Daily review 27/03/2023

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, March 27th, 2023 - 126 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

126 comments on “Daily review 27/03/2023 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Anker 1
    27 March 2023 at 6:26 pm

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/prime-minister-to-front-post-cabinet-as-new-child-poverty-measure-announced/YUYF7X6CGVDA5GQVVQG73VN2IY/

    so Hipkins scolds Marama for saying cis white mails cause or the violence, but it appears from this article he doesn’t condemn the violence towards women at the protest. Good to know he’s looking out for men.

    btw I saw the video clip of the 70 year old woman being punched by a trans rights activist. Will find the link and post, but it is despicle

    • Red Blooded One 1.1
      27 March 2023 at 6:37 pm

      Actually he has condemned the reported violence at the rally. Not sure he's been made aware of the lady punched specifically. Is she laying charges as she should.

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/131615586/prime-minister-chris-hipkins-condemns-juice-

      • weka 1.1.1
        27 March 2023 at 8:47 pm

        Nah. He minimised what happened by focusing on the soup. Nothing about how terrifying it was for the people who were surrounded by the mob and couldn't get away. His silence on that is a passive sanctioning, no matter what he says about throwing things or violence against people speaking generally.

        • Red Blooded One 1.1.1.1
          27 March 2023 at 9:05 pm

          Nah, he minimised nothing! He stated something along the lines of whether it was juice or bricks it is unacceptable. He hasn't supported any violence from any side.

          • weka 1.1.1.1.1
            27 March 2023 at 9:26 pm

            the claim is that he didn't condemn violence against women at the event. Which is true. He didn't say anything about that. He talked about not throwing things, and condemned the souping, but he said nothing about the terrorising of KJK and others there to the point that 111 calls were made and then they had to flee and even then the mob didn't let them leave, they had to muscle their way out until they reached the police (and the police had to help them leave, they weren't able to just walk out).

            That's violence, it was frightening, it could have seriously harmed people, and Hipkins didn't say anything about it.

            • Red Blooded One 1.1.1.1.1.1
              27 March 2023 at 9:36 pm

              In the article ….

              "Hipkins said he supported the “significant number” of trans rights counter-protesters who did not use violence."

              ergo: he doesn’t support any violence
              How, as Anker stated, is he supporting Men more than Women.

              • Molly …
                27 March 2023 at 9:57 pm

                Hipkins was in a position to ensure the likelihood of violence was reduced, by ensuring the police response was adequate. From multiple accounts it appears the police were instructed not only to not control the crowd, but also not to intervene despite multiple calls to 111 and direct requests to police on the periphery to come and assist women to leave the rotunda.

                Sean Plunket had dedicated his morning show to women calling in, and many told the same story about the deliberate inaction that contributed to the crowd's escalated behaviour.

                • Liberty Belle …
                  27 March 2023 at 10:13 pm

                  Molly, I listened to Sean this morning as well. Did you hear the interview with one of the organisers of KJK's visit? If I heard it correctly, she claimed that police told her (she has it recorded) that they (the police) chose to be low key because they were afraid of the media imagery if they had to arrest and/or physically restrain trans activists.

                  • Molly …
                    27 March 2023 at 10:43 pm

                    Yes, that was Katrina Biggs IIRC. She has a recording of them saying it was bad for optics.

                    • Liberty Belle …
                      27 March 2023 at 11:07 pm

                      Thanks Molly. It bothers me that the police consider 'optics' any kind of reason to not protect members of the public going about their lawful business.

                  • weka …
                    27 March 2023 at 10:47 pm

                    please link.

                    • Molly …
                      27 March 2023 at 10:58 pm

                      This'll be the third time I've linked to Sean Plunket today (which is a surprise), but I THINK Katrina is on the second of the three parter he posted this morning.

                      https://youtu.be/id36-purKMI

                    • Liberty Belle …
                      27 March 2023 at 11:05 pm

                      Sorry Weka, I was 'fact checking' myself with Molly to make sure I heard it correctly.

                    • weka []
                      27 March 2023 at 11:21 pm

                      If you provide a link we can all see what was said instead of relying on people’s memory.

                    • Incognito []
                      28 March 2023 at 8:41 am

                      Or relying on people’s ‘extrapolations’ …

                    • weka []
                      28 March 2023 at 11:06 am

                      exactly.

                    • Molly …
                      28 March 2023 at 9:00 am

                      There's three hours of people ringing in on the show. About two of them are testimonies of women that attended or were involved with the organisation of the #LetWomenSpeak event.

                      I think Katrina was on Part two, but please don't ask me to look through the whole thing to find it. I just confirmed that what liberty belle recalled – was what I heard as well.

                    • weka []
                      28 March 2023 at 11:13 am

                      Your video link was very helpful generally. I was replying to Liberty Belle, who was making statements of fact and appeared to want to get that backed up by someone’s else’s recollection rather than providing a link so we can see the context, tone, and what was specifically said.

                      (I haven’t yet heard the bit from Katrina about the police being afraid about PR)

                • Shanreagh …
                  28 March 2023 at 12:48 am

                  I think the You Tube comments said they had women from overseas ringing NZ Police to get action at Albert Park.

                  • Molly …
                    28 March 2023 at 9:26 am

                    NZ women watching the livestream, as well as those on site.

                    Many saying the call operator was apparently being deliberately obtuse. When KJK left, the operator said to one – Oh, that's alright then. She said, No. What about the other women?

                • Incognito …
                  28 March 2023 at 8:09 am

                  Hipkins was in a position to ensure the likelihood of violence was reduced, by ensuring the police response was adequate.

                  All he needed to do was pick up the phone and call the Police Commissioner, Andrew Costner, and leave clear instructions. Or to get Stuart Nash to do it for him … and then fire him …

                  • Molly …
                    28 March 2023 at 9:02 am

                    smiley

                    From many of the first-hand testimonies – given on The Platform linked above – the police instructions appeared to be clear. Do nothing.

                    If true, it is worth an inquiry.

                    • Incognito …
                      28 March 2023 at 9:36 am

                      Strike me down with a feather, Police brass were interviewed on the Platform by Sean ‘Ungrateful Hua’ Plunket and unequivocally stated that Hipkins had instructed them to be kind to the protestors!? I hope that Ginny Andersen will have a firm word with those soft cops and commission an independent enquiry – Debbie Francis and Maria Dew come highly recommended.

              • weka …
                27 March 2023 at 10:52 pm

                you are really tying yourself up in knots over this.

                Anker said,

                he doesn’t condemn the violence towards women at the protest.

                If you can find a statement where he does, I will be pleased. Because he should. Haven't seen or heard that statement myself yet.

                saying you support the large number of people who weren't violent is a way of avoiding condemning the violence that did happen. Of course he doesn't support violence generally, that's a given.

    • Red Blooded One 1.2
      27 March 2023 at 9:15 pm

      If the clip you hoped to post is the one that Molly posted then the lady was charging violently at the other person. I would welcome a complaint being laid and the court deciding.

      • Molly 1.2.1
        27 March 2023 at 9:28 pm

        "If the clip you hoped to post is the one that Molly posted then the lady was charging violently at the other person. "

        How do you know that? There were multiple instances of women having their signs ripped from them.

        Do you have a video that shows the full lead up to the incident?

        (It didn't look like she was charging to me, but happy to view what further information you have.)

        • Red Blooded One 1.2.1.1
          27 March 2023 at 9:44 pm

          Well I watched the video you posted. Sure looks like she was charging to me. I'm not saying a punch wasn't made, but maybe it was self defence and thats why I hope the lady lays charges and someone can get to the truth of the matter.

          • Molly 1.2.1.1.1
            27 March 2023 at 9:51 pm

            So, no. I don't know what else to say, other than I thought you may have had something for a second other than an excuse for violence.

            • Red Blooded One 1.2.1.1.1.1
              27 March 2023 at 10:01 pm

              Once again you are putting words in my mouth. I am NOT making excuses for violence.

              • Molly …
                27 March 2023 at 10:32 pm

                You saw a video of an elderly women getting punched twice. You also considered her movement forward as "charging".

                One of these was explicit and unequivocal violence.

                One was a possible interpretation, but not necessarily true.

                "If the clip you hoped to post is the one that Molly posted then the lady was charging violently at the other person. I would welcome a complaint being laid and the court deciding."

                "Well I watched the video you posted. Sure looks like she was charging to me. I'm not saying a punch wasn't made, but maybe it was self defence and thats why I hope the lady lays charges and someone can get to the truth of the matter."

                Both of these comments highlights the possible interpretation, rather than the definite act of violence.

                Now, I suggest you do what I have just done. Download the video, and playback slowly.

                It seemed to me that the lady was attempting to retrieve something.

                In her left hand she has a sign the same size, shape and colour as the one the man is holding. My initial impression, that she was endeavouring to retrieve something, is reinforced by the slow motion playback which shows her right hand moving towards the sign held as if to get it back.

                If you bother listening to the testimonies of those there, many reported having their signs wrenched out of their grip, and ripped to shreds.

                I'm not stating that this is unequivocally the case, but I'm thinking it is the most probable explanation of what you are seeing.

                What I don't really understand is why you would expect an older woman to choose to violently charge that young person for no reason whatsoever, which is what is needed for your scenario to be at all feasible.

                “Maybe it is self-defence” IS an excuse for violence. Now ask yourself, was it a justified excuse?

      • Michael P 1.2.2
        28 March 2023 at 4:09 am

        A 70+ year old lady "charging violently". Yea….nah.

  2. Anker 2
    27 March 2023 at 6:59 pm

    https://www.todayfm.co.nz/home/opinion/2023/03/rachel-smalley-how-on-earth-did-the-greens-become-so-antiwomen.html

    yes how did the Greens become so anti women?

    And RBO, I realize that Hipkins may have mentioned the violence, by it wasn’t in the article.

    I see a delegation in the UK is going to try and meet with our ambassador in London and ask him how come one of their citizens was left so unprotected by the police

    • Robert Guyton 2.1
      27 March 2023 at 7:00 pm

      Was Marama knocked to the ground by a motorcyclist?

      • Robert Guyton 2.1.1
        27 March 2023 at 7:03 pm

        Found this: [unlinked quote deleted]

      • bwaghorn 2.1.2
        27 March 2023 at 8:00 pm

        Probably a white cis man on the bike hell he probably did it on purpose. !!!!

      • Anker 2.1.3
        27 March 2023 at 8:56 pm

        Yes Marama was either knocked down or knocked by the bikes handlebars. I have heard differing accounts which is normal with news.

        Yesterday on one of these threads I utterly condemned this action if it was deliberate and wished Marama a good recovery.

        There is very little information about what happened, but I would be willing to bet it wasn't a gender critical women involved in the incident. I could be wrong of course.

        The motorbike issue makes it worst that Marama who may have suffered a deliberate hit by the bike, failed to condemn the violence against women at the protest. Where do you stand on that violence Robert?

    • Red Blooded One 2.2
      27 March 2023 at 7:25 pm

      So you are prepared to misrepresent him with "from this article he doesn’t condemn the violence towards women at the protest."

      despite your comment

      "Hipkins may have mentioned the violence, by it wasn’t in the article."

      Do you know if the lady is pressing charges. Do you agree she should?

      By far the huge majority there were peaceful as they were, the following day.

    • SPC 2.3
      27 March 2023 at 8:46 pm

      The Ambassador should simply say London police do exactly the same thing at the monthly Hyde Park gatherings of LWS (allow counter-protestors to kettle the gatherings and shout them down).

      Also at a weekend lesbian gathering in the UK (in a hall), they were only able to leave in small groups with police help.

      And inform of the facts of the Auckland event.

      1. KJK had tomato juice poured on her by someone born inter-sex (who has received death threats since).

      2. Her security threw a women to the ground by the rotunda (it's on KJK own video feed).

      3. No blow was struck to KJK, she was however in a security team bubble pushing through crowd to get out of the rotunda area to get to a pathway out from the park.

      • weka 2.3.1
        27 March 2023 at 8:51 pm

        way to minimise violence against women.

        • SPC 2.3.1.1
          27 March 2023 at 8:56 pm

          If you say so. But nothing about it is untrue – the same things occur more often in the UK than here.

          I’d ask why no one has a problem with what her security team did – you saw it yourself and said nothing.

          • Anker 2.3.1.1.1
            27 March 2023 at 8:59 pm

            Just look at the video of KJK leaving the event. She said she feared for her life. I think it is reasonable to think she did

            • SPC 2.3.1.1.1.1
              27 March 2023 at 9:19 pm

              Sure, it's a risk to try and move through a crowd, and if the event is centred around your presence (and there is some verbal going on as well) it would be natural to have some fear.

            • Red Blooded One 2.3.1.1.1.2
              27 March 2023 at 9:21 pm

              I watched the link Weka had posted of Posies video and I agree with you that she probably was afraid. Maybe not for her life but genuinly afraid. I’m also a little surprised she was permitted to continue recording inside a Police Vehicle. Hardly being shut down. Freedom of Speech met Consequences that day.

              • Molly …
                27 March 2023 at 9:33 pm

                "Freedom of Speech met Consequences that day."

                So in other words, even though she didn't get to say anything – and neither did the other women – they should have known to not even try.

                Well at least they know for next time.

                They deserved this for being uppity.

                • Red Blooded One …
                  27 March 2023 at 9:49 pm

                  I won't put words in your mouth, don't put them in mine. Link to where I have suggested any woman is "uppity"

                  • Molly …
                    27 March 2023 at 10:41 pm

                    Wasn't a quote. I use quote marks when I quote someone.

                    Rest assured, you didn't say the word "uppity".

                    I was extrapolating the possible interpretations of the word "Consequences" that followed your completely non-ironic use of the words "Freedom of Speech".

          • weka 2.3.1.1.2
            27 March 2023 at 9:07 pm

            give me a time stamp and I'll take a look.

            Generally my position on protest is that if you push the boundaries then you take the risk. Push back should be proportionate to the situation. Remember the naked woman at the parliament protests who had oiled her body so the police couldn't hold her so they grabbed her hair instead? She understood what the risks were and knew what she was doing.

            • SPC 2.3.1.1.2.1
              27 March 2023 at 9:35 pm

              Would that argument include counter-protesters kettling those gathered?

              It's routine to allow kettling at UK events.

              11min 20-30 seconds

              But it's not her security team, a woman is pulled back, taken to the ground and held down (this is the last seen of it).

              PS – the delegation “to our ambassador in London” seems to lack cogniscance that allowing kettling is standard practice in the UK and at Albert Park there was an effort to have a separation barrier.

          • weka 2.3.1.1.3
            27 March 2023 at 9:10 pm

            If you say so. But nothing about it is untrue – the same things occur more often in the UK than here.

            It's what you left out that is the minimising of violence against women.

            Apart from Hyde Park yesterday, the situation in the UK has been different than Ak or Hobart, in that police have generally done their job and prevented harm being done. In Ak, the police chose to absent themselves and let things play out.

            One of the consequences is that the ante is now upped. I will be completely unsurprised if we start seeing more assaults now.

          • SPC 2.3.1.1.4
            27 March 2023 at 10:10 pm

            Correction, the security team was not involved, it was done by civilian others (motives unclear).

      • Molly 2.3.2
        27 March 2023 at 9:19 pm

        A woman who requires security because of credible death threats, should be grateful for tomato juice you say? No concern about the visceral fear of having someone pour an unknown substance on your head, after receiving yet another death threat under your hotel room door? Or the risk of crushing?

        https://youtu.be/uxTXEy5OFBk

        State, police, media and other idiots promoted, sanctioned and now excuse thuggery.

        Handwave away the stench if you want, at some point it'll need to be corrected.

      • SPC 2.3.3
        27 March 2023 at 10:08 pm

        Correction to 2. (not her security team) and it does not belong in the list – as it was not an action by the security team hired by a British passport holder during her visit to New Zealand.

      • Anker 2.3.4
        28 March 2023 at 11:34 am
        • Your denial of the violence against women is staggering SPC
        • SPC 2.3.4.1
          29 March 2023 at 10:21 pm

          My comment was in relation to the specific's of KJK.

          Your lack of interest in the inter-sex person (who poured the tomato juice) claiming she was later assaulted is noted. Your lack of notice of the woman taken to the ground and held own (video cuts at that point) or the incident where a man head locks a woman … etc

    • SPC 2.4
      27 March 2023 at 8:53 pm

      One wonders if the WSPU were accused of being anti-man or anti-patriarchy for seeking their rights.

      Winston Churchill of course noted his fear of the Commons public spaces being accessed by a woman back in 1919

      Winston: “I find a woman's intrusion into the House of Commons as embarrassing as if she burst into my bathroom when I had nothing to defend myself with, not even a sponge.”

      Nancy: “You are not handsome enough to have worries of that kind.”

      I suspect he was fearful of debating with women as political equals.

      https://www.plymouth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/20_winston_churchill_biog_final.pdf

    • Liberty Belle 2.5
      27 March 2023 at 11:20 pm

      Chilling, and brilliantly written article. Thanks for posting.

  3. Robert Guyton 3
    27 March 2023 at 7:06 pm

    "
    Clearly the British anti-trans activist wasn’t closed down because she’s a woman. Her speech was halted by people power because she’s promoting hatred towards an at risk group who’re tired of suffering the type of abuse and stigmatisation that Parker and her fanatics are promoting.

    Posie Parker knows this, but instead of letting that understanding govern her actions, she attempted to manipulate the narrative again by playing the victim card."

    https://thejackalman.blogspot.com/2023/03/posie-parker-arsehole-of-week.html

    • Visubversa 3.1
      27 March 2023 at 7:58 pm

      Yeah, because bloke's reckons on blogs are always right.

      Did you see the statement from the Australian Jewish Association repudiating the lies told about the "Nazis" at the Australian protest.? The lies and smears that have been repeated all week.

      Did you see the horrible anti-women placards and posters carried by the so called peaceful demonstrators. The ones with the threats of sexual violence?

      Do you need a reminder?

      • Robert Guyton 3.1.1
        27 March 2023 at 8:58 pm

        Is this bit "she's promoting hatred towards an at risk group who’re tired of suffering the type of abuse and stigmatisation" true, do you think?

        • Molly 3.1.1.1
          27 March 2023 at 9:21 pm

          No.

        • Brigid 3.1.1.2
          27 March 2023 at 9:51 pm

          No

          Can you provide a link that proves us wrong?

        • Liberty Belle 3.1.1.3
          27 March 2023 at 11:26 pm

          No.

          The people promoting hatred on Saturday were the transactivists, aided and abetted by four senior Green Party people, who were "utterly fervent in their opposition to women at the weekend, calling on the public to rise up against the Let Women Speak group, and then applauding the abuse and intimidation that rained down on them."

        • Tony Veitch 3.1.1.4
          28 March 2023 at 3:42 am

          No, no, no: three reckons do not make a yes, but I reckon Robert is right!

          • Michael P 3.1.1.4.1
            28 March 2023 at 4:43 am

            Let's make it four then. No, promoting women's rights and creating an event to Let women speak in public is not promoting hatred

            • Tony Veitch 3.1.1.4.1.1
              28 March 2023 at 10:21 am

              I said the above because the very few trans people I know have all said they had felt threatened by ordinary people at some stage in their lives.

              • Nic the NZer …
                28 March 2023 at 10:49 am

                Meaning what? One night, walking home by myself, I felt threatened by 2 men rapidly approaching me who I thought were chasing me. I ran to stay ahead of them. It turns out they were just running to cross the road ahead of traffic. Though I still stayed well ahead of them making my way home just in case.

                Promoting extreme rhetoric onto her in order to have her written off in the media probably isn't lessening the threat they feel either. Its the kind of thing which results in a counter protester getting so worked up they feel the need to punch a 70 year old woman for approaching them.

              • Francesca …
                28 March 2023 at 10:57 am

                I have felt threatened by ordinary people all through my life, not only threatened but beaten up and raped .They were able to do it because as a woman I'm smaller and vulnerable.

              • Michael P …
                28 March 2023 at 4:07 pm

                Yep I've felt threatened plenty of times in my life and it is never an enjoyable experience although I can look after myself so am sure for me it wasn't as scary as it would have been for your friends. Aggressive, threatening, violent behavior is never acceptable except in a small number of very distinct scenarios.

                And one things for certain, Robert is definitely right!

              • Molly …
                28 March 2023 at 4:30 pm

                Robert:

                Is this bit "she's promoting hatred towards an at risk group who’re tired of suffering the type of abuse and stigmatisation" true, do you think?

                Tony Veitch

                No, no, no: three reckons do not make a yes, but I reckon Robert is right!

                Tony Veitch: I said the above because the very few trans people I know have all said they had felt threatened by ordinary people at some stage in their lives.

                How do these three sentences link up?

            • Robert Guyton 3.1.1.4.1.2
              28 March 2023 at 10:48 am

              "Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, who self-identifies as Posie Parker … is conducting a tour beneath the slogan “2023 is the year of the TERF [trans exclusionary radical feminist]”,"

              https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/28-03-2023/how-nz-fringe-groups-latched-on-to-the-posie-parker-controversy

              • Brigid …
                28 March 2023 at 4:33 pm

                "Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, who self-identifies as Posie Parker, and is conducting a tour beneath the slogan “2023 is the year of the TERF [trans exclusionary radical feminist]”,Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, who self-identifies as Posie Parker, and is conducting a tour beneath the slogan “2023 is the year of the TERF [trans exclusionary radical feminist]”," is a quote from Stuff.

                Can you point to a quote she has made?

                Besides does 'exclusionary radical' equate with 'violent'? Was she being violent or fomenting violence at this rally?

    • Michael P 3.2
      28 March 2023 at 4:32 am

      Robert she's not an anti trans activist, she's a women's rights activist.

      How is she "promoting hatred" against an at risk group? Are you suggesting that letting women speak is promoting hatred? Please give an example.

      Am assuming you've reported a hate incident to the police in regards to her "promoting hatred"? If not then I have to assume that is because you don't really believe what you are saying.

      Any and all "abuse" both physical and verbal was coming from the TRA's as far as I can tell

      • Robert Guyton 3.2.1
        28 March 2023 at 10:48 am

        She is? She isn't? See above. And below 🙂

        “Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, who self-identifies as Posie Parker … is conducting a tour beneath the slogan “2023 is the year of the TERF [trans exclusionary radical feminist]”,”

        “https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/28-03-2023/how-nz-fringe-groups-latched-on-to-the-posie-parker-controversy”

        • Michael P 3.2.1.1
          28 March 2023 at 4:09 pm

          Deciding to own the slur thrown at you by trans activists doesn't make you anti trans

    • Anker 3.3
      28 March 2023 at 3:18 pm

      Just look at the video of KJK leaving the event. She said she feared for her life. I think it is reasonable to think she did.

      "People power"……ffs. Ferel, hateful mob, mostly men stop free speech.

      It is outrageous to say a women who was attacked that way is accused of playing the victim card. Shame on you

      • Robert Guyton 3.3.1
        28 March 2023 at 3:25 pm

        I have not said that, Anker, nor do I believe that.

        What is your response to this statement (I've posted it 3 times now 🙂

        “Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, who self-identifies as Posie Parker … is conducting a tour beneath the slogan “2023 is the year of the TERF [trans exclusionary radical feminist]”,”

        “https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/28-03-2023/how-nz-fringe-groups-latched-on-to-the-posie-parker-controversy”

        • Molly 3.3.1.1
          28 March 2023 at 4:22 pm

          I know you are relying elsewhere for your information.

          However, many accused of being TERFs are familiar with this version of the acronym:

          TERF – Tired of Explaining Reality to Fuckwits.

          I know it's the first one to come to mind when I have the term thrown my way.

        • Anker 3.3.1.2
          28 March 2023 at 5:01 pm

          If I have misquoted you Robert, I apologise.

          I haven't seen her use that slogan. It is one that is used against us. We do want to have the ability to exclude men who identify as female from our change rooms, sporting competitions etc.

  4. Peter 4
    27 March 2023 at 10:10 pm

    I follow a community forum where it's common for outrageous claims to be made about politicians, suggesting that what they are not reported as saying means they believe something.

    A made up example, but fitting the pattern. The PM makes a speech somewhere about crime. There's media reporting on the event which does not mention anything about ram raids. All people know is what's in the press. Next day I read the PM is soft on ram raids, has said nothing about ram raids and doesn't care about them.

    Or he is in the news over a couple of weeks and hasn't specifically addressed poverty, or he may have but the comments haven't been in the columns, over the radio waves on our tvs. That translates to "Hipkins is doing nothing about poverty. He doesn't care about it."(That's a specific one to Jacinda Ardern.)

    The way around it? Maybe the PM and Ministers can have a little prologue before they any speech listing all the things they're for and against so the bases are covered. Then the debate will get to the order of mentioning topics in that list or the number of words used in the references. The cost of living being mentioned after health resources would mean he doesn't care about the cost of living and minimises its impact on families. This is the world we live in.

    • Anne 4.1
      27 March 2023 at 10:58 pm

      A made up example, but fitting the pattern. The PM makes a speech somewhere about crime. There's media reporting on the event which does not mention anything about ram raids. All people know is what's in the press. Next day I read the PM is soft on ram raids, has said nothing about ram raids and doesn't care about them.

      I watched a re-run of today's post cabinet press conference this evening and Hipkins was bombarded with questions over the week-end's events. In reply to one journalist he made clear his abhorrence of violence and mentioned a couple of examples that occurred in Auckland. But those comments don't appear to have been reported in the media (thus far) so now he is facing charges of not caring about violence against women including from one or two commenters on this site.

      • Shanreagh 4.1.1
        28 March 2023 at 3:18 am

        The PM should have front footed it with the Auckland situation. I listened and it seemed he only mentioned it as a result of questions.

        I thought that was poor. Front footing says

        a) you are not ignoring it

        b) it is top of mind

        c) gives you the ability to guide or set the parameters

        I got the impression had the questions not been asked he would not have made any comment. very poor. What he was condemning was garbled. He should have made a holding comment on Saturday afternoon. Saying resorting to violence is bad is or should be uncontroversial or do the trans community have a special pass.

        All the while those of us watched as overseas NGOs swung into action drafting letters to their liaison minsters to send on to NZ, people were organising how to boycott NZ produce & women's groups were contacting women's groups here in NZ to offer support, prominent women in the UK made appraoches to the NZ govt. We could all see this in real time.

        It came to Monday and we have no comment/condemnation from NZ Government.

  6. SPC 6
    27 March 2023 at 11:15 pm

    Talk about ignoring the white elephant on the pathway.

    MD was being interviewed by the wife of Mr white mans Zealandia Alps.

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2023/03/prime-minister-chris-hipkins-says-marama-davidson-s-white-cis-men-comments-weren-t-appropriate.html

    • Molly 6.1
      27 March 2023 at 11:19 pm

      Oh, that explains it. Marama Davidson is only responsible for her own words when replying to certain people. Otherwise, it's all their fault.

      (Using /sarc, but it’s just not the same.)

      • SPC 6.1.1
        27 March 2023 at 11:24 pm

        What MD said was with sacrasm wink .

        But sure indigenous people need to be careful about what they say to a white social media blog video journalist. Because MSM will hold them accountable? (sarcasm emoji insert).

        • Molly 6.1.1.1
          28 March 2023 at 10:33 am

          In your own linked article, Marama Davidson doesn't claim sarcasm:

          "Davidson now says she made that comment while in a state of shock".

          Nice of you to do it for her. I'll just post the video and let people make up their own minds.

          https://twitter.com/LouiseChadwic/status/1639450559043506181?s=20

          • Michael P 6.1.1.1.1
            28 March 2023 at 4:23 pm

            She is definitely, 100% not suffering from shock in that video as anyone who knows what shock looks like will tell you.

            In my opinion she is just a despicable, nasty, person who has now shown her true racist colors and who is now an enabler and apologist for abuse and physical violence carried out by men against woman.

            I will never vote for The Greens while she (and a few others) are running the party.

            Disgraceful.

            PS – I don't think people will have yet realized (because many of them will be sitting in their bubble with their like minded friends celebrating) how much damage this weekend may have done to support for the Green Party and how much it may have turned or started to turn many ordinary people against the whole gender ideology and trans movements. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

  7. Shanreagh 7
    28 March 2023 at 1:08 am

    This is an incredible response.

    Hipkins has not condemned the violence at the protest. ie said it was regrettable that women who gathered were not able to start their events, barricades were breached and people injured by others. Apologise to JKM & those injured.

    He is still pussy footing. The thugs will be emboldened to use violence against any women's rights meetings.

    I could write a statement for him tomorrow that would sheet home responsibility, apologise for the violence, say it is not the way we do things around here, promise to do better by referring issue to ???? HR Commissioner, Independent Police Conduct Authority and I guarantee he would come out looking caring about all sectors.
    And I was not even a speech writer when i worked in Parlt but worked with ours on speeches for he portfolios.

    But I feel there is not the political will.

    Women are just not worth it to Hipkins and the wider Labour Party.

    This leaves the IPCA and also the United Nations.

    Reem Alsalem (Jordan) is the United Nations Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, its causes and consequences, since August 2021.

    https://www.ohchr.org/en/special-procedures/sr-violence-against-women#:~:text=Reem%20Alsalem%20(Jordan)%20is%20the,and%20consequences%2C%20since%20August%202021.

    • SPC 7.1
      28 March 2023 at 1:40 am

      Yes, there is a problem if people cannot safely hold gatherings.

      Thus he could say – "that after what happened at Albert Park there will be some review of arrangements for such events. And guidelines provided for councils, organisers and police."

      Women are just not worth it to Hipkins and the wider Labour Party.

      Really? The demographics of the supporters of left and right wing parties are what they are.

      The HRC and the UN positions are not in line with the KJK narrative …

      https://www.ohchr.org/en/sexual-orientation-and-gender-identity/about-lgbti-people-and-human-rights

      Focus should be on safety

      Events
      Refuges
      Prisons
      Women’s only places/gatherings
      Young people (best health support practice)
      Sports

      (as per self ID risk).

      • Shanreagh 7.1.1
        28 March 2023 at 3:06 am

        I think you have missed the point. I referred to the work that the Special Rapporteur in the UN working on violence against women:

        As violence against women continues to impact the lives of women and girls everywhere, the establishment of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, its causes and consequences, as the first independent human rights mechanism on the elimination of violence against women, represented an important benchmark within the global women’s rights movement. Not only did it recognize violence against women as a human rights violation, but it also tasked the Special Rapporteur with ensuring that violence against women was integrated into the United Nations human rights framework and its mechanisms.

        This does not have anything to do with trans rights per se. It's focus is on violence against women. My suggestion was nothing to do with KJM. My suggestion was that it be used to investigate the cause of the violence against women at Albert Park especially if there is no condemnation from the PM or investigation by NZ Police.

        Again you have missed my point in this:

        'Women are just not worth it to Hipkins and the wider Labour Party.'

        I was not talking about demographics and voting numbers per se. I was talking about which policies are what we (as analysts or adivsors) used to call 'sexy' and which ones are not.

        At the moment 'trans' anything are 'sexy' (maybe as a result of concessions sought by the Greens in the coalition agreement to No debate)

        Women issues are not 'sexy', they are probably regarded as passe. Equal pay for jobs of equal value is difficult work, progressions are difficult, sexism & ageism & ableism, all likely to affect women are on the rise according to anecdote. The response of many is crudely 'look we gave you the vote a 100 years ago, what more do you want?"

        When you have sexy policies that capture the political wing it is difficult for:

        1 politicians, when they are whipped to make any headway if they do not go along with the said policy

        and

        2 politicians find it difficult to get traction for issues that are not considered sexy/appealing…..women's issues seems to be one of these. We have an invisible Minister working in a portfolio that is not seen as go ahead and you are unlikely to make your mark advocating for women. This is my perception not that I agree with it.

    • SPC 7.2
      28 March 2023 at 5:52 am

      Hipkins has not condemned the violence at the protest

      He had.

      Hipkins said "violence shouldn't come into it" and no one should use it to convey their views.

      "I don't believe people should throw things at a protest, whether what they're throwing is a soup or a brick," he told reporters during his post-Cabinet press conference.

      "Ultimately, the right to free speech does not extend to the right to physical violence, and so I would condemn that, regardless of who's engaging in that type of activity."

      On the matter of the police response

      Hipkins didn't go into detail on what he thought of the police response, saying this isn't something ministers should give direction on.

      https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2023/03/chris-hipkins-condemns-physical-violence-at-protest-after-posie-parker-doused-in-red-juice.html

    • Peter 7.3
      28 March 2023 at 7:32 am

      That shows the problem. Hipkins is in a totally no win situation. He needs you to write his statements for him, not just on this issue but on others I suppose. When that happens you can say he is saying the right things.