As you know, there’s a tiny group of Dame Jacinda Ardern haters in New Zealand who are easily triggered by facts and the ongoing success of the former prime minister on the world stage.

The tiny eeny weeny group is made to look bigger online by an automated army of fake profile bots who all say the same five or six things and all leave a space before a comma.

This automation is imported into New Zealand so many of the profiles are in other countries and simply are not real humans.

Naturally this illusion of “flooding the zone” programmatically on social media causes the non-critical minded to assume they are a majority when they have no such real evidence to support that delusion.

Yet here’s some context and food for thought.

None of the haters have run a public hospital, been a director-general of health during a pandemic, been an epidemiologist or even a GP and many struggle to spell their own name properly let alone read anything accurately.

None of them have read all the Health Advice offered to the government during the covid-19 pandemic. They don’t know it at all.

Know a lot more
Yet they typically feel they do know a lot more than any of those people when it comes to a global pandemic unfolding in real time.

None of the haters can recite all 39 recommendations from the first Royal Commission of Inquiry into Covid-19, less than three of them have read the entire first report, none have any memory of National voting for the wage subsidy and business support payments when they accuse the Labour government of destroying the economy.

Most cannot off the top of their heads tell us how the Reserve Bank is independent of government when it raises the OCR and many think Jacinda did this but look you may be challenged to a boxing match if you try to learn them.

The exact macro economic state of our economy in terms of GDP growth, the size of the economy, unemployment and declining inflation forecasts escape their memory when Jacinda resigned, not that they care when they say she destroyed the economy.

They make these claims without facts and figures and they pass on the opinions of others that they listened to and swallowed.

It’s only a tiny group, the rest are bots.

The bots think making horse jokes about Jacinda is amusing, creative and unique and it’s their only joke now for three years — every single day they marvel at their own humour. In ten years they will still be repeating that one insult they call their own.

Bots on Nuremberg
The bots have also been programmed to say things about Nuremberg, being put into jail, bullets, and other violent suggestions which speaks to a kind of mental illness.

The sources of these sorts of sentiments were imported and fanned by groups set up to whip up resentment and few realise how they have been manipulated and captured by this programme.

The pillars of truth to the haters rest on being ignorant about how a democracy necessarily temporarily looks like a dictatorship in a public health emergency in order to save lives.

We agreed these matters as a democracy, it was not Jacinda taking over. We agreed to special adaptations of democracy and freedom to save lives temporarily.

The population of the earth has not all died from covid vaccines yet.

There is always some harm with vaccines, but it is overstated by Jacinda haters and misunderstood by those ranting about Medsafe, that is simply not the actual number of vaccine deaths and harm that has been verified — rather it is what was reported somewhat subject to conjecture.

The tinfoil hats and company threatened Jacinda’s life on the lawn outside Parliament and burnt down a playground and trees and then stamp their feet that she did not face a lynch mob.

No doors kicked in
Nobody’s door was kicked in by police during covid 19.

Nobody was forced to take a jab. No they chose to leave their jobs because they had a choice provided to them. The science was what the Government acted upon, not the need to control anyone.

Mandates were temporary and went on a few weeks too long.

Some people endured the hardship of not being present when their loved ones died and that was very unfortunate but again it was about medical advice.

Then Director-General of Health Sir Ashly Bloomfield said the government acted on about 90 percent of the Public Health advice it was given. Jacinda haters never mention that fact.

Jacinda haters say she ran away, but to be fair she endured 50 times more abuse than any other politician, and her daughter was threatened by randoms in a café, plus Jacinda was mentally exhausted after covid and all the other events that most prime ministers never have to endure, and she thought somebody else could give it more energy.

We were in good hands with Chris Hipkins so there was no abandoning as haters can’t make up their minds if they want her here or gone — but they do know they want to hate.

Lost a few bucks
The tiny group of haters include some people who lost a few bucks, a business, an opportunity and people who wanted to travel when there was a global pandemic happening.

Bad things happen in pandemics and every country experienced increased levels of debt, wage subsidies, job losses, tragic problems with a loss of income, school absenteeism, increased crime, and other effects like inflation and a cost of living crisis.

Haters just blame Jacinda because they don’t get that international context and the second Royal Commission of Inquiry was a political stunt, not about being more prepared for future pandemics but more about feeding the haters.

All the information it needed was provided by Jacinda, Grant Robertson and Chris Hipkins but right wing media whipped up the show trial despite appearances before a demented mob of haters being thought a necessary theatre for the right wing.

A right wing who signed up to covid lockdowns and emergency laws and then later manipulated short term memories for political gain.

You will never convince a hater not to hate with facts and context and persuasion, even now they are thinking how to rebut these matters rather than being open minded.

Pandemics suck and we did pretty well in the last one but there were consequences for some — for whom I have sympathy, sorry for your loss, I also know people who died . . .  I also know people who lost money, I also know people who could not be there at a funeral . . .  but I am not a hater.

Valuing wanting to learn
Instead, I value how science wants to learn and know what mistakes were made and to adapt for the next pandemic. I value how we were once a team of five million acting together with great kotahitanga.

I value Jacinda saying let there be a place for kindness in the world, despite the way doing the best for the common good may seem unkind to some at times.

The effects of the pandemic in country by country reports show the same patterns everywhere — lockdowns, inflation, cost of living increases, crime increase, education impacts, groceries cost more, petrol prices are too high, supply chains disrupted.

When a hater simplistically blames Jacinda for “destroying the economy and running away” it is literally an admission of their ignorance.

It’s like putting your hand up and screaming, ‘look at me, I am dumb’.

The vast majority get it and want Jacinda back if she wants to come back and live in peace — but if not . . .  that is fine too.

Sad, ignorant minority
A small sad and ignorant minority will never let it go and every day they hate and hate and hate because they are full of hate and that is who they really are, unable to move on and process matters, blamers, simple, under informed and grossly self pitying.

I get the fact your body is your temple and you want medical sovereignty, I also get medical science and immunity.

It’s been nearly three years now, is it time to be a little less hysterical and to actually put away the violent abuse and lame blaming? Will you carry on sulking like a child for another three years?

It’s okay to disagree with me, but before you do, and I know you will, without taking onboard anything I write, just remember what Jacinda said.

In a global pandemic with people’s lives at stake, she would rather be accused of doing too much than doing too little.

Gerard Otto is a digital creator, satirist and independent commentator on politics and the media through his G News column and video reports. This article is republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

An increasing proportion of New Zealand’s immigrants are foreign citizens. In the 2010s – especially the later 2010s – a critical driver of immigration had been returning New Zealand citizens. As the headlines have indicated, that process of sourcing immigrants from the New Zealand diaspora has long finished.

Where have New Zealand’s post-covid immigrants come from? The following table shows immigration from the 31 countries which Statistics New Zealand follows. The estimates for the years-ended-August have just been released.

We note that not all intended migrations to New Zealand are successful. Most immigrants arrive on non-residence visas, and then have to apply for permanent residence or other long-stay visas. Unsuccessful immigrations arise both from failures to secure the desired permission, or from immigrants themselves having second thoughts. There are two possible outcomes of unsuccessful immigration: return migration, or onward migration.

Onward migration may take place following immigrants’ success in gaining New Zealand passports. But that is not unsuccessful immigration, and it’s not shown here. The data below looks at the 12-month period ending August 2023, and deducts the migrant departures for each nationality in the following 12 months (ending August 2024). For comparison, the table also shows 12-month period ending August 2024, deducting the migrant departures for each nationality in the 12 months ending August 2025.

These data are estimates for successful immigration (as defined above) by migrants’ nationalities:

It turns out that Philippines is the 2023 ‘winner’. Philippines consistently has few return or onward migrants. We note that the Philippines’ number dropped more in 2024 compared to India, probably reflecting the larger numbers of Indian migrants who arrived as tertiary students.

Two other stand-out immigrant countries – relative to their source populations – are Sri Lanka and Nepal.

The dominant groups of countries are our Pacific neighbours (Oceania); and South and East Asia. In this context we should note that a substantial majority of immigrants from Philippines, Malaysia, and Indonesia are ethnic ‘Austronesians’, the same broad ethnic group as our indigenous Māori and most of our Oceanian immigrants. Immigrants from Philippines are a particularly good fit, because of their similar Christian culture and because they are ethnic cousins of indigenous Aotearoans.

That’s not to say that any other national group is a bad fit. Most of our immigrants seek to integrate sufficiently to become Kiwis, without being under pressure to assimilate into Euro-Kiwi norms. Interestingly, of the six top immigrant-source countries, New Zealand only has direct flights with two: China and Fiji.

We note that the richer Asian nations feature well down the list. And we note the disproportionately low representation of nationalities with mainly Muslim populations. Indonesia, with 2½ times the population of Philippines has only 2½ percent of the Philippines’ successful immigration. Indonesia, our near-invisible near-neighbour, is the fourth most populous country in the world, and may well have more people than the United States by 2050.

With slightly more immigrants than from Indonesia is Pakistan, the world’s fifth most populous country, and a country with strong sporting links to New Zealand. But Pakistan is way below India in the above table. A surprising omission from the table is Bangladesh, the world’s eighth most populous country, with more residents than Russia (the world’s number nine). Bangladesh does have a significant community in New Zealand, including my GP doctor. I suspect that Bangladeshis feature strongly in the ‘other Asia’ category, along with Cambodians who continue to operate small bakeries in Aotearoa New Zealand. Another country of importance missing from the list is Singapore, whose airline does bring many if not most of our South Asian immigrants.

Other countries not mentioned so far in the world’s top-ten by population are Brazil, Nigeria, and Mexico. Of these only Brazil features in the table above, although Nigeria may well have a significant presence in ‘other’, and Mexico has had some high-profile immigrants to Aotearoa New Zealand. Brazilian immigration, which appears to be dropping off, may return once China Eastern commences flights from Auckland to Buenos Aires.

We see the richer countries in Europe and the Americas (traditional sources of immigration), and Australia, feature in the bottom half of the ‘Top-31′; much more so for 2024 than for 2023. We note that the negative numbers in 2024 mean that more people with those countries’ passports departed in 2025 than arrived in 2024.

Ukraine doesn’t feature, though it might be a major part of ‘other Europe’. Czechia, which I am surprised Stats NZ have included, may be taken as a proxy for Eastern Europe. Also, ‘other Africa’ has held up while South African successful immigration has halved.

The data all reinforces the fact that New Zealand is a demographic turnover country, with the momentum of immigration coming from much poorer non-Muslim countries, and with a significant outflow of richer-country migrants.

For some up-to-date perspective, the table below shows estimated immigration for the featured countries in the year to August 2025. It shows an increase in migrant arrivals from some richer countries, such as United States, Australia, Japan, Germany and France; however, it is likely that similar numbers of these nationalities will leave New Zealand in the next 12 months as arrived in the previous 12 months. Many from France will actually be from New Caledonia; from Oceania rather than from Europe.

Finally, total arrivals of foreigner immigrants were 201,950 in the year to August 2023; 142,661 in the year to August 2024; and 112,591 in the year to August 2025; much lower than immediately post-covid, but still high. Total departures of foreigner immigrants were 35,972 in the year to August 2023; 46,099 in the year to August 2024; and 54,092 in the year to August 2025.

So, in the last year, foreigner migrant departures from New Zealand had reached almost half of foreigner migrant arrivals. This suggests that, for many, immigration to New Zealand is a fraught and often unsuccessful experience.

*******

Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

The proposed changes will set clear expectations on how universities should approach freedom of speech issues.

Each university will then have to adopt a “freedom of speech statement” consistent with the central government’s expectations.

The changes will also prohibit tertiary institutions from adopting positions on issues that do not relate to their core functions.

Associate Education Minister David Seymour said fostering students’ ability to debate ideas is an essential part of universities’ educational mission.

“Despite being required by the Education Act and the Bill of Rights Act to uphold academic freedom and freedom of expression, there is a growing trend of universities deplatforming speakers and cancelling events where they might be perceived as controversial or offensive,” he said.

“That’s why the National/ACT coalition agreement committed to introduce protections for academic freedom and freedom of speech to ensure universities perform their role as the critic and conscience of society.”

Minister for Tertiary Education and Skills Penny Simmonds said freedom of speech was fundamental to the concept of academic freedom.

“Universities should promote diversity of opinion and encourage students to explore new ideas and perspectives. This includes enabling them to hear from invited speakers with a range of viewpoints.”

It is expected the changes will take effect by the end of next year, after which universities will have six months to develop a statement and get it approved.

Aside from the fact that the free speech legislation for universities is a waste of time (and seemingly ideologically inconsistent with the anti-regulation stance of the government), this line from the RNZ article is both hilarious and worrying pic.twitter.com/aOoPa0ZPc5

— Quintin Jane (@RealQuintinJane) December 19, 2024

Te Herenga Waka-Victoria University of Wellington said the important issue of free speech had been a dominant topic throughout the year.

It believed a policy it had come up with would align with the intent of the criteria laid out by the government today.

However, the Greens are among critics, saying the government’s changes will add fuel to the political fires of disinformation, and put teachers and students in the firing line.

Labour says universities should be left to make decisions on free speech themselves.

‘A heavy-handed approach’
The Tertiary Education Union (TEU) said proposed rules could do more harm than good.

They have been been welcomed by the Free Speech Union, which said academic freedom was “under threat”, but the TEU said there was no problem to solve.

TEU president Sandra Grey said the move seemed to be aimed at ensuring people could spread disinformation on university campuses.

“I think one of the major concerns is that you might get universities opening up the space that is for academic and rigorous debate and saying it’s okay we can have climate deniers, we can have people who believe in creationism coming into our campuses and speaking about it as though it were scientific, as though it was rigorously defendable when in fact we know some of these questions . . .  have been settled,” she said.

Grey said academics who expressed views on campus could expect them to be debated, but that was part and parcel of working at a university and not an attack on their freedom of speech.

“There isn’t actually a problem. I do think universities, all the staff who work there, the students, understand that they’re covered by all of their requirements for freedom of speech that other citizens are.

“So it feels like we’ve got a heavy-handed approach from a government that apparently is anti-regulation but is now going to put in place the whole lot of requirements on a community that just doesn’t need it.”

Some topics ‘suppressed’

Free Speech Union chief executive Jonathan Ayling said freedom of speech was under threat in universities.

“We’ve supported academics . . .  where they feel that they have been unfairly disadvantaged simply for holding a different opinion to some of their peers. Of course, that is also an addition to the explicit calls for people to be cancelled, to be unemployed,” he said.

Ayling said some academics were afraid to express their views and there was also a problem with “compelled speech”.

“Forcing certain references on particularly ideological issues. There’s questions around race, gender, international conflicts, covid-19, these are all questions that we’ve found have been suppressed and also there’s the aspect of self-censorship,” he said.

“As we have and alongside partners looked into this more and more, it seems that many people in the academy exist in a culture of fear.”

University committed to differing viewpoints
Te Herenga Waka-Victoria University of Wellington is committed to hearing a range of different viewpoints on its campuses, vice-chancellor Professor Nic Smith says.

Free speech had been an important issue during 2024, and the university had arrived at a policy that covered both freedom of speech and academic freedom.

By consulting widely, there was now a shared understanding of “foundational principles”, and its policy would be in place early in the new year.

“We believe this policy aligns with the intent of the criteria [from the government] as we understand them. It recognises the strength of our diverse university community and affirms that this diversity makes us stronger,” Professor Smith said.

“At the same time, it acknowledges that within any diverse community, individuals will inevitably encounter ideas they disagree with-sometimes strongly.

“Finding value in these disagreements is something universities are very good at: listening to different points of view in the spirit of advancing understanding and learning that can ultimately help us live and work better together.”

The university believed in hearing a range of views from staff, rather than adopting a single institutional position.

“The only exception to this principle is on matters that directly affect our core functions as a university.”

‘Stoking fear and division’

Green Party’s spokesperson for Tertiary Education, Francisco Hernadez, said the new policy had nothing to do with free speech.

“This is about polluting our public discourse for political gain.”

Universities played a critical role, providing a platform for informed and reasoned debate.

“Our universities should be able to decide who is given a platform on their campuses, not David Seymour. These changes risk turning our universities into hostile environments unsafe for marginalised communities.

“Misinformation, disinformation, and rhetoric that inflames hatred towards certain groups has no place in our society, let alone our universities. Freedom of speech is fundamental, but it is not a licence to harm.”

Hernandez said universities should be trusted to ensure the balance was struck between academic freedom and a duty of care.

“Today’s announcement has also come with a high dose of unintended irony.

“David Seymour is speaking out of both sides of his mouth by on the one hand claiming to support freedom of speech, but on the other looking to limit the ability universities have to take stances on issues, like the war in Gaza for example.

“This is an Orwellian attempt to limit discourse to the confines of the government’s agenda. This is about stoking fear and division for political gain.”

Labour’s Associate Education (Tertiary) spokesperson Deborah Russell responded: “One of the core legislated functions of universities in this country is to be a critic and conscience of society. That means continuing to speak truth to power, even if those in power don’t like it.”

“Nowhere should be a platform for hate speech. I am certain universities can make these decisions themselves.”

‘Expectations clarified’ – university
The University of Auckland said in a statement the announcement of planned legislation changes would help “to clarify government expectations in this area”.

“The university has a longstanding commitment to maintaining freedom of expression and academic freedom on our campuses, and in recent years has worked closely with [the university’s] senate and council to review, revise and consult on an updated Freedom of Expression and Academic Freedom Policy.

“This is expected to return to senate and council for further discussion in early 2025 and will take into account the proposed new legislation.”

The university described the nature of the work as “complex”.

“While New Zealand universities have obligations under law to protect freedom of expression, academic freedom and their role as ‘critic and conscience of society’, as the proposed legislation appreciates, this is balanced against other important policies and codes.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

SPECIAL REPORT: By Joe Hendren

Since the Israeli invasion of Lebanon I can’t help but think of a friend I met in Beirut.

He worked at the Regis Hotel, where I stayed in February 2015.

At one point, he offered to make me a Syrian dish popular in his hometown of Aleppo. I have long remembered his kindness; I only wish I remembered his name.

At the time, his home city was being destroyed. A flashpoint of the Syrian Civil War, the Battle of Aleppo lasted four long years. He didn’t mention this of course.

I was lucky to visit Lebanon when I did. So much has happened since then.

Economic crisis and a tragic port explosion
Mass protests took over Lebanese streets in October 2019 in response to government plans to tax WhatsApp calls. The scope of the protests soon widened, as Lebanese people voiced their frustrations with ongoing economic turmoil and corruption.

A few months later, the covid-19 pandemic arrived, deepening the economic crisis and claiming 10,000 lives.

On 4 August 2020, the centre of Beirut was rocked by one of the largest non nuclear explosions in history when a large amount of ammonium nitrate stored at the Port of Beirut detonated. The explosion killed 218 people and left an estimated 300,000 homeless. The government of Hassin Diab resigned but continued in a “caretaker” capacity.

Tens of thousands of protesters returned to the streets demanding accountability and the downfall of Lebanon’s political ruling class. While some protesters threw stones and other projectiles, an Al Jazeera investigation found that security forces violated international standards on the use of force. The political elite were protected.

In 2021, The World Bank summarised the situation:

“The Lebanon financial and economic crisis is likely to rank in the top 10, possibly top three, most severe crises episodes globally since the mid-nineteenth century. This is a conclusion of the Spring 2021 Lebanon Economic Monitor (LEM) in which the Lebanon crisis is contrasted with the most severe global crises episodes as observed by Reinhart and Rogoff (2014) over the 1857–2013 period.

“In fact, Lebanon’s GDP plummeted from close to US$ 55 billion in 2018 to an estimated US$ 33 billion in 2020, with US$ GDP/capita falling by around 40 percent. Such a brutal and rapid contraction is usually associated with conflicts or wars.”

The Lebanon Poverty and Equity Assessment, produced by the World Bank in 2024, found the share of individuals in Lebanon living under the poverty line more than tripled, rising from 12 percent to 44 percent. The depth and severity of poverty also increased over the decade between 2012 and 2022.

To make matters worse, the port explosion destroyed Lebanon’s strategic wheat reserves at a time when the war in Ukraine drove significant increases in global food prices. Annual food inflation in Lebanon skyrocketed from 7.67 percent in January 2019 to a whopping 483.15 percent for the year ending in January 2022. While food inflation has since declined, it remains high, sitting just below 20 percent for the year ending September 2024. The World Bank said:

“The sharp deterioration of the Lebanese pound, which lost 98 percent of its pre-crisis value by December 2023, propelled inflation to new heights. With imports constituting about 60 percent of the consumption basket (World Bank, 2022), the plunging currency led to triple-digit inflation which rose steeply from an annual average of 3 percent between 2011 and 2018, to 85 percent in 2019, 155 percent in 2020, and 221 percent in 2023 . . .

“Faced with falling foreign exchange reserves, the government withdrew subsidies on medication, fuel, and wheat further fuelling rising costs of healthcare and transport (Figure 1.2). Rapid inflation acted effectively as a highly regressive tax, striking hardest at the poor and those with fixed, lira-denominated incomes.” 

The ongoing crisis of the Lebanese economy has amplified the power of Hezbollah, a paramilitary group formed in 1982 in response to Israel’s invasion and occupation of Lebanon.

“Hezbollah is famous for entrenching its power in an elaborate social infrastructure of Islamic welfare. The social grip of those structures and services is increased by the ongoing crisis of the Lebanese economy. When the medical service fails, desperate families turn to the Hezbollah-run health service,” says Adam Tooze

As banks imposed capital controls, many Lebanese lost confidence in the financial system. The financial arm of Hezbollah, the al-Quad al-Hassan Association (AQAH), experienced a significant increase in clients, despite being subject to US Treasury sanctions since 2007.

The US accuses Hezbollah of using AQAH as a front to manage its financial activities. When a 28-year-old engineer, Hassan Shoumar, was locked out of his dollar accounts in late 2019, he redirected his money into his account at AQAH: “What I care about is that when I want my money, I can get it.”

While Hezbollah portrays itself as “the resistance”, as a member of the governing coalition in Lebanon, it also forms an influential part of the political elite. Adam Tooze gives an example of how the political elite is still looking after itself:

“[T]he Lebanese Parliament in a grotesque act of self-dealing in January 2024 passed a budget that promised to close the budget deficit of 12.8 of GDP by raising regressive value-added tax while decreasing the progressive taxes levied on capital gains, real estate and investments.

“For lack of reforms, the IMF [International Monetary Fund] is refusing to disburse any of the $3bn package that are allocated to Lebanon.”

While the protest movement called for a “technocratic” government in Lebanon, the experiences of Greece and other countries facing financial difficulties suggest such governments can pose their own risks, especially when they involve unelected “experts” in prominent positions.

One example is the political reaction to the counterproductive austerity programme imposed on Greece by the European Commission, European Central Bank and IMF in the aftermath of the 2007-2008 financial crisis. This demonstrates how the demands of international investors can conflict with the needs of the local population.

Lebanon carries more than its fair share of refugees
Lebanon currently hosts the largest number of refugees per capita in the world, despite its scarce resources. This began as an overflow from the Syrian conflict in 2011, with nearly 1.2 million ‘displaced’ Syrians in Lebanon registered with UNHCR by May 2015.

When I visited Lebanon in 2015, I tried to grasp the scale of the refugee issue. In terms of population, Lebanon is comparable to New Zealand, with both countries having just over 5 million people.

I imagined what New Zealand would be like if it attempted to host a million refugees in addition to its general population. Yet in terms of land area Lebanon is only 10,400 square kilometres — about the size of New Zealand’s Marlborough region at the top of the South Island.

Now, imagine accommodating a population of over 5 million in such a small space, with more than a fifth of them being refugees.

While it was encouraging to see New Zealand increase its refugee quota to 1500 places in July 2020, we could afford to do much more in the current situation. This includes creating additional visa pathways for those fleeing Gaza and Lebanon.

#BREAKING
United States VETOES Security Council draft resolution that would have demanded an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, and the release of all hostages

RESULT
In Favor: 14
Against: 1 (US)
Abstain: 0 pic.twitter.com/BpUj5xhJHE

— UN News (@UN_News_Centre) November 20, 2024

On top of all that – Israeli attacks and illegal booby traps
Since the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, and the ongoing Israeli invasion of Gaza, Israel and Hezbollah have exchanged fire across Lebanon’s southern border.

Israel makes much of the threat of rocket attacks on Israel from Hezbollah. However, data from US based non-profit organisation Armed Conflict Location and Event Data (ACLED) shows Israel carried out 81 percent of the 10,214 attacks between between the two parties from October 7, 2023, and September 20, 2024.

These attacks resulted in 752 deaths in Lebanon, including 50 children. In contrast, Hezbollah’s attacks, largely centred on military targets, killed at least 33 Israelis.

Hezbollah continues to offer an immediate ceasefire, so long as a ceasefire also applies to Gaza, but Israel has refused these terms.

While the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) disputed these figures as an “oversimplification”, the IDF do not appear to dispute the reported number of Lebanese casualties. Hezbollah continues to offer an immediate ceasefire, so long as a ceasefire also applies to Gaza, but Israel has refused these terms.

In a further escalation, thousands of handheld pagers and walkie-talkies used in both civilian and military contexts in Lebanon and Syria suddenly exploded on September 17 and 18.

Israel attempted to deny responsibility, with Israeli President Isaac Herzog claiming he “rejects out of hand any connection” to the attack. However, 12 defence and intelligence officials, briefed on the attack, anonymously confirmed to The New York Times that Israel was behind the operation.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu later boasted during a cabinet meeting that he had personally approved the pager attack. The New York Times described the aftermath:

“Powered by just a few ounces of an explosive compound concealed within the devices, the blasts sent grown men flying off motorcycles and slamming into walls, according to witnesses and video footage. People out shopping fell to the ground, writhing in agony, smoke snaking from their pockets.”

The exploding devices killed 42 people and injured more than 3500, with many victims losing one or both of their hands or eyes. At least four of the dead were children.

Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikatri called the explosions “a serious violation of Lebanese sovereignty and a crime by all standards”.

While around eight Hezbollah fighters were among the dead, most of those killed worked in administration roles and did not take part in hostilities. Under international humanitarian law targeting non-combatants is illegal.

Additionally, the UN Protocol on Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices also prohibits the use of “booby-traps or other devices in the form of apparently harmless portable objects which are specifically designed and constructed to contain explosive material”. Israel is a signatory to this UN Protocol.

Israel’s decision to turn ordinary consumer devices into illegal booby traps could backfire. While Israel frequently stresses the importance of its technology sector to its economy, who is going to buy technology associated with Israel now that the IDF have demonstrated its ability to indiscriminately weaponise consumer devices at any time?

International industry buyers will source elsewhere. Such a “silent boycott” could give greater momentum to the call from Palestinian civil society for boycotts, divestments and economic sanctions against Israel.

The booby trap pagers are also likely to affect the decisions of foreign airlines to service Israel on the grounds of safety. Since the war began in October 2023, the number of foreign airlines calling on Ben Gurion Airport in Israel has fallen significantly. Consequently, the cost of a round-trip ticket from the United States to Tel Aviv has risen sharply, from approximately $900 to $2500.

Israel targets civilian infrastructure in Lebanon
Israel has also targeted civilian organisations linked to Hezbollah, such emergency services, hospitals and medical centres operated by the Islamic Health Society (IHS). Israel claims Hezbollah is “using the IHS as a cover for terrorist activities”. This apparently includes digging people out of buildings, as search and rescue teams have also been targeted and killed.

Israel accuses the microloan charity AQAH of funding “Hezbollah’s terror activities”, including purchasing weapons and making payments to Hezbollah fighters. On October 20, Israel attacked 30 branches of AQAH across Lebanon, drawing condemnation from both Amnesty International and the United Nations.

Ben Saul, UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Counter-terrorism maintains AQAH is not a lawful military target: “International humanitarian law does not permit attacks on the economic or financial infrastructure of an adversary, even if they indirectly sustain its military activities.”

On top of all that — an Israeli invasion
In 1982, Israel attempted to use war to alter the political situation in Lebanon, with counterproductive results, including the creation of Hezbollah. In 2006, Hezbollah used the hilly terrain of southern Lebanon to beat Israel to a stalemate. Israel risks similar counterproductive outcomes again, at the cost of many more lives.

Yet on 1 October 2024, Israel launched a ground invasion of Lebanon, alongside strikes on Beirut, Sidon and border villages. The IDF confirmed the action on Twitter/X, promising a “limited, localised and targeted” operation against “Hezbollah terrorist targets” in southern Lebanon. One US official noted that Israel had framed its 1982 invasion as a limited incursion, which eventually turned into an 18-year occupation.

Israeli strikes have since expanded all over the country. According to figures provided by the Lebanese Ministry of Public Heath on November 13, Israel is responsible for the deaths of at least 3365 people in Lebanon, including 216 children and 192 health workers. More than 14,000 people have been wounded, and more than one million have been displaced from their homes.

Since September 30, 47 Israeli troops have been killed in combat in Southern Lebanon. Around 45 civilians in northern Israel have died due to rocket fire from Lebanon.

So, on top of an economic crisis, runaway inflation, unaffordable food, increasing poverty, the port explosion and covid-19, the Lebanese people now face a war that shows little signs of stopping.

Analysts suggest there is little chance of a ceasefire while Israel retains its “maximalist” demands, which include a full surrender of Hezbollah and allowing Israel to continue to attack targets in southern Lebanon.

A senior fellow at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut, Mohanad Hage Ali, believes Israel is feigning diplomacy to push the blame on Hezbollah. The best chance may come alongside a ceasefire in Gaza, but Israel shows little signs of negotiating meaningfully on that front either.

On September 26, the Lebanese Foreign Minister Abdallah BouHabib summarised the mood of the country in the wake of the pager attack:

“[N]obody expected the war to be taken in that direction. We Lebanese—we’ve had enough war. We’ve had fifteen years of war. . . .We’d like to live without war—happily, as a tourist country, a beautiful country, good food—and we are not able to do it. And so there is a lot of depression, especially with the latest escalation.”

In Aotearoa New Zealand, the Māori phrase “Kia kaha” means “stand strong”. If I could send a message from halfway across the world, it would be: “Kia kaha Lebanon. I look forward to the day I can visit you again, and munch on a yummy Za’atar man’ousheh while admiring the view from the beautiful Corniche Beirut.”

Joe Hendren holds a PhD in international business from the University of Auckland. He has more than 20 years of experience as a researcher, including work in the New Zealand Parliament, for trade unions and on various research projects. This is his first article for Asia Pacific Report. His blog can be found at http://joehendren.substack.com

Where I ate my Za’atar man’ousheh – Pigeon’s Rock, Corniche Beiruit

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Surveillance and better vaccine coverage is needed to prevent another measles outbreak in the Pacific, says the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Western Pacific regional director.

Dr Saia Ma’u Piukala said many children missed out on routine vaccinations — including measles and rubella — during the covid-19 pandemic.

According to WHO, measles cases jumped by 225 percent — from just over 1400 cases in 2022 to more than 5000 last year — in the Western Pacific region.

“I think the health workforce were concentrating on covid-19 vaccinations and forgot about routine vaccinations, not only for measles, but other routine immunisation schedule,” Piukala told RNZ Pacific.

“People are going back to fill the gaps.”

From 2022 to 2023, 11 countries in the Western Pacific, including Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau and Papua New Guinea, conducted nationwide measles and rubella vaccination campaigns.

Catch-up successful
Piukala said the catch-up campaigns had been successful.

“That will definitely reduce the risk,” he said.

“No child should get sick or die of measles.”

In 2019, Samoa had an outbreak that killed 83 people off the back of an outbreak in Auckland.

Piukala said the deaths made people understand the importance of measles and rubella vaccinations for their children.

Fiji, Guam, French Polynesia and New Caledonia are the only countries or territories that have local testing capacity for measles, with most nations sending samples to Melbourne for testing.

Piukala said WHO plans for Samoa, the Cook Islands, and the Solomon Islands to have testing capacity by 2025.

“The PCR machines that were made available in Pacific Island countries during the covid pandemic can also be used to detect other respiratory viruses, including the flu, LSV, and measles and rubella.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The University of the South Pacific journalism programme is hosting a cohort student journalists from Australia’s Queensland University of Technology this week.

Led by Professor Angela Romano, the 12 students are covering news assignments in Fiji as part of their working trip.

The visitors were given a briefing by USP journalism teaching staff — Associate Professor in Pacific journalism and programme head Dr Shailendra Singh, and student training newspaper supervising editor-in-chief Monika Singh.

The students held lively discussions about the form and state of the media in Fiji and the Pacific, the historic influence of Australian and Western news media and its pros and cons, and the impact of the emergence of China on the Pacific media scene.

Dr Singh said the small and micro-Pacific media systems were “still reeling” from revenue loss due to digital disruption and the covid-19 pandemic.

As elsewhere in the world, the “rivers of gold” (classified advertising revenue) had virtually dried up and media in the Pacific were apparently struggling like never before.

Dr Singh said that this was evident from the reduced size of some newspapers in the Pacific, in both classified and display advertising, which had migrated to social media platforms.

Repeal of draconian law
He praised Fiji’s coalition government for repealing the country’s draconian Media Industry Development Act last year, and reviving media self-regulation under the revamped Fiji Media Council.

However, Dr Singh added that there was still some way to go to further improve the media landscape, including focus on training and development and working conditions.

“There are major, longstanding challenges in small and micro-Pacific media systems due to small audiences, and marginal profits,” he said. “This makes capital investment and staff development difficult to achieve.”

The QUT students are in Suva this month on a working trip in which students will engage in meetings, interviews and production of journalism. They will meet non-government organisations that have a strong focus on women/gender in development, democracy or peace work.

The students will also visit different media organisations based in Suva and talk to their female journalists on their experiences and their stories.

The USP journalism programme started in Suva in 1988 and it has produced more than 200 graduates serving the Pacific and beyond in various media and communication roles.

The programme has forged partnerships with leading media players in the Pacific and our graduates are shining examples in the fields of journalism, public relations and government/NGO communication.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Former broadcasting minister Willie Jackson has defended Aotearoa New Zealand’s public interest journalism fund that his government started during the covid-19 pandemic, after the new deputy prime minister characterised it as “bribery”.

Speaking to media on Monday after his swearing in, Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters accused state-funded media organisations of a lack of independence from the previous Labour government.

Peters was asked how quickly he expected government departments to take action on removing te reo Māori from their names.

“Well, we’ll see the speed at which TVNZ and RNZ — which are taxpayer owned — understand this new message. We’ll see whether these people, both the media and journalists — are they independent?,” he said.

“Well, isn’t that fascinating, I’ve never seen evidence of that in the last three years.” he said.

He then laughed, and said “you can’t defend $55 million of bribery, cannot defend $55 million of bribery. Get it very clear”.

That last remark was a reference to the Public Interest Journalism Fund, a three-year $55m contestable fund for journalists initially set up to shore up public interest media during the covid-19 pandemic, which was wound up in July.

Media jobs, development funded
This included funding for 219 jobs and 22 industry development projects. Political coverage was exempted from eligibility to benefit from it. The fund was administered by NZ On Air.

Jackson, who became broadcasting minister in the Labour government two years after the fund was set up, said it was for media around the country, not just state-funded organisations.

“It was introduced during covid because it was a disastrous time in terms of media and we were pressured by good people out there to say, ‘hey, you support financial institutions so how about supporting local media that’s struggling’.”

It was aimed at supporting New Zealand media to keep producing public interest stories, he said and was “not just for RNZ and for TVNZ”.

“What you saw was a great investment in support of media outlets, Māori, Pasifika, regional [outlets] … Gisborne Herald, Otago Daily Times, Asburton Guardian, they got support and an opportunity to rebuild, reset.

“I’m very proud of what we did.”

Influence denied
He denied the then Labour government had any influence over the media as a result.

“The rules are very clear, we can’t interfere, we can’t intervene . . .  You guys have to have your own independence.”

RNZ’s charter requires the broadcaster to be independent, including providing “reliable, independent, and freely accessible news and information”.

While the organisation is funded by the government, by law no ministers of the Crown or person acting on their behalf may give direction to RNZ relating to programming, newsgathering or presentation, or standards, and cannot have staff removed.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The traditionally blue seat is currently held by Labour — the election of 2020 was the first time it had been won by the left since 1938 — but polls suggest that won’t last much longer.

Five candidates took part in the live-streamed debate at the Homestead Tavern organised by right-wing lobby group the Taxpayers’ Union.

With a partisan audience and The Daily Blog editor/publisher Martyn “Bomber” Bradbury and libertarian Damien Grant as MCs — political commentators from opposite ends of the political spectrum — it was a rollicking, raucous ride, sometimes rude but never dull.

For Prime it was a foray into hostile territory with the Labour MP all but drowned out by shouts and jeers.

She had little chance to defend her party’s record or set out her priorities above the din.

The loudest reaction came after mention of the C word — that’s covid, of course.

Covid response ‘saved lives’
Prime defended the government’s response, saying it was one of the best in the world and had saved lives, but acknowledged some in the room did not agree with her.

There were angry shouts from some in the near-capacity crowd anytime she used a word in te reo Māori, such as Aotearoa or puku [belly].

The other candidates received a warmer reception, with Matt King — the former Northland MP who quit National and set up DemocracyNZ in protest at the party’s covid policy — having the loudest supporters.

New Zealand First candidate Shane Jones continued his campaign theme of describing himself as the politician who delivered for Northland when he held the purse strings for the Provincial Growth Fund.

He also said it was time Northlanders broke their habit of electing lions, only to find they turned into lambs as soon as they took their place in Parliament.

Jones promised a “laser-like focus” on Northland’s infrastructure deficit, especially when it came to roads, rail and shipping.

‘Squeezed middle’
National candidate Grant McCallum, a Maungaturoto farmer who won the party’s selection process to replace King, also promised a laser-like focus — but in his case it would be on costs and the “squeezed middle”.

He said middle New Zealanders had been hard hit by rising prices and interest rates.

King was initially denied a place in the debate, raising the prospect of a protest outside the venue by his supporters, with the Taxpayers’ Union saying he did not meet the criteria.

Those criteria included being a sitting MP or polling at least 5 percent in the electorate.

King was told on Monday he could join the debate after all because the weekend’s Taxpayers’ Union-Curia poll put his support in Northland at 5 percent, once undecided voters were excluded.

King promised to “fight back for farmers” against what he called a “climate change catastrophist narrative”.

ACT list MP Mark Cameron, meanwhile, just wanted less government, saying New Zealanders should be left alone to do what they did best.

Gun register dismissed
He was questioned by MC Martyn Bradbury about ACT’s plans to reverse a ban on high-calibre semi-automatic weapons, which Cameron did not address — but he did say bringing in a gun register had not worked overseas and would not work in New Zealand.

Between the serious politicking there was also plenty of humour.

When New Zealand First was accused of being less interested in real issues than in culture-war talking points such as the use of public toilets by transgender women, MC Damien Grant asked — with some trepidation — how Jones defined a woman.

“Matua Shane Jones has 19 mokopuna [grandchildren],” Jones replied.

“And he has his beautiful wife sitting right in front. Bro, that’s a woman.”

The last word went to Prime, who warned the crowd a change of government would lead to cuts in basic services.

It is not clear, however, if anyone heard her above the jeers.

‘Lot at stake in election’
“There is a lot at stake in this election, and I implore you all, to ask the questions and do the research,” Prime said.

Earlier in the evening, the organisers released the results of a Taxpayers’ Union-Curia poll conducted in the Northland electorate the previous weekend.

The poll showed McCallum had 43 percent of the electorate vote, followed by Prime on 18 percent and Jones on 13 percent.

Both King and the Greens’ Reina Tuai Penney, who did not take part in the debate, had 4 percent support with Cameron trailing on 2 percent.

However, the poll had a relatively small sample size of 400 and a margin of error of almost 5 percent.

The proportion of respondents who had not made up their minds was 11 percent. If they were excluded, McCallum’s share of the vote jumped to 49 percent.

The poll showed broadly similar trends when it came to the party vote, although personal support for Jones (13 percent) was much higher than support for his party overall in Northland (3 percent).

Situation reversed
The situation was reversed for Cameron who had just 2 percent support as a candidate while his party, ACT, polled 12 percent.

Cameron has, however, been campaigning for the party vote only and suggesting his supporters give their electorate votes to McCallum.

Respondents were asked what they believed was the most important issue facing Northland.

Unsurprisingly, given the state of the region’s transport network, 36 percent opted for roads, followed by the cost of living on 15 percent, health on 14 percent and law and order on 8 percent.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Analysis by Keith Rankin.

This chart shows total deaths in a number of comparable countries with high or highish life expectancies. The countries with most deaths have older populations.

New Zealand should perhaps be compared most with Ireland, Scotland, Denmark and Finland; all countries with just over five million people. And with Australia.

Australian mortality has been similar to New Zealand’s in recent years, though, as more New Zealand citizens migrate to Australia, in the next few years New Zealand will age faster than Australia.

Ireland is exceptional because of its relationship with United States’ high technology companies and its full membership of the European Union. Thus Ireland has many elite ‘tech’ workers at present. Further, in past years of difficulty – especially 2008 to 2014 – Ireland was able to unload much of its underclass to other countries. While the health and financial circumstances of Ireland’s sixty- and seventy-somethings requires further investigation, Ireland will neither have had as big a baby bust as New Zealand in the 1930s nor as intense a baby boom from 1946 to 1965. So, it is likely that the numbers of deaths in New Zealand will rise faster in coming years than the number of deaths in Ireland.

The high death numbers in Scotland, Denmark and Finland do not reflect lower life expectancies in those countries. Rather, they reflect populations with comparatively fewer younger people compared to older people. These countries’ mortality numbers in 2018-2022 are the best guide we have to what death numbers will be like in New Zealand in coming years, as the baby bust generation passes on and the 1940s’ and 1950s’ baby boomers reach the days in which they dominate death data.

Most importantly, the experience of these three countries suggests that we will see the demand for health care in New Zealand surge from now on – peaking in the 2030s and 2040s – at a time when current projections show that New Zealand’s healthcare workforce will trough. There seems to have been minimal, if any, demographic analysis of the implication in New Zealand of a baby bust generation giving way to baby boom generations. This is despite record numbers of policy analysts and cost analysts contracted by government.

Some Particular Comments about other countries

I have included Qatar and its near-neighbour Oman to show how low death numbers are at present in small Arabian countries with relatively large numbers of working-age residents. I think that this observation also applies to Israel.

We note also the death incidence in the higher life expectancy countries of Latin America – Costa Rica, Colombia and Chile – on account of their relatively low numbers of people in their eighties.

We note that Portugal and Japan have relatively high numbers of elderly people in their populations. Portugal has been a retirement magnet within Europe, with strong links to the United Kingdom. I have generally been puzzled as to why Japan has so many older people, though we should note that the generation which fought in World War II has largely passed on. I guess that, as in England, many Japanese children in the war were transported into the countryside so that they were not in the cities which suffered very intense bombing from the United States. Overall, Japan is one of the most age imbalanced countries; the low birth rates in recent decades contribute most to this.

Germany is a country which suffered particularly from Covid19 and similar diseases in 2022. But its high 2018 death tally suggests demographic causes which still need unravelling. Despite Germany being a major labour inflow country in Europe, it still has a median age about ten years higher than New Zealand’s (47 compared to 37).

On the flipside of Germany’s role as a labour-inflow country within the European Union, we have Finland and the other Baltic states as outflow countries. Hence the high death tallies in Finland and the Baltics relative to their resident populations.

Neither Finland nor Denmark look particularly happy in this chart. I predict that New Zealand’s death tally will soon be like Finland’s, given both countries’ propensities to lose labour to bigger neighbours. The situation of Greece is similar to that of the Baltic counties; too great a loss of their younger people to the employment centres of the European Union.

Re a few countries not in the chart, I can affirm that both England and Netherlands have population-adjusted death tallies very similar to the United States. And Canada’s adjusted numbers are very similar to Norway’s.

Finally, we should note Sweden, which was neutral in World War II. So Sweden does not have the extreme demographics of older people which New Zealand and other war participant countries exhibit. And, Sweden was less impacted by Covid19.

______________

Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

Parliament has ended for another term, shutting down ahead of the Aotearoa New Zealand election campaign with a debate where many focused on attacking their political opponents.

Labour Party leader and Prime Minister Chris Hipkins warned New Zealanders: “We can continue to move forward under Labour, or we can face a coalition of cuts, chaos, and fear: A National/ACT/New Zealand First government that would be one of the most inexperienced and untested in our history.”

Parliament typically rises at the end of a term with an adjournment debate, and Thursday’s seemed to confirm the coming election on October 14 would be full of negative campaigning.

Here is a brief summary of the political leaders’ speeches:

Chris Hipkins (Labour):

Labour’s leader and incumbent Prime Minister Chris Hipkins launched into the closing adjournment debate reflecting on the eventful past six years. He said his own tenure in the role had not broken that mould, with the Auckland floods sweeping in just two days after he was sworn in, followed by Cyclone Gabrielle.

“Ours is a government that has been forged through fire. Every challenge that has been thrown our way, we have risen to that,” he said.

He said Labour had achieved a lot, but there was more to do — and much at stake in the coming election.

“We can continue to move forward under Labour, or we can face a coalition of cuts, chaos, and fear: A National/ACT/New Zealand First government that would be one of the most inexperienced and untested in our history, a government who want to wind the clock back on all of the progress that we are making.”

He praised Finance Minister Grant Robertson’s handling of the economy, highlighting a 6 percent larger economy than before the covid-19 pandemic, record low unemployment, and wages “growing faster under our government than inflation”.

He soon returned to attacking political opponents, however.

“Now is not the time to turn back. Now is not the time to stoke the inflationary fires with unfunded tax cuts as the members opposite promised, and it is not a time to turn our backs on talent by introducing a talent tax,” he said, referring to National’s plan to increase levies on visas.

“National wants to turn the clock backwards; we want to keep moving forward.”

He finished by saying Labour had a positive vision for New Zealand, before his final parting words: “and I wave goodbye to Michael Woodhouse, too, because he’s guaranteed not to be here after the election”.

Christopher Luxon (National):

The National leader said Hipkins’ speech should be one of apology, “to the parents and the kids who actually have been let down by an education system …to all the people who have waited for endless times and hours in hospital emergency departments … to all the victims of ram raids in dairies and superettes … to all the people that are lying awake at night worried about how they’re going to make their payments and keep their house.”

He continued with the requisite thanks such speeches so often sprinkle on officials, staff, supporters and workers before thanking the man he had been criticising.

“I do want to thank, in particular, the Prime Minister Chris Hipkins for his services to the National Party, because he rode in very triumphantly in February, and he announced that he was sweeping away everything that Jacinda Ardern stood for-especially kindness. But I have to say it turned out it was all words and no action, because, as we expected, he just carried on doing more of the same: Excessive, addicted government spending.

He turned to the slew of Labour personnel problems of the past year and more, likening the government to a car with the wheels falling off; the Greens were “in this rally too, they’re on their e-bikes, and they’re pedalling along the Wellington cycle lanes,” while Te Pāti Māori were “in their waka, but, sadly, they’re not the party of collaboration that they once were”.

“Then there are the ACT folk. They’re off in their pink van, and it’s been wonderful. They’re travelling the countryside, and David’s reading Mandela’s Long Walk to Freedom, which is a good read, as you well know, Mr Speaker.”

He lavished praise on his own team, singling out deputy Nicola Willis, then closed by promising National was “ready to govern, we are sorted, we are united, we have the talent, we have the energy, we have the ideas, we have the diversity to take this country forward”.

David Seymour (ACT):

ACT’s leader also honed in on his political opponents, targeting Labour’s polling.

“It’s been a long three years in this Chamber and it has been characterised by one fact that lays bare what has happened, and that is the fact that the Labour Party, in Roy Morgan, polled 26 percent. That means that half the people who voted for Labour at the last election have abandoned voting for Labour in three years. The question that they must be asking themselves is why that is.”

“I think the reason that we have so much change and support-Labour have lost half of their supporters in the last three years because, frankly, never has so much been promised to so many and yet so little actually delivered … New Zealanders overwhelmingly say this country is going in the wrong direction, and they also will tell you that their number one concern is the cost of living. That is Grant Robertson’s epitaph.”

He targeted housing, debt, inflation, victimisation, and child poverty before targeting the government for taking “a divisive approach to almost every single issue”.

“If you take the example of vaccination. Now, I’m a person who says that vaccination was safe and effective, yet by using ostracism as a tool to try and increase vaccination levels this government has eroded social cohesion and divided New Zealanders when they didn’t need to,” he said.

“New Zealand have had enough of that style of politics. They’ve had enough of Chris Hipkins going negative. They’ve had enough of the misinformation.”

He finished by saying the choice for New Zealanders now was not between swapping “Chris for Chris and red for blue”, but “we’ll actually deliver what we promise, we’ll cut waste, we’ll end racial division, and we’ll get the politics out of the classroom. Those aren’t just policies, those are values that we all share.”

James Shaw (Greens):

The Green co-leader took his own opening shot at Seymour, as “the leader of ‘New New Zealand First’”.

“Mr Seymour must be feeling quite grumpy right now, because last term he worked so hard to get rid of Winston Peters so that this term he could become Winston Peters, and now Winston Peters is calling and he wants his Horcrux back because that blackened shard of a soul can only animate the body of one populist authoritarian at once.”

He turned the hose on both major parties in one statement, saying it was odd National was proposing more new taxes than Labour while the Greens were promising bigger tax cuts than National. He criticised National over its plan to spend the funds from the Emissions Trading Scheme, before turning to climate change overall as — unusually — a source of positivity.

“Our greenhouse gas emissions in Aotearoa are falling, and that is because — and it is only because — with the Green Party in government with Labour, we have prioritised that work every single day.”

But positivity did not last long.

“Under the last National government, one in 100 new cars sold in this country was an electric vehicle. Last June, it was one in two … and National want to cancel all of that so that they can have an election year bribe.”

Rawiri Waititi (Te Pāti Māori):

The Pāti Māori leader Rawiri Waititi began with a fairy tale.

“It seems like this side of the House can find a grain of salt in a sugar factory. I just wanted to say, as I heard the story about Goldilocks — Mama Bear, Papa Bear, Baby Bear — I tell you, it’s been very difficult to sit next to a polar bear and a gummy bear, and it’s been quite hard to contain the grizzly bear in me.”

He spoke in te reo Māori before giving a speech which — unlike the other leaders — focused exclusively on his own party’s promises.

“We are the only movement that will fight for our people,” he said.

“What does an Aotearoa hou look like? It looks like how we would treat you on the marae. We will welcome you. We will feed you. We will house you. We will protect you. We will educate you. We will care you. We will love you.”

“Te Pāti Māori is a movement that leaves no one behind, whether you are tangata whenua or a tangata Tiriti, tangata hauā, takatāpui, wāhine, tāne, rangatahi, mokopuna — you are whānau.”

He spoke of the need to reduce poverty and homelessness, before making the second of two references to his suspension from Parliament this week, then said it was time to “believe in ourselves to be proud, to be magic, and to believe in your mana”.

“I am proud of you all, I am proud of our movement, and I’m proud to head into this campaign, doing what we said we would do.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

As of August 15, the mandates ended for the seven-day isolation period and masks in health settings, with the Health Minister Dr Ayesha Verrall saying wastewater testing showed little trace of the virus.

Dr Verrall acknowledged many would still feel vulnerable.

“So it is on all of us to think well if we’re visiting an aged residential care home for example, that we do follow the recommended procedures there.

“Te Whatu Ora will continue to encourage people to wear masks when they go to hospital — they won’t be mandated.”

Covid cases accounted for just over 2 percent of hospital admissions, Dr Verrall said.

Last step on wind down
Prime Minister Chris Hipkins told RNZ Morning Report this was the last step in winding down covid-19 restrictions.

“We waited until after the winter peak period. The health system overall, while it’s been under pressure and it’s still under pressure, had a much better winter this winter than last winter.”

He said it was on the advice of the director-general of health and there was never a perfect time to make changes to health settings.

General Practice New Zealand chair Dr Bryan Betty said practices like mask wearing and self-isolation should be encouraged for all viruses, not just Covid.

He told Morning Report people needed to continue with the lessons that were learnt from covid but which were applicable to all viruses that were spread from person-to-person such as influenza and RSV.

“Voluntarily staying at home if you do have a flu or a cold so you don’t spread it, and I think masking in public areas of health facilities voluntarily is something we should still keep in play.”

Health providers should consider ensuring masks were worn in places where sick people gathered such as hospitals or GPs’ waiting areas, Dr Betty said.

Vaccination still important
Vaccination would still play an important part in reducing infection and re-infection, he said.

“We do that every year for influenza, we are potentially going forward going to be recommending that for covid, especially for vulnerable populations.”

Employers should be considering how to support workers so they do not come into work sick, he said.

Employers should give people with colds, the flu or Covid the opportunity to work from home if they can to avoid spreading the illness around the workplace, he said.

University of Otago epidemiologist Professor Michael Baker also urged people to stay home when they were sick with covid-19, even though all of the health restrictions had been lifted.

Professor Baker told Morning Report that covid had transitioned from a pandemic threat to an endemic infectious disease.

“Unfortunately that means it’s there the whole time, it is still in New Zealand among the infectious diseases, the leading cause of death and hospitalisation and we know that those infections and reinfections are going to add to that burden of long covid.”

Still vital to isolate
People must remember that it was still vital to isolate when they were sick and not go to work or school or socialise which spread the virus, he said.

People should also continue to wear masks in medical facilities and in poorly ventilated indoor spaces, he said.

New Zealand had come through its fourth wave of infection for the Omicron variant, he said.

“We are going to see new subvariants or lineage of the virus arrive, they will be better at escaping from our immunity, our immunity will wane of course unless you get boosted.”

The government needed to look at how to reinforce those behaviours that prevented covid from spreading now that the mandates had been removed, he said.

“I mean this could be running media campaigns or developing codes of practice say with employers, Business New Zealand, I mean this is a chance for them really to show leadership about how they’re going to support the workforce in New Zealand, self-isolating when they are sick.”

Hospitilisations and mortality rates showed that covid-19 continued to have an impact and watching those rates would indicate whether the mandates had been removed too early, he said.

Integrated approach needed
New Zealand needed to develop a coherent, integrated approach to dealing with all respiratory infections which were the infectious diseases that had the biggest impact, he said.

“They have a big drain on our health resources and so we do need to look at better surveillance for these infections that will tell us what’s happening and also really it’s just having a culture of limiting transmission of these infections.”

That meant staying home when sick and using masks in indoor environments with poor ventilation, he said.

Auckland Council disability strategic advisory group chair Dr Huhana Hickey said getting rid of masks at health care centres was extremely dangerous for immunocompromised people.

“The problem for immune-compromised people is we’re frequent flyers, but we’re being asked to go into a situation that puts us all at risk of not just dealing with what’s making us sick but risking getting covid, which could kill us.”

Hickey said scrapping the seven-day compulsory isolation period could result in more workers returning while still infectious, which she believed would mean immunocompromised people were likely to stay home.

“If they cannot stay home and employers require them to work, they’re going to spread covid as well, so that means I don’t go to restaurants now because I don’t know if the waiter’s sick, I don’t know if the chef’s sick.”

Minimal impact of numbers
University of Auckland mathematics professor and covid-19 modeller Michael Plank expected the lack of mask and isolation requirements to have a minimal impact on case numbers.

He said the main drivers of infection were people who were asymptomatic cases or had not tested yet.

“I’m not sure than an isolation mandate is going to have a particularly large effect on infection rates in the long term.

“If we look at other countries that removed isolation mandates, like Australia, there’s really no evidence of a surge in numbers.”

Restaurant owners embraced the government’s decision.

The Restaurant Association surveyed more than 200 of its members, and 84 percent said they supported the idea.

But many planned to introduce their own requirements, chief executive Marisa Bidois said.

“Thirty nine percent of the respondents said they intended to mandate a five day isolation period for their employees,” she said.

“So that’s something they’re going to implement themselves as an internal policy.”

Many hospitality workers would also be expected to test themselves proactively.

“We also had 42 percent of respondents planning to require employees with any symptoms to undergo testing before returning to work.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Analysis by Keith Rankin.

These three countries are very useful comparators because they have broadly similar demographics – especially population age structures – to each other. Further they have comparable living standards. The Republic of Ireland has a population the same size as New Zealand (and a similar climate); Australia has close to five times the population of each of the others.

Of the above charts, Ireland best shows the three main waves of mortality in the Covid19 Pandemic. [Note that I will capitalise the word ‘pandemic’ for a WHO-declared pandemic. Otherwise uncapitalised.] There are very clear covid mortality peaks in Ireland in April 2020, January 2021, and December 2022. Other than these peaks there are clear periods of elevated mortality, the second half of 2021 and most of 2022. 2023 also, from March.

Ireland’s population has been growing more slowly this century than Australia’s and New Zealand’s. Death tallies before the Pandemic years were not noticeably growing from 2015 to 2019; compare Australia below. There was an influenza pandemic from late 2016 to about April 2018; the high numbers of deaths in Ireland in January 2017 and December 2017 reflect this. (I have omitted 2016 and 2018 to avoid chart clutter. For Ireland, influenza pandemic deaths actually peaked in January 2018, and extended into March of that year.)

The most obvious difference in the New Zealand chart is the southern hemisphere seasons. The second most obvious difference in New Zealand is the lack of obvious Covid19 waves.

The scales of the two charts are fully comparable, because of the near-identical populations of each country. But a careful look will show that ‘normal’ – ie baseline – summer deaths in Ireland are lower than in New Zealand. Ireland’s population may have better baseline health than New Zealand’s. Or, New Zealand may have more deaths because it has a higher population of post-war ‘baby-boomers’ than Ireland; a population which is now starting to die in greater numbers.

The New Zealand data are worrying in other ways, however. While 2017 clearly shows the 2016-2018 influenza pandemic, with its July 2017 mortality peak, summer data for 2017 and 2019 don’t show large increases in deaths arising from population growth. The period from March to July 2019, in the absence of known epidemic illness, nevertheless looks like a protracted period of deaths triggered by early seasonal viruses. (Indeed, I recall from my former workplace that there were a lot of ‘bugs’ around for parts of 2019.)

If we regard the April to June periods in 2017 and 2019 as having elevated death tallies, then 2021 looks like a normal year in New Zealand, even allowing for population growth. Yet it wasn’t a normal year. It was the peak year of the Covid19 panic; the year of the most extreme public health mandates, with an effectively shut international border and with face-masking required in many settings. The big question is to ask why 2021 was not more like 2020. In the winter of 2021, New Zealand had no Covid19 to speak of, and no influenza.

Elevated death tallies reappeared in March 2022, continuing through to January 2023. While these were clearly linked to Covid19, there was no mortality peak anything like that which Ireland experienced in December that year. My guess is that the timing of mortality in New Zealand reflected the timing of booster vaccinations against Covid19, whereas Ireland was caught unawares that December.

A good check on these tentative conclusions for New Zealand is Australia. (The scale is five times higher, reflecting that Australia’s population is five times greater.) Australia shows most of the same features as New Zealand in the years before 2020, though in a muted way. Australia shows more consistently than New Zealand the impact of population growth before 2020 being reflected in more deaths each year than the previous year. We see that in the spring months (September to November) Australian deaths are generally lower than New Zealand’s; probably because winter lingers for longer in New Zealand.

Australia shows the same problem in 2021 as New Zealand; normal winter deaths despite highly abnormal circumstances. As in New Zealand, there almost certainly were ‘killer viruses’ in both countries that year. Deaths to some extent will have been people who would otherwise have died in 2020, but avoided viruses then because of the lockdowns and physical distancing. Also, weakened immunity arising from the lack of normal exposure to respiratory viruses in 2020 will have increased the chances of vulnerable people dying in 2021 after contracting such a cold virus. The 2021 mortality peaks were higher in New Zealand than in Australia.

Australia shows a classic Covid19 mortality peak in January 2022, before the ‘Omicron’ variant of Covid19 was discovered in New Zealand. Australia had covid exposure peaks in December 2021, much of that being the Delta variant, pre-Omicron. In the autumn and early winter of 2022, Australian mortality data show a shorter and lower ‘Omicron wave’ than New Zealand data.

All three countries continue to show elevated levels of mortality this year, though this is obscured in New Zealand by the problematic numbers of deaths in the autumns and early winters of 2017 and 2019. New Zealanders in the first four months of this year have had slightly more deaths (adjusting for population) than Australians. This may reflect New Zealand’s relatively more overstretched healthcare system, noting from having myself spent some time in Australia this year that Australians also see their healthcare system as overstretched.

*******

Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

The media sector in the Pacific should be supported with an enabling environment to report “without fear” in the face of ongoing challenges brought about since the covid-19 pandemic, according to a new study.

The paper, titled Pacific media freedom since the pandemic, is published in the latest edition of the Pacific Journalism Review.

As part of the research, the authors hosted an online panel discussion with senior Pacific journalists and news editors from Palau, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Fiji in December 2021 and held a follow-up discussion with those journalists in March 2023.

Researchers from the Australian National University and the University of the South Pacific said there was a need for “ongoing vigilance with regards to media freedom in the Pacific Island countries” post-pandemic.

ANU’s Dr Amanda Watson and USP’s Dr Shailendra Singh, who are the paper’s co-authors, said covid-19 exposed the difficulties faced by media organisations and journalists in the region.

“Covid-19 has been a stark reminder about the link between media freedom and the financial viability of media organisations”, they said, adding “especially in the Pacific, where the advertising markets are relatively small and profit margins correspondingly limited”.

They said media companies “faced challenges during the height of the pandemic due to revenue downturns”.

‘Strives for impartial reporting’
However, the industry “continues to strive to conduct impartial reporting, for the benefit of citizens and the societies in which they live,” they said.

“Media professionals and businesses face various challenges and thus it is important to support their work and ensure that they are able to operate without fear of violence or any other forms of reprisal,” the researchers concluded.

A media study from 2021 found that Pacific journalists were among the youngest, most inexperienced and least qualified in the world.

Dr Singh has told RNZ Pacific in the past that capacity building of local journalists must become a priority for mainstream media to improve its standards and Pacific governments must also play a key role in investing in the industry’s development.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A third New Zealand university is close to signing with Mumbai’s Bombay Stock Exchange Institute, opening up opportunities for Indian students to study in Aotearoa.

The Bombay Stock Exchange Institute is a subsidiary of Bombay Stock Exchange, which at 148 years old, is the oldest stock exchange in Asia.

Managing director and CEO of the Bombay Stock Exchange Institute Ambarish Datta said it was a privilege to partner with universities in New Zealand.

“New Zealand education is recognised worldwide, and students are offered a fantastic opportunity to learn in a great country,” he said.

The University of Canterbury signed a memorandum of understanding in late 2018, allowing students to study in New Zealand for two of its master’s programmes.

It allows students to start their course in India and then travel to New Zealand to graduate while still qualifying for a Post Study Work Visa.

University of Canterbury Business Taught Masters programme director Stephen Hickinson said the agreement was beneficial to universities because they get students in different levels of study.

Cheaper for students
“It is also cheaper for students because they spend the first half of their study in India.”

The University of Otago reached agreements with five Indian institutions in 2017.

International director Jason Cushen said staff were also looking to develop further partnerships across India, particularly in the southern region and in the state of Maharashtra.

He said these programmes offer more opportunities for international students that may not be accessible in their home country

RNZ understands that another New Zealand university is in the final stages of signing an agreement with the Bombay Stock Exchange Institute.

A spokesperson for the institute said they are currently finalising the curriculum and planning to start the programme by February next year.

Covid-19 impact
According to a recent Education New Zealand study, international students contributed $3.7 billion to New Zealand’s economy in 2019, with a sizeable portion going to universities.

But the pandemic changed everything.

“We started the course in 2019 and then covid hit, so we have only had a few students so far,” Hickinson said.

“At the moment, it’s a little unknown how things will turn out.”

Education Minister Jan Tinetti and Finance Minister Grant Robertson recently announced extra funding for struggling universities and tertiary institutions.

An additional $128 million will be invested to increase tuition subsidies at degree-level and above by a further 4 percent in 2024 and 2025. This is in addition to the 5 percent funding increase that was included in the 2023 Budget, which the government described as the most significant funding increase in 20 years.

“The government has heard the concerns of the sector,” Tinetti said.

“When we began our Budget process, universities and other degree providers were forecasting enrolment increases. The opposite has occurred, and it is clear that there is a need for additional support.”

A new approach
However, Quality NZ Education chief executive Sandeep Sharma believed the pandemic offered a fresh perspective.

The organisation was formed during covid-19 and played a major role in creating the pathway programmes that connect Indian students with New Zealand universities.

“The pandemic was a good time for us because all our shareholders were in New Zealand, and they found that the pandemic [changed] a lot of things in the education industry, especially the traditional way of recruiting students,” he said.

He mentioned that there was considerable interest among Kiwis to go to India to learn about “wellbeing, Ayurveda and yoga”.

Sharma believed that it was time for universities to introduce programmes that were not dependent on border control.

He also highlighted the importance of Indian contributions to New Zealand’s education sector in the coming years.

“India is going to be the largest pool of international students, overtaking China by 2027,” Sharma said.

“It’s vital to have these pathway programmes and I think New Zealand should capitalise on these opportunities.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The Pandemic can be assessed a bit like games of football, with deaths being the score. (Or, given that there are many ‘teams’ competing together, a better analogy may be a Marathon race. Nevertheless, I will use the language of the football metaphor.)

The winning country would be that with the fewest number of deaths attributable to Covid19. While this football metaphor is indeed useful, our perceptions of ‘who did best’ are strongly coloured by the pandemic’s first year, when media attention was greatest, when public health measures were most ‘in our faces’, and when the pandemic response was at its most bureaucratic.

As a result, the half-time scores are the scores that most seeped into public consciousness. Then, deaths which were classed as ‘covid-deaths’ were implicitly seen as more tragic, more requiring of daily tallying, than other deaths.

The two Tables below look at this Pandemic ‘World Cup’ through the simple demographic criteria of increases in deaths, all deaths. We may note four ‘ordinary-time’ phases of the pandemic. Together, they add up to a period of four years.

First, the warm-up, from May 2019 to February 2020. The warm-up, going back to 2019, is important to include because countries with unusually low numbers of deaths due to respiratory illnesses in 2019 would typically have higher death tallies in the next respiratory epidemic, whatever virus that might be.

Second is the first half of the Pandemic proper, which I would date as March 2020 to March 2021. Third is the second half, from April 2021 to April 2022, which includes the waves associated with the Greek-alphabet variants (especially Alpha, Delta and Omicron).

Following ‘ordinary-time’, there was ‘extra-time’ which I define as May 2022 to April 2023. We may note that the WHO declared the Pandemic to be over at around the end of April this year. So, we may formally categorise the period from May 2023 as ‘post-pandemic’.

Table 1 below indicates the score at the end of ordinary-time. It shows the percentage increase in deaths for a number of countries for the three years from May 2019 to April 2022, compared to the three years from May 2015 to April 2018. In the right-hand column is a counterfactual which is a best estimate of what the increase in deaths would have been in the pandemic period had there been no pandemic. (The counterfactual is calculated by comparing deaths in the 24 months ending April 2019 with deaths in the 24 months ending April 2017. I have used April years because, in both hemispheres, the period in late April and early May is generally free from epidemic respiratory deaths. This method minimises the impact to this calculation of the severe influenza global epidemic which lasted from late 2016 to early 2018.)

Table 2 indicates the ‘extra-time score’, comparing the year-to-April 2023 with the year-to-April 2019. It uses the same ‘trend’ counterfactual as Table 1. Whereas Table 1 is sorted to place the ordinary-time ‘winners’ at the top, Table 2 is sorted to place the ‘extra-time losers’ at the top. (We note that, for Table 2, some countries are laggards in publishing their mortality data; and also that the most recently published numbers are subject to upwards revision. The countries which are problematic in this regard have their data marked with asterisks, the number of asterisks indicating the degree of estimation required.)

In the pandemic proper, the two countries with easily the least increases in deaths were Norway and Sweden. The others in the ‘Top Eight’ (the ‘quarterfinalists’, to use the football metaphor) were the other Nordic countries, Australia and New Zealand, and Taiwan.

Based on the media coverage in New Zealand and the world news channels that New Zealanders mainly follow, the only surprise in that Top Eight would be Sweden, which pursued a very different policy response, especially in the ‘first-half’ of the Pandemic. In the 2020 New Zealand election campaign, political parties generally agreed that Taiwan was the exemplar for other countries to follow.

We may note that only New Zealand and Taiwan had counterfactuals showing higher projected increases in deaths than what actually happened. Thus, these two may be declared the ‘ordinary-time’ winners. The problem is that the Pandemic World Cup had ‘extra-time’. (It must also be noted, however, when we take the ‘non-death costs’ of the pandemic and its associated health policies, Sweden’s non-death costs were easily the lowest. So, on this basis, it could be argued that Sweden was the true ordinary-time winner, despite having been way behind at ‘half-time’.)

Extra-Time

When we look at Table 2 we see clearly that the East Asian countries performed very poorly. Most of these were deemed to be success stories in ordinary time. Taiwan is very prominent here. So is South Korea which has a conservative estimate in this table for its ‘extra-time’ increase in deaths. Macao is very important here, because it is the best proxy we have for China. Taiwan has had a recent resurgence in deaths in May 2023, and Macao has had a resurgence of Covid19 cases in recent weeks. So, these countries’ pandemic problems are far from over. (There are also signs that New Zealand’s seasonal death tally is picking up early this year.) The Macao situation, combined with other reports that all is not well in China right now, suggest that China may be presently going through a significant third wave of Covid19. This will add to global supply-chain problems.

New Zealand and Australia are in the top (ie worst) half of Table 2. So are two of the Nordic countries, Iceland and Finland, the Nordic countries which imposed more restrictive health mandates than their neighbours. So is Ireland near the worst, more restrictive in its public health mandates than the United Kingdom countries. Norway, top of Table 1, is in the middle of the Table 2 pack. Of the Nordic countries, only Sweden – easily the least restrictive in Europe, especially in the first-half of the Pandemic – performed well.

Quirky Counterfactuals

Creating consistent counterfactuals for each country is difficult because there are quirky demographics at play. First, we note that there are three main reasons why death increases might trend high for a given country. The first is a general increase in the population of a country: more people, more deaths. Second is the aging of a country, represented by increases in the median age of living persons. Third is a deterioration of general health, especially of those middle-age cohorts whose deaths ‘come under the radar’, given that deaths are dominated in most countries by people aged over 75.

It is likely that the high counterfactual for New Zealand is due to a mix of these. We know that New Zealand has some of the same issues of underclass deprivation as the United States, which include obesity, diabetes, and substance abuse. And we know that the United States has a lower life expectancy than other ‘western’ countries; a life expectancy now known to be falling.

The other two main quirks to look out for are birth rates in the troubled second quarter of the twentieth century. The Great Depression and World War Two were the main events that impacted on birth rates. There was also warfare in the 1950s in Korea and Malaysia. Sweden is an interesting case, comparable with Switzerland, neutral in World War Two, so having a lesser demographic impact from the War. Also, Sweden came out of the Great Depression early, meaning it will have had comparatively high birth numbers in the 1930s; Sweden’s peak deaths since 2015 will have been higher than otherwise, on that account.

While New Zealand is possibly the western country with the fastest population growth this century, this is offset by the fact that low birth numbers in the 1930s are translating to lower deaths since 2015. (See my recent ‘Smithometer’ analysis, in Granny Smith.) Aging and population growth are not the whole story of New Zealand’s upper quartile trend of increasing deaths. (Unlike, say Portugal, which is known to attract retirees in Europe as Florida does in the United States.)

New Zealand also has the additional factor of having, in June and July 2022, too many vulnerable people who were denied, for unexplained political reasons, a timely second booster Covid19 vaccination. The July 2002 mortality peak, almost entirely experienced by older European-ethnic New Zealanders – the Granny Smiths – came to a prompt end once these people became eligible for second-boosters. This sharp July peak – and drop-off – appears to have been a New Zealand specific phenomenon.

High counterfactual notwithstanding, New Zealand performed very poorly in extra-time, though not as badly as the East Asian countries which imposed the most ‘sterile’ public health policies on their people.

East Europe

I would like to note two other groups of countries. First, it was Eastern Europe which had the highest reported per-capita Covid19 death tolls. These countries do not look as bad in this analysis, though they (except the Baltic states) still look bad in Table 1, especially in light of their often negative counterfactual death trends. The main demographic problem that these countries have been facing is emigration of working-age adults, especially those Eastern European countries in the European Union. Generally, these countries look much better in Table 2, in extra-time.

Most of these countries successfully imposed severe public health restrictions in the first half of 2020, but abandoned those restrictions – or were unable to easily reimpose them – in the later stages of ‘the game’. The result was that these countries’ populations had substantially compromised immunity going into the winter of 2020/21. Their death peaks were much higher than the death peaks in the west earlier in 2020. The second problem was that, on account of their departed youth, their populations were aging as well as falling. Hence the high Covid19 per capita death tolls that savage winter.

In ‘extra time’, East Europe has ‘performed’ best. This would appear to be in part because so many of their most vulnerable people had already died; respiratory viruses had lost much of their human ‘fuel’. Also, these countries had re-established (the hard way) high levels of natural immunity to respiratory illnesses.

Russia continues to supply mortality data, though it excludes deaths in the Ukraine conflict zone; so its not included in the tables. And Ukraine has certainly stopped supplying data, due to governmental priorities as well as a lack of will to publicise its present demographic plight. Kazakhstan is probably the best proxy for assessing the impact of the Pandemic in Russia.

South America

These countries (plus Mexico) are among the worst performers in both Tables. Typically, they exhibit many of the ‘underclass’ socio-economic problems apparent in the United States, United Kingdom, and New Zealand: inequality, poverty, homelessness, obesity, crime, violence. It is likely that they will see ongoing increases in annual mortality on account of these factors; factors exacerbated by both the Pandemic and its associated mandates.

While Latin American populations are much younger than Eastern European populations – due to both higher births and less emigration – there will also have been a significant growth of numbers of people of peak-dying-age (over 75) contributing to ‘trend’ counterfactuals in some cases as high as New Zealand’s.

Another factor in these American countries is the high proportions of people living in or near the tropics at high altitudes. Under normal circumstances, these are unusually healthy environments, in which seasonal respiratory illnesses do not circulate as much as in temperate climes. But, it makes people living in these zones more vulnerable to pandemic respiratory illnesses when they do happen. It’s an old story that goes back to the time of Spanish colonisation in the sixteenth century.

This last factor is only apparent here in Colombia and Ecuador. Other similarly affected countries – Peru and Bolivia – had very high early death tolls, but (presumably due to political crises) have not released ‘extra-time’ data. Venezuela was even less forthcoming with useful data.

Africa including Qatar

Mortality statistics from Africa are rare. Egypt is now the best, and it certainly suffered. South Africa, which in ‘ordinary-time’ had a similar experience to that of East Europe, used to supply good quality data; but no more as its present economic crisis deepens. Signs are that the African continent was less impacted directly by Covid19 than other regions, though its more fragile economic supply-chains have become victims of the Pandemic’s ‘extra-time’ environment.

Qatar is an interesting case, because of its unusual demographics. Qatar’s resident population is heavily weighted towards the younger working-age population. So, while its death rates per capita have been very low, its percentage increases in deaths have not been low. We do need a good comparative analysis of the health impact of Covid19 on working-age populations, though made difficult by demographic data today still focusing on sex and ethnicity rather than age or occupation or labour force status.

South Asia

After China, the biggest Pandemic uncertainties relate to South Asia, with Inda being the largest country. We may also add the very populous country that is Indonesia. This region is a demographic black hole, which experiences high levels of emigration as well as of death. (We may note here – see Hundreds of Pakistanis dead in Mediterranean migrant boat disaster, CNN 19 June 2023 – that the majority of victims of the overcrowded refugee boat which sank last week off the coast of Greece were from Pakistan.) This region has suffered a huge upheaval since 2020, with the Pandemic a significant contributing factor.

Conclusion

There remains a lack of competent demographic analysis of recent and former pandemics, partly due to poor (sometimes politically-motivated) record-keeping, and partly due to the low status of demography among the social sciences. Analyses like mine here – amateur in the sense of being unpaid, but not in the sense of quality – help to fill the gap.

The most striking conclusion is that the ‘extra-time’ of the Pandemic gives a very different picture of the Pandemic’s human cost. The imposition by governments of sterile environments for long periods is not a recipe for good health outcomes, although it may give good headlines in the early phases of a pandemic when the Press is at its most attentive.

*******

Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.