Open mike 03/09/2011

105 comments on “Open mike 03/09/2011 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Pete George 1

   3 September 2011 at 7:13 am

   Find a NARK memorial location near you and drop off a small soft toy today between noon and 3pm today – event map.

   STOP the Deaths from Child Abuse! NOW!

   This memorial for our children who have died at the hands of someone who was supposed to be caring for them is simple,it does not cost BUT it will have huge impact.

   I am asking you to spare 1 Toy/soft cuddly on September the 3rd and encourage everyone you can and know to do the same.

   1 Toy to be placed at your towns local memorial statue or wall, in memory of our fallen heroes, the many children lost to child abuse.

   Since our great soldiers passed there have been none other like them ever except for these Babies and I want a nation to accept awareness because for these children thats the very least we can be. AWARE.

   Thank you and I really hope you can help.

   Cherie Kurarangi Sweeney
   • The Voice of Reason 1.1

     3 September 2011 at 9:14 am

     You going to help with the clean up afterwards, Pete? Hate to think of our war memorials covered in furry litter.
2. logie97 2

   3 September 2011 at 7:23 am

   Master Builders Federation cheer Labour’s apprenticeship initiative. So another traditional NACT support body gives the opposition the thumbs up, and more importantly, contradict the Minister Steven Joyce’s statements. (They simply don’t believe NACT).
   And we have Joky Hen being economical with the truth again. Ultimately Garner and Espiner will ask him the right questions.

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10749150

   We are so lucky to have such an innovative and progressive government …
   (Europe to remove all incandescent light bulbs by next year. New Zealand has already done that … wait a moment, we were going to but NACT reversed that policy as soon as they took office.)
   • prism 2.1

     3 September 2011 at 9:04 am

     @logie 97 The old light bulbs are great, the new ones don’t offer the light levels that their
     display card promises, they change colour hues such as red, they are more expensive and they break more easily, it is doubtful whether they will last as long as they promise (who will know after a year), the present ones I do know have lasted six months of ordinary use. And then there is a disposal problem, and some problem about gas escaping if they are broken. And my friend has done a lot of research on them and has misgivings, but nobody can look past the low hanging fruit of eco friendly? light bulbs. Nobody wants to know either here in NZ or overseas.
     • Draco T Bastard 2.1.1

       3 September 2011 at 9:55 am

       All of which is incorrect – except the changing colour bit.
       • prism 2.1.1.1

         3 September 2011 at 11:26 am

         @DTB Not so, I speak from personal experience.
         • Draco T Bastard 2.1.1.1.1

           3 September 2011 at 11:49 am

           So do I.
         • Lanthanide 2.1.1.1.2

           3 September 2011 at 1:46 pm

           If you first bought CFL bulbs when they came out 5-6 years ago then a lot of your concerns were valid. They weren’t bright, they didn’t last long.

           The bulbs that are produced now are definitely of higher quality, though. If you buy cheap ones (Signature Range, Warehouse Red Stamp ones) then the brightness is a bit lower and in my experience these bulbs can sometimes die much sooner than they should.

           However if you buy more expensive ones, eg Pihilips or GE or any well-recognised brand, you will get the brightness claimed as well as the life time. In fact consumer magazine did a product test on the bulbs and found that the majority of them were actually brighter than stated (sometimes by up to 20%). They also did a longevity test over a period of 8-9 months, which involved power switching the lights more frequently than you would normally do. At the time of publishing the article, not a single bulb had failed.

           So your personal experience is either outdated, or seriously at odds with the normal experience for these bulbs.

           Also the disposal problem is hyped out of all proportion. Anyone concerned about disposing of a CFL bulb every 3-5 years after they wear out better be recycling all of the regular disposable batteries they throw away as they’re far more toxic.

           http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/cfl.asp
           • Jim Nald 2.1.1.1.2.1

             3 September 2011 at 4:53 pm

             Interesting.

             Speaking from personal experience, I have been using them since 2002. At the newly built house in Mt Eden, I replaced all 9 recessed/downlights (with standard E27, screw cap fitting) in the lounge/open-plan kitchen with GE 18W bulbs purchased for what was the astronomical price then of about $11 each, I think. These were the straight tube-like ones, unlike the new spiral ones available these days, and did stick out a bit like bright tongues. But they worked well.

             I recall my cousin visiting and looking up, gasping and saying – you replaced them all! I tried to casually shrug my shoulders, grinned and said they would be justified over the long term despite the upfront costs. I said I was able to afford the ‘investment’ which I put ahead of other purchases.

             All those 9 bulbs, and actually 4 more in my bedroom, lasted more than four years. I took them with me when I moved. And since around 2006 until today, I would have used another 7 energy-saving lightbulbs (eg in table- and floor-standing lamps which I have many around the house).

             They have performed well, never given any problems, and lasted 4 years (or more with the ones that get switched on less often).

             They are about $5 – 7 each if you keep an eye out for sales at supermarkets, Mitre10 or Bunnings.

             Surf online for comparison of brands, etc, for eg
             http://www.consumer.org.nz/reports/cfl-bulbs/we-recommend

             My recent purchases have been for the Philips Tornado, Extra Bright ones, which work ok. One of them was for a 24W ( = 125W?) bulb.

             I would like to see the latest research, thinking and action about proper disposal of the bulbs which contain a small amount of mercury. There does not seem to be much advice about what to do, or what we might need to look at doing, in the near future at:
             http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/waste/disposal-household-lamps/index.html

             Except for cost/affordability (and if so, households can slowly phase them in by replacing only the ones used more often) I really didn’t and still don’t know what the fuss was about switching over.
       • aerobubble 2.1.1.2

         3 September 2011 at 1:51 pm

         You both can be right. If the batch they sold cheap because it was up to thelightening standard.

         Its a fact of living in NZ, that manufactures dump their smelly bke bean, sad
         light bulbs and poor cuts of meat onto the local market.
     • MrSmith 2.1.2

       3 September 2011 at 5:59 pm

       Prism: here is a good reason to switch. This debates is a lot like the smoking in bars debate, except National made a big song and dance about the bulbs, now all the national dancing sheep are still dancing 3 years later, ‘Face Palm’ any wonder they are ahead in the polls.
3. The Voice of Reason 3

   3 September 2011 at 9:17 am

   More about the growing cult surrounding Julian Assange. There really is something creepy about the Wikileaks founder and the way he runs the organisation.
   • prism 3.1

     3 September 2011 at 9:26 am

     @TVOR I think that some people on this blog are creepy. But I may be wrong or just find their ideas different than the ones I’ve held for yonks. On the other hand –
     “I was disturbed and conflicted. I still found the organisation’s aims were in many ways laudable, the financial and legal pressures unjust, and its publishing pattern far more responsible than it received credit for.
     I couldn’t support its internal culture, its lack of accountability, willingness to lie publicly, and crucially its failure to condemn Shamir. I supported the organisation’s principles, but not its methods.
4. prism 4

   3 September 2011 at 9:40 am

   @lprent – Hi Editing time. Query – Why, when the clock is still going with as much as 1 and half minutes do I get refusal to edit sign? I could do much in that time. Maybe the edit time should be cut but with all the time available for change, with only the last 10-20 seconds if necessary being excluded? (Can’t communicate through Contact us)
   • lprent 4.1

     3 September 2011 at 10:48 am

     I don’t know. But it sounds like a clock issue somewhere. I’ll check the server and the code
     • prism 4.1.1

       3 September 2011 at 11:25 am

       @lprent Thanks for looking at it.
     • Lanthanide 4.1.2

       3 September 2011 at 11:34 am

       I’ve had this happen several times and can’t make much sense of it either.

       My only guess is if someone else has replied to your post already, but you haven’t seen it because you haven’t refreshed the page yet.
       • thejackal 4.1.2.1

         3 September 2011 at 11:46 am

         The clock that appears is run off an individuals computer. Therefore it can still be counting down while the server clock has already timed out. It’s unlikely to be interference from someone replying to the comment, and more likely to be the commentators computer keeping an incorrect time or the administration making changes to the comment before the server clock has timed out.
         • prism 4.1.2.1.1

           3 September 2011 at 11:56 am

           @thejackal I have noticed it particularly when I want to go back and tweak or correct for a second time that its then I get the Clear orf notice.
           • thejackal 4.1.2.1.1.1

             3 September 2011 at 12:04 pm

             Sounds like a slow-running query. Can either be a slow connection or problems with the physical database design.
             • prism …

               3 September 2011 at 11:31 pm

               @thejackal I don’t know about all that but I do get a message popping up every now and then saying I’m on a slow server. I leave all that to my son so haven’t done anything about that yet.
               • thejackal …

                 4 September 2011 at 10:38 am

                 All of New Zealand is on a slow server.
5. thejackal 5

   3 September 2011 at 10:01 am

   P-lab Contaminated Houses Ignored

   Those who are unfortunate enough to live in a house that has previously been used to manufacture the methamphetamine drug known as pure (P), have an uphill battle on their hands. P lab contaminated houses are a serious problem as the residual chemicals are highly toxic and exposure can cause illnesses related to immunodeficiency and serious diseases like cancer. Therefore you’d think the government was getting serious about the problem, unfortunately not…
6. Jum 6

   3 September 2011 at 10:51 am

   This is the sort of headline you use when you want to change the S59 bill back to hitting children:

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/5555783/Petone-father-sentenced-for-slapping-sons

   Read it, PLEASE.

   Those bastards at the Dominion Post – so-called ethical journalists – either made up the headline themselves for the readers with the attention span of Nats or it was done by the foreign newspaper owners’ New Zealand editorial bum boys.

   This is spectacularly sick. This headline and its contents must be saved for this election campaign by every person in New Zealand that actually cares about a society that holds children at its heart. The Dominion Post and its lackies have none of those people on its staff or they would have refused to write it, sign it off, print it, distribute it, sell it and worse still to BUY it.

   When John Key and his jerkoffs front up to the New Zealand voter at this election we can front up to him with this article that would have been on every newsprint stand in Wellington as everywhere else. This media in New Zealand is the epitome of a neo-conservative government’s wishlist for closing down objective, truthful reporting.

   Since when does a ‘drunken, aggressive’ adult male lunge out with a ‘slap’ to a 2-year old and an 11-month old. No mention in the heading about dragging said 2-year old off the couch by the hair. Even the judge used the word ‘hit’

   Disgusting, immoral and unethical journalism in New Zealand. You newspaper harbingers of an authoritarian, lying pseudo-American NActU government to come in again this year unless New Zealanders get their fucking heads out of the sand.
   • Bill 6.1

     3 September 2011 at 11:12 am

     S59 won’t be repealed Jum. From the wee bit of reading I’ve done, NZ was one of the last countries to legislate against child assault. In line with other countries they shied away from the ‘no physical reprimand’. Whether or not you agree with the compromise, it works.

     Head lines like the one you linked to are no more effective than appeals to capital punishment. They sell copy and change nothing.
   • mickysavage 6.2

     3 September 2011 at 2:32 pm

     Aye Jum.  The headline is a shocker.

     It should have said “Petone father sentenced for assaulting sons and police in a drunken rage”. 
     • locus 6.2.1

       4 September 2011 at 5:42 am

       The headline is the Dom’s cynical and pathetic attempt to rekindle this debate. Other headlines that would have helped them sell papers: “Drunken father takes out anger on babies” or … “Police save baby and tot from violent drunk”
7. Brett Dale 7

   3 September 2011 at 11:09 am

   Judge Philippa must go to discharge a pedofile and then says this is disgusting. “He’s a talented New Zealander. He makes people laugh and laughter’s a good medicine that we all need a lot of.”
8. prism 8

   3 September 2011 at 11:43 am

   Did anyone in Wellington get to hear Polly Higgins on the environment yesterday. She was talking at the Spectrum Theatre in the city. She flew to Nelson and spoke in the evening to a small but enthusiastic group.
   She seemed to feel happy with her time in the capital city and tweeted –
   “Great day in Windy Wellington, meeting ministers, lawyers, campaigners – with big thanks. Now off to speak in Nelson”
   She’s now off to Auckland. Good ideas on wings!
   • Jim Nald 8.1

     3 September 2011 at 1:09 pm

     From someone (me) who has been conferenced out during the past 7 years, I need to say that if there is one event that some of us jaded ones must go to and lend an ear, it is Polly’s presentation.

     Polly’s Auckland presentations tomorrow & Monday are confirmed at the following (prism and I have exchanged comments and I have double checked):

     http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-02092011/#comment-370809
9. RedBaron 9

   3 September 2011 at 11:46 am

   I can’t see the politicians going near a repeal of S59 either Jum. Homosexual law reform was a lot like this, once it passed the politicians didn’t go near it again [these are issues that are too hot to touch] and then over time people go “what was the fuss about?” as it becomes the new norm.
   I didn’t like the headline either, it minimises a serious assault on small people, although the body of the text suggests that everybody in the system dealing with it was pretty unhappy. The sentence seemed a bit light but I am no expert on that. The paper has probably shot itself in the foot, most read more than the headlines, and will be thinking “What???”

   I must admit I look at all these people still invested in getting s59 repealed, not forgetting the one who spent $0.5m on the Queen Street march where nobody turned up, and think ‘Just how sick are you if you get off on hitting people smaller than yourself” .

   Of course she is now likely to be on a benefit, and according to the far right, should immediately go out to work, and have her benefit cut because she will be having a child while she is on that benefit.
   All good things to her and the kids.
10. Akldnut 10

    3 September 2011 at 11:53 am

    Coast FM poll

    The National Government is looking at asset sales if it wins the election in November. Do you agree with their strategy?

    Coast Poll Results

    Yes (13.46%)
    No (82.69%)
    Don’t care (3.85%)

    http://www.thecoast.net.nz/
    • alex 10.1

      3 September 2011 at 11:58 am

      Coast Fm, being mainly a station that caters to older people, should be National’s bread and butter. Gratifying to see that the old timers keep up with the issues, even if us yoofs are apathetic.
      • thejackal 10.1.1

        3 September 2011 at 12:13 pm

        Makes sense really… They’re the people who worked their whole lives, paying taxes to build up those assets and now National just wants to flog them off to the Chinese. If anybody should feel they already own New Zealand’s assets, it’s the elderly.
      • Akldnut 10.1.2

        3 September 2011 at 12:21 pm

        ok I admit it – I’m 50 but I look a lot younger (I wish lol)
        The polls been going for about an hour.
      • Draco T Bastard 10.1.3

        3 September 2011 at 3:05 pm

        A lot of those old timer remember and understand why those assets were state owned in the first place. It’s only the hype that has accompanied the neo-liberal revolution over the last 30+ years that has caused people to either forget or never learn in the first place.

        It’s more efficient and thus cheaper to do it as a community than to pay the capitalists to get around to it. It’s also far more reliable.
        • swordfish 10.1.3.1

          3 September 2011 at 4:29 pm

          Poll breakdowns suggest that the over 60s are, indeed, the most opposed to Asset Sales.
    • Jim Nald 10.2

      3 September 2011 at 12:51 pm

      ‘No’ has gone up by another percent
      • ianmac 10.2.1

        3 September 2011 at 2:03 pm

        Wonder how many make up that 82%?
        • logie97 10.2.1.1

          3 September 2011 at 4:06 pm

          It’s a meaningless poll unfortunately. You can vote as many times as you like and watch the numbers change…
11. William Joyce 11

    3 September 2011 at 12:40 pm

    Taniana Turia said, on Think Tank this morning, that 50+% of Maori boys were leaving school unable to read or write. She blamed the education system and said that this was evidence of “systemic racism”.
    Leaving aside her dumping all the blame on the system, no information was given on the actual mechanics on how the education system expresses “institutional racism”.
    Perhaps someone who has looked at this subject could fill in the blanks for me.
    • Bill 11.1

      3 September 2011 at 2:15 pm

      Simple. The education system was constructed by privileged white people in order to cater for their needs.

      Effectively then, the education system reflects the mind set of the white middle class and white middle class kids find it easier to interact with and negotiate.

      And that’s what institutional racism is. It’s not particularily deliberate, but it’s real. Just like the class bias inherent to the education system isn’t particularily deliberate.
      • Draco T Bastard 11.1.1

        3 September 2011 at 3:09 pm

        But how does that prevent Maori from learning while they’re at school?
        • Bill 11.1.1.1

          3 September 2011 at 6:10 pm

          It doesn’t stop Maori from learning, but the environment is foreign. I can only relate to this from a working class perspective rather than a race perspective, but the same dynamics carry…there’s a ‘foreignness’ that is evident to those of us who come from a different cultural milieu to that represented by the education system. (Unless we seamlessly adopt and assimilate)

          Culturally there are many ways to pass on knowledge. Some cultures use dance or oral traditions or … shit, I don’t know the term… but hands on direct experience.

          The western education system is based on abstraction (understanding particular symbols) and theory. It also elevates particular cultural imperitives (heirarchy, middle class morality/expectations etc) and ignores or stomps on others (language, dialect, perspectives, morals etc).

          edit. seems Adele already commented on most of this
          • Vicky32 11.1.1.1.1

            4 September 2011 at 6:34 pm

            I can only relate to this from a working class perspective rather than a race perspective, but the same dynamics carry…there’s a ‘foreignness’ that is evident to those of us who come from a different cultural milieu to that represented by the education system.

            Do speak for yourself, mate! I am as working class as you are, but only in NZ does working-class equate to finding such things as schools a foreign environment! My sisters, brother and I had no such problems. (The only problems we had were the expectations of some school staff and our classmates’ parents, who assumed we’d want to go into factory work.) 
            My younger son’s best friends were a standard NZ white guy, and a very dark-skinned obviously foreign-looking Korean brought up in Germany by German adoptive parents. Guess which one of them got all the prizes? Hint – not the white guy…
            • Bill 11.1.1.1.1.1

              4 September 2011 at 7:02 pm

              yup. And I knew a brown crippled woman from a working class background who was far more succesful in the work environment than a white guy from an upper middle class background.

              So obviously there is no racism, sexism or discrimination in the workplace. Jeez.
      • logie97 11.1.2

        3 September 2011 at 4:16 pm

        Sorry Bill for the first time on this site I feel I need to say “Bollocks”. Too simple an argument I am afraid.

        The classroom environment and opportunities are totally supportive and conducive to all children’s learning – I suggest you read the School Curriculum and school charters – they are considerably changed since the 80’s.

        There is an addage that “It takes a village to raise a child,” (school is only 6 hours of the child’s village) and unfortunately the street corners and domestic situations have a much bigger influence on the progress of learners.
        • Adele 11.1.2.1

          3 September 2011 at 5:07 pm

          The majority of schools are not supportive or conducive to learning for Maaori students. The only thing that has changed since the 1980s are the charters – otherwise its the same old same old. The following are words from Maaori academic Rawiri Taonui written in 2009.

          “Maori fail in education because education fails Maori.

          The destruction of pre-contact Waananga (schools), subjugation of tohunga (priests) and attempted obliteration of te reo nearly annihilated ancestral institutions for knowledge preservation and transmission. Based on false notions of intellectual, cultural and moral superiority, the assimilationist system that replaced them tried to Europeanise Maori into a menial under-class.

          The seminal 1980 Royal Commission on Social Policy described it thus – “thousands of Maori are being subjected to a process of schooling that atrophies their potential because the majority of teachers are middle-class and monocultural; they know little of things Maori, speak only English, do not consider Maori language important, consider Pakeha culture superior to Maori culture, and hold low expectations for Maori”. These problems continue today.

          While educators recognise prejudice in the outside world, they find it difficult to accept that their institutions reflect those same inequalities. They are therefore often well-intentioned and assume they know best, but they are patronising in ways that undermine the aspirations of the minority they believe they help.

          Some argue Maori underperformance is purely socioeconomic – 35% of Maori who do well come from higher socioeconomic groups and 45% are from high decile schools, while only 20% of Maori from poor families and 18% from low decile schools do well.
          However, socioeconomic status is not the sole determinant – Pakeha from higher and lower socioeconomic groups do better than their Maori equivalents.

          Asinine ahistorical anti-Maori commentators blame Maori culture and parents.
          There are issues of abuse and violence. Tamariki are five times more likely to be raised by single mums, and 40% of Maori women suffer partner abuse. However, rather than being endemic, these problems derive from cumulative inter-generational cultural alienation and impoverishment.
          Maori mums and dads have in fact shown massive commitment to the education of their children.
          Maori parents are 15% of the population but 19% of all school trustees.

          They drove the rise of kohanga reo, tikanga reo rua (bilingual-lingual) kura kaupapa (primary immersion), whare kura (secondary immersion), wananga (Maori universities), te reo becoming an official language, the incorporation of the Treaty of Waitangi in the Education Act (1989) and the first Maori Education Strategy (1999).

          Moreover, the maxim of brown people failing in white education has only ever changed under the advocacy of Maori parents. ………Maori do better in Maori immersion and bilingual units. Year 11 candidates at bilingual schools are more likely to meet NCEA 1 literacy and numeracy standards than Maori in English medium units and are also closing in on mainstream Pakeha.

          However, there are not enough such units or teachers – 83% of Maori kids remain in non-reo units, 92% are in mainstream schools of which Ero says only 42% deliver effectively to Maori.
          Maori also do better where schools have programmes like Aim-hi, a multicultural teaching programme in nine Auckland Schools; Te Kauhua, which bridges gaps between schools and Maori communities (30 schools in six years); and the Kotahitanga programme which addresses teaching practices and attitudes – Maori pass rates have improved up to 15% at NCEA 1, 22% at NCEA 2, and 30% at NCEA 3.

          We need new and broader strategies. Increase the proportion of Maori principals, administrators and teachers to 30%. Maori are 20% of students but only 12% of principals and just 8% of staff.
          Te reo Maori must be compulsory for students and teachers. The days of monolinguals in charge is over.”
          • rosy 11.1.2.1.1

            3 September 2011 at 5:56 pm

            To me this is the key phrase… and hold low expectations for Maori

            If educators believed Maori should achieve at the same levels as pakeha, or better, then they might have strategies to ensure they do. But educators don’t believe this, so they don’t do anything to make it happen.

            Yes – there are social problems, yes – that makes learning harder. But that is the same for all kids. Believing these kids can achieve, can maybe make educators achieve their goal of education for all.
            • Bill 11.1.2.1.1.1

              3 September 2011 at 6:17 pm

              It’s not the social problems that are the defining problem, it’s the inherent (massively myopic) nature of the educational institutions that’s the problem.
              • logie97 …

                3 September 2011 at 6:22 pm

                Visit some classrooms and get a little “real world” handle on it people. Academic hogwash doesn’t cut it I am afraid.
                • logie97 …

                  3 September 2011 at 6:26 pm

                  Maori children don’t tend to populate too many of the decile 10 schools where Tikanga Maori is largely ignored. Get out and visit some of lower decile schools and see how much Maori is incorporated across the curriculum. The schools can only do so much …
                  • Bill …

                    3 September 2011 at 6:39 pm

                    “…and see how much Maori is incorporated across the curriculum…”

                    But isn’t that the crux of the matter? It isn’t Maori (or anyone) who should be being ‘incorporated’ into a ‘one size fits all’ system; it’s the systems of education that should be adapting and devolving.

                    but of course that’s not going to happen. Because education is about ‘industrialising’ and ‘marketising’…about teaching rather than facilitating learning.
                    • Draco T Bastard …

                      3 September 2011 at 7:12 pm

                      Because education is about ‘industrialising’ and marketising’…about teaching rather than facilitating learning.

                      Now that is something I can agree with. I get really pissed off when asked what sort of job I was after when I tell them what I’ve studied. I wasn’t after a job, I was after an education.
                    • Bill …

                      3 September 2011 at 7:26 pm

                      Seeing as how I got kicked out of school for asking questions….something about how light travelled was, from memory, the final straw…(summoned and issued an ultimatum) See education? See my arse!
                    • RedLogix …

                      3 September 2011 at 8:44 pm

                      Because education is about ‘industrialising’ and ‘marketising’…about teaching rather than facilitating learning.

                      Well in that case who cares about whether 50% plus of Maori boys leaving school cannot read or write to a standard required for the ‘industrialised’, ‘marketised’ world? Traditional tohunga knowledge should suffice perfectly well…no? None of this naasty whitey math, physics or chem for these special people…eh bro?

                      Nah. In my humble opinion, and backed with rather more extensive experience than you would expect, the main reason why Maori tend not to do so well at school… and much of the rest of their lives either… is low expectations from their own exceedingly class oriented, snobby people.

                      Never heard of the ‘brown aristocracy’ Bill? And never noticed how they make damn sure ‘their’ mokopuna get a pefectly fine education thank you very much.
                    • Bill …

                      3 September 2011 at 10:27 pm

                      @ RL

                      Traditional tohunga knowledge should suffice perfectly well…no? None of this naasty whitey math, physics or chem for these special people…eh bro?

                      It’s not the maths or the physics per se that constitute the problem. It’s the manner and culture of the institutions that teach these things and the way knowledge is ‘meant’ to be constructed, understood and presented; it’s the denial of other knowledges and ways of understanding that those institutions propagate thats the problem.

                      As an example, take navigation. There was traditional knowledge throughout Polynesia that arguably produced navigational skills far and beyond that which can be obtained from instrument readings and calculations alone….a far better ability to read wave formations, clouds, wildlife, stars etc…valuable knowledges that are (probably) all gone now.

                      The colonial story is a tiresome one where drives to dominate trumped any concept of union; a story where subjegated cultures are routinely dismissed and discarded ‘wholesale’, resulting in a diminishing of the sum total of human knowledge/ experience, understanding or means of expression.

                      It was never ‘this’ ‘and’. Always ‘either’ ‘or’.

                      The education system reflects and propagates that false story of progress as linear and dismisses people and cultures that are not suitably aligned to the dominant ‘western’ culture and it’s market demands.

                      edit And in a world dominated by the market, then of course people being failed by eductional establishments is important.
                    • marty mars …

                      3 September 2011 at 10:50 pm

                      Don’t agree with you red – I don’t blame Māori or even a subset of Māori – I blame the system because it is biased, as in the die are loaded. Who designed the education system and for whose benefit? Certainly Māori values around knowledge and how it is disemminated weren’t included or even considered.

                      To fix this requires a bit of a change in thinking and an actualisation of the partnership between Māori and the Crown – then we can work on solutions from more than one euro-centric angle, until then we will be stuck in this mire.
                    • RedLogix …

                      3 September 2011 at 11:23 pm

                      Certainly Māori values around knowledge and how it is disemminated weren’t included or even considered.

                      Absolute bs. Ever wondered why so many Maori who bugger off to Aussie, and away from the low expectations of the whanau back home, do so very well for themselves?

                      Or the Maori I worked with for some years, who got out from under the no-hoper crowd in his home town and worked his way into being a Regional Director for a major global corporate. His brother’s still pumping petrol.

                      Look I do get colonisation. It was in a sense the first round of globalisation that took place between roughly 1840 and ending in 1914; it was a massive challenge to cultures everywhere in the world and we still live with the echoes of it 100 years later. But we cannot undo history. Nor will endlessly pressing the ‘white liberal guilt’ button acheive much in the way of re-writing it’s consequences.

                      Environments change all the time; you either adapt to the new or perish. Notably it is societies that are deeply entrenched in tradition, hierarchy and privilege that are usually the least successful at adapation.
                    • marty mars …

                      4 September 2011 at 12:51 am

                      “Certainly Māori values around knowledge and how it is disemminated weren’t included or even considered.” says me

                      “Absolute bs.” says you

                      Oh really – so they were included and considered – nah didn’t think so.

                      I am suggesting improvements not attempting to activate your liberal guilt – I don’t care about anyone;s guilt, I care about equality and empowerment – you know – basic human rights.
                    • Bill …

                      4 September 2011 at 9:03 am

                      “Environments change all the time; you either adapt to the new or perish.”

                      In the context of this discussion, that’s almost colonialism right there RL.

                      The environment we are talking about is one facet of a wider imposition of western values. Viewed as superior by the west…as progress… the social Darwinist arguments were trundled out as a ‘logic’ to explain away the destruction of other cultures and peoples. Adapt (to our environment), or perish. (sigh)

                      Good to see such ‘logic’ alive and well.

                      As for some Maori negotiating the education system well, so do some working class kids. But it doesn’t take away the fact that education is bias along lines of class and race.

                      The two aren’t mutually exclusive. There are points of intersection and interplay. So your class position might ameliorate the impact that race has on you in an educational system that promotes white, middle class values…or it might exaggerate it.

                      Must say. I’m more than a bit surprised at the stand you’ve adopted here, but hey.
                    • RedLogix …

                      4 September 2011 at 6:28 pm

                      The environment we are talking about is one facet of a wider imposition of western values. Viewed as superior by the west…as progress… the social Darwinist arguments were trundled out as a ‘logic’ to explain away the destruction of other cultures and peoples. Adapt (to our environment), or perish. (sigh)

                      Yes and sigh is all you can do about it now. The simple fact was that the colonising Europeans dominated by dint of numbers, technology and legal system. It was the same everywhere else and no amount of relitigating the past is going to change one jot of it.

                      Having said that, neither was the adaptation all one way traffic. The extraordinary degree of intermarriage alone has modified the colonists as well. Us white looking New Zealanders are no longer really Europeans either; we’ve changed substantially ourselves. Most modern-day British immigrants will tell you this; that it’s a huge mistake to come here thinking New Zealand is just a smaller, nicer version of mother England. It ain’t as they quickly discover.

                      The point is that adaptation was neither one way, nor avoidable. Social evolution is pretty much the same a it’s genetic cousin; being a process of retaining those features that prove useful and gradually allowing those that are ineffective to die out. But while genetic evolution is a mechanistic process, social evolution is a far more a consequence of human ideas and choices.

                      The only people who can determine what is useful to retain around ‘Maori values and ideas’ in the context of a globalised modern world… are of course Maori themselves. And while retaining identity and diversity has to be fundamental to that project, no culture is an island to itself. And no return to the pre-colonisation state is possible. For Maori, the past is no longer a safe guide to the future… and that concept alone is a challenge for all peoples.

                      Because when you devalue the European dominated education system and ‘industrialised and marketised’ … I could imagine you might rejoice that such a large portion of young Maori so emphatically reject the system by failing to so much as learn to read or write. Is that a victory to you? Because apparently it isn’t to Tariana Turia.
                    • Bill …

                      4 September 2011 at 8:00 pm

                      Yes and sigh is all you can do about it now.”

                      Pretty sure you’re aware my resignation was in relation to your (pretty close to) retreaded social Darwinism rather than the historical prevalence of it during colonisation.

                      The simple fact was that the colonising Europeans dominated by dint of numbers,

                      How many indigenous Americans were there in relation to Spanish colonisers? (I think there were many, many more.) But the Spanish had disease. As did the waves of Europeans who landed there and elsewhere afterwards. And local populations had no immunity.

                      technology

                      You mean guns and stuff, right? (Plus a rather peculiar concept known a ‘total war’?)

                      and legal system.

                      You really think colonised cultures had no system of law?

                      It was the same everywhere else and no amount of relitigating the past is going to change one jot of it.

                      Yup.

                      Having said that, neither was the adaptation all one way traffic.

                      The asymmetry of power determined who had to adapt to what and who got the benefits. So the English adapted their shipbuilding techniques to those used in India for example. Cause…well, the Indians had better technology. And they chose to. But were the Indian cotton workers allowed to emulate the printfields and cotton mills of Manchester, Paisley etc? Of course not. They had their thumbs removed. More ‘adaptation’.

                      The extraordinary degree of intermarriage alone has modified the colonists as well. Us white looking New Zealanders are no longer really Europeans either; we’ve changed substantially ourselves.

                      The dominant culture here is most assuredly European. More than that, it’s very English….the language, the legal system that you put so much store by in your comment as well as… dare I say it? …the basic foundations of the educational system.

                      Most modern-day British immigrants will tell you this; that it’s a huge mistake to come here thinking New Zealand is just a smaller, nicer version of mother England. It ain’t as they quickly discover.

                      I am an immigrant. And I found many more cultural differences in Portugal for example than I do with the dominant culture here.

                      The point is that adaptation was neither one way, nor avoidable. Social evolution is pretty much the same a it’s genetic cousin; being a process of retaining those features that prove useful and gradually allowing those that are ineffective to die out. But while genetic evolution is a mechanistic process, social evolution is a far more a consequence of human ideas and choices.

                      So Maori and other colonised peopleschose to lose their language and rules of law and religion and traditions of learning etc. I see. And the Europeans allowed these things to ‘die out’ and they ‘died out’ becasue they were ‘ineffective’.

                      Have you any idea how utterly racist what you are saying is, RL?

                      The only people who can determine what is useful to retain around ‘Maori values and ideas’ in the context of a globalised modern world… are of course Maori themselves.

                      Asymmetry of power again. Think about it. (Shit, I forgot. The ‘fading away’ of those things not aligned with the dominant culture [globalisation in this case] is a natural by product of progress.)

                      And while retaining identity and diversity has to be fundamental to that project, no culture is an island to itself.

                      Ever crossed your mind that if two cultures met on truly equal terms and took the better of each other’s traditions and values (as you seem to believe happened here) that both original cultures would essentially disappear? So that on these islands no-one would speak either Te reo nor English for example; but that some hybrid language would have would emerged? And that the same would count for all other facets of culture?

                      And no return to the pre-colonisation state is possible. For Maori, the past is no longer a safe guide to the future… and that concept alone is a challenge for all peoples.

                      But the European heritage is a safe guide to the future. Good O.

                      Because when you devalue the European dominated education system and ‘industrialised and marketised’ …

                      I didn’t say the education system was industrialised and marketised, I said it was about industrialising and marketising. A very different thing.

                      I could imagine you might rejoice that such a large portion of young Maori so emphatically reject the system by failing to so much as learn to read or write. Is that a victory to you? Because apparently it isn’t to Tariana Turia.

                      Don’t care what Tariana Turia’s personal opinion is. But if you’d actually read my previous comments you’d….fuck it, I’ll reiterate. That the education system systematically failing people (because of its cultural bias and class bias etc) in a world where it is necessary to interact with the market is a massive cause for concern.
                    • marty mars …

                      4 September 2011 at 8:47 pm

                      I tautoko Bill and add

                      “The only people who can determine what is useful to retain around ‘Maori values and ideas’ in the context of a globalised modern world… are of course Maori themselves.”

                      You have said the alpha and omega right there – do you believe what you wrote?

                      “For Maori, the past is no longer a safe guide to the future…” Um – that is rubbish – the past is the only safe guide to the future.

                      anyway I’ll let it go now because I have ‘debated’ with you before red, as have others on this topic, and it only goes downhill from here…
                    • RedLogix …

                      5 September 2011 at 8:48 am

                      We’re talking at cross purposes again. Everything you say about our history is more or less true and I don’t disagree with you. Maori did not choose to have change thrust upon them, but then that is the nature of history everywhere. While I agree totally that history teaches us lessons, every now and then the environment does a step change on us… and some new is demanded in response.

                      The sense I get from both you and marty is that you’re both rooted in the past and keep thinking that by reinventing it we can somehow change the future.

                      And in that future Maori must determine for themselves how they want to participate in a world totally different to the one their ancestors knew prior to the globalisation of the 1800’s. Whatever that future looks like it is entirely up to Maori to determine what elements of their way of life they want to take forward and what to discard. And none of us yet know what entirely new things may yet appear. Moreover this process cannot occur in isolation from the rest of the world.

                      That is what I mean by social evolution. If you think Maori incapable of rising to this challenge then I’ll be next in line to play the r-word.
                    • Bill …

                      5 September 2011 at 10:06 am

                      We’re not talking at cross purposes at all RL.

                      Nothing wrong with dynamic change. Nothing at all.

                      But you display a fantastic ability to be blind to the ‘drivers’ of change. To you it’s all natural and neutral…a level playing field.

                      But colonised people were seriously disempowered by brutally violent and deeply dishonest colonisation processes. And the empowerment of the colonisers, predicated on the relative disempowerment of the colonised, was established through (among other things) the imposition of laws detrimental to colonised peoples – at the point of a gun if necessary.

                      That power is maintained today (in large part) through the legacy of the loaded institutions that the colonisers imposed on the dispossessed.

                      See, I’d assume you’d consider it absurd if a kindly official at a race meeting offered crutches to a runner whose legs he’d previously shattered. And then blithely proclaimed ; “Jeez. I just don’t know why the cripple keeps complaining. He’s got as much opportunity to run as the next guy!”

                      Now sure. You can’t unshatter the legs. But you can surely see that the race isn’t fair and can probably never be fair given it’s historical context.

                      Some might advocate moves to ‘level such a playing field (by giving the cripple x yards of a start or whatever). I’m of the persuasion to abandon the race altogether ’cause it’s a crock of shit from ‘woe to go’ and develop altogether new and different modes of human interaction.
                    • RedLogix …

                      5 September 2011 at 11:14 am

                      Again I have very little to quibble about your historic analysis Bill. Yes the globalisation of the 1800’s ‘shattered’ the traditional Maori way of life. As indeed it was shattered for peoples all around the planet.

                      But where I depart from you runner with the shattered legs analogy is this. The runner can never regain his fully functioning legs again. He literally cannot grow a new pair. But that is where the analogy breaks down; there is no reason why Maori cannot stage a recovery on their own terms. Sure history kicked them in the nuts, but ultimately it’s only the Maori themselves who are capable of determining and shaping their own future. To suggest otherwise is essentially insulting to all Maori.

                      Is the deck stacked against them? Certainly, but Maori don’t have that on their own; the deck is stacked against most of us. As you say the system itself is the root of this evil and it’s extirpation is the evolutionary step change I think we both have in mind.

                      Footling with band-aid patches stuck onto a rotting corpse is madness. Throwing money at elitist coporatised iwi while they contemptuously ignore ordinary young Maori men like our neighbours, is equally futile.
                    • marty mars …

                      5 September 2011 at 11:49 am

                      poor impulse control i have

                      “ultimately it’s only the Maori themselves who are capable of determining and shaping their own future. To suggest otherwise is essentially insulting to all Maori.”

                      yet you pontificate on what you think Māori should do and think, such as “For Maori, the past is no longer a safe guide to the future…” what if the Māori Nation don’t agree – are Māori wrong? misguided? sucked in? … or maybe – Māori are capable of determining and shaping their own future and it is your views which are out of kilter – shit, bet you never thought of that.
                • Adele …

                  3 September 2011 at 10:45 pm

                  How ironic, a Maaori with a PhD is rendered irrelevant to a discussion on the education system. If his voice cannot be heard or considered what chance do our tamariki have?

                  Our lives as Maaori living as Maaori precludes us from a life of smug intellectualism. We are connected to the reality of decile one schooling by whakapapa – our connections are whanau related and also experiential.

                  The New Zealand Curriculum Principles, and Teaching Inquiry of May 2011 undertaken by the ERO found that of the eight principles underpinning the revised NZ Curriculum (launched in 2007) the least evident (as in practise) were, ”Treaty of Waitangi, cultural diversity, coherence and future focus. Teachers took a range of actions to encourage bicultural understanding, but schools still need to strategically address, through the curriculum, the Treaty of Waitangi principle. Schools’ practice in addressing cultural diversity could also be improved, particularly with respect to making provision for students to express their cultural perspectives and views.”
            • prism 11.1.2.1.1.2

              3 September 2011 at 9:03 pm

              @Rosy And for lower decile people whose children are not succeeding to learn there are various strategies that informed, advanced educators would use which have worked elsewhere and would work here too.

              One is to bring the family into the learning process, maybe the mother could bring along younger children to a creche and work alongside the young student both doing the same course that she missed doing when at school herself. This brings the education circle back where it was broken. If the parent is keen then this will encourage the student. The school needs to have funds to set up for this. It is known that children follow parents examples, so broken education for parents means a likely lack of interest and commitment to education for their children. It is seen frequently that professional people have children that themselves become highly educated. Low skilled people tend not to set higher standards than their parents. No-skilled people have no role model to enable them to choose a different path.

              Another is to bring in the father to help with homework, and offer him whatever education that he has missed out on, perhaps through night school. I like the idea of poor people being paid to help their children with homework. This could be incorporated into payments to all caregivers for their input so could be done without howls of protest about favouritism from the racist and classist types.

              Another is to do something with the child’s peer group, such as sports training etc. – something they would enjoy and then get them to strive for goals and rewards. One of the reasons that Maori and probably PI students don’t do well at school is peer group pressure to not be better than the group, to not stay away to do the private thinking and learning needed, and the student may be forced out of the group because of becoming ‘other’, seeming to reject the group routine, thinking and behaviour.
              • rosy …

                3 September 2011 at 10:04 pm

                Yes Prism, shaking up learning environments is essential. IMO however, none of the environments that kids can achieve in will be put in place as long as the powers-that-be expect certain groups to underachieve in the first place – e.g. believing boys to be troublemakers, so expect them to fail to meet girls achievements. Similarly expectations that kids from poor backgrounds will do poorly, expectations Maori will fail/withdraw from education. At best it’s a bit of liberal passiveness – these kids have everything against them, why pile the pressure on? At worst it’s institutional elitism/racism – the kids are useless because they’re in a particular social/cultural group and the families are useless.

                If educators believe kids are capable of achieving they can put stuff in place to enable that to happen. At the moment there are a lot of people out there that simply don’t believe it, so don’t bother.

                And no – national standards won’t help, they will simply perpetuate the belief that Maori cannot achieve in an educational environment…. when it is the educational environment (as well as the social/cultural environment) that perpetuates under-achievement.

                And yes – I know there are a lot of really good teachers out there who believe in their students (I’d never have got through school and further education without a teacher like that at primary school) but I believe they’re isolated voices in the education system.

                Also yes, RedLogix – the low expectations of family/social groups is up there as a major impediment to achievement. But not just for Maori.
          • William Joyce 11.1.2.1.2

            3 September 2011 at 9:09 pm

            @Adele – The quoted piece you give is interesting and raises some points that have to be included in the debate. However, it is what has become the tradition explanation that puts all the blame on post-colonial alienation and imposed culturally biased systems.

            Asinine ahistorical anti-Maori commentators blame Maori culture and parents.

            It is indeed asinine to blame Maori culture and parents as a single cause but it is equally asinine to try to minimize them and to point to cumulative inter-generational cultural alienation and impoverishment as single cause – as the author does.
            IMHO, all of these are issues and there is only so much that be blamed on the affects of colonialism. I am sure that having more Maori involved in senior roles in education and undoing some of the alienation by reconnecting Maori to Te Reo etc is part of the mix but it seems that there must be more to this than the things the author portrays.
             
            There are vast chunks of the Pakeha youth who are also under performing in schools and these seem to correlate on socio-economic markers. This is something that Taonui almost dismisses in one sentence but uses when talking of impoverishment in another.
            I wonder if the malaise that is common to both groups (and to the rioting youth of England and Philadelphia) is not rooted in the very socio-economic melieu of low-wages, welfare dependency, poverty, low expectations of parents and themselves, alienation from the wealth in the economy, marginalised in the decision making promises, housing, ghetto-ising and the list goes on.
             
            However, I am still looking to understand the very mechanics of what goes on in the school that is institutionally racist. How it manifests itself.
            It seems to me that the new generation of movers and shakers in Maoridom have taken the best of Maori heritage and combined it “the institutionally racist education system” and used that combined skill set to work for their iwi and people. How did they do it?
             
             
             
            • Adele 11.1.2.1.2.1

              4 September 2011 at 12:40 pm

              Maori have always embraced knowledge acquisition as a means of securing the welfare of hapuu. We valued knowledge and maintained various institutions for its preservation and its dissemination at different levels. Whare waananga, and in some areas more advanced institutions known as whare kura, facilitated higher learning for those of high rank and standing. Whare waananga taught iwi and hapuu leaders advanced forms of knowledge essential to the welfare of their people.

              Whare waananga related to a mental process of learning, rather than a physical institution where learning took place. When an individual undertook instruction at whare waananga, their classroom was the world they lived in and learning could take place anywhere, at any time. Waananga education focused on developing mental discipline and adeptness in several different fields of study.

              On arrival of Te Paakehaa, Maaori were eager to participate in an exchange of knowledge and our past narrative is replete with Maaori demonstrably adapting new forms of knowledge for their own use, as well as incorporating ancient traditions with imported knowledge to improve their own situation.

              The schooling of Maaori, facilitated by the Education Ordinance of 1847 and the Natives Schools Act of 1858 clearly represented a means for social control, assimilation and for the orderly establishment of British law. Mission schools were to replace traditional Maaori concepts with European concepts and ideals.

              The structure of the native schools system served to promote Paakehaa knowledge as more important and valid than Maaori knowledge. Maaori cultural values and institutions were both consciously and unconsciously denigrated, while Paakehaa-dominant class ideas and values were promoted. Central to the native schools’ philosophy was the limitation of the curriculum, designed to restrict Maaori to the working-class. Maaori were being trained to become the domestics and labourers for Paakehaa.

              In 1969 the natives schools were discontinued and Maaori were taught the national curriculum – albeit a curriculum still promoting Paakehaa ideals and values. In 1986, a Waitangi Tribunal enquiry into the Maaori language made the following observation:

              When such a system produces children who are not adequately educated they are put at a disadvantage when they try to find work. If they cannot get work that satisfies them they become unemployed and live on the dole. When they live on the dole they become disillusioned, discontented and angry. We saw such angry people giving evidence before us.

              They are no more than representatives of many others in our community. When one significant section of the community burns with a sense of injustice, the rest of the community cannot safely pretend that there is no reason for their discontent. This is a recipe for social unrest and all that goes with

              So yes, colonisation and its aftermath of inter-generational cultural alienation are directly responsible for the state of Maaori underachievement today.
        • Bill 11.1.2.2

          3 September 2011 at 6:30 pm

          @ logie 97.

          the comment of mine you responded to wasn’t even making an argument. I was simply making an observation regarding the foundational roots of the educational system.

          Argument wise (and apart from what I’ve said in the past few minutes on other comments); education was set up because it was desirable to have at least some workers who could read written instructions and calculate certain weights volumes or lengths etc.

          But a moment’s thought would reveal that the main incentive for developing a western educational system was so that the knowledge necessary for the maintenance of privilege was passed on to the appropriate people. (The engineer, medical professional or whoever wanted his son (not daughter) to enjoy the same advantage as himself and needed a mechanism to pass on a large, changing and ever growing body of theoretical knowledge pertaining to his profession.)

          As a ‘by the by’ workers were taught how to read etc so that they could function in the new industrial environment. And they learned (perhaps most importantly of all) how to respect self appointed authority.
          • logie97 11.1.2.2.1

            4 September 2011 at 10:21 am

            Guess the real issue is of government support for Maori pedagogy initiatives.

            There should be total funding for initiatives and development of Maori pedagogy and building new Kura to provide enough places and the choice for all children wanting to attend.

            Don’t waste time and energy though trying to radically change the traditional school as the place for that development.

            One requirement of schools is to facilitate a public forum annually for local iwi / whanau / parents to seek their wants/desires/needs from the school and the system. These meetings can be well attended but sometimes not and are often just talkfests. Maybe the high-profile “committed” who make the claims / statements should make themselves available to attend these public meetings and assist their communities in determining what can be done locally.
            • Bill 11.1.2.2.1.1

              4 September 2011 at 10:31 am

              “Guess the real issue is of government support for Maori pedagogy initiatives.”

              Or, more expansively explore such educational initiatives as A S Neill’s ‘Summerhill’.

              http://www.summerhillschool.co.uk/
      • Vicky32 11.1.3

        4 September 2011 at 6:25 pm

        Simple. The education system was constructed by privileged white people in order to cater for their needs.
        Effectively then, the education system reflects the mind set of the white middle class and white middle class kids find it easier to interact with and negotiate.

        Sorry, that’s arrant nonsense! I have been a part of that system and have also steered two sons through it. We are not and never have been middle class, (what a vile idea!) and my older son is part-Maori. If the system’s so institutionally racist, how come brown people who are not Maori, do fine? How come any of we working class people manage to get any qualifications?
        • Bill 11.1.3.1

          4 September 2011 at 6:48 pm

          In line with some other ‘noble’ defenders of the education system you are…look, nobody is saying all Maori or other non-dominant cultures or all working class kids will fail in the system. No more so than women will fail in the workforce.

          Do you really believe that working class values and the values of non- European cultures were built into education systems?!

          edit . Samoans achieve in the same ratios as middle class white kids, do they? You got sources for that contention of yours?
        • ropata 11.1.3.2

          4 September 2011 at 6:59 pm

          I have to agree with Vicky, our education system is one of the most Maori friendly institutions in the country, educators are doing one of the toughest jobs around and all that special interest groups can do is bitch and moan.
          • marty mars 11.1.3.2.1

            4 September 2011 at 7:39 pm

            “our education system is one of the most Maori friendly institutions in the country” Yes but comparing with a very low base means that that means nothing. It might be friendly compared to other institutions out there but it is not serving Māori well – that is obvious. Māori are not a special interest group but partners to the Crown and the reason that many Māori feel let down is because the education system is just not good enough for Māori, not even close. That has nothing to do with teachers – good, bad or ugly – it is society, it is institutionalised.
12. thejackal 12

    3 September 2011 at 2:35 pm

    Cameron Slater did another Fran O’Sullivan copy and paste post today about Nicky Hager’s new book called Other People’s Wars. The oily one says he’s not going to believe the information in a book he hasn’t even read because the source documents haven’t been revealed.

    Nicky Hager should do exactly that. He can pub­lish his source
    doc­u­ments with­out reveal­ing his source. He should do it promptly.

    Releasing source documents usually does exactly that… It reveals the organisation where the documents are located and the people who have access. If they are redacted to avoid this, they will just provide information already contained in the book. The RWNJ’s want a witch-hunt, because they can’t handle the truth.
    • Bill 12.1

      3 September 2011 at 3:12 pm

      nah. They’re right. There is no Bradbury Manning person. Never existed.
      • Vicky32 12.1.1

        4 September 2011 at 6:41 pm

        There is no Bradbury Manning person.

        I take it you mean Bradley Manning..
13. Jum 13

    3 September 2011 at 2:44 pm

    Thanks to all who commented on the father who hit his toddlers. I certainly agree that those that read it will think WTF and also that so many people seem to think that many women deliberately go on the benefit with a second/plus child on the way. Have they ever bothered to consider that the woman had finally decided that maybe the child was more important than the marriage/partnership, in keeping with our interest in having children at the centre of our society’s policy-making?

    I have calmed down now; if the person who had added the headline to that article was in front of me, now, maybe I could have impressed upon them how dangerous their manipulation of the written media has become.

    We can all understand sudden welling up of anger. But let’s not pretend it is less than what it is – violence against someone smaller.
14. Jum 14

    3 September 2011 at 2:44 pm

    I know that in newspapers the headlines are thought up elsewhere. That suggests that Kiwis have lost control over their own information sharing. With the NZPA out of the way, Key and backers will control our very future.
15. Draco T Bastard 15

    3 September 2011 at 4:21 pm

    The call by the RWNJs for total disenfranchisement of the poor been gaining momentum for awhile now. This is something we need to address and loudly. Make it clear to the majority of the people that the right are on a quest to stop them having a say in their community. To ensure that only the rich have a say in government policies, that government truly does become government of the poor, by the rich, for the rich.
    • NickS 15.1

      3 September 2011 at 5:21 pm

      lawl@ Slater’s and Kate’s epic whining.

      Perhaps they both need hugboxes complete with a built in sound system playing a selection of some of ACT’s “special” policies.

      And irony of ironies, Slater’s basically advocated stripping himself of his basic right to vote, even more pathetic is that they both fail utterly to understand democracies and somehow think a minority, with no money to fund extensive lobbying, can somehow have a major influence. On top of the other juicy stupidity Pagani noted of their own hypocrisy vis selfishness in voting for tax cuts or wanting a return the undemocratic FPP and it’s vile offspring.
16. Jim Nald 16

    3 September 2011 at 5:41 pm

    “Front of the queue”?

    Pagani calls Billshit on the use of obfuscatory English:

    “The obfuscatory talk about ‘New Zealanders at the front of the queue’ to buy our power companies has been torn away with yesterday’s disclosure that foreigners will be able to buy parts of our state-owned enterprises. And if Kiwis do get a holding, why wouldn’t they then resell to foreigners for a quick buck?”

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/blogs/john-pagani-left-leaning
17. Jim Nald 17

    3 September 2011 at 5:59 pm

    Congratulations to Kataraina O’Brien, New President, MWWL.

    Putting whanau first, indeed!

    “The Maori Women’s Welfare League has a new president: Kataraina O’Brien.

    “Ms O’Brien, a Tauranga City Councillor who has been a member of the League since the late 60s, campaigned on a message of taking the organisation back to its roots of putting whanau first.

    “Despite a nomination declared valid by a judge after a wave of controversy, Hannah Tamaki – wife of Destiny Church leader Bishop Brian Tamaki – failed to attract enough support to win the presidency.”

    http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=135950&fm=psp,tst
    • William Joyce 17.1

      3 September 2011 at 6:41 pm

      Hopefully that puts that nasty little affair to rest but maybe not.
      Trouble is, with their protestant evangelical zeal for “manifest destiny” and “ordained to rule”, we may see a less obvious, less brute force, invasion of the league.
      She did herself no favours bringing High Court action but now she can stack the vote stealthily over time.
18. Treetop 18

    3 September 2011 at 6:10 pm

    I wonder if Owen Glenn is positioning himself to buy energy shares when the night mare begins (selling 49% of energy shares)?

    This morning Glenn stated that he is going to sell his overseas company (not sure of the name) and he will announce this in October when he is back in the country.

    Also on The Nation this morning he was not asked about the sale of state assests, (correct me if I am wrong as my hearing is impaired severly in one ear).

    He gave Goff’s employment project for youth the thumbs up. What really surprised me is that he said he would put 100 million into youth education/employment and said it would be more if National was re-elected.

    On again at 8 am tomorrow on TV 3.
    • Brett 18.1

      3 September 2011 at 6:14 pm

      Generous offer, but fuck me he must despise Labour.
      Can’t blame him though the way he was treated by Clark was just bull shit.
      • Jum 18.1.1

        4 September 2011 at 5:50 pm

        Brett,

        I said pre 2008 election that Owen Glenn was setting up Clark and Peters. Peters was popular and NAct wanted rid. Then they could attack Clark through the trumped up charges against Peters. I still believe that.

        Parliamentary parties were happy to stab Peters in the back; they thought it would bring them more votes.

        Owen Glenn the tobacco company agent – hardly the morally upright sort of person you would want to get too close to. He offered the money to Labour. Clark didn’t ask.

        This was a giant set up by Glenn. He’s now back with Sean Plunket dribbling all over him and with Sean feeding him a question they both knew the answer to. What is in this for Plunket? He’s not even pretending anymore to be objective.

        NAct is pulling the same crap they pulled last election. Are people so stupid they would believe this garbage again from people like you, Brett.
    • William Joyce 18.2

      3 September 2011 at 6:31 pm

      Glenn said that he would give the money if National and ACT won the election
      The headlines should be…….
      “Owen Glenn Tries to Buy NZ Election”
      “NZ has the best democracy that Owen Glenn’s money can buy”
      “Glenn offers to buy National a government”
      “NZ Voters Get Hundreds of Million of Dollars if they elect National”
       
      This is outrageous political vote buying by the rich!
      • Treetop 18.2.1

        3 September 2011 at 6:35 pm

        William I thought that Glenn said he would give 100 million either way, but much more were National to win. Not his actual words but content.
        • William Joyce 18.2.1.1

          3 September 2011 at 6:44 pm

          Plunket asked him (and I’m paraphrasing) : so you will give hundreds of millions of dollars if National and ACT win the election?
          Owen Glenn said yes.
          You could be right about the 100 either way. I’ll watch again in the morning.
          • Jim Nald 18.2.1.1.1

            4 September 2011 at 7:43 am

            It’s our democracy, not his kleptocracy
          • Treetop 18.2.1.1.2

            4 September 2011 at 11:25 am

            William Joyce you were correct that the offer was providing National/Act won the election. Please accept my apology. Just managed to see the relevant content again this morning. Glenn came across as being smug. First he states how he thinks Labour’s youth employment strategy has merit, then he states that he will put money into youth and education, then he hesitates on the amount, but specifies at least 100 million, and makes a conditiion on National/Act being re – elected.

            I recall yesterday Glenn saying that the country was broke.
      • Draco T Bastard 18.2.2

        3 September 2011 at 7:16 pm

        +1

        Seems that business people expecting to buy our government is becoming normalised.
19. Treetop 19

    3 September 2011 at 6:26 pm

    Yes the offer is generous and providing National don’t run the thing, youth will benefit because National have proved to be clueless when it comes to the future of those who have their whole working life ahead of them.
20. thejackal 20

    3 September 2011 at 6:37 pm

    How about that Owen Glenn eh! Buying votes for National and Act by offering to give them $100 million if they win the next election. If he actually gave a damn about New Zealand, he would donate that money no-matter what side of the fence won. Besides, vote buying is against the law:

    Electoral Act 1993 – Part 7 – Corrupt and illegal practices – Bribery

    Somehow I don’t think the corrupt cretin is going to be charged.
21. ak 21

    4 September 2011 at 1:26 am

    Owen Glenn actually won the election for NACT last time and seemed to enjoy the limelight, not to mention the intense and expensive “relationship building” from NACT that both preceeded and followed his effete knifing of Winnie’s back. Not surprising that any physically repugnant neanderthal would seek to repeat a serendipitous occurrance, let alone this particular vain, repulsive, moronic puppet.
    • Treetop 21.1

      4 September 2011 at 11:37 am

      Glenn always shows up around election time and he gets media attention.

      If he is sincere about helping the desperate plight of youth he should be unconditional, however if he wants a project run a particular way he should be entitled to run the project that way providing it is lawful in every aspect and does not discriminate. The man turned a few thousand into half a billion, and the country is broke, NZ youth need all the help they can get.
22. Anne 22

    4 September 2011 at 11:47 am

    Where is the Labour Party on this latest Glenn declaration? Sitting (as usual) with their hands folded beneath their backsides? This is blatant bribery and should be publicly denounced. This is the same pretentious creep who lied about the content of conversations he had with Helen Clark, Mike Williams, Winston Peters and sundry other individuals simply because he didn’t get his own way with them. He was never called out on it by the media of course.

    To hell with his tainted $100 million dollars unless he is prepared to donate it without such political strings attached.
23. Carol 23

    4 September 2011 at 6:31 pm

    I can remember the time when rugby was the game for kiwis from all classes…. then came professionalisation.

    This morning on RNZ several people were waxing lyrical about the business opportunities for NZ business people (probably mostly businessmen), when foreign business types are here for the Rubber Wool Cup. It’s all about building relationships, they said…. sounds like fertile ground for cronyism.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/sunday/20110904

    Tonight on One News, reporters were gushing about all the private jets arriving in NZ, bringing celebs for the RWC.

    And where will the many less well-off Kiwis be while all this schmoozing and brown nosing is going on?

    e.g. all the obvious and hidden homeless in Wellington, with several families living in a small flat or house?
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/5558310/Housing-crisis-sees-hidden-homelessness

    Too many of these journos seem totally out of touch with the lives of many ordinary Kiwis and battlers.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS