – they’re a very very wealthy ‘1 percenter’… And I think that’s one of the excesses of global capital, when you allow those sorts of interests to influence your housing market.” Therefore, this big first move of the coalition government can be seen as symbolically very important. And that’s what Patrick Gower argued this morning, saying “It sends the symbol that this Government is different to the last one, on housing in particular” – see Newshub’s Labour’s foreign housing ban ‘symbolism’ – Patrick Gower. And he says it will be politically powerful: “Gower argued the ban is supported by two-thirds of the public, and the Government will get credit from voters for instituting it.” An even more sceptical view is that this big announcement can be seen as a sop to leftwing coalition supporters who are soon going to have to accept the Government signing up to the TPP. This is the argument made by Rob Hosking in the NBR: “So this week’s announcement was part distortion – the foreign buyers announcement is good crowd-pleasing stuff but it won’t mean much at this point in the housing cycle – and part the start of a softening process” – see: Ardern drops ‘sovereignty’ concerns over TPP (paywalled). To go even further, here’s Mike Hosking’s view that the housing buying ban is entirely pragmatic: “This so-called ban is window dressing, it’s xenophobic, made-up political bollocks for expediency purposes and nothing else. It’s the move you make to make you look like you’re doing something, when in reality it’s for headlines and coalition promises – not for any real effect. It’s the work of inexperienced amateurs” – see: Foreign house buyer ban ‘xenophobic bollocks’. Labour’s beef with National Patrick Gower says this could be a big win for the prime minister, and predicts “It will be extremely embarrassing for National, if she pulls this off, as it said it could never be done.” And National’s prior role in trying to prevent Labour from achieving a ban is now in the spotlight. Ardern herself has come out and criticised the former National Government, saying that it now seems they didn’t even ask their officials for advice on whether a ban on foreigners buying houses was possible. Some speculate that National actually went out of their way to “wedge” Labour on the issue. Vernon Small explains that when the former government was negotiating the TPP, it deliberately chose not to include the possibility for a future government to implement a foreigner ban on house buying. He asks: “Was National’s decision to exclude a ban on foreign buyers of Kiwi homes from free trade deals a poison pill left for Labour to swallow?” – see: Foreign buyers ban in, Labour points finger at Nats for ‘misleading’ over free trade clash. Small reports that “there has been speculation that former prime minister John Key and his team were explicit – leave it out. If they were so weasel-cunning it’s easy to see how the logic would flow; create an irreconcilable clash between Labour’s policy on foreign house buyers and the TPP so they can have one but not the other.” Labour clearly blames National and its former trade negotiator, Tim Groser for the problem. New minister for trade negotiations, David Parker, has expressed bitter disappointment that National wouldn’t cooperate with Labour, so as to maintain a bi-partisan consensus on trade agreements. In an interview with the Herald, Parker says: “It has absolutely been clear for many, many years that the Labour Party in terms of trying to maintain bipartisan consensus around this has been strong on this ability to have New Zealand markets for our land, not international markets, and therefore how the last government chose to do that was an attempt to wedge us” – see Audrey Young’s David Parker targets trade deal and bar on house sales to overseas buyers. Of course, now Groser is the Government’s diplomatic representative in Washington, and the question of his re-call is therefore on the agenda. Parker says this is a matter for Winston Peters, as Foreign Minister, to decide, but adds: “He is one of the people who wedged us on this issue” and “He was pretty central to those decisions.” The AgriHQ publication has recently put across the view that in the previous National Government, “Tim Groser tried and failed to persuade Cabinet colleagues to accommodate the Labour Party’s previous policy of restricting house purchases by non-residents to preserve a long-standing consensus on trade policy between the two major parties” – see Nigel Stirling’s Groser backed trade policy. However, according to this account, “the recommendation never saw the light of day after a ‘captain’s call’ from then Prime Minister John Key and National campaign manager Steven Joyce in the middle of the Korean talks meant Groser was forced to back down.” This is also covered by Richard Harman in his column, Did National play politics with MFAT’s TPP advice? Harman says this account reinforces the “suspicion that National played partisan politics with the TPP.” But he points to a briefing paper produced by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, which also appears to give poor advice on these issues. Harman says: “That calls into question the quality of the advice given to the previous Government on the TPP and raises the question as to whether it was advice tailored to be acceptable to the National Government”. Finally, for satire on this issue, see my blog post, Cartoons about foreign house sales and TPP.]]>

NZ exhibition aims to highlight ‘regeneration’ of refugees lives

By Pacific Media Centre -

November 1, 2017

ugeeportrait_alistairguthrie_680-510pxls-jpg — ]]>

By Kendall Hutt in Auckland

Black-and-white photographs are aiming to start a conversation and dispel myths around former refugees and asylum seekers in New Zealand.

Transplanted: Refugee portraits of New Zealand showcases two-metre tall, black-and white-close-up portraits of former refugees by award-winning photographer Alistair Guthrie.

The portraits are currently on display in a ten-day exhibition at the New Zealand Portrait Gallery in Wellington.

“Refugees lives have been pulled up from the roots and transplanted on new soil,” explains curator and journalist Tracey Barnett.

“I created Transplanted because I wanted to show the regeneration of lives, that these people can become our future – carpenters and teachers and insurance brokers and our art gallery directors just like anyone else.

“In New Zealand about roughly 45 percent of our quota intake are children. They grow up to be Kiwis in every sense of the word.

-Partners-

“You may not even recognise that they began life as a refugee because they speak with a Kiwi accent, eat pineapple lumps, and cheer for the All Blacks on a Saturday night just as loudly as anyone else,” Barnett said.

Refugee ‘talking space’
Transplanted opened with a talk by former Prime Minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer on Friday and continues until Sunday, November 5 with insights from former refugees and international diplomats.

Tracey Barnett, journalist-turned-advocate for changing refugee narratives … “just like anyone else”. Image: Tracey Barnett.

The gallery exhibition is also a “refugee talking space”, intended to turn the tide on negative perceptions of refugees, both globally and closer to home.

“It has been incredibly saddening and worrying to see the label of refugees become so disrespected.

“These people have overcome tremendous odds and tremendous difficulties to get to safety, something any of us would aspire to,” Barnett told Asia Pacific Report.

Barnett, who serves on the executive board of the Refugee Council of New Zealand, said the media was partly to blame.

“Unfortunately the media shows these people always in the worst moments of their lives, but the reality is that it’s just one short chapter of a much bigger life.”

A highlight has been the ‘Human Library’ sessions, Barnett said, where former refugees speak one-on-one with the public.

Lives in limbo
“It’s been incredibly moving, enjoyable and informative I think for everyone who’s participated and it’s a real highlight.”

Human Library sessions … “incredibly moving, enjoyable and informative”. Image: Tracey Barnett

But while some refugees lives have been “transplanted on new soil” in New Zealand, the lives of asylum seekers in one of Australia’s offshore detention centres remain in limbo.

“These refugees have every reason to be afraid and every reason to be worried that they will not be protected and they will not be safe,” Barnett said.

The words of Wage Peace NZ’s founder come as a 2013 offer by New Zealand to take in 150 refugees a year from Australia’s detention centres remains “nixed” by Australia.

This means asylum seekers on Manus Island, around 600 of whom are refusing to leave the now closed centre, are being forced to relocate to several sites in nearby Lorengau – including the Manus Refugee Transit Centre – or “trade one hell for another” for the “other prison island” of Nauru where human rights abuses are rife, Barnett said.

Many of the single men who remain on Manus fear for their lives, with reports locals have allegedly already looted the centre.

Barnett said “there have been worrying and frightening outbreaks of violence” in the past.

Manus supplies cut
These outbreaks of violence include a shooting on April 14, 2017 in which bullets were directly fired into the refugee centre by security forces.

All power, water and food supplies have stopped at the refugee processing centre.

A notice posted by Papua New Guinea’s Immigration and Citizenship Service Authority stated all staff had left and the site would be returned to the Defence Force today.

“This is the last communication you will receive at this location,” the notice stated.

Closure of Australia’s detention centre on Manus Island … “will not end refugee suffering”. Image pixelated by SBS. Image: SBS News

The closure of Manus Island comes after PNG’s Supreme Court ruled last year the centre was illegal and unconstitutional.

Barnett said New Zealand’s new Labour-led government should also be applying “huge pressure” and push to renegotiate its 2013 deal with Australia.

“This makes a perfect opportunity for Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern to stand back and say ‘I’m a new government, this is a new possibility, let’s talk about doing this as a one-off instead and helping you evacuate the camps, but you must agree to not reopen them’,” Barnett said.

Examine NZ offer
Ardern has said she would renew the offer after examining the proposal Australia continues to reject.

“I want to look at the detail of the offer that was made and the obligations that we’ve set out that we would take on,” she said.

“Of course that would be within our refugee quota, and within existing intent that we’ve shared with the UN around taking UN mandated refugees.”

Green MP Golriz Ghahraman, herself a former refugee from Iran, has recently labelled New Zealand’s alleged silence over the past four years as ‘complicity’.

Former refugee Golriz Ghahraman … New Zealand silence on Manus Island issue equals “complicity” in Australia’s human rights abuses. Image: Alistair Guthrie

Ghahraman will be speaking this evening at the exhibition on the ‘I am not a label: Young refugee voices’ panel.

Manus Island’s closure also provides an opportunity to provide “fresh eyes” on New Zealand’s own refugee policies, Barnett said.

“New Zealand has never pulled its weight when it comes to our quota.

‘We can do more’
“Unfortunately we rank 95th worst in the world per capita for the total number of refugees and asylum seekers we host.

“If you measure it by our relative wealth, our GDP, it’s even worse and we rank 121st worst in the world.

“That isn’t good enough and we can do more,” Barnett said.

Although it was “wonderful” New Zealand’s quota was going up to 1500, Barnett stated it would be a while before refugees felt its impact.

“The quota is only reviewed every three years and we’ll be changing our quota in 2018. It will be several years again before we hit that 1500 mark.

“I’m hoping that the government will consider changing that number earlier and faster to make a bigger impact.

“We can do more and we should.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: The surprising new power behind Winston Peters

By Bryce Edwards -

November 1, 2017

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: The surprising new power behind Winston Peters

[caption id="attachment_13635" align="alignright" width="150"]

Dr Bryce Edwards.[/caption] As the new coalition government forms, a number of crucial staffing appointments are being made by Labour, New Zealand First and the Greens. Some of these jobs are incredibly important, as the people in them can end up being more powerful than most of the MPs in the party caucuses. Depending on the role and the person appointed, they can become a central part of the success or otherwise of a government or party in power. The most interesting new appointment announced so far, is that of political scientist Jon Johansson to the role of Chief of Staff for New Zealand First – see Jo Moir’s news report, Political scientist Jon Johansson made NZ First chief of staff. A surprising appointment [caption id="attachment_15343" align="alignleft" width="225"]

Political scientist Jon Johansson is NZ First’s new chief of staff.[/caption] Judging by reactions, everyone has been entirely surprised by Johansson’s shift from being a political scientist to a political player. And certainly, it’s quite unusual for a political scientist to go from teaching politics to practicing it. But it does happen from time to time. National’s controversial Jian Yang is a prime example, having previously taught politics at the University of Auckland. And for the latest on him, see Matt Nippert’s article yesterday, Three unanswered questions about our spy-trainer MP. But perhaps it’s not entirely surprising that Johansson has shifted into politics. He’s long been very close to many politicians and others around the Beehive. In fact, few university academics would know the corridors of power as well as Johansson – he’s a creature of the Wellington political scene like no other, and should have little trouble shifting from the classroom to the Beehive. A surprising party to go with That the Victoria University of Wellington lecturer has chosen to pin his colours to New Zealand First is a surprise for most political followers. After all, in the past he has been more associated with Labour and the Greens, and in the lead-up to the 2014 election he advised these opposition parties in their quest to project themselves as a coherent alternative government. There will inevitably be ideological questions about Johansson’s shift into partisan politics. In the past, as an academic and political commentator he has endeavoured to be as objective as possible. However, he has previously been forthright when it comes to what might be regarded as “socially conservative” ideologies or policies. For example, he became the major academic critic of Don Brash’s Orewa Speech. And it will be interesting to see how he will respond in his new role when inevitably confronted with socially conservative politics involving New Zealand First. Why Johansson’s appointment is smart Johansson’s affinity with Winston Peters will make him a good fit with the New Zealand First leader. He will play the role of Peters’ right-hand-man. And because Johansson is a leading expert in political strategy and New Zealand politics, he will be very valuable to New Zealand First. Furthermore, Johansson’s academic specialty is in political leadership. He is already highly aware of Peters’ strengths and weaknesses. He knows how leadership works, leaders succeed, and how Peters can best create a legacy as one of the top political leaders of our era. If nothing else, we can expect to see some spectacular new speeches from the New Zealand First leader. But more than this, Johansson’s appointment is smart because the political scientist is also close to Labour and the Greens. His role as chief of staff is primarily going to involve coalition management, ensuring that the New Zealand First caucus and staff are working together with their counterparts. Because Johansson is already close to the two other parties, he will be well placed to ensure coalition stability and make sure that New Zealand First’s interests are looked after by Labour and the Greens. The fact that Johansson does not have a history of involvement in the New Zealand First party could be considered a disadvantage in his role as chief of staff. After all, he won’t be aware of the configurations of power and policy within his new party. And he’s essentially an outsider, coming in to manage people who don’t know him or necessarily trust him. But this could also be an advantage. He won’t be tainted by any of the factional differences and loyalties in the party. He therefore comes in as a more independent manager of the party, and this may help when dealing with disputes and differences. He will also have a greater degree of objectivity, which can be very useful in these roles. It’s not always good to have a party activist running the parliamentary operations of a political party. Sometimes having someone with a background and strong ideological belief in a party can be a handicap. Why Johansson’s appointment is risky Of course, successful political management isn’t simply a matter of knowing all the theory, and Johansson is coming into this important management role with no proven record or experience in the nitty-gritty of how Parliament works. Added to that, the New Zealand First party is one of the more elusive and mysterious political vehicles around. So, landing straight at the top of this empire – albeit beside Winston Peters – might still prove a difficult task. He will need to show that he has the temperament and diplomacy to deal with complicated and difficult coalition and internal-party problems. As an outsider, Johansson may also not be in the best position to wield his considerable new power in a way that will protect the party. “Guns for hire” often don’t have the knowledge and emotional commitment that enables them to advance the party’s core interests, and inevitably they are readier to compromise on issues in a way that a “true believer” in the party might see as “selling out”. After all, there will be many party activists and MPs who have slogged away to get the party into government, and may feel that suddenly an outsider has taken the most powerful job in the parliamentary team. And there will be doubts that he knows how New Zealand First voters really think and feel, like they do. Also, Johansson’s perceived closeness to Labour could be a problem. Those in New Zealand First might come to regard him as being too ready to give way to Labour and the Greens, or that in his liaisons with the coalition partners he is vulnerable to “Stockholm Syndrome”. Johansson’s past political commentary New Zealand First’s political opponents and the media will look to Johansson’s many articles, chapters, books, and media appearances to find critical statements he’s made about Winston Peters and his party. Some of this might make for interesting reading. Already, one person on Twitter has tweeted a statement of Johansson’s from 2005: “Well, that he was mercurial, charismatic, but really was never a team player, and as such, in terms of legacy, there’s really not much of a record there at all. It’s always in a sense been more of a style over substance.” And interestingly enough, Winston Peters then “liked” this on Twitter. And during the election campaign, Johansson published a number of opinion pieces that might now be re-read in a new light. Here they are: • Change is coming, ready or not. • Game On: Dancing with the Zeitgeist. • Battling the zeitgeist. • The big crunch – minor party struggles . • Turei, Key to Labour’s surge. • Can National overcome the three-term curse? • Relentlessly positive vs relentlessly dissatisfied. • Ardern is ‘standout leader’ of post-Clark Labour. Finally, many journalists were taught by Johansson when they studied politics at Victoria University of Wellington. Press gallery reporter Henry Cooke (@henrycooke), for example, on hearing of Johansson’s appointment tweeted his lecture notes from 11/05/12: “Winston will want to be part of the next election. He might enter some kind of abstention agreement. He stands to gain more from National than Labour. Jon thinks Jacinda has potential as leader, like a young 21st Clark with warmth.” For more such tweets, see Top tweets about Jon Johansson becoming NZ First Chief of Staff.]]>

Government in Solomon Islands ‘collapsing’ as MPs change allegiance

By Pacific Media Centre -

October 31, 2017

solomonis_parliament_pclooppng_680-500pxls-jpg — ]]>

Solomon Islands government ‘intact’ says DCCG … 18 MPs switch allegiance to Opposition, Independents. Image: Loop PNG

A change of government is likely on the horizon for the Solomon Islands after several MPs changed allegiance.

The saga unfolded on Saturday following the resignation of seven cabinet ministers, including Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs Manasseh Maelanga.

Other ministers include Minister for National Planning and Aid Coordination Danny Philip, Snyder Rini, Minister for Fisheries and Marine Resources, Minister of Forestry and Research Chris Laore, Moses Garu, Minister of Police, National Security and Correctional Services, Minister of Public Service Moffat Fugui and Elijah Doromuala, Minister of Justice and Legal Affairs.

Deputy private secretary to the Governor-General, Rawcliffe Ziza, revealed the ministers resigned after losing confidence in Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare, Solomon Star News reports, prompting the newspaper to headline the move as ‘Government collapsing’.

The drama continued Sunday as two more ministers resigned from the Democratic Coalition for Change Government (DCCG), bringing the total number of resignations to nine, the Solomon Islands Broadcasting Corporation (SIBC) reports.

The ministers were Minister of Provincial Government and Institutional Strengthening David Tome and Minister of Peace, National Unity and Reconciliation Samson Maneka.

Several backbenchers have also resigned, Solomon Star News reports, meaning 18 MPs have deserted Sogavare since Saturday.

-Partners-

MPs join Opposition
They have since joined the Opposition and Independents in a show of solidarity at the Honiara Hotel and again in parliament.

The move brought the ‘Honiara Hotel Camp’ to 29 members on Sunday, Solomon Star News reports.

Opposition ranks grow … 18 MPs switch allegiance from Sogavare-led Democratic Coalition for Change Government. Image: Solomon Star News

The SIBC also reports Sogavare will face a motion of no confidence when parliament resumes on Monday, November 6.

Speaker of Parliament Ajilon Jasper Nasiu received the motion from the leader of the Parliamentary Independent Group Dr Derek Sikua on Sunday.

According to an MP who wished to remain anonymous, a new prime minister will be elected within two weeks, the Solomon Star News reports.

“Members of the DCCG have totally lost all trust and confidence in the leadership of Sogavare.

“Sogavare has allowed his controversial nephew Robson Djokovic to control government affairs,” the MP said.

Government remains intact
It is believed Sogavare’s major cabinet shakeup – embarked on since early August – which saw several ministers reassigned and two terminated, upset the United Democratic Party, the major coalition partner of the DCCG.

A government issued statement said the government remains intact despite the walkout of nine ministers.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

Tūhoe leader’s address to deliver ‘hard truths’ about New Zealand

By Pacific Media Centre -

October 31, 2017

tamatikruger_brucejessonmemoriallecture_680-504pxls-jpg — ]]>

Tūhoe settlement, self-determination chief negotiator Tamati Kruger … ‘historic opportunity’ to deliver Bruce Jesson lecture. Image: Tamati Kruger.

By Alex Braae in Auckland

Tūhoe leader Tamati Kruger has some hard truths to deliver in his upcoming 2017 Bruce Jesson Memorial lecture.

The chair of Tūhoe Te Uru Taumatua says New Zealand needs to face up to the fact that “we create a reality to suit our time and our purpose, and some of it is quite dishonest”.

“In New Zealand we have a mythology that we are a clean green nation, when we are not. We have another mythology that we’re quite egalitarian and liberal. We are not.

“We are quite a cruel people to refugees and people who have emigrated here. We are not as tolerant as we pretend to be.

“We have these things we have to be truthful about, to repair and fix,” Kruger said.

Kruger will speak tomorrow at the University of Auckland in a lecture which honours the late journalist and political thinker Bruce Jesson. The lecture has been delivered in previous years by notable intellectuals, including Jane Kelsey, Nicky Hager and David Lange.

-Partners-

He will also be speaking about his experiences leading his iwi, Tūhoe’s settlement with the Crown, and the Te Urewera Act. Kruger was the chief negotiator for Tūhoe in the settlement process.

Navigating differing politics
He said an important part of leadership has involved navigating the difference between Māori and Pākehā politics.

“Part of the blessing of Pākehā politics is you have this apparatus called law, where you can bend people to one’s will. But in Tūhoe politics you have to depend on your reputation and integrity for people to find that whatever you have to say has some wisdom and truth in it.”

On taking up the mantle of leadership, he said he “got to the stage where I could not renounce my parents’ prayers that I contribute something back to the iwi.

“I don’t see myself as having to do what I do forever…I’m probably facing the end part of my contribution to the Tūhoe people and I just want to continue to do my very best.”

Acting chair of the Bruce Jesson Foundation, Simon Collins, said the theme of the lecture was always about “the most important issues that we face in New Zealand, and one of the big elephants in the room is the big disparity between Māori and everyone else”.

“What Tūhoe is doing is one of the most exciting responses to that. They’re taking it into their own hands to do something about the problem.

“That’s what we’re hoping Tamati Kruger can talk about – what they’re doing can have lessons for all of us.”

Alex Braae is a journalism major at the Auckland University of Technology.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

Fiji’s devastated Tukuraki village moves to new site after landslide

By Pacific Media Centre -

October 29, 2017

opening-tukuraki-village-e1509236291423-png — ]]>

A Pacific Media Centre video at Tukuraki by the Bearing Witness team Julie Cleaver and Kendall Hutt in May.

Pacific Media Centre Newsdesk

After more than five years of living in temporary housing, the community of Tukuraki in the highlands of Fiji are this weekend celebrating as they move into their newly built, disaster resilient village.

The Tukuraki community – featured by the Pacific Media Centre’s Bearing Witness climate project in May – was devastated in 2012 as a landslide buried 80 percent of their village and tragically took the lives of a young family including a toddler and young baby.

The opening of the new Tukuraki village on Friday with SPC’s Dr Audrey Aumua (from left), Minister Inia Seruiratu and EU’s Christoph Wagner. Image: SPC

The community were forced to relocate to temporary homes as they were at risk of further landslides and in the midst of recovering from the landslide, the community was hit by Cyclone Evan only 10 months later.

In February last year, the community was again forced to flee to nearby caves as Tropical Cyclone Winston hit – the community’s third major disaster in four years.

As a result, the Fiji government deemed relocation for the inland community an urgent priority and approached the Pacific Community (SPC) to support in this work.

-Partners-

On Friday, 11 homes and a community hall built to category five cyclone standards were officially opened.

The F$756,000 relocation of the Tukuraki village to a safer and less disaster prone site was made possible through the European Union and the ACP Group of States-funded Building Safety and Resilience in the Pacific Project (BSRP) implemented by the Pacific Community.

Reducing vulnerability
The BSRP Project is committed to reducing the vulnerability for the Pacific to disaster and climate change.

Flashback to January 2012…mud and rock buried Tukuraki village, killing Anare Taliga and his family. Image: Janet Lotawa/Rise Beyond The Reef.

Inia Seruiratu, High Level Climate Change Champion for COP23 and Minister for Agriculture, Rural and Maritime Development, and National Disaster Management and Meteorology said:

“Today as we celebrate the critical milestone for Tukuraki, we also remember Anare Taliga (38 years), Mereoni Robe (23 years), Losena Nai (18 months) and Makelesi Matalau (6 months), who lost their lives to the devastating landslide that altered the lives of everyone in the Tukuraki community.

“The achievement of creating a disaster resilient community that has been led by the community itself is testament to the resilience of the Tukuraki community.”

In addition to the buildings, the project also provided the community with access to a reliable water sources. The Ba area is known for enduring long term droughts and to counter this issue, the project built a dam nearby and have strategically placed water tanks that connect to each household, ensuring the community will never run out of water.

Pacific Community Deputy Director-General Dr Audrey Aumua said: “This community knows and understands disaster but what makes this relocation remarkable is the partnership led by Fiji government with SPC and the European Union to achieve real, measureable disaster resilience at the community level.

“We know this new community will protect not only the lives but the livelihoods of the Tukuraki community and we are immensely proud to be a key partner in this work.”

Community assisted
Along with the 11 homes and the evacuation centre, the Tukuraki community has also been assisted with a retaining wall (to prevent soil erosion), road access, site levelling and a playground.

The new location is closer to Nalotawa District School which means the community will have easier access to schools as well as health services.

European Union head of cooperation Christoph Wagner said: “We are proud to partner up with the Fiji government and the Pacific Community on this project as it not only has helped the people of this community, it has also established for the nation what a resilient rural community looks like.

“With the effects of climate change and rising tides threatening coastal communities all over the Pacific, Tukuraki stands as a great example of how effective partnerships can sustain development.”

Tukuraki is the first inland community to be relocated, a unique feature as the other 46 key priority communities for relocation are all coastal.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: The new government may not be so radical after all

By Bryce Edwards -

October 27, 2017

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: The new government may not be so radical after all

[caption id="attachment_13635" align="alignright" width="150"]

Dr Bryce Edwards.[/caption] For a week now, the political left has been celebrating, and the political right has mostly been catastrophising. The dominant theme has been that this is a government of change – indeed, a government of radical leftwing change. But there are some signs and more sober readings of events that suggest the new administration might not be as radical as it first appeared. The political right is becoming relaxed [caption id="attachment_15332" align="aligncenter" width="800"]

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern (right), Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters (left) and the Governor General of New Zealand Dame Patsy Reddy (centre) – image taken at the swearing in of the new Labour-led Government, October 26, 2017.[/caption] Rightwing commentator Matthew Hooton has the most interesting and sober reading of the new government as relatively moderate. His NBR column today in print is titled “Why Ardern needs to manage expectations”. In this, Hooton responds to fears (or hopes) that the new government is anti-capitalist or even boldly radical. He opens the column like this: “If this is what the end of capitalism-as-we-know-it looks like, everyone can relax. The seven-page Labour-NZ First coalition agreement and the equally brief Labour-Green confidence and supply agreement are surprisingly benign. There is hardly anything in either that Sir John Key or even Bill English wouldn’t have signed up to in a flash had they thought it was the difference between government and opposition.” Hooton then goes through key elements of the new government’s programme of reform and sees parallels with initiatives under the former National administration, including the regional development fund, tree-planting, the new Forestry Service, and the leap in the minimum wage. But his thoughts on the new Cabinet personnel are most interesting. Here’s Hooton on Ardern’s two most powerful ministers: “The finance minister, Mr Robertson, is more the Wellington technocrat he became in the 2000s than the Otago student radical he pretended to be in the early 1990s. Economic development minister David Parker is a political puritan and can be expected to fix the worst of National’s corporate-welfare excesses and government-procurement mess. As trade minister, his views on modern international economic agreements like the TPP are entirely mainstream.” And he makes similar observations about other ministers. Hooton even claims to be relaxed about the New Zealand First leader: “Mr Peters’ call for capitalism to have a human face is inherently conservative and not a call to nationalise the means of production, distribution, and exchange.” And as to why so many radical statements are being made by people in the new government: “It is perhaps because of the relative conservatism of her government’s announced programme and key personnel that the prime minister will have an ongoing need to throw some red-meat rhetoric to her left over the weeks ahead. The business community should set this aside.” Even Mike Hosking is starting to relax about the new government. Initially the broadcaster struggled with the change of government – see, for example, Steve Kilgallon’s How Mike Hosking handled the election result – but now Hosking seems to have realised that the Labour-led coalition isn’t going to live up to his worst fears. He wrote, on Wednesday that Maybe the new Government’s not the end of the world after all. In this he argues that “If you look with an open mind, there is always a decent amount there to – at the very least – not be overly bothered or freaked about.” Hosking goes through a number of key policies of the new administration, and challenges the reader as to what there is to disagree with. Even on the minimum wage boost, Hosking sees common sense: “A lot of people will argue the minimum wage needs to be higher than it is, and here’s a good example of why this Government isn’t as radical as its opponents might want to make it out to be. They want the minimum wage to be 20 bucks by 2020, that’s three years away, and it’s already over 16. So we are hardly talking radical change here.” And business leaders themselves are ready to accept that the new administration isn’t all bad. For example, Wellington Chamber of Commerce chief executive John Milford writes today welcoming the Prime Minister “absolutely ruling out” allowing workers to negotiate their employment conditions by striking – see: Signals are encouraging, but some of the policies could be a problem. He also notes how keen Jacinda Ardern is to work with business. The media on how moderate the government is Newspaper editorials have been relatively positive about the new government, and are downplaying the notion there is anything to worry about. When the coalition agreements were announced this week, the New Zealand Herald seemed pleasantly surprised: “Much of what has been said in the past few weeks and days have raised fears the fundamentals of a modern, market-led economy might be at risk. The package of policies announced yesterday do not appear to go that far” – see: Peters agrees to a cautious, tentative deal. On some of the major interventions in the economy, the editorial expresses relief that “they will likely not fundamentally undermine the economy”. Similarly, it regards Winston Peters as having made little ground in terms of his desire to reform monetary policy and “Most of the coalition agreements are token concessions to Peters.” The editorial concludes: “The language of both agreements is more cautious and tentative than a prescription for change. If this is as daring as the coalition gets, the economy should not suffer too much harm.” The Dominion Post newspaper also seems to be giving the new government coalition agreements a stamp of approval, noting in its editorial that some of the more radical or alternative policy agendas of the three parties have been watered down or left aside – see: Fudging the coalition. It concludes: “The areas where it fudges, however, remain very important, and might simply lead to paralysis or cop-out. In reality the coalition’s plan is probably not radical.” The latest Listener magazine is also somewhat surprised about the lack of boldness or real action promised by the new government, and says “the public awaits more details on how Ardern and Peters intend redressing capitalism’s shortcomings” – see: PM Jacinda Ardern needs to assert her authority over NZ First – and fast. The magazine complains about the watering down of some key issues: “In Opposition, Labour talked a lot about child poverty and homelessness, creating expectations that it had new ideas for solving these long-standing and complex problems. However, the only reference to housing in the coalition agreement is the words ‘establish a housing commission’. Children do not live in commissions. Similarly, environmental causes that had a high profile in the election campaign have not translated into significant policy wins.” And it lampoons the inclination of the new government to kick for touch on so many vital issues: “The Government intends to ‘commission a feasibility study’ on moving the Ports of Auckland, ‘recognise’ the potential for aquaculture, ‘examine’ agricultural debt, ‘re-examine’ the Defence Capability Plan, ‘investigate’ growing Kiwibank and a volunteer rural constabulary, ‘review’ the processes of Parliament, ‘hold a full-scale review’ into power prices and ‘hold a public inquiry’ on local-government costs.” Modifying the status quo But we may have to wait and see whether the new Labour-led administration is going to be one of radical reform . Audrey Young argues this week that “On the basis of the agreement released, it is not yet possible to tell whether it will a Government of radical change, as New Zealand First wanted, or whether it is one that modifies the status quo. That will become apparent in May next year when Grant Robertson delivers his first Budget with the plans to implement the gains” – see: Radical change or modified status quo? Similarly, Tim Murphy argues that despite some of the rhetoric from Winston Peters, his party hasn’t really won any great boldness of policy in its coalition agreement with Labour, and so “NZ First’s effect on this government will be a ‘modifying’ rather than revolutionising one” – see: Searching for Winston’s legacy. Furthermore, since Peters has chosen to be Foreign Minister, it seems unlikely he will be able to play any role as a radical reformer in this government. John Armstrong notes that the “appointment seems to be more about status and seniority than Peters being serious about mounting a reform-heavy offensive on ‘irresponsible capitalism’. If he was serious about tackling the latter, he would have ensured he was allocated such portfolios which offer the means to make a difference on that front” – see: Winston Peters starting to look like he’s ready to hand over to Shane Jones. Nonetheless, if you’re after some counter-arguments to show that the incoming administration really is going to shakeup the economy and society, see Martyn Bradbury’s Why the new Government is far more revolutionary than many suspect, and David Slack’s Back to the future? Finally, for the ultimate counterview, you can read an article published in The Australian: Kiwis now led by a Commie as Ardern attacks capitalism and embraces socialist roots.]]>

Jakarta power plants could cause premature deaths, says Greenpeace

By Pacific Media Centre -

October 27, 2017

greenpeace-pollution-protest-680wide-jpg — ]]>

Greenpeace activists stage a demonstration in front of the Health Ministry office in Jakarta last month. Image: Muhammad Adimaja/Jakarta Globe/Antara

Pacific Media Centre Newsdesk

Jakarta will be surrounded by more than 10 coal-fired power plants (PLTU) within a 100km radius, which could lead to premature deaths, Greenpeace Indonesia has reported.

The report entitled Silent Murder in Jakarta predicted that the presence of the PLTU could cause 10,600 premature deaths and 2800 low weight births a year in Greater Jakarta areas.

Jakarta is already surrounded by eight PLTUs. The other four will begin operating between 2019 and 2024 and another one, which is currently operating, will be expanded in 2019.

Greenpeace Indonesia’s climate and energy campaigner Didit Wicaksono said on Tuesday that the city’s air quality was bad, and it was mostly caused by transportation and housing.

“But the fact is, it’s not only transportation that damages the health of Jakarta’s residents and their children, it’s also large capacity PLTUs in Java, specifically around Jakarta, and two steam and gas power plants [PLTGU] in Jakarta,” Didit said in a statement.

“Pollution generated from the power plants has also caused Jakarta’s air to be unhealthier.”

-Partners-

Based on Greenpeace Indonesia’s study, the combined emissions from the PLTUs will likely affect cities located to the north and west of the power plants, namely Cilegon and Tangerang in Banten, Bogor in West Java, Jakarta, as well as Bekasi, Depok, Tambun and Karawang in West Java.

The pollution could cause serious respiratory disease, stroke, cardiovascular disease and other heart related disease. Children, pregnant woman and the elderly are the most vulnerable to the pollution.

“For the sake of public health, Greenpeace encourages the Indonesian government to improve the emissions standard for thermal power plants and monitor their performance,” Didit added.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

Scott Waide: Why sorcery superstition thrives in PNG where services are poor

By Pacific Media Centre -

October 27, 2017

villagers-discussing-alleged-sorcery-case-emtv-680wide-jpg — ]]>

ANALYSIS: By Scott Waide in Lae, Papua New Guinea

In the early hours of October 23, 2017, a woman in her late 40s was dragged out of her home by a mob who accused her of practising sorcery.

Until then, she had lived much like them – in a tiny rented shack in a settlement in Lae City at the edge of the Bumbu River.

The men carried what the landlord later described as a bamboo, used for witch hunting. According to them, the bamboo tells them where a sorcerer is.

An edited image from the Bumbu River “sorcery” accusations incident … “failure of education”. Image: Pacific Media Watch

Police were alerted and came just in time to rescue the woman we later came to know as “Elizabeth” from the Eastern Highlands. They fired shots, dispersed the crowd and took the woman to hospital.

Her neighbour, someone who shared meals with her, was initially confused when they dragged her into her yard.

-Partners-

“They were going to burn her in front of my house,” she said. She continued her tale as I listened. She told them that she could be innocent. Her closest neighbor became her enemy after a few unfounded accusations.

She went on to justify why the accusations were correct.

Neighbour turned enemy
“She took my baby the other time. I think she ate her heart. I don’t know,” she said.

Her closest neighbour was now her enemy.

As I stood on the banks of the Bumbu river listening to the men and women talk about the sanguma meri I was going to interject, to try to make them see reason. But I held back.

This was not something you explain and reason to people who have grown up in a belief system that has never been challenged since childhood.

How do you do it?

From the outside, we see the obvious: Brutal violence against women. We see the mob mentality and the abuse. What do they see? A sorcerer who is a threat to society and life itself.

We are on two separate wavelengths. We are not connecting. Police can arrest 100 people, or a whole village. But the idea remains. You have to kill the idea with another.

‘Gruesome’ Madang case
In Madang in 2014, seven people including two children were killed in a raid on their village. The attackers were searching for sorcerers “responsible for a number of deaths” in the neighbouring village.

Gruesome pictures of hacked bodies were obtained by police. Later, 100 men and boys as young as 10 were arrested and taken to the Madang police station for questioning.

Each person had a sense that justice had been served, that they all did the right thing.

On the banks of the Bumbu River, what struck me was that most of the accusers were people younger than me – in their 20s and 30s. These are people you assume would be forward thinking and educated enough to not connect three unrelated deaths to a random woman in their community.

Maybe those who died perished after drinking water from the contaminated river. Maybe they died from multidrug resistant TB. But how would they know?

Their world is not one where bacteria and viruses live. They live in a world where people just do not die suddenly from heart attacks or suffer from depression or mental illness. There has to be a reason for the death and usually someone is to blame.

I was personally angered and disgusted that we have allowed our country to come to this state.

Failed education system
We are partly reaping the results of a failed education system imposed on our communities in 1995. An education system that took grade eight and ten dropouts and made them elementary school teachers in a few weeks.

In the Sandaun province, the Catholic Education Service struggled to implement government policy which demanded that the person with the highest education level in the village (which consultants assumed was grade 12), be trained as an elementary school teacher.

In Oksapmin, where I spent weeks with a research team talking to teachers and members of the community, that government directive was hard to implement if the “most educated” had completed grade eight a few years ago.

Over 20 years PNG sacrificed quality for quantity to meet UN goals of universal primary education. It looked good politically when we reported on the number of kids now able to attend school. But it was a double-edged sword.

We created generations of Papua New Guineans over two decades who could not even read after third grade. We chucked out critical thinking and opted to have our kids parrot whatever the teacher said and did according to the syllabus provided by the education department.

The evidence of the results are all around us — in the primary schools, in the high schools and in the universities.

Then our very own in the government system stole money meant to go to the health and education of our kids. Over the years, we saw education funding stolen through incomplete projects and medicine from area medical stores sold to private clinics while public medical facilities suffered.

The Public Accounts Committee hearings exposed so much of the rot. But few of the corrupt got the the pain they deserved.

Education ‘a burden’
A friend of mine, an academic, told of how students just want to get university life over and done with so they could “get jobs and work for money.” She said education has become a burden for those poorly educated in primary school and high school. University is no longer a fun learning experience.

The accusers of the woman are from a generation that came from the broken education system.

Their families are unable to access medical care because the health system is so heavily burdened and still too expensive for them. Every death is blamed on sorcery. Every illness can be blamed on some random old woman living near them.

In Pindiu, Morobe Province where I travelled with a provincial government team, the superstition is so deeply rooted. How can they trust modern medicine when they do not have access to it?

A village birth attendant assists nearly every woman who gives birth. If a child is born with a deformity, it is because of sorcery.

Superstition thrives where service delivery is poor.

Scott Waide is EMTV’s Lae bureau chief and runs the blog My Land, My Country. This article was republished with permission by Pacific Media Watch.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: The new government line-up

By Bryce Edwards -

October 26, 2017

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: The new government line-up

[caption id="attachment_13635" align="alignright" width="150"]

Dr Bryce Edwards.[/caption] The new government has officially taken office, and we know who will be doing what following yesterday’s allocation of ministerial portfolios. Below are five important general themes that have emerged about the new ministerial line-up. 1) A strong and sensible administration has been put together [caption id="attachment_15325" align="aligncenter" width="800"]

The Prime Minister of New Zealand, Jacinda Ardern, was officially sworn in on October 26 2017 by the Governor General Dame Patsy Reddy.[/caption] The consensus amongst political commentators and newspaper editorials is that Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has cleverly put together a credible new ministerial line-up. She has done so in a way that seems to satisfy all the different demands within the coalition. The three parties will be generally happy with what they have got, and ministers seem to be in the right portfolios. As Audrey Young comments, “Forming a ministry is a delicate job but Jacinda Ardern made it look easy. Navigating her way through hierarchies, talent, egos, expectations and political considerations is a minefield. But she has done a remarkable job in balancing those in her ministerial appointments and has come up with a very credible ministry” – see: Jacinda Ardern takes job of assembling cabinet in her stride. Overall, it is a strong line-up of ministers. The one criticism that could be made is that everything was a bit too predictable, with no big surprises. Sam Sachdeva says in this regard, “it was relatively hard to quibble with the list. Any shocks were few and far between, with Labour’s ministers largely tasked with handling portfolios they had already worked on in opposition” – see: Ardern plays it safe with ministerial line-up. But the government will be very happy if that’s the extent of the criticism. For an excellent backgrounder on the new ministers and under-secretaries, see RNZ’s Who’s who in the new Labour-led coalition? Also very useful, is Laura Walters’ Jacinda Ardern’s new ministers and a peek into their backgrounds. 2) Jacinda Adern as Minister for Child Poverty Reduction is significant By taking on the role of the new Minister for Child Poverty Reduction, Jacinda Ardern is signalling this issue will be a high priority for the new government. It is a stake in the ground, emphasising that all her talk about this issue isn’t just rhetoric. It’s therefore a gutsy move and contrasts strongly with John Key’s previous decision to take on the portfolio of tourism. Today’s Dominion Post editorial focuses on this appointment, calling it the “single most important part of the coalition’s new ministry” – see: Major challenges for a Cabinet with little experience. But the newspaper also warns of the difficulties involved, and points to previous prime ministers personally taking on reform agendas, with less than perfect results. Audrey Young calls the self-appointment “commendable” and explains why: “It is more than just symbolism. It is a bold move which directly links her leadership to a commitment to reduce child poverty as a primary goal. Failure on that front won’t be an option for her government.” It is certainly a risk. Will Ardern really be able to turn poverty figures around? If not, this will be very embarrassing for her and the government. Vernon Small says: “She will be measured on one of the most important and difficult issues facing the country. Three years is a very short timeframe to make a big impact on a problem that has been decades in the making” – see: Jacinda Ardern displays innovation and industry but Apec test looms. 3) The powerful ministers are now obvious It goes without saying that Ardern and Winston Peters will be powerful (as PM and deputy), as will Grant Robertson as Minister of Finance. But we can now see who the other powerful players will be. David Parker is going to be a particularly crucial minister. Jason Walls and Pattrick Smellie have labelled him as the “linchpin in the new coalition cabinet, taking the pivotal economic development, environment and trade portfolios that will connect him to key ministers in both the New Zealand First and Green parties” – see: David Parker emerges as pivotal minister in new cabinet. Parker’s power is partly based on the fact that he “has emerged as a key confidant of the new Labour leader since she took over from Andrew Little in August, and has a long and cordial relationship with the deputy prime minister and foreign minister to be, Winston Peters.” But it goes further than this. Vernon Small also addresses Parker’s strategic linchpin role: “His lead portfolio is Attorney-General, but the engine room will be his other roles, which include important links to NZ First and the Greens, both of which rate and trust him. As Environment Minister he ties into the Greens, who dominate in that arena, holding Conservation (Eugenie Sage) and Climate Change (Shaw). As Economic Development Minister he will be working closely with NZ First’s Regional Economic Development Minister Jones, who, with a $1 billion-a-year capital fund, will get to cut the ribbons on the cheques written by Robertson. As Trade and Export Minister Parker will give Labour’s input into what, in government-ese, are called the external-facing roles that are otherwise dominated by Peters in Foreign Affairs, under-secretary Fletcher Tabuteau and NZ First’s Ron Mark in Defence.”: Phil Twyford is now deemed to be “Minister for Auckland”, having been given the Housing portfolio, as well as the related portfolios of Transport, and Urban Development. These are major issues for the whole country and Labour has big plans in these areas, which makes Twyford central to the new administration. But because these issues are especially relevant to New Zealand’s biggest city, Twyford is going to be critical to Auckland. Andrew Little has been given the hefty portfolios of Justice, Courts, and Treaty negotiations – which is appropriate for a former lawyer. He also has responsibility for the security services, as well as the new portfolio responsible for re-entering the Pike River mine. Chris Hipkins has the big Education portfolio (which includes Tertiary education), and is also Leader of the House and Minister of State Services. Audrey Young explains: “Hipkins will also be in a uniquely pivotal position to keep an eye on potential problems in ministries and ministerial offices as State Services Minister and Minister Responsible for Ministerial Services.” Shane Jones is looking very powerful – he has his hands on $1b for the regions each year, including the responsibility for ensuring 100m trees are planted annually. He is also in charge of the new Forestry Service, which will be housed in Rotorua. This role sets him up to be Peters’ replacement as leader. For more on all this, see Patrick Gower and Lloyd Burr’s Revealed: Shane Jones Minister for 100 million trees, $1 billion regional fund. In contrast, the Greens are looking less powerful, mainly through being outside of Cabinet. But the Greens’ roles are mainly related to environmental issues – as opposed to welfare, social policy, economy, etc – which means the party gets to re-build as a more green-focused force over the next three years. 4) Portfolios and ministries have been renamed and re-configured As is normal with an incoming government, a number of the official portfolio roles and ministries have had a shakeup. The Ministry of Primary Industries is being split into three separate agencies and ministers: Agriculture, Fisheries, and Forestry. For more detail about the break up, as well as positive reaction to the news – see Craig McCulloch’s MPI to be dismantled under new government. Similarly, it seems that MBIE is also to be broken up. Vernon Small reports: “Steven Joyce’s brainchild, the super ministry of business, employment and innovation, will be blown into fragments.” For more on this, see Sam Sachdeva’s Ardern plays it safe with ministerial line-up. He also reports that Bill English’s Social Investment Agency may yet survive in the new government, and will initially be “handled by Social Development Minister Carmel Sepuloni”. Some portfolios have also been re-amalgamated. The Education portfolio has been united and there is no longer a separate minister of tertiary education. Chris Hipkins has responsibility for the whole sector. Similarly, Housing is also re-united, under Phil Twyford. And there are new portfolios. Andrew Little is the Minister for re-entering the Pike River mine. More surprisingly, Kelvin Davis is in charge of Crown-Maori Relations – apparently, a role concentrating on post-Treaty settlement relations. The Dominion Post comments that this “signals a move beyond the (vital but historical) work of treaty settlements. Building a more future-focussed partnership between the treaty partners is in theory a sound idea, although the scope of the new project remains unclear. Davis is a capable politician who might do useful work here.” And today’s Otago Daily Times explains that this new portfolio “will be critical to Labour retaining the faith of the Maori who voted for the party in such strong numbers” – see the editorial, Great expectations for Ardern. Bill English has criticised the new ministerial line-up for being “bloated” – there are now 31 ministers and under-secretaries, which is the largest ever. English says that roles have been created as a “make work scheme” for the three parties. He’s probably right – the new prime minister has obviously had to cater to the political needs of all three parties. Every government does this, but it seems Ardern has taken this a step further. 5) Demographically, the new ministerial line-up can be seen as more diverse Ethnically, the new ministerial line-up is more diverse. There are now 13 ministers with a Maori or Pasifika heritage. But Asian representation appears to be zero. For more on the Maori and Pasifika demographics of the ministers, see John Boynton and Mihingarangi Forbes’ Maori MPs secure 18 ministerial portfolios, RNZ’s Four Pasifika ministers in new NZ govt line-up, and Teuila Fuatai’s Time for more Pacific clout at Government table. In gender terms, the Cabinet continues to be unequal. Seven of the 20 ministers in Cabinet are women – the same as the outgoing government, and the same as in the Helen Clark Labour government – see Andy Fyers’ New Cabinet has a gender balance problem. But, for the first time, the Minister of Maori Development is a woman – Nanaia Mahuta. Finally, for satire on the new ministerial line-up, see my blog post of Cartoons about the new government.]]>

PNG media council calls for ‘silence’ on domestic violence to be broken

By Pacific Media Centre -

October 26, 2017

rosalyn-evera-in-port-moresby-680wide-png — ]]>

The Family, Sexual, Violence Actions office in Port Moresby has condemned news of women being violently abused in Papua New Guinea with manager Ruth Beriso calling on citizens to act and “stop being spectators”. Video: EMTV

Pacific Media Watch Newsdesk

The Media Council of Papua New Guinea is calling for an investigation into the untimely death of senior journalist and Post-Courier business editor Rosalyn Albaniel Evara.

“While the council respected the wishes of her immediate family to proceed with her burial, it acknowledges that the pain that Late Rosalyn had to endure is no longer just hers, and a pain that many more women in the country may be going through every day,” the MCPNG said in a statement.

Evara, 41, was rushed to hospital last week on October 15 after collapsing in her home.

She died in Port Moresby General Hospital later that day.

-Partners-

Pacific Media Watch reports Evara’s funeral on Monday was overshadowed by abuse allegations, after her aunt, Mary Albaniel, said her niece had been a victim of violence.

“No to violence against women”. Image: Loop PNG

The MCPNG is now calling on PNG’s media fraternity to push for justice for the victims of gender-based violence.

“It has happened to one of our own, and it is time to acknowledge that it needs to stop.

Domestic violence ‘cancer’
“More needs to be said about this cancer, which thrives behind closed doors and breeds on fear,” it said.

The MCPNG said many female journalists in PNG suffered from violent and abusive relationships, which affected their work and families.

It said the media could no longer keep silent and must continue to report on the issue “despite cultural and social challenges”.

“It is not too late to help those who are living with the same fear she had to endure,” the MCPNG stated.

Human Rights Watch has stated PNG’s government has taken insufficient steps to address gender-based violence.

Described as an “emergency” which needs addressing in their 2015 report “Bashed Up: Family violence in Papua New Guinea”, domestic violence rates in PNG remain among the highest in the world and are rarely prosecuted.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

]]>

Pacific’s role and history of nuclear suffering boosted treaty success

By Pacific Media Centre -

October 25, 2017

ICAN-Kim-Trump-680wide-e1508847220995 — ]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

ANALYSIS: By Dr Vanessa Griffen

The Norwegian Nobel Committee announced earlier this month that the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to ICAN, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons.

ICAN is an international non-profit network of more than 465 organisations with campaigners in 100 countries.

ICAN was singled out by for the Nobel Peace Prize announced on October 6, as the committee recognised the role it played in raising awareness of the humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons and in helping to bring about the historic Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, adopted in the UN General Assembly on July 7 this year.

The treaty now makes nuclear weapons illegal for any use, development or threat of use. They are to be eliminated.

While ICAN is honoured by the award, it immediately gave credit to the many campaigners around the world who helped make the treaty possible. It also noted the role of the hibakusa atomic bomb survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and nuclear weapons testing victims all over the world, who shared their suffering to bring about the prohibition treaty.

The Pacific Islands’ region has a long history of protesting against nuclear weapons due its legacy – unique in the world perhaps – of being used by nuclear armed states, the United States, United Kingdom and France as sites to develop and test their nuclear weapons.

Pacific’s long anti-nuclear history of struggle … ICAN campaigners Abacca Anjain-Maddison (Marshall Islands, from left) and Vanessa Griffen (Fiji, right) with the outspoken voice of the hibakusha (Japan’s atomic bomb survivors), Setsuko Thurow, at the UN General Assembly treaty conference. Image: ICAN

-Partners-

The Marshall Islands, French Polynesia, and Christmas Island in Kiribati, were used for years for the conduct of horrendous nuclear tests.

Sixty-seven nuclear tests were conducted in the Marshall Islands from 1946-1958; French Polynesia had 30 years of atmospheric and underground tests by France.

Pacific countries protested
All Pacific countries joined in anti-nuclear protests from the 1970s to the present.

The Pacific Island states have joined other non-nuclear states and ICAN, in supporting the humanitarian initiative and calls for a legal instrument to prohibit these weapons use under any circumstances.

Several Pacific states voted on resolutions in the United Nations and in international conferences on humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons, keeping up Pacific voices on the nuclear weapons issue.

In the final treaty negotiations in New York, nine Pacific countries voted for the adoption of the historic treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons, joining 122 states that voted “yes”.

Seven Pacific states had already signed the treaty when on September 20 in New York when it opened for official signatories – Fiji, Kiribati, Palau, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

In the period now of heightened tensions between the United States and North Korea threatening to use and develop nuclear weapons, the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize gives timely support to ICAN and the treaty that makes nuclear weapons illegal.

What the Nobel Peace Prize is giving strong support for is this historic shift in international thinking on nuclear disarmament – to the opposite philosophy from deterrence -– of rejecting any use, development or threat of use of nuclear weapons because they are inhumane and dangerous.

Humanitarian initiative
The Pacific Islands have always been a part of that campaign – way before it was called a humanitarian initiative, because Pacific Islanders knew first hand the humanitarian, environmental and health impacts on many generations, of nuclear weapons because of the region’s involuntary experience of weapons’ tests.

As the Nobel Prize of 2017 is awarded this year to ICAN and its international campaign and the new ban treaty, the Pacific Island countries and many campaigners will celebrate.
The Prime Minister of Samoa, speaking at the UN General Assembly on September 22 said:

“As small island states, we are no longer protected by our isolation” and explained why he gladly signed the treaty on behalf of Samoa. He pointed to the global dynamics “leading our world perilously close to a potential catastrophe of unimaginable proportions.”

The Pacific Islands has lived through those catastrophes – still ongoing, in Marshall Islands, French Polynesia, among service men affected by nuclear radiation.

Fifty states’ ratifications are needed to bring the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons into force.

With 12 Pacific countries with UN status, the region could play a significant role again, in ratifying soon, so the period before the treaty is enforced is shortened. It is needed urgently.

The Pacific nuclear legacy has been channelled into being a force to be reckoned with. It joins other non-nuclear states that have helped create this alternative to stalled nuclear disarmament – a global treaty for nuclear disarmament that stresses humanitarian impacts as its rationale.

‘Defending’ N-weapons
Present treaties on nuclear disarmament such as the Non-Proliferation Treaty( NPT) do the opposite – defending the use of such nuclear weapons they helped to shape.

None of the nine countries that possess nuclear weapons – the United States, Russia, Britain, China, France, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel – took part in the treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons and the United States, Britain and France say they will never sign it.

On December 10, ICAN will receive its award in Oslo from the Norwegian Nobel Committee.

As most campaigners know, the work to prohibit nuclear weapons must continue with more urgency than ever. The Pacific Islands have done a great deal to share their experience of nuclear testing and launch a new approach to nuclear disarmament – prohibition of such weapons.

Dr Vanessa Griffen of Suva, Fiji, is a Pacific supporter of ICAN. She was formerly a member of the Fiji-based ATOM Committee (Against Testing on Moruroa) and a member of the Nuclear Free and Independent Pacific (NFIP) movement. She attended with ICAN two of the three international conferences on the humanitarian impacts of nuclear weapons and was part of ICAN’s lobby team at the negotiations for the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. This article was especially written for Asia Pacific Report.

]]>

PNG journalist death sparks anger over violence against women

By Pacific Media Centre -

October 25, 2017

AsiaPacificReport.nz

Post-Courier journalist Rosalyn Evara … furore over the circumstances of her death. Image: Loop PNG

Pacific Media Centre Newsdesk

Papua New Guinea’s National Capital District Governor Powes Parkop sought a court order to stop the burial of a journalist until a proper post-mortem has been conducted on her, reports The National.

Her burial was halted this morning after the last relative objecting to a post-mortem – her mother – agreed, reports Loop PNG.

Her body was taken back to the funeral parlour last night under instructions by investigating police homicide unit detectives and latest reports said the result of the post-mortem would be known tomorrow.

Her paternal family had also sought a post-mortem, reports said.

Rosalyn Albaniel Evara, 41, was business editor of the PNG Post-Courier newspaper until she died on Sunday, October 15.

-Partners-

Her death has unleashed a wave of anger over violence against women in Papua New Guinea.

The front pages of Papua New Guinea’s two daily newspapers contrasted today with The National splashing Evara’s death on the front page while the late journalist’s own newspaper, the Post-Courier, featured a curtainraiser on the Kumuls for their Rugby League World Cup opener in Port Moresby next Saturday.

A tale of two newspapers … contrasting front pages of The National and the Post-Courier today. Image: Alex Rheeney

This sparked PNG Media Council president Alex Rheeney, a former chief editor of the Post-Courier, to condemn his old newspaper on social media.

Writing in The Pacific Newsroom, Rheeney said in a bitter commentary directed at the Post-Courier:

“Halo she was your employee and one of the best – if not the best – until the end. All employers have a duty of care to their employees and the Post-Courier continues to fail by not seeking justice for their business editor Rosalyn Albaniel Evara and giving editorial prominence to the issue from the date of her death.

“The newspaper failed to get to the bottom of the death of the esteemed journalist, and my former colleague, when she passed on … October 15, leaving that responsibility [to] close friends and family.

“In today’s edition you choose to belittle the memory of one of Papua New Guinea’s top journalist by running stories and pictures on her funeral service yesterday on Page 16, unlike The National which did well by giving the issue front page coverage.

“As a former chief editor of the newspaper, I am shocked and disgusted at the management’s failure to give editorial prominence to the issue and be proactive in relation to the death of Rosalyn and push for a full investigation into her shocking death, as a responsible employer.

“Where is the empathy to and for Papua New Guinean professionals who contribute to your annual profits?”

Current Post-Courier editor Todagia Kelola defended his newspaper’s decision to carry the report of the funeral well inside the newspaper, saying it was an issue of “the angle” for the news.

The newspaper had taken an editorial decision to focus on the funeral rather than the allegations around her death, he told Loop PNG.

In a separate statement, he claimed the funeral had been “hijacked” over the allegations.

The Minister for Youth, Religion and Community Development, Soroi Eoe, condemned Evara’s death and joined Parkop’s call on authorities to investigate the allegations.

“I condemn such death in the strongest terms based on the allegations of late Mrs Evara being a victim of gender based violence. Again the matter is serious and must be dealt with accordingly.”

Injury marks on body
At her funeral service at the Rev Sione Kami Memorial Church in Port Moresby yesterday, The National reports, her aunt, Mary Albaniel, showed to the crowd images of her body with injury marks on it.

“The images were shown on a screen inside the church,” the newspaper said.

“No to violence against women”. Image: Loop PNG

“Mary Albaniel wore an orange t-shirt with the words: ‘No to violence against women’ on the back. She told the congregation that her niece had been a victim of violence.”

The National reported that the images showed that Evara had injuries to several parts of her body.

A death certificate from the Port Moresby General Hospital showed that Evara, 41, was rushed the hospital after she had collapsed that afternoon. She was reported to have been suffering from headaches the previous day.

Governor Parkop last night was working with police homicide unit at Boroko and the coroner to get a court order to stop her planned burial today at the 9-Mile Cemetery outside Port Moresby until a proper post-mortem was conducted to confirm the cause of her death.

‘Mere allegations’
Parkop, a strong advocate of ending violence against women, said he had called up the newspaper but was told that claims of violence instituted on her by someone close to her were “mere allegations”.

“I will follow up to find out the truth,” Parkop said.

“I am determined that there must be [a] prosecution if the allegation is true.”

Overseas media were yesterday also chasing up the story of her death.

A police homicide officer at the Boroko police station confirmed with The National last night that they were working on the case with Parkop.

Evara’s mother Ella Albaniel, a former principal of Lae School of Nursing, told The National that she was against the idea of a post-mortem although her daughter could have died from injuries, The National reported.

Evara completed Grade 12 at the Aiyura National High School in Eastern Highlands in 1993.

She spent two years at Divine World University where she graduated in 1995 with a Diploma in Communication Arts.

She worked with Word Publishing until about 2002 when she joined the Post-Courier.

Evara was based in Lae, Madang and Port Moresby.

]]>

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: The legitimacy of the Labour-led government

By Bryce Edwards -

October 24, 2017

Bryce Edwards’ Political Roundup: The legitimacy of the Labour-led government

[caption id="attachment_13635" align="alignright" width="150"]

Dr Bryce Edwards.[/caption] Many New Zealanders are disgruntled that the new government does not include the largest party in parliament – i.e. National, which won 44.4% of the vote. Some are even questioning the legitimacy of the Labour-led government. It’s worth checking out a basic but ingenious explanation of MMP coalition government from the following Facebook post from Eva Allan: “Allow me to explain MMP: There’s one mince and cheese pie left in the shop it costs $5. Bill has $4.50. Jacinda has $3.70. Winston has 70c. James has 60c and David has 5c. No one has enough money to buy the pie by themselves but Jacinda, Winston and James put their money together and buy the pie. Bill gets no pie because he needed 50c but didn’t have any friends to help him pay for the pie. I hope this helps explain things.” [caption id="attachment_297" align="aligncenter" width="1600"]

The Beehive and Parliament Buildings.[/caption] Legitimacy challenged This Facebook post has been a hit, and the reason it has resonated so strongly is there are still plenty of loud challenges being made to the legitimacy of the new government. The fact that the three parties that came second, third, and fourth in the election have been able to combine together to get a majority in Parliament is, of course, a new phenomenon. New Zealand hasn’t seen this under MMP yet, although we were always going to eventually. In fact, having the biggest party get 44 per cent of the vote and not be in government is incredibly rare, even in other countries with proportional representation. Jane Clifton has been searching around and found that “the only other time it has happened was in Sweden in the 1970s” – see her latest column, Minority Rules: Who will be the first voted off Coalition Island. For the most colourful and interesting challenge to the legitimacy of the new government, see Richard Prebble’s column, Jacinda Ardern will regret this coalition of losers. Prebble makes the astonishing allegation: “There has been a coup. The political scientists can tell us it’s legal but the fact remains – it is undemocratic. For the first time in our history who governs us is not the result of an election but the decision of one man. Jacinda Ardern is Prime Minister in name only. The only real power that the Prime Minister has is to allocate portfolios.” Prebble goes further with the hyperbole, saying that “New Zealand is now a Shogunate. In Japan the Emperor had the title and the Shogun had all the power.” This column has received an exasperated reply from Chris Trotter, who says “there is not a word of truth in any of this”, and he suggests that Prebble knows this and is simply trying to lay the ground for a counter-coup in which the new government is brought down – see: Dark transactions: Winston Peters decision to “Go Left” has already set his enemies in motion. Prebble’s eccentric arguments aren’t entirely marginal – in fact they’re broadly in line with a media that has given considerable weight to the idea that National has a “moral authority” or mandate to govern due to enjoying greater popularity than Labour. This is actually best conveyed on the front page of The Australian newspaper, which had a large headline declaring “NZ Shock: Losers take power”. You can see this front page and others in my blog post: Newspaper frontpages on the New Zealand election and new government. Although the Australian newspaper might simply be ignorant of the local constitutional reality in New Zealand, much of the New Zealand media also pushed a similar line about National’s position. Newspaper front pages in this country were very one-sided after the election, suggesting National had “won”, and that it was almost a formality that New Zealand First would put National back into office. In fact, the Sunday Star Times editorial after the election said: “Let us be clear: Peters has no choice. The voting public cannot, and will not, tolerate him abusing his kingmaker position by swinging his support behind Ardern, when she is trailing 13 seats behind National. Some will be happy with this outcome; some disappointed. But the result is clear and unequivocal. A record 2.5 million New Zealanders voted. An unprecedented 1.2 million voted for National” – see Jonathan Milne’s Voters cannot, and will not, tolerate Winston abusing his kingmaker position. Arguments against the “moral authority” line As Eva Allan’s Facebook post conveys, the simple answer to those who dispute the legitimacy of the new government is to point out that the National Party doesn’t have the necessary majority of seats in Parliament, whereas the combined three parties of government do. Bryan Gould points out “The only thing that matters – as it always does under any voting system in a Westminster-style parliament – is that it must be able to win crucial votes in parliament – that is, it must have a parliamentary majority. How that majority is made up, and whether or not it includes the largest party, is completely irrelevant. A coalition of (let us say) the five smallest parties in parliament would be perfectly legitimate, as long as it commanded a majority” – see: How MMP is meant to work. Similarly, MMP campaigner Hans Grueber says, “It does not matter if the majority is reached by one, two, three or any number of parties as long as they together represent the majority of the voters. That is why a proportional system is regarded as the most democratic. Majority rules. There is nothing undemocratic about the fact that the voters have decided not to give one party an absolute majority but spread their votes among four parties in the clear expectation that these parties would have to compromise and work together to form a coalition to reach a majority in Parliament” – see: Nothing says the largest party has moral right to govern. However, the best refutation of the “moral authority” argument has been made in a stream of tweets by Michael Appleton‏ (@michelappleton). Not only does he make logical arguments about the legitimacy of the new government, but Appleton also calculates how much popular support this government has compared to previous ones. He finds that the Ardern Administration “represent a higher proportion of Kiwi voters” than two-thirds of governments since 1936. For ease of reading, I have compiled all of Appleton’s tweets in one blog post: Has the new NZ government been installed by an undemocratic coup? A Twitter reply. So why has the media given so much weight to the idea that the party with the most seats should govern? Public law expert Edward Willis has blogged on “Why the media got it wrong” (as well as why they are wrong) – see: Why being the largest party matters (and why it doesn’t). Willis has two possible answers – one is that the media deemed accuracy less important than the need for copy and controversy, and the second is “the issue is a subtle one, and the news media isn’t adept at drawing distinctions between political and constitutional questions.” Finally, for a further dose of the “moral authority” argument – including from National’s Northland MP Matt King – see Laura Macdonald’s MMP attacked online after coalition formed.]]>

Global research project examines ‘social impact’ of natural disasters

By Pacific Media Centre -

October 24, 2017

DrHermin_IndonesianSeminars_680-529 — ]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

CESASS director Dr Hermin Indah Wahyuni … environment “out of focus” in Indonesia. Image: Kendall Hutt/PMC

By Kendall Hutt in Auckland

How Indonesian society manages in the face of natural disasters is the focus of a global research collaboration as part of the Indonesian government’s World Class Professor programme.

Spearheaded by the Universitas Gadjah Mada’s Centre for Southeast Asian Social Studies (CESASS), the WCP collaboration centres on ecological communication.

“We tried to find a topic which would facilitate us working together, and two other universities have specifications in tsunami mitigation and focus on maritime coastal disasters,” said CESASS director Dr Hermin Indah Wahyuni.

These are the Universitas Syiah Kuala’s (Unsyiah) Tsunami Disaster Mitigation Research Centre (TDMRC) and Universitas Diponegoro’s Centre for Coastal Rehabilitation and Disaster Mitigation Studies (COREM).

The Auckland University of Technology’s Pacific Media Centre and its director, Professor David Robie, are also part of the maritime disaster issues research project.

Speaking to Asia Pacific Report, Dr Wahyuni said CESASS and its partners wanted to highlight the “social aspect of maritime disasters” and were interested in three aspects of ecological communication.

-Partners-

“We would first like to know how the society communicates about disasters; understanding about the environment and why media is important in constructing reality and making disasters important; and how infrastructure has developed.

Environment ‘unimportant issue’
“We have the feeling society does not categorise what is happening around a disaster,” she said.

Dr Wahyuni said the problem may lie in people’s perceptions and the mentality surrounding natural disasters.

“It’s unlucky, as as a society we don’t think the environment is an important issue.

“We never discuss about why, for example, the fish are dying. It’s happening, but it’s out of focus for us.”

In an attempt to understand Indonesia’s thinking and hopefully turn the tide on Indonesia’s poor environmental record, Dr Wahyuni and her team are in the midst of investigating the social, political and economic impacts of natural disasters.

The team revealed the findings of their early research at a PMC hosted seminar series while in New Zealand earlier this month.

The focus of CESASS’ Dr Budi Irawanto’s research is how the stories of natural disaster survivors are told by Indonesian media.

Focus on survivors
“The focus of my research is how the media deals with tragedy through the narratives of survivors,” he said.

Although venturing into a “new kind of territory”, Dr Irawanto said his research interest came about after discovering there were a lack of studies on the relationship between natural disasters and the media.

Focusing on weekly magazine Tempo and using the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami, the 2006 earthquake in Yogyakarta and 2010 Mount Merapi eruption as case studies, Dr Irawanto’s early research revealed survivor narratives are underrepresented in the media due to a focus on the economic impacts of natural disasters.

Universitas Gadjah Mada’s Dr Budi Irawanto … economic impacts of natural disasters overtake survivor narratives. Image: Kendall Hutt/PMC

The suffering of survivors was brought closer, he said, but “compassion fatigue” existed.

Dr Wahyuni reflected such a focus on economics may be due to the makeup of Indonesian society.

“The dynamic of our society is mostly in the political system…Business interests are more important than how we conserve our environment.

“With this research we would like to more deeply explore this problem from many perspectives – media, anthropology, economy.”

‘We need journalists’
However, Dr Wahyuni acknowledged the media had a large role to play in bringing environmental issues into focus.

“We need journalists that can translate, for example, climate change. It is very difficult to translate the concept to ordinary people as climate change is very hard to understand,” she said.

Further research by CESASS academics has provided insight into the communication of natural disasters in Indonesia.

Analysing over 45,000 tweets between 2014 and 2015, Dr Bevaola Kusumasari’s research focused on how people use social media platform Twitter during disasters.

Focusing on the Asia-Pacific region, Dr Kusumasari’s research revealed how different sectors of society – government, non-governmental organisations, media and celebrities – use Twitter.

Dr Kusumasari’s research findings … Twitter could be ideal platform for relief coordination. Image: Kendall Hutt/PMC

Dr Kusumasari discovered NGOs use Twitter for relief coordination, while media and government participate in second-hand reporting and celebrities encourage the public to donate to relief efforts.

Although tweets came from outside the disaster zone, Dr Kusumasari found Twitter’s speed of reach could mean it is the ideal platform for relief coordination.

Future collaboration hope
Dr Wahyuni said she hoped the research collaboration marked the beginning of an ongoing academic relationship between CESASS and its partners, and that the research has real-world effects.

“We are starting with the academic, the university, the student awareness about what we can do to attempt to change this situation.

“We will support the effort to look after the environment better.”

PMC director Dr Robie, who has specialised in environmental journalism and launched the Bearing Witness climate project in 2016, heads to Indonesia next week as part of the WCP programme.

]]>

Keith Rankin Analysis: A Century of New Zealand Elections

By Keith Rankin -

October 24, 2017

Century-of-Elections — Governments and their popular support. Graph by Keith Rankin.

Keith Rankin Analysis.

In 2017, the popular vote for the parties supporting the government is just over 50 percent – as it has always been since proportional representation was introduced 1996.

Before 1996 it was another story. After 1951, only 1972 and 1984 showed majority popular support for the resulting government. However, there was a block of elections from 1925 to 1951 in which popular support for the government exceeded 50% (with a proviso around John A Lee’s Labour breakaway party in 1943).

Of the post-war FPP elections, popular support for the resulting government was especially weak in 1954, 1966, 1978, 1981 and (most of all) 1993.

We must note that Independents always played a role upto 1935, much as they have done in Australia this century. I have used light blue for conservative Independents (and for Christian/Conservative parties in recent years). And I have used dark grey for Labour-supporting Independents (and for New Zealand First in recent years).

Of particular interest among the earlier elections are 1928 and 1931. In 1928 the party that had been third in 1925 (United, the rump of the Liberal Party of John Ballance, Richard Seddon and Joseph Ward; and led, from September 1928, by the now 72-year-old Ward).

In 1928 Reform, the principal precursor of National, had more votes than United but was tied on seats (27 each). United was able to form a government with Labour support on confidence and supply. It was Labour’s first taste of power. The arrangement did not last; it was Ward’s death in 1930 that revealed that United without Ward was really a very conservative party. (The global economic depression took hold in New Zealand in the second half of 1930.)

In 1931, Labour had more votes than any other party, and had increased its vote. But Labour was well short of a majority. A conservative coalition of United (3rd place) and Reform assumed power. United’s leader (George Forbes) continued as Prime Minister. Indeed, in all three elections which Forbes contested as leader of his party (1925, 1931 and 1935) his party had come third. Further, Forbes was instrumental in the postponement of the 1934 election, a situation that we would not tolerate of Jacinda Ardern and her government.

The chart is necessarily presented, on two dimensions, in a binary format. We should not presume the popular opposition to these governments as a united opposition, given the presence of independent MPs and independent parties such as Social Credit and New Zealand First.

Social Credit (shown in dark green) was never in government until, in the 1990s, it joined the Alliance (shown in dark red). Likewise, New Zealand First (in dark grey) is, with one exception, shown as ‘opposition’ unless a part of government. In 2005, a New Zealand First vote was not a vote for a Don Brash National change government. In 2017 a vote for New Zealand First was either a vote for ‘change’ or for a ‘substantially modified’ status quo. The exception is 1996, where there was no status quo, as it was New Zealand’s first MMP election. So, in 1996 I have split the New Zealand First support between government and opposition.

The Māori Party formed from Labour, in opposition to Labour. In the public mind it was been widely seen as ‘brown National’, and it was on that basis that it was not returned to Parliament in 2017. So here I have depicted the Māori Party (from 2005) as pro-National. This acts as a counterweight to the depiction of New Zealand First since 2005 as pro-Labour.

There is nothing exceptional about the present governing arrangement. Indeed, it’s what most people (at least in the media) expected to be the outcome in 1996. Multiparty government is not only associated with proportional representation. It has also been the reality in the United Kingdom for most of this decade. And it is a common reality in Australia.

Will the new government last until the next scheduled election year? Probably. 1928 and 1996 provide examples of a governing arrangements that did not last, even though in each case the Prime Minister was throughout the leader of the same party. We have to go back more than 100 years – to 1912 – to find a case when a Leader of the Opposition became Prime Minister mid-term. The 1912 situation can and will happen again, probably in the next twenty years. It nearly happened in 1998.

Urban battle for Marawi finally over – 1000 dead, says Philippines

By Pacific Media Centre -

October 24, 2017

AsiaPacificReport.nz

The war is over, but Marawi City on Mindanao Island is devastated. Image: Rappler files

Pacific Media Centre Newsdesk

The five-month battle against terrorists in the southern Marawi City on Mindanao has ended, Philippine Defence Secretary Delfin Lorenzana announced today.

“After 154 days of the siege of Marawi by the Daesh-inspired Maute ISIS group, or after a week since the Commander-in-Chief declared the liberation of Marawi, we now announce the termination of all combat operations in Marawi,” Lorenzana told reporters.

Urban warfare: The 153 day war as compiled by Rappler’s Carmella Fonbuena.

He made the statement at the ASEAN regional security meeting in Clark, Pampanga, reports Rappler.

The announcement comes almost a week after President Rodrigo Duterte announced the “liberation” of Marawi from “terrorist influence” on October 17, during his visit to the war-torn city.

Lorenzana said government security forces – both the armed forces and the police – “nipped the budding infrastructure and defeated terrorism in the Philippines”.

Government forces had been fighting a fierce war with the terrorist Maute Group and a faction of the Abu Sayyaf Group, led by supposed ISIS emir Isnilon Hapilon.

-Partners-

Local government thanks military
Crisis spokesperson Zia Alonto Adiong said the local government was thankful to the military.

“I must not forget to address this message of gratitude to all our troops who have tirelessly fought in the last few months in our city. Our gratitude to our splendid men goes forth from all our hearts in this city and the entire province,” Adiong said in a press conference after Lorenzana’s declaration.

But Adiong said the hard work was just beginning.

“We may allow ourselves to a brief period of rejoicing right now, but let us not forget for a moment the toil and efforts that lie ahead…. We must recognise that the end of the war is only the first step toward building the peace,” Adiong said.

1780 hostages rescued
More than 1000 people have been killed in the war.

In a press conference in Marawi, AFP information chief Colonel Romeo Brawner said that 920 terrorists had been killed, but troops were still trying to recover around 30 to 40 corpses left in the last holdout building.

On the government side, 165 soldiers and cops had been killed in action, Brawner said.

A total of 1780 hostages had been rescued, and 850 firearms were recovered.

In Clark, Lorenzana said that in defeating what he called “thus far the most serious attempt to export violent extremism and radicalism” in the Philippines and the region, “we have contributed to preventing its spread in Asia and give our share of maintaining global peace, stability, and security”.

“While we submit that this tactical and strategic gains will not annihilate the ideology completely, we declare that this achievement is clear manifestation of how our regional cooperation can lead to a decisive advance against the proliferation of terrorism in this part of the world,” he added.

Lorenzana thanked other countries – in particular China, the United States, Australia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, and Singapore – in the battle to liberate the city.

Catalyst for cooperation
“We hope that this operational achievement in Marawi in the Philippines will be the catalyst that shall bring to the core future cooperation and partnerships not only against terrorism but also those that shall defeat other regional and global security threats,” he added.

Presidential Spokesman Ernesto Abella, commended the troops, including those killed in action, “for their courage, gallantry, and sacrifice”.

“With the liberation of Marawi, our focus now shifts to the enormous and challenging task of rebuilding, reconstruction and rehabilitation of the Islamic city.

“The damage to Marawi’s infrastructure and private properties and the displacement of thousands of residents require the government’s unified and comprehensive effort; thus, we call on all our citizens to come together to move our country forward towards a peaceful, prosperous and secure future,” he said.

]]>

Brimob officer dies in Papua shooting exchange with armed group

By Pacific Media Centre -

October 24, 2017

Brimod-on-patrol-at-Freeport-mine-680wide — ]]>

AsiaPacificReport.nz

Security officers from the “Amole Task Force” on standby at Mile 61 in Tembagapura in Mimika, Papua, last month. Two vehicles belonging to mining giant PT Freeport Indonesia were fired on by unknown assailants while travelling to the mining area at Mile 61. Image: Papua Police

By Nethy Dharma Somba in Jayapura

First Brigadier Berry Pramana Putra, a member of the National Police’s Mobile Brigade stationed in Timika, Papua, has been killed in an exchange of fire with unidentified gunmen on Utikini bridge, Tembagapura, Mimika regency.

The Jakarta Post reports that Berry died yesterday during a pursuit of armed assailants who were allegedly behind a shooting incident in the mining area of US-based PT Freeport Indonesia at Mile 60 to 67, Papua police Chief Inspector General Boy Rafli Amar said today.

“The victim died on the scene while Mobile Brigade members were in an exchange of fire with an armed criminal group on Utikini bridge, a day after the group shot at two patrol vehicles owned by PT Freeport,” he said in Jayapura.

He alleged the group was behind security disturbances in Freeport’s mining area. He also suspected it was the same group who seized two Steyr assault rifles and ammunition from members of the Mobile Brigade two years ago, as the same weapons were believed to have been used in the shooting that killed Berry.

The allegations arose from the bullet casings found at the scene.

‘Group identified’
“We have identified the group, although we will not yet publish the name of the group,” Chief Inspector Boy added.

-Partners-

No additional security personnel would be added despite the incidents, he said, adding that police would handle the issue in accordance with law enforcement procedures to end the security disturbances in Papua.

The Papua police delivered the body of First Brigadier Berry to his hometown in Bengkulu in a release ceremony led by Boy. As Berry had died on duty, the police also granted him a posthumous promotion to one level above his rank.

Nethy Dharma Somba is a reporter for The Jakarta Post.

]]>

Murray Horton: Hey, Jacinda, let’s do this – be truly independent

By Pacific Media Centre -

October 23, 2017

AsiaPacificReport.nz

“The Americans are very proud of having won their independence from the British Empire; it’s time for us to do the same from the American Empire.” Cartoon: Malcolm Evans/TDB

OPINION: By Murray Horton, of the Aotearoa Independence Movement

Jacinda Ardern, we have some suggestions for when you go as New Zealand’s incoming Prime Minister to APEC in Vietnam next month. Take note of where you are – in a country that fought Western imperialists for decades, first the French, then the Americans, to successfully achieve independence.

What more appropriate inspiration for your new government, one elected by people wanting change for the better, to declare that Aotearoa too will become truly non-aligned and independent?

Close the Waihopai spy base, get out of Five Eyes, and pull the plug on the ANZUS-in-all-but-name military and intelligence alliance with Trump’s increasingly dangerous and unhinged United States. Get out of the American wars that we are already in, such as in Iraq and Afghanistan and definitely stay out of any new wars that Trump may try to drag us into, such as in Korea.

The Americans are very proud of having won their independence from the British Empire; it’s time for us to do the same from the American Empire.

Don’t sign the TPPA (Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement) while you’re at APEC. With or without the US, it’s a dog.

And it is extremely feeble of Labour to say that your only quibble is your wish to stop foreign speculators from buying NZ houses. That is commendable in itself, but it is the very least of what’s wrong with the TPPA and so-called “free trade” deals like it.

-Partners-

The whole model of such foreign investment agreements is broken and needs to be reconsidered from scratch. They are in the interests of transnational corporations only, and certainly not in the interests of the New Zealand people.

Don’t be bullied
Don’t be bullied by so-called experts and journalists with an ideological agenda who accuse you of wanting to “close New Zealand off from the world”. Tell them to look no further than Australia which, for example, has much more stringent restrictions on house ownership by foreigners.

It’s great that you are giving the existential issue of climate change a high priority. Make sure that your government does something real about it, not just more greenwash. One thing that needs to be done immediately is to open this country’s doors to our Pacific neighbours who are under immediate threat of literally going under due to climate change.

They did nothing to cause this problem – whereas New Zealand certainly did and continues to do – but they pay the cost. Taking them in is not a solution to climate change, it is simply an acknowledgement of reparations for damage done. All up, there are only a few thousands of them. We owe them safe haven much more than we do American billionaires seeking a bolthole.

Both Labour and New Zealand First have expressed concern, to a greater or lesser degree, about foreign control of this country. Rest assured that it consists of a lot more than house sales and the relentless takeover of NZ’s prime rural land. They are important but the important stuff is who owns the real guts of the economy.

Name any sector of the NZ economy – take banks as just one example – and it is owned outright by, or dominated by, transnational corporations. That is where the emphasis must be for a government that is really committed to change. Making transnationals pay their fair share of tax is fine but is just tinkering around the edges. It is dealing with the insult, not the injury

Don’t just stop the further sale of public assets such as state houses – take back those assets that have been stolen from the people of New Zealand by your predecessors (both National and Labour). Renounce and reverse Rogernomics, not just because it proved to be electoral poison for Labour but because it was, and is, fundamentally wrong.

It constitutes a crime against the people, a crime of the few against the many. You can trace the dramatic spike in NZ’s deplorable slew of negative social statistics back to the deliberate imposition of that institutionalised inequality and declaration of class war on workers and those at the bottom of the heap.

Naughty old Uncle Winston has had the bad manners to mention the “C” word, one which no recent labour Leader has ever mentioned, let alone in a critical sense, for fear of inducing double incontinence in the business sector.

Good on him for doing so but he is indulging in wishful thinking. Trying to put a “human face on capitalism” is, to use another phrase from the election campaign, putting lipstick on a pig. Concentrate on sorting out the pig and forget about the lipstick.

Murray Horton
Spokesperson, Aotearoa Independence Movement (AIM)
Christchurch

]]>

Disaster risk reduction event in West Papua a boost for sustainability

By Pacific Media Centre -

October 23, 2017

AsiaPacificReport.nz

The objective of Indonesia’s RPJMN plan is to protect the economic growth centers from the threat of disaster, ensuring the sustainability of development. Image: Netral News

Pacific Media Centre Newsdesk

Disaster risk reduction efforts need to be understood as investments to sustain development plans rather than mere budget expenditures, says Indonesia’s National Disaster Mitigation Agency (BNPB).

The agency is holding the 2017 Disaster Risk Reduction Month event in four areas of West Papua from today until Wednesday, the head of BNPB Willem Rampangilei announced.

Rampangilei added that the Nawacita (Nine Priorities) programme and the 2015-2019 National Medium Term Development Plan (RPJMN) document emphasise disaster management, particularly disaster risk reduction into national to local development planning, reports Netral News.

“The objective of the plan is to protect the economic growth centers from the threat of disaster so as to ensure the sustainability of development,” Rampangilei said.

In the RPJMN document, the government set the priority of 136 regencies/municipalities as the center of high-risk economic growth.

Disaster risk reduction would increase resilience so that it did not significantly affect the development process, Rampangilei said.

-Partners-

One of the disaster risk reduction efforts was by lowering the risk index of disaster at the centres of economic growth.

In 2016, BNPB together with the government and other stakeholders, lowered the disaster risk index by 15.98 percent. In 2019, the disaster risk index is targeted to fall by 30 percent, according to the RPJMN.

Rampangilei said it was vital to strengthen government and community understanding of disaster risk reduction activities as an investment for resilience.

Expected investments include building of joint awareness, dialogue and networking among stakeholders involved in disaster risk reduction activities.

]]>

1...1,2011,2021,203...1,286 Page 1,202 of 1,286