Changing minds; changing lives

14 comments on “Changing minds; changing lives ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Colonial Weka 1

   26 March 2013 at 11:49 am

   Great write up Karol, thanks.

   The GP website says that submissions on the housing policy closed on the March 1st. I wonder if someone can clarify.

   http://www.greens.org.nz/housing

   They’re doing the same meeting in Wellington on April 3

   http://www.greens.org.nz/events/giving-our-kids-home-life-public-meeting-better-housing-wellington-holly-walker-mp-and-metiri
2. karol 2

   26 March 2013 at 12:18 pm

   Good point, weka.

   And on my point about the Greens needing to reach out more to low income people, I have just seen GP notices of meetings in Kaitaia (2nd April) and Sth Auckland (3rd April) on the destructive impact of low incomes.

   False Economy: The high cost of a low wage economy with Jan Logie and Denise Roche
   …
   How the Government’s drive for a low-wage
   economy affects us all with Green Party
   MPs Jan Logie and Denise Roche. With
   speakers from a range of organisations
   including those representing unions, women,
   people with disabilities, youth, migrant and
   refugee communities, Maori and Pasifika
   communities, and more…

   Though the Mana Party’s approach is more being on the streets actively participating in struggles alongside low income groups.
3. Rogue Trooper 3

   26 March 2013 at 12:52 pm

   Greens have to achieve the political power afirst
   (not surprised to read of middle-class capture; oh well, many will become the “struggling” class, given time.)
   • karol 3.1

     26 March 2013 at 1:02 pm

     Actually, Turei did say that over half a million families in NZ now rent, and that the biggest decline in home ownership is for middle income families.

     I do think middle-class people are more likely to go to public meetings and to stand up and contribute. Thus I think the Mana strategy is a good one, struggling alongside the least powerful people on the streets.

     But, meetings of relevant groups in low income areas may be a step towards engaging more with low income people.
4. just saying 4

   26 March 2013 at 2:16 pm

   Excellent as always Karol.

   It did my heart good to hear some good news for a change.

   But this is something that been on my mind for ages regarding a number of political and community issues:

   Nevertheless, in my (superficial visual) judgement, the people attending were mainly, but not exclusively, Pakeha. For instance, the guy who thanked the speakers on behalf of the west Auckland Green Party, and a woman who expressed concerns about housing for her retirement were Pasifika people. Those who asked questions from the floor appeared to be largely from the middle-classes*, albeit while expressing concerns for those on low incomes. More needs to be done to directly engage with the people most in need of affordable housing, as the Mana Party does.

   What do we do about this everybody? Te Mana has limited resources and we can’t expect them to do all the heavy lifting here. Maybe we could brainstorm ideas.

   We have a responsibility here imo. People have been excluded, ignored and discriminated against, often for their lifetimes.

   *I think some who appear middle-class may not be. I often go out wearing my best middle class disguise (which isn’t even that flash) because I prefer to no be treated like dog vomit.
   • karol 4.1

     26 March 2013 at 2:32 pm

     A good point, js. My visually-based judgements were more on ethnicity. The class judgements were more based on style and content of speaking. In my experience, many middle-class people, especially lefties, tend to dress down for such occasions.

     e.g. One guy talked about the community centred around his children’s school in glen Eden. he identified himself as middle-class, but also talked about the diversity of income levels and ethnicity in the community, and their differeing needs. Others mentioned their roles or group affiliations.

     But, I agree my judgements were pretty superficial. Even that still indicated a certain amount of diversity at the meeting.

     However, I do think there is a lot of evidence that many on low incomes have become politically disengaged, and this is an on-going challenge. (I also think the Labour caucus has become more engaged with the middle-classes than they were originally (in the 1930s).

     I think the beneficiary advocacy event by Auckland Action Against poverty indicates the kind of active and creative ways to engage the disenfranchised.
5. just saying 5

   26 March 2013 at 2:50 pm

   I wasn’t meaning to criticise your description, Karol. I’m sure your judgement is astute.
6. Leopold the Viper 6

   26 March 2013 at 4:39 pm

   Not knowing anything about Auckland let alone Waitakere, what is the Wha Room at the Hub? The poor can be more easily intimidated from attending if the venue is an overtly middleclass one , set up miles from where they live, is in the richer area of of Waitakere, thus entailing a waste of petrol to get there,, and do the poor really want to waste their scanty leisure listening to suits pontificate, with no obvious action at the end of it? I speak as one who has done a fair share of attending such meetings. And as I have said, have never been to Waitakere, so I could be wrong
   • karol 6.1

     26 March 2013 at 4:47 pm

     It’s a fairly unimposing hall, with the entrance open to the street.

     It’s not too far from Henderson and amongst a pretty diverse community. Maybe slightly off the main transport lines, but not very far.
   • karol 6.2

     27 March 2013 at 12:10 pm

     Late Last night, I realised I hadn’t paid enough attention at the meeting to something that is pretty crucial to reaching out to more low income people. The meeting organisers asked for a show of hands on how people found out about the meeting. My recollection was that most of the options were electronic sources: email, Facebook, etc.

     I don’t recall being asked about learning of the meeting from flyers etc. (The meeting organisers were probably recording the results.)

     Anyway, most people seem to have learned about the meeting through emails and facebook, as I recall. This would only be tapping into the existing Green Party networks.

     Reaching more low income (non)voters might require more footwork and tapping in to more offline networks.
     • BM 6.2.1

       27 March 2013 at 12:27 pm

       Reaching more low income (non)voters might require more footwork and tapping in to more offline networks.

       Don’t be ridiculous, that would actually involve meeting and talking to poor people.
       You might find they’re not all all interested in what you propose which would rather ruin your buzz.
       • karol 6.2.1.1

         27 March 2013 at 12:59 pm

         BM: got any evidence of that other than in your imagination?
7. Raymond a Francis 7

   27 March 2013 at 12:02 pm

   Well reported Karol with some ideas that make sense and should give positive results

   Maybe a capitals gain tax on ALL capital gains might be the way to get on top of the housing for gain
   Not necessary a level tax, lower for people trying to climb the housing ladder but higher for those in the game for profit with more than one house available for their use including those they have an interest in to gather in those with Trusts
   • KJT 7.1

     27 March 2013 at 12:23 pm

     I’ve always said we should have a CGT on housing, starting at zero for houses in, say, the lowest percentile. I.E. Under 250k at the moment. Rising to maximum in houses over 500k.

     To get those who are speculating, If someone has say two 250k houses then they should be taxed as if it was one 500k house.

     Exempting the family home, as the Greens propose, is too hard to police and implement.
     I can see too many million dollar family homes suddenly appearing, owned by teenage, and young adult, children of millionaires.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS