New Zealand’s Green Party says it will double the Best Start payment from $69 a week to $140 — and it will also make it available for all children under three years.

Greens co-leader Marama Davidson announced the policy today, saying it is part of a “fully costed plan” paid for with a fair tax system.

“One in 10 children are growing up in poverty. For Māori, it is one in five. How is it possible that in a wealthy country like ours, there are thousands of children without enough to eat, a good bed, warm clothes, and decent shoes?,” she asked.

“That is why the Green Party would ensure all families have what they need for these early years, by doubling Best Start from $69 a week, to $140, and make it universal for all children under three years.”

Currently, families can receive the $69 weekly Best Start payment until their baby turns one, no matter the income.

However, they do not get that payment while they are receiving the paid parental leave payment. After the first year, only families earning under $96,295 are eligible to receive the payment until their child turns three.

The doubling of the Best Start payment is part of the Green Party’s Income Guarantee plan.

“This universal payment for the first three years recognises that just like in our older years through superannuation, the very first years of a new baby’s life are a time when every family needs extra support,” Davidson said.

Fairer Working for Families
“Under this plan we’ll also reform Working for Families into a simpler, fairer system.

“This will provide a payment of up to $215 every week for the first child, and $135 a week for every other child, in addition to the Best Start payments.

“With the Green Party in government, we can take action to guarantee every whānau has enough to get by no matter what.

“There is no reason for any child in Aotearoa to go hungry or to live in a damp, cold house. Poverty is a political choice.

“Our plan will provide lasting solutions that will guarantee everyone has what they need to live a good life and cover the essentials — even when times are tough.”

Since 2021, the Labour government has increased the Best Start payment from $60 to $69 a week.

• Monday night’s Newshub-Reid Research poll gave the Greens a boost, rising to 14.2 percent, as the Labour Party dipped slightly to 26.5 percent.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Last year Joelle Holland invested all of the money she had saved for a home deposit and put it into a baby product business called Hawaiiki Pēpi.

The sole focus of Hawaiiki Pēpi is to teach Māori children to be proud of their culture and language.

Hawaiiki Pēpi has already reached more than $100,000 in sales, but most importantly for its owner, it has delivered on its promise to encourage and normalise all things Māori.

“I don’t have any experience in business at all. But what I do have is a passion for my culture and the revitalisation of our language,” she says.

“This venture was a way for me to express that and show people how beautiful Māori can be.”

Holland (Tainui, Tūhoe, Ngāti Whātua) came up with the idea after giving birth to her children Ivy-āio, three, and Ryda Hawaiiki, one.

The online business that Holland manages and runs from her home, creates Māori-designed products such as blankets for babies.

Proud to be Māori
“When my eldest child was in my puku, I was trying to find baby products that showed that we were proud to be Māori. There weren’t any at the time. That’s how the idea of Hawaiiki Pēpi came about,” she says.

With the support of her partner Tayllis, Holland decided to take a risk and enter the competitive baby industry.

To prepare for her very first start up, Holland took business courses, conducted her own research and did 18 months of development before launching Hawaiiki Pēpi at the end of last year.

“The aim is to enhance identity, te reo Māori and whakapapa. We are hoping to wrap our pēpi in their culture from birth so they can gain a sense of who they are, creating strong, confident and unapologetically proud Māori.”

Holland grew up in Auckland and went to kohanga reo and kura kaupapa before spending her high school years boarding at St Joseph’s Māori Girls College in Napier.

She says that language is the key connection to one’s culture. It was through learning te reo Māori from birth that instilled in her a strong sense of cultural identity. It has motivated her in all of the important life decisions that she has made.

‘Struggled through teenage years’
“I struggled throughout my teenage years. I was trying to find my purpose. I was searching for who I was, where I came from and where I belonged.

“I realised that the strong connection I had to my tupuna and my people was through the language. Everything has reverted back to te reo Māori and it has always been an anchor in my life.”

Holland went to Masey University to qualify to teach Māori in schools, juggling study, with taking care of two children under three, and starting a new business.

This year, she completed her degree in the Bachelor of Teaching and Learning Kura Kaupapa Māori programme. The qualification has allowed Holland to add another powerful tool in her life that nurtures Māoritanga in the younger generation and contributes to the revitalisation of te reo Māori.

“I loved my studies. Every aspect of the degree was immersed in te reo Māori, from our essays, presentations to our speeches. Although I grew up speaking Māori, I realised there is still so much more to learn,” she says.

For now, Holland will be focusing on growing her business and raising her children before embarking on a career as a teacher.

“My end goal is to encourage all tamariki to be proud of their Māoritanga, encourage them to speak their language and stand tall.”

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Tens of thousands of ni-Vanuatu children could be experiencing “stress and trauma” after the double cyclones that tore through the island nation last week, say educators.

With widespread damages to infrastructure, many children have lost their homes, had their schools damaged, and neighbourhoods hit hard by tropical cyclones Judy and Kevin.

Port Vila International School teacher Cassidy Jackson-Caroll told RNZ Pacific it was important to prioritise school-aged children’s wellbeing during these times.

Jackson-Caroll said that requires all stakeholders to move quickly and restore a sense of normalcy and enable children to return to school.

“It is quite important [for schools to open],” she said, while noting the large-scale devastation caused by the twin cyclones.

“One thing I thought is the kids want to see their friends. They have spent a lot of time time at home tucked up with their families, which is very important [during cyclones]. But they also need a little relief to see that their friends are okay.”

She said no electricity and no running water is an issue across the country which means schools remain affected.

But she is hoping the situation will improve by next week and those children who can return to school will be able do so.

“I think it is important even if it is half days or two or three days a week for some kids that is enough because some are going to be traumatiSed,” she said, adding Port Vila International School will have a “soft opening” on Wednesday.

“Sometimes they might just need to see their friends and go and play some soccer or just have a hug. They just need to laugh away from the anxiety and stress and trauma that they might have at home,” she added.

Schools, health centres ‘damaged’
UNICEF estimates up to 58,000 children have been impacted and those in the worst affected provinces of Tafea and Shefa needing urgent assistance.

The UN agency’s Pacific representative Jonathan Veitch said “with power still out in many places, and boats and planes grounded or damaged, we still don’t have enough information on the impact of children in the outer islands of Tafea.”

“We know that schools and health centres have been damaged throughout the country.”

“UNICEF Pacific, in partnership with the government, has begun to support the children and families most affected,” he added.

Preliminary reports indicate that almost the entire population has been affected.

World Vision Vanuatu country director Kendra Derouseau said they are expecting similar destruction to Tafea province that occured following Cyclone Pam in 2015.

“We know that most homes will be partly or completely destroyed,” Derouseau said.

Food sources scarce
“The vast majority of the population in Tafea are subsistence agricultural farmers so food sources will be scarce and water sources will be contaminated.”

She confirmed that there were about 2000 people still in evacuation centres on Efate.

“People tend to sleep in the evacuation centres, leave vulnerable individuals and a carer in the centres during the day, and then go back to their homes to try and build and repair and then come back to sleep at night.”

But Derouseau said the number of people in evacuation centres were decreasing as people felt safe to go back to their home.

Meanwhile, New Zealand has sent relief supplies including water containers, kits for temporary shelters, and family hygiene kits and an initial financial contribution of NZ$150,000.

Foreign Affairs Minister Nanaia Mahuta said the government was working closely with Vanuatu to support this response, together with France and Australia.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says New Zealand will move to the red traffic light setting if omicron is spreading in the community following reports that a border worker who was yesterday reported as covid-19 positive has been confirmed to have the omicron variant.

On Tonga, Defence Minister Peeni Henare says he understands power has been restored in large parts of Nuku’alofa following Saturday’s eruption of Hunga Tonga-Hunga Haʻapai volcano.

The government leaders were speaking at today’s media briefing.

More than 120,000 doses of the children’s Pfizer vaccine for covid-19 are ready to go at clinics around the country.

Tamariki aged five to 11 are eligible for the first of two recommended doses, eight weeks apart.

Ardern said it was pleasing to see people had been lining up today to be the first through the door at vaccination centres, and lines have been clearing quickly.

Henare, who is also Whānau Ora and Associate Health Minister, said the government had been working closely with iwi leaders to ensure tamariki could receive the vaccine, and was looking towards the schools for when they reopened.

Another milestone day
Today was another milestone day in the vaccination campaign in New Zealand, Ardern said.

New Zealanders have been able to get boosters since early January and online bookings open from today.

“For children of course they are able to be booked in now via Book My Vaccine … we’ve heard that whānau are coming in to get both their booster and to bring their children in to be vaccinated as well.”

Today Ardern received her booster dose of the covid-19 vaccination.

She says it was possible 80 percent of the country’s population could be boosted by the end of February.

She thanked all those putting in mahi so far, to get the booster roll-out well underway.

Over half of eligible New Zealanders have had their booster, she says.

66,000 make bookings
“The traffic on the website today has been good, she says, with over 66,000 people having made a booking by midday compared to about 12,000 on other recent days.

Aotearoa’s first community case of the omicron variant of covid-19 was announced yesterday. The person is a border worker in Auckland and has 50 close contacts.

The worker, who was infectious from January 10, took two bus services in Auckland and visited a supermarket and four other stores in the city.

Ardern said when it comes to omicron in the community it is a matter of when, not if.

“New Zealanders have had the break that we hoped they would get but we know that with omicron it is a case of when, not if, and that is why the booster campaign is just so critical.”

The government would look to move into the red traffic light setting if Omicron was spreading in the community, Ardern says.

“What I expect is over the coming weeks to be able to share with you some of the additional preparation that has been done over and above the work that we did on delta, for the specific issue of omicron and what it represents.

“We have the ability to learn from other nations and see the impact or the way that omicron is behaving and prepare ourselves.”

Changes in testing, isiolation
“This will mean changes including to the way testing, isolation and contact tracing is done, and the details will be shared in the coming weeks.

“We’ve managed to get delta down to extraordinarily low levels, that means the risk posed by opening that border, now is very low. We are in the right place now to remove those requirements.”

Ardern said the traffic light system was designed to deal with surges, outbreaks and had the possibility of new variants in mind. She said the measures under the red setting were designed to slow the spread of a variant like omicron.

Another update on traffic light settings would be given on Thursday, she said.

Vaccination passes do not currently have the booster set within them. Ardern said the option to include that in future is being retained, but getting a booster remained the best way to protect against omicron.

“We’re doing what we can but I think it would be wrong to assume those border measures will be sufficient. At some point we will see omicron in the community … we should always assume at any time.”

Eruption crisis in Tonga
Defence Minister Peeni Henare said he understood power had been restored in large parts of the Tongan capital Nuku’alofa.

Ardern said the RNZAF Orion had been undertaking an assessment from the air of the outer islands in particular to provide that information to the Tongan authorities.

The C-130 would perform naval drops, with planning being done to enable that regardless of the status of the airport.

“I understand that on the ground of course that Tonga has also now by sea dispatched to the outer islands.”

She says the C-130 was expected to fly today regardless, and would be able to meet immediate supply needs.

Henare said it is being ensured that the C-130 had the necessities on board. He said the aerial assessment being done would help with that.

The response must be directed to where it was needed the most, he said.

Navy able to deploy quickly
Ardern said the navy was able to deploy very quickly.

She said communication had been difficult but the flight today along with communication with officials on the ground would help establish the needs of those in Tonga, but they knew water was needed.

She cautioned that while there had been reports that some islands had seen no casualties, it was still early days.

It is thought the connectivity problems with the underwater cable stemmed from power outages, she said.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Two children have died and at least six staff of Papua New Guinea’s National Broadcasting Corporation lost their property worth thousands of kina in a blaze in Boroko.

The fire yesterday gutted two units of a four-unit property of the public broadcaster in Tanatana Street, impacting on eight families who occupied the building.

Staff and families who reside in the NBC compound said the fire started from one of the rooms on the ground level.

Investigations have started into how the fire began.

The fire started at about 2pm yesterday with two small children trapped inside.

Firefighters tried hard to put out the fire and save the children.

NBC staff who live there have blamed the management for negligence over the rundown building.

The father of the dead children is a senior archivist with the PNG’s oldest radio station.

The children were with a female tenant in a neighbouring room at the time of the fire while the mother was doing laundry.

Firefighters from Boroko Fire Station rushed to the scene after seeing thick smoke from a distance and hastily put out the flames with assistance from tenants.

The mother of the dead children wept while the father, who had been at work, rushed home to search for the toddlers alongside firefighters, police and ambulance officers on site.

The bodies were taken to the Port Moresby General Hospital morgue.

The dead children were of mixed parentage from West Papua and Mailu in Central province.

Lina Keapu is a PNG Bulletin reporter.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

More than 2000 people took part in Auckland today in a demonstration for justice for Palestine and against “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing”.

While speakers welcomed the ceasefire on Thursday night in the Israeli attack on Gaza after 11 days of bombardment, they lamented the lack of progress in addressing the “root causes” of the conflict.

The protesters marched to the US consulate in Auckland and condemned uncritical US policy in support of Israel.

This is the second weekend in a row when protests in support of Palestinian statehood and self-determination have been held across Aotearoa New Zealand.

Palestinian community organisers set-up a pavement vigil for the 70 Palestinian children killed in the continuous barrage of Israeli jets and missiles.

At least 243 Palestinians were killed by the Israeli bombardment, including more than 100 women and children. The Gaza Health Ministry also said more than 1800 Palestinians had been wounded.

Twelve Israelis, including two children, were killed by Palestinian rockets, the country’s medical service said.

The United Nations estimated that at least 94 buildings in Gaza had been destroyed by the Israeli military, comprising 461 housing and commercial units.

Photographs/video: David Robie/Asia Pacific Report

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The fear that has led for years to silence dozens of children, allegedly victims of sexual abuse by a former priest who begins trial today in Timor-Leste’s western enclave, still shrouds the case.

Witnesses, victims and others who knew about the abuse – including people involved in the process – prefer not to speak, pointing in some cases to the feeling of deference to the figure of the accused American Richard Daschbach, 84.

Even after being expelled from the priesthood and officially condemned by the Vatican, Daschbach continues to be venerated by many who call him “master” and who minimise or ignore the crimes he is accused of.

Instead, they highlight his humanitarian action and even the support he gave during the Indonesian occupation, in some cases, mixing truths with myths.

When he recently turned 84, for example, some of his supporters posted a photo of him in traditional Timorese clothing on Facebook.

The publication had hundreds of congratulatory votes and even a “tag” on the page of one of its alleged victims.

Even if the rumours circulated, the matter was rarely more than half conversations or references in secret, a situation that would have continued if one of the victims had not brought her abuse report to the congregation.

Punished by the Vatican
Richard Daschbach, detained in 2019, who has already been punished by the Vatican, is accused of abusing at least two dozen children at the orphanage where he worked, Topu Honis, located in Oecusse.

The prosecutor also charges Daschbach with the crimes of child pornography and domestic violence.

Unprecedented in Timor-Leste, as it involved a former church member, the case has sparked controversy and intense debate.

Current and past sources in the Timorese judicial sector, heard by Lusa, highlight the importance of the process, admitting that the outcome, whatever it may be, can have a significant impact, silencing or giving confidence to other victims.

Part of the debates focuses on the public perception that Daschbach has had support from some individuals in Timor-Leste, namely two former Presidents of the Republic, Xanana Gusmão and Taur Matan Ruak, the latter current prime minister.

Judicial sources indicated to Lusa that Xanana Gusmão was even listed as a defence witness, among a range of people, most of whom were linked to the orphanage where the crimes were committed.

In 2018, for example, after confessing his crimes to the congregation – the Vatican was beginning the process that would end in his expulsion from the priesthood -, Daschbach was visited by Taur Matan Ruak and his wife, Isabel Ferreira, at headquarters SVD in Dili.

Ex-priest’s return to Oecusse
A visit in which, explained Yohanes Suban Gapun, SVD regional supervisor, Taur Matan Ruak had asked them to let the ex-priest return to Oecusse.

“Mr Taur Matan Ruak and his wife came to visit us and spoke to Daschbach. I was also asked if I would please let him return to Oecusse because many people like him there and still respect him a lot. Please let him go to Oecusse too because he is old and let him die there in peace,” he said.

Asked by Lusa in 2019 about the reason for this visit, Taur Matan Ruak said he did it out of respect.

“I had no intention of passing the priest an immunity card. Just as a human being, out of respect, we visited to find out what was going on and to express our concern about the issues,” he said.

Even more evident has been the support given by former President Xanana Gusmão, which began to be publicly noticed in October last year when Juu’s, which represents the victims, introduced a precautionary measure against the Archdiocese of Dili, to stop the publication of a controversial report on the case prepared by the then head of the Justice and Peace Commission.

Xanana Gusmão, who was outside the Dili Court with an organised demonstration in support of the diocese, was listed as a witness because a copy of the report had been given to him and because he later sent a copy to Juu’s.

In his testimony, the Timorese leader ended up deviating several times from the audience’s purpose, questioning the fact that there were accusations against the former priest only recently, despite the fact that he had been in Timor-Leste for a long time.

Justice ‘has to be fair’
“There has to be justice, but justice has to be fair, obey procedures, criteria that dignify justice itself. I realised that there was something in this case that was not in accordance with the rules of investigation”, he told Lusa at the time.

More controversial was the recent visit that Xanana Gusmão made to the house in Dili where Daschbach was under house arrest, at the time of the defendant’s birthday, and about which he informed some East Timorese press, later distributing a statement that was practically published in full in several newspapers .

The visit led the ex-president’s three children to write letters to the alleged victims, regretting that their father visited Daschbach.

The news coverage of this visit drew criticism from the president of the Timorese Press Council, Virgílio Guterres, who considered that the news in the national press tried to “whiten” the former American priest.

Xanana Gusmão has so far not reacted to the controversy, but on Thursday he traveled with an entourage to accompany Daschbach on the ferry that took him from Dili to Oecusse.

Mateus Assunção Mendes, chief superintendent and commander of the National Police of Timor-Leste (PNTL), confirmed to Lusa that Xanana Gusmão, Daschbach and the rest of the delegation are staying at the same hotel in Pante Macassar, capital of the enclave.

“Yes, they are in the same place,” he confirmed.

Lusa tried several times to talk to Xanana Gusmão, without success.

Little Timorese media attention
Another factor that has conditioned the environment around the case has been the reduced attention of almost all Timorese media, which, in some situations, has even been accused by the Press Council of trying to “whiten” Daschbach.

Exceptions are the publication Tempo Timor, the first to report the case of the former priest and who has already presented testimonies of victims and details of the case, and Néon Metin, which has also written about the case, including recently publishing testimonies of victims.

José Belo, the journalist for Tempo Timor who, with journalist Tjistske Lingsma, first reported the case, tells Lusa that it has been difficult to convince people to talk about the case.

“It is very difficult to convince people to speak. When planning interviews, everyone prefers to remain silent. Some people look at this man as a god,” he told Lusa.

The trial, which takes place behind closed doors, begins today at the Oecusse Court in Pante Macassar.

PNTL plans to install a security perimeter around the building.

This article has been translated by an Asia Pacific Report correspondent and is published with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

How determined are Labour to take the necessary steps to fix inequality and poverty? Will electoral calculations triumph over their principles and stated ambitions?

These are some of the questions being asked on the political left, as Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s government looks determined to stand by while social problems continue to get worse under their watch.

During their last term in government, Ardern and colleagues failed to be transformational on their key promise of fixing inequality and poverty. And now they are choosing policies that massively increase inequality, while ignoring the plight of those at the bottom.

That’s why this week more than 60 charities and NGOs made an open plea to the government to increase welfare benefits before Christmas.

Despite the extraordinary conditions at the moment, Ardern response was a firm “no”. Poverty advocates say Labour should be “ashamed”, with many suggesting that the prime minister’s own advocacy of kindness and compassion is directly contradicted by her actual decisions.

Writing in The New Zealand Herald today, Matthew Hooton argues that the poverty advocates “have a point” in their dissatisfaction, as “Ardern’s response to these issues is unsatisfactory”. He argues that this week’s rejection of benefit increases “has prompted the first mini-rebellion on her left”.

Hooton is particularly dismissive of Ardern’s plea for more time to consider benefit levels: “she says more ‘work’ is needed but it is not clear what ‘work’ is required to make a basic decision on benefit levels.

Why is more ‘work’ needed?
Ruth Richardson, after all, took just 53 days after the October 27 1990 election to announce her benefit cuts. It is not obvious why any more “work” is needed to make the opposite decision.

In any case, the “work” was presumably already done in Ardern’s now eight and a half years in the children’s portfolio and by her [Welfare Expert Advisory Group].”

So should the left be rebelling? And is Labour putting hanging on to power above tackling poverty? Hooton seems to believe so: “The Prime Minister just emotes her usual concern.

“This is not economically or socially sustainable — and surely not politically sustainable either. There must come a time when Ardern’s own political base demands something more on such issues than her frowny-concerned face.

“It will be another 100 years before Labour again wins a mandate like the one Ardern secured last month. If she won’t act now on the issues she says concern her, left-wing activists will be entitled to ask whether hungry children and young couples struggling to buy a house really mean anything to her beyond being useful walk-on parts during election campaigns.”

Similarly, writing in the National Business Review yesterday, Brent Edwards says the debate “is a pointed rejoinder to Ardern from those who do not believe she is as committed to reducing child poverty as her rhetoric suggests”, and he argues that the decision to keep benefits down is unsurprising, given that Ardern’s decisions are guided by electoral considerations.

Brent Edwards contrasts the benefit decision with the first policy announcement of the Finance Minister: “Grant Robertson announced the Cabinet had decided to extend the small business cashflow loan scheme, which was due to end next month, for another three years and extend the interest-free period from one to two years.

Wooing the business community
“It is also looking at other changes to make the scheme more accessible for small businesses. It was the new government’s first decision of this term and is part of its attempt to woo the business community.”

So, just how long will beneficiaries and others in poverty have to wait until Labour delivers? Today’s Stuff newspaper editorial asks: “It takes more than one term to solve it, but will it take more than two?”

The editorial says Ardern is risking damage to her own brand by talking about kindness but doing the opposite: “Poverty advocates are used to hearing governments say one thing about poverty, especially the emotionally powerful issue of child poverty, but do another.”

They also ask: “What is the political cost of kindness? Or conversely, what is the political cost of doing nothing?”

Poverty advocates are understandably upset by Ardern’s rejection of action on poverty, and some are starting to speak out strongly against her and the government. Auckland Action Against Poverty’s coordinator Brooke Stanley Pao has said that Ardern is “choosing to keep people and families in poverty”.

According to this article, Pao “challenged the prime minister and other politicians to try and live on the current benefit for a month and ‘see how they find themselves’.”

Brooke Stanley Pao also wrote about this just prior to the election, saying, “You can’t eat kindness“. Responding to Ardern’s mantra, she says “We want more than kindness. We want the political bravery necessary to lift people out of poverty. Anything else is lip service.”

Leftwing bloggers losing faith
Other leftwing bloggers are losing their faith that Labour and Ardern really believe in progressive politics. For example, No Right Turn says: “The message is clear: their ‘kindness’ extends only to rich people, who will be exempted from paying their fair share of the costs of the pandemic (or society in general).

“As for poor kids, they can keep on starving. Which once again invites the question: what is Labour for, exactly, if they’re not going to ever deliver anything?”

The Child Poverty Action Group reports “the dismayed, disappointed and, in some cases, furious response to its dismissal” of benefit increases by Ardern and asks of the Government, “What, exactly, are they waiting for?”

She argues that increased payments would have an immediate impact on alleviating poverty.

McAllister also draws attention to the Government making decisions in the Covid environment that are likely to worsen inequality while ignoring the needs of those at the bottom: “Using children as economic shock absorbers – that’s unreasonable.

“Covid-response policies that stretch inequity even further – that’s unreasonable. Child Poverty Action Group research this year has shown that core entitlements for those receiving benefits are mostly far below key poverty lines, and in some cases will be tipping people into severest poverty.

“We modelled a scenario that shows 70,000 additional children are at risk of poverty due to Covid-19 on current policy settings.”

Why Labour is ‘tinkering’
For more on what Janet McAllister thinks is wrong with the current government policies, see Why Labour’s tinkering of our welfare system just isn’t enough.

Looking back at what Labour have implemented over the last term, she concludes: “By themselves, these policies are disappointing. It’s still just tinkering around the edges and far from big, bold moves to cut the mustard.

“They’re of no use to many of our poorest families.”

Another poverty advocate, Max Rashbrooke of Victoria University of Wellington, has written in The Guardian about how disappointed he is with progress on child poverty under the government, and how things look set to get worse unless policies are implemented that live up to the lofty targets set by Ardern.

The problem according to Rashbrooke is that Ardern “has relied largely on the ‘third way’ policies of her Labour predecessor, Helen Clark, in her fight against child poverty.”

And so although there has been some “modest progress” on some poverty measures, these are essentially the result of picking the low-hanging fruit. He points to Treasury modelling showing that “the number of families in ‘material hardship’ – those reporting they are unable to afford basic items – will ‘rise sharply’.”

Is it true that the government can’t afford to increase benefits? Not according to business journalist Bernard Hickey, whose must-read column this week argues that Ardern and Robertson seem determined to massively increase inequality by following outdated economic philosophies.

Making homeowners richer
He asks: “Is it more important that homeowners are $100 billion richer? Or that hundreds of thousands of children are left unnecessarily in poverty?”

Here’s Hickey’s main point: “It is bizarre that a Labour government and a Reserve Bank that talk a big game on their social responsibilities and sustainability are choosing to pump up to $150 billion into increasing housing market valuations for the richest half of New Zealanders who own homes, but don’t think they can afford increasing benefits at a cost of $5.2 billion for the hundreds of thousands of kids and their parents living in poverty.”

He points out that “economists as conservative as those at the OECD, the IMF and the World Bank are now begging Governments to do things differently by spending money on the poor and on infrastructure, rather than just pumping up asset prices to make the rich even richer.”

Hickey also refers to a report out this week with findings from the Growing Up in New Zealand longitudinal study. You can read the report here: Now we are eight: Life in middle childhood.

Hickey sums up the inequality findings: “Nearly 40 per cent are living in cold, mouldy and damp homes. About a third are obese. About 20 per cent of the families surveyed did not have enough money to eat properly.

“Nearly 15 per cent of the eight-year-olds had already moved school twice, largely because of having to move from one rental property to the next.”

Not everyone is criticising Labour’s rejection of benefit increases. Newstalk ZB’s Mike Hosking says that giving into such a demand would take the government down a “slippery slope”, and be too expensive for little real gain.

Urgent need for relief
There is no doubt there is urgent need for relief for those at the bottom. And this week the Auckland City Mission launched a campaign to replenish their run-down stocks of food, noting that prior to covid they estimated “10 percent of Kiwis experienced food insecurity on a regular basis.

“Due to covid-19, it believes the figure is now closer to 20 percent – or one million people – who do not have enough good food to eat on a weekly basis.”

And today it’s being reported that the government’s two-tier welfare payments have come to an end.

Finally, what’s to be done about poverty and inequality, given this government has no great interest in being transformational on this issue? According to veteran leftwing commentator Chris Trotter, “it’s time for some ‘earnest struggle’”. He argues that Labour will only ever carry out leftwing reforms if they are forced to.

Trotter wants to see less reliance on appeals to Ardern and Robertson to “be kind”, and more mass marches down Auckland’s Queen St.

Dr Bryce Edwards is a New Zealand-based political scientist of reliability and prominence. His analysis and commentary is regularly published on EveningReport.nz. This article is republished by the Pacific Media Centre with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern won power in 2017 on the basis of statements such as “My goal is to eradicate child poverty in New Zealand”. The Government’s progress on child poverty will be under scrutiny at this year’s general election, but progress is slow, and many are claiming not enough is being done to address this urgent problem.

Statistics NZ has just published details of child poverty levels for the last few years, as required under the new Child Poverty Reduction Act. For the best report on this, see Sarah Robson’s New figures show little change in child poverty. She reports: “for the year ended June 2019, there was no significant change to the percentage of children living in material hardship, compared to the previous year – remaining at about 13 percent, or one in eight children”.

The Children’s Commissioner Andrew Becroft has described the figures as “underwhelming”.

The problem is the statistics can be interpreted in different ways – or at least cherry-picked by supporters and critics. Also, the statistics are limited in what they measure, particularly in terms of the time periods involved.

Some critics to the left and the right of the Government are pointing to various elements of the report to say things are getting worse, while the Government is highlighting elements that show they’re making progress.

Overall, there’s probably a consensus that if improvements have been made, they are marginal, and much more needs to be done to combat child poverty.

Interpretation of the child poverty statistics

Jason Attewell of Stats NZ gave an insight yesterday into why measures of poverty are contested and interpreted differently: “Now child poverty is a real complex issue, and it’s really hard to define who’s poor and who’s not poor… So we don’t look at just one measure we look at nine measures across.”

For the best discussion of the different interpretations of the new stats, see Jason Walls’ PM Jacinda Ardern and National’s Simon Bridges spin child poverty numbers – but who’s right? (paywalled). He points to the Government and Opposition arguments on the latest report, and declares “Both are right but for different reasons.”

Here’s the Government’s interpretation: “Ardern used what is known as the after-housing costs measure to argue her case for successfully combating child poverty. That showed that after housing costs, 235,400 kids lived in homes with less than 50 per cent of the overall median household income, in the year to June 2019. That’s a drop of 18,400 children, or a 2 per cent fall compared to the previous year.”

Here’s the Opposition interpretation: “Bridges used the numbers to suggest child poverty was getting much worse ‘under Jacinda Ardern’. He used the before-housing cost measure for the bottom 60 per cent of households and compared the year to June 2017 figures with those from 2019. On this measure, the 20,000 figure is correct – 243,300 kids were in this category in 2017, compared with 263,400 in 2019.”

In contrast, Walls points out that there is arguably a third and more important interpretation of the figures: “the most important measure – according to Children’s Commissioner Andrew Becroft – was actually increasing. Material hardship, which measures the things most people would consider to be essentials – such as access to fresh fruit and vegetables, going to the doctor and the ability to pay bills on time – increase by just over 4000 in the year to June last year.”

For further discussion of the different measures of child poverty and what is changing, see Thomas Manch’s Child poverty: Numbers show marginal change, but more children in material hardship. This includes reporting of Stats NZ’s principal statistician Diane Ramsay, who “said she could not be confident there was a downward trend in the figures due to margin, and results in the coming years would clarify this.”

Also, see Max Rashbrooke’s analysis, which is more positive, suggesting that the PM should be relieved to finally have “a tangible – if tentative – sign of progress” – see: Child poverty stats promising, but more is needed.

Rashbrooke also points to the contrast with what was occurring under the last National Government: “If the improvements are real, they will be all the more impressive when seen in the light of the previous National-led governments, of which the best that can be said is that they maintained, overall, a very high level of poverty. In their nine years in power, poverty fell on some measures but increased on others, and in general seemed to be becoming cemented into the foundations of New Zealand life. We may look back on this moment, then, and see it as a turning point”.

Criticism about the failure to deliver

Critics on both left and right of Labour are saying the Government is failing to deliver the promised improvements in child poverty.

On the right, Mike Hosking is calling this out as “another promise not met”, which he says is especially damaging for the PM, as child poverty reduction “was the Prime Minister’s calling card” – see: Child poverty is the KiwiBuild of social failure. Hosking concludes: “Every social indicator has gone backwards – food handouts, housing queues, jobless payments and poverty. Every single one of them in the wrong direction.”

Heather du Plessis Allan also has a hard-hitting take on the findings – see: Child poverty figures shows PM is not helping those she promised to. She says this about Ardern: “Remember when she promised to lift 100,000 children out of poverty by 2020. Well, it’s 2020, that is so far from happening… it’s just gutting. We expect centre-left governments to come and do the best they can for people at the bottom of the heap, because those people are there.”

Du Plessis Allan warns it will damage Labour and Ardern’s credibility with their own supporters: “It has charities, NGOs, churches, unions, all telling them to get on with it. Labour’s entire support base is telling them to help people, but they’re not. How can they expect those people to re-elect them or even respect them? How can the Prime Minister ever say again that she will help the worst off and expect us to believe it? Today’s figures haven’t just hurt the government’s credibility; they’ve hurt the Prime Minister’s.”

Those NGOs are also speaking out. Child Poverty Action Group spokesperson Susan St John says: “Put simply: these statistics do not show any change for the children living in the worst, most entrenched poverty… This confirms our view that the Families Package (implemented July 2018) was not designed to give the necessary income boost to those in the deepest poverty. This picture is unlikely to change when the full Families Package is counted in the next report due in 2021” – see: The latest child poverty statistics are a wake-up call.

Her group says “child poverty requires urgent and immediate action. Meaningful adjustments to the benefit system and working for families must not wait until after the election for implementation.”

And even in Max Rashbrooke’s cautiously congratulatory account, he warns much more action is needed, saying: “the government will have to marshal resources of which it has only just begun to dream. Most of its efforts so far have focused on taking those who are just below the poverty line and lifting them just over it. That is valuable, and makes a real difference to families’ lives. But there are still tens of thousands of families in far deeper poverty. Their situation, the new data suggests, has barely improved.”

Rashbrooke says the PM needs to take a bolder approach: “That will require considerably more political courage from a leader who has so far governed cautiously. But it is the reality of the task she has set herself. The early steps she has made, though valuable, may turn out to have been the easiest.”

Ardern is promising more, and she is reported as believing that her government is “on track” to meet its promises. She says part of the problem is that the latest statistics don’t reflect how much has recently been done – see Zane Small’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern confident child poverty reduction policies ‘yet to show’ full results.

Finally, last month the Child Poverty Action Group commissioned Spinoff cartoonist Toby Morris to illustrate the need for “the government to fix the broken welfare system so all children and families can thrive” – see: Fairer Future: Fixing Poverty in Aotearoa.

Analysis by Dr Bryce Edwards – Tonight’s historic first vote on abortion laws will inevitably disappoint many advocates of reform. This is because of the watered-down proposals put forward by the Government, and the politicking that has accompanied the legislation – especially New Zealand First’s insistence on seeking a referendum. 

Of course, abortion law reform has been inevitable for some time, and the nature of the issue means it was always going to be complicated. Politicians have been avoiding the reform question for decades, while a public consensus has continued to build in favour of liberalisation. The public are generally more progressive on abortion than the politicians, who continue to risk only moderate change for fear of alienating more conservative voters.

That’s why, even over the last year, the Government’s promises of reform continued to be stalled as Labour attempted to negotiate a compromise package of reform that would keep their New Zealand First colleagues happy. The results of this process, as well as all the overall politicking around it, are nicely laid out today in Thomas Coughlan’s article, Abortion bill heads to Parliament: What’s changing and when.

Reform success looks likely

It is clear that the more moderate legislation planned by the Labour-led Government has been designed so as not to buy too much of a fight or mean it will struggle to get passed. Hence, early signs are that the first reading tonight will very easily get the numbers. Henry Cooke and Thomas Coughlan are projecting, at this stage, 73 votes for and 26 against – see: Abortion vote will sail through with or without NZ First, according to Stuff survey.

Aside from the mysterious New Zealand First orientation to the bill, the stances of other parties’ MPs are becoming clearer: “All 8 Green MPs have said they will support it, while 32 of Labour’s 46 MPs have said they will definitely back it. Four more say they’d be likely to support it. National is slightly more divided with 17 of its 55 MPs saying they will definitely back it, with just 7 saying they will definitely oppose it. Ten say they’re not yet sure how they’ll vote. Act leader David Seymour and independent MP Jami-Lee Ross have both said they back the Bill.”

And for more on how a number of conservatives, including the National Party leader, seem to be on board for at least the first reading of the legislation, see Henry Cooke and Thomas Coughlan’s Simon Bridges will vote for abortion bill at first reading but wants more safeguards.

Bridges’ own position seems to have become more liberal lately, as this article reports that he now supports “the changes to the law for abortions in the first 20 weeks”, with him saying “the position pre-20 weeks of gestation is one where law and practice should match, they haven’t, so I accept that’s the right decision” – which is a turnaround from his position last year in which he insisted that the current rules don’t need fixing.

The same article delves into the positions of some of the more socially conservative Labour MPs, and also finds increasing support for change. For example, “Aupito William Sio, Peeni Henare, and Kris Faafoi all said that they were ‘leaning’ to or ‘probably’ voting yes. None opposed the bill.” Similarly, “Several MPs who voted against the End of Life Choice Bill on euthanasia were supportive, such as Health Minister David Clark and backbencher Kiri Allan. Some members, like Maori caucus co-chair Meka Whaitiri, said they would vote for the bill at its first reading, but would not commit to voting the bill any further.”

But there will still be some Labour MPs who vote against it, and are not willing to speak publicly about their stance. For example, the article reports: “Nanaia Mahuta refused to say how she would vote, simply describing it as a conscience issue.”

The Government’s conservative reform

Despite some degree of positivity that politicians are finally catching up with the broader public mood in favour of increased liberalisation, the details of the Government’s reform are finding less favour with many advocates of reform.

After all, the Government bill really amounts to only partial-decriminalisation instead of full decriminalisation of abortion. This won’t satisfy those who believe that abortion should fundamentally come down to a “woman’s right to choose”. Instead of going along with that demand and principle, Justice Minister Andrew Little has very determinedly decided that it’s a woman’s right to choose up until 20 weeks of pregnancy, but women lose the right after that, by which it essentially remains a criminal issue rather than a health issue.

I wrote about the details of this issue in a previous column, earlier in the year – see: Abortion reform in question. This pointed to an array of health professionals and reform advocates wanting a more progressive result than the Government was looking to deliver.

And it has come to pass that the Government has gone with a watered-down and relatively conservative option for moderate reform. This has caused some to complain that Labour have let the reform movement down, as they have on other important issues. For example, the No Right Turn blogger says it’s “another example of Labour chickening out. They promised to listen to medical professionals, and they haven’t. While a technical delivery on their promise, its a substantive failure” – see: Labour chickens out on abortion.

Here’s the main point: “Health professionals were crystal clear in supporting complete decriminalisation. But instead of that, Labour has taken the most conservative option, then made it worse, imposing a test for women to access an abortion after 20 weeks. Such abortions are almost always performed for medical reasons, and so should be a health issue, but instead Labour is going to make women continue to endure the wagging finger of society if they need proper medical care.”

The blogger argues that Labour MPs need to push amendments to make the legislation more radical, but fears they will “refuse to in order to avoid upsetting their bigot rump and their conservative coalition partner.”

RNZ has published one anonymous opinion piece on the issue, which criticises the reform bill for retaining much of the status quo for pregnancies beyond the 20-week mark, saying: “The proposed bill is not much better. It sends the message that you may know what’s best for yourself up to 19 weeks, six days, 23 hours and 59 minutes. Once the clock ticks over at midnight, boom, a doctor suddenly becomes the expert on your life. How can a country that trusted women enough to allow us to vote, not trust us to know our own situations?” – see: Abortion is a medical necessity, reform is needed.

According to this writer, “The proposed bill has been called a “mixed bag”. To be blunt, it’s a bit of a cop-out. Sure, the government took a turn in the right direction by making it a health issue and proposed some steps to ensure better access to abortions. But it does not go far enough.” They urge the Government to go further, and to use this moment to create a legacy rather than just another compromise fix.

Similarly, leftwing commentator Gordon Campbell is disappointed that the reform falls so far short of what has been required for modernisation: “Abortion is to be medicalised, rather than criminalised. That’s progress, I guess. If that sounds grudging… it is. Undoubtedly, the proposed law will be better than the 1977 legislation it replaces. Yet surely, you’d hope there would be progress, 42 years down the track” – see: On reforming the abortion laws.

Campbell doesn’t believe that abortion control should simply be converted from being a criminal issue to a medical one: “there is no objective need for the level of medicalisation envisaged by the current Bill. The message being: the ultimate control of women’s reproductive choices is being handed over from the Police to doctors. That’s supposed to be counted as progress.”

And if the issue is a simple health one then why, Campbell asks, isn’t it being treated like this by the Government and Opposition: “If abortion really is just a medical procedure, then the Health Minister should be owning it, and promoting it as part of the government’s health programme. That’s what a grown-up country would do.” He argues against the vote being a conscience one.

Campbell also makes the case that the legislation is entirely backward in assuming that abortion has to be a “medicalised procedure enacted by a doctor”, when the trend – especially in other parts of the world – is towards the use of chemical abortifacients: “they offer a safer, less invasive means of abortion than surgical means. It is a process that can be supervised by a nurse.”

Here’s Campbell’s main problem: “In other European countries, the two pills involved are moving towards being available as an over-the-counter abortifacient. The reforms being proposed in New Zealand do not recognize this trend. For the foreseeable – and by that I mean potentially for decades to come – the women who import such drugs and/or those people who help them to access such drugs will continue to be prosecuted under the Crimes Act.”

Referendum debates

The law reform itself has been overshadowed in recent days by New Zealand First’s desire to make reform contingent on a public referendum – see Jenna Lynch’s Justice Minister Andrew Little caught off guard as New Zealand First hints at abortion referendum.

It seems that in the months of negotiations between Andrew Little and New Zealand First’s Tracey Martin, the traditional stance of her party in favour of referendums on moral issues like abortion never arose. But then in NZ First’s caucus meeting this week, MPs pushed back, despite – or perhaps, because – Martin had said publicly the same day that no referendum was necessary.

According to Henry Cooke: “It’s understood NZ First members have been giving the party some grief about the fact it is demanding a referendum on euthanasia but not abortion” – see: Winston Peters pulls rug out from under Andrew Little – again.

Cooke gives his view: “Little has every right to be furious with this blindside from NZ First, even if he can’t quite say it. He’s already softened the bill to keep NZ First happy, shrinking the number of weeks that an abortion can be accessed without a statutory test. But he shouldn’t be surprised. Peters has used the Parliamentary process to have several bites of the same cherry before, and has also humiliated Little in the past over three strikes. At the end of the day these people are from different parties and will be fighting over the same voters in about a year’s time.”

Of course, New Zealand First wanting a referendum doesn’t necessarily impact on the legislation at all. The party has already signed off on the bill being introduced to Parliament tonight. It simply means that the party is likely to put up an amendment to the bill to include a referendum. This wouldn’t happen in practice until after the second vote on the bill, and it’s very unlikely to be successful. The big question is whether New Zealand First MPs will vote for the bill without a referendum being put in place.

This is all best dealt with in Claire Trevett’s column, NZ First abortion referendum ploy leaves sour taste (paywalled). She argues that no one should be surprised that Winston Peters would want a referendum: “It was not that long ago both NZ First’s leader Winston Peters and Martin herself had provided statements setting out the party’s position that abortion was for a referendum. Given that, if it was not raised in caucus perhaps Martin should have raised it herself to ensure it would not become a stumbling block later.”

Trevett suggests that the re-positioning by New Zealand First could simply be one of empty strategy: “NZ First could simply be posturing to allow Peters to say the party had tried to stick to its policy but was thwarted by others”.

So, who’s to blame for the miscommunication and incorrect assumptions about New Zealand First’s policy on referendums? Mike Hosking points the finger at both Tracey Martin and Andrew Little – see: Winston Peters again pulls the wool over Labour’s eyes on abortion referendum.

And today Winston Peters has struck back, accusing Andrew Little of bad faith and blindsiding New Zealand First – see: Winston Peters takes aim at Labour over abortion law reform.

There is now some very interesting discussion going on about the role of referendums in determining law. For the best of these, see Sam Sachdeva’s Why Winston Peters is wrong on referendums, and today’s editorial in The Press: Abortion debate: let the politicians decide.

Finally, for satire on these issues, going back a long way, see my blog post, Cartoons about abortion law reform in New Zealand.

By RNZ Pacific

A report has detailed shocking levels of physical violence and neglect towards millions of Pacific Islands children, sparking calls for better-targeted aid programmes from countries like New Zealand and Australia

The report team, from combined aid agencies, investigated child-rearing practices in seven Pacific countries, as well as Timor-Leste.

The report found as many as four million children experience violence at home across the Pacific – a staggering 2.8 million in Papua New Guinea alone.

READ MORE: Phil Fitzpatrick: PNG’s Kramer ‘crucial’ law and order change maker

More than half of all sexual violence referred to medical clinics involves children in PNG, where almost one in three parents report beating children “as hard as they can”.

The research also outlines a range of factors that contribute to the abuse, including Pacific societies with high levels of gender inequality; social acceptance of physical punishment of children, weak governance, and growing poverty and inequality.

The report’s authors said the research shows the critical lack of overseas aid invested in programmes aimed at ending violence against children, and programmes by countries like New Zealand and Australia need to be more targeted.

Carsten Bockemuehl, World Vision’s advocacy campaigns lead for the Pacific, said the study painted a “pretty bleak picture” of regional and donor governments that had failed to prioritise children’s rights.

“It’s a massive development issue that is really negatively impacting on children and societies as a whole,” he said.

Around 0.1 percent of all Australian foreign aid to the Pacific and Timor-Leste in 2017 was directed to programmes specifically addressing violence against children, according to aid group Save The Children, which claimed just $US2.3 million was spent in total by all foreign donors “on this critical issue”.

Bockemuehl said violence against children will make societies less prosperous and will exacerbate risks to health and criminal justice systems and that there needed to be a “rebalancing” of aid priorities in the Pacific.

“It’s actually an economic issue, it makes countries poorer, so that’s why, out of the many competing priorities in developing countries, we just advocate for violence to be recognised as a critical development issue.”

• This article is published under the Pacific Media Centre’s content partnership with Radio New Zealand.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Sally Lloyd as told to Scott Waide in Lae

A few days ago, I asked Sally Lloyd about the picture she posted on Facebook of a distraught mother weeping over the body of her baby who had died. This is the story behind the picture.

They are from Fomabi Village near Nomad, Western Province.

The child got sick with pneumonia, I believe and Nomad Health Centre could not help them. The facility there has been very run down and ill equipped for a very long time.

READ MORE: Scott Waide’s “My Land, My Country” blog

They then had to make the long walk to Mougulu health centre for many hours to get further help.

Unfortunately, the child died the following afternoon, and without any helpers with them the parents had to walk back to their village with the dead child.

-Partners-

They were of course heartbroken and it was very hard to send them on their way into darkness and a storm.

Family grief. Image: Sally Lloyd/My Land, My Country

Faced difficulties in life
The woman has already faced some difficulties in her life. She was totally distraught, waving her arms and crying out.

When Sally went to the clinic she said it was her first time to visit Mougulu and this had happened.

Earlier on Facebook, Sally posted:

“That sound I hate…the grief of the parents of this precious eight-month-old indicating the worst had happened.

“This evening they have the long walk back (6 to 8 hours at least) to Fomabi Village with a very heavy burden – almost too much to bear.

“The father offloaded some heavy food items and we gave high protein food and fish, a torch and umbrella – it’s going to storm tonight.

“God knows how much we need that emergency vehicle – to bring patients more quickly, but also for parents who should not have to walk a day (or all night) to get home and bury their child.”

“RIP Ezekiel.”

Scott Waide is a leading Papua New Guinean journalist and deputy news editor of EMTV News based in Lae. His blog items are republished by the Pacific Media Centre on Asia Pacific Report with permission.

The long walk. Image: Sally Lloyd/My Land, My Country

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Pacific Media Centre Newsdesk

Health and human rights advocates fear the mental ill-health of refugees on Nauru could worsen following the Pacific government’s move to scrap a vital support service.

Doctors Without Borders (MSF – Médecins Sans Frontières) was told on Friday its free psychological and psychiatric services, provided to both Nauruans and refugees since November 2017, were “no longer required”.

The medical aid agency was given 24 hours to cease operations which is comprised of a clinic at the Republic of Nauru Hospital and home visits.

READ MORE: Manus and Nauru background and updates

The organisation indicated a desire to find a way to continue its work, reports Australian Associated Press.

“At this stage MSF wishes to reiterate our strong commitment to providing quality mental health care to all those in need on the island,” a spokesperson said.

-Partners-

“We are extremely concerned that the health of our patients may be affected by this decision and urge the authorities to grant us permission to continue our lifesaving work.”

The abrupt dismissal follows a report by two prominent Australian refugee organisations saying most refugee children on Nauru are experiencing life-threatening mental health problems, including not eating or drinking and showing suicidal symptoms.

An Australian protest over deteriorating conditions for children at the Nauru detention centre. Image: Al Jazeera

‘Add to distress’
Advocacy group Refugee Action Coalition said MSF’s absence would “add enormously to the distress among asylum seekers and refugees” because the Australian government’s contracted mental health care provider, International Health and Medical Services, was “stretched to breaking point”.

The Department of Home Affairs said on Saturday MSF’s dismissal was a matter for the Nauruan government and that it would continue to provide “appropriate healthcare and mental health support to refugees and asylum seekers through contracted service providers”.

MSF uses more than 30,000 doctors, nurses and other mostly volunteer personnel to provide medical aid in more than 70 countries.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By RNZ Pacific

A legal advocacy group has told the UN Human Rights Council that more than 100 asylum seeker and refugee children are living without hope on Nauru.

The Human Rights Law Centre addressed the latest council session in Geneva.

The centre’s Daniel Webb told the council that despite the fact the Australian government was professing its committment to human rights in Geneva, it continued to indefinitely imprison 102 children in its offshore detention centre on Nauru.

“Imprisoned for fleeing the same atrocities our government comes here and condemns. And after five years of detention, these children have now lost hope.

“Some have stopped speaking. Some have stopped eating. A 10-year-old boy recently tried to kill himself.”

Webb said if the detention was not stopped there would be deaths.

-Partners-

He said even the government’s own medical advisers were warning that the situation was untenable.

“Yet the Australian government still refuses to free these kids, and is fighting case after case in our Federal Court to deny them access to urgent medical care. Mr President, we are talking about 102 children.”

Australia presented their concerns regarding human rights around the world at the same session but did not mention their detention camps on Nauru or Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island.

This article is republished under the Pacific Media Centre’s content partnership with Radio New Zealand.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

ANALYSIS: By Dr Crosbie Walsh

Nauru hosts the Pacific Islands Forum — whose membership includes Australia, New Zealand and 16 Pacific Islands nations — from today until Wednesday when lofty ideas may help soften present realities.

The island, 56km south of the Equator and thousands of kilometres from anywhere else, is 21 km in size and its population is 11,000, 40 percent of whom have type 2 diabetes, 90 percent are unemployed and 94 percent obese – the highest rate in the world.

The island’s recent history is one of rags to riches and rags again.

READ MORE: Nauru faces media, security pressure ahead of Pacific Islands Forum

For most of the past century millions of tonnes of phosphate from bird droppings were mined and exported as fertiliser to Australia and New Zealand, leaving much of the area barren.

In 1970, the British Phosphate Commission handed over control to the Nauru government. Mining increased, briefly making Nauru the second most wealthy nation on earth based on GDP per capita, second only to the United Arab Emirates.

-Partners-

Most of the phosphate was extracted through strip mining which leaves the earth largely barren, infertile, and unable to sustain plant life.

Currently, about 90 percent of the island is covered in jagged and exposed heaps of petrified coral, which is unsuitable for both building and agriculture. Additionally, runoff from mining sites has left the water in and around Nauru severely contaminated.

About 90 percent of Nauru is covered in jagged and exposed heaps of petrified coral … unsuitable for both building and agriculture. Image: CWB

Marine pollution
Researchers estimate that approximately 40 percent of the marine life has been lost due to this pollution. Additionally, the only remaining phosphate on the island would not produce a profit if mined.

In 1989, Nauru took Australia to the International Court of Justice over its actions during its administration of Nauru, and particularly its failure to remedy the environmental damage caused by phosphate mining.

An out-of-court settlement rehabilitated some of the mined-out areas. By 2000 no marketable phosphate remained.

An out-of-court settlement rehabilitated some of the mined-out areas on Nauru. By 2000 no marketable phosphate remained. Image: CWB

In 1993, the government won a legal case against Australia for its mismanagement. The reparations have been used for restoration projects, one of which is a detention centre for more than 1000 refugees seeking asylum in Australia.

Some have called Nauru an Australian “client state.”

Since then, the political and economic situation has worsened. The phosphate trust fund was mismanaged (thanks largely to the influence of a modern beachcomber) and most of its assets lost.

Corruption is reported as rampant. Searching desperately for an income, government
briefly facilitated and condoned money laundering, and now relies heavily on aid and income from the Australian refugee detention centre where conditions have been reported as “akin to torture”.

Disturbing report
This BBC report on the effects on refugee children is especially disturbing.

Both governments have kept the injustices perpetrated against these refugees quiet by limiting access to the island.

A media visa costs $8000, taking pictures inside the detention centre is forbidden; so is carrying a smart phone with a camera.

In 2015, Australia passed the Australian Border Force Act, which makes speaking out about the conditions inside its camps on Nauru, and Manus in PNG, punishable by a two-year prison sentence.

It will be interesting to see how both governments, and other members of the Pacific Islands Forum, including New Zealand that benefited greatly from Nauru phosphates, handle questions over the next two days — and whether the NGOs present ask the right ones.

Dr Croz Walsh is a retired development studies professor at the University of the South Pacific. In his blog, he comments on New Zealand, Fiji, and Pacific Islands issues of political and social interest.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz