Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
8:13 am, December 22nd, 2023 - 107 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
For those interested in playing Whamageddon you can find the rules here.
haha, cruel.
(do people still have autoplay turned on though?)
Looking for a place to party on New Year's Eve?
AI is watching you!
https://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/news/133496062/thinking-of-throwing-a-party-in-an-airbnb-over-new-years-ai-is-watching-you
Cowardly Museum management kissing up to a homophobic and misogynistic ideology. It could have supported science and tolerance.
"The spectre of J.K. Rowling’s belief in biological sex, her defence of gay people and her concern for women’s rights may indeed make a handful of employees at Auckland Museum feel uncomfortable and unsafe. They’ve been well-trained. The common rhetoric within trans activism is that to mention the facts of biological sex is hate speech and causes literal harm to vulnerable transgender people. It’s an inherently fragile and precarious position to decide your own safety is determined by everyone in society adopting your world view. It also reeks of authoritarianism.
Auckland Museum is not some quaint faith-based private venture. It’s a rate-payer funded public institution with a natural history department and it has cancelled an exhibition because of its links to someone who believes in biological sex. What’s next? If the Auckland Museum wants to run an exhibition on the wonders of evolution will they withdraw because fundamentalist creationist Christians declare they are “deeply uncomfortable”? Will an exhibition that focuses on astronomy not astrology be cancelled when they receive hand-wringing emails from staff members who strongly identify as Sagittarius or Gemini and lament the deterioration of their safe space."
https://theministryhasfallen.substack.com/p/the-terrible-truth-about-jk-rowling?r=nbtqn&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
They got slammed hard for one lighting show supporting Israel after the Hamas attack, so they have good reason to be gunshy.
They probably should focus on dinosaur exhibitions, Egyptphemera, and curating their exhibitions and ensure there is still a museum to interpret contentious current events in a century from now.
Was the museum forced to cancel, or did they choose to cancel?
They are able to make independent decisions?
The question is are they able to make decisions independent of the pressures of gender identity activists.
I haven't read the Spinoff piece so don't know in this situation, but we know that there is significant coercion from gender identity activists in NZ and abroad. People lose their jobs and careers over this. Does the threat of career loss count as force?
Did you read the subbstack article? I thought Garwhoungle explained clearly what the issues are with the museum's role and the decision they made.
"The question is are they able to make decisions independent of the pressures of gender identity activists. "
The question is are they able to make decisions independent of the pressures of any activists? For example, those who hold strong views about Te Tiriti o Waitangi?
What would be an example of a comparable exhibition about the Treaty?
Some staff might object to a Treaty exhibition for the reasons the protesters objected to Te Papa's exhibition.
so an exhibition on the Treaty that was inaccurate and misleading?
According to the protesters.
Translations leave more than enough room for plenty of mistakes .Maori only had the Maori version to sign most Maori could not read or write as they relied in verbal history repeated through constant repetition .But Northern Maori had built the first schools and understood English probably better than most of the early settlers 'sailors and soldiers. They were not happy with the treaty. Since the treaty Maori have been gaslighted and bullied dehumanizing to make it easy to keep Maori on the bottom of the heap so Maori have no power keeping Maori impoverished destroying Maori culture by the imperialist vultures who have taken everything leaving Maori with intergenerational poverty.While the imperialists have had intergenerational wealth.Transactions between Maori and European started off as good but when phase 2 of colonization takes place European settlers defrauded Maori out of vast tracks of land knowing full and well how valuable that land was.Insider trading that would be called today.Maori didn't have independent legal advise on any land transaction until the 1880's only because religious leaders stepped in because they could see Maori were being fleeced another crime.
Seems the protesters were correct 🙂
At the time I believe Maori literacy was higher than settler literacy. Can't find the reference at the moment.
And some might object to a revised presentation – because it doesn't fit with their understanding of the topic. There are different understandings of the Treaty – much though the radical left might decry them.
Someone can always object to something about an exhibition. Especially when they are designed to provoke interest, discussion and challenge perceptions.
It was an internal matter for the museum, wasn't it?
They have responsibilities to their staff that are different to those toward the general public. I think you are conflating the two groups.
“They have responsibilities to their staff that are different to those toward the general public. I think you are conflating the two groups.”
Dear me, no. Staff can have a range of opinions about topics – just as the general public can.
To assume that all staff within an organization share your radical perspective, would be a mistake.
?
that was an excellent piece.
I read it. It describes the " museum’s" decision to support staff who felt the exhibition would make them feel unsafe. That seems reasonable, supporting your staff that way.
“In which Auckland Museum cancels a natural history exhibition because of associations with the author of Harry Potter.”
In which Auckland Museum cancels a natural history exhibition because of concerns of staff.
if it's reasonable to base curation policy on staff needs to feel safe, does that apply to religious staff who are upset about some of the science in the museum?
How about women staff who feel unsafe with an exhibition based on the art of the misogynistic Picasso?
It would be up to "the museum" to decide in those instances, wouldn't it, as they did with this issue. Perhaps if staff felt a Picasso exhibition would make them feel unsafe, the museum would make the same decision. It's up to them, I suppose.
Gosh. So if there is a staff member who is 'uncomfortable' with a display on the Treaty – it should immediately be cancelled?
How about climate change? – there's certainly a lot of controversy about that one – and many different perspectives are likely to be held within an organization. No displays on that topic, either.
I doubt there would be a single painting in the Auckland art gallery which *isn't* open to controversy of one kind or another. Should we shut down all of those exhibitions, then.
Cancel culture is going to ridiculous lengths.
Gosh, if the museum so decided.
They, I presume, know more about it than we do, given it's their bread and butter and they know the ins and outs, the behind the scenes details, better than us.
Great. I look forward to your unequivocal support when any Museum, gallery or other space decides to cancel something you care about. After all, it will be a decision that they make "knowing more about it than we do"
Personally, as a ratepayer in Auckland, I do feel that I have a mandate to criticise what I see as poor-quality decision-making, unduly influenced by a loud minority of staff.
Of course you can criticise, you are doing that here.
So am I.
Yes, indeed.
It's clear that we have very different philosophical approaches to freedom of information.
What do you mean?
"It's impossible…" – "the left's mission" – hmm…
https://www.foxnews.com/media/museum-scrubs-jk-rowling-harry-potter-display-transphobic-views-reducing-impact
Money, money, money (magic)
Must be funny…
This particular facet of 'trans' makes for some strange bedfellows.
Tbh, I'm a bit surprised that our Auckland museum followed suit with Seattle's Museum of Pop Culture – whatever next?
A little humility goes a long way, imho, regardless of where you (assert you) are on the sociopolitical spectrum, and whatever unequivocal Bs you might have in your bonnet.
Happy Holidays to us all; and bless us, everyone!
Climate Change is Climate Change. There is only one perspective. It exists and its going to get worse. A person can choose to accept the overwhelming scientific evidence or they can be wilful and stupid and claim it either doesn't exist or not caused by human behaviour. They are categorically wrong so their so-called perspective is null and void.
Obviously the museum is trusted with making decisions, so yes, it is up to them. But it's not a free for all. So would you mind explaining why you think that political safety of this kind should be the deciding factor?
I don't know what all of the factors behind the museum's decision were (though I did read the long Spinoff article when it was first suggested here). It seems that commenters here are objecting to the museums decision to can the exhibition for personal political and ideological reasons, where I am arguing that it's up to the museum – my position on the rights or wrongs of Harry Potter, the beasts he finds himself amongst, JK Rowling, activists, etc. have no place in my argument.
Thanks for clarifying, that really helps.
Up to a point. As a former metropolitan museum employee you will no doubt be aware of the constant internal dialogue around public space and serving stakeholders. I'm not really a fan of museums making hard and fast decisions around who is and isn't a stakeholder in this way. The exhibition has no political bias in it, and is not spreading factual untruths, so this is basically a political move, and it's a very dangerous thing when museums start making political moves.
I think they made a decision based on various factors; staff concerns, visitor comfort etc. and can be perceived as having a political aspect, depending upon one's politics.
All exhibitions can be perceived as having political bias.
Edit: “and is not spreading factual untruths” – it features un-true, invented creatures, does it not? Just wondering…
I saw this in the sidebar: time to go outside and plant something 🙂
Robert Guyton to Robert Guyton
good idea! Plenty here that still needs to go in teh ground.
So the 'concerns of staff' trump the actual mission of the Museum?
What a load of cobblers.
There have been many occasions when staff in a public information role (libraries, museums, etc) are working in a space where they may not personally agree with a particular display, presentation or event.
As an information professional – you suck it up, and get on with the job.
If you have ongoing concerns about a conflict between the mission of the organization and your personal ethics – you look for another job.
You don't impose your personal ethical beliefs on the organization.
Does the museum have a requirement to ensure staff safety? Surely they do. Interpreting that would be up to them, I expect.
Is the requirement to ensure perfect 'staff safety' greater than their requirement to deliver information? Surely not.
Especially in the situation where 'staff safety' is only compromised by being confronted by a world-view which is different to their own. [We're not talking about them abseiling down from the rooftops, here]
This is Ethics 101 in any information science qualification. Any information professional who is unable to separate their personal identity/ethics from those of the organization they work for – is in the wrong job.
Auckland Museum will now have to figure out a way to cover any resulting holes in their budget. I do not think the Auckland Council (the funding body) will be very sympathetic to requests for additional funding – when the Museum has turned down an opportunity for what would be a highly lucrative touring exhibition. Especially in a cost-cutting environment
"Is the requirement to ensure perfect 'staff safety' greater than their requirement to deliver information? Surely not."
Seeming, it is. The museum will have weighed the issues then made their decision, I expect.
From the link:
"The decision was ultimately based on the views of a small group of staff members who declared they were “deeply uncomfortable” with the exhibition because of the associations with Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling. "
A small group of staff being 'deeply uncomfortable' is hardly a reason to cancel the event.
The museum thought otherwise. Being on the spot and in full receipt of the details as I suppose they were, I guess we should credit them with the responsibility to decide fairly.
I am not so generous, Robert. I tend to agree with the author of the linked article:
"The spectre of J.K. Rowling’s belief in biological sex, her defence of gay people and her concern for women’s rights may indeed make a handful of employees at Auckland Museum feel uncomfortable and unsafe. They’ve been well-trained. The common rhetoric within trans activism is that to mention the facts of biological sex is hate speech and causes literal harm to vulnerable transgender people. It’s an inherently fragile and precarious position to decide your own safety is determined by everyone in society adopting your world view. It also reeks of authoritarianism."
Such a lot of supposition in that quoted segment, David.
"They've been well-trained"?
Sounds like an ideologue making assumptions.
You've highlighted a four word sentence and completely ignored the argument that followed.
I have (highlighted) and haven't (ignored).
The "four word sentence" is representative of the entire quote, imo.
There is a lot of it about. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/students-defamation-case-against-academic-accused-of-being-transphobic-bigot-thrown-out-by-judge/ILUUYLDYMZEEZEXTJDPVSEMWF4/
So you think the museum cancelled the show because of a high minded concern for the feelings of 2 or 3 staff members?
Really Robert .I didn't think you would be so naive
They cancelled the show out of fear of rowdy activists picketing and compromising the safety of museum goers /staff is my feeling.
And they were afraid of a facebook lynch mob
You reckon.
"So you think…" is often the prelude misrepresenting the thoughts of another.
Museums often quietly welcome protest – it raises the profile of certain exhibitions. I reckon you're speculating. As we all are 🙂
*disclaimer – I worked in a city museum for 2 years.
Question mark there you may have missed
Are you saying that the museum's duty is first to avoid discomfort of a very small minority of staff members before addressing the benefit of the public ?
Is that what museums are for in this new age where biological sex can be "changed" at will
Tell that to the plants
"Are you saying that the museum's duty is first to avoid discomfort of a very small minority of staff members before addressing the benefit of the public ?"
No. I'm saying that the details of why the museum chose to do what they chose to do is known best to them; speculation is fun, but faulted.
"Is that what museums are for in this new age where biological sex can be "changed" at will"
I don't understand that sentence at all, sorry.
I've planted gobo and toona so far. Casana and Japanese aralia next!
The many fraught emails that went to and from between museum officials laid out their fears of public backlash
As to the second paragraph you say you don't understand
maybe I can rephrase
We live in a post modern age where words can stand in place of physical realities.
For instance "someone born male can be a woman just by declaring it"
My long experience with the natural world does not reflect this
My long experience with humans divorced from the natural world and increasingly engaged with an unreal cyber world. is not hugely surprised but somewhat dismayed by that kind of thinking
Fear of public back-lash is a reasonable consideration for the museum to entertain. It would be unreasonable to expect them not to take it into account.
As to the second…
Your example, "someone born…" doesn't interest me much and isn't part of my thinking about why a museum might reject an exhibition.
Your comment, "My long experience…" could apply to people holding the opposite view to yours, I imagine.
I happen to strongly agree with you regarding the value of connection with, and especially close observation of, the "natural world", but I'm not sure about the perils of "engaging with an unreal cyber world.", as we are doing here. I like pushing the envelope through reading/watching material from the cyber world, safe-ish in the knowledge and confidence that I have gleaned from my time spent watching seeds sprout, fish feed, clouds roil and birds warble. The question of "what is natural" must surely be the topic a discussion somewhere and would no doubt be convoluted and heated 🙂
Who said that, and is the belief reality-based, i.e. the "someone born male can be a woman" bit, and/or the "just by declaring it" bit?
Imho, "someone born male" can be feminine, but not female, and there’s an application process (forms/fees) to change one's 'sex-marker' and/or ‘gender’.
https://www.govt.nz/browse/passports-citizenship-and-identity/changing-your-gender/
I acknowledge the flood of problems in the 6 months since a new self-ID process replaced the Family Court process. Maybe our new govt will address 'the issue' in due course – could be right up their alley.
It's interesting that the new hydra headed confabulation is doing nothing about self ID. I guess that is because National and ACT supported it and NZ First did not make doing anything about that an important coalition condition.
Nothing so far about “sex based identity facilities in public buildings” from the coalition either.
I agree with you that gender can be expressed within a very wide spectrum and I applaud it .
I welcome difference.
It's when it becomes an imperative to accept nonsense that men can become women by dint of will or surgery or other social interventions that I balk.
JK Rowling has attracted a huge amount of hate for standing up to those who declare its possible to change
"JK Rowling has attracted a huge amount of hate for standing up to those who declare its possible to change"
Why did she "stand up to" those who believe "it's possible to change"?
Why do you feel antagonistic towards people who don't support her "standing up to" those folk, many of whom are New Zealanders.
Huge amount of hate & support, generating heat – trans issues polarise.
https://www.transgendertrend.com/support-j-k-rowling/
https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy
Ideally, people should be free (and supported) to be themselves, as long as they're not not harming others, and shouldn't feel sad about who they (feel they) are. But feeling sad is part of the human condition.
It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas.
Sorry – got tied up in Xmas not nots
How could staff at a museum possibility feel unsafe due to an exhibition?
Being exposed to art, literature, or any other type of display at a museum or art gallery can in no way cause harm to employees.
However I do understand that some individuals may become upset when exposed to ideas that do not conform to their world view. In this instance, it is not a safety issue. To suggest it is makes a mockery of "health and safety" in the workplace. Just ask any builder, construction worker or engineer who actually works in a hazardous environment.
One would expect that employees who work in a museum, art gallery, library, or any place that may have displays, or exhibitions which can be challenging etc, would be resilient enough the cope without "feeling unsafe". It's part of the job.
"How could staff at a museum possibility feel unsafe due to an exhibition?"
I guess you'd have to ask them, or the managers they approached with their concerns.
"Being exposed to art, literature, or any other type of display at a museum or art gallery can in no way cause harm to employees."
So, anything goes, so long as it's art, no matter who works there? I can think of plenty of themes that would traumatise some people, especially those who carry trauma from experience – no thought to be given to their wellbeing, do ya reckon?
We tough-as blog-commenters should just tell those softies to harden-up!
No Robert, they are not actually unsafe.
It is inconceivable that someone who’s career is working in museums or art galleries would be, or would feel unsafe from an exhibition.
They might feel uncomfortable with an exhibition, but that’s why they do the job.
Unless of course they have some ideological reason to shut something down. This would go against any museum or art gallery’s core reason for existing. Therefore again, the type of person who would feel unsafe with an exhibit in a museum or art gallery, would not pursue a career in a museum or art gallery
"the type of person who would feel unsafe with an exhibit in a museum or art gallery, would not pursue a career in a museum or art gallery"
Art galleries attract sensitive people, you must be able to see that. Often, those people have liberal, across the spectrum world-views, with regards politics, gender, how they dress, what they watch and listen to. Naturally, they can be "tender" when it comes to some issues.
I think some folk here are irritated because some people of the sort I've described, succeeded in an action they took, based upon their ideology. They managed to "defeat someone" who is admired by some folk here and they find that annoying. Is that the case with you, Terry?
It seems rather odd to characterize J K Rowling, or anyone for that matter, as someone who "believes in" biological sex. Surely if no-one "believed in" biological sex the human race would come to an end.
there are people who believe that sex isn't binary and that people can literally change biological sex.
When GC people say they believe in biology, what is meant is that they adhere to the science that has demonstrated that humans reproduce by two sexes (only), and that these sexes cannot be changed.
So, yes, not believing in sex is a nonsense, but where we are.
Staff feelings – Why are staff at TVNZ able to cope with Harry Potter films being shown? Or those of news media with reports mentioning JKR by name?
Or is it staff or building safety – protests and graffiti? If so, the protestors veto.
The censorship issue
The exhibit harms no one, but the precedent of suppressing creative work does.
The idea that a group of people is harmed, if someone is not blacklisted/boycotted because of their opinions is frankly a McCarthyist reprise.
On the merits, the censorship of someones works based on disapproval of their political position on a matter unrelated to the work is wrong. And the case for censorship of someones works because of disapproval of the political content ranges from somewhat credible to negligible.
My personal feeling is that while J K Rowling has become quite loathsome with her doubling down on being all chummy with outright fascists on social media, banning a harmless exhibition is the worst kind of superficial virtue signaling.
It's an interesting position to be in – JK Rowling's on this issue. I have no problem with women's safety advocacy.
However people like Angela Dworkin, not a tame feminist, was very wary of feminists working with the conservative political right. As some like Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshall do.
What happens, when two sides entrench themselves in positions for a long cold war, is that their own idealism is compromised in the struggle – they develop a gang mentality. And so they support others on their side and get tarnished by association.
A local example, in 1983, Douglas posed New Zealand adopting market economics and becoming a free trade based economy and got acceptance from Lange as his Finance Minister. He got support from the political right for this and became an applause junkie going further and further to the right to get his fix.To the point Lange lost confidence in him.
That JK Rowling gets support from the right is unsurprising and not her fault – she does not support the political right because of this. But she is being dragged into mutual support with others who call for the annihilation of the feminist "gender" tolerant left. When she would probably see herself as feminist and supportive of the political left. The hard-liners of the cause are prepared to use the political right as partners, but I suspect that Dworkin will be proven right about that tactic being a dangerous one (Dworkin was opposed to prostitution and pornography, just like K-J K-M by the way).
https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/
It's very much her fault if she's going to align herself with people like Matt Walsh and Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshall, liking their posts, promoting their work.
I do not know about her connections to Walsh.
Matt Walsh is known for being anti LBG, and works for Ben Shapiro former editor in chief of Breitbart News.
https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1737970157614514200
https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1546141988139016194?s=20
This tweet provoked rather a lot of consternation on those grounds. Some might say that when one is a very public figure, one should take the time to know who one is platforming.
Well she did say his use of the word “comment” indicated some ignorance (an inaccurate euphemism) and he should back off.
Ah, but it was followed by this little outburst of mutual admiration
The criticism continued
Sure she did agree with criticism he made about some women's groups. That is because many embraced the "gender" cause, as one of progressive solidarity with others.
In that tweet, JKR is telling Walsh to shut the fuck up. A very large follower account telling someone to shut the fuck up isn't platforming them. She's using her power to push back at Walsh blaming feminists for gender identity ideology and there are solid reasons to do so. She's also running interference for other feminists, again a good use of her power. And, she’s making a strong political point about the nature of violent misogyny directed at women who speak up about GC issues, something that the left used to help women with once upon a time.
Implying she didn't know who Walsh is is an example of what I've been talking about. People in this debate who are generally clueless about large aspects of what is going on because they bought into the TRA/liberal PR that there are only two sides: virtuous pro-trans people and evil anti-trans right wingers. JKR is neither of those. And of course she knew who Walsh is.
What was going on in that tweet is that Walsh was a late comer to the gender/sex wars, and because he's an ultra conservative, misogynistic, women in the kitchen, dickhead, who happens to be very good at what he does with social media, he colonised the GC movement, and now blames women for whatever he can. As part of his conservative agenda.
Walsh laying down blame, feminists responding and setting the record straight, is an ongoing feature of the war. Which you would know if you actually listened to what GCFs are saying.
Feminists have been debating about how to use material from Walsh for ages. In this case, that wasn't even what was happening, JKR was simply calling out his lies.
Hmmmmm seems quite cosy to me https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1546162915107037185?s=20
what she says in that tweet,
1. She expresses her opinion about his film (one I share, he did do a good job of exposing the incoherence of GI and its harms).
2. she reiterates her point that it's not women that are to blame for the rise of GI.
That's a large follower feminist account, speaking publicly to a large follower ultra conservative account, so that people can see the counter argument.
I can't speak to her motivations, but having watched her strategy for a number of years, she is smart. How I read this is that it's better here with Walsh to engage in an evenhanded way than go all angry feminist on him.
She doesn't give a shit about liberal brownie points, this is another thing the left is missing. There's a liberation that comes for women when they stop caring about losing favour. Once it goes past a certain point, those feminists are much freer to work in more effective ways.
The other group which want to ban Rowling and all her works, are the fundamentalist Christians (promotion of 'witchcraft')
Are the far left trans-positive campaigners comfortable with those bedfellows?
Proof is required for that sort of statement.
Exhibitions are not automatically selected by museums; a board most likely, will assess and decide. They have discretion to do as they please, mostly. Internal issues can have some influence over final decisions. In this instance, they (probably) did.
TVNZ staff won't have to experience the (ephemeral) films over a long period of time; they may choose not to watch them. Museum staff are more likely to be personally exposed to a prolonged, high-profile exhibition. The situations are not equivalent.
https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/13-12-2023/why-auckland-museum-pulled-the-pin-on-hosting-a-hit-harry-potter-exhibition
An encouraging read…
Buying the farm in a burning world
“We’re in this process of dreaming a farm back into being in the hinterlands of the ruined provincial capital in our remote corner of the crumbling empire.”
“There are no profane places, only sacred and desecrated places. And I wonder what it will take and what it could mean to restore, to reconsecrate, this place?”
https://dark-mountain.net/buying-the-farm-in-a-burning-world/
As I've noted many times the travesty of not implementing WEAG when there was a collective expert, policy, community and public support was abysmal. Helen Clark blew the opportunity to help the most vulnerable by only helping those on NZS and so did Jacinda by failing to follow through.
Still Labour are the original architects in NZ of this neo-liberal shit-storm so we should not be surprised.
[TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]
Democracy…..ok…. lets see how Winston who is pro rail and the other two heads, who are pro trucking in the monster that is the current govt, avoid going off the rails…
NZFirst policy on rail: https://www.nzfirst.nz/2023_policies
I see a very strained relationship developing…….
And…….Josie Pagani now cheerleader for the trucking industry……..
"Instead of spending billions on new ferries capable of carrying trains, stick with moving freight by truck, and put the money towards other priorities………. argues Josie Pagani.
https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/nz-news/350135936/you-think-2023-went-rails-wait-until-you-see-2024?utm_source=stuff_website&utm_medium=stuff_referral&utm_campaign=mh_stuff&utm_id=mh_stuff
There will be a need for either a truck or train load of popcorn in 2024………Sadly there are those among us who will need life lines………….
[TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]
Trains boats and planes. I recall an airport being an issue in 1998.
New roads are not fixes to existing ones crumbling because of trucks. The new roads do not last 50 years like the Kiwi Rail plan infrastructure does. New roads do not reduce carbon use.
Well dear moderator I beg to differ…it was on topic and far from irrelevant…..perhaps you should look at the words and the context in relation to quote: "The coalition government has hijacked the democratic process for its own partisan and nefarious agenda….."
Perhaps it was mentioning Josie Pagani….
But hey, no big deal…Merry Christmas to all….
On balance, I felt, as the Author, that the comment was more suited for OM and the reply comment by SPC confirmed this (this had already been submitted when I moved the whole thread). It had nothing to do with JP
No big deal and no harm done.
Nicola Willy latest gaffe says its the size of the sausage not what you do with it was she replying to Hipkins gaffe or gushing over her sausage shaped leader
She's playing the goofy real person card. All while delivering increased inequality and deprivation.
My thoughts also, SPC – scripted "gaffe" – she can't be a BSD, but she can allude to them.
Some positive developments at last …
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/301031134/health-officials-boost-security-in-eds-over-summer-to-help-keep-hospitals-safe
PS I'd add a notice in these areas stating that some security have access to tasers/pepper spray.
World News : What is really going on now.
The PA and the political wing of Hamas are in talks about Hamas coming under the PLO umbrella and the return of the PA to Gaza.
This is opposed by the military wing of Hamas.
So when Hamas says no more release of hostages until the IDF action ends (withdrawal from Gaza) this has two related meanings.
Essentially for this to occur Israel has to defeat the military wing of Hamas in the south as well, as in the north, or for someone to take the military forces in Gaza (an escape route).
The cynic would suggest a ship takes them to Libya. So they can form a new refugee camp, or get hired into team Russia or team Turkey in their civil war.
The hostages are a sideshow. Largely irrelevant in the big picture.
Meanwhile in white race nation news, revivalism has arrived down under.
The defeat of One Voice in Oz and indigenous peoples rights in New Zealand (except for Tuhoe nation and maybe Waipounamu, where Nga Tahu co-govern with Queenstown and farmers).
The symbolism of the bonfire is well known at Ephesus and the USA – Indians and New World settlers burnt to the ground each others settlements. And later in the American south after the end of slavery.
https://www.1news.co.nz/2023/12/22/the-year-that-began-and-ended-with-labour-policy-bonfires/
She means the trucking industry influence within the National Party.
So even if there is a wider New Zealand interest in the capacity to move rail goods over the Cook Straight, the government will say they will not deliver – unless there is some external capital source providing a partner to Kiwi Rail in the InterIslander service or the whole business.
So if New Zealand's overall interest is placed first – it's all in favour of Kiwi Rail's plan, improved speed of goods movement, allows for increased volume and reduces the carbon footprint.
https://www.1news.co.nz/2023/12/22/interislander-ferry-govt-to-set-up-expert-advisory-group/
It's going to be interesting to add up what's been spent already on the cancelled ferries, what it'll cost to bracket the existing contracts , what the review costs and what willis' plan b costs , bet it'll be close to labours plan with a crappy outcome.
The land of excuses. You cannot give foreign aid because there is poverty at home. Poverty at home, is no excuse not to give the hard working middle class a tax cut, end the bright-line test on investors, or allow debt cost to reduce tax on rent income. And here is a new one …
New roads are not fixes to existing ones crumbling because of trucks. The new roads do not last 50 years like the Kiwi Rail plan infrastructure does. New roads do not reduce carbon use.
https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/nz-news/350135936/you-think-2023-went-rails-wait-until-you-see-2024?utm_source=stuff_website&utm_medium=stuff_referral&utm_campaign=mh_stuff&utm_id=mh_stuff
Three strikes and you’re out. This simplistic rule is heavily promoted by ACT and made it into the coalition agreement under the header “Restoring Law and Order and Personal Responsibility” yet, ironically, ACT doesn’t abide by it. (NB the National-Act Agreement shows ACT’s pathological obsession with anything ‘regulation’)
As before, ACT’s renewed attempt at “meta-regulation” comes under heavy criticism from Jane Kelsey.
https://theconversation.com/acts-attempt-at-regulatory-reform-in-nz-has-failed-3-times-already-whats-different-now-220140
We can use our tax cut to pay those rising rates.
/
@JonoMilne
At @NewsroomNZ, I've obtained a letter from Local Govt Minister Simeon Brown, telling councils he’ll relax consultation/audit requirements so they can lock in their rates plans. Some propose rates hikes as high as 33% because of the Three Waters repeal.
https://newsroom.co.nz/2023/12/21/three-waters-repeal-forces-councils-to-hike-rates-by-a-third/
https://twitter.com/JonoMilne/status/1737648009268351137
We’ll have to.
So, here's something that perhaps sums up and perhaps explains why Labour lost.
A govt dept (customs) was furnished with plug in hybrids to replace older vehicles early in the year as part of emmisions reductions. So far so good right… excepting that no charging infrastructure in the building the vehicles are parked was provided so 9 months later and 40k on the odometer the charging cables are still in the packaging and they've been running on petrol the whole time.
Very depressing.
[TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]
"Martin Foo, an analyst at S&P Global Ratings, say the extension of the statutory deadline should provide welcome breathing space for councils that need to go back to the drawing board now that the incoming government has confirmed the repeal of water services legislation.
On whether the new “financially separate council-owned organisation” would be considered by lenders to be distinct from its council owners, he says the devil is in the detail.
The rating agency would need to assess whether financial separation is genuinely achieved, not just in an accounting sense but from a credit rating angle too. Foo says there’s still something of a disconnect between the letter’s idea of “local decision-making” and financial separation. “It is not easy to disentangle political control from financial control.”
https://newsroom.co.nz/2023/12/21/three-waters-repeal-forces-councils-to-hike-rates-by-a-third/
It is worth noting that the recently announced rates increases were made on the basis of no provision of water, waste water and stormwater services by councils…..they were to be charged separately.
[TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]