As part of the coalition government, the Green MPs have delivered us up the Zero Carbon Act. A reading of the Act reveals that it has not one single measure to cut GHG emissions, nor any measures at all to keep to the targets set out in it.
I defy anyone to say that it does.
Setting out targets is good, but with no measures to achieve them targets are meaningless.
I could set a target to be a millionaire in ten years.
I could even set down intermediate targets, that to reach my goal I will need to meet a target of a $100,000 a year.
Sorted.
To give myself further excuse not to implement any measures to achieve my target, I could push my millionaire target out to thirty years from now, so that no one can really check whether I achieve it or not.
I defy anyone, who after reading the Zero Carbon Act was to conclude, other than that, the Zero Carbon Act is a corrupt attempt to put off doing anything about climate change in the here and now.
The political system has limits, no use putting up a bill that doesn't have support, from the electorate or coalition members
The zero carbon bill, and I agree with you , its severely limited, is an illustration of whats possible at the moment (in a time when benign dictators aren't a thing)
James did his best for cross party consensus. Don't blame him, blame the incremental nature of politics, and the resistance of dinosaurs
Get out on the street, encourage and join the kids on climate strike Fridays, build the movement for change,change your own life.
Indeed he has done. This is how politics should be done and kudos for him for achieving this. It would not have been easy.
Don't blame him, blame the incremental nature of politics, and the resistance of dinosaurs
Human social groups, at whatever scale, have a fundamental problem to solve; how to respond to the unknown, the novel and to change. When faced with strangers, or new information and ideas, we have two possible responses. One is to open up and embrace them, the other is to close off and resist them. Crucially both strategies serve a purpose.
Being open means that you get first mover advantage with fresh ideas and can react to changing circumstances more rapidly. The downside is that not all strangers are benign, some will be dangerous and threatening. And not all new ideas are good ones, most in fact will fail … some fatally.
Being closed means that you avoid these risks, and by trusting the 'tried and true' it is more likely you will survive in the short term. This is important, there is no value to investing in a better future decades in the future, if you die this winter because the crops failed. But conversely resisting all innovation and novelty also ensures failure in the long-run; failure to adapt and being out-competed by more agile neighbours.
Obviously the correct solution is some balance between the two; but how? The same person cannot easily be both open and closed at the same time. Humans appear to have evolved a fascinating way to deal with it; some of us are open, some are closed. When faced with something new, we each respond according to our temperament and then we talk about it. We socially argue the case for and against and arrive at some consensus. We try the plan out, see what works and what didn't and repeat. It's quite a smart solution.
With climate change the process got subverted when the big fossil carbon players borrowed a strategy originally devised by the tobacco companies. The basic idea was not to win the argument, but to prevent consensus from being formed by provoking the resistance of the naturally cautious among us. And us more open types attacking them only makes them more cautious and more reactionary. (This too was part of the plan.)
It was only after we went for the tobacco companies themselves, the source of the disinformation, that we reached a consensus and took effective action. The same applies here, but on a larger scale.
We can be closed to social change yet open to economic change and vice versa
We are generally a mixture of fears and conservatism, optimism ,altruism and the whole bleeding mess
The time frame, the imminence of tipping point and collapse probably means that striving for consensus in a democracy just loses us more time .
I still think, lets shift our consciousness first, away from anthrocentrism at all costs, then whatever comes after(technological fixes, new strategies )is coming from an inclusive, sustainable and happier place
“I still think, lets shift our consciousness first, away from anthrocentrism at all costs, then whatever comes after(technological fixes, new strategies )is coming from an inclusive, sustainable and happier place"”
True, but on any given issue we generally take one position at a time. Otherwise you run the risk of being perceived as 'talking out both sides of your mouth'.
The openness personality trait is highly predictive of holding to progressive or left wing political views and I'd wager most of the regulars here at TS are very open types. We have lots of different ideas and we debate them vigorously, but more closed conservative people are either rare or simply don't come here.
Yet in political terms they constitute roughly half the population, and in terms of my outline above … they serve a vital and useful purpose in the debate. Conservatives may frustrate the hell out of us, but in collective terms they usefully keep a society grounded and functioning on a day to day basis.
It's my view that progressives would achieve more if we approached them with this broader understanding and worked with their natures rather than against them. This would be inclusiveness at work, would it not?
The other thing is that putting up a bill destined to fail reminds me of a time I was writing a provisional report on a project, and drafted it "Some _____ refused to participate…". My boss pointed out that this essentially committed those non-participants to their position, and suggested the redraft "Some _____ were reluctant to participate". I learnt a lot from that boss.
The political system has limits, no use putting up a bill that doesn't have support, from the electorate or coalition members
The zero carbon bill, and I agree with you , its severely limited, is an illustration of whats possible at the moment (in a time when benign dictators aren't a thing)
James did his best for cross party consensus….
Why Consensus Stinks!
The Australian term white-anting comes from the action of termites that hollow out and empty something that looks fine on the surface.
The Zero Carbon Bill is an example, white-anting any real action on climate change, looking substantial, but completely hollowed out of any real action.
The argument made for the Zero Carbon Bill by its supporters, is that we have to seek 'Consensus' with the National Party, otherwise when they get back into power they will repeal any concrete legislation we put in place.
Apart from being a weak defeatist position, this argument is actually not proven.
The Nats never repealed the Nuclear Free Legislation. Labour have never repealed the Anadarko Amendment. Phil Goff traveled the Country in a big red bus with "Kill The Bill" (the National Government Bill to increase GST to 15%) before admitting that if he was elected he wouldn't repeal it.
Consensus is not democracy it is an attack on democracy.
As Winston Churchill famously said, Democracy is the worst of all possible systems, except for all those others that have been tried.
Democracy has been described by its detractors as the dictatorship of the majority over the minority.
This is the sound of ideologies crashing, sang Billy Bragg
Consensus is an effort to paper over these differences between ideologies.
And it fits into one of those 'worst ways' Churchill spoke of.
Consensus is not democracy.
Consensus is going for the lowest possible denominator to achieve unanimity.
Consensus is an effort to silence and stifle political debate. To suffocate the sound of ideologies clashing.
The tragedy of Consensus politics is that it robs the electorate of making a clear choice between one way forward and another.
Consensus politics prevents us hearing the arguments between both ways forward, and for making an informed decision with our vote.
Consensus politics murders democracy in back room deals between politicians.
At its core what consensus politics displays, is a lack of faith in the people.
Consensus politics is an abrogation of leadership.
I defy anyone, who after reading the Zero Carbon Act was to conclude, other than that, the Zero Carbon Act is a corrupt attempt to put off doing anything about climate change in the here and now.
Oh, fuck off. We went through this yesterday. If you don't understand why Labour/Green don't have either the numbers in Parliament or the electoral mandate to implement the policies you want to see, read up on the subject or just don't comment on it. Alleging corruption (even scummier than yesterday's accusation of cynicism) is a grotesque insult to people who had to fight hard to get even this level of legislation on the table and have shown a far greater commitment to doing something about it than you have.
If you want to see your preferred policies implemented, join one of those two parties and put in the hours and the money to help them get more MPs in Parliament. Insulting them from your armchair will just get you more "Fuck off"s.
I wonder if Shaw, Davidson and Ardern would prefer 'useless leaders' rather than 'corrupt'?
One description is acquired by simply failing to do what was promised (i.e. dealing to climate change with the same vigour and commitment as was afforded the nuclear free policy) while the other requires some forethought, planning and cooperation. One is simply passively muddling along while the other is deliberate and active.
The way I see it (from someone who bought the whole Green thing and voted accordingly, in a household where the rest largely voted Labour for the same reasons.) is that none of the above named party leaders have the heft of Winston.
A truly committed and charismatic leader would have been able to bring others along in such numbers that Winston's own caucus would have been putting pressure on him to at least meet L/G more than halfway, and the three could have all contributed to a Bill that we could have been proud of. As it is, we're left with a lilly livered and truly pathetic piece of legislation that condemns our children to a bleak future.
Restoring support services which were defunded and cut completely by the NACT government…support which was provided to many of the most at risk groups in NZ…
Support which is literally priceless…but for which proverbial pennies of funding per year (few millions)…in monetary cost to retain, restore and fund those same priceless services into the future…
Winston First is courting the rural vote and was always going to be a problem. If he can't hold those votes his party is gone. Letting the coalition fold would be a better option for him if the cost of maintaining it was to lose those votes. Where is all the criticism of NZF?
I take it as read that we all know that 'the problem' is Winston….I suspect there are NZF Members who would dearly like to participate more positively in climate change mitigation…but there's Winston….and he doesn't give a shit.
He just gets to sit at the table again, play kingmaker again, handicap real transformative policy implementation again.
His voter base are dying out.
And none too soon.
The leaders of the other two coalition parties need to do much, much better.
As for the 'rural vote', again, the generation of farmers with callous disregard for the environment are a dying breed. Many farmers now see that SSDD (literally) practices are not sustainable and change needs to be sped up. Shaw near breathlessly reassuring us that there is 'no need to reduce stock numbers' when even many farmers know there are plenty of good reasons to was just sad.
I'm not claiming to have the answers, I'm just telling it as I see it. The Zero Carbon Act is a joke if its purpose is to mitigate the effects of climate change. Only true and decisive leaders with definitive policies and messaging will effect change.
We're told repeatedly we are approaching climate change crisis…you'd never believe that going on the response from our government.
I still have no idea what it is that you would have them do. It is irrelevant what Green and Labour policy is if Winston is better off to end the coalition than support it.
Farmers are still the biggest sector opposing meaningful Climate policy. Have you not been paying attention?
Public disagreement that outlines the stumbling blocks would be a good start. Then the discourse is out in the open, and the general public get to decide for themselves who is looking out for future interests and who are looking to protect their positions.
It seems that at the moment, even those who voted for this coalition government are not permitted to critique their performance. And unfortunately criticisms are often valid, and if they are not even acknowledged and used to improve then we have a coalition government that is trending towards the arrogance and disregard of the previous.
The consequences of climate change, insecure housing, appalling child poverty, our health system and inequality do not lie in suspended animation until the next electoral term, they impact on us all now – some much more than others. My impetus as a voter for addressing these issues is not to maintain the employment status of my limited choice of politicians, but to continue to ask for change in these matters.
Politicians should not be so concerned with polling and reelection, that they don't use the opportunity they possess to start public awareness and discussion. This coalition government is not even progressing in that department.
@ solkta. This kind of dismissal is what I am talking about.
The deference shown by Shaw for the farmers concern about methane limits, is not based on science or acknowledgement of what needs to be done. If I was not aware of the issues of climate change, and was not yet informed of the immediacy of need for transition, then seeing James Shaw – leader of the Green Party – on television, downplaying these issues and congratulating this coalition government on coming to an agreement – would have a negative impact, along the lines of:
"Even the Green Party leader is not concerned about methane, or feels that a carbon-zero bill that aspires without consequence to a carbon-free 2050 goal is worth pursuing."
For those in New Zealand whose current knowledge of the issues of climate change are non-existent or slight, this will be one of their main news items on this topic. Disturbingly, it will reassure many that if even the Greens are not concerned, the status quo can continue for the foreseeable future.
Does this explain the disquiet that I share with others on this forum?
OK, how about them? The parties with those policies have 43% of the vote, ie 53 out of 120 MPs in Parliament. Please explain why you believe it would be possible for that minority of MPs to enact those policies as legislation in their entirety. And not just why it would be possible, but why it's so obviously possible that you feel free to berate the parties' leadership for failing to do it.
….Please explain why you believe it would be possible for that minority of MPs to enact those policies as legislation in their entirety. And not just why it would be possible, but why it's so obviously possible that you feel free to berate the parties' leadership for failing to do it.
Hi Psycho,
I could name half a dozen green policies that the Green MPs have refused to champion in government.
The iniquitous Anadarko Amendment to the RMA that makes it illegal to protest deep sea oil drilling. Is one of the things that the Green Party have refused to try and repeal, The law that makes it illegal to raise climate change in consent hearings for new fossil fuel projects is another piece of iniquitous piece of legislation that the Greens are happy to leave in place, for the sake of 'consensus'.
At a time when many voters have trouble telling the political parties apart, the last thing we need is more consensus between them.
Consensus muffles the sound of 'ideologies clashing' making it harder to differentiate between the parties vying for our vote.
Let's have the arguments out, let us hear them.
Consensus turns the political spectrum into one whole amorphous mass.
If all the parties have consensus on climate change why vote for the Greens? Indeed what is the need for a Green Party? We are all in agreement. We have achieved consensus.
One of the key demands of XR is for 'politicians to tell the truth about climate change' papering over the differences between political parties on this issue, is not telling the truth about climate change, it is covering up the truth about climate change.
Do you not realise that many NZF voters are National defectors who can't cope with voting Labour or Green and that if it collapses they will probably go back to National? And then we would have a National government again. This coalition government has to make many compromises, but half a loaf is better than no bread.
The various iterations of the New Zealand Election Study (2008-2014) suggest those swinging to NZF have disproportionately been former Labour voters (& – as with most smaller parties – switchers comprise a significant segment of NZF support).
What's more, NZF voters have chosen Labour as their preferred Coalition partner in 3 out of the last 4 General Elections (including overwhelmingly in 2017).
Winston First is courting the rural vote and was always going to be a problem. If he can't hold those votes his party is gone.
I'd estimate NZF received a little over 60% of its 2017 vote from both Metro & Provincial City seats. So, all things being equal, he probably only needs to hold around a third of his Rural / Small Town vote to be sure of returning.
Your estimate is meaningless until you back it up with some stats. Even if you are right that doesn't mean Winston is prepared to take the risk or have a smaller presence and say no thanks to those votes. As he straddles the centre he needs to appear to both his left and right flanks that he is protecting their interests.
that doesn't mean Winston is prepared to take the risk or have a smaller presence and say no thanks to those votes.
No, it certainly wouldn't be his aim … but I do take issue with the idea that holding / expanding his rural vote is an absolute necessity.
(2)
Your estimate is meaningless until you back it up with some stats. Your estimate is meaningless until you back it up with some stats.
Started by adding the NZF Party-Vote in all Metro (Akld / Wgtn / Chch) & Provincial City seats (ranging in city size from Gisborne (East Coast) up to the two Dunedin & two Hamilton seats).
Then (based on a rough estimation), I subtracted the likely Rural / SmallTown NZF vote in those Provincial City seats that weren't entirely urban … then added the likely Urban NZF vote from the Maori seats (as with the General Roll Provincial Centres, this was according to a broad estimation of what proportion of Maori seats were urban / rural).
Made some allowance for error within my estimation.
Then simply calculated the final result as a proportion of the entire Nationwide NZF Party-Vote in 2017.
Hence, I'd estimate NZF received somewhere between 59%-62% of its 2017 Party-Vote from both Metro & Provincial City seats.
It is possible to be very precise … but that would involve going through every single booth in the Provincial Cities … but, you know, benefits considerably less than the enormous energy invested … law of diminishing returns
(3)
As he straddles the centre he needs to appear to both his left and right flanks that he is protecting their interests.
The various iterations of the New Zealand Election Study (2008-2014) suggest:
– those swinging to NZF have disproportionately been former Labour voters (& – as with most smaller parties – switchers comprise a significant segment of NZF support). Over those 3 consecutive Elections, around two-thirds of switchers to Winston's Party came courtesy of the Left (overwhelmingly former Labour supporters … but also a small segment of former Greens) / one-third from the Right (overwhelmingly former National voters … but also a sizeable minority from ACT / Cons / Maori Party). (my calculations from raw Flow-of-the-Vote stats from the 08-14 NZES).
– NZF voting-base can best be seen as a segment of the morally-conservative Left. Most of the latter group still vote Labour, but a section swung to NZF back in the 90s, while even more have moved in Winston's direction over the last two decades. (Although they haven’t always remained particularly Loyal).
– Which, in turn, explains why (as I pointed out to JanM) NZF voters have chosen Labour as their preferred Coalition partner in 3 out of the last 4 General Elections (including overwhelmingly in 2017).
It is too easy (and convenient) to apportion the lack with Winston, as you note there must also be a willingness to prevaricate on the part of the other parties….and expressions of anger and disappointment are to be expected just as they are frequently on other topics, and rightly so otherwise everyone would have fucked off long ago
The nuclear-free legislation was enacted without any negotian needed, by a Labour government that held 56 of the 95 seats in Parliament. If the Green Party currently held 55% of the seats in Parliament, I expect the Zero Carbon Act would look very different – wouldn't you agree? But they don't hold 55% of the seats in Parliament, they hold 7%. Can you see how that might make a very big difference to their legislative ability?
Re "charismatic leadership," NZ First is a party of provincial conservatism and its fundamental principles are in some respects completely opposed to those of Labour and the Greens. Environmental policy is one of those areas. How do you picture "charismatic leadership" getting a party to go against its fundamental principles? For instance, can you picture a charismatic National leader getting the Green Party to cooperate with it on an extensive programme of privatisation?
Perhaps you should, because that's a terrible summary of events and an unrealistic belief a party not even in a coalition government can set such an agenda.
The only way to get hard green policy is to vote for more green mps.
Hard Green Policy would compromise New Zealand's national security posture. It's standard Green Party Defence policy to cut tier 1 defence assets, frigate, P8 and anything over 50cal. That these defence assets is vital in securing not only New Zealand's natural resources but that of the South Pacific as well means the Greens will not be able to pull the majority to their side.
If there were 30 green mps, they'd have plenty of leverage, and plenty of green policy. You just have to vote for them instead of whining about how useless they are.
And where do you think those extra votes would come from?
The reason being. Last election when Labour dropped to 24% and the Greens were polling at 15% Labour claimed they wouldn't look at forming a Government with Little stating Labour would need a considerably greater share of the vote to form a government. Despite (at 24%) still potentially having the numbers to form a Government.
Therefore, it seems Labour would have rather let National win than be forced to work with a stronger Green party.
Less of the goal post moving and more substance to the point.
If you want more green policy there has to be more green mps. That must be a given. Knowing this, bashing the greens for not doing enough when they don't have the numbers to force legislation is an admission of not understanding how parliament works, or an excuse to put the boot in to suit an agenda… Or both.
Once you admit there needs to be many more green mps in the house, in government, to push through green policy, then we can talk about where they come from.
I'm not bashing the Greens for not having the numbers. I'm bashing them for not using their nous and showing us what work they are actually doing to help achieve more.
I admit if the Greens had the numbers to win an election that (more green policy) would be what one would expect. However, that is highly unlikely on their current and past polling. Moreover, very unlikely on their current performance in this term.
Taking their policy is in general 'radical' for NZ, you've consistently bashed them for watering down or not getting what they sought. No cites needed, it's archived. Even in these exchanges you've bemoaned them for not achieving and doing enough to get elected in greater numbers.
That's incorrect. You've been called out. Therefore, cites are indeed needed.
Furthermore, you initially stated radical Green policy now you are shifting the goal posts by claiming that all their policy is radical. In which case you should have initially stated all Green policy. Therefore, best you stick to cites that reflect your initial assertion which is radical Green policy and not all Green policy which you are now attempting to reach for.
Additionally, me bemoaning them for not doing enough to get elected in greater numbers also doesn't prove your initial assertion.
Nope, no cites needed, as all your anti green comments are archived, as will your efforts from today will be.
If there's a mod call to find posts where you have criticised the greens for not getting that policy through unfettered, then sure I'll list some, but prepared as I am, as they are numerous and no doubt fresh in the minds of most green voters here to gain consensus for my statement, I'm sure that call won't come.
It wasn't that Labour could not work with a stronger Green Party, they had an MOU and lots of policy in common, it was more that Winston wouldn't have been able to deal with the Greens being a bigger partner.
You are as transparent as a transparent thing. A really crap troll.
Labour weren't even prepared to find that out. Therefore, their unwillingness to even have a crack at strongly it suggests it was Labour putting the kibosh on it (working with a stronger Greens).
On those numbers you gave above 24% and 15%, of course there was no way to form a government. How on 39% do you propose they had a chance?
But guaranteed, if that were even remotely possible, with that ratio, you'd have many green ministers and much more real green policy getting legislated. Fact. And you’d still moan about it.
At the time, even with nz1st, it wasn't doable on the numbers, and then if it were, what Solkta wrote above.
Yes, it was. Even Guyon was taken back at Little's/Labour's poisition.
As I said to solkta, Labour weren't even prepared to find that out.
And it was this unwillingness to even have a crack at it that strongly suggests it was Labour putting the kibosh on it (working with a stronger Greens).
It's speculative at best to assume winston would have gone with labour and the greens at that level of support for the green party and accepting a minor position as last cab off the rank, and in playing for more votes, to rule out dealing with nz1st, I can see why Little could have backtracked, but solkta's scenario seems far more plausible.
So you clearly don't know how mmp works in government, and choose to blame the small number of green mps, not even part of the formal coalition, for having to compromise and not being able to effect radical change they want to.
But your position is crap and based on a total bollocks understanding of how much a very small number of green mps can achieve under a confidence and supply arrangement.
My position is based on their dreadful performance to date. And is shared by many. Even within the Greens, they know they have been lacking the fight, made many mistakes, and have swallowed too many dead rats.
You trying to blame this on my misunderstanding is a joke.
See that's where you fall down. You don't accept that in this government they are bit players having to compromise to get anything, and the only way to change that is to have more green mps and get them in a proper coalition.
And I don’t think your misunderstanding is a joke, I think it’s quite deliberate.
Not at all. Those failures mentioned are admitted by the Greens themselves.
Without addressing their weaknesses, achieving more MPs is very unlikely. And merely securing more without addressing their weaknesses is unlikely to improve their performance.
What seems to be deliberate is your failure to see and understand this.
The weakness is they don't have the numbers to roll out their ideas without compromise 🙄
No genuine green voter is going to turn on the party because they aren't pumping out their policies ten to the dozen. They know, just like I do, that you can only do what you can with what you have.
Most greens will be encouraged to push harder in the run up to 2020 and work for the party and it’s ideals, not sit on the sidelines and cry crocodile tear laments.
I'm not denying I go the Greens. Almost everyone knows that. But I have a go at them on valid grounds. Which is why most rebuttals end up being directed at me and not the valid points I've raised.
The weakness is they don't have the numbers to roll out their ideas without compromise
Yes, most understand that. However, that's not the weaknesses I just alluded to above, which the Greens themselves largely admit. And it is these weaknesses that they require to correct to better perform, which will help grow their support and performance going forward.
You can't expect them to substantially grow their vote on their current performance – and their polling largely reflects that.
I don't expect them to be pumping out policies ten to the dozen, that's just you trying to suggest I'm some kind of extremist expecting them to perform beyond reality.
The reality is, they've made a number of costly mistakes, they lack backbone, and failed to gain fair compensation for the dead rats swallowed. Furthermore, they talk a lot about pushing hard for certain issues but show little if anything on the work being done in regards to those issues and the progress being made or setbacks faced.
noted (and taken on board) – but please note that this is in reply to A poster who seems to have lernt a new term “fuck off” and is quite happy to tell people to do so should they dare to say something he/she didn’t like.
I never said that James Shaw was corrupt. I said, (and I quote), "the Zero Carbon Act is a corrupt attempt to put off doing anything about climate change in the here and now."
Possibly a bad choice of word, I could have said is a 'corrupted attempt'. It is corrupted by the very nature of the process.
James Shaw is trying to solve a political problem, by bureaucratic means. A political problem cannot be solved with bureaucratic means. This just cannot work.
The problem; National Party’s intransigence over climate change. This political problem cannot be solved by pandering to National. In my opinion National's intransigence over climate change must be confronted openly and publicly denounced and demolished, it’s called politics.
History shows that a leader convinced of the rightness of their cause and with the confidence to get up and openly and courageously fight for it, can win over a majority from a minority position.
It's called leadership.
And it does not depend on the size of your majority (or lack of) in the house.
In prewar England the wealthy class and their political representatives, the Conservative Party were riddled with fascist appeasers and fifth columnists and even open fascist sympathisers. Churchill who had been elected into the house as a sole 'independent' MP for his Constitutionalist Party, (You couldn't get a more minority position), did not try to make peace with these appeasers, from his seat in the back benches, he denounced them at every opportunity.
The rest is history.
Another example is over the debate over nuclear ship visits. The Labour Party from the opposition benches through the strength of their argument was able to win over the majority of parliament to support a minority private members bill to ban nuclear ships. Which two National MPs crossed the floor to support.
Again, the rest is history.
This is how political differences are fought out.
In my opinion, in trying to seek common ground with the National Party, James Shaw has not just given up on politics, he has given up on leadership.
Problem is your “How you get there antidote” is about as deep as a puddle on practicality and as a workable solution Are you a secondary school student
Bewildered doesn't attempt a practical answer to anything because '"Everything may be done, but nothing should be done for the first time'. Yes Minister. e&oe
Randomised controlled trials – comparing one action to a different action – are the obvious and proven way to work out how to do things better. Yet somehow, when it comes to some fields, large numbers apparently believe it's immoral to conduct RCTs. WTF?
This makes me curious enough to want to do a small study on how The Standard community interprets data from studies.
Imagine tribbles escape from the South England Spaceport, and their expanding population is nearing womble habitats. The Society for Womble Protection are concerned that wombles sharing their habitat with tribbles will adversely affect them, so they run a trial putting wombles and tribbles together sharing the same spaces.
Wombles are well studied, there are 80 independent tests, measurements etc that are done to measure womble well-being. As is common, p<0.05 is adopted as the significance level for reporting a result suggesting adverse effects (less than 1/20 probability of the observed result happening by chance).
The SWP study checked all 80 markers, and reported they observed the test wombles had more nugs on their nagunoids than normal, and elevated miasmia levels.
These results were of concern to three other groups, who then repeated the study as closely as possible. None observed increased numbers of nugs or increased miasmia, but one group found depressed motivon levels, the second group observed increased hyperchitinism, the third group observed increased thyromia activity and decreased collaberism.
So all up, four groups each studied studied the 80 possible indicators of decreased womble well-being, and there were 6 results suggesting adverse effects outside the normal range.
I'm curious what first impressions The Standard participants get from these results, and what next steps readers think should be taken. Such as, OMG, six demonstrated risks, tribbles must be immediately contained then eradicated to protect wombles. Or, meh, the data looks all good for the wombles to me. Or, the four studies show conflicting results, we need to do more studies. Or, whatever else you come up with.
My first instinctive reaction is that our old friend Bayes is lurking within this data somewhere, but I lacked a justifiable prior to make a case.
Assuming that each of the four studies reported their adverse findings at a p<0.05 level, then the next obvious question is why did all four find significant adverse outcomes, but all found different ones? Clearly like many sociological results we're suffering from a bad lack of replicability here.
On this basis I would conclude that our four studies suggest there something going on, after all none of them found no adverse effect, so they don't support the null hypothesis (ie no adverse effect at all) … but neither do they prove one. We're really no better off than if the studies had not been done at all.
But because we have only one population of wombles, and apparently isolating one randomised, unbiased sample of them from trimbles is not possible … then the gold standard of RCT's looks impossible to implement.
I'm curious to know if there is a way around this problem.
I tried really hard to set it up so that if Bayes came sniffing around I could tell him to fuck right off, it's none of his business.
As far as the randomised controlled trials part of it goes, imagine it has been previously established that wombles suffer no ill-effects from being confined to enclosures by themselves. And that it has been previously established that there are some other critters that wombles can co-exist with in enclosures without suffering ill-effects, while there's some other critters that do cause ill-effects when enclosed with wombles.
I'm getting the impression your base position is that natural systems are so complex that trials inherently oversimplify things and can therefore never produce reliable data. Is that close to being a fair interpretation of your view?
In the case of mammals the size of wobbles, yes. If your scenario revolved around say, bacteria, then there's more chance of a valid result. Wombles are sentient beings, so they may conspire to mislead you; have you taken that into account
Thanks, that covers the question I had in mind at the start of this thread.
But given your position as a councillor that may be called on to make some kind of call on whether to accept or reject something new and how to regulate it, I'm still curious about how you view the numbers. Imagine it was something simple and controlled enough you were comfortable that controlled trials produced useful valid results.
Say, allowing autonomous delivery vehicles to replace posties and couriers.
So of 80 factors examining previous areas where autonomous deliveries were allowed, the first study found increased unemployment, and more cats getting scared away from their homes (p<0.05). The subsequent three studies did not find increased unemployment or more cats going missing. One study found more complaints of residents' driveways getting blocked by the new autonomous vehicles than used to be blocked by human drivers, one study found more problems with junk mail littering the streets, one study found more complaints of misdelivered mail and more complaints of bored dogs barking because posties didn't stop and play with them anymore (ok, I'm reaching).
Do you think these four studies show allowing autonomous delivery vehicles will cause increased problems? What next steps would you want to take?
Really, really sorry for butting in but no way do we want to take humans totally out of the loop. Eisenhower when he coined the term Militray Industrial Complex was warning of the profit motive of war.
Ron Mark Minster of Defence dosnt want full autonomous war fighting. Could you imagine a war fought with all drones. War between drones dosnt have to stop.
So these guys pushing drone technology are flooding the private sector and making up the worlds boardrooms and it's them pushing full autonomous networks for profit and well, we have to be conscious of the military applications at the same time.
At the same time Weaponising drones isn't something that's in New Zealand's control. We've got China and America vying for technological supremacy and apart of that will eventually spill over into robot wars. So there's this double wade sword again of progress and innovation or not being able to keep pace with innovation.
Perhaps we we should be asking whether or not an autonomous network should be privately owned or publicly owned.
It's not just ownership that would be an issue. Companies have personhood. So these robots wouldn't just have the same rights as humans they would have extra rights, for one they don't pay taxes. We can't eat robots so can't hunt them. They will be competing for the same resources and jobs as humans but we won't be able to attack them like an animal because they will have the same rights as a company would have. So no, I don't think auto networks should be privately owned. Whether or not it is a mature technology does not preclude a future government from regulating the industry. Laws lag notoriously far behind tech innovations anyway.
Yes quite. And that is also relevant to the discussion…
Robots however are only one component of a discussion around automation
Private automation co-exists with public automation…
Public or private as a legal construct won't alter that human beings are not in control of present day automation…
And therefore…can't be in control of future automation…
I get you were referencing <em>warfare…</em>
I'm referencing the entirity of automation…which includes human beings as a component of the processes…processes which are rendering our speicies…irrelevant.
Yeah, we killed God when she gave birth to us and AI will kill us when we birth AI. My only hope is transcendencing by uploading my consciousness into a computer. It's the closest humans can possibly get to God like, all knowing and that.
We are just entering the 4th industrial revolution of AI. We don't even know what technologies are installed for humanity but if competition for resources can be controlled by making technology so cheap, technology doesn’t have to be free, just so cheap every one can participate.
It is? I haven't heard of an autonomous network that actually exists. Which one are you referring to, and what's the basis for your belief that it's no longer controllable by humans?
Well I understood what onesies said. To mean a technological paradigm shift. Arguably paradigm shifts are out of the control of humans.
While this may be the inevitable long-term future of society, I see this as nothing but an extremely bad idea.
Then again, I have objections to anything even remotely like Pornhub meets Startrek holodedks the PG version (to hell with centralization), so I'm unfairly biased.
When considering the scientific approach to everything and putting rationality and practicality (apparent) as first and foremost in decision making, I recall the opinion of Aldous Huxley expressed to George Orwell on his book '1984', that the demand for efficiency will ruin our civilisation.
Aldous Huxley – …May I speak instead of the thing with which the book deals — the ultimate revolution? The first hints of a philosophy of the ultimate revolution — the revolution which lies beyond politics and economics, and which aims at total subversion of the individual's psychology and physiology…
My own belief is that the ruling oligarchy will find less arduous and wasteful ways of governing and of satisfying its lust for power…can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience. In other words, I feel that the nightmare of Nineteen Eighty-Four is destined to modulate into the nightmare of a world having more resemblance to that which I imagined in Brave New World.
The change will be brought about as a result of a felt need for increased efficiency.
So while Random Controlled Trials and other scientific methods are useful in making decisions, the question remains as to which decisions, and who or what do they serve? Is it 'good and cost-efficient government, respectful of the wellbeing of all people and thinking of all sentient and other living things of the earth – now realised as so important ie fungi in the soil? Or is it serving some obsessive need of a group who have divorced themselves from everyday simple living which is all that is needed by human society?
"Do you think these four studies show allowing autonomous delivery vehicles will cause increased problems? "
Each of them shows an increased problem. None were supported by any other study. Overall, no valid statement about increased problems can be made based on those studies, imo.
What next steps would you want to take?"
Introduce the vehicles. Field complaints, compiling data until causation is established, adjust their use until a happy medium, agreed to by most, is reached. It's rough, but hey, why not take a punt
Actually, I'd want to debate the issue with my fellow councillors, hear from our expert staff , hear from the promoters/designers of the technology, invite comment from other councils using the vehicles, then petition the public for their views.
Thanks. FWIW, it's at the better end of what I might hope for from an elected official.
I'm curious, is that response informed by any further education in formal statistics beyond what you had to do in high school, or is it the outcome of a lifetime of trying different things to see what happens?
Well, as a councillor, I follow process when it comes to such decisions but as well I try to influence what gets considered in less formal forums involving councillors and staff.
My first thought when faced with ambiguous data is to ask if Mr Bayes is at work here, but I'll take it as read that this isn't the case here.
The core problem is the lack of replicability. All four studies found statistically significant adverse effects but not the same ones. Not even an overlap.
The next place to look is given there are 80 possible adverse effects we could find, and our definition of 'statistical significant' is a 1/20 probability on each one … what is the probability that we will find at least some adverse effects just by random chance?
At the risk of embarrassing my rusty stats, my first wild arse guess that it could be 20/80 or 1 in 4. Or another way of putting it, any given study will find on average 4 different adverse effects purely by chance.
Ok, since we're both engineers and our reasoning heads down similar paths, can I ask you to pause it here for a while to see what other people's reactions are, untainted by what we've got to say?
"so they run a trial putting wombles and tribbles together sharing the same spaces."
I need to know more about these trials; how closely do the conditions reflect the real-world situation; laboratory conditions need to be very carefully set and results looked at cautiously. Wombles in particular act quite differently when removed from the commons.
See my response to RL at 2.1.1. In short, imagine it has already been established that results from putting wombles in enclosures produces valid results.
My initial reaction would be that, if different people are repeating the same study as closely as possible and each getting a different result, the study isn't telling us anything useful. The method would need some pretty serious review at that point.
Well, where I'm going with this is trying to show that a claimed statistically significant result is actually much less reliable than you might think from the claimed p value. For this example, I'm trying to show that six reported statistically significant results doesn't show there's likely problems, and in fact is more likely to show the opposite on further analysis.
After all, even if the researchers act with perfect integrity using sound methods, publish all their results including all the negative and neutral results, if what's considered statistically significant is p<0.05, then 1 in 20 of all results are just plain wrong.
But when you add in publication bias (negative and neutral results are boring so nobody tries to publish them), and the way it's so very tempting to indulge in data-dredging and p-hacking when you've got a massive pile of data, it's no wonder there's a replication crisis.
Noting your question of Robert Guyton above, "is that response informed by any further education in formal statistics beyond what you had to do in high school," I can boast a C+ achieved in a remedial intro stats course aimed at first-year students who were going to need to understand stats but hadn't done well at it in school (at which point I decided the arts and humanities were going to be a more appropriate arena for my clearly limited talents). So yes, definitely not qualified to be making confident assertions about anything involving statistics.
That said, the ordinary old arts and humanities have given me enough of an education to figure out that it's completely dishonest to comb academic journals for that one line or bad result that supports your irrational beliefs and trumpet the cherry-picked fruits of your search as compelling evidence that irrationalism rules – which I think is where you were also going with this.
That question wasn't intended as an assertion of superiority accruing to those with paper quals; a bullshit detector developed from a lifetime of observation is often more useful in arriving at a sensible position when faced with unclear or even contradictory data. Then there's the problem of paper quals getting pressed into the service of baffling with bullshit, rather than trying to aid understanding.
Looking at the responses, common themes are questioning the methodology of the studies, and raising potential external factors not considered by the studies. Here I'm trying to raise awareness that a lot of what are presented as meaningful results are in fact just cherry-picked instances of random noise that are going to happen even in well-designed honestly conducted studies.
That question wasn't intended as an assertion of superiority accruing to those with paper quals…
I certainly didn't take it that way, just as an opportunity to make clear that any comments I make on social science studies are definitely not based on my expertise in the field of statistics.
These days I kind of wish I'd paid more attention back then because it would come in handy very often, given all the news stories about "new study shows X" that make my bullshit detector clang away but I don't have enough knowledge to go look at the actual study to see where the grift is.
My first impression was why did you link to the pop vox article and not the original one?
Original article: "morally problematic"
Vox: "We even use A/B tests here at Vox. If I have two headlines I really love for a story, I can arrange for different viewers to see different ones — and then I can settle on the one that’s engaging more readers."
Ta daaaa!
Vox headline: "A shocking share of the public thinks randomized trials are immoral"
As for the scenario you present, and being rubbish at stats, my first impression is that we may need to go back to basics and do some RCTs on Womble well-being measurements if four different groups can get very different results. An RCT based on suspect methodology is going to be suspect.
Sorry I'm a bit slow addressing why I linked the Vox piece rather than the original study. The original study report is a bit dry and tl;dr-ish; the Vox piece is quite a lot more readable and links to the original report for anyone that wants. The Vox piece also usefully points to further implications and questions to ponder.
1) What were the size of the RCT? Which gives the related question – what were the power of the hypothesis tests?
2) There needs to be context here. What is the value of the wombles and tribbles? Are wombles native so deserving greater protection? What are the possible unintended consequences? Is the eco-balance between wombles and shelats destroyed as the sehlat population explodes because of the extra tribble food?
Just to add extra factors. What about a different type of thinking? Are the automated vehicles needed? Are they better from APOV than at present? Is capital expenditure on them justified whether public or private – being that they will likely have to be imported?
Is it justified for us to have a permissive society of the type that says that society has to definitely opt out if business or whoever,can just opt in? Will Uber try and take over this initiative and muck it up for any former investors, start-ups?
Say compare the rules of the sex- controlled society to the society that is entirely permissive of new innovations of machines and technology? Would it be better to swap so that we are controlling of this new innovative acceptance of machines, and more permissive of sexuality? I think of the raunchy, rude meaning behind the Beatles song "Why don't we do it in the road"? Sex in the road is regarded as bad because society says so, and it is impractical anyway. But new technology on the road is accepted whether it has entirely practical uses without question, and of course it is now being forced on us on the footpath.
These perspectives would never be considered by engineers. And it indicates how slow we are to understand the great changes being forced on us. These will affect our human lives to becoming subservient to the machines that business corporates, a machine-like management system itself, forces on us. And that we people embrace, because – new, because it is 'better', because they are ubiquitous – better lie down and let machines and machine-thinking roll over you.
Douglas Adams looked at that inevitably approach – the taking of personal assets and commons by authority – when he had Arthur Dent lie in front of roadmaking machines that were going to bulldoze his house so a Council-endorsed road go pass over the land. And slyly, he introduced the method of substitution that is at the base of using derivatives in financial transactions. But that is another matter.
Thank you to everybody that engaged with the actual topic. But I gotta say I'm disappointed that there are some commenters active today that are in the habit of opining definitively and loudly on topics where an understanding of data and statistics is crucial, who have chosen not to engage.
Personally when I need to understand data sets, one of the first things I look for is the underlying natural background incidence of what I'm interested in. Together with some kind of expectation (cue Tommy Bayes asking why I told him to fuck off) of how genuinely significant results might be distinguished from random noise.
In the specific case of examining 80 independent distributions of samples for comparison to controls or a baseline at p<0.05 considered significant, I would actually expect an average of 4 "false positive" results, or 16 "false positives" on average from running 4 lots of 80. The fact that none of the positives from any one of the trials were repeated in any of other trials suggests they are all false positives.
That there were far fewer "positive" results than would be expected from purely random statistical considerations immediately raises the question of whether there is an effect going in the opposite direction to what was originally expected. Might the data actually show that cohabiting with tribbles actually improves wombles' well-being? That would be an immediate quick bit of number-crunching to run, and on the numbers I've used for this made-up scenario, I'd strongly expect that answer to be yes, it certainly appears cohabiting with tribbles is in fact beneficial to wombles.
Then there's the question of doing some kind of meta-analysis, where you combine the results from different studies to try to firm up any conclusions. In this fictional scenario it should be easy, there were four trials, three of them attempting to replicate the first as closely as possible. With any luck, the trial conditions would turn out to be close enough that the data from the different trials could just be combined together to just make a much larger sample size. If that's not feasible, there's all kinds of statistical tests (a lot of them Bayesian) comparing the results of the different trials against each other.
Sorry, Andre, I got a little side-tracked elsewhere …
A very interesting topic. At no stage did you mention effect-size!?
As you are aware, P<0.05 has become somewhat of a curse, especially in biomedical science. For one, it says absolutely nothing about clinical relevance.
TBH, I kinda figured you and some others likely to have significant statistics knowledge saw where I was likely trying to go with this and deliberately stayed out to let it run its course.
The only tweak on that would be if there were some underlying common cause in several of those observations – e.g. motivon, miasma, and nug incidence were all part of the womble's precosian system and might point to a assininus deficiency. Then it might be worth a closer look.
But the main priority would be to 1080 the heck out of southern England to stop the invasive species outbreak.
“This is not the age of reason, this is the age of flummery, and the day of the devious approach. Reason’s gone into the backrooms where it works to devise means by which people can be induced to emote in the desired direction.”
I get nervous about ideas like "the correct answer" when looking for statistical signals in noisy data. To me there's only stronger and weaker suggestions and probabilities and interpretations. All to be monitored on an ongoing basis and subject to revision on receipt of new data.
The US military has opened a twitter post to let sevicepeople express their positive service experience. Only most talk of depression, lost limbs and other serious health issues and los and lots of suicide. The overwhelming trend is heartbreaking loss and anger and violence…
We in New Zealand are shamefully slow in electrifying transport. We could and should be matching China's example, where many cities have a 100% electric urban bus fleet. Rubbish trucks, concrete trucks, delivery vans, basically anything with a stop-start urban work cycle is an absolute natural for electrification.
When it comes to smaller electric vehicles, China is yet again waaay ahead of the rest of the world. Last time I saw a breakdown of the global EV market, more than half the EVs sold worldwide were in China.
I'd guess it's that tolerance of very high charging rates that make them attractive to bus applications.
Which kinda makes me curious how really high power charging stations and their power connections work together – whether they just have a super grunty network connection and rely on the grid to absorb the massive rapid fluctuations in demand or whether the charging stations themselves incorporate batteries and/or supercapacitors to smooth their demand.
Tesla new battery is really just another new design for a solid-state lithium battery that several different places have worked on. The solid state lithium battery is coming one way or another, at the moment we're just trying to figure out who has the best design for the industry to go with, and which one will be the easiest to transition to from lithium ion. Electric powertrain designs are coming to trucks and buses. Question is will people stop buying electric cars.
I've been contemplating reforming a touring company… Electric vehicles, in NZ at least, are a bit naff. Unless I have 100k for a Tesla I can't get anything with decent range, not even to cover only the top half of the North Island. The recharge times are prohibitive for taking others on the road too, the fast charge stations…? It seems the cars here can't charge so well as the charging stations aren't very good? There was nothing to suggest I'd get < several hours to wait to recharge and extend range past 200 miles.
All in all it was a discouraging experience trying to build a green touring model. Trains etc are hopeless I have sound gear to cart around.
Back in the day the government bought rolling stock for trains that could only go half as fast as the engines – making trucks look faster. Is the same trick of light being used on chargers to make EV's unattractive, or are they shit?
Nolan Brewer has been sentenced in an act of vandalism against a synagogue, but court documents are starting to reveal some incredible information.https://t.co/CbBhsz52y7
— Emily of the State (@EmilyGorcenski) May 25, 2019
[…]
Nolan was arrested along with someone who was then reported as a minor. Court documents now reveal it was his then 17-year old wife, Kiyomi, who spent a lot of time in Discord. I wonder what her Discord name was.
[…]
HOLY SHIT.
The defense names BEN SHAPIRO as a motivation for Kiyomi's radical right wing views.
I'm losing track of how many violent white supremacists @benshapiro has helped radicalize.
Thats just a stupid way to communicate. You and Joe90 are debating in bad faith, half truths and fallacious arguments to prove that Jew+RWNJ=Auschwitz.
Its not just stupid calling normal people racist against there own people its villainous. All you are doing is claiming victim status so you can control people and I won't play that bullshit game. Villains use subterfuge and lie to control and I'm not trying to be like that.
Who called Shapiro racist? You sound awfully defensive. Also how am I claiming to be a victim? I’m merely pointing out the type of things Shapiro says. It is the racists that say they’re inspired by him. You’re misrepresenting what’s being said with half-truths and imaginary “fallacious arguments”.
All you are doing is claiming victim status so you can control people and I won’t play that bullshit game. Villains use subterfuge and lie to control and I’m not trying to be like that
You’re not trying to express yourself clearly either.
You are not only playing the victim, youre shit at communicating, you're blaming me for your stupid arguments and again, making out like I'm deficient.
So if you can please provide quotes that Shapiro is rascist against Jews.
Joe90 produced this quote "The defense names BEN SHAPIRO as a motivation for Kiyomi's radical right wing views.
I'm losing track of how many violent white supremacists @benshapiro has helped radicalize."
To which I ask if Joe90 was aware Shapiro is Jewish. It's idiotic to imply that Shapiro is in anyway way involved in rascist attacks against Jews. And Joe90 just shat all over you and took off.
Arkie. I'm finding it difficult to believe that Sam is a sincere person. He expresses himself (herself/itself) in a manner that "sounds" more like an algorithm that a person's genuine views. The modus operandi Sam uses is to make a claim, then lace further replies with insults, cryptically delivered, in order to mask the insincerity of his position and making it impossible to hold him to account for his claims. It feels more like an experiment in creating a "debating programme" than a discussion with a flesh and bone human, in my opinion.
Appeals to the audience doesn't influence the strength of your argument or position. It just goes to show how insecure and weak your ideological reasoning is. We are discussing whether or not it's cool to claim Ben Shapiro is rascist against Jews, got anything to add?
It's likely that my observations about your hypocrisy and inconsistency are accurate and you are employing your trademark caustic strategy in an attempt to dis-hearten your perceived adversary.
I reserve the right to disrespect anyone who can not have a simple conversation. As I keep saying my position is that Jew+RWNJ does not equal Aushwitz. What’s your position Rob?
You may be debating the issue, " that Jew+RWNJ does not equal Aushwitz." but I am not. As I clearly expressed, I'm making comment on your incongruous claims around debating, a discussion that began on another thread, yesterday. This is Open Mike, where a range of topics can be addressed. You have declined to address my claims while at the same times lacing your responses with a variety of put-downs. Regarding your claimed " right to disrespect anyone who can not have a simple conversation.", I presume you are referring to me, and if that's the case, cannot agree that I am unable "to have a simple conversation", in fact, I'm confident that having simple conversations is something I regularly and successfully do. Your "conversations" as evidenced here on TS, are so convoluted, infolded and obscure and caustic that it seems to me you should disrespect yourself, based on your performance so far. Kindly meant and simple expressed of course.
Yeah, I don't just reserve the right to call you a whingy little puss bag, I'll talk smack to any one who try's to act a fool. You, mods, anyone.
Once I feel that my arguments are as strong as and people begin to take the bitch route around instead of taking on my arguments directly I'll just let fire. Sorry not sorry.
TBH Iv got very little idea what you're on about talking about something I said a couple days ago.
Besides that if I do argue the flaws of IQ it would be that IQ tests are frequently used to test army recruits to see if they can gain a few extra meters than Vietnam vets.
On the other hand if I was to argue for IQ testing then I'd argue that testing is best used for high achieving Uni students rather than soilders.
And that you're still to respond to my claim that your claim is hypocritical. So, worthwhile persisting, despite your determined avoidance strategy. At this point, I've lost interest and have more useful things to do, so, see you in the soup, or, in the likely case that Incognito sends you to Coventry, see ya, Sam.
My point is you, Joe and arkie have a problem with Ben Shapiro because he is a conservative and you are biased against him and seek to unjustly smear him as a rascist.
And my problem is you make me and the rest of the left look like fucken chumps.
How convenient for Shapiro that you have absolved him of inspiring racists.
It is my position that a self-identifying racist vandal says they were radicalised by Shapiro. That's less of a position, more a response to your defense of Shapiro based on his religious identity.
Its not convenient at all. In fact it's inconvenient that I am forced to defend Shapiro from a bunch of morons masquerading as lefties trying to smear Shapiro.
I couldn't prove that Shapiro is rascist towards Jews because I believe that Shapiro is a practitioner of the faith. It's also covered in freedom of religion legislation so unless your can prove Shapiro has committed an act of violence or supported an act of violence then you're just a (insert what ever hurts your feelings the most here)
Back in 2007-08 I watched an episode of Law and Order (the courtroom drama) that had a man who murdered a black girl defending himself by saying that the rants of a right wing shock jock whipped him into such a frenzy that he ended up killing her.
Bigtree wore a universal symbol of oppression, hate, and suffering, in an effort to portray himself and his halfwitted followers as victims. Fucking scum.
I don't think you understood what was and still is going on , around that specific issue…do you?
You should be able to explain what you reckon was, and still is going on there…and therefore you understand why you are absolutely wrong to call Bigtree, scum
…but you don’t understand…do you?
Which says you are using the jewish faith to peddle your own ignorance… and I’ll request that you either stop propagating such ignorant and warped views…or at least spend some time learning what is actually going on…before you USE the jewish communities once again…
Because that is what you appear to be doing…using the jewish community …
Are you jewish or direct descendant ?
I'll get you started….fill in the blanks…
Orthodox jewish communities in NY were and are being discriminated against through use of [ ] and/or [ ] for adhering to their right to religion….
Bigtree was illustrating his distain for those who are repeating the past by persecuting those same orthodox jewish communities…
Do take your relentlessly determined dishonesty and shove it.
Instrumentalizing the fate of Jews who were persecuted by hateful antisemitic ideology and murdered in extermination camps like #Auschwitz with poisonous gas in order to argue against vaccination that saves human lives is a symptom of intellectual and moral degeneration.
Leaving the inbuilt and ingrained prejudice aside, gives best opportunity to obtain objectivity…
Then it is simply a question of investing the necessary time to explore all available angles of a subject…not superficially…. as well as seek out the intersections where there is cross over into related topical pathways…
"There was pain on both sides." Noelle McCarthy displays her ignorance of New Zealand history
RNZ National, Saturday 25 May 2019
Anybody who cares about the terrible state of our public broadcasting service will be able to point to one or more really sickening or substandard performances by the people entrusted—and paid good money—to ask intelligent questions on our behalf. I have over more than a decade recorded dozens of disastrous performances, but here are three of the worst interviews that have polluted our airwaves in this century: an under-prepared Kim Hill foolishly reading out Pentagon talking points to, of all people, John Pilger in 2003 [1]; Noelle McCarthy in 2013 allowing a right wing ideologue to excuse the use of torture by U.S. troops [2]; a baffled Jesse Mulligan opining learnedly in 2016 that Russia is "L-L-L-L-LOOKIN' for trouble" [3].
Yesterday morning, we were treated to—actually, inflicted with—not just one, but two really terrible interviews. Both of them were carried out by one Noelle McCarthy.
After the 9 o'clock news, McCarthy's guest was historian Vincent O'Malley. This was well worth listening to when he was speaking; unfortunately, however, McCarthy felt compelled to interpose her own complacent, prejudiced and slanted views. Her comments, as usual, were callow, ill thought out and deeply reactionary, the sort of thing you'd expect from some drooling old Pakeha farmer ranting in the lounge bar in a south Taranaki pub.
"There was pain on both sides…. Can we learn from the way the Americans do it with their Civil War sites?…. politicization of history…. In Ireland the IRA glommed on to various commemorations."
After the 11 o'clock news, she moved from complacent and ignorant to plain nasty. The topic, ominously for anyone who has heard her laughing about the plight of the Palestinians, was Gaza.
Sorry about that, Incognito. I've already deleted the second one, and replaced it with something to show that I do appreciate Ms McCarthy when she is on form.
I wonder how many people bother to check the accuracy of the numbers they use in a debate before making claims that depend on the accuracy of their quotes?
There was a brief letter in the "To the point" section in yesterday's Dom/Post. I can't locate it on-line but it was on page C6 for anyone who wants to see it. It was from someone named Carole who was complaining that teachers were not happy with their pay claim and then she made a claim that is simply in the realm of fantasy. The sentence read "What is even surer is that with the Prime Minister's salary more than tripling in the past few years, the Government will never be disappointed". I take this to be a claim that the Government has paid much larger pay increases to itself than they have offered the teachers.
It seemed rather unlikely to me so I looked at the numbers. Exactly what she means by a "few" is not stated but I will allow it to be 9 years. It can't really be more than that can it?
On today's date in 2010 the PM was paid $393,000. Today the PM is paid $471,049.
And Carole seems to think that this increase, which is in fact 19.86% over what I would regard is somewhat more than a "few" years, is a 300% rise? How can she possibly come to that conclusion? It might be a very large pay packet but it hardly means that MPs cash in while Teachers miss out. does it?
I can see that Sam is being allowed to run free. If the dog is not going to be put on a leash, and be sent to puppy school and so absent for a while, then I Postman Pat will not be delivering any more missives. I apparently am not appreciated so will attend to important personal requirements.
Of course they're going to war. The armageddon-obsessed theocrats are determined to fulfill their end times fantasy.
West Point, N.Y. — Vice President Mike Pence told the most diverse graduating class in the history of the U.S. Military Academy on Saturday that the world is "a dangerous place" and they should expect to see combat. "Some of you will join the fight against radical Islamic terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq," he said.
Pence congratulated the West Point graduates on behalf of President Trump, and told them, "As you accept the mantle of leadership I promise you, your commander in chief will always have your back. Mr. Trump is the best friend the men and women of our armed forces will ever have."
The week prior the French assembled for the two soldiers killed in Burksina Faso.
Very moving ceremony with the historical music Marche des soldats de Robert Bruce (which was played by Joan of Arcs scottish soldiers on entering Orleans)
However, even that branch of the PUA tree is wilting away. Many "self-help" style PUA forums like Nextasf and RSDnation are shutting down or have already shut down. In March, Chateau Heartiste, a batshit crazy PUA turned White Nationalist/Alt-Right blog was shut down by WordPress. This week, rape advocate Roosh V (whom you may recall once called yours truly a "Wonkette typist/clown face, would not bang") announced that he was renouncing his PUA ways and devoting himself to Jesus. He explained to the forum he manages that he would no longer be allowing anyone to discuss premarital "fornication."
NEW RULES: Casual sex and hooking up can no longer be discussed on the forum
Due to my recent turn to faith, my sense of morality is becoming based on the Bible. I've stopped a lot of behaviors that I've used to do and am in the process of making other changes. I've also realized that the majority of my published materials and online platforms lead men into sin or enable them to partake in sin. I no longer want this to occur, so I am implementing two new rules on the forum that are effective on June 1, 2019.
Young people transitioning from state care to independence will no longer be cut off from Government support when they turn 18.
"Teenagers leaving care should have the right to expect what any young person would want – knowing there is someone to turn to if they need help; a warm bed to sleep in; some help and encouragement when it is needed.
"This service will provide that, both by allowing young people to stay longer with their caregivers and providing specialised transitions support workers whose job is to help this group."
Oranga Tamariki has been tasked with building the service, which will employ 175 new specialist staff employed and make 60 supported accommodation facilities available by year four.
Trawling my way down here to the bottom of your comment section for 26 I find you footnoters/ idea investigators but nowt as sharp as an arrow point. I recognise youse but when I call I'm not in the mood for milling about. More my fault.
Excerpts from Being and Being Bought, by Kajsa Ekis Ekman, Spinifex Press, 2013. Part 4 Ekman, a Swedish journalist and critic, brings together a Marxist and feminist analysis of prostitution and surrogacy in this groundbreaking book. This is the fourth part of a synopsis and brief commentary of the book by Daphna ...
The Democracy Virus: China’s authoritarian political system enables a level of social surveillance and control that liberal democratic societies cannot match. The Chinese Government makes full use of the latest digital technology to both punish – and reward – its citizens. The plans it formulates cannot be challenged, or hindered. Where ...
Another day, another IPCA report on criminal conduct by policy. This time they kicked a child in the head when he was handcuffed:Police chased him and yelled out for him to stop. When he turned to face the police, he threatened them with a hammer. That's when the officers tasered ...
The investigation of two of the five parties in Parliament for fraud around their election donations has pushed the issue of party funding back into the spotlight. And while there are obvious things we can do to tighten up the donations regime - a much lower declaration threshold, realtime disclosure ...
While the south of New Zealand has been struggling with too much rain in recent days, here in the north we are so very short of it (though Saturday’s forecast looks promising). Basically, we have had almost none since Christmas.As someone who relies on rain to wash the car, ...
Former National Party MP Jami-Lee RossIt comes as no surprise that Jami-Lee Ross has been named as one of the defendants in the X2 $100,000 National Party donations case currently before the courts. Click bait journalists who were chaffing at the bit to discredit the former senior whip had already ...
Stand Clear! Winston Peters is encouraging voters to think of RNZ as belonging to “The Media Party”. He wants them to see it as a politically partisan institution with its own, vicious attack-dogs in the electoral fight. If he succeeds, it will be, and probably should be, the end of ...
"You're going to need a longer runway" Gratton et al explore the ongoing effects of upward-creeping temperatures on aviation in Greece in the period since 1955 at a range of airports in that country. For longer runways impacts are measurable but with little impact on operations. For airports with shorter runways, ...
In mid-December the Israeli secret police, the Shin Beit, revealed it had arrested dozens of Palestinian left-wing activists, including members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), in the previous few months. Among those arrested was one of the central leaders of the PFLP, Khalida Jarrar. As ...
Former National Party chief whip Jami-Lee Ross is one of the four people charged over National's multiple fraudulent donations. How unsurprising. Meanwhile, just days ago National leader Simon Bridges was trying to pretend the charges were nothing to do with his party. Yeah, right. When your chief whip effectively publicly ...
If you've been watching FYI for a while, you'll have noticed that the police have a bad habit of demanding ID from requesters. They have apparently been repeatedly told to stop doing this by the Ombudsman, but we all know what law enforcement thinks of the law, so thye keep ...
Collateral Damage: For the Green Phoenix to be reborn, the funeral pyre so patiently assembled by its identity politicians over the course of many fractious years – but with growing intensity over the past three – first has to be ignited. The terrible probability, of course, is that, in setting ...
If you follow politics in New Zealand you've likely noticed that the right wing have been going on and on about the Coalition Government failing to reduce poverty. In fact they’ve been incessantly claiming, in the absence of any conclusive data, that poverty has been getting worse.Yesterday, NewstalkZB reported:Mike Hosking: ...
The Herald reported over the weekend that an Auckland business owner is being targeted with asset forfeiture laws over a workplace death:A workplace fatality has seen police use a law usually associated with drugs and organised crime to seize millions of dollars in assets from a business owner because of ...
Just days after talking about how people feel "squeezed" and promising tax and service cuts as a "solution", National is talking about cancelling a rise in the minimum wage if elected: National is considering scrapping the Government's planned minimum wage increase if it wins this year's election, the party's finance ...
Nobody thinks about the next century anymore. That at least is Sci-Fi writer William Gibson’s observation (in this BBC 4 short interview, starting at 1:43:50 ). He calls it “Futures Fatigue”, but isn’t judgemental about it. Gibson notes that in the 20th century speculation about the 21st (and beyond) was common. Now ...
A Labour government desperate for the numbers crawls into bed with Winston Peters. Winston ignores the law and secretly takes money under the table from someone. When it is exposed just months out from an election, he is investigated by the Serious Fraud Office. That's what happened back in 2008. ...
So the Serious Fraud Office has another secret $100,050 National Party donation before the Courts in a major scandal that looks set to quash any chances Simon Bridges had of winning the 2020 election.Yesterday, Newsroom reported:The Serious Fraud Office prosecution of four people over donations to the National Party involves ...
Story of the Week... Toon of the Week... Coming Soon on SkS... Climate Feedback Claim Review... Poster of the Week... SkS Week in Review... Story of the Week... Iceberg twice the size of Washington, D.C., breaks off Pine Island glacier in Antarctica Story Highlights: The Pine Island ...
Prof Philippa Howden-ChapmanHousing policy is building up to be the key election issue again. In this blog I reflect on the importance of the role of the New Zealand Government in improving access to affordable housing. I look at what the Government has been doing to increase quality public housing ...
Writing on The Spinoff, Danyl Mclauchlan argues that we have a vacuum in our political system, in that there is no longer an anti-establishment party anymore:I think there’s a vacuum in our political system. There are obvious problems with the status quo but no real critics offering reform. It’s a ...
Stuff today has a piece about the government discovering it has been oversubsidising polluters for a decade under the Emissions Trading scheme:The Government is pledging to urgently fix an issue within the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), after it emerged some polluters are likely being over-compensated with taxpayer-funded carbon credits. [...] ...
The Marlborough District Council, tired of public scrutiny, wants to increase the amount it charges for LGOIMA requests:The cost of requesting official information from Marlborough's government agency could almost double after a jump in "fishing expeditions". Charges could be raised from $60 to $100 an hour for information supplied by ...
When Winston Peters was caught money laundering donations and stalking journalists, the Greens were conspicuous by their silence. It was another example of how getting along with their government partners was eroding their values and their own reputation. It was obviously unsustainable, and so now James Shaw has finally spoken ...
I am among the most pro-free speech people I know. I don’t doubt there are others more strident than me, but I’m certainly up there. And my support for freedom of expression isn’t limited to opposition to government-imposed restrictions. It extends to a belief that employers should have limited powers ...
With over 69,000 confirmed cases and 1,600 deaths, here’s your round-up of the latest coronavirus news. New disease and virus have now officially been named On the 11th February, the WHO Director General announced a new name for the disease: COVID-19 which is short for coronavirus disease 2019. The naming ...
A chronological listing of news articles linked to on the Skeptical Science Facebook Page during the past week, i.e., Sun, Feb 9, 2020 through Sat, Feb 15, 2020 Editor's Pick ANALYSIS-Climate change opens up 'frontier' farmland, but at what cost to the planet?Climate change could expand farmland globally by ...
After cross-examination Jones knew he would lose the defamation case he took against film maker Renae Maihi. That’s why he threw in the towel. The weight of evidence was clearly against the old tycoon with the defense presenting fifty articles to confirm Jones’ racist views.Being unable to harass somebody into ...
Sprung! Former NZ First president, Lester Gray, chats with RNZ's Guyon Espiner in the carpark of a Tauranga shopping centre.(Photo supplied anonymously to NZ First and The BFD.)IT’S CLEAR THAT an important aspect of Jacinda Ardern’s political success is her willingness to seek – and take – advice. This ...
Ruth Cunningham, Charlotte Paul, Andrew MoorePublic health responses to infectious diseases such as COVID-19 require us to draw on our common humanity and be explicit about our values. Recognising this will help us make good decisions in difficult situations so that, for example, the need to impose restrictive measures ...
The Helen Clark Foundation has released its report on the housing crisis, and found that house-hoarders are to blame for it:Property investors are to blame for New Zealand's high house prices, a new research paper published by the Helen Clark Foundation says. [...] McArthur said previous attempts to address housing ...
The Abortion Legislation Committee has reported back on the Abortion Legislation Bill and recommended that it be passed with some amendments. Unfortunately, the latter include even more hoops to jump through for those seeking abortions after 20 weeks, including a time-wasting requirement to consult a second doctor. No-one casually seeks ...
Brexit is likely to be a disaster for the UK (how sad, never mind). But now that they're out of the EU, the latter has finaly taken the opportunity to blacklist one of their key tax havens:The Cayman Islands, a British overseas territory, is to be put on an EU ...
I’m not quite sure of what to make of the new figures for COVID-19 (as we must now call the novel coronavirus – though I’m not sure the capitalisation is correct) from Hubei province:Image from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-51495484The spike yesterday is a consequence of a using a different way of ...
Bob Jones has dropped his defamation case against Renae Maihi. Good. But at the same time, it perfectly exposes what the case was all about: not protecting Jones' reputation, but punishing someone who had dared to criticise him, and deterring others from doing the same. This rich pompous asshat dragged ...
As I've done for the past few years, I'm curating and presenting The Listening Lounge, the talk programme at Splore. On the morning of Saturday the 22nd at the Living Lounge stage, the korero goes like this.Yes, we're talking about drugs again, not just because I'm professionally interested in drug ...
What Were They Thinking? RNZ's CEO Paul Thompson (left) and Jim Mather, Chairman of the RNZ Board of Governors, attempt to justify the debacle arising out of their attempt to downgrade RNZ Concert to the Economic Development, Science and Innovation Select Committee at Parliament on Thursday, 13 February 2020.WHAT IS ...
Dame Tariana Turia with former PM John KeyWhat is it about Tariana Turia’s grudge against the Labour Party? Not content with attacking the Government over Whānau Ora funding, which was increased by $80 million in 2019, she has now made it personal by saying that Jacinda Ardern is out of her ...
Back in 2017, right after being elected, Jacinda Ardern promised that there would be no new mines on conservation land. Since then, her government has done nothing to make that happen, and now the policy has been officially "parked" for the election:West Coast-Tasman MP Damien O'Connor says the "no new ...
So the guy who advocated for public burning and beheading feels offended because someone called him a racist!Perhaps Bob Jones hasn't heard of the very old saying; Live by the sword, die by the sword?I mean for someone who often writes opinionated nonsense about Maori; this is a ridiculous case ...
The government today announced a major support package aimed at reducing homelessness. A thousand new transitional housing places, more support for people to find homes (or not lose them in the first place), all good stuff. The one problem with it is that they're going to start charging people in ...
Courtroom Drama: There is no off-switch in a courtroom. Neither is it possible to turn the page in disgust. Ill-formed and ill-defended opinions will be exposed ruthlessly and unapologetically. As Shakespeare put it: “Reputation is an idle and most false imposition; oft got without merit, and lost without deserving.” Sometimes the ...
As of today, the novel coronavirus spreading in China is called COVID-19. Why does it matter? Around the office, we’ve had several conversations over the past few weeks about how 2019-nCoV needed its own name. First, it was getting annoying calling it by the above designation, and ‘novel coronavirus’ doesn’t ...
by Philip Ferguson Last month B’Tselem, the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, reported: “In 2019, Israeli security forces killed 133 Palestinians, including 28 minors. Of the casualties, 104 were killed in the Gaza Strip, 26 in the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and three within ...
A ballot for a single Member's Bill was held today, and the following bill was drawn: Arms (Firearms Prohibition Orders) Amendment Bill (No 2) (Brett Hudson)Its basicly more "tough on crime" nonsense (its already illegal for unlicensed people to own guns) designed to wedge NZ First against its arsehole base. ...
In 2015 the world agreed to the Paris Agreement to fight climate change. Each country would offer a Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) "that it intends to achieve", and "pursue domestic mitigation measures, with the aim of achieving [it]". And every five years, they'd improve on it, ratcheting up ambition until ...
In theory, the emissions trading scheme should reduce emissions. Making polluters pay for permits to pollute lets them save money by reducing pollution, giving them a financial incentive to do the right thing. But right from the start the ETS was broken with a system of free allocation, so polluters ...
Irish voters went to the polls on Saturday in parliamentary elections, and perhaps delivered a political revolution. Since independence, Irish politics has been dominated by two parties, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. Basicly patronage networks with indistinguishable policies, their cleavage isn't ideology, but who killed whose father or grandfather in ...
Once again the Aotearoa Bike Challenge is on us, and once again I’m participating. In principle this is not hard because it does not represent a significant switch in behavior for me. I already bike nearly every day. The Bicycle The fascinating thing about cycling is the realisation that this ...
Lately there has been a great deal of misinformation regarding the origins and purpose of Skeptical Science. As John Cook wrote nearly a decade ago, Skeptical Science is primarily a website that debunks climate misinformation with peer-reviewed science. Despite the ever-worsening impacts from climate change, with record after record being broken in ...
Under Attack: By sacking not only RNZ Concert’s presenters, but also its producers and librarians, and reducing the station to an automated purveyor of classical music in-between parliamentary broadcasts, RNZ’s CEO, Paul Thompson, wasn’t simply announcing an operational shake-up, he was declaring war on one of the most important guardians of ...
Story of the Week... Editorial of the Week... Toon of the Week... Quote of the Week... Coming Soon on SkS... Climate Feedback Reviews... SkS Week in Review... Poster of the Week... Story of the Week... Australian smoke plume sets recordsThe recent wildfires in Australia sent one of ...
The Global Protest to #FightInequality was powerful – thankyou and what next? Dear allies, We started the decade with a huge protest to #FightInequality that was heard around the world, including the 1% at Davos. Watch and share the highlights on facebook and twitter. A huge thank you. Together we ...
The Ministry of Health have announced a package that might ensure NZ will never experience another measles epidemic. While at the time of writing the details are still limited it appears that the important limitations in our current programme have been acknowledged and the intent is to address them. Great ...
Prof Nick Wilson, Prof Michael BakerIn this blog we briefly summarise our assessment of the highly uncertain new coronavirus threat. Given its potential to become a severe and prolonged global pandemic, a precautionary response now means activating all components of our pandemic plan, with a particular focus on ‘keep ...
When Labour was running for election, Jacinda Ardern famously said that climate change was "my generation's nuclear free moment". The implication was that her government would take the problem seriously, and act swiftly to reduce emissions. The reality:New Zealand will emit a million more tonnes of greenhouse gases in 2020 ...
James Renwick is Professor of Physical Geography at Victoria University of Wellington. He studied at Canterbury and the University of Washington and has worked on diverse aspects of climate science, including global atmospheric circulation and Antarctic sea ice. In December 2019 he was appointed to the New Zealand Climate Change ...
by Philip Ferguson Exit polls are showing a three-way virtual tie between the main parties in the south of Ireland. Sinn Fein, Fianna Fail and Fine Gael are all on just over 22%. FG on 22.4, SF on 22.3, FF on 22.2. Exit polls indicate that over 30% of 18-24 ...
A chronological listing of news articles linked to on the Skeptical Science Facebook Page during the past week, i.e., Sun, Feb 2, 2020 through Sat, Feb 8, 2020 Editor's Pick New Report Details How Fossil Fuel Industry's Climate Destruction Also Exacerbates Human Rights Abuses"Even in the face of the ...
In a previous post I described briefly when and how the Starlink satellite chains – recent launches by Space-X in a scheme to bring 5G internet connectivity to the whole globe – could be seen from New Zealand with the naked eye. Here I provide an update and predictions for ...
Keeping The Faith: This Government’s broad, new, heavily moderated, progressive faith does not require a prime minister with the powers of a medieval pope. Jacinda’s regime has no need of subterranean torture chambers to ensure compliance. A gift for diplomacy and the ability to inspire her fellow human-beings is all ...
Jonathan Freedland of the Guardian has penned a column which chastises the left wing of the Labour party for daring to retain principles and ideals, qualities - it seems - that should be jettisoned in pursuit of power.Never mind that Freedland was an ardent Remainer, that is to say, one ...
Tonight’s news suggests the coronavirus outbreak may have originated from pangolins. Details are very sketchy, almost nothing at all beyond a claim of high similarity. My impression is this claim comes from a press release by South China Agricultural University. Initial discussion online suggests this is a more likely candidate ...
by Susanne Kemp The Fire and Emergency service (FENZ) has recently asked firefighters in Auckland Areas 3, 4 and 5 to take on an additional duty that has rather ominous implications. Namely, to collect names and addresses of everyone on the premises of fires they attend. The firefighters’ union, the ...
Part of the story of the Nazis' rise to power in Germany was the willingness of mainstream right-wing parties to work with them to keep out the left. Because of this, one of the fundamental rules of postwar German politics has been "do not work with Nazis". As a result, ...
There has long been a truism in public broadcasting: don't mess with Concert FM. The theory was that although the station has been in a long-term audience decline, and that audience is steadily ageing out, it has powerful establishment support – and any threat to it would provoke a fury.As ...
This is a re-post from the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists The heat absorbed in Earth’s oceans reached a new record in 2019, found a recent study published in the journal Advances in Atmospheric Sciences. Despite the fact that this has been the case for almost every year over the past decade, this information ...
While the Provincial Growth Fund has provided $2 million to set up temporary water supplies in Kaikohe and Kaitaia, Regional Economic Minister Shane Jones said he is greatly concerned that there are “issues” in implementing the projects. The Minister said the immediate solution was to pipe water from a bore ...
Mark Patterson MP, New Zealand First List MP for Clutha-Southland NZ First is calling on Rio Tinto to accept its responsibilities to the Southland community and enable the immediate removal of the toxic Aluminium Dross from the Mataura Paper Mill site. New Zealand First List MP for Clutha-Southland, Mark Patterson ...
Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones was on RNZ’s Morning Report talking about the recent droughts in the Northland region and what the Provincial Growth Fund (PGF) is doing to alleviate its impact. The PGF recently announced a funding of $2 million for temporary water supplies to Kaikohe and Kaitaia, ...
Speaking to The Country’s Jamie Mackay, New Zealand First MP and Cabinet Minister Shane Jones talks water storage, plant-based meat imitation, and superstar Hollywood director James Cameron. While water storage may have its critics, Minister Jones defended the scheme by saying: “unless we invest and continue to invest” in this ...
Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones is accusing northern iwi leaders of selling out Māori by voting for ideologically-driven court cases rather than practical steps to increase water supply. “I just think that iwi leaders who think that water issues are going to be solved by perpetually fighting in the ...
A dairy owner in St Kilda, Dunedin was delighted to hear that an attempted robbery of his establishment was foiled by a government-funded security system. Sean Lee was delighted at how well the anti-theft smoke system worked. When a knife-wielding man entered the store, the shop assistant immediately pressed a ...
Customs says it stopped more than three tonnes of illegal drugs coming into New Zealand last year. This includes 1,180kg of methamphetamine, 329kg of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine precursors, which could have been converted into 246kg of methamphetamine, 739kg and 6469 pills of MDMA or Ecstasy and 60kg of cocaine. Offshore, ...
Hon. Shane Jones, Minister for Regional Economic Development Up to $2 million will be allocated from the Provincial Growth Fund to set up temporary water supplies in Kaikohe and Kaitaia where drought is biting hard, Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones has announced. Drought conditions in Northland have led to ...
Darroch Ball, Spokesperson for Law and Order New Zealand First welcomes the deployment of an Eagle Police helicopter in Christchurch in what is a step towards fulfilling its long-standing goal to increase the use of police helicopters for the front line, particularly in addressing the scourge of fleeing drivers. Christchurch leads ...
It may have been the first sitting week of 2020, but our Government is already in full-swing - managing a strong economy, investing in infrastructure, and working to break the cycle of homelessness. Read below for all that, and more... ...
In a heated debate in Parliament, National's Deputy Leader Paula Bennett claimed that “nearly 1600 patched gang members have been added” since the Coalition Government took power. To illustrate her point, she altered a chart used by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern to show her government’s progress in housing to instead ...
Speech by the Rt Hon Winston Peters at Parliament’s Opening 2020 "We all need insurance" This year New Zealanders are going to have a clear choice to make That choice is between: Optimism versus pessimism; More progress versus back to the future; Investment versus divestment; Unity versus division. New Zealand ...
Infrastructure Minister Shane Jones has slammed the Board of Auckland Airport following the airport's runway closing twice within two weeks due to maintenance. Around 2,000 passengers were affected by last week’s runway closures, according to 1NEWS. Another maintenance closure on January 24 saw two international flights and three domestic flights ...
Jenny Marcroft, Spokesperson for Broadcasting New Zealand First supports the commissioning of a business case to assess the viability of a new public media entity. “A strong media environment is critical for a healthy democracy. New Zealand First is a strong supporter of a diverse, independent media,” New Zealand First broadcasting spokesperson ...
Pounamou and technology industries in the West Coast region are set to receive more than $2 million in Provincial Growth Fund (PGF) funding. This was announced by the Under-Secretary for Regional Economic Development Fletcher Tabuteau during Waitangi Day commemorations in Hokitika. He said $800,000 would be given to Development West ...
Clayton Mitchell MP, New Zealand First spokesperson for Labour and Industrial Relations Unemployment and wage growth numbers released by Stats NZ today demonstrate a labour market in good shape with unemployment falling to 4.0%, the underutilisation rate falling to an 11 year low, and wage growth at a 10-year high ...
Hon. Ron Mark, New Zealand First Spokesperson for Defence New Zealand First Spokesperson for Defence Ron Mark, welcomes the official opening of Te Rau Aroha, a new museum at Waitangi Treaty Grounds as part of our Coalition Agreement. “It is a great honour to be part of an effective Government ...
Rt. Hon. Winston Peters, Deputy Prime MinisterGood morning,Let us start with important acknowledgements.First, this special day, in remembrance of the 28th Maori Battalion, is also to honour all those men and women who have risked their lives in the service of our country.Second, special guest Robert ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters says New Zealand will look to build on its relationship with the United Kingdom and recommit to the European Union, after the country officially left the continental union recently. The Minister said New Zealand already cooperates closely with Britain on defence and security issues and has ...
The Government continues to make progress on a fairer and more secure rental market for renters and landlords with the First Reading of the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill and its referral to the Social Services and Community Select Committee. “Now is the opportunity for landlords, tenants and others who want ...
Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister Hon James Marape will visit New Zealand from 21-25 February, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced today. “New Zealand and Papua New Guinea have a warm and friendly relationship. I look forward to welcoming Prime Minister Marape here and strengthening the relationship between our two countries,” ...
Thousands of children have begun receiving a free lunch on every day of the school week, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said. The Government’s free and healthy school lunch programme is under way for 7,000 students at 31 schools in Hawke’s Bay / Tairāwhiti and Bay of Plenty / Waiariki, extending ...
The Minister for Social Development Carmel Sepuloni today announced a new approach that continues to broaden the Government’s social sector focus from a narrow, investment approach to one centred on people and wellbeing. Minister Sepuloni said redefining the previous approach to social investment by combining science, data and lived experience ...
The Government is strengthening the Protected Disclosures Act to provide better protection for whistle blowers, Minister of State Services Chris Hipkins said today. “The Protected Disclosures Act is meant to encourage people to speak up about serious wrongdoing in the workplace and protect them from losing their jobs or being ...
Nǐn hǎo (Hello in Mandarin). Xīn Nián Kuài Lè (Happy New Year in Mandarin) Néi Hóu (Hello in Cantonese). Sun Nin Fai Lok (Happy New Year in Cantonese) Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa. Thank you for your invitation to attend this celebration today. I would like to acknowledge ...
Tougher penalties for gun crime are a step closer with the passage of firearms reform legislation through another stage in Parliament. The Arms Legislation Bill has tonight passed its Second Reading. “The changes have one objective - to prevent firearms falling into the wrong hands,” said Police Minister Stuart Nash. ...
Introduction Mr Speaker We all know why we are here today. It has been a long journey. The journey did not actually begin on 15 March 2019. It began on 30 June 1997. Almost 23 years ago, Justice Sir Thomas Thorp told us what was wrong with our firearms legislation. ...
The Government’s work to put trades and vocational education back on the agenda took another major step forward today with the passing of the Education (Vocational Education and Training Reform) Amendment Bill, Education Minister Chris Hipkins said. “This is a watershed day for trades and vocational education. These law changes formalise ...
Speeding up the return of Christchurch regeneration activities to local leadership is behind the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Amendment Bill introduced to Parliament today by Minister Megan Woods. “As we approach nine years since the February 2011 earthquake in Canterbury, and with the transition to local leadership well underway, the time ...
Hundreds of New Zealanders and international visitors will be able to get back out into nature with the Milford Track partially reopening next week, after extensive assessments and repairs, the Minister of Conservation Eugenie Sage announced today. The popular Great Walk has been closed since 3 February after an extreme ...
Up to 110 new EV chargers nationwide in cities and regions 50 electric vehicles for ride-sharing The Government is helping deliver more infrastructure and options for low emissions transport through new projects, Energy and Resources Minister Dr Megan Woods says. Tauranga, Nelson, Levin, New Plymouth and Oamaru are just some ...
New Zealanders are increasingly better off under this Government as wages rise and families have more disposable income, Finance Minister Grant Robertson says. Stats NZ reported today that average household disposable incomes after housing costs rose 4.9% in 2019. This was the highest rise in four years and came as ...
All New Zealanders need to have their voices heard at work to ensure we have an inclusive and productive economy. Today we introduce a Bill to do this for workers in the New Zealand screen industry, Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Iain Lees-Galloway says. “The Screen Industry Workers Bill will ...
The Government has announced further help for the Southland and Otago regions to speed up recovery efforts from the floods. “I’ve approved Enhanced Taskforce Green (ETFG), making $500,000 available to help with the clean-up in Fiordland, Southland, and the Clutha district in Otago,” Minister for Social Development Carmel Sepuloni said. ...
Following the announcement that more than 340 schools will be funded to run events promoting vocational education, the Government has announced it will fund a further 257 events to be run by employers and industry. “These industry-run events will allow more than 30,000 students to connect with more than 2,000 ...
Today the Government is making progress on a fairer and more secure rental market for renters and landlords with the introduction of the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill in Parliament. “This Bill includes a series of reforms to improve the wellbeing of the 609,700 households that live in rented homes, and ...
A Government programme to wipe out pea weevil has achieved a world first, with Biosecurity Minister Damien O’Connor today announcing the successful eradication of the noxious pest from Wairarapa. This means the nearly four-year ban on pea plants and pea straw was lifted today. Commercial and home gardeners can again grow ...
Southland residents hit by flooding caused by heavy rainfall can now access help finding temporary accommodation with the Government activating the Temporary Accommodation Service, Minister of Civil Defence Peeni Henare announced today. “The Temporary Accommodation Service (TAS) has been activated by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment to help ...
“Is that it?” That’s Finance Minister Grant Robertson’s response to Simon Bridges’ much-hyped economic speech today. “Simon Bridges just gave the most over-hyped and under-delivered speech that I can remember during my time in politics,” Grant Robertson said. “It’s not surprising. Simon Bridges literally said on the radio this morning ...
A trial deployment of the Police Eagle helicopter in Christchurch will test whether the aircraft would make a significant difference to crime prevention and community safety. “The Bell 429 helicopter will be based in Christchurch for five weeks, from 17 February to 20 March,” said Police Minister Stuart Nash. “The ...
The Government has kept up the pace of its work to promote New Zealand’s trade interests and diversify our export markets, with visits to Fiji and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) by Trade and Export Growth Minister David Parker. Building momentum to bring the PACER Plus trade and development agreement ...
The Coalition Government’s investment in a strong border and disrupting transnational organised crime produced record results for stopping drugs in 2019, says Minister of Customs Jenny Salesa. The illegal drugs were seized at the New Zealand border by Customs, and overseas by Customs’ international border partners before the drugs could ...
Transport Minister Phil Twyford today kicked off construction of a separated cycleway alongside Tamaki Drive. A two-way separated cycleway will be built along the northern side of Tamaki Drive, between the Quay Street Cycleway extension and Ngapipi Road. There will be a separate walking path alongside. Phil Twyford said giving ...
Owner-occupiers of unit and apartments living in earthquake-prone buildings will have certainty about the financial support they’ll be eligible for with the release of criteria for an upcoming assistance scheme, Minister for Building and Construction Jenny Salesa says. The Residential Earthquake-Prone Building Financial Assistance Scheme will help unit owners facing ...
Temporary restrictions on travel from China will remain in place as a precautionary measure to protect against the spread of the COVID-19 coronavirus. The restrictions which prevent foreign nationals travelling from, or transiting through, mainland China from entering New Zealand have been extended for a further 8 days. This position ...
Employment Minister Willie Jackson announced today that Tairāwhiti rangatahi will benefit from an investment made by the Government’s He Poutama Rangatahi (HPR) scheme. The funding will go to the Tautua Village, Kauneke programme and the Matapuna Supported Employment Programme which will fund 120 rangatahi over two years. “Both programmes work ...
All parents and caregivers need to ensure that their children go to school unless they are sick, Associate Education Minister Tracey Martin said today. “The school attendance results for 2019 show, across the board, a drop in the number of students going to school regularly,” the Minister says. “Apart from ...
A Deed of Settlement agreeing redress for historical Treaty claims has been signed by the Crown and Moriori at Kōpinga Marae on Rēkohu (Chatham Islands) today, Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Andrew Little has announced. Moriori have a tradition of peace that extends back over 600 years. This settlement ...
Transport Minister Phil Twyford today with Māori King Tuheitia Pōtatau Te Wherowhero VII officially opened the country’s newest road, the $384 million Huntly section of the Waikato Expressway. The 15km four-lane highway with side and central safety barriers takes State Highway 1 east of Huntly town, across lowlands and streams ...
The rapid uptake of life-saving new hepatitis C medicine Maviret since it was funded by PHARMAC a year ago means the elimination of the deadly disease from this country is a realistic goal, Health Minister David Clark says. Hepatitis C is a blood-borne virus which attacks the liver, proving fatal ...
Kaupapa Māori will underpin the Government’s new plan to deal with homelessness announced by the Prime Minister in Auckland this morning. “Māori are massively overrepresented among people experiencing homelessness, so, to achieve different outcomes for Māori, we have to do things very differently,” says the Minister of Māori Development ...
1000 new transitional housing places delivered by end of year to reduce demand for emergency motel accommodation. Introduce 25% of income payment, after 7 days, for those in emergency motel accommodation to bring in line with other forms of accommodation support. Over $70m extra to programmes that prevents those at ...
Clear requirements for ensuring customers are treated fairly by banks, insurers and other financial service providers are included in new financial conduct legislation that passed its first reading today. “The recent reviews, by the Financial Markets Authority (FMA) and Reserve Bank of New Zealand, into the conduct of banks and ...
Applications are now open for the fifth round of the Regional Culture and Heritage Fund Associate Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage Grant Robertson announced today. “I am delighted to open this year’s fund which has some $7 million available to support performing arts venues, galleries, museums and whare ...
The Minister of Māori Development, Hon Nanaia Mahuta today congratulated Associate Professor Amokura Kawharu on her appointment as the next President of the Law Commission. “Amokura Kawharu will be a standout in her new role, leading in an innovative and forward looking approach to the law reform process. She will ...
Auckland University legal academic Amokura Kawharu has been appointed as the next President of the Law Commission, Justice Minister Andrew Little announced today. Associate Professor Kawharu will take up her new appointment on 11 May 2020. “I would like to congratulate Associate Professor Kawharu on her appointment,” Andrew ...
A programme for employers to help them engage effectively with younger employees was launched today by Minister of Employment, Willie Jackson. The Youth Ready Employer Programme contains a range of on-line templates that employers can easily access to help with employing and retaining young people in their businesses. The programme ...
Budget 2020 will be delivered on Thursday 14 May, Finance Minister Grant Robertson announced today. “This year’s Budget will continue the Coalition Government’s focus on tackling the long-term challenges facing New Zealand while also preparing the economy for the future. “Those challenges and opportunities cannot be resolved in one budget, ...
I move, That this House place on record its appreciation and thanks for the devoted and distinguished service to New Zealand by the late Rt Hon Michael Kenneth Moore, member of the Order of New Zealand, a member of Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, an Honorary Member of the ...
Editor’s Note: Here below is a list of the main issues currently under discussion in New Zealand and links to media coverage.New Zealand Parliament Buildings, Wellington, New Zealand.Today’s contentDonations scandals Thomas Coughlan (Stuff): Who are the people at the centre of the SFO political donation row? Collette ...
Policyholders fear the sale of AMP LIfe to a Bermuda-based 'zombie fund guru' could leave them stranded because a legal gap means the FMA is powerless to protect them ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Giancaspro, Lecturer in Law, University of Adelaide When booking a luxury cruise, you generally expect relaxation and enjoyment, not forced quarantine and distress. Unfortunately, for the thousands of vacationers trapped on cruise ships in Asia the past month, what started as ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Courtney Hempton, Associate Research Fellow, Deakin University The Voluntary Assisted Dying Review Board has this week published a report detailing the first six months of the legislation in action in Victoria. The report reveals 52 people legally ended their lives from the ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Blanca del Rosal Rabes, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Swinburne University of Technology Brain temperature is implicated in many common conditions including stroke, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, traumatic brain injury, and headaches. Changes in brain temperature can indicate there is a disease developing, but researchers ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Anthony Albanese will commit a Labor government to adopting a target of zero net emissions by 2050, in a speech titled “Leadership in a New Climate” to be delivered on Friday. The opposition leader’s embrace ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy N. W. Jackson, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Australian Venom Research Unit, University of Melbourne This is an article from I’ve Always Wondered, a series where readers send in questions they’d like an expert to answer. Send your question to alwayswondered@theconversation.edu.auWho would ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Benjamen Franklen Gussen, Lecturer in Law, Swinburne University of Technology In 1971, a Time magazine article, titled “Should New York City Be the 51st State?”, observed: States have not only short-changed and hamstrung their cities but are themselves the least creative ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ida Kubiszewski, Associate professor, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University Labor’s treasury spokesman, Jim Chalmers, wants to follow New Zealand’s example and introduce a “wellbeing budget” alongside the traditional budget that stresses economic growth, when Labor is next in office. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fiona Andreallo, Honorary research fellow, University of Sydney A sea of oversized hair bows bobs through primary school gates each morning. It might be dismissed as a harmless children’s fad but big bows are back, driven by current fashions, tween influencers and ...
The Government of New Zealand has recognized that the country is facing a housing crisis, said Leilani Farha, UN Special Rapporteur on the right to housing, at the end of her visit to the country . “While the Government has taken important steps ...
Survey results released today by the Helen Clark Foundation and the New Zealand Drug Foundation show that support for cannabis legalisation grows when people know more about the proposed legislation. When respondents were asked how they would vote ...
In today’s edition: Views on cannabis legalisation could hardly be tighter, the Papua New Guinea PM arrives in NZ, and bad light threatens cricket on the radio.A new poll published this morning finds that 46% of those surveyed would vote yes, and 44% no, with 10% undecided. That’s a markedly different ...
Actress Jennifer Ward-Lealand Te Atamira, a long-time champion of the arts, and te reo Māoriis the Kiwibank New Zealander of the Year for 2020. Mark Jennings reports on the night that honours the best of us. What does it mean to be a New Zealander? The question was posed by ...
This week's biggest-selling New Zealand books, as recorded by the Nielsen BookScan New Zealand bestseller list and described by Steve Braunias.FICTION 1 In the Clearing by JP Pomare (Hachette, $34.99) All next week at ReadingRoom is devoted to this brilliant thriller inspired by Australian cult The Family, led by ...
‘A life-changing experience’, ‘The greatest of the great! It must be experienced!’, ‘That show with the dancing lady on the billboard.’ Shen Yun ads are impossible to avoid, but what on earth is it?So what is Shen Yun?According to the Shen Yun website: “It is a brilliant artistic revival ...
"To the girls, to the women, to the mothers, to the daughters who hear the music bubbling within, please speak up. We need to hear your voices." These are the words of Hildur Guðnadóttir, who recently accepted the Oscar for best original score for the film Joker at the 92nd ...
Dr Amanda Landers discusses the stigma associated with palliative care and why the field deserves recognition Scalpels are a powerful tool in medicine, but words can be just as mighty. Some medical specialties are easy to comprehend - they cut, stitch, unblock, restart or fix. Others are just too hard ...
A Northland property stockpiled one million litres of flammable and toxic chemicals. Almost two years since the situation came to the attention of authorities, the poorly stored solvents remain a fire and environmental risk. While Government agencies struggled to get a polluter to clean up his mess, up to one million ...
Georgia Hale's tireless and compassionate work, using her sport of rugby league to create opportunities for many different communities, has earned her the title of Young New Zealander of the Year. As soon as she left high school, Georgia Hale began working with children with intellectual disabilities. It changed her ...
A new, "true green" party hoping to break into Parliament at this year's election has been hit by resignations and allegations of questionable conduct, Newsroom's political editor Sam Sachdeva reports Fledgling political party Sustainable New Zealand has been rocked by a flurry of resignations and allegations of questionable behaviour by its ...
A rare visit by a prime minister of Papua New Guinea to New Zealand highlights a strong friendship, but one which could be closer, writes Johnny Blades for RNZ.Papua New Guinea’s James Marape has embarked on a state visit to New Zealand. It’s the first visit to New Zealand by ...
Plant-based food producers ‘stigmatise and demonise’ traditional agriculture, according to Jones, but those working in the new industry say it should be seen as an opportunity, not a threat. NZ First minister Shane Jones’ suggestion that plant-based food must be “stopped in its tracks” has been labelled concerning, negligent and anti-competitive ...
The prospect of going to the Red Planet is possibly a step closer with the US President's State of the Nation speech, in which he promises we will land there. The chances of anything coming from Mars - according to the 1978 Jeff Wayne musical War of the Worlds - are ...
Jennifer Ward-Lealand’s dedication to acting, directing and te ao Māori saw her named the 2020 Kiwibank New Zealander of the Year at a special dinner in Auckland last night. Alice Webb-Liddall speaks to her about how she hopes to nurture the future of the craft that has given her so ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Seen as a political narrative, the Morrison government’s handling of the coronavirus (COVID-19) fits the patterns of its approaches on border security and anti-terrorism. Stressing the central imperative is to “keep Australians safe”, it has ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra The coronavirus is presenting a major threat to Australia’s education export industry, which is highly dependant upon the China market, and a huge challenge to the universities. Phil Honeywood, CEO of the International Education Association ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra The corona virus is presenting a major threat to Australia’s education export industry, which is highly dependant upon the China market, and a huge challenge to the universities. Phillip Honeywood, CEO of the International Education ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stacey L Rowe, PhD candidate, Monash University Today’s evacuation of about 180 passengers from the cruise ship Diamond Princess to serve another period of quarantine back in Australia has raised questions about the best way to control spread of the coronavirus. The ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tess Hardy, Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Melbourne Australian supermarket giant Coles and discount chain Target this week joined an ignominious list of large corporations caught up in “wage theft” scandals. Coles confessed to underpaying salaried employees about A$20 million over ...
Parliament is now seeking public submissions on an international treaty that makes it possible to recover child or spousal support from someone who lives in another country. The Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marissa Parrott, Reproductive Biologist, Wildlife Conservation & Science, Zoos Victoria, and Honorary Research Associate, BioSciences, University of Melbourne Since July last year, bushfires have burned more than 7.7 million hectares of southeast Australia, putting many threatened species at increased risk of extinction. ...
Business is Boring is a weekly podcast series presented by The Spinoff in association with Callaghan Innovation. Host Simon Pound speaks with innovators and commentators focused on the future of New Zealand. This week he talks to Pranav Chopra, founder and CEO of Nemi Teas.On Business is Boring this week, ...
Barnardos is today welcoming the Minister of Social Development’s announcement of a new ‘social wellbeing approach’. Speaking from the official launch of the new approach in Tamaki Makaurau today, Barnardos’ Chief Executive Mike Munnelly ...
A failed Dunedin financial adviser is facing 12 charges relating to fraud and theft over what the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) says is a Ponzi scheme that lost investors $15.7 million. Barry Kloogh appeared in the Dunedin District Court this morning to face charges brought by the SFO over running ...
How to stop procrastinating and actually (finally) get on top of KiwiSaver. Because there’s a good chance that if you’re reading this, you don’t know a single thing about it. Read the full series here.As we learned in part two, being in the right fund can make all the difference: you ...
New Zealand Cricket and media company NZME have failed to reach a deal on radio broadcast rights for next season's international and domestic matches. The current deal expires at the end of April and does not affect the remainder of this summer's broadcast schedule on Radio Sport. Radio Sport has ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jianling Xie, Postdoctoral Scientist, South Australian Health & Medical Research Institute Researchers in the United States have unveiled the structure of the “spike protein” of 2019-nCoV – the virus behind the current coronavirus disease outbreak. Despite the fact that researchers have already ...
Australian national airline Qantas is cutting some trans-Tasman flights because of the expected fall in business from the coronavirus. It said it will reduce capacity by 5 percent because of a fall in demand, along with the reduction in services to China, Hong Kong and Japan. Qantas and Jetstar services ...
Dr Bryce Edwards.Is the National Party off the hook over the Serious Fraud Office donations prosecution? That’s what the party is claiming, pointing out that no National official or MP has been charged. But of course, there was a National MP involved – albeit one no longer with the ...
Editor’s Note: Here below is a list of the main issues currently under discussion in New Zealand and links to media coverage.New Zealand Parliament Buildings, Wellington, New Zealand.Today’s contentDonation scandals Bryce Edwards (Guardian): Vested interests in New Zealand politics are too big to ignore – we need ...
Eden Project New Zealand (EPNZ) has announced that it has signed a ‘licence to occupy’ agreement with Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) and the Christchurch City Council (CCC) regarding a new Eden Project in Ōtautahi/Christchurch. ...
Thursday, February 20: South Islanders will be bidding ‘Auf Wiedersehen’ to Austrian oil and gas giant OMV, which has come up empty handed following a controversial deep sea drill in the Great South Basin. Greenpeace climate and energy campaigner, ...
A Southland woman has been prosecuted by SPCA after she docked the tails of eight Rottweiler puppies using docking bands. Taylor Hall pleaded guilty to eight charges of docking the tail of a dog and was sentenced at Invercargill District Court on ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jon Piccini, Lecturer, Australian Catholic University Australia has just entered its final year of its membership on the UN Human Rights Council. This position was won on the strength of two key arguments: Australia would be the first Pacific nation to ...
In Zoey’s Extraordinary Playlist, the titular Zoey starts to hear the thoughts of those around her – but expressed in song. Sam Brooks investigates what would happen if Zoey took a trip across the Pacific to sunny ol’ New Zealand.If you could pick any superpower, what would it be? Flight? ...
Auckland Council is warning government officials of the risks of disastrous housing developments like some seen in the United Kingdom. It is facing off over the way the government plans to get thousands of prefabricated homes built here to tackle the housing crisis. An email sent last week by council ...
By Rambo Talabong in Manila The top lawyer of the Philippine Bureau of Corrections (BuCor) who was a controversial witness in Senate hearings on the Good Conduct Time Allowance (GCTA) controversy has been shot dead. According to the police report, lawyer Fredric Santos was gunned down yesterday afternoon by ...
Shane Jones was back in his Northland home patch during the week to announce the serving of another dollop of public money from the Provincial Growth Fund. It was not the first allocation of PGF funding to benefit the region this year. This time the PGF will allocate up to ...
We need to challenge those who minimise the actions of rapists based on the gender or ages of their victims, argues Emily Writes.Content warning: this article contains descriptions of sexual assault.News out of Australia of another college supporting a sexual predator is as unsurprising as it is horrific. Victims of ...
The two recent donations investigations show political party funding rules are not fit for purpose, and politicians cannot be trusted to fix them, Cat MacLennan writes. ...
The legislation setting up a firearms register and introducing tougher licensing controls is a step closer to becoming law, but negotiations with New Zealand First are still ongoing. ...
A year after they went carbon neutral, The Warehouse Group’s chief sustainability officer reflects on the journey so far and the work that is still to be done. It was a year ago that the red shed made its biggest commitment to going green in its 38 year history. The Warehouse ...
Fresh on the heels of this morning’s news about the prime minister handing someone a bottle opener, The Spinoff can reveal that Jacinda Ardern once offered a man a banana. Jacinda Ardern once offered an Auckland man a banana, according to a tweet viewed by The Spinoff.The MP who would go ...
Auckland Airport has reported a flat first-half result, and plans to bring forward the billion-dollar redevelopment of its domestic terminal, and upgrade the international arrivals hall. The company's net profit for the six months to December was unchanged from the year earlier's $147.2 million, reflecting a drop in passenger growth ...
How voters react to the headlines generated by NZ First’s latest financial shenanigans may (or may not) determine the outcome on September 19. The most recent Colmar Brunton poll had NZ First down at 3%, so some commentators are already writing off the party’s chances of survival. But the real ...
Since 2017 New Conservative has been calling for net zero immigration until our housing stocks meet demand. Immigrants must prove they are financially independent so they have the means to pay higher rents which forces those at the ...
Despite more than 40 years of law reform aimed at improving the experience of giving evidence for adult rape complainants, Ministry of Justice research in 2018 re-confirmed that the process remains distressing and re-traumatising. According to experts, more ...
Just like donations to political parties, the justice system should be open and transparent. That is what I believe and have sought. Until now, however, I have been unable to make a public statement regarding these allegations, despite wanting to ...
Himali McInnes looks past the fact that the first black woman to win the Booker had to bloody share it and focuses on the book – in itself a treasure. Girl, Woman, Other is the smart, urbane eighth novel by Bernadine Evaristo. Born in London of Nigerian, German and Irish descent, ...
The Prime Minister clearly hasn’t read the draft bill to legalise recreational cannabis, Road Transport Forum (RTF) chief executive Nick Leggett says. "That was clear after watching her answer a question at Parliament yesterday, on the bill ...
Open mike 26/05/2019 
Excerpts from Being and Being Bought, by Kajsa Ekis Ekman, Spinifex Press, 2013. Part 4 Ekman, a Swedish journalist and critic, brings together a Marxist and feminist analysis of prostitution and surrogacy in this groundbreaking book. This is the fourth part of a synopsis and brief commentary of the book by Daphna ...8 mins ago
The Democracy Virus: China’s authoritarian political system enables a level of social surveillance and control that liberal democratic societies cannot match. The Chinese Government makes full use of the latest digital technology to both punish – and reward – its citizens. The plans it formulates cannot be challenged, or hindered. Where ...1 hour ago
Another day, another IPCA report on criminal conduct by policy. This time they kicked a child in the head when he was handcuffed:Police chased him and yelled out for him to stop. When he turned to face the police, he threatened them with a hammer. That's when the officers tasered ...20 hours ago
While the south of New Zealand has been struggling with too much rain in recent days, here in the north we are so very short of it (though Saturday’s forecast looks promising). Basically, we have had almost none since Christmas. As someone who relies on rain to wash the car, ...21 hours ago
Former National Party MP Jami-Lee RossIt comes as no surprise that Jami-Lee Ross has been named as one of the defendants in the X2 $100,000 National Party donations case currently before the courts. Click bait journalists who were chaffing at the bit to discredit the former senior whip had already ...22 hours ago
"You're going to need a longer runway" Gratton et al explore the ongoing effects of upward-creeping temperatures on aviation in Greece in the period since 1955 at a range of airports in that country. For longer runways impacts are measurable but with little impact on operations. For airports with shorter runways, ...2 days ago
In mid-December the Israeli secret police, the Shin Beit, revealed it had arrested dozens of Palestinian left-wing activists, including members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), in the previous few months. Among those arrested was one of the central leaders of the PFLP, Khalida Jarrar. As ...2 days ago
I am among the most pro-free speech people I know. I don’t doubt there are others more strident than me, but I’m certainly up there. And my support for freedom of expression isn’t limited to opposition to government-imposed restrictions. It extends to a belief that employers should have limited powers ...4 days ago
...2 weeks ago
Jonathan Freedland of the Guardian has penned a column which chastises the left wing of the Labour party for daring to retain principles and ideals, qualities - it seems - that should be jettisoned in pursuit of power.Never mind that Freedland was an ardent Remainer, that is to say, one ...2 weeks ago
While the Provincial Growth Fund has provided $2 million to set up temporary water supplies in Kaikohe and Kaitaia, Regional Economic Minister Shane Jones said he is greatly concerned that there are “issues” in implementing the projects. The Minister said the immediate solution was to pipe water from a bore ...20 hours ago
It may have been the first sitting week of 2020, but our Government is already in full-swing - managing a strong economy, investing in infrastructure, and working to break the cycle of homelessness. Read below for all that, and more... ...7 days ago
The Government continues to make progress on a fairer and more secure rental market for renters and landlords with the First Reading of the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill and its referral to the Social Services and Community Select Committee. “Now is the opportunity for landlords, tenants and others who want ...17 hours ago
Editor’s Note: Here below is a list of the main issues currently under discussion in New Zealand and links to media coverage.
The number of 14 and 15 year olds who have tried cannabis has fallen by more than a quarter. ...1 hour ago
Paid parking on weekends looks set to stay, as Wellington Mayor Andy Foster struggles to find support for his agenda around the council table. ...1 hour ago
Southland cleanup highlights climate change threat - Conservation Minister Eugenie Sage; and new taskforce to look at Wellington water issues. ...1 hour ago
Policyholders fear the sale of AMP LIfe to a Bermuda-based 'zombie fund guru' could leave them stranded because a legal gap means the FMA is powerless to protect them ...1 hour ago
The Government of New Zealand has recognized that the country is facing a housing crisis, said Leilani Farha, UN Special Rapporteur on the right to housing, at the end of her visit to the country . “While the Government has taken important steps ...2 hours ago
Over the next three weeks Rod Oram will be cycling the length of New Zealand ...2 hours ago
In today’s edition: Views on cannabis legalisation could hardly be tighter, the Papua New Guinea PM arrives in NZ, and bad light threatens cricket on the radio.A new poll published this morning finds that 46% of those surveyed would vote yes, and 44% no, with 10% undecided. That’s a markedly different ...3 hours ago
Actress Jennifer Ward-Lealand Te Atamira, a long-time champion of the arts, and te reo Māori is the Kiwibank New Zealander of the Year for 2020. Mark Jennings reports on the night that honours the best of us. What does it mean to be a New Zealander? The question was posed by ...3 hours ago
This week's biggest-selling New Zealand books, as recorded by the Nielsen BookScan New Zealand bestseller list and described by Steve Braunias. FICTION 1 In the Clearing by JP Pomare (Hachette, $34.99) All next week at ReadingRoom is devoted to this brilliant thriller inspired by Australian cult The Family, led by ...3 hours ago
"To the girls, to the women, to the mothers, to the daughters who hear the music bubbling within, please speak up. We need to hear your voices." These are the words of Hildur Guðnadóttir, who recently accepted the Oscar for best original score for the film Joker at the 92nd ...4 hours ago
Dr Amanda Landers discusses the stigma associated with palliative care and why the field deserves recognition Scalpels are a powerful tool in medicine, but words can be just as mighty. Some medical specialties are easy to comprehend - they cut, stitch, unblock, restart or fix. Others are just too hard ...4 hours ago
A Northland property stockpiled one million litres of flammable and toxic chemicals. Almost two years since the situation came to the attention of authorities, the poorly stored solvents remain a fire and environmental risk. While Government agencies struggled to get a polluter to clean up his mess, up to one million ...4 hours ago
Georgia Hale's tireless and compassionate work, using her sport of rugby league to create opportunities for many different communities, has earned her the title of Young New Zealander of the Year. As soon as she left high school, Georgia Hale began working with children with intellectual disabilities. It changed her ...4 hours ago
A new, "true green" party hoping to break into Parliament at this year's election has been hit by resignations and allegations of questionable conduct, Newsroom's political editor Sam Sachdeva reports Fledgling political party Sustainable New Zealand has been rocked by a flurry of resignations and allegations of questionable behaviour by its ...4 hours ago
The prospect of going to the Red Planet is possibly a step closer with the US President's State of the Nation speech, in which he promises we will land there. The chances of anything coming from Mars - according to the 1978 Jeff Wayne musical War of the Worlds - are ...5 hours ago
Leaked emails show a 'summer of sewage' has broken the confidence of councillors in the region's shared water services company ...12 hours ago
Exemptions from paying Fringe Benefit Tax for double cab utes could clash with the Government's intentions to cut transport emissions. ...16 hours ago
A failed Dunedin financial adviser is facing 12 charges relating to fraud and theft over what the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) says is a Ponzi scheme that lost investors $15.7 million. Barry Kloogh appeared in the Dunedin District Court this morning to face charges brought by the SFO over running ...17 hours ago
New Zealand Cricket and media company NZME have failed to reach a deal on radio broadcast rights for next season's international and domestic matches. The current deal expires at the end of April and does not affect the remainder of this summer's broadcast schedule on Radio Sport. Radio Sport has ...17 hours ago
Australian national airline Qantas is cutting some trans-Tasman flights because of the expected fall in business from the coronavirus. It said it will reduce capacity by 5 percent because of a fall in demand, along with the reduction in services to China, Hong Kong and Japan. Qantas and Jetstar services ...17 hours ago
The government has dropped controversial plans to let primary and intermediate school children sit NCEA literacy and numeracy tests. ...18 hours ago
Auckland Council is warning government officials of the risks of disastrous housing developments like some seen in the United Kingdom. It is facing off over the way the government plans to get thousands of prefabricated homes built here to tackle the housing crisis. An email sent last week by council ...19 hours ago
Shane Jones was back in his Northland home patch during the week to announce the serving of another dollop of public money from the Provincial Growth Fund. It was not the first allocation of PGF funding to benefit the region this year. This time the PGF will allocate up to ...20 hours ago
The legislation setting up a firearm’s register and introducing tougher licensing controls is a step closer to becoming law. ...21 hours ago
Auckland Airport has reported a flat first-half result, and plans to bring forward the billion-dollar redevelopment of its domestic terminal, and upgrade the international arrivals hall. The company's net profit for the six months to December was unchanged from the year earlier's $147.2 million, reflecting a drop in passenger growth ...22 hours ago
How voters react to the headlines generated by NZ First’s latest financial shenanigans may (or may not) determine the outcome on September 19. The most recent Colmar Brunton poll had NZ First down at 3%, so some commentators are already writing off the party’s chances of survival. But the real ...23 hours ago
As part of the coalition government, the Green MPs have delivered us up the Zero Carbon Act. A reading of the Act reveals that it has not one single measure to cut GHG emissions, nor any measures at all to keep to the targets set out in it.
I defy anyone to say that it does.
Setting out targets is good, but with no measures to achieve them targets are meaningless.
I could set a target to be a millionaire in ten years.
I could even set down intermediate targets, that to reach my goal I will need to meet a target of a $100,000 a year.
Sorted.
To give myself further excuse not to implement any measures to achieve my target, I could push my millionaire target out to thirty years from now, so that no one can really check whether I achieve it or not.
I defy anyone, who after reading the Zero Carbon Act was to conclude, other than that, the Zero Carbon Act is a corrupt attempt to put off doing anything about climate change in the here and now.
I don't think so Jenny at all.
The political system has limits, no use putting up a bill that doesn't have support, from the electorate or coalition members
The zero carbon bill, and I agree with you , its severely limited, is an illustration of whats possible at the moment (in a time when benign dictators aren't a thing)
James did his best for cross party consensus. Don't blame him, blame the incremental nature of politics, and the resistance of dinosaurs
Get out on the street, encourage and join the kids on climate strike Fridays, build the movement for change,change your own life.
James did his best for cross party consensus.
Indeed he has done. This is how politics should be done and kudos for him for achieving this. It would not have been easy.
Don't blame him, blame the incremental nature of politics, and the resistance of dinosaurs
Human social groups, at whatever scale, have a fundamental problem to solve; how to respond to the unknown, the novel and to change. When faced with strangers, or new information and ideas, we have two possible responses. One is to open up and embrace them, the other is to close off and resist them. Crucially both strategies serve a purpose.
Being open means that you get first mover advantage with fresh ideas and can react to changing circumstances more rapidly. The downside is that not all strangers are benign, some will be dangerous and threatening. And not all new ideas are good ones, most in fact will fail … some fatally.
Being closed means that you avoid these risks, and by trusting the 'tried and true' it is more likely you will survive in the short term. This is important, there is no value to investing in a better future decades in the future, if you die this winter because the crops failed. But conversely resisting all innovation and novelty also ensures failure in the long-run; failure to adapt and being out-competed by more agile neighbours.
Obviously the correct solution is some balance between the two; but how? The same person cannot easily be both open and closed at the same time. Humans appear to have evolved a fascinating way to deal with it; some of us are open, some are closed. When faced with something new, we each respond according to our temperament and then we talk about it. We socially argue the case for and against and arrive at some consensus. We try the plan out, see what works and what didn't and repeat. It's quite a smart solution.
With climate change the process got subverted when the big fossil carbon players borrowed a strategy originally devised by the tobacco companies. The basic idea was not to win the argument, but to prevent consensus from being formed by provoking the resistance of the naturally cautious among us. And us more open types attacking them only makes them more cautious and more reactionary. (This too was part of the plan.)
It was only after we went for the tobacco companies themselves, the source of the disinformation, that we reached a consensus and took effective action. The same applies here, but on a larger scale.
But we are both open and closed aren't we?
We can be closed to social change yet open to economic change and vice versa
We are generally a mixture of fears and conservatism, optimism ,altruism and the whole bleeding mess
The time frame, the imminence of tipping point and collapse probably means that striving for consensus in a democracy just loses us more time .
I still think, lets shift our consciousness first, away from anthrocentrism at all costs, then whatever comes after(technological fixes, new strategies )is coming from an inclusive, sustainable and happier place
“I still think, lets shift our consciousness first, away from anthrocentrism at all costs, then whatever comes after(technological fixes, new strategies )is coming from an inclusive, sustainable and happier place"”
Well put.
But we are both open and closed aren't we?
True, but on any given issue we generally take one position at a time. Otherwise you run the risk of being perceived as 'talking out both sides of your mouth'.
The openness personality trait is highly predictive of holding to progressive or left wing political views and I'd wager most of the regulars here at TS are very open types. We have lots of different ideas and we debate them vigorously, but more closed conservative people are either rare or simply don't come here.
Yet in political terms they constitute roughly half the population, and in terms of my outline above … they serve a vital and useful purpose in the debate. Conservatives may frustrate the hell out of us, but in collective terms they usefully keep a society grounded and functioning on a day to day basis.
It's my view that progressives would achieve more if we approached them with this broader understanding and worked with their natures rather than against them. This would be inclusiveness at work, would it not?
Yes, I'm totally with you there.
actually it seems to be similar to what Jonathan Haidt argues in The Righteous Mind
Ha haaa ! … I recognise the Big Five Psychometrics when I see them.
Agreed.
The other thing is that putting up a bill destined to fail reminds me of a time I was writing a provisional report on a project, and drafted it "Some _____ refused to participate…". My boss pointed out that this essentially committed those non-participants to their position, and suggested the redraft "Some _____ were reluctant to participate". I learnt a lot from that boss.
Why Consensus Stinks!
The Australian term white-anting comes from the action of termites that hollow out and empty something that looks fine on the surface.
The Zero Carbon Bill is an example, white-anting any real action on climate change, looking substantial, but completely hollowed out of any real action.
The argument made for the Zero Carbon Bill by its supporters, is that we have to seek 'Consensus' with the National Party, otherwise when they get back into power they will repeal any concrete legislation we put in place.
Apart from being a weak defeatist position, this argument is actually not proven.
The Nats never repealed the Nuclear Free Legislation. Labour have never repealed the Anadarko Amendment. Phil Goff traveled the Country in a big red bus with "Kill The Bill" (the National Government Bill to increase GST to 15%) before admitting that if he was elected he wouldn't repeal it.
Consensus is not democracy it is an attack on democracy.
As Winston Churchill famously said, Democracy is the worst of all possible systems, except for all those others that have been tried.
Democracy has been described by its detractors as the dictatorship of the majority over the minority.
This is the sound of ideologies crashing, sang Billy Bragg
Consensus is an effort to paper over these differences between ideologies.
And it fits into one of those 'worst ways' Churchill spoke of.
Consensus is not democracy.
Consensus is going for the lowest possible denominator to achieve unanimity.
Consensus is an effort to silence and stifle political debate. To suffocate the sound of ideologies clashing.
The tragedy of Consensus politics is that it robs the electorate of making a clear choice between one way forward and another.
Consensus politics prevents us hearing the arguments between both ways forward, and for making an informed decision with our vote.
Consensus politics murders democracy in back room deals between politicians.
At its core what consensus politics displays, is a lack of faith in the people.
Consensus politics is an abrogation of leadership.
This government hates targets.
They keep showing them up as useless – needing a reset (kiwibuild anyone)
what they say is all fairy dust and aspirations – most of the time I’m sure they know they can’t deliver
Could just as easily be talking about National.
It's not thing unique to Labour… Governments hate measures. People can hold them to account.
I defy anyone, who after reading the Zero Carbon Act was to conclude, other than that, the Zero Carbon Act is a corrupt attempt to put off doing anything about climate change in the here and now.
Oh, fuck off. We went through this yesterday. If you don't understand why Labour/Green don't have either the numbers in Parliament or the electoral mandate to implement the policies you want to see, read up on the subject or just don't comment on it. Alleging corruption (even scummier than yesterday's accusation of cynicism) is a grotesque insult to people who had to fight hard to get even this level of legislation on the table and have shown a far greater commitment to doing something about it than you have.
If you want to see your preferred policies implemented, join one of those two parties and put in the hours and the money to help them get more MPs in Parliament. Insulting them from your armchair will just get you more "Fuck off"s.
It's a step, which I hope they follow up on soon. This government's actions for the poor are more indictable.
The art of the possible…..and why we fail.
So now Shaw is "corrupt". There is again only one reasonable response to your bile, fuck off.
So now Shaw is "corrupt".
I wonder if Shaw, Davidson and Ardern would prefer 'useless leaders' rather than 'corrupt'?
One description is acquired by simply failing to do what was promised (i.e. dealing to climate change with the same vigour and commitment as was afforded the nuclear free policy) while the other requires some forethought, planning and cooperation. One is simply passively muddling along while the other is deliberate and active.
The way I see it (from someone who bought the whole Green thing and voted accordingly, in a household where the rest largely voted Labour for the same reasons.) is that none of the above named party leaders have the heft of Winston.
A truly committed and charismatic leader would have been able to bring others along in such numbers that Winston's own caucus would have been putting pressure on him to at least meet L/G more than halfway, and the three could have all contributed to a Bill that we could have been proud of. As it is, we're left with a lilly livered and truly pathetic piece of legislation that condemns our children to a bleak future.
A pox on all their houses.
I'll fuck off now.
Breakfast in schools could have been implemented almost immediately, as one example of something useful this government could have done for children.
But they haven’t.
Yep, there are a few other of Hone Harawira's policies they could enact too.
A teacher aid in every class room was another I liked.
Yes, absolutely that too…
Restoring support services which were defunded and cut completely by the NACT government…support which was provided to many of the most at risk groups in NZ…
Support which is literally priceless…but for which proverbial pennies of funding per year (few millions)…in monetary cost to retain, restore and fund those same priceless services into the future…
Winston First is courting the rural vote and was always going to be a problem. If he can't hold those votes his party is gone. Letting the coalition fold would be a better option for him if the cost of maintaining it was to lose those votes. Where is all the criticism of NZF?
Where is all the criticism of NZF?
I take it as read that we all know that 'the problem' is Winston….I suspect there are NZF Members who would dearly like to participate more positively in climate change mitigation…but there's Winston….and he doesn't give a shit.
He just gets to sit at the table again, play kingmaker again, handicap real transformative policy implementation again.
His voter base are dying out.
And none too soon.
The leaders of the other two coalition parties need to do much, much better.
The leaders of the other two coalition parties need to do much, much better.
I still have no idea what it is that you would have them do.
His voter base are dying out.
Winston's old people constituency is starting to die out, that is why he has so much invested in the rural vote.
I still have no idea what it is that you would have them do.
Let's see now….how about…./the-green-party-policy-manifesto-full-costed-and-seriously-progressive/
and….https://www.labour.org.nz/climatechange
As for the 'rural vote', again, the generation of farmers with callous disregard for the environment are a dying breed. Many farmers now see that SSDD (literally) practices are not sustainable and change needs to be sped up. Shaw near breathlessly reassuring us that there is 'no need to reduce stock numbers' when even many farmers know there are plenty of good reasons to was just sad.
I'm not claiming to have the answers, I'm just telling it as I see it. The Zero Carbon Act is a joke if its purpose is to mitigate the effects of climate change. Only true and decisive leaders with definitive policies and messaging will effect change.
We're told repeatedly we are approaching climate change crisis…you'd never believe that going on the response from our government.
I still have no idea what it is that you would have them do. It is irrelevant what Green and Labour policy is if Winston is better off to end the coalition than support it.
Farmers are still the biggest sector opposing meaningful Climate policy. Have you not been paying attention?
Public disagreement that outlines the stumbling blocks would be a good start. Then the discourse is out in the open, and the general public get to decide for themselves who is looking out for future interests and who are looking to protect their positions.
It seems that at the moment, even those who voted for this coalition government are not permitted to critique their performance. And unfortunately criticisms are often valid, and if they are not even acknowledged and used to improve then we have a coalition government that is trending towards the arrogance and disregard of the previous.
The consequences of climate change, insecure housing, appalling child poverty, our health system and inequality do not lie in suspended animation until the next electoral term, they impact on us all now – some much more than others. My impetus as a voter for addressing these issues is not to maintain the employment status of my limited choice of politicians, but to continue to ask for change in these matters.
Politicians should not be so concerned with polling and reelection, that they don't use the opportunity they possess to start public awareness and discussion. This coalition government is not even progressing in that department.
If you don't think that Shaw has been promoting public awareness and facilitating discussion then you are not worthy of a reply.
@ solkta. This kind of dismissal is what I am talking about.
The deference shown by Shaw for the farmers concern about methane limits, is not based on science or acknowledgement of what needs to be done. If I was not aware of the issues of climate change, and was not yet informed of the immediacy of need for transition, then seeing James Shaw – leader of the Green Party – on television, downplaying these issues and congratulating this coalition government on coming to an agreement – would have a negative impact, along the lines of:
"Even the Green Party leader is not concerned about methane, or feels that a carbon-zero bill that aspires without consequence to a carbon-free 2050 goal is worth pursuing."
For those in New Zealand whose current knowledge of the issues of climate change are non-existent or slight, this will be one of their main news items on this topic. Disturbingly, it will reassure many that if even the Greens are not concerned, the status quo can continue for the foreseeable future.
Does this explain the disquiet that I share with others on this forum?
Let's see now….how about…./the-green-party-policy-manifesto-full-costed-and-seriously-progressive/
and….https://www.labour.org.nz/climatechange
OK, how about them? The parties with those policies have 43% of the vote, ie 53 out of 120 MPs in Parliament. Please explain why you believe it would be possible for that minority of MPs to enact those policies as legislation in their entirety. And not just why it would be possible, but why it's so obviously possible that you feel free to berate the parties' leadership for failing to do it.
26 May 2019 at 1:58 pm
….Please explain why you believe it would be possible for that minority of MPs to enact those policies as legislation in their entirety. And not just why it would be possible, but why it's so obviously possible that you feel free to berate the parties' leadership for failing to do it.
Hi Psycho,
I could name half a dozen green policies that the Green MPs have refused to champion in government.
The iniquitous Anadarko Amendment to the RMA that makes it illegal to protest deep sea oil drilling. Is one of the things that the Green Party have refused to try and repeal, The law that makes it illegal to raise climate change in consent hearings for new fossil fuel projects is another piece of iniquitous piece of legislation that the Greens are happy to leave in place, for the sake of 'consensus'.
At a time when many voters have trouble telling the political parties apart, the last thing we need is more consensus between them.
Consensus muffles the sound of 'ideologies clashing' making it harder to differentiate between the parties vying for our vote.
Let's have the arguments out, let us hear them.
Consensus turns the political spectrum into one whole amorphous mass.
If all the parties have consensus on climate change why vote for the Greens? Indeed what is the need for a Green Party? We are all in agreement. We have achieved consensus.
One of the key demands of XR is for 'politicians to tell the truth about climate change' papering over the differences between political parties on this issue, is not telling the truth about climate change, it is covering up the truth about climate change.
Do you not realise that many NZF voters are National defectors who can't cope with voting Labour or Green and that if it collapses they will probably go back to National? And then we would have a National government again. This coalition government has to make many compromises, but half a loaf is better than no bread.
Don't think so.
The various iterations of the New Zealand Election Study (2008-2014) suggest those swinging to NZF have disproportionately been former Labour voters (& – as with most smaller parties – switchers comprise a significant segment of NZF support).
What's more, NZF voters have chosen Labour as their preferred Coalition partner in 3 out of the last 4 General Elections (including overwhelmingly in 2017).
solkta
I'd estimate NZF received a little over 60% of its 2017 vote from both Metro & Provincial City seats. So, all things being equal, he probably only needs to hold around a third of his Rural / Small Town vote to be sure of returning.
Your estimate is meaningless until you back it up with some stats. Even if you are right that doesn't mean Winston is prepared to take the risk or have a smaller presence and say no thanks to those votes. As he straddles the centre he needs to appear to both his left and right flanks that he is protecting their interests.
(1)
No, it certainly wouldn't be his aim … but I do take issue with the idea that holding / expanding his rural vote is an absolute necessity.
(2)
Started by adding the NZF Party-Vote in all Metro (Akld / Wgtn / Chch) & Provincial City seats (ranging in city size from Gisborne (East Coast) up to the two Dunedin & two Hamilton seats).
Then (based on a rough estimation), I subtracted the likely Rural / Small Town NZF vote in those Provincial City seats that weren't entirely urban … then added the likely Urban NZF vote from the Maori seats (as with the General Roll Provincial Centres, this was according to a broad estimation of what proportion of Maori seats were urban / rural).
Made some allowance for error within my estimation.
Then simply calculated the final result as a proportion of the entire Nationwide NZF Party-Vote in 2017.
Hence, I'd estimate NZF received somewhere between 59%-62% of its 2017 Party-Vote from both Metro & Provincial City seats.
It is possible to be very precise … but that would involve going through every single booth in the Provincial Cities … but, you know, benefits considerably less than the enormous energy invested … law of diminishing returns
(3)
The various iterations of the New Zealand Election Study (2008-2014) suggest:
– those swinging to NZF have disproportionately been former Labour voters (& – as with most smaller parties – switchers comprise a significant segment of NZF support). Over those 3 consecutive Elections, around two-thirds of switchers to Winston's Party came courtesy of the Left (overwhelmingly former Labour supporters … but also a small segment of former Greens) / one-third from the Right (overwhelmingly former National voters … but also a sizeable minority from ACT / Cons / Maori Party). (my calculations from raw Flow-of-the-Vote stats from the 08-14 NZES).
– NZF voting-base can best be seen as a segment of the morally-conservative Left. Most of the latter group still vote Labour, but a section swung to NZF back in the 90s, while even more have moved in Winston's direction over the last two decades. (Although they haven’t always remained particularly Loyal).
– Which, in turn, explains why (as I pointed out to JanM) NZF voters have chosen Labour as their preferred Coalition partner in 3 out of the last 4 General Elections (including overwhelmingly in 2017).
So what I'm suggesting at (3), just to be clear, is that the Right-leaning component of NZF's support-base is relatively small.
Yes … Winston's voters do tend toward moral conservatism on the Liberal / Libertarian vs Conservative / Authoritarian Moral spectrum.
But on the other key axis – the classic one – the Left vs Right Economic spectrum … a very large majority of them are on the Left.
Thanks swordfish, I do appreciate your analysis.
Cheers.
It is too easy (and convenient) to apportion the lack with Winston, as you note there must also be a willingness to prevaricate on the part of the other parties….and expressions of anger and disappointment are to be expected just as they are frequently on other topics, and rightly so otherwise everyone would have fucked off long ago
The nuclear-free legislation was enacted without any negotian needed, by a Labour government that held 56 of the 95 seats in Parliament. If the Green Party currently held 55% of the seats in Parliament, I expect the Zero Carbon Act would look very different – wouldn't you agree? But they don't hold 55% of the seats in Parliament, they hold 7%. Can you see how that might make a very big difference to their legislative ability?
Re "charismatic leadership," NZ First is a party of provincial conservatism and its fundamental principles are in some respects completely opposed to those of Labour and the Greens. Environmental policy is one of those areas. How do you picture "charismatic leadership" getting a party to go against its fundamental principles? For instance, can you picture a charismatic National leader getting the Green Party to cooperate with it on an extensive programme of privatisation?
“I’ll fuck off now.”
Perhaps you should, because that's a terrible summary of events and an unrealistic belief a party not even in a coalition government can set such an agenda.
The only way to get hard green policy is to vote for more green mps.
The only way to get hard green policy is to vote for more green mps.
If by Green you mean more of what we have in parliament now claiming such…then maybe not.
Hard Green Policy would compromise New Zealand's national security posture. It's standard Green Party Defence policy to cut tier 1 defence assets, frigate, P8 and anything over 50cal. That these defence assets is vital in securing not only New Zealand's natural resources but that of the South Pacific as well means the Greens will not be able to pull the majority to their side.
Yeah, them, the ones you claim to have voted for.
I hear your frustration and disappointment Rosemary.
Being the eternal optimist, I reckon voting for more Green MPs emboldens the other MPs, provides leadership for the public and direction for business.
But would it really make a difference?
They still wouldn't have king maker leverage.
They've shown they'd prefer to be in the tent than out. So no leverage there.
Thus, they would still end up being the smaller partner of Labour that prefers not to rock the boat.
If there were 30 green mps, they'd have plenty of leverage, and plenty of green policy. You just have to vote for them instead of whining about how useless they are.
And where do you think those extra votes would come from?
The reason being. Last election when Labour dropped to 24% and the Greens were polling at 15% Labour claimed they wouldn't look at forming a Government with Little stating Labour would need a considerably greater share of the vote to form a government. Despite (at 24%) still potentially having the numbers to form a Government.
Therefore, it seems Labour would have rather let National win than be forced to work with a stronger Green party.
Less of the goal post moving and more substance to the point.
If you want more green policy there has to be more green mps. That must be a given. Knowing this, bashing the greens for not doing enough when they don't have the numbers to force legislation is an admission of not understanding how parliament works, or an excuse to put the boot in to suit an agenda… Or both.
Wasn't moving the goal posts, just pointing out Labour's preference when it comes to working with a stronger Greens.
Therefore, even with greater numbers they'd still end up being the smaller partner of Labour that prefers not to rock the boat.
Having leverage without the backbone to use it means little. And the one thing the Greens have shown is they have no spine.
Once you admit there needs to be many more green mps in the house, in government, to push through green policy, then we can talk about where they come from.
Over to you.
I'm not bashing the Greens for not having the numbers. I'm bashing them for not using their nous and showing us what work they are actually doing to help achieve more.
Your bashing them for not getting radical green policy through the house which is because, again, they don't have the numbers to do so.
Do you accept the greens need more mps, and actually in government to enact their preferred legislation?
I admit if the Greens had the numbers to win an election that (more green policy) would be what one would expect. However, that is highly unlikely on their current and past polling. Moreover, very unlikely on their current performance in this term.
That's a start, which kind of puts your unreal expectations of what a minor party can achieve, in some sort of context.
Now lets expand a little and say nz1st weren’t in the picture. You’d expect the greens to get a little more through, right?
No. And now I'm going to call you on your bullshit. Prove it. Where have I bashed them for not not getting radical green policy through the house?
Taking their policy is in general 'radical' for NZ, you've consistently bashed them for watering down or not getting what they sought. No cites needed, it's archived. Even in these exchanges you've bemoaned them for not achieving and doing enough to get elected in greater numbers.
You’re fifth column.
That's incorrect. You've been called out. Therefore, cites are indeed needed.
Furthermore, you initially stated radical Green policy now you are shifting the goal posts by claiming that all their policy is radical. In which case you should have initially stated all Green policy. Therefore, best you stick to cites that reflect your initial assertion which is radical Green policy and not all Green policy which you are now attempting to reach for.
Additionally, me bemoaning them for not doing enough to get elected in greater numbers also doesn't prove your initial assertion.
Nope, no cites needed, as all your anti green comments are archived, as will your efforts from today will be.
If there's a mod call to find posts where you have criticised the greens for not getting that policy through unfettered, then sure I'll list some, but prepared as I am, as they are numerous and no doubt fresh in the minds of most green voters here to gain consensus for my statement, I'm sure that call won't come.
Not from me, it won’t.
Onya
It wasn't that Labour could not work with a stronger Green Party, they had an MOU and lots of policy in common, it was more that Winston wouldn't have been able to deal with the Greens being a bigger partner.
You are as transparent as a transparent thing. A really crap troll.
Labour weren't even prepared to find that out. Therefore, their unwillingness to even have a crack at strongly it suggests it was Labour putting the kibosh on it (working with a stronger Greens).
On those numbers you gave above 24% and 15%, of course there was no way to form a government. How on 39% do you propose they had a chance?
But guaranteed, if that were even remotely possible, with that ratio, you'd have many green ministers and much more real green policy getting legislated. Fact. And you’d still moan about it.
But of course you know under MMP there was a potential to if they were willing to talk to NZF, which Labour wasn't prepared to do.
In fact, Little wasn't even prepared to give a number/percentage on where they would actually consider it (forming a Government).
At the time, even with nz1st, it wasn't doable on the numbers, and then if it were, what Solkta wrote above.
Yes, it was. Even Guyon was taken back at Little's/Labour's poisition.
As I said to solkta, Labour weren't even prepared to find that out.
And it was this unwillingness to even have a crack at it that strongly suggests it was Labour putting the kibosh on it (working with a stronger Greens).
It's speculative at best to assume winston would have gone with labour and the greens at that level of support for the green party and accepting a minor position as last cab off the rank, and in playing for more votes, to rule out dealing with nz1st, I can see why Little could have backtracked, but solkta's scenario seems far more plausible.
Your interpretation seems way off by comparison.
Yes, which is why I said potentially could form a Government.
Nevertheless, you clearly or is that purposely missed the point?
Being, Labour ruled it out from the get go. Therefore, it was never going to get to the negotiation stage.
Which is the point. Labour shut this potential down before even giving it a chance.
You can't blame that on Winston.
I don't blame anyone for hypothetical postulations, just question the motive of those raising them.
I question the notion the Greens are going to get more support on the grounds of their current performance.
And they are quickly running out of time to up their game.
I did vote for them. Which helped them into power only for us to find out how useless they really are.
Therefore, if they continue to remain useless they can't really expect more people to vote for them.
So you clearly don't know how mmp works in government, and choose to blame the small number of green mps, not even part of the formal coalition, for having to compromise and not being able to effect radical change they want to.
No. That is a strawman. My position is stated above.
But your position is crap and based on a total bollocks understanding of how much a very small number of green mps can achieve under a confidence and supply arrangement.
My position is based on their dreadful performance to date. And is shared by many. Even within the Greens, they know they have been lacking the fight, made many mistakes, and have swallowed too many dead rats.
You trying to blame this on my misunderstanding is a joke.
See that's where you fall down. You don't accept that in this government they are bit players having to compromise to get anything, and the only way to change that is to have more green mps and get them in a proper coalition.
And I don’t think your misunderstanding is a joke, I think it’s quite deliberate.
Not at all. Those failures mentioned are admitted by the Greens themselves.
Without addressing their weaknesses, achieving more MPs is very unlikely. And merely securing more without addressing their weaknesses is unlikely to improve their performance.
What seems to be deliberate is your failure to see and understand this.
The weakness is they don't have the numbers to roll out their ideas without compromise 🙄
No genuine green voter is going to turn on the party because they aren't pumping out their policies ten to the dozen. They know, just like I do, that you can only do what you can with what you have.
Most greens will be encouraged to push harder in the run up to 2020 and work for the party and it’s ideals, not sit on the sidelines and cry crocodile tear laments.
I'm not denying I go the Greens. Almost everyone knows that. But I have a go at them on valid grounds. Which is why most rebuttals end up being directed at me and not the valid points I've raised.
Yes, most understand that. However, that's not the weaknesses I just alluded to above, which the Greens themselves largely admit. And it is these weaknesses that they require to correct to better perform, which will help grow their support and performance going forward.
You can't expect them to substantially grow their vote on their current performance – and their polling largely reflects that.
I don't expect them to be pumping out policies ten to the dozen, that's just you trying to suggest I'm some kind of extremist expecting them to perform beyond reality.
The reality is, they've made a number of costly mistakes, they lack backbone, and failed to gain fair compensation for the dead rats swallowed. Furthermore, they talk a lot about pushing hard for certain issues but show little if anything on the work being done in regards to those issues and the progress being made or setbacks faced.
Go on then, what are their self confessed weaknesses they need to correct to better perform and grow their support going forward?
@The Chairman …
26 May 2019 at 3:
speaking if bile – you seem to be full of it of late.
Perhaps you you should try fucking off yourself and come back when you are a little more cherry.
[Hi James, why don’t you try your own recipe? – Incognito]
See my Moderation note @ 12:57 PM.
Would that be the cherry on top of the icing on the cake?
I don't like cherries or icing, just for the record.
Noted.
Seen and noted. Thanks.
noted (and taken on board) – but please note that this is in reply to A poster who seems to have lernt a new term “fuck off” and is quite happy to tell people to do so should they dare to say something he/she didn’t like.
I know, James, I’m reading the same comments as you are. Inflaming is not helpful, and you know this full well, so I shouldn’t have had to warn you.
Putting words in my mouth again Solkta?
I never said that James Shaw was corrupt. I said, (and I quote), "the Zero Carbon Act is a corrupt attempt to put off doing anything about climate change in the here and now."
Possibly a bad choice of word, I could have said is a 'corrupted attempt'. It is corrupted by the very nature of the process.
James Shaw is trying to solve a political problem, by bureaucratic means. A political problem cannot be solved with bureaucratic means. This just cannot work.
The problem; National Party’s intransigence over climate change. This political problem cannot be solved by pandering to National. In my opinion National's intransigence over climate change must be confronted openly and publicly denounced and demolished, it’s called politics.
History shows that a leader convinced of the rightness of their cause and with the confidence to get up and openly and courageously fight for it, can win over a majority from a minority position.
It's called leadership.
And it does not depend on the size of your majority (or lack of) in the house.
In prewar England the wealthy class and their political representatives, the Conservative Party were riddled with fascist appeasers and fifth columnists and even open fascist sympathisers. Churchill who had been elected into the house as a sole 'independent' MP for his Constitutionalist Party, (You couldn't get a more minority position), did not try to make peace with these appeasers, from his seat in the back benches, he denounced them at every opportunity.
The rest is history.
Another example is over the debate over nuclear ship visits. The Labour Party from the opposition benches through the strength of their argument was able to win over the majority of parliament to support a minority private members bill to ban nuclear ships. Which two National MPs crossed the floor to support.
Again, the rest is history.
This is how political differences are fought out.
In my opinion, in trying to seek common ground with the National Party, James Shaw has not just given up on politics, he has given up on leadership.
I watched the introduction of the Zero Carbon bill on Tuesday and observed the Children's strike later that same week.
The kids have got it right – this catastrophe is beyond tinkering.
But I've commented more fully on 'How to get there.'
Problem is your “How you get there antidote” is about as deep as a puddle on practicality and as a workable solution Are you a secondary school student
Bewildered doesn't attempt a practical answer to anything because '"Everything may be done, but nothing should be done for the first time'. Yes Minister. e&oe
Randomised controlled trials – comparing one action to a different action – are the obvious and proven way to work out how to do things better. Yet somehow, when it comes to some fields, large numbers apparently believe it's immoral to conduct RCTs. WTF?
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/5/25/18637156/randomized-trials-immoral-study
This makes me curious enough to want to do a small study on how The Standard community interprets data from studies.
Imagine tribbles escape from the South England Spaceport, and their expanding population is nearing womble habitats. The Society for Womble Protection are concerned that wombles sharing their habitat with tribbles will adversely affect them, so they run a trial putting wombles and tribbles together sharing the same spaces.
Wombles are well studied, there are 80 independent tests, measurements etc that are done to measure womble well-being. As is common, p<0.05 is adopted as the significance level for reporting a result suggesting adverse effects (less than 1/20 probability of the observed result happening by chance).
The SWP study checked all 80 markers, and reported they observed the test wombles had more nugs on their nagunoids than normal, and elevated miasmia levels.
These results were of concern to three other groups, who then repeated the study as closely as possible. None observed increased numbers of nugs or increased miasmia, but one group found depressed motivon levels, the second group observed increased hyperchitinism, the third group observed increased thyromia activity and decreased collaberism.
So all up, four groups each studied studied the 80 possible indicators of decreased womble well-being, and there were 6 results suggesting adverse effects outside the normal range.
I'm curious what first impressions The Standard participants get from these results, and what next steps readers think should be taken. Such as, OMG, six demonstrated risks, tribbles must be immediately contained then eradicated to protect wombles. Or, meh, the data looks all good for the wombles to me. Or, the four studies show conflicting results, we need to do more studies. Or, whatever else you come up with.
My first instinctive reaction is that our old friend Bayes is lurking within this data somewhere, but I lacked a justifiable prior to make a case.
Assuming that each of the four studies reported their adverse findings at a p<0.05 level, then the next obvious question is why did all four find significant adverse outcomes, but all found different ones? Clearly like many sociological results we're suffering from a bad lack of replicability here.
On this basis I would conclude that our four studies suggest there something going on, after all none of them found no adverse effect, so they don't support the null hypothesis (ie no adverse effect at all) … but neither do they prove one. We're really no better off than if the studies had not been done at all.
But because we have only one population of wombles, and apparently isolating one randomised, unbiased sample of them from trimbles is not possible … then the gold standard of RCT's looks impossible to implement.
I'm curious to know if there is a way around this problem.
I tried really hard to set it up so that if Bayes came sniffing around I could tell him to fuck right off, it's none of his business.
As far as the randomised controlled trials part of it goes, imagine it has been previously established that wombles suffer no ill-effects from being confined to enclosures by themselves. And that it has been previously established that there are some other critters that wombles can co-exist with in enclosures without suffering ill-effects, while there's some other critters that do cause ill-effects when enclosed with wombles.
I would be very suspicious of the findings that purport to show that wobbles,
"suffer no ill-effects from being confined to enclosures by themselves."
For which of God's creatures is that true?
Models for considering should have real "players" as their subjects or you'll end up with findings that don't mirror reality.
I'm getting the impression your base position is that natural systems are so complex that trials inherently oversimplify things and can therefore never produce reliable data. Is that close to being a fair interpretation of your view?
In the case of mammals the size of wobbles, yes. If your scenario revolved around say, bacteria, then there's more chance of a valid result. Wombles are sentient beings, so they may conspire to mislead you; have you taken that into account
Thanks, that covers the question I had in mind at the start of this thread.
But given your position as a councillor that may be called on to make some kind of call on whether to accept or reject something new and how to regulate it, I'm still curious about how you view the numbers. Imagine it was something simple and controlled enough you were comfortable that controlled trials produced useful valid results.
Say, allowing autonomous delivery vehicles to replace posties and couriers.
So of 80 factors examining previous areas where autonomous deliveries were allowed, the first study found increased unemployment, and more cats getting scared away from their homes (p<0.05). The subsequent three studies did not find increased unemployment or more cats going missing. One study found more complaints of residents' driveways getting blocked by the new autonomous vehicles than used to be blocked by human drivers, one study found more problems with junk mail littering the streets, one study found more complaints of misdelivered mail and more complaints of bored dogs barking because posties didn't stop and play with them anymore (ok, I'm reaching).
Do you think these four studies show allowing autonomous delivery vehicles will cause increased problems? What next steps would you want to take?
Really, really sorry for butting in but no way do we want to take humans totally out of the loop. Eisenhower when he coined the term Militray Industrial Complex was warning of the profit motive of war.
Ron Mark Minster of Defence dosnt want full autonomous war fighting. Could you imagine a war fought with all drones. War between drones dosnt have to stop.
So these guys pushing drone technology are flooding the private sector and making up the worlds boardrooms and it's them pushing full autonomous networks for profit and well, we have to be conscious of the military applications at the same time.
At the same time Weaponising drones isn't something that's in New Zealand's control. We've got China and America vying for technological supremacy and apart of that will eventually spill over into robot wars. So there's this double wade sword again of progress and innovation or not being able to keep pace with innovation.
Perhaps we we should be asking whether or not an autonomous network should be privately owned or publicly owned.
Actually the question is…
Will autonomous networks be controllable by human beings…
And the answer is already out there.
No. They won't be. That point, has been passed.
It's not just ownership that would be an issue. Companies have personhood. So these robots wouldn't just have the same rights as humans they would have extra rights, for one they don't pay taxes. We can't eat robots so can't hunt them. They will be competing for the same resources and jobs as humans but we won't be able to attack them like an animal because they will have the same rights as a company would have. So no, I don't think auto networks should be privately owned. Whether or not it is a mature technology does not preclude a future government from regulating the industry. Laws lag notoriously far behind tech innovations anyway.
personhood.
Yes quite. And that is also relevant to the discussion…
Robots however are only one component of a discussion around automation
Private automation co-exists with public automation…
Public or private as a legal construct won't alter that human beings are not in control of present day automation…
And therefore…can't be in control of future automation…
I get you were referencing <em>warfare…</em>
I'm referencing the entirity of automation…which includes human beings as a component of the processes…processes which are rendering our speicies…irrelevant.
Yeah, we killed God when she gave birth to us and AI will kill us when we birth AI. My only hope is transcendencing by uploading my consciousness into a computer. It's the closest humans can possibly get to God like, all knowing and that.
We are just entering the 4th industrial revolution of AI. We don't even know what technologies are installed for humanity but if competition for resources can be controlled by making technology so cheap, technology doesn’t have to be free, just so cheap every one can participate.
And the answer is already out there.
It is? I haven't heard of an autonomous network that actually exists. Which one are you referring to, and what's the basis for your belief that it's no longer controllable by humans?
…AI will kill us when we birth AI. My only hope is transcendencing by uploading my consciousness into a computer.
If the computers intend your death, it hardly seems likely they'd volunteer to host your consciousness.
Well I understood what onesies said. To mean a technological paradigm shift. Arguably paradigm shifts are out of the control of humans.
While this may be the inevitable long-term future of society, I see this as nothing but an extremely bad idea.
Then again, I have objections to anything even remotely like Pornhub meets Startrek holodedks the PG version (to hell with centralization), so I'm unfairly biased.
When considering the scientific approach to everything and putting rationality and practicality (apparent) as first and foremost in decision making, I recall the opinion of Aldous Huxley expressed to George Orwell on his book '1984', that the demand for efficiency will ruin our civilisation.
http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/03/1984-v-brave-new-world.html
Aldous Huxley –
…May I speak instead of the thing with which the book deals — the ultimate revolution? The first hints of a philosophy of the ultimate revolution — the revolution which lies beyond politics and economics, and which aims at total subversion of the individual's psychology and physiology…
My own belief is that the ruling oligarchy will find less arduous and wasteful ways of governing and of satisfying its lust for power…can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience. In other words, I feel that the nightmare of Nineteen Eighty-Four is destined to modulate into the nightmare of a world having more resemblance to that which I imagined in Brave New World.
The change will be brought about as a result of a felt need for increased efficiency.
So while Random Controlled Trials and other scientific methods are useful in making decisions, the question remains as to which decisions, and who or what do they serve? Is it 'good and cost-efficient government, respectful of the wellbeing of all people and thinking of all sentient and other living things of the earth – now realised as so important ie fungi in the soil? Or is it serving some obsessive need of a group who have divorced themselves from everyday simple living which is all that is needed by human society?
"Do you think these four studies show allowing autonomous delivery vehicles will cause increased problems? "
Each of them shows an increased problem. None were supported by any other study. Overall, no valid statement about increased problems can be made based on those studies, imo.
What next steps would you want to take?"
Introduce the vehicles. Field complaints, compiling data until causation is established, adjust their use until a happy medium, agreed to by most, is reached. It's rough, but hey, why not take a punt
Actually, I'd want to debate the issue with my fellow councillors, hear from our expert staff , hear from the promoters/designers of the technology, invite comment from other councils using the vehicles, then petition the public for their views.
How's that?
Thanks. FWIW, it's at the better end of what I might hope for from an elected official.
I'm curious, is that response informed by any further education in formal statistics beyond what you had to do in high school, or is it the outcome of a lifetime of trying different things to see what happens?
Well, as a councillor, I follow process when it comes to such decisions but as well I try to influence what gets considered in less formal forums involving councillors and staff.
Is this what they call empirical study, trying and seeing?
Dougal and Father Ted calmly cope with some aggrieved bomb planting.
Sorry about the distance of my response from your question.
My first thought when faced with ambiguous data is to ask if Mr Bayes is at work here, but I'll take it as read that this isn't the case here.
The core problem is the lack of replicability. All four studies found statistically significant adverse effects but not the same ones. Not even an overlap.
The next place to look is given there are 80 possible adverse effects we could find, and our definition of 'statistical significant' is a 1/20 probability on each one … what is the probability that we will find at least some adverse effects just by random chance?
At the risk of embarrassing my rusty stats, my first wild arse guess that it could be 20/80 or 1 in 4. Or another way of putting it, any given study will find on average 4 different adverse effects purely by chance.
Ok, since we're both engineers and our reasoning heads down similar paths, can I ask you to pause it here for a while to see what other people's reactions are, untainted by what we've got to say?
"so they run a trial putting wombles and tribbles together sharing the same spaces."
I need to know more about these trials; how closely do the conditions reflect the real-world situation; laboratory conditions need to be very carefully set and results looked at cautiously. Wombles in particular act quite differently when removed from the commons.
See my response to RL at 2.1.1. In short, imagine it has already been established that results from putting wombles in enclosures produces valid results.
My initial reaction would be that, if different people are repeating the same study as closely as possible and each getting a different result, the study isn't telling us anything useful. The method would need some pretty serious review at that point.
I reckon the wombles are pulling Andre's chain
Well, where I'm going with this is trying to show that a claimed statistically significant result is actually much less reliable than you might think from the claimed p value. For this example, I'm trying to show that six reported statistically significant results doesn't show there's likely problems, and in fact is more likely to show the opposite on further analysis.
After all, even if the researchers act with perfect integrity using sound methods, publish all their results including all the negative and neutral results, if what's considered statistically significant is p<0.05, then 1 in 20 of all results are just plain wrong.
But when you add in publication bias (negative and neutral results are boring so nobody tries to publish them), and the way it's so very tempting to indulge in data-dredging and p-hacking when you've got a massive pile of data, it's no wonder there's a replication crisis.
Noting your question of Robert Guyton above, "is that response informed by any further education in formal statistics beyond what you had to do in high school," I can boast a C+ achieved in a remedial intro stats course aimed at first-year students who were going to need to understand stats but hadn't done well at it in school (at which point I decided the arts and humanities were going to be a more appropriate arena for my clearly limited talents). So yes, definitely not qualified to be making confident assertions about anything involving statistics.
That said, the ordinary old arts and humanities have given me enough of an education to figure out that it's completely dishonest to comb academic journals for that one line or bad result that supports your irrational beliefs and trumpet the cherry-picked fruits of your search as compelling evidence that irrationalism rules – which I think is where you were also going with this.
That question wasn't intended as an assertion of superiority accruing to those with paper quals; a bullshit detector developed from a lifetime of observation is often more useful in arriving at a sensible position when faced with unclear or even contradictory data. Then there's the problem of paper quals getting pressed into the service of baffling with bullshit, rather than trying to aid understanding.
Looking at the responses, common themes are questioning the methodology of the studies, and raising potential external factors not considered by the studies. Here I'm trying to raise awareness that a lot of what are presented as meaningful results are in fact just cherry-picked instances of random noise that are going to happen even in well-designed honestly conducted studies.
I knew it!
That question wasn't intended as an assertion of superiority accruing to those with paper quals…
I certainly didn't take it that way, just as an opportunity to make clear that any comments I make on social science studies are definitely not based on my expertise in the field of statistics.
These days I kind of wish I'd paid more attention back then because it would come in handy very often, given all the news stories about "new study shows X" that make my bullshit detector clang away but I don't have enough knowledge to go look at the actual study to see where the grift is.
My first impression was why did you link to the pop vox article and not the original one?
Original article: "morally problematic"
Vox: "We even use A/B tests here at Vox. If I have two headlines I really love for a story, I can arrange for different viewers to see different ones — and then I can settle on the one that’s engaging more readers."
Ta daaaa!
Vox headline: "A shocking share of the public thinks randomized trials are immoral"
As for the scenario you present, and being rubbish at stats, my first impression is that we may need to go back to basics and do some RCTs on Womble well-being measurements if four different groups can get very different results. An RCT based on suspect methodology is going to be suspect.
Sorry I'm a bit slow addressing why I linked the Vox piece rather than the original study. The original study report is a bit dry and tl;dr-ish; the Vox piece is quite a lot more readable and links to the original report for anyone that wants. The Vox piece also usefully points to further implications and questions to ponder.
There are two important things straight off
1) What were the size of the RCT? Which gives the related question – what were the power of the hypothesis tests?
2) There needs to be context here. What is the value of the wombles and tribbles? Are wombles native so deserving greater protection? What are the possible unintended consequences? Is the eco-balance between wombles and shelats destroyed as the sehlat population explodes because of the extra tribble food?
Just to add extra factors. What about a different type of thinking? Are the automated vehicles needed? Are they better from APOV than at present? Is capital expenditure on them justified whether public or private – being that they will likely have to be imported?
Is it justified for us to have a permissive society of the type that says that society has to definitely opt out if business or whoever,can just opt in? Will Uber try and take over this initiative and muck it up for any former investors, start-ups?
Say compare the rules of the sex- controlled society to the society that is entirely permissive of new innovations of machines and technology? Would it be better to swap so that we are controlling of this new innovative acceptance of machines, and more permissive of sexuality? I think of the raunchy, rude meaning behind the Beatles song "Why don't we do it in the road"? Sex in the road is regarded as bad because society says so, and it is impractical anyway. But new technology on the road is accepted whether it has entirely practical uses without question, and of course it is now being forced on us on the footpath.
These perspectives would never be considered by engineers. And it indicates how slow we are to understand the great changes being forced on us. These will affect our human lives to becoming subservient to the machines that business corporates, a machine-like management system itself, forces on us. And that we people embrace, because – new, because it is 'better', because they are ubiquitous – better lie down and let machines and machine-thinking roll over you.
Douglas Adams looked at that inevitably approach – the taking of personal assets and commons by authority – when he had Arthur Dent lie in front of roadmaking machines that were going to bulldoze his house so a Council-endorsed road go pass over the land. And slyly, he introduced the method of substitution that is at the base of using derivatives in financial transactions. But that is another matter.
(Share and enjoy says the automated teamaker.(
Thank you to everybody that engaged with the actual topic. But I gotta say I'm disappointed that there are some commenters active today that are in the habit of opining definitively and loudly on topics where an understanding of data and statistics is crucial, who have chosen not to engage.
Personally when I need to understand data sets, one of the first things I look for is the underlying natural background incidence of what I'm interested in. Together with some kind of expectation (cue Tommy Bayes asking why I told him to fuck off) of how genuinely significant results might be distinguished from random noise.
In the specific case of examining 80 independent distributions of samples for comparison to controls or a baseline at p<0.05 considered significant, I would actually expect an average of 4 "false positive" results, or 16 "false positives" on average from running 4 lots of 80. The fact that none of the positives from any one of the trials were repeated in any of other trials suggests they are all false positives.
That there were far fewer "positive" results than would be expected from purely random statistical considerations immediately raises the question of whether there is an effect going in the opposite direction to what was originally expected. Might the data actually show that cohabiting with tribbles actually improves wombles' well-being? That would be an immediate quick bit of number-crunching to run, and on the numbers I've used for this made-up scenario, I'd strongly expect that answer to be yes, it certainly appears cohabiting with tribbles is in fact beneficial to wombles.
Then there's the question of doing some kind of meta-analysis, where you combine the results from different studies to try to firm up any conclusions. In this fictional scenario it should be easy, there were four trials, three of them attempting to replicate the first as closely as possible. With any luck, the trial conditions would turn out to be close enough that the data from the different trials could just be combined together to just make a much larger sample size. If that's not feasible, there's all kinds of statistical tests (a lot of them Bayesian) comparing the results of the different trials against each other.
Sorry, Andre, I got a little side-tracked elsewhere …
A very interesting topic. At no stage did you mention effect-size!?
As you are aware, P<0.05 has become somewhat of a curse, especially in biomedical science. For one, it says absolutely nothing about clinical relevance.
TBH, I kinda figured you and some others likely to have significant statistics knowledge saw where I was likely trying to go with this and deliberately stayed out to let it run its course.
The only tweak on that would be if there were some underlying common cause in several of those observations – e.g. motivon, miasma, and nug incidence were all part of the womble's precosian system and might point to a assininus deficiency. Then it might be worth a closer look.
But the main priority would be to 1080 the heck out of southern England to stop the invasive species outbreak.
I did say "well-studied" and "independent".
You ever seen tribbles get given 1080? Hoo boy …
So difficult to kill. That's the trouble with those fluffy little buggers.
That's …
The Trouble with Tribbles
So many Trials and Tribble-ations.
Nope trouble with Lichen (John Wyndham)
“This is not the age of reason, this is the age of flummery, and the day of the devious approach. Reason’s gone into the backrooms where it works to devise means by which people can be induced to emote in the desired direction.”
exhibit one.
http://www.math.mcgill.ca/rags/seminar/poli.txt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreasonable_ineffectiveness_of_mathematics
I think this is the citation you're looking for:
In the meantime I've had some fun digging around for the correct answer myself.
Thanks for the thought provoking post.
Phew, I wouldn't want to be boring.
I get nervous about ideas like "the correct answer" when looking for statistical signals in noisy data. To me there's only stronger and weaker suggestions and probabilities and interpretations. All to be monitored on an ongoing basis and subject to revision on receipt of new data.
The US military has opened a twitter post to let sevicepeople express their positive service experience. Only most talk of depression, lost limbs and other serious health issues and los and lots of suicide. The overwhelming trend is heartbreaking loss and anger and violence…
View at Medium.com
We in New Zealand are shamefully slow in electrifying transport. We could and should be matching China's example, where many cities have a 100% electric urban bus fleet. Rubbish trucks, concrete trucks, delivery vans, basically anything with a stop-start urban work cycle is an absolute natural for electrification.
https://thinkprogress.org/electric-buses-outsell-diesel-china/
When it comes to smaller electric vehicles, China is yet again waaay ahead of the rest of the world. Last time I saw a breakdown of the global EV market, more than half the EVs sold worldwide were in China.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/02/china-is-winning-the-electric-vehicle-race/
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/02/24/china-electric-vehicle-sales-jump-175-up-to-4-8-of-auto-market-in-january/
Those LTO cells I've been using have worked incredibly well. We've yet to get anywhere near their limits.
Interestingly their primary market is in fact the electric buses mentioned in your first link.
I'd guess it's that tolerance of very high charging rates that make them attractive to bus applications.
Which kinda makes me curious how really high power charging stations and their power connections work together – whether they just have a super grunty network connection and rely on the grid to absorb the massive rapid fluctuations in demand or whether the charging stations themselves incorporate batteries and/or supercapacitors to smooth their demand.
Tesla new battery is really just another new design for a solid-state lithium battery that several different places have worked on. The solid state lithium battery is coming one way or another, at the moment we're just trying to figure out who has the best design for the industry to go with, and which one will be the easiest to transition to from lithium ion. Electric powertrain designs are coming to trucks and buses. Question is will people stop buying electric cars.
I've been contemplating reforming a touring company… Electric vehicles, in NZ at least, are a bit naff. Unless I have 100k for a Tesla I can't get anything with decent range, not even to cover only the top half of the North Island. The recharge times are prohibitive for taking others on the road too, the fast charge stations…? It seems the cars here can't charge so well as the charging stations aren't very good? There was nothing to suggest I'd get < several hours to wait to recharge and extend range past 200 miles.
All in all it was a discouraging experience trying to build a green touring model. Trains etc are hopeless I have sound gear to cart around.
Back in the day the government bought rolling stock for trains that could only go half as fast as the engines – making trucks look faster. Is the same trick of light being used on chargers to make EV's unattractive, or are they shit?
"I want to talk to you about Julian Assange….Judicial process though, yah?"
Evan Davis smoothly transforms from nice-but-dim to ideological assassin at the 20:44 mark….
Chomsky is very reliable; this was well worth the time to listen to it. Thanks for this.
Fascinating White Island is very active at present.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/390580/swarm-of-almost-200-earthquakes-on-white-island
A bad penny always turns up.
[…]
Nolan was arrested along with someone who was then reported as a minor. Court documents now reveal it was his then 17-year old wife, Kiyomi, who spent a lot of time in Discord. I wonder what her Discord name was.
[…]
HOLY SHIT.
The defense names BEN SHAPIRO as a motivation for Kiyomi's radical right wing views.
I'm losing track of how many violent white supremacists @benshapiro has helped radicalize.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1132210962889678848.html
Joe90. Were you aware before posting that tweet and its content that Ben Shapiro is a practising Jew?
And?
– Ben Shapiro
There needs to be some acknowledgment that Jew + right wing does not equal rascist attacks on Jews.
It's classic woke victimhood that illustrates why it's so dangerous unopposed.
Referring to the left-wing voting habits of "Bad Jews" is a-ok though?
Thats just a stupid way to communicate. You and Joe90 are debating in bad faith, half truths and fallacious arguments to prove that Jew+RWNJ=Auschwitz.
Its not just stupid calling normal people racist against there own people its villainous. All you are doing is claiming victim status so you can control people and I won't play that bullshit game. Villains use subterfuge and lie to control and I'm not trying to be like that.
Who called Shapiro racist? You sound awfully defensive. Also how am I claiming to be a victim? I’m merely pointing out the type of things Shapiro says. It is the racists that say they’re inspired by him. You’re misrepresenting what’s being said with half-truths and imaginary “fallacious arguments”.
You’re not trying to express yourself clearly either.
Are you functionally illiterate?
You are not only playing the victim, youre shit at communicating, you're blaming me for your stupid arguments and again, making out like I'm deficient.
So if you can please provide quotes that Shapiro is rascist against Jews.
Who claimed Shapiro is racist against Jews?
I don't have to "make out" your deficiencies.
Joe90 has left you idiots holding a shit sandwich and you can't tast it.
You can't point out where anyone (other than you) has said this thread is about Shapiro being racist against Jews.
I am convinced that you are a professional liar.
And I'm convinced your invective is almost entirely projection
Now see if you can follow the bouncy ball.
Joe90 produced this quote "The defense names BEN SHAPIRO as a motivation for Kiyomi's radical right wing views.
I'm losing track of how many violent white supremacists @benshapiro has helped radicalize."
To which I ask if Joe90 was aware Shapiro is Jewish. It's idiotic to imply that Shapiro is in anyway way involved in rascist attacks against Jews. And Joe90 just shat all over you and took off.
Arkie. I'm finding it difficult to believe that Sam is a sincere person. He expresses himself (herself/itself) in a manner that "sounds" more like an algorithm that a person's genuine views. The modus operandi Sam uses is to make a claim, then lace further replies with insults, cryptically delivered, in order to mask the insincerity of his position and making it impossible to hold him to account for his claims. It feels more like an experiment in creating a "debating programme" than a discussion with a flesh and bone human, in my opinion.
I also wondered whether TS is sometimes being used as a ‘field trial’ for AI-bots. Lynn may have some insights on this.
Who said (or implied) he was involved? You’re continuing to make shit up.
The wife of the perpetrator of the racist vandalism said they were radicalised by Shapiro.
You understand what radicalisation is, don’t you Sammy?
Muh broz. Y'all need saving from your fathers. Let me be your father. I'll take care of you. Just kiss the ring finger.
Sam said: "You and Joe90 are debating in bad faith".
Yesterday, he claimed he debates with people with the objective of showing that their argument is "low IQ" and "dog-shit".
Ya gotta wonder at that.
Appeals to the audience doesn't influence the strength of your argument or position. It just goes to show how insecure and weak your ideological reasoning is. We are discussing whether or not it's cool to claim Ben Shapiro is rascist against Jews, got anything to add?
Who claimed Ben Shapiro is racist against Jews Sammy?
Again. Are you functionally illiterate?
I must be. Point it out to me where it's been claimed Shapiro is racist against Jews.
2nd quote of the tweet.
So are you functionally illiterate? Because nowhere in the 2nd quote does it say Shapiro is racist against Jews. Your claims and reality are at odds.
.
So what? All you have proven is your abilities and skills of quoting me. Thx I guess my son.
I'm noting your hypocrisy, Sam. If your claims about engaging in debate are inconsistent, your other arguments might well be also.
It's likely that your debating skills consists of avoiding the original point being made and slandering when you realise you're in the wrong.
It's likely that my observations about your hypocrisy and inconsistency are accurate and you are employing your trademark caustic strategy in an attempt to dis-hearten your perceived adversary.
I reserve the right to disrespect anyone who can not have a simple conversation. As I keep saying my position is that Jew+RWNJ does not equal Aushwitz. What’s your position Rob?
You may be debating the issue, " that Jew+RWNJ does not equal Aushwitz." but I am not. As I clearly expressed, I'm making comment on your incongruous claims around debating, a discussion that began on another thread, yesterday. This is Open Mike, where a range of topics can be addressed. You have declined to address my claims while at the same times lacing your responses with a variety of put-downs. Regarding your claimed " right to disrespect anyone who can not have a simple conversation.", I presume you are referring to me, and if that's the case, cannot agree that I am unable "to have a simple conversation", in fact, I'm confident that having simple conversations is something I regularly and successfully do. Your "conversations" as evidenced here on TS, are so convoluted, infolded and obscure and caustic that it seems to me you should disrespect yourself, based on your performance so far. Kindly meant and simple expressed of course.
Yeah, I don't just reserve the right to call you a whingy little puss bag, I'll talk smack to any one who try's to act a fool. You, mods, anyone.
Once I feel that my arguments are as strong as and people begin to take the bitch route around instead of taking on my arguments directly I'll just let fire. Sorry not sorry.
Hi all, may I briefly butt in and ask to not resort to pointless personal attacks and insults?
Maybe it’s time to agree to disagree and walk away without the spray while you still can?
appeal to authority is a logical falsay as well eh, incognito.
If you can read, you can take heed.
So where is your argument addressing my claim re your hypocrisy, as described in my first comment
"Sam said: "You and Joe90 are debating in bad faith".
Yesterday, he claimed he debates with people with the objective of showing that their argument is "low IQ" and "dog-shit"."?
“I’m noting your hypocrisy, Sam. If your claims about engaging in debate are inconsistent, your other arguments might well be also. “
TBH Iv got very little idea what you're on about talking about something I said a couple days ago.
Besides that if I do argue the flaws of IQ it would be that IQ tests are frequently used to test army recruits to see if they can gain a few extra meters than Vietnam vets.
On the other hand if I was to argue for IQ testing then I'd argue that testing is best used for high achieving Uni students rather than soilders.
Still dosnt improve my impression of rob.
Unable to understand my simple conversation, Sam?
Let's see, there was a quote about that just recently…here it is:
Sam said:
26 May 2019 at 2:56 pm
"I reserve the right to disrespect anyone who can not have a simple conversation."
again, so what. All you've done is prove that you can quote me.
And that you're still to respond to my claim that your claim is hypocritical. So, worthwhile persisting, despite your determined avoidance strategy. At this point, I've lost interest and have more useful things to do, so, see you in the soup, or, in the likely case that Incognito sends you to Coventry, see ya, Sam.
Yeah. Now get lost.
So is Alan Dershowitz. So is Binyamin Netanyahu.
What is your point, exactly?
My point is you, Joe and arkie have a problem with Ben Shapiro because he is a conservative and you are biased against him and seek to unjustly smear him as a rascist.
And my problem is you make me and the rest of the left look like fucken chumps.
-Ben Shapiro
I reckon you do you stand up job of looking like a fucken chump without any assistance.
Are you senile? My position is Shapiro isn't rascist towards Jews so can't be held responsible for attacks against Jews. What is your position?
How convenient for Shapiro that you have absolved him of inspiring racists.
It is my position that a self-identifying racist vandal says they were radicalised by Shapiro. That's less of a position, more a response to your defense of Shapiro based on his religious identity.
Its not convenient at all. In fact it's inconvenient that I am forced to defend Shapiro from a bunch of morons masquerading as lefties trying to smear Shapiro.
Where's the smear Sammy? No-one has made any claims about Shapiro's racism except you. The smear is in your head.
Does make me wonder who really is the "moron masquerading as a leftie"
Yeah. You are acting like a fool that dosnt know you are in the wrong and I blame Joe99 for being low cunning
Yeah. I think you're a big-brain Alpha and a pretty cool guy. You can definitely read and doesn't afraid of anything.
Shapiro is one of the filthier critics of liberal Jews. How can you say he is not racist against Jews? You are ignorant.
I couldn't prove that Shapiro is rascist towards Jews because I believe that Shapiro is a practitioner of the faith. It's also covered in freedom of religion legislation so unless your can prove Shapiro has committed an act of violence or supported an act of violence then you're just a (insert what ever hurts your feelings the most here)
Back in 2007-08 I watched an episode of Law and Order (the courtroom drama) that had a man who murdered a black girl defending himself by saying that the rants of a right wing shock jock whipped him into such a frenzy that he ended up killing her.
Looks like life is imitating art.
So as to be clear joe, because you seem to get yourself confused…
Del Bigtree expressed open support for the persecution of jewish communities in NY…
You called Bigtree, scum.
Now, you are performing the exact same cut n paste routine, this time against Ben Shapiro…
Simultaneously for and against those who express support for the jews…
Which is it ?
Bigtree wore a universal symbol of oppression, hate, and suffering, in an effort to portray himself and his halfwitted followers as victims. Fucking scum.
I don't think you understood what was and still is going on , around that specific issue…do you?
You should be able to explain what you reckon was, and still is going on there…and therefore you understand why you are absolutely wrong to call Bigtree, scum
…but you don’t understand…do you?
Which says you are using the jewish faith to peddle your own ignorance… and I’ll request that you either stop propagating such ignorant and warped views…or at least spend some time learning what is actually going on…before you USE the jewish communities once again…
Because that is what you appear to be doing…using the jewish community …
Are you jewish or direct descendant ?
I'll get you started….fill in the blanks…
Orthodox jewish communities in NY were and are being discriminated against through use of [ ] and/or [ ] for adhering to their right to religion….
Bigtree was illustrating his distain for those who are repeating the past by persecuting those same orthodox jewish communities…
Over to you for your version of the events…
Do take your relentlessly determined dishonesty and shove it.
https://www.adl.org/blog/anti-vaccine-protesters-misappropriate-holocaust-era-symbol-to-promote-their-cause
From someone who is part of those communities…
You need to desist from using such material…because you are ignorantly propagating and endorsing further persecution in doing so…
You are so very wrong, and you are extremely misinformed…
That you then used the adl as some sort of protective cover for your repeated attacks on the jewish communities is perverse…
But you wouldn't understand why it is perverse…because you do not know what is actually going on there…
And you need to stop.
You've got yourself some of that special sauce discernment and insight, haven't you?
Nothing special about it, joe…
Leaving the inbuilt and ingrained prejudice aside, gives best opportunity to obtain objectivity…
Then it is simply a question of investing the necessary time to explore all available angles of a subject…not superficially…. as well as seek out the intersections where there is cross over into related topical pathways…
Your desire unfolds into dimensionless acceptance.
Assange Is Indicted for Exposing War Crimes While Trump Considers Pardons for War Criminals
https://www.democracynow.org/2019/5/24/assange_is_indicted_for_exposing_war
Democratic Candidates Speak Out Against Trump’s Moves in the Middle East
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/05/democratic-candidates-trump-iran-saudi-arabia/
Victor Meldrew knew how to handle Tory voters
"There was pain on both sides." Noelle McCarthy displays her ignorance of New Zealand history
RNZ National, Saturday 25 May 2019
Anybody who cares about the terrible state of our public broadcasting service will be able to point to one or more really sickening or substandard performances by the people entrusted—and paid good money—to ask intelligent questions on our behalf. I have over more than a decade recorded dozens of disastrous performances, but here are three of the worst interviews that have polluted our airwaves in this century: an under-prepared Kim Hill foolishly reading out Pentagon talking points to, of all people, John Pilger in 2003 [1]; Noelle McCarthy in 2013 allowing a right wing ideologue to excuse the use of torture by U.S. troops [2]; a baffled Jesse Mulligan opining learnedly in 2016 that Russia is "L-L-L-L-LOOKIN' for trouble" [3].
Yesterday morning, we were treated to—actually, inflicted with—not just one, but two really terrible interviews. Both of them were carried out by one Noelle McCarthy.
After the 9 o'clock news, McCarthy's guest was historian Vincent O'Malley. This was well worth listening to when he was speaking; unfortunately, however, McCarthy felt compelled to interpose her own complacent, prejudiced and slanted views. Her comments, as usual, were callow, ill thought out and deeply reactionary, the sort of thing you'd expect from some drooling old Pakeha farmer ranting in the lounge bar in a south Taranaki pub.
After the 11 o'clock news, she moved from complacent and ignorant to plain nasty. The topic, ominously for anyone who has heard her laughing about the plight of the Palestinians, was Gaza.
End of Part 1 (of 2)
[1] https://www.nzonscreen.com/title/face-to-face-with-kim-hill-john-pilger-2003
[2] https://morrisseybreen.blogspot.com/2018/01/noelle-mccarthys-patsy-interview-with.html
[3] https://morrisseybreen.blogspot.com/2018/01/more-evidence-of-jesse-mulligans.html
The good Noelle
She can be really intelligent, and compassionate, as she shows in this interview with a reprobate.
https://morrisseybreen.blogspot.com/2018/01/noelle-mccarthy-swallowed-vomit-for-15.html
Double comment? Takes up space so I might delete one.
Sorry about that, Incognito. I've already deleted the second one, and replaced it with something to show that I do appreciate Ms McCarthy when she is on form.
All good 😉
I wonder how many people bother to check the accuracy of the numbers they use in a debate before making claims that depend on the accuracy of their quotes?
There was a brief letter in the "To the point" section in yesterday's Dom/Post. I can't locate it on-line but it was on page C6 for anyone who wants to see it. It was from someone named Carole who was complaining that teachers were not happy with their pay claim and then she made a claim that is simply in the realm of fantasy. The sentence read "What is even surer is that with the Prime Minister's salary more than tripling in the past few years, the Government will never be disappointed". I take this to be a claim that the Government has paid much larger pay increases to itself than they have offered the teachers.
It seemed rather unlikely to me so I looked at the numbers. Exactly what she means by a "few" is not stated but I will allow it to be 9 years. It can't really be more than that can it?
On today's date in 2010 the PM was paid $393,000. Today the PM is paid $471,049.
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2009/0340/latest/DLM2508203.html#DLM2508203
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2019/04/where-jacinda-ardern-ranks-among-highest-paid-world-leaders.html
And Carole seems to think that this increase, which is in fact 19.86% over what I would regard is somewhat more than a "few" years, is a 300% rise? How can she possibly come to that conclusion? It might be a very large pay packet but it hardly means that MPs cash in while Teachers miss out. does it?
Housing problems in an unfair and shrinking world.
Pakistani slums – https://borgenproject.org/tag/slums/page/2/
Milkshake truthiness, false flags, and dodgy AF go fund me appeals for milkshake victims. More fuckwittery to come, I'm sure.
https://www.truthorfiction.com/was-a-milkshake-thrown-at-an-elderly-brexit-party-volunteer/
I can see that Sam is being allowed to run free. If the dog is not going to be put on a leash, and be sent to puppy school and so absent for a while, then I Postman Pat will not be delivering any more missives. I apparently am not appreciated so will attend to important personal requirements.
bugger.
"will attend to important personal requirements."
It is the little room down at the end of the corridor. And remember, when you finish, Put the Bloody Toilet Seat Down".
Grey, this is terrible news. We want you and need you here.
For you. Greywarshark
Of course they're going to war. The armageddon-obsessed theocrats are determined to fulfill their end times fantasy.
West Point, N.Y. — Vice President Mike Pence told the most diverse graduating class in the history of the U.S. Military Academy on Saturday that the world is "a dangerous place" and they should expect to see combat. "Some of you will join the fight against radical Islamic terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq," he said.
Pence congratulated the West Point graduates on behalf of President Trump, and told them, "As you accept the mantle of leadership I promise you, your commander in chief will always have your back. Mr. Trump is the best friend the men and women of our armed forces will ever have."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mike-pence-west-point-graduation-vice-president-says-they-should-expect-to-see-combat-today-2019-05-25/
The week prior the French assembled for the two soldiers killed in Burksina Faso.
Very moving ceremony with the historical music Marche des soldats de Robert Bruce (which was played by Joan of Arcs scottish soldiers on entering Orleans)
Rape promoting PUA boards the tax exempt flock fleecing Yeshua train.
However, even that branch of the PUA tree is wilting away. Many "self-help" style PUA forums like Nextasf and RSDnation are shutting down or have already shut down. In March, Chateau Heartiste, a batshit crazy PUA turned White Nationalist/Alt-Right blog was shut down by WordPress. This week, rape advocate Roosh V (whom you may recall once called yours truly a "Wonkette typist/clown face, would not bang") announced that he was renouncing his PUA ways and devoting himself to Jesus. He explained to the forum he manages that he would no longer be allowing anyone to discuss premarital "fornication."
https://www.wonkette.com/the-week-in-garbage-men-no-country-for-old-pick-up-artists
Forty years ago.
Thanks for that Joe.
Stands the test of time and still scares the shit out of me today. All time great.
If this scheme is half of what it is cracked up to be then well done this government.
This might even count as Good News.
Bugger me.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/390605/150m-package-to-help-youth-transition-from-state-care
Young people transitioning from state care to independence will no longer be cut off from Government support when they turn 18.
"Teenagers leaving care should have the right to expect what any young person would want – knowing there is someone to turn to if they need help; a warm bed to sleep in; some help and encouragement when it is needed.
"This service will provide that, both by allowing young people to stay longer with their caregivers and providing specialised transitions support workers whose job is to help this group."
Oranga Tamariki has been tasked with building the service, which will employ 175 new specialist staff employed and make 60 supported accommodation facilities available by year four.
Trawling my way down here to the bottom of your comment section for 26 I find you footnoters/ idea investigators but nowt as sharp as an arrow point. I recognise youse but when I call I'm not in the mood for milling about. More my fault.