The End of Life Choice Bill
Written By:
- Date published:
7:30 am, December 21st, 2017 - 155 comments
Categories: act -
Tags: assisted dying, David Seymour, euthanasia, members bills
On the 13th, the government recently withdrew several of its own Members’ bills, with no guarantee their replacements wouldn’t be Opposition bills, (luck was with Labour and NZ First backbenchers, however, and those two parties won all three new bill drawings) in order to advance the End of Life Choice Bill up the members ballot. This means we need to have a serious discussion both about the moralities and practicalities of euthanasia in New Zealand, and I think this is a reasonable issue to revisit, and probably one of the best things ACT in its modern, post-Banks incarnation has done, actually acting like the Liberal right-wing party it claims to be, and being permissive on social reforms.
That said, despite my usually strident stance as a liberal and champion of reform on social policy, this is not a Bill without complications, and this is an issue that in my opinion even supporters should be wary of. This is one of the few bills where I have actually listened to National Party concerns in the debate and actually said to most (but naturally, not all) “actually, these are valid dangers we need to be careful of in writing a Bill like this, and they might arguably have a bit of a point even if they’re taking it too far.” That doesn’t stop me from thinking that cautiously providing people in suffering and near the end of their life or with a terminal condition with a way to end their life with diginity is a good idea, it just makes me think this bill needs dramatic rewrites before it’s an acceptable starting point.
I’m going to do a quick rundown of what the bill does. And by quick, I mean it will be quick for analyzing a Bill that does anything more than a quick fix, so strap in, we’re heading past 2,000 words.
Eligibility and general problems
To even be eligible, people must be:
- Over 18.
- A New Zealander. (citizen or permanent resident)
- Suffering from a terminal illness with a prognosis of six months or less, or have “a grievous and irremediable medical condition.”
- In “an advanced state of irreversible decline in capability.” Capability is NOT explicitly defined in the Bill.
- “[Experiencing] unbearable suffering that cannot be relieved in a manner that he or she considers tolerable.”
- Be (presumably, mentally) capable of understanding both the nature of assisted dying and its consequences.
All of these are, with the possible exception of being over 18, necessary requirements of a reasonable assisted dying law. And the over 18 requirement is absolutely forgivable for a first-shot at this issue, as arguably allowing younger people assistance with the permission of their guardians is an issue that can be left until after the law is reviewed, and would likely need additional caution and/or safeguards beyond what’s in this Bill, because we should probably want to see how the bill works in New Zealand before we consider if it needs to allow for younger people in these situations to have a process to make a decision with the permission of their legal guardian(s). We could also argue with a six-month prognosis, but this does seem a reasonable point to open up the decision given the process seems to be quite lengthy, and sometimes prognoses are optimistic, so I hope those parts are going to remain uncontroversial.
The age restriction is intended to prevent young people taking this option before they’ve had a reasonable chance to develop. The bill definitely prevents large-scale death tourism by locking out non-residents, and prevents those who are mentally not competent to make this decision from being eligible. It may not prevent all death tourism, however, and it may increase immigration requests for, say, Australians who would like to end their lives, or other nearby countries with no law allowing this. The fact that we have laws around not necessarily accepting immigrants who are already sick won’t always stop people applying.
These requirements may not be is sufficiently broad in preventing bad outcomes. Where are they lacking?
Well, there is no requirement that the person’s reason for seeking assisted dying must be related to the effects of their condition, just that they have the condition and find their suffering intolerable, so arguably people who happen to be suffering and have a degenerative condition, but have other reasons to want to die, such as depression, could be said to qualify under the bill. (depression for reasons not caused by the patient’s condition is not usually a loss of capacity to understand, it simply influences decisions in ways that may be self-destructive or harmful, so arguably it should be excluded from the evaluation given current wording!) There is also no reasonable attempt to require affirmative consent throughout the process, just make people aware they can say no, and this issue should really be addressed in legislation that aims to deal with degenerative illness. Other laws that allow euthanasia are very clear that when consent is not obtained it is still illegal to kill someone. The law simply refers to what to do if someone chooses to receive or not to receive the lethal medication. It should instead refer to consenting or not consenting, so that a lack of consent is treated as choosing not to go through with the process.
There is also no allowance for the evaluation to actually conclude that the person involved isn’t in fact suffering, or criteria for what constitutes “unbearable suffering,” meaning that it’s completely open to a reasonable person test. Remember that “reasonable people” in jury decisions allowed us to beat kids with weapons before we repealed §59 of the crimes act, so while it’s an established legal process, that doesn’t mean it will be enforced well, and the risks for this bill letting things go wrong are very high, because we’re talking about people potentially dying when they shouldn’t, here.
Alarmingly, there is little consideration of the very real slippery slope effect this could have for the elderly, gradually broadening the definition of “unbearable suffering.” Already most people who would qualify or want to qualify are likely to be older New Zealanders, and we should be very careful about the effect it might have on our society to lose this many people. While there is provision to avoid active coercion, there is no provision to rule out contributory effects from feeling devalued, or a burden on the community, that arguably have been observed in countries that allow euthanasia, and whether these could be termed “unbearable suffering.” If I were drafting this bill, I would likely be referring to specific categories of symptoms that trigger eligibility rather than suffering in general, such as “intolerable pain,” or listing specific degenerative diseases that affect the brain. (just referring to loss of mental capacity arguably runs into issues with disabilities and the elderly, again, so it would need to be defined carefully to avoid this. Listing specific degenerative diseases, and giving the Minister of Health the ability to add more via the Governor General, would probably be the best bet to avoid this issue)
Finally, there is no separation between terminal or degenerative disease and disability- in fact the requirements can be read to explicitly include any sort of irreversible disability that involves progressive decline in capability, and this too is poorly defined and could broaden in definition over time if not spelled out explicitly in the Bill. There are very real concerns that this Bill will allow for disabled people to be euthanized, and this concern should be taken in the context of previous medical treatments having been performed on disabled people without their consent, often with painful or traumatizing physical or psychological side-effects. A lack of effort in addressing these concerns would likely cause the Bill to fail at second or third reading, because the Greens’ support at the very least in contingent on this issue being addressed.
Conscientious Objection
This was one of the points of objection that the conservative MPs in Parliament had that I most disagreed with. This bill has a thoroughly sensible regime around conscientious objection- any medical practitioner may object to providing this service, but they are compelled to tell their patients who request end of life options that there will be a SCENZ register available where they can find a practitioner that doesn’t object. This means that the patient is adequately informed of alternatives, but the objector never themselves has to do the direct referral, simply tell them that there is an organization which will arrange the referral for them. I would actually consider taking this approach a little further and allowing them to pass off the duty of informing their patient of the SCENZ register to any willing staff member, so long as they confirm their patient was in fact informed, allowing them even more moral distance from the act they object to.
This approach is in fact so sensible, that we should probably extend it to our abortion law, where currently women (or anyone else who needs an abortion) have no right to be informed of where else they might go to get an abortion if they ask someone who objects to providing one. Whatever your personal opinion on abortion, it is a safe medical procedure, (less risky than assisted dying, in fact) and it is absolutely reasonable if this Bill passes into law, to conclude Labour has no excuse for not extending the same treatment to medical practitioners who object to abortions. You could have the Ministry for Women provide the necessary information.
Currently the allowable penalties for failure to comply with this provision are up to three months of jail time, or a fine of up to $10,000 for most offenses against this act, so likely any non-complying conscientious objectors would simply be hit with a fine. I think that’s probably appropriate in most cases, although I can see a judge getting frustrated with repeat offenders and giving them a short stay in jail.
Providing full information and evaluating the request
This part of the bill is quite good, in that nobody can make a final decision on being assisted to die until they have been informed thoroughly of the nature of their condition, any other options for treatment or palliative care, the fact that they can change their mind at any time, informed of their rights both to talk to family, friends, etc… or not talk to them if they don’t want to, and there must be an effort made to ensure this person has not been pressured or compelled into the decision, in fact the attending practitioner is legally required to do this to the best of their abilities.
There is good evidence that making people aware of their options for end of life care including palliative care, and having them make a decision in advance actually decreases both unnecessary treatment and suffering, and desire for more radical solutions like euthanasia in cases where an option for reduced suffering exists that doesn’t require an early death or simply dying due to giving up, so discussing these options with patients in general is good policy, and I welcome its requirement in this bill because where these methods of giving dignity to the dying are utilized at a patient’s request they are a much more preferable outcome for everyone.
Either two or three medical practitioners must assess the patient independently, (a third is necessary if one or both of the first two cannot make a determination as to the mental capacity of the patient to make this decision) so there are reasonable provisions for assessment in the Bill, but again, assessment only safeguards against things the bill requires to be considered in the assessment, such as direct coercion or inability to make and/or comprehend the decision, and its consequences in the latter case. It also doesn’t provide safeguards to prevent involuntary death in terms of administering the lethal drugs. The requirement for a second independent assessment by a person chosen by SCENZ, however, is a reasonable safeguard against fakery regarding the assessment step in most cases, so it does make sure that eligibility is accurately determined. SCENZ will need to be careful, however, in how they assign people to each other, to ensure there is no room for collusion.
Confirming the decision
Basically, a lot of people are required to send a lot of paper trail to each other. While this is important to establish accountability and make sure people take their obligations seriously, this is one of the weaker parts of the bill, and does not in fact act as a failsafe, and I find the Opposition’s arguments reasonably damning here. More safety measures (such as legal requirements to ensure the patient is still sufficiently committed to this course with each evaluation that the process should proceed, rather than simply reminding them they can change their mind, or requiring an independent observer to be present who can halt the procedure if they think the patient is being/has been coerced or unduly influenced) may be a good idea for the initial introduction of this bill, perhaps with a sunset for some of the safeguards that can be triggered by the SCENZ watchdog group as and when it considers it appropriate, or with agreement by the Minister.
What the bill actually allows and requires
Unusually for such a Bill, this Bill allows for both assisted dying, (where the patient is provided drugs but chooses to take them themselves) and for medical practicioners to administer lethal drugs at the patient’s request. There is a very good argument on the precautionary principle that we should start with just assisted dying where the patient actively has to take the drugs themselves, and leave a provision in the law that if SCENZ has no ethical concerns about how the law is being applied, that we can proceed to allowing medical practitioners to administer drugs, too, as in my opinion that is the most dangerous step, because it can theoretically be done by force rather than requiring co-operation.
It also has some reasonable requirements about dealing with medication that isn’t required due to last-minute changes of mind, but again, this focuses a little much on creating a paper trail compared to actual safeguards, although this may be because those safeguards are implicit in requirements on pharmacists and similar professionals.
It also requires SCENZ (an agency set up to assist with administering the law, “Support and Consultation for End of Life in New Zealand”) to report on statistics and concerns to the responsible minister regularly, and makes various provisions relating to BDM that don’t immediately seem controversial.
This bill explicitly states that it doesn’t interfere with or change existing rights in law to effectively end your own life by refusing treatment or food, which is probably a good thing, as these are important legal principles and are well-integrated into our medical ethics in New Zealand.
What’s missing
This bill allows immunity to conviction (presumably on murder or similar charges) for people offering assisted dying in good faith who took reasonable measures to avoid negligence. This is effectively the heart of the bill, and is very simply drafted. However, this is arguably also a problem, because it might require an experienced lawyer to draft instructions on how medical professionals maintain that immunity, and it’s possible that even if these concepts are defined well and uncomplicated to interpret, they may be difficult to explain well to lay people. While the general concepts are easily explained to someone with passing familiarity to the law, and thus likely to any good nurse, (compliance with the law is a large part of the job) the border cases might be difficult to define. I would have preferred an approach where negligence is well-defined in the law as failure to comply with specific provisions to a specified standard, rather than simply leaned on as a legal concept. Good faith is relatively self-explanatory- you are liable to murder charges if you collude to trick someone into ending their life, or to do it for profit, or any other motive that is against the patient’s best interests. This prevents situations where we’re allowing collusion by prison medics to kill prisoners, or allowing killers who are demonstrably so-called “angels of mercy” to have legal immunity, but there needs to be more safeguards to prevent these types of people from potentially infiltrating the medical profession and actually killing people rather than offering a dignified end to those who want and need it in advance, because preventing murder is literally the first job a society has, and there is a reasonably thin line, although an observable one, between euthanasia and murder, or assisted death and suicide. Likely, the opportunities will be rare enough that serial killers, at least, will not be a concern, but we should be cautious at first because any failures in this legislation are very high-stakes.
As I allude to above, the bill is a very strong approach to euthanasia, and fails to include phase-in or phase-out periods for safeguards and additional methods of assisting people to die with dignity that arguably could cause a slippery slope.
As above, there also needs to be a lot better work done about properly defining eligibility in a way that doesn’t allow loopholes or potentially stigmatize disability and old age.
There are also tricky issues of risk around prognosis of terminal illness versus actually having a given terminal illness, and the accuracy of prognoses. Often we just don’t know enough to give accurate timeframes or even diagnoses of when and whether a person has a terminal disease. While doctors often do very well, there is a very real risk that people without a terminal or degenerative condition will end their lives on inaccurate information, and we won’t find out until after their death. I would hope that this is an issue that receives a lot of debate in public, and in parliament, because we may need some reasonable safeguards in the law here.
If you’d like to submit on the bill, Parliament has opened submissions. You can read the bill on our legislation site now if you want to check parts or the whole for yourself to check if you agree with my criticisms or praise. I have already made a submission along the lines in this post, although it is not worded exactly the way I have worded my feedback here, to avoid it seeming like a form letter if anyone chooses to lift parts of this post for their submission. (which you are all welcome to do if any of my criticism or praise speaks to you)
155 comments on “The End of Life Choice Bill ”
- Comments are now closed
- Comments are now closed
Recent Comments
- 2024 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #51
A listing of 25 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, December 15, 2024 thru Sat, December 21, 2024. Based on feedback we received, this week's roundup is the first one published soleley by category. We are still interested in ...2 hours ago - Dance Magic
Well, I've been there, sitting in that same chairWhispering that same prayer half a million timesIt's a lie, though buried in disciplesOne page of the Bible isn't worth a lifeThere's nothing wrong with youIt's true, it's trueThere's something wrong with the villageWith the villageSomething wrong with the villageSongwriters: Andrew Jackson ...14 hours ago - Government Forces Universities to Enforce “Free Speech” While Limiting Universities̵...
ACT would like to dictate what universities can and can’t say. We knew it was coming. It was outlined in the coalition agreement and has become part of Seymour’s strategy of “emphasising public funding” to prevent people from opposing him and his views—something he also uses to try and de-platform ...14 hours ago - Fact brief – Are we heading into an ‘ice age’?
Skeptical Science is partnering with Gigafact to produce fact briefs — bite-sized fact checks of trending claims. This fact brief was written by Sue Bin Park from the Gigafact team in collaboration with members from our team. You can submit claims you think need checking via the tipline. Are we heading ...1 day ago
- As Our Power Lessens: Published
So the Solstice has arrived – Summer in this part of the world, Winter for the Northern Hemisphere. And with it, the publication my new Norse dark-fantasy piece, As Our Power Lessens at Eternal Haunted Summer: https://eternalhauntedsummer.com/issues/winter-solstice-2024/as-our-power-lessens/ As previously noted, this one is very ‘wyrd’, and Northern Theory of Courage. ...1 day ago - By Any Other Name.
The Natural Choice: As a starter for ten percent of the Party Vote, “saving the planet” is a very respectable objective. Young voters, in particular, raised on the dire (if unheeded) warnings of climate scientists, and the irrefutable evidence of devastating weather events linked to global warming, vote Green. After ...1 day ago - Bernard’s last Saturday Soliloquy for 2024
The Government cancelled 60% of Kāinga Ora’s new builds next year, even though the land for them was already bought, the consents were consented and there are builders unemployed all over the place. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāMōrena. Long stories short, the six things that mattered in Aotearoa’s political ...2 days ago - Bernard’s Picks ‘n’ Mixes for Saturday, December 21
Photo by CHUTTERSNAP on UnsplashEvery morning I get up at 3am to go around the traps of news sites in Aotearoa and globally. I pick out the top ones from my point of view and have been putting them into my Dawn Chorus email, which goes out with a podcast. ...2 days ago - 2024 OIA stats
Over on Kikorangi Newsroom's Marc Daalder has published his annual OIA stats. So I thought I'd do mine: 82 OIA requests sent in 2024 7 posts based on those requests 20 average working days to receive a response Ministry of Justice was my most-requested entity, ...2 days ago - Climate Change: A perverse incentive
The government published its first Biennial Transparency Report under the Paris Agreement yesterday, and the media has correctly noted that it is missing any plan to actually meet our target. While it hypes domestic emissions reductions so far - which have been good, but will likely get worse thanks to ...2 days ago
- Economic Bulletin December 2024
Welcome to the December 2024 Economic Bulletin. We have two monthly features in this edition. In the first, we discuss what the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update from Treasury and the Budget Policy Statement from the Minister of Finance tell us about the fiscal position and what to ...2 days ago - NZCTU make submission in opposition to Treaty Principles Bill
The NZCTU Te Kauae Kaimahi have submitted against the controversial Treaty Principles Bill, slamming the Bill as a breach of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and an attack on tino rangatiratanga and the collective rights of Tangata Whenua. “This Bill seeks to legislate for Te Tiriti o Waitangi principles that are ...2 days ago
- ZB’s Power Couple
I don't knowHow to say what's got to be saidI don't know if it's black or whiteThere's others see it redI don't get the answers rightI'll leave that to youIs this love out of fashionOr is it the time of yearAre these words distraction?To the words you want to hearSongwriters: ...3 days ago - Austerity thumps GDP most since 1991
Our economy has experienced its worst recession since 1991. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāMōrena. Long stories short, the six things that matter in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, climate and poverty on Friday, December 20 in The Kākā’s Dawn Chorus podcast above and the daily Pick ‘n’ Mix below ...3 days ago
- Weekly Roundup 20-December-2024
Twas the Friday before Christmas and all through the week we’ve been collecting stories for our final roundup of the year. As we start to wind down for the year we hope you all have a safe and happy Christmas and new year. If you’re travelling please be safe on ...3 days ago - The Hoon around the year to December 20, 2024
The podcast above of the weekly ‘Hoon’ webinar for paying subscribers on Thursday night features co-hosts & talking about the year’s news with: on climate. Her book of the year was Tim Winton’s cli-fi novel Juice and she also mentioned Mike Joy’s memoir The Fight for Fresh Water. ...3 days ago
- The baby-boomers’ last gasp
The Government can head off to the holidays, entitled to assure itself that it has done more or less what it said it would do. The campaign last year promised to “get New Zealand back on track.” When you look at the basic promises—to trim back Government expenditure, toughen up ...3 days ago - Skeptical Science New Research for Week #51 2024
Open access notables An intensification of surface Earth’s energy imbalance since the late 20th century, Li et al., Communications Earth & Environment: Tracking the energy balance of the Earth system is a key method for studying the contribution of human activities to climate change. However, accurately estimating the surface energy balance ...3 days ago
- Join us at 5pm for 2024’s last Hoon
Photo by Mauricio Fanfa on UnsplashKia oraCome and join us for our weekly ‘Hoon’ webinar with paying subscribers to The Kākā for an hour at 5 pm today.Jump on this link on YouTube Livestream for our chat about the week’s news with myself , plus regular guests and , ...3 days ago - Christmas Gifts: Ageing Boomers, Laurie & Les, Talk Politics.
“Like you said, I’m an unreconstructed socialist. Everybody deserves to get something for Christmas.”“ONE OF THOSE had better be for me!” Hannah grinned, fascinated, as Laurie made his way, gingerly, to the bar, his arms full of gift-wrapped packages.“Of course!”, beamed Laurie. Depositing his armful on the bar-top and selecting ...3 days ago
- GDP Figures No Christmas Present for New Zealand
Data released by Statistics New Zealand today showed a significant slowdown in the economy over the past six months, with GDP falling by 1% in September, and 1.1% in June said CTU Economist Craig Renney. “The data shows that the size of the economy in GDP terms is now smaller ...4 days ago
- Cheeseburgers and Stunt Monkeys
One last thing before I quitI never wanted any moreThan I could fit into my headI still remember every single word you saidAnd all the shit that somehow came along with itStill, there's one thing that comforts meSince I was always caged and now I'm freeSongwriters: David Grohl / Georg ...4 days ago - MSD rejecting 220 pleas for food grants each day
Sparse offerings outside a Te Kauwhata church. Meanwhile, the Government is cutting spending in ways that make thousands of hungry children even hungrier, while also cutting funding for the charities that help them. It’s also doing that while winding back new building of affordable housing that would allow parents to ...4 days ago
- The Wing Parties’ Economic Policies.
It is difficult to make sense of the Luxon Coalition Government’s economic management.This end-of-year review about the state of economic management – the state of the economy was last week – is not going to cover the National Party contribution. Frankly, like every other careful observer, I cannot make up ...4 days ago - Back on Track
This morning I awoke to the lovely news that we are firmly back on track, that is if the scale was reversed.NZ ranks low in global economic comparisonsNew Zealand's economy has been ranked 33rd out of 37 in an international comparison of which have done best in 2024.Economies were ranked ...4 days ago - Book Review: How Big Things Get Done
This is a guest post by George Weeks, reviewing a book called How Big Things Get Done by Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner Want to know how to do something big? Ask someone who has done it before! Professor Bent Flyvbjerg has spent his career studying megaprojects. In 2023, ...4 days ago
- Gordon Campbell On Why We Can’t Survive Two More Years Of This
Remember those silent movies where the heroine is tied to the railway tracks or going over the waterfall in a barrel? Finance Minister Nicola Willis seems intent on portraying herself as that damsel in distress. According to Willis, this country’s current economic problems have all been caused by the spending ...4 days ago - Dragging our way towards the finish line, the end of this year can’t come soon enough for many…
Similar to the cuts and the austerity drive imposed by Ruth Richardson in the 1990’s, an era which to all intents and purposes we’ve largely fiddled around the edges with fixing in the time since – over, to be fair, several administrations – whilst trying our best it seems to ...4 days ago - Handling Democracy.
String-Pulling in the Dark: For the democratic process to be meaningful it must also be public. WITH TRUST AND CONFIDENCE in New Zealand’s politicians and journalists steadily declining, restoring those virtues poses a daunting challenge. Just how daunting is made clear by comparing the way politicians and journalists treated New Zealanders ...4 days ago
- Open letter to the Minister of Dwindling Finances
Dear Nicola Willis, thank you for letting us know in so many words that the swingeing austerity hasn't worked.By in so many words I mean the bit where you said, Here is a sea of red ink in which we are drowning after twelve months of savage cost cutting and ...4 days ago - Open Government: The joke ends
The Open Government Partnership is a multilateral organisation committed to advancing open government. Countries which join are supposed to co-create regular action plans with civil society, committing to making verifiable improvements in transparency, accountability, participation, or technology and innovation for the above. And they're held to account through an Independent ...4 days ago
- An unusual sort of press conference
Today I tuned into something strange: a press conference that didn’t make my stomach churn or the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end. Which was strange, because it was about the torture of children. It was the announcement by Erica Stanford — on her own, unusually ...4 days ago - This substack has talked about this government’s seeming corruption & pro-corporate issues...
This is a must watch, and puts on brilliant and practical display the implications and mechanics of fast-track law corruption and weakness.CLICK HERE: LINK TO WATCH VIDEOOur news media as it is set up is simply not equipped to deal with the brazen disinformation and corruption under this right wing ...4 days ago - NZCTU: Minister needs to listen to the evidence on engineered stone ban
NZCTU Te Kauae Kaimahi Acting Secretary Erin Polaczuk is welcoming the announcement from Minister of Workplace Relations and Safety Brooke van Velden that she is opening consultation on engineered stone and is calling on her to listen to the evidence and implement a total ban of the product. “We need ...4 days ago
- Wednesday 18 December
The Government has announced a 1.5% increase in the minimum wage from 1 April 2025, well below forecast inflation of 2.5%. Unions have reacted strongly and denounced it as a real terms cut. PSA and the CTU are opposing a new round of staff cuts at WorkSafe, which they say ...4 days ago
- Can the government change its mind on the ferries?
The decision to unilaterally repudiate the contract for new Cook Strait ferries is beginning to look like one of the stupidest decisions a New Zealand government ever made. While cancelling the ferries and their associated port infrastructure may have made this year's books look good, it means higher costs later, ...4 days ago
- Notes from Afar: Will Luxon Attend Waitangi Day? And Opposition Calls Out Nicola Willis for “C...
Hi there! I’ve been overseas recently, looking after a situation with a family member. So apologies if there any less than focused posts! Vanuatu has just had a significant 7.3 earthquake. Two MFAT staff are unaccounted for with local fatalities.It’s always sad to hear of such things happening.I think of ...5 days ago - Member’s morning
Today is a special member's morning, scheduled to make up for the government's theft of member's days throughout the year. First up was the first reading of Greg Fleming's Crimes (Increased Penalties for Slavery Offences) Amendment Bill, which was passed unanimously. Currently the House is debating the third reading of ...5 days ago
- Going Backwards
We're going backwardsIgnoring the realitiesGoing backwardsAre you counting all the casualties?We are not there yetWhere we need to beWe are still in debtTo our insanitiesSongwriter: Martin Gore Read more ...5 days ago - Blaming Treasury & Labour, Willis looks for even more Austerity
Willis blamed Treasury for changing its productivity assumptions and Labour’s spending increases since Covid for the worsening Budget outlook. Photo: Getty ImagesMōrena. Long stories short, the six things that matter in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, climate and poverty on Wednesday, December 18 in The Kākā’s Dawn Chorus podcast above ...5 days ago
- December-24 AT Board Meeting
Today the Auckland Transport board meet for the last time this year. For those interested (and with time to spare), you can follow along via this MS Teams link from 10am. I’ve taken a quick look through the agenda items to see what I think the most interesting aspects are. ...5 days ago
- The Making of a Mental Health Rockstar
Hi,If you’re a New Zealander — you know who Mike King is. He is the face of New Zealand’s battle against mental health problems. He can be loud and brash. He raises, and is entrusted with, a lot of cash. Last year his “I Am Hope” charity reported a revenue ...5 days ago - It could have been worse
Probably about the only consolation available from yesterday’s unveiling of the Half-Yearly Economic and Fiscal Update (HYEFU) is that it could have been worse. Though Finance Minister Nicola Willis has tightened the screws on future government spending, she has resisted the calls from hard-line academics, fiscal purists and fiscal hawks ...5 days ago
- The Deep Divisions of Local Government
The right have a stupid saying that is only occasionally true:When is democracy not democracy? When it hasn’t been voted on.While not true in regards to branches of government such as the judiciary, it’s a philosophy that probably should apply to recently-elected local government councillors. Nevertheless, this concept seemed to ...5 days ago - Willis’ austerity strategy just isn’t working
Long story short: the Government’s austerity policy has driven the economy into a deeper and longer recession that means it will have to borrow $20 billion more over the next four years than it expected just six months ago. Treasury’s latest forecasts show the National-ACT-NZ First Government’s fiscal strategy of ...5 days ago
- Sabin 33 #7 – Are solar projects hurting farmers and rural communities?
On November 1, 2024 we announced the publication of 33 rebuttals based on the report "Rebutting 33 False Claims About Solar, Wind, and Electric Vehicles" written by Matthew Eisenson, Jacob Elkin, Andy Fitch, Matthew Ard, Kaya Sittinger & Samuel Lavine and published by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia ...5 days ago
- Join us for a pop-up Hoon at 5pm on HYEFU
5 days ago - ‘Ideas Worth Saving’: A Call for Papers
Some years ago, I found myself pondering the power of literature to endure. Or at least the power of some of it to endure, while the rest vanishes in mere decades: https://phuulishfellow.wordpress.com/2019/08/07/look-on-my-works-ye-mighty-and-despair-the-literary-future/. I have similarly had fun with the subject in some of my short stories, such as Another Alexandria ...5 days ago - Corrections is torturing prisoners again
In 1998, in the wake of the Paremoremo Prison riot, the Department of Corrections established the "Behaviour Management Regime". Prisoners were locked in their cells for 22 or 23 hours a day, with no fresh air, no exercise, no social contact, no entertainment, and in some cases no clothes and ...5 days ago
- HYEFU and BPS data shows New Zealand is way off track
New data released by the Treasury shows that the economic policies of this Government have made things worse in the year since they took office, said NZCTU Economist Craig Renney. “Our fiscal indicators are all heading in the wrong direction – with higher levels of debt, a higher deficit, and ...5 days ago
- “Better economic management”
At the 2023 election, National basically ran on a platform of being better economic managers. So how'd that turn out for us? In just one year, they've fucked us for two full political terms: The government's books are set to remain deeply in the red for the near term ...5 days ago
- Shameless, clueless
AUSTERITYText within this block will maintain its original spacing when publishedMy spreadsheet insists This pain leads straight to glory (File not found) Read more ...5 days ago - Minimum wage ‘increase’ is an effective cut
The NZCTU Te Kauae Kaimahi are saying that the Government should do the right thing and deliver minimum wage increases that don’t see workers fall further behind, in response to today’s announcement that the minimum wage will only be increased by 1.5%, well short of forecast inflation. “With inflation forecast ...6 days ago
- Crazy ’bout a Sharp-dressed Man
Oh, I weptFor daysFilled my eyesWith silly tearsOh, yeaBut I don'tCare no moreI don't care ifMy eyes get soreSongwriters: Paul Rodgers / Paul Kossoff. Read more ...6 days ago - How much should you worry about a collapse of the Atlantic conveyor belt?
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Bob Henson In this aerial view, fingers of meltwater flow from the melting Isunnguata Sermia glacier descending from the Greenland Ice Sheet on July 11, 2024, near Kangerlussuaq, Greenland. According to the Programme for Monitoring of the Greenland Ice Sheet (PROMICE), the ...6 days ago
- 8% ACT Party Creates One Ring To Rule Them All
In August, I wrote an article about David Seymour1 with a video of his testimony, to warn that there were grave dangers to his Ministry of Regulation:David Seymour's Ministry of Slush Hides Far Greater RisksWhy Seymour's exorbitant waste of taxpayers' money could be the least of concernThe money for Seymour ...6 days ago - When austerity worsens public debt & cuts GDP
Willis is expected to have to reveal the bitter fiscal fruits of her austerity strategy in the HYEFU later today. Photo: Lynn Grieveson/TheKakaMōrena. Long stories short, the six things that matter in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, climate and poverty on Tuesday, December 17 in The Kākā’s Dawn Chorus podcast ...6 days ago
- Govt to double number of toll roads
On Friday the government announced it would double the number of toll roads in New Zealand as well as make a few other changes to how toll roads are used in the country. The real issue though is not that tolling is being used but the suggestion it will make ...6 days ago
- Luxon’s pre-emptive strike
The Prime Minister yesterday engaged in what looked like a pre-emptive strike designed to counter what is likely to be a series of depressing economic statistics expected before the end of the week. He opened his weekly post-Cabinet press conference with a recitation of the Government’s achievements. “It certainly has ...6 days ago
- Gordon Campbell On The Coalition’s Empty Gestures, And Abortion Refusal As The New Slavery
This whooping cough story from south Auckland is a good example of the coalition government’s approach to social need – spend money on urging people to get vaccinated but only after you’ve cut the funding to where they could get vaccinated. This has been the case all year with public ...6 days ago
- More public service contempt of parliament
Back in 2023 the New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties raised concerns about the inherent conflict of interest involved in public service agencies supporting parliamentary select committees. Our parliament is run on a shoestring, so depends on the public service for advice. But public service agencies work for Ministers, not ...6 days ago
- If There Is A God
And if there is a GodI know he likes to rockHe likes his loud guitarsHis spiders from MarsAnd if there is a GodI know he's watching meHe likes what he seesBut there's trouble on the breezeSongwriter: William Patrick Corgan Read more ...6 days ago - A Lipstick Government
Here’s a quick round up of today’s political news:1. MORE FOOD BANKS, CHARITIES, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHELTERS AND YOUTH SOCIAL SERVICES SET TO CLOSE OR SCALE BACK AROUND THE COUNTRY AS GOVT CUTS FUNDINGSome of Auckland's largest foodbanks are warning they may need to close or significantly reduce food parcels after ...6 days ago - NZCTU open letter to Treasury on undue restrictions on restricted briefings
Iain Rennie, CNZMSecretary and Chief Executive to the TreasuryDear Secretary, Undue restrictions on restricted briefings This week, the Treasury barred representatives from four organisations, including the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions Te Kauae Kaimahi, from attending the restricted briefing for the Half-Year Economic and Fiscal Update. We had been ...6 days ago
- Why you won’t hear me advocate for electric cars
This is a guest post by Tim Adriaansen, a community, climate, and accessibility advocate. I won’t shut up about climate breakdown, and whenever possible I try to shift the focus of a climate conversation towards solutions. But you’ll almost never hear me give more than a passing nod to ...7 days ago
- Coalition forced to back down on tolling Pahiatua track
A grassroots backlash has forced a backdown from Brown, but he is still eyeing up plenty of tolls for other new roads. And the pressure is on Willis to ramp up the Government’s austerity strategy. Photo: Getty ImagesMōrena. Long stories short, the six things that matter in Aotearoa’s political economy ...7 days ago
- Thank You
Hi all,I'm pretty overwhelmed by all your messages and emails today; thank you so very much.As much as my newsletter this morning was about money, and we all need to earn money, it was mostly about world domination if I'm honest. 😉I really hate what’s happening to our country, and ...1 week ago - 2024 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #50
A listing of 23 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, December 8, 2024 thru Sat, December 14, 2024. Listing by Category Like last week's summary this one contains the list of articles twice: based on categories and based on ...1 week ago
- Making Gravy
I started writing this morning about Hobson’s Pledge, examining the claims they and their supporters make, basically ripping into them. But I kept getting notifications coming through, and not good ones.Each time I looked up, there was another un-subscription message, and I felt a bit sicker at the thought of ...1 week ago - Nothing here but the shadows
Once, long before there was Harry and Meghan and Dodi and all those episodes of The Crown, they came to spend some time with us, Charles and Diana. Was there anyone in the world more glamorous than the Princess of Wales?Dazzled as everyone was by their company, the leader of ...1 week ago - The United Right: the FSU’s Continued Efforts to Undermine Academia
The collective right have a problem.The entire foundation for their world view is antiscientific. Their preferred economic strategies have been disproven. Their whole neoliberal model faces accusations of corporate corruption and worsening inequality. Climate change not only definitely exists, its rapid progression demands an immediate and expensive response in order ...1 week ago
- Showing the Americans how to do it
Just ten days ago, South Korea's president attempted a self-coup, declaring martial law and attempting to have opposition MPs murdered or arrested in an effort to seize unconstrained power. The attempt was rapidly defeated by the national assembly voting it down and the people flooding the streets to defend democracy. ...1 week ago
- 2 Men, 1 Haircut
Hi,“What I love about New Zealanders is that sometimes you use these expressions that as Americans we have no idea what those things mean!"I am watching a 30-something year old American ramble on about how different New Zealanders are to Americans. It’s his podcast, and this man is doing a ...1 week ago - Chris Penk’s Hate Parade
What Chris Penk has granted holocaust-denier and equal-opportunity-bigot Candace Owens is not “freedom of speech”. It’s not even really freedom of movement, though that technically is the right she has been granted. What he has given her is permission to perform. Freedom of SpeechIn New Zealand, the right to freedom ...1 week ago - Tell me a story
All those tears on your cheeksJust like deja vu flow nowWhen grandmother speaksSo tell me a story (I'll tell you a story)Spell it out, I can't hear (What do you want to hear?)Why you wear black in the morning?Why there's smoke in the air? Songwriter: Greg Johnson.Mōrena all ☀️Something a ...1 week ago
- National’s Greatest Misses 2023-4
National has only been in power for a year, but everywhere you look, its choices are taking New Zealand a long way backwards. In no particular order, here are the National Government's Top 50 Greatest Misses of its first year in power. ...2 days ago - Release: Minister’s plan for tertiary sector a backwards step
Returning to the model that was failing for most polytechnics and Institutes of Technology is not the answer. ...2 days ago
- Release: National buries 1019 planned homes
It’s been revealed that National has cancelled 60 percent of its housing projects planned before mid-2025 amidst housing woes. ...3 days ago
- Release: Rule-Czar bill a right-wing power grab
The Government is quietly undertaking consultation on the dangerous Regulatory Standards Bill over the Christmas period to avoid too much attention. ...3 days ago
- Release: Why not both? Luxon shuns Waitangi celebrations
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is running away from problems of his own creation, with his decision not to go to Waitangi. ...3 days ago
- Govt’s ‘free speech’ legislation stokes fear, not freedom
The Government’s planned changes to the freedom of speech obligations of universities is little more than a front for stoking the political fires of disinformation and fear, placing teachers and students in the crosshairs. ...3 days ago - Release: Nicola Willis spirals country deeper into recession
The economy shrank 1% this quarter and New Zealand has tumbled into the depths of a recession of Nicola Willis’ making. ...3 days ago
- Release: Hikes for company directors but not ordinary Kiwis
Working people are going backwards while company directors are being given huge pay hikes. ...4 days ago
- ECE no place to cut corners
The Ministry of Regulation’s report into Early Childhood Education (ECE) in Aotearoa raises serious concerns about the possibility of lowering qualification requirements, undermining quality and risking worse outcomes for tamariki, whānau, and kaiako. ...4 days ago
- Release: Strengthening Justice Services for New Zealanders
A Bill to modernise the role of Justices of the Peace (JP), ensuring they remain active in their communities and connected with other JPs, has been put into the ballot. ...5 days ago
- Release: Labour will continue fight against destructive projects
Labour will continue to fight unsustainable and destructive projects that are able to leap-frog environment protection under National’s Fast-track Approvals Bill. ...5 days ago
- Green Government will revoke dodgy fast-track projects
The Green Party has warned that a Green Government will revoke the consents of companies who override environmental protections as part of Fast-Track legislation being passed today. ...5 days ago
- Government for the wealthy keeps pushing austerity
The Green Party says the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update shows how the Government is failing to address the massive social and infrastructure deficits our country faces. ...5 days ago
- Release: Visa changes let migrant workers be paid less
The Government’s latest move to reduce the earnings of migrant workers will not only hurt migrants but it will drive down the wages of Kiwi workers. ...5 days ago
- Release: Nightmare before Christmas for Nicola Willis
With more debt and a larger deficit, Nicola Willis’ reputation is in tatters after her failure to return the Government’s books to surplus. ...5 days ago
- Warning to Fast-Track Applicants – ‘Exploit the Whenua, Face the Consequences’
Te Pāti Māori has this morning issued a stern warning to Fast-Track applicants with interests in mining, pledging to hold them accountable through retrospective liability and to immediately revoke Fast-Track consents under a future Te Pāti Māori government. This warning comes ahead of today’s third reading of the Fast-Track Approvals ...5 days ago
- Release: Govt cuts wages for lowest paid NZers… again
For the second year running, the government has effectively cut wages for the lowest paid workers in New Zealand. ...6 days ago
- Govt’s miserly 1.5% minimum wage will take workers backwards
The Government’s announcement today of a 1.5 per cent increase to minimum wage is another blow for workers, with inflation projected to exceed the increase, meaning it’s a real terms pay reduction for many. ...6 days ago
- Release: Govt shirking responsibility for rate hikes
All the Government has achieved from its announcement today is to continue to push responsibility back on councils for its own lack of action to help bring down skyrocketing rates. ...6 days ago
- Luxon’s ‘localism’ strikes again
The Government has used its final post-Cabinet press conference of the year to punch down on local government without offering any credible solutions to the issues our councils are facing. ...6 days ago
- Release: Govt breaks promise on EV chargers
The Government has failed to keep its promise to ‘super charge’ the EV network, delivering just 292 chargers - less than half of the 670 chargers needed to meet its target. ...6 days ago
- Greens call for end to subsidies for Methanex
The Green Party is calling for the Government to stop subsidising the largest user of the country’s gas supplies, Methanex, following a report highlighting the multi-national’s disproportionate influence on energy prices in Aotearoa. ...6 days ago
- Govt child poverty targets allow for increase in poverty
The Green Party is appalled with the Government’s new child poverty targets that are based on a new ‘persistent poverty’ measure that could be met even with an increase in child poverty. ...1 week ago
- Release: Four weeks annual leave under threat
The Government’s attack on workers continues with news it is scrapping work on the Holidays Act. ...1 week ago
- Govt’s emissions plan for measly 1% reduction
New independent analysis has revealed that the Government’s Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP) will reduce emissions by a measly 1 per cent by 2030, failing to set us up for the future and meeting upcoming targets. ...1 week ago
- Greens stand in solidarity with Whakaata Māori on sad day
The loss of 27 kaimahi at Whakaata Māori and the end of its daily news bulletin is a sad day for Māori media and another step backwards for Te Tiriti o Waitangi justice. ...1 week ago
- Sanctions regime to create more hardship for families
Yesterday the Government passed cruel legislation through first reading to establish a new beneficiary sanction regime that will ultimately mean more households cannot afford the basic essentials. ...1 week ago
- Govt gifts renters housing anxiety for Christmas
Today's passing of the Government's Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill–which allows landlords to end tenancies with no reason–ignores the voice of the people and leaves renters in limbo ahead of the festive season. ...1 week ago
- Release: National Party urged to support modern slavery legislation
Labour is urging the Prime Minister to walk the talk and support legislation combating modern slavery. ...2 weeks ago
- Release: Labour has lost confidence in the Speaker
The Speaker of the New Zealand Parliament made an unprecedented decision on the government amendment to the Fast Track Approvals Bill last night. ...2 weeks ago
- One year on, still no progress on new ferries
Today’s announcement from the Government on its plan for new ferries throws more uncertainty on the future of the country’s rail network. ...2 weeks ago
- Release: Nicola Willis’ smaller ferries will cost more
After wasting a year, Nicola Willis has delivered a worse deal for the Cook Strait ferries that will end up being more expensive and take longer to arrive. ...2 weeks ago
- Bill to sanction unlawful occupation of Palestine
Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick has today launched a Member’s Bill to sanction Israel for its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, as the All Out For Gaza rally reaches Parliament. ...2 weeks ago
- Release: Labour fully supports greyhound racing ban
The Government has done the right thing in moving to ban greyhound racing. ...2 weeks ago
- Greyhound racing industry ban marks new era for animal welfare
After years of advocacy, the Green Party is very happy to hear the Government has listened to our collective voices and announced the closure of the greyhound racing industry, by 1 August 2026. ...2 weeks ago
- Rangatahi voices must be centred in Government’s Relationship and Sexuality Education refresh
In response to a new report from ERO, the Government has acknowledged the urgent need for consistency across the curriculum for Relationship and Sexuality Education (RSE) in schools. ...2 weeks ago
- Govt introduces archaic anti-worker legislation
The Green Party is appalled at the Government introducing legislation that will make it easier to penalise workers fighting for better pay and conditions. ...2 weeks ago
- Winston Peters – Kinleith Mill Speech
Thank you for the invitation to speak with you tonight on behalf of the political party I belong to - which is New Zealand First. As we have heard before this evening the Kinleith Mill is proposing to reduce operations by focusing on pulp and discontinuing “lossmaking paper production”. They say that they are currently consulting on the plan to permanently shut ...2 weeks ago - Swarbrick calls on Auckland Mayor to end delay of revival of St James Theatre
Auckland Central MP, Chlöe Swarbrick, has written to Mayor Wayne Brown requesting he stop the unnecessary delays on St James Theatre’s restoration. ...2 weeks ago
- He Ara Anamata: Greens launch Emissions Reduction Plan
Today, the Green Party of Aotearoa proudly unveils its new Emissions Reduction Plan–He Ara Anamata–a blueprint reimagining our collective future. ...2 weeks ago
- Internationally-trained doctors jump at chance to boost health workforce
Health Minister Dr Shane Reti says Health New Zealand will move swiftly to support dozens of internationally-trained doctors already in New Zealand on their journey to employment here, after a tripling of sought-after examination places. “The Medical Council has delivered great news for hardworking overseas doctors who want to contribute ...14 hours ago - PM appoints business leader to APEC Business Advisory Council
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has appointed Sarah Ottrey to the APEC Business Advisory Council (ABAC). “At my first APEC Summit in Lima, I experienced firsthand the role that ABAC plays in guaranteeing political leaders hear the voice of business,” Mr Luxon says. “New Zealand’s ABAC representatives are very well respected and ...2 days ago
- New intelligence oversight appointments
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has announced four appointments to New Zealand’s intelligence oversight functions. The Honourable Robert Dobson KC has been appointed Chief Commissioner of Intelligence Warrants, and the Honourable Brendan Brown KC has been appointed as a Commissioner of Intelligence Warrants. The appointments of Hon Robert Dobson and Hon ...2 days ago
- New housing developments able to progress more quickly
Improvements in the average time it takes to process survey and title applications means housing developments can progress more quickly, Minister for Land Information Chris Penk says. “The government is resolutely focused on improving the building and construction pipeline,” Mr Penk says. “Applications to issue titles and subdivide land are ...2 days ago
- Actions to speed up air travel delivering results
The Government’s measures to reduce airport wait times, and better transparency around flight disruptions is delivering encouraging early results for passengers ahead of the busy summer period, Transport Minister Simeon Brown says. “Improving the efficiency of air travel is a priority for the Government to give passengers a smoother, more reliable ...2 days ago
- Ending contracted emergency housing in Rotorua
The Government today announced the intended closure of the Apollo Hotel as Contracted Emergency Housing (CEH) in Rotorua, Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka says. This follows a 30 per cent reduction in the number of households in CEH in Rotorua since National came into Government. “Our focus is on ending CEH in the Whakarewarewa area starting ...2 days ago
- Vocational education and training decisions support return to regions
The Government will reshape vocational education and training to return decision making to regions and enable greater industry input into work-based learning Tertiary Education and Skills Minister, Penny Simmonds says. “The redesigned system will better meet the needs of learners, industry, and the economy. It includes re-establishing regional polytechnics that ...3 days ago
- Reducing the environmental impact of synthetic refrigerants
The Government is taking action to better manage synthetic refrigerants and reduce emissions caused by greenhouse gases found in heating and cooling products, Environment Minister Penny Simmonds says. “Regulations will be drafted to support a product stewardship scheme for synthetic refrigerants, Ms. Simmonds says. “Synthetic refrigerants are found in a ...3 days ago
- Ngāruawāhia section of Waikato Expressway back to 4 lanes for Christmas
People travelling on State Highway 1 north of Hamilton will be relieved that remedial works and safety improvements on the Ngāruawāhia section of the Waikato Expressway were finished today, with all lanes now open to traffic, Transport Minister Simeon Brown says.“I would like to acknowledge the patience of road users ...3 days ago
- Appointments to the ENZ board
Tertiary Education and Skills Minister, Penny Simmonds, has announced a new appointment to the board of Education New Zealand (ENZ). Dr Erik Lithander has been appointed as a new member of the ENZ board for a three-year term until 30 January 2028. “I would like to welcome Dr Erik Lithander to the ...3 days ago
- Government to celebrate Waitangi Day around NZ
The Government will have senior representatives at Waitangi Day events around the country, including at the Waitangi Treaty Grounds, but next year Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has chosen to take part in celebrations elsewhere. “It has always been my intention to celebrate Waitangi Day around the country with different ...3 days ago
- More gangs added to Gangs Act list
Two more criminal gangs will be subject to the raft of laws passed by the Coalition Government that give Police more powers to disrupt gang activity, and the intimidation they impose in our communities, Police Minister Mark Mitchell says. Following an Order passed by Cabinet, from 3 February 2025 the ...3 days ago
- Judicial appointment announced
Attorney-General Judith Collins today announced the appointment of Justice Christian Whata as a Judge of the Court of Appeal. Justice Whata’s appointment as a Judge of the Court of Appeal will take effect on 1 August 2025 and fill a vacancy created by the retirement of Hon Justice David Goddard on ...3 days ago
- GDP data highlights importance of growth
The latest economic figures highlight the importance of the steps the Government has taken to restore respect for taxpayers’ money and drive economic growth, Finance Minister Nicola Willis says. Data released today by Stats NZ shows Gross Domestic Product fell 1 per cent in the September quarter. “Treasury and most ...3 days ago
- Strengthening Free Speech in Universities
Tertiary Education and Skills Minister Penny Simmonds and Associate Minister of Education David Seymour today announced legislation changes to strengthen freedom of speech obligations on universities. “Freedom of speech is fundamental to the concept of academic freedom and there is concern that universities seem to be taking a more risk-averse ...4 days ago
- Launch of Emergency Cellular Priority Service
Police Minister, Mark Mitchell, and Internal Affairs Minister, Brooke van Velden, today launched a further Public Safety Network cellular service that alongside last year’s Cellular Roaming roll-out, puts globally-leading cellular communications capability into the hands of our emergency responders. The Public Safety Network’s new Cellular Priority service means Police, Wellington ...4 days ago
- Minister reopens Mangamuka Gorge
State Highway 1 through the Mangamuka Gorge has officially reopened today, providing a critical link for Northlanders and offering much-needed relief ahead of the busy summer period, Transport Minister Simeon Brown says.“The Mangamuka Gorge is a vital route for Northland, carrying around 1,300 vehicles per day and connecting the Far ...4 days ago
- Funding confirmed for second Ashburton Bridge
The Government has welcomed decisions by the NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) and Ashburton District Council confirming funding to boost resilience in the Canterbury region, with construction on a second Ashburton Bridge expected to begin in 2026, Transport Minister Simeon Brown says. “Delivering a second Ashburton Bridge to improve resilience and ...4 days ago
- Government boosts support for avian influenza response
The Government is backing the response into high pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) in Otago, Biosecurity Minister Andrew Hoggard says. “Cabinet has approved new funding of $20 million to enable MPI to meet unbudgeted ongoing expenses associated with the H7N6 response including rigorous scientific testing of samples at the enhanced PC3 ...4 days ago
- Levelling the playing field for media advertising
Legislation that will repeal all advertising restrictions for broadcasters on Sundays and public holidays has passed through first reading in Parliament today, Media Minister Paul Goldsmith says. “As a growing share of audiences get their news and entertainment from streaming services, these restrictions have become increasingly redundant. New Zealand on ...4 days ago
- Inspector-General of Defence appointed
Today the House agreed to Brendan Horsley being appointed Inspector-General of Defence, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says. “Mr Horsley’s experience will be invaluable in overseeing the establishment of the new office and its support networks. “He is currently Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, having held that role since June 2020. ...4 days ago
- Fire and Emergency New Zealand final levy rates confirmed
Minister of Internal Affairs Brooke van Velden says the Government has agreed to the final regulations for the levy on insurance contracts that will fund Fire and Emergency New Zealand from July 2026. “Earlier this year the Government agreed to a 2.2 percent increase to the rate of levy. Fire ...4 days ago
- More AML relief on the way for Kiwi businesses
The Government is delivering regulatory relief for New Zealand businesses through changes to the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act. “The Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Amendment Bill, which was introduced today, is the second Bill – the other being the Statutes Amendment Bill - that ...4 days ago
- Hawke’s Bay Expressway moving at pace
Transport Minister Simeon Brown has welcomed further progress on the Hawke’s Bay Expressway Road of National Significance (RoNS), with the NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) Board approving funding for the detailed design of Stage 1, paving the way for main works construction to begin in late 2025.“The Government is moving at ...4 days ago
- Government seeks partnerships to plant trees on Crown-owned-land
The Government today released a request for information (RFI) to seeking interest in partnerships to plant trees on Crown-owned land with low farming and conservation value (excluding National Parks) Forestry Minister Todd McClay announced. “Planting trees on Crown-owned land will drive economic growth by creating more forestry jobs in our regions, providing more wood ...4 days ago
- Wide ranging legislation to make justice system more efficient
Court timeliness, access to justice, and improving the quality of existing regulation are the focus of a series of law changes introduced to Parliament today by Associate Minister of Justice Nicole McKee. The three Bills in the Regulatory Systems (Justice) Amendment Bill package each improve a different part of the ...4 days ago
- Diverse skills in community trust appointments
A total of 41 appointments and reappointments have been made to the 12 community trusts around New Zealand that serve their regions, Associate Finance Minister Shane Jones says. “These trusts, and the communities they serve from the Far North to the deep south, will benefit from the rich experience, knowledge, ...4 days ago
- Torture redress for survivors of the Lake Alice Unit
The Government has confirmed how it will provide redress to survivors who were tortured at the Lake Alice Psychiatric Hospital Child and Adolescent Unit (the Lake Alice Unit). “The Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care found that many of the 362 children who went through the Lake Alice Unit between 1972 and ...4 days ago
- A busy year in the House
It has been a busy, productive year in the House as the coalition Government works hard to get New Zealand back on track, Leader of the House Chris Bishop says. “This Government promised to rebuild the economy, restore law and order and reduce the cost of living. Our record this ...5 days ago
- Consultation opens on working with engineered stone
“Accelerated silicosis is an emerging occupational disease caused by unsafe work such as engineered stone benchtops. I am running a standalone consultation on engineered stone to understand what the industry is currently doing to manage the risks, and whether further regulatory intervention is needed,” says Workplace Relations and Safety Minister ...5 days ago
- Greater reporting on Treaty settlement commitments
Mehemea he pai mō te tangata, mahia – if it’s good for the people, get on with it. Enhanced reporting on the public sector’s delivery of Treaty settlement commitments will help improve outcomes for Māori and all New Zealanders, Māori Crown Relations Minister Tama Potaka says. Compiled together for the ...5 days ago
- New appointments to the Charities Registration Board
Mr Roger Holmes Miller and Ms Tarita Hutchinson have been appointed to the Charities Registration Board, Community and Voluntary Sector Minister Louise Upston says. “I would like to welcome the new members joining the Charities Registration Board. “The appointment of Ms Hutchinson and Mr Miller will strengthen the Board’s capacity ...5 days ago
- Building consent processing times improve
More building consent and code compliance applications are being processed within the statutory timeframe since the Government required councils to submit quarterly data, Building and Construction Minister Chris Penk says. “In the midst of a housing shortage we need to look at every step of the build process for efficiencies ...5 days ago
- Faster access to support through Innovation Fund
Mental Health Minister Matt Doocey is proud to announce the first three recipients of the Government’s $10 million Mental Health and Addiction Community Sector Innovation Fund which will enable more Kiwis faster access to mental health and addiction support. “This fund is part of the Government’s commitment to investing in ...5 days ago
- New Zealand to assist Vanuatu on earthquake response
New Zealand is providing Vanuatu assistance following yesterday's devastating earthquake, Foreign Minister Winston Peters says. "Vanuatu is a member of our Pacific family and we are supporting it in this time of acute need," Mr Peters says. "Our thoughts are with the people of Vanuatu, and we will be ...5 days ago
- Government takes steps to reduce card fees for Kiwis
The Government welcomes the Commerce Commission’s plan to reduce card fees for Kiwis by an estimated $260 million a year, Commerce and Consumer Affairs Minister Andrew Bayly says.“The Government is relentlessly focused on reducing the cost of living, so Kiwis can keep more of their hard-earned income and live a ...5 days ago
- Review recommends ECE regulation shakeup
Regulation Minister David Seymour has welcomed the Early Childhood Education (ECE) regulatory review report, the first major report from the Ministry for Regulation. The report makes 15 recommendations to modernise and simplify regulations across ECE so services can get on with what they do best – providing safe, high-quality care ...5 days ago
- Offshore Renewable Energy Bill passes first reading
The Government‘s Offshore Renewable Energy Bill to create a new regulatory regime that will enable firms to construct offshore wind generation has passed its first reading in Parliament, Energy Minister Simeon Brown says.“New Zealand currently does not have a regulatory regime for offshore renewable energy as the previous government failed ...5 days ago
- Local Government (Water Services) Bill passes first reading
Legislation to enable new water service delivery models that will drive critical investment in infrastructure has passed its first reading in Parliament, marking a significant step towards the delivery of Local Water Done Well, Local Government Minister Simeon Brown and Commerce and Consumer Affairs Minister Andrew Bayly say.“Councils and voters ...5 days ago
- Gene Technology Bill passes first reading
New Zealand is one step closer to reaping the benefits of gene technology with the passing of the first reading of the Gene Technology Bill, Science, Innovation and Technology Minister Judith Collins says. "This legislation will end New Zealand's near 30-year ban on gene technology outside the lab and is ...5 days ago
- Vanuatu quake: Warnings as bad weather threat looms for Port Vila
By , New Zealand’s Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) says impending bad weather for Port Vila is now the most significant post-quake hazard. A tropical low in the Coral Sea is expected to move into Vanuatu waters, bringing heavy rainfall. Authorities have issued warnings to people ...59 minutes ago - Signs of the hīkoi: More than just ‘words on cardboard’
The placards seen at the Hīkoi mō Te Tiriti conveyed "huge kōrero with immediacy", expert says: "People know the power of the word." ...10 hours ago - A final Ode to .. King Luxon
Cosmic CatastropheThe year draws to a close.King Luxon has grown tired of the long eveningsListening to the dreary squabbling of his Triumvirate.He strolls up to the top floor of the PalaceTo consult with his Astronomer Royal.The Royal Telescope scans the skies,And King Luxon stares up into the heavensFrom the terrestrial ...18 hours ago - A hater and an enthusiast review The Royal Free by Carl Shuker
Spinoff editor Mad Chapman and books editor Claire Mabey debate Carl Shuker’s new novel about… an editor. Claire: Hello Mad, you just finished The Royal Free – overall impressions? Mad: Hi Claire, I literally just put the book down and I would have to say my immediate impression is ...19 hours ago - Survive to 25 (December, that is)
Christmas and its buildup are often lonely, hard and full of unreasonable expectations. Here’s how to make it to Jesus’s birthday and find the little bit of joy we all deserve. Have you found this year relentless? Has the latest Apple update “fucked up your life”? Have you lost two ...19 hours ago
- All I want for Christmas is modern day slavery legislation
Despite overwhelming public and corporate support, the government has stalled progress on a modern day slavery law. That puts us behind other countries – and makes Christmas a time of tragedy rather than joy, argues Shanti Mathias. Picture the scene on Christmas Day. Everyone replete with nice things to eat, ...19 hours ago
- Israeli-American historian describes attacks on Gaza as ‘war of annihilation’
Asia Pacific Report “It looks like Hiroshima. It looks like Germany at the end of World War Two,” says an Israeli-American historian and professor of holocaust and genocide studies at Brown University about the horrifying reality of Gaza. Professor Omer Bartov, has described Israel’s ongoing war on Gaza as an ...22 hours ago
- NZ govt plans to make ‘heavy handed’ change to free speech rules for universities
The New Zealand government coalition is tweaking university regulations to curb what it says is an increasingly “risk-averse approach” to free speech. The proposed changes will set clear expectations on how universities should approach freedom of speech issues. Each university will then have to adopt a “freedom of speech statement” ...22 hours ago
- Caitlin Johnstone: Where does the aggression really begin?
Report by Dr David Robie – Café Pacific. – COMMENTARY: By Caitlin Johnstone New York prosecutors have charged Luigi Mangione with “murder as an act of terrorism” in his alleged shooting of health insurance CEO Brian Thompson earlier this month. This news comes out at the same time as ...1 day ago
- OECD Report Highlights That More Is Needed
This report reflects that gap in our dealings overseas, and it shows that legislators, the public sector and businesses need to walk the talk. ...1 day ago - Government quietly scraps waste minimisation policies
The government has quietly cancelled plans to improve recycling and roll out a kerbside food scraps composting scheme. ...1 day ago
- MEAA welcomes News MAP funding ‘leg up’ for Australian journalism
Pacific Media Watch The union for Australian journalists has welcomed the delivery by the federal government of more than $150 million to support the sustainability of public interest journalism over the next four years. Combined with the announcement of the revamped News Bargaining Initiative, this could result in up to ...1 day ago
- Transmission Gully partnership breakdown will not hurt future public-private partnerships, Infrastru...
The roads partnership unravelled under a confidential settlement this week, meaning NZTA will now finish off what it had said was incomplete work. ...2 days ago
- Funding cuts to charity particularly felt over Christmas period
The number of people seeking help from Lifeline is expected to increase by 10 to 20 percent over Christmas. ...2 days ago
- Nelson Hospital conditions ‘unbearable’ – staff
One worker says the building is decrepit and falling down around them. ...2 days ago
- The Secret Diary of .. Luxon at Xmas
MONDAY“Merry Xmas, and praise the Lord,” said Sheriff Luxon, and smiled for the camera. There was a flash of smoke when the shutter pressed down on the magnesium powder. The sheriff had arranged for a photographer from the Dodge Gazette to attend a ceremony where he handed out food parcels to ...2 days ago
- Stand by for cricket’s Smash Palace
It’s a little under two months since the White Ferns shocked the cricketing world, deservedly taking home the T20 World Cup. Since then the trophy has had a tour around the country, five of the squad have played in the WBBL in Australia while most others have returned to domestic ...2 days ago
- Early-onset dementia under the microscope
Comment: If we say the word ‘dementia’, many will picture an older person struggling to remember the names of their loved ones, maybe a grandparent living out their final years in an aged care facility. Dementia can also occur in people younger than 65, but it can take time before ...2 days ago
- Keeping the pirates at bay: Should the Australian ‘Blocking Order’ case prompt a discussion in N...
Piracy is a reality of modern life – but copyright law has struggled to play catch-up for as long as the entertainment industry has existed. As far back as 1988, the House of Lords criticised copyright law’s conflict with the reality of human behaviour in the context of burning cassette ...2 days ago
- ‘We were as famous as Tom Cruise’: Craig Parker on 90s Shortland St fandom
As he makes a surprise return to Shortland Street, actor Craig Parker takes us through his life in television. Craig Parker has been a fixture on television in Aotearoa for nearly four decades. He had starring roles in iconic local series like Gloss, Mercy Peak and Diplomatic Immunity, featured in ...2 days ago
- ‘I prioritise the mission, not my health’: Adam McGrath’s perfect weekend playlist
The Ōtautahi musician shares the 10 tracks he loves to spin, including the folk classic that cured him of a ‘case of the give-ups’. When singer-songwriter Adam McGrath returns to Kumeu’s Auckland Folk Festival from January 24-27, he’s not planning on simply idling his way through – he wants the late ...2 days ago
- The rescue dog bringing joy to Christchurch retirement homes
Alex Casey spends an afternoon on the job with River, the rescue dog on a mission to spread joy to Ōtautahi rest homes. Almost everyone says it is never enough time. But River the rescue dog, a jet black huntaway border collie cross, has to keep a tight pace to ...2 days ago
- Fiji pro-Palestine nativity scene exposes Gaza as ‘hell on earth’ at Christmas
Asia Pacific Report Fiji activists have recreated the nativity scene at a solidarity for Palestine gathering in Fiji’s capital Suva just days before Christmas. The Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre and Fijians for Palestine Solidarity Network recreated the scene at the FWCC compound — a baby Jesus figurine lies amidst the ...2 days ago
- Vanuatu quake: ‘Our shop was flattened like a deck of cards’
By 1News Pacific correspondent Barbara Dreaver and 1News reporters A number of Kiwis have been successfully evacuated from Vanuatu after a devastating earthquake shook the Pacific island nation earlier this week. The death toll was still unclear, though at least 14 people were killed according to an earlier statement from ...2 days ago
- How diplomats have broken the law in NZ – and what happened next
A handful of foreign diplomats have misbehaved during their time here - and not all of them have been brought to justice. ...2 days ago
- Swim schools report sinking enrolments as downturn deepens
Being able to swim is often considered a life skill, but tough economic times are forcing many families to pull their children out of lessons. ...2 days ago
- ‘There will be deaths because of this’ – Warning over Health NZ IT cuts
A West Coast IT worker is warning patients will die as Health New Zealand aims to slash its data and digital staff. ...2 days ago
- Polytech sales possible but unlikely when Te Pūkenga disestablished – minister
In a surprise move, the sale of polytechnics will be on the table when the national institute of technology Te Pūkenga is disestablished. ...2 days ago
- Parliament’s final sitting day an insight into party factions
On Parliament's last day of the year, there was a rare glimpse of the factions within the major parties. ...2 days ago
- Former Labour MP, North Shore mayor Ann Hartley dies
Former Labour MP and mayor of Auckland's North Shore City Ann Hartley has died. ...2 days ago
- The closest thing Australian cartooning had to a prophet: the sometimes celebrated, sometimes contro...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Scully, Professor in Modern History, University of New England Bunker. Image courtesy of Michael Leunig, CC BY-NC-SA Michael Leunig – who died in the early hours of Thursday December 19, surrounded by “his children, loved ones, and sunflowers” – was the ...2 days ago
- Labour moves Speaker from the ‘nice’ to ‘naughty’ list
Last week's fights with the Speaker over the Fast Track schedule may have changed the tone in Parliament. ...2 days ago
- Govt ends pilot programme for Māori and Pacific, sparking outrage
The Government announced the end of the programme that allowed Māori and Pacific people to acess bowel cancer screening at 50-years-old. ...2 days ago
- Parliament fits an extra morning into final sitting day
The House - On Parliament's last day of the year, there was the rare occurrence of a personal (conscience) vote on selling booze over the Easter weekend. While it didn't have the numbers to pass, it was a chance to get a rare glimpse of the fact ...2 days ago
- The Friday Poem: ‘Bejeweled log’ by Holly Fletcher
A new poem by Holly Fletcher. bejeweled log i was dreaming about wasps / wee darlings that followed me / ducking under objects / that i was fated to pickup / my fingers seeking / and meeting with tiny proboscis’s / but instead / i wake up / roll sideways ...2 days ago
- Sunglasses don’t just look good – they’re good for you too. Here’s how to choose the right p...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Flora Hui, Research Fellow, Centre for Eye Research Australia and Honorary Fellow, Department of Surgery (Ophthalmology), The University of Melbourne Versta/Shutterstock Australians are exposed to some of the highest levels of solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation in the world. While we ...2 days ago
- How does franchising work?
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Terry, Professor of Business Regulation, University of Sydney Michael von Aichberger/Shutterstock Even if you’ve no idea how the business model underpinning franchises works, there’s a good chance you’ve spent money at one. Franchising is essentially a strategy for cloning ...2 days ago
- The one episode of Shortland Street you need to watch this year
If something big is going to happen in Ferndale, it’s going to happen at Christmas. This is an excerpt from our weekly pop culture newsletter Rec Room. Sign up here. If there’s one episode of Shortland Street you should watch each year, it’s the annual Christmas cliffhanger. The final episode of ...2 days ago
- As China expands its cyber espionage and sabotage operations, how will the Trump administration resp...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By William A. Stoltz, Lecturer and expert Associate, National Security College, Australian National University US President-elect Donald Trump has named most of the members of his proposed cabinet. However, he’s yet to reveal key appointees to America’s powerful cyber warfare and intelligence institutions. ...2 days ago
- The Unity Books bestseller chart for 2024
Announcing the top 10 books of the the year at Unity Books’ stores in High St, Auckland, and Willis St, Wellington. AUCKLAND 1 Intermezzo by Sally Rooney (Faber & Faber, $37) The phenomenal Irish writer is the unsurprising chart topper for 2024 with her fourth novel that, much like her first ...2 days ago
Since yesterday’s unveiling of the Government’s medical cannabis reforms do not specify what happens when a person who is allowed to use cannabis as pain relief (only if they have 12 months to live) fails to die when the specified 12 months have elapsed.
I guess this Bill will solve that potential problem….
The Medical Cannabis Bill is an example of what happens when something is tampered with so much it might be better not to have it at all.
It amazes me that our MPs are fronting up to end of life challenges but do not have the collective courage to legalise cannabis fullstop. Beggars belief.
Intense pain is one reason, of many, that people want to kill themselves. If smoking dope gives them a quality of life it should be permitted imo.
It does seem incongruous that we are discussing legal ways to end a life while tying hands behind backs around cannabis.
So agree with you. My mother is having horrible side effects from oxycodone. (Pharmaceutical grade heroin) so she goes off it and then she wants to die and prays loudly for God to take her now. I just wish she could try marijuana if that would help her.
I feel for you and your mum.
God I feel your pain fairy godmother.
When I was chemically poisoned for the fisrt six months when the pain ripped my body apart as the immune system was attacking my body thinking it was helping it would have been helpful to ave good medical doctoring to treat chemical poisoning affects and their impcts but no such treaments were available so now after we found two doctors one in Canada one in Florida my health slowly improved and the pains subsided.
I nw medicate myself now after 25 yrs living with the long term effects of chemical poisoning.
We wish your family would recieve some assitance from doctors now that we have a new compassionate government, and please dnt give up hope as it was hope that got me through all our family had to endure.
TFG….watch the youtube clip here… https://thestandard.org.nz/the-medicinal-marijuana-bill/#comment-1428775 ….the manufacturers of oxy have a solution to one of the most serious side effects of their product.
And they’re very proud….
Kia kaha.
“If smoking dope gives them a quality of life it should be permitted imo.”
We need to move away from the narrative that medical cannabis is ‘smoked’.
Already there are oils and tinctures that are placed in the mouth (usually under the tongue) and balms that when massaged into areas of pain can give extraordinarily good relief. Medicinal cannabis is being made into capsules.
To my knowledge there have been no reports of adverse effects from using these products, at least not the ones that have been produced and supplied ( often at no cost) by the established ‘Green Fairies’.
Sometimes, and I understand it is not usual, medical cannabis is vaped.
Its no wonder that the old fuddy duddies that appear to be dictating Winston’s intractable stance on this issue are nervous when the narrative that the only way of using cannabis is by setting fire to it and inhaling the smoke persists.
I was not talking about medical marajuana, hence I wrote “smoke dope”.
I just cannot comprehend why this bill is only considering people with a teminal illness, what about people who live with chronic pain – sciatic pain for one example which is unbearable, frankly the terminally ill finally are released from their pain but the chronically ill live with it, it doesn’t kill them but makes their lives a misery. That this Government tinkers around the edges of this bill but can go through the motions of making euthanasia legal is horrible beyond belief.
Let people grow their own dope – its easy to do – take the criminal aspect out of it and just start governing properly, not just dancing around the edges of laws which need to be implemented. Adhern said she had no problems with legalizing cannabis for the ill and chronically disabled people – just do it Jacinda for f…. sake.
they, at the very least could decriminalize the possession and use of it. A bit like the Netherlands.
But i guess that is in the to hard basket, and besides, someone could have fun with it. And that can’t be. IF you want to have fun get pissed.
Completely agree with your comments on this thread, tracey
Why indeed are these two bills which are polar opposites at face value in terms of intrinsic ‘risk’…
Seemingly being embraced the wrong way around…
I would suggest its obvious, but that’s only my point of view..
Death, not life being to the fore of the directives and policies deployed at home and abroad
Reduced capability and unbearable suffering are read together. Being disabled does not mean unbearable suffering per se and is something of a safeguard for someone with a disability wanting out cos of the disability. It is also a chance for us to become more enlightened in our attitudes to disability. For example giving a liveable income not a subsistence income. I am constantly amazed at how many people with disability do not kill themselves given the pittance we give them reducibg tgem to survivors not thrivers. Simple things like a trip to another city or town to visit friend or relative. Not on a benefit you dont.
Doctors and Nurses Councils will draft extensive guidelines if they have not done so already in anticipation. Perhaps those should become Regulations to the Act?
I hope that during this process the experience of other nations will be explained to the public to help us get the best understanding.
Thanks for the post Matthew. I know it would have taken a long time to put together.
“I am constantly amazed at how many people with disability do not kill themselves given the pittance we give them…”
For some in the disability community staying alive and, as Draco T Bastard put it the other day…
https://thestandard.org.nz/nrt-on-submitting-on-the-end-of-life-choice-bill/#comment-1427245
“4. Keeping them alive takes up resources (food, doctors, medicine, nurses, etcetera) that would be better used to keep someone else, who isn’t at deaths door, alive.
That’s the one that you’re really going to hate but it happens to be true. Our resources aren’t unlimited and so we, as a society, have to choose which is the best option for the person dying, for those who can actually be helped with the use of our limited resources and society.”
….is activism.
Perhaps DTB and his like minded and oh so virtuous friends could generate a list of those members of society who are not worthy of consumption of ‘resources’.
It must be so simple in his world.
I am slightly confused by your post. I was referring to people who have a disability, not who are dying and to the fact that we limit their employment opportunities by our attitudes and those who cannot work arecreduced to subsistence. We need to address that and one way is giving them the average wage. Yes average. And watch how quickly Nats stop using average wage as a measure if we did. They would suddenly champion median wage as a measure.
Bill English is incandescent about this Bill but his recotd of supporting the livibg is appalking. EG benefirs to those who are disabled.
“…people who have a disability, not who are dying ”
Effectively one and the same (In the context of throwing valuable resources at folk who are not going to get better) especially if the disability requires a very high level of supports…and I’m talking about nursing care, and medications, and equipment and medical supplies to manage various bodily functions that no longer work…all products that are already rationed to those with high and and complex care needs who are not covered by ACC.
Then why are we not seeing backdoor euthanasia on these folks now or are we? I think that bow is being drawn way too long.
Excuse me…but denying treatment to someone with an existing disability happens…often.
Subsisting on a benefit because of a disability or chronic health condition is bad enough, but combine that with having to re use pre- packed sterile single use catheters because the dhb will only fund 20 per month (it used to be 10) and you live with constant bladder and kidney infections that make you feel like shit all the time and yes, feel like death would be a blessed release…
I get that Rosemary and where is English and other morally outraged anti End of Life people on that? Silent and in English’s case complicit in the degradation of those lives.
He is outraged by this Bill but seemungly totally incapable of seeing how he has been part of making some people’s lives such a misery that they seek death as the answer.
I see no one having the coyrage to challenge him this way.
Sadly, tracey, its not just English and his National mates….at the risk of opprobrium…Labour did/does it too.
I agree. I confess I havent looked at who is opposing so picked on English. Mostly cos he has had his hands on finances for 9 years to make a genuinely christian impact on the lives of the vulnerable
Quite. Very loud whenever their prescriptive morality is challenged, but ask them for resources to make life bearable instead and he’s suddenly awfully quiet, or goes on a rant about how that’s Not The Government’s Job, and people need to be independent of the state.
Why?
It would still be their choice and not anybody else’s.
And, yes, someone choosing to die before their life becomes intolerable to them will free up resources that can be used to help others. That’s simply a fact and one that we need to accept and take into account when considering euthanasia laws.
“It would still be their choice and not anybody else’s.”
You’d have to make damn sure that it is a real ‘choice’…not something they have been marginalised or guilt tripped into making.
“See, I’m a truly virtuous member of the community because I choooose not to persist in consuming valuable and limited resources in keeping my terminally ill/degenerative diseased/disabled arse alive…”
Because, almost every single comments section in articles in MSM is liberally peppered with this narrative.
Yes.
Speaking of resources I can’t help wondering how many people would choose to end their lives with this legislation vs how many more would have improved lives if the costs, time & effort involved with implementing and administering this legislation were redirected into palliative care.
It shouldn’t mean that, Tracey, but the terms used in the bill are very ill-defined in my opinion, and I’m very worried about definition creep. Remember, in the law, it’s whatever the person requesting to end their life deems unbearable, not anyone else.
But it is an and situation not an or situation isnt it Matthew so
Unbearable pain; and
” Suffering from a terminal illness with a prognosis of six months or less, or have “a grievous and irremediable medical condition.”
Neither of those will be definable by the sufferer but by the medical profession?
So, whether they have a terminal illness or irredeemable medical condition is a medical diagnosis, sure, I am very conscious of that. I’m also conscious of the fact that it is an “and” relationship, not an “or.” But, the point is, not everyone who has a terminal illness or an incurable medical condition is in fact suffering at all, or in an “unbearable” fashion, at every given point after their diagnosis, but they could genuinely feel they are and be wrong, because of how life-shattering those diagnoses can be.
The point is that with the patient being the only one legally allowed to determine the unbearable threshold of pain, you get into a situation where as long as the two evaluators of the patient’s condition don’t feel the patient is actually lying, they can end their life for reasons Seymour or the people considering this law probably didn’t intend or anticipate, even if those medical professionals would disagree that they are in extreme suffering, and that their case isn’t one that should qualify. (This is why English claimed in the debate that people who are depressed might qualify- because they just need to be genuinely depressed to the point they’re not lying about how they feel about their suffering, and have either a terminal illness or qualifying medical condition at the same time) It seems obvious that the intent was that there be genuinely and objectively extreme suffering to the point that the patient’s determination of it being unbearable is reasonable, and that the patient’s opinion be given heavy weight in that determination. I feel it’s a huge mistake to allow no say to the two people evaluating the patient’s condition in whether that suffering is in fact objectively of an extreme nature that warrants them to be allowed to take their own life. There needs to be some degree of check on the patient’s own opinion, so that the evaluating practitioners can veto people who are seeking to end their life for highly subjective reasons, or for reasons that don’t relate in some way, even indirectly, to their condition or illness.
The same way that we should be worried about whether this bill safeguards sufficiently against involuntary euthanasia, we should also worry about it being used to allow people to end their own lives when they’re still able to live a happy life, but for whatever reason can’t see it at the time. Not everyone is always a perfect judge of their own circumstances, and there need to be safeguards against that given that the final decision is irrevocable.
A really thoughtful discussion – thanks, Matthew. I’ve also been thinking about this bill, although I can’t claim to have explored it as closely as you. I’ve got mixed feelings about this issue – definitely sympathy for people stuck at the moment with no choices, but concerned about loose definitions and possible complications. In particular, I worry about people who are feeling like a burden. Loneliness or lack of support can be very real issues for people with long term health problems but we should try to provide other possible solutions.
I certainly hope we can make progress with this issue, but I’m not comfortable with the bill as it stands. It’ll need a lot of work at select committee stage. Either that, or lessons could be learned from this bill and a more thorough version developed.
red-blooded
There are provisions to address the lonliness etc situation
“Either two or three medical practitioners must assess the patient independently, (a third is necessary if one or both of the first two cannot make a determination as to the mental capacity of the patient to make this decision)”
Having spoken to , mainly, nurses on this issue I partly see this Bill as protection and guidance for them. Nurses are in the frontline of this issue because they are the ones confronted by patients and family. By requests to assist dying. Who see the suffering. We need to be thinking as much about these professionals as the patient.
It is particularly vital that if this passes sufficient resources are put in place to support these professionals. In the high demand area of nursing not much is in place now to help nurses confronted by this issue with some of the support limited to ” just tell them it is illegal and you will talk to the dr aboyt upping pain relief”. That is not good enough without this proposed Law.
Mental capacity to make a decision is basically being intelligent enough to understand the concept of death, and presumably protects the mentally disabled, people who are unconscious etc. I think it’s drawing a long bow to see it as protecting people who are depressed or lonely and feeling like a burden (and whose feelings could be allieviated in other ways), cleangreen, below, describes his feelings when first dealing with his disability. Maybe someone in that situation would choose euthanasia, when over time they could develop other ways to manage and to find ongoing value in their lives. (cleangreen, I’m not presuming to comment on you in particular, just thinking about the kind of situation where I worry that a decision made at one point would cut off any other possibilities that couldn’t be foreseen at the time.)
Of course, the fact that you and I see mental capacity so differently illustrates one of the problems with the bill as it stands.
Again, I do support the aim of the bill, but I’ve got issues with it as it is currently drafted.
It is not just mental capacity. They must meet multiple factors of which that is one. Do you think 2 to 3 medical practioners will view lonliness and feeling like a burden as qualifying criteria for ” unbearable suffering” and less than 12 months to live? I dont.
” Providing full information and evaluating the request
This part of the bill is quite good, in that nobody can make a final decision on being assisted to die until they have been informed thoroughly of the nature of their condition, any other options for treatment or palliative care, the fact that they can change their mind at any time, informed of their rights both to talk to family, friends, etc… or not talk to them if they don’t want to, and there must be an effort made to ensure this person has not been pressured or compelled into the decision, in fact the attending practitioner is legally required to do this to the best of their abilities.
There is good evidence that making people aware of their options for end of life care including palliative care, and having them make a decision in advance actually decreases both unnecessary treatment and suffering, and desire for more radical solutions like euthanasia in cases where an option for reduced suffering exists that doesn’t require an early death or simply dying due to giving up, so discussing these options with patients in general is good policy, and I welcome its requirement in this bill because where these methods of giving dignity to the dying are utilized at a patient’s request they are a much more preferable outcome for everyone. ”
My hope is those opposing this will put energy into supporting the vulnerable. So come on Bill English, youve had 31 years maybe now you will work to support the vulnerable to thrive?
I have confidence in most of our medical professionals, Tracey, but this Bill is so poorly drafted in some areas that it both ties their hands and makes them consider information that is thoroughly irrelevant to making this decision in a reasonable fashion.
The Bill is very clear in the eligibility section that it’s only the patient’s decision about what is unbearable that qualifies them for eligibility, and that the evaluation is to establish eligibility according to the Bill. So essentially they’re restricted to only confirming that the patient feels their condition is unbearable, and they are not restricted to considering factors that are a direct or indirect result of their illness or condition in that evaluation. If a medical practitioner disagrees that the condition is unbearable but notes that the patient does feel it is, that does not disqualify them under the Bill.
It does limit you to people who are in a terminal condition or have a permanent, incurable illness, true. But among those people, it is absolutely open to factors that are irrelevant to that person’s condition being a driver for their request. The only requirement is that these factors contribute to “unbearable suffering”- you could literally be depressed because you lost a family member as well as your illness, and that could make you request this service, and it would be a factor that had to be considered in the evaluation.
Overall, very poor drafting. The evaluation should give medical staff the ability to make an independent consideration of what qualifies as “unbearable suffering,” not merely attest that the patient feels it, and they should be required to consider only factors related to their medical condition or illness.
Exactly right, Tracey.
In the other thread about this issue, I linked to an article which discussed the attitude of doctors and nurses. The conclusion was that doctors and nurses currently administer drugs, or withhold treatment, knowing that the patient concerned will probably die as a result. Some of these professionals may be breaking the law. They should not be in that position.
Lets remember that Dr Harold Shipman murdered about 250 patients (maybe more). I am not sure he would’ve been able to commit so many murders had similar legislation been in place in the UK.
Thanks for this Ross.
I concur with you Ross & Tracey,
This is a to swiftly produced bill with to many pitfalls for everyone.
Let s go sit arouund n while we all can think awhile.
Rushed bills often wind up being wrongly constructed as this bill is.
100% Red blooded, we must hope for a better outcome here.
After my chemical poisoning I was faced medicallly to revert to gentle less invasive “alternative medicine,” (IV’s + vitamins/minerals and herbs,) that the majority of the “conventional medical community” stll tries to avoid sadly as it was these “alternative” medications that 25yrs later that are taken now that is still keeping me alive and living in some resonable (isolated) lifestyle.
before end life choices are made all other options must be available to us all to have a choice for our own use, not to be ‘excusively’ controlled by the medical ‘establishment as they are draconian souls who understand less than we give them credit for.
This is as big a decision as the abortion debate many decades ago, and has some of the same features. As usual, it starts off with the argument that the legal right to end people’s lives will be incredibly rare, extremely well thought through by everyone having to make a decision through it all, and incredibly well regulated, but the reality is different:
https://teara.govt.nz/en/interactive/29033/abortion-rates
I am aware that the Dutch experience with euthenasia has not been bad overall, but the amount of careful groundwork laid by the entire Dutch medical profession over many decades , prior to the legislative change, meant that they were ready to carefully regulate doctors and educate families about the moments not to prosecute doctors and how to properly regulate it. We are not comparable to the Netherlands on this issue:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2733179/
I want to know if my taxes will go to subsidising killing people. I want to know how much. If this is not a voluntary procedure, then it should not be legal. If it is a voluntary procedure, then no taxpayer funding should go to it.
So this bill is being put to parliament with almost no support from the medical profession, and on the back of overwhelming opposition from the public to parliament against euthenasia only six months ago. What a damn insult to those who put their organisational force into it.
I recommend people read this Parlliamentary Select Committee report that thousands of New Zealanders contributed to:
https://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-NZ/SCR_74759/4d68a2f2e98ef91d75c1a179fe6dd1ec1b66cd24
It made no recommendation to go where this Bill is going.
I want to know why Seymour will do more to assist a dying person than those full of life. I want to know why English is outraged by this Bill but has damaged more lives than this Law would take. He has stood by for 31 years and watched while the disabled are treated like dogs. Their benefits cut. The challenges with ACC made harder. Some are born with disability and some are aquired. If you were working when disabled you get 80% of your earnings. If not working or born with a disability or disabled by illness you get subsistence. If anything English has stood by while some people feel forced to contemplate that death is better than tge life they have.
That is what I want to know.
And where is the current govt on raising, significantly the standard of living of our most vulnerable.
Well put Tracey,
David Seymour seems to be a bitter resentful soul that cares very little of human life and any means to improve the quality of all our lives including the poor, disabled; sick and dying.
“And where is the current govt on raising, significantly the standard of living of our most vulnerable.”
Labour has always struggled to see those with disability or illness as equally deserving of support as those who were once productive members of society and have been disabled through accident.
Look how Labour has been supportive of maintaining or extending ACC cover at the same time as ignoring or further disadvantaging those with impairments not covered by ACC.
There have been pre- election promises by Labour on issues relating to non ACC disabled which some of us have been told by the current incumbents will take some time to be addressed.
Some of us with long standing issues are seriously considering popping down to Welly when parliament opens in the New Year to remind them that we’re not dead yet and we expect them to at least listen to us.
That’s if we can come up with the $$$ for the trip….
100%
Ruth Dyson presided over a sweeping policy to make even the permanently disabled have to be reassessed every year. The stress this put on the disabled and their families seemed to escape them.
Ardern wants to champion children in poverty which is great but like low incomes few of our parties want to address our appalling treatment of the disabled.
Good move Rosemary;
Please let me know when you get ready as we may also join this delegation if we can.
We have already in 2011 had our proposal for those with ‘other disabilities’ recognised under this UN Charter inside our own NZ charter document given to the UN panel in 2012. ‘see under article 8 ‘Other disabilities’ as part of the ‘NZ declaration of the rights of the disabled’.
en.wikipedia.org/…ntion_on_the_Rights_of_Persons…
The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities is an international human rights treaty of the United Nations intended to protect the rights and dignity of …
NZ has signed up to this convention.
United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with …
http://www.odi.govt.nz/…ention-on-the-rights-of-persons...
United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. … United Nations Convention on the Rights …
So New Zealand’ has international obligations now.
Politicians need to be reminder not to discinate against us with cronic disabilities that are not cobvered under present health agencies or ACC to comply with the mamoranding of understanding the Government signed at the UN in 2012 to not disciminate against all those persons with disabilities under the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities
http://www.un.org/…/socdev/enable//rights/ahc3sum24may.doc
I wrote a blg two days ago about infringements against those of us with disabilities and sonme bloggers were unaware of our rights to “dignity” and other considerations. it seems that the general public are yet to understand we with disabilities have rights to be adhered to under the UN charter of disabled human rights. This is our cornerstone protection document now as Australia has confirmed this also.
Yes Rosemary we would be keen to join with you in the trip to Wellington too if allowed.
We assisted changes to the NZ Government submission to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
http://www.hrc.co.nz/…ts/people-disabilities/our-work/crpd
New Zealand ratified the Convention
we included in their submission in artilce 8 a addition of “other disability issues” where some of us are not currently recognised by the NZ medical ‘establishment as Austrlia, Canada, USA, Germany, Denmark and others do at present so this may help our cause to be given the ‘dignity and respect for services’ we are entitled to under the Disability convention now.
Let us know when you are arranging the trip to Wellington please with some notice.
Yep. It’s one of Labour’s big ideological holes IMO that rather than viewing work as something people do to effect positive outcomes in society, that work is somehow a measure of the dignity of a person in general. It’s a pathological attitude that leads to unjustifiable stigma against people who absolutely want to live in ways that will have them participate in and enrich our society, whether it’s paid work or not.
100% Ad.
Agreed.
Did you feel the same way about the overwhelming public opposition to repealling s59 of the Crimes Act?
I agreed with the Select Committee report on the issue.
Why don’t you go and read the Euthenasia one and find a position. that supports this bill.
So the number of polled kiwis supporting or disagreeing was just a red herring.
Nope.
Nothing in the few months since this bill was last introduced has altered the …very complicated, very divisive, and extremely contentiousnature of the issue, and you have to wonder why it is being repeatedly thrust upon us.
While I appreciate the careful work Matthew has done in outlining the holes in the bill, and suggesting amendments, there is a larger question as to whether our institutions are currently capable of holding to firm safeguards that are anything more than defensive paper trails. A society that is under continuous pressure to privilege expedience and usefulness above all things, with a few sentimental values thrown in, cannot be trusted to put these concerns to one side when considering matters of life and death, rendering any safeguards rather flexible. And as Tracey points out, people who lack the status and resources to fight back are permitted very few meaningful safeguards in life, and questions of consent are very hard to settle once a person is dead.
I do wish that progressives would see that their cherished ideals do not reliably play out under predatory capitalism in the same way as they might under a genuinely inclusive social democracy.
This.
Until we decide as a society to value people not money the risks will remain higher. I support euthanasia in principle, but I don’t trust the state or our political culture/processes to get this right just yet.
Me too
It’s not fixed in stone. If the legislation isn’t working as well as it should be it can be changed and amended.
But, IMO, we do need to start somewhere rather than just saying that it’s too hard.
And if the medical profession consider it unclear one of their bodies will quickly seek a court intervention to define terms?
I would hope so.
I don’t think it’s too hard. I think that we should be broadening the conversation out to look at what the risks are. Rosemary’s comments should be highlighted (and offsite, what disabled people are saying), and we need to understand those things in the context of 35 years of neoliberalism. Yes, legislation can be amended, doesn’t mean it will be, or that the people in charge at the time are working in our best interests. I wouldn’t have trusted Key’s govt to get this right for instance. I don’t even trust Ardern’s.
We need a big conversation in NZ around vulnerability and disability and what kind of society we want. This seems like an ideal time.
This is my position too- there are people who really, really, want and need the control and dignity over their death that this Bill will give them, and it’s not okay to not try to do this right, and do it now.
But we do need to look at the bits that some people are saying “too hard!” about, and come up with reasonable solutions before we can proceed safely. While this is a bill that could change our culture about death and make it much more healthy and dignified in some ways, it comes with enormous risks if we set it up incorrectly.
There are also big concerns among Māori groups, who talk about the concept of euthanasia being foreign to their culture. Sure, Seymour says that there’s majority support among Māori in his polling on this issue, but that could absolutely simply be the influence of colonization. That’s something we need to consider carefully before proceeding, too.
There are also big concerns among Māori groups, who talk about the concept of euthanasia being foreign to their culture.
Given that the bill is about voluntary euthanasia, there’s no issue. Anyone who feels voluntary euthanasia is foreign to their culture presumably won’t apply for it. And if they mean involuntary euthanasia is foreign to their culture, well it’s foreign to ours too.
There is absolutely nothing we can do to save Māori Culture in the way that it was. Culture changes all the time and, when confronted with another culture, changes even faster.
Yes, I’m sure that Māori culture didn’t have euthanasia. Many cultures didn’t including that which we’ve brought from England and other European countries.
None of those cultures had the capability of keeping a body alive for 15 years despite the person being, for all intents and purposes, dead. Instead, when some one got sick, they just waited for the natural course of events which would probably only take a few days and of which there was nothing that they could do about it.
Our new capabilities means that we have to pretty much ignore previous culture. If we continue to try to hold ourselves in the 19th century then we’re not going to come up with solutions to the problems that those new capabilities have bequeathed upon us.
EDIT: and what PM said.
Yeah, I’m just saying it’s something we do need to be sensitive to in this debate that we are potentially engaging in some colonialism here, and we need to listen to Māori voices in this debate and engage constructively with their concerns.
I think you’re right that the lack of euthanasia was likely due to different living conditions and that it’s not fundamentally something we’re imposing as European values so much as something that has become necessary to consider due to the conditions modern New Zealanders live in, but I think we do need to be open to the possibility that we’re wrong in that conclusion, or that the conditions modern New Zealanders live in are themselves an imposition of colonialism. Cheers.
I agree with much of what you say. Seymour wants to honour those dying but fucks over many of the vulnerable who are alive. English is morally outraged but has stood by and more recently presided over the degradation of the lives of the vulnerable living.
If we are not prepared to value the living and their right to thrive why are we moving toward the right for the state to help end lives?
I support the notion of the right to end our life. I support the need to support the medical professiionals who are already confronted with this issue daily. And I plead with our society to honour our vulnerable and accord tgem the right to thrive. Lets do the last 2 before the first.
I am not, on principle, in favour of euthanasia, though I am aware that mine is but one position among many, that there is often a fine line between passively allowing someone to die and speeding up the process, and that situations do arise upon which one would have to be callous to pass judgement. In cases like the latter it is within the capacities of the courts to be merciful rather than punitive.
But I am very much opposed to a codified system of euthanasia being introduced to a country that tends to be remiss about safe-guarding people it does not consider useful or valuable, and that lacks the infra-structure to firmly uphold its claimed safe-guards. We cannot even maintain safe work places, and rarely punish those who disregard workers’ safety, even when death results from their disregard.
This was meant to be an answer to Weka, but I struck the wrong “reply” button.
See, this is why I submitted that the bill shouldn’t proceed unless it gets a signoff from the disability community more broadly. (don’t think that’s explicitly in the post anywhere, but it bears mentioning) They are key stakeholders who need to be convinced that this Bill will be safe for them, and if there are any unaddressed concerns they have, that’s a sign that both Labour and the Greens should withdraw support from the bill as a bloc.
If we were a compassionate society that did look after vulnerable people well, would you support euthanasia legislation in principle?
As you can see, my position is a nuanced one, but probably not, because I would still have an issue with the codification, which would invite the search for ways past it, if someone doesn’t want Granny but does want her house. I also worry about people missing out on valuable last moments, or perhaps changing their minds. What if, with a sound mind, you made a living will that included a request for euthanasia, but found yourself enjoying life in a doolally state and decided against it? Which “you” would have the last say?
However, as I have said, I do not regard my own position as the only possible one, and am not hostile toward those who don’t share it. And I would be far more at ease with it in a society that treated vulnerable people well, and also, I would add, had the capacity to uphold its own safeguards and treat them with utmost seriousness.
Nuanced is what is called for imo.
I think if we were a different kind of society there would still be risk, but much smaller and probably worthwhile when put up against other people’s suffering. This is the sharp end of it that lots of pro people don’t like talking about. The fact that there will be mistakes and should we allow it anyway give the benefits elsewhere?
Is there a proposal to allow living wills for euthanasia? I think the Act would still require medical agreement and consultation etc, so no matter what you had said previously at the time you would still need to be considered competent to make the decision.
I think having a living will that prompts doctors to approach you about the process under predetermined circumstances is a great idea.
I also agree that there are concerns that we have the wrong sort of structural attitudes in our culture for euthanasia. I don’t view this as an insurmountable obstacle, so long as the process and the people involved aren’t coming from that place themselves, and are set up to avoid it being taken into consideration.
There’s no way to guarantee that the people involved aren’t coming from that place including doctors.
It’s not just about relatives wanting to bump off their loved ones stuff. I’m thinking about the people whose lives are so shitty they will want a way out sooner rather than later and who fit the criteria for assisted suicide. Shitty not simply because they are in pain and dying, but because they’ve been unsupported across their lives and now they have a way out. That’s the stuff that’s underpinning some of the tension in this debate I think. NZ treats some people so badly they’d rather be dead.
Yes, I absolutely agree with you. That’s why I think the legislation should require those evaluating a case to consider only factors relating directly or indirectly to the condition or illness that is supposed to be the cause of their suffering, and not other factors. (ie. depression is relevant to whether you are suffering unbearably if you are depressed because you have a limited time left to live, or because you’re constantly in pain. It’s not relevant if it’s because your dog died, or your family have devalued your existence, even though you have a legitimate reason to feel bad in all three cases) That way, if they start approving end of life applications on other grounds, like you’re pointing out, we can have SCENZ or whoever say to them “whoah, hold on, what you’re doing here looks medically negligent and non-compliant with the law, you need to stop or someone might charge you with a crime.”
I don’t think we’ll completely eliminate these factors because potentially people could lie and omit them from written reports or whatever and end up getting a second evaluation that agrees with them by chance. That’s absolutely a fair criticism of the bill. I think having one or two independent checks would be a sufficient safeguard if the person requesting an end of life option also appointed an advocate who had the power to stop the process as well and was present for both evaluations and the person being given lethal medicine, because they would be able to take into account whether they thought that the people involved were making a biased decision.
Weka’s right, Matthew. Take the last nine years: how can you compensate for the effects of the National Party on people’s will to live?
Weka’s usually right, and I pay great deference to her opinions. 😉 I just don’t think her being correct with her concern means we can’t structure a bill in a way that makes it difficult or impossible for her concern to actually result in an unjustified suicide. This bill is not yet that bill, but I think it could be, if the government parties put in the effort to reform it.
Good quip though, lol.
a way that makes it difficult or impossible for her concern to actually result in an unjustified suicide.
Health outcomes, including mental health, and life expectancy, don’t just correlate to poverty, but also to the GINI; inequality affects the wealthy too.
That suggests that everyone born or living in NZ between 1984 and the present is more likely to seek assistance in dying than a hypothetical ‘control group’.
We can already see this tendency in the suicide statistics.
In these circumstances, it’s easy for the result to be “unjustified”.
I agree statistics can indicate causative relationships like the one you point out, although I would caution that suicidal behaviour, including inappropriately seeking to use the proposed bill, is only more likely under those statistics, not guaranteed. The determinants of suicidal behaviour are a little more complicated than that, of course, not that they don’t exist within that group in larger numbers.
My point is that a well-designed process should have the health professionals taking into account whether a person’s reasons for assisted dying are related to their illness or medical condition or not, and only those ones reasons that, taken as a whole, genuinely constitute extreme and suffering and are related to their illness or condition should qualify them to go ahead with the process.
If we have the law set up that way, and on the whole medical professionals involved are well-trained and sensitive to how to carry out this process in a matter that is caring, professional, and respects the safeguards mandated by law, then I suspect we’ll avoid the pitfall you seem to be anticipating. Right now, the law does allow this sort of thing through, but I’m confident that there will be sufficient opposition to it if by the time it’s through select committee it hasn’t been tightened up sufficiently.
Yeah, this is actually one of my points against the bill in the post, if you don’t get overwhelmed by the wall-of-text: right now the only safeguard is that you get at least two independent evaluations before the process goes ahead, everything else is paperwork that keeps track of who’s responsible.
This does nothing to ensure that nobody is administered lethal medication against their will, which should be the very real concern in giving this ability to medical practitioners, especially in the context of prior malpractice in certain areas, like involuntary electroconvulsive therapy. Hence why I recommend a nominated observer by the patient (which could be either a family member, friend, or just a volunteer they picked out and trust who is obliged to honour their wishes and privacy requests) must be present and have the power to stop or pause the process at any time on their behalf.
And yes, I do agree that the structural pressures you list will be present in many people, if not all, who are eligible for the process created by this Bill. The Bill should rule out any suffering caused by those attitudes, either explicitly or through the way its eligibility provisions are structured. It currently does no such thing, and that too is deeply worrying.
This does nothing to ensure that nobody is administered lethal medication against their will…
That does seem like one hell of a gap for a voluntary euthanasia bill to have in it. Ensuring the “voluntary” part is one of the core tasks of such a bill.
That said, I wouldn’t want it to be so restricted that you couldn’t create living-will stuff like “If I’ve been in a vegetative state for X weeks, please see me off without further ado.”
Well, Seymour has essentially made a lot of good active chances for people to say no. One of my recommendations in my submission is that he instead restructure the wording so that failing to say “yes” is treated as a no unless and until the patient does manage to say “yes,” so that we’re always looking for active consent. Right now he doesn’t even have a provision in the bill for what happens when someone is offered the choice but doesn’t give a clear yes or no.
To be fair, if people are genuinely following the law in good faith and each one involved is acting as an individual, then Seymour’s structure will work. What it’s not well-designed to prevent is a culture of collusion to kill people without explicit consent, such as when, say, two doctors both know each other and have worked together in the past, and one of them gets assigned to independently review the other’s patient. If both doctors have, say, a dismissive view of the disabled, then they might unethically pressure the person towards killing themselves, and report that they followed the bill. In this situation, it would require someone accidentally barging in to them doing so in order to have any evidence of what they’d done, and to either prevent the killing, or to hold them responsible for murder. Requiring the patient to appoint an advocate who attends these sessions to ensure everything is above-board before the formal evaluations can start would prevent this.
Well said there Olwyn.
Above all else we need to protect life.
No Medical person or agency or service, has the right to decide who should live or die.
Even those who murder found gulty in a court of law is able to decide any death without a legal challege.
No Medical person or agency or service, has the right to decide who should live or die.
Er, yes. Why do you point out this truism? Has someone suggested they should have that right?
What are you even trying to say here, Cleangreen?
This bill, if followed, would put the decision broadly in the hands of the patient. There are some technical issues to work out to make sure that this intention is followed through with in reality and that the safeguards are accurate, but nobody is actually proposing that we let anyone get away with involuntary euthanasia, it’s just a question of whether the bill is well-written enough to prevent that.
(I think it will be with staff who are acting in good faith, what I’m worried about is places where the staff might act in bad faith then be assigned an independent reviewer who also acts in bad faith)
Ad
I’d say that there’s plenty of support for this Bill from the medical profession. I dont think many enjoy watching patients suffer.
Plenty of support for some action on the issue of euthanasia doesn’t necessarily equate with supporting the bill as it now stands. I’m with the Greens on this one – send it to select committee, give people the chance to have an input, look to plug holes and improve definitions, then see whether it’s been rendered fit for purpose or (if the basic concept has support) use it as a learning experience towards drafting a better bill.
Agree with this.
It is very hard for some in the medical profession to be truly honest about what already happens for obvious reasons.
There is support from some parts, and opposition from others.
Naturally, palliative carers are against it. They want to think their option is for everyone, which is a little arrogant in my view, although understandable- what I actually like about this Bill very much is that it steers people who didn’t know about the other options towards them instead if it meets their goals, which is good policy and good medicine.
My girlfriend (who has just qualified as a nurse, and doesn’t follow politics) was actually very surprised that there were medical people against it, though, so there are definitely many who are for it. I think the thing is, they are reluctant to submit as much because there is some very real stigma against openly identifying yourself as a supporter, not least because people might start looking at your patients who died to see if you potentially euthanized any of them, and even if you don’t hold with that sort of thing, that doesn’t mean someone won’t get the wrong idea.
I think the point about the infrastructure and preparation for this being in place is a good one, Ad, and another reason to proceed with caution even if we sort out all of the kinks in this law. It’s a reasonable point to make in a submission, if anyone wants to, I’d say- start the bill in shutdown mode, and give SCENZ and/or the Minister of Health the power to determine when the necessary infrastructure is in place to let it proceed.
I disagree with the idea of allowing these controversial procedures, like euthanasia and abortion, but withdrawing all taxpayer funds from them. That’s not freedom of conscience. That’s economic boycott.
My taxes go to plenty of things I don’t like, (and those things vary from petty objections, like subsidizing rugby, to moral and economic ones, like subsidizing dairy irrigation) but we decide democratically where they go, and if you look at the funding amounts, you can absolutely argue that people who do support these things are the ones funding them, given how small an amount of government money goes to it. If there’s a huge bloc that agrees with you that boycotting our collective money to euthanasia or abortion is okay, and we should restrict it only to people who can financially afford it themselves or get the help of a private charity, then we’ll have to accept it, I guess, but what you are doing there is not conscientious objection, you are trying to deny people access, and you need to own up to that when you call for it, because without taxpayer funding, there will inevitably be a shortfall of people who can’t afford these services, but would like them.
This is the same thing as doctors claiming they have a right not to inform their patients that there are other people who will perform an abortion for them when they object to doing it- it is an attempt to deny people access.
We have a three tier health system: private, public, and inaccessible.
Citizens for whom the system is inaccessible – whether because of underfunding, long waiting lists, or low income, necessarily experience worse health – often throughout their lives. You can work out how that becomes relevant to this bill on your own.
When user pays is dead and buried, and healthcare is genuinely accessible to all, it might be time to have this conversation.
Fourth tier is the NGOs (different from private). So kill and bury user pays, and the competitive funding models, and the utter fuckwittery of the neoliberal push to make everything function within a business model,
https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/really-sad-social-service-agency-disarray
+111
Private healthcare actually removes necessary resources from the public health system. Healthcare needs to be a public monopoly just like telecommunications and power.
This is actually a very relevant point. Cheers, OAB.
ps. I just trashed your “test” post, to clean up the thread. It went through fine, in case you didn’t see it.
Thanks.
And like that we hand the state the power to regulate killing of its citizens.
What next I wonder, what next…
In so many ways they already do and in other cases we torture them first… but it isnt a Law so some turn a blind eye.
So we should stop the state from killing anyone. Rather than blindly accept it.
No we don’t and you really need to stop with the lies.
You need to get a grip on reality, stop and think beyond your own experience for two minutes.
But then again you thinking the state killing people for economic reasons is acceptable, so I’m not sure you are the best advocate for this bill.
I gave DTB a pass on his reply hoping it wouldn’t get any disagreement, (and because I know he has a tendancy to try and state his position quickly in his first reply and then follow up substantively later, which is a great time-saver where all respondents agree) but I generally would prefer that people disagree respectfully in my posts and actually talk substantively about their opinions.
Draco has strong opinions, like most authors here, but he is not generally one to refuse to think about others’ perspectives, if they articulate them clearly.
What you’ve done, Adam, is just given short lines about your own opinion, not made any substantive argument for it. Perhaps try going into more detail about what your problems are, and why you think this bill will “kill people for economic reasons’ before you accuse an author on this site of being unwilling to listen to your perspective when he has a great history of replying in detail when reasonably challenged.
I’m at least somewhat a critic of this bill despite supporting its aims, and even I think it’s very unlikely that people will succeed in killing people for economic reasons in any significant numbers from this bill as it is now, so I think you’ll need to make a strong case if you want someone like Draco to change his mind.
Cheers.
The state won’t killing any one if this bill, or one like it, goes through.
EDIT: Clarify: This bill does not give the state the right to kill people.
That is absolutely true. What it gives is immunity to medical professionals, when they competently follow this process in good faith.
Killing someone for economic gain is basically the definition of bad faith.
https://thestandard.org.nz/nrt-on-submitting-on-the-end-of-life-choice-bill/#comment-1427245
Just saying.
Yes, I pointed out that there were economic considerations that needed to be addressed whether you like it or not.
At no point have I said that that should then allow anyone to kill someone else.
It’s not a question of like.
Re the murder thing, would you be ok with people who fit the criteria being provided drugs and killing themselves?
Lets not use the word murder, I’ve been told that offends to many people.
Let me try again then,
Re the killing thing (where someone else does the act that kills the person), would you be ok with people who fit the criteria being provided drugs and killing themselves?
Not happy weka, but not opposed.
With caveat that it’s not the state, and it is not another individual involved in the end of the life.
No, it’s simple reality.
If someone asks you to help them die in a way they choose, is that really killing them, Adam? Is it not instead giving them control and dignity over their body and their life?
This is bill largely focuses on terminal patients and people with conditions that are untreatable but lead to suffering. The intent of the bill is good in my opinion, what I’m worried about is the implementation. This bill rushes ahead to allowing practitioners to administer lethal medication at a patient’s request before we’ve even had a regime that lets patients take the medication themselves. That is the appropriate starting point, and it is a good safeguard against people breaking the law and killing people who don’t want to die.
The state already has the power to regulate things that can kill its citizens, by the by. Insufficient resources in health can kill citizens. Insufficient resources in welfare can kill citizens. This Bill isn’t some new moral ground we’re treading on to in that respect, and we’ve debated this issue twice before, too, so it’s not new in that respect, either. What is new is that there seems to be a will, in principle, to go ahead with this, the questions about whether we should from Parliamentarians are largely practical ones at the moment.
The state already has and always has had the power to regulate killing of its citizens. Parliament is sovereign.
And you don’t think that is a problem?
You don’t think that sometimes we will need to regulate when it’s appropriate for people to live and die? We already have a military, that’s absolutely a state-sponsored organization that has authority to kill people. I’m opposed to war on principle in most cases, and even I think that the state needs to have the power to have one.
Likewise, I might oppose the state killing people, but I don’t think that’s what this bill is, in principle. It is giving ordinary people in painful situations the power to decide the manner of their own death, taking away the threat of the state arresting people who help them in order to restore their autonomy and dignity. My objections are entirely practical.
Well, it may be a problem, but it’s not really a relevant problem to the post at hand, given that no involuntary euthanasia bill has been presented to Parliament
Nice side step to my question. And a personal dig in as well. Well done.
Well, what do you want? This bill isn’t about the state killing people. You may wish it was, but it isn’t.
Have a good holiday Psycho Milt.
‘The NZ Experiment’ continues..
The chemical companies will maintain control by leathal death while simultaneously ensuring that cannabis and natural remedies are sidelined for as long as possible, as broardly as possible..
For those commentators in this thread who don’t or can’t reconcile the government /parliaments position on these two topics
Captured and controlled by industry is the reason…
You’re going to have to explain your theory a bit better than that, One Two. While I have big objections to this bill as-is, it’s clear that it is written in such a way that there is no profit incentive to it, in fact killing people for profit would nullify the immunity, ie. make the people involved liable for murder.
Hi Matthew, I appreciated your article, and thought it was objectively written
I see it like this…
NZ Govt takes its medical directives largely from the US/UK/CANADA
The US has industry lobbyist dedicated to maintaining control of chemical drugs over natural plant based ‘medicine/treatments’, is well documented…
The chemical pharmaceutical companies have a conflict of interest between discussions and policy around life/death…they operate on both sides, which make the explanations more detailed/complex than I will go into here..
Simply, and in my opinion, the government of NZ has an ‘easier’ option by not pissing off its corporate sponsors, via the ‘assisted death’ legislation, than it does with the ‘medical marajuana’ legislation..
Medical weed progression will be closely monitored and curtailed by the chemical companies, which can be witnessed with the watering down of the bill…too much is at stake to the chemical industry to stand by passively..
That these two bills are presented simultaneously is not luck, nor is it an accident
Does David Clark meet David Seymour in the secret office where they run everything from, or do they just text one another?
lol.
If this were being driven by powerful corporates, One Two, why would the National Party oppose it?
Ask ‘The National Party’…
It’s convenient to have the bill put forward by Act, as it is convenient to have a mock showing of ‘counter balance’, this time by the NATS
In any case, I posted a number of comments on another thread of the same subject in recent times…
My position is that NZ as a nation is not equipped/mature enough to having this discussion…
We are long way short of being ready, yet here it comes..
It’s not going away, and will become ‘law’ sooner than later..with or without National Party support
They already know that though…
The Nats definitely have real opposition to this Bill, One Two. One of the provisions that Bill English got shouty about is something his wife went to court to prevent being policy on abortion- he’s not inventing his personal anger about this bill, he genuinely has problems with it. (This is the conscientious objection clause, which I praised in the main post)
The nats are largely opposed because there is no significant economic impact, so they’re gonna conscience vote based on whether they’re liberals or conservatives, and the liberals will vote based on whether they think the bill is genuinely workable, wheras the conservatives will oppose en masse because of moral objections.
I’m not opposed to thinking that there are political conspiracies out there to help enrich large corporations. I’m in fact sure that sometimes this does happen, even in New Zealand. But we should be careful about veering in this direction in every case, and I think in this case if you’re thinking it’s a corporate conspiracy, you’re saying that Labour, NZF, and the Greens are all in on it, which is a little ridiculous- Labour might be, but NZF and the Greens are almost reflexively going to be against anything like that.
“every case…
Nope, and that’s not what I’m saying about the political parties…
I’ll say it about the entire system though..captured by big interests and debt!
Nothing is ridiculous, except the ruling out of a serious, in depth conversation …which I don’t believe will happen..it’s not allowed in Nz..Why do you think that might be?
People are free to believe in the political system and frameworks all they like…
I look at the actors, the synergies between them..and past actions of those involved, and those that are likely involved..
Then I look examples abroad to see where the direction which the nz experiment will take..then I lower the bar…
So, you’re saying you have no actual evidence, even circumstantial, behind your allegation that this law is all about corporate profits? Because that’s sure what it sounds like.
“That these two bills are presented simultaneously is not luck, nor is it an accident”
So the Act and Labour Parties are in conspiracy?
While there is provision to avoid active coercion, there is no provision to rule out contributory effects from feeling devalued, or a burden on the community, that arguably have been observed in countries that allow euthanasia, and whether these could be termed “unbearable suffering.”
I don’t see any way a law could cover people’s feelings. Those who require a great deal of care right now are open to feeling devalued or that they’re a burden on their families/society, and there’s no sign of an epidemic of non-assisted suicide. What’s the mechanism by which the possibility of assistance to kill yourself makes you suddenly feel devalued or a burden on society if you didn’t feel that way already?
Actually the law as written makes someone’s feelings a prerequisite for them to qualify. You must FEEL that you are in unbearable suffering, and the evaluations must agree you feel that.
I guess “cover people’s feelings” is the wrong phrase. I’m all for laws that say “If you feel like you want to do this, far be it from the government to try and stop you.” Of less value are laws that say “Well, we can’t let you do this thing you want to do because it might make third party X feel bad.”
As someone with a lived experience of mental health problems, the subjectivity of that test worries me greatly. It is absolutely possible for people to have feelings that are completely out of line with reality. I think what the patient feels is a valid barometer for starting the process, but the evaluation that they be allowed to continue should test if those feelings are grounded in the reality of their circumstances, rather than unrelated poor mental health, or outside social pressure, feeling devalued and stigmatized, etc…
I think there is some risk in doing so that people with genuinely unbearable pain or suffering may feel like they are being asked to prove it, but I think that’s a reasonable ask before we have someone assist them to a death of their own choosing.
Finally, there is no separation between terminal or degenerative disease and disability- in fact the requirements can be read to explicitly include any sort of irreversible disability that involves progressive decline in capability, and this too is poorly defined and could broaden in definition over time if not spelled out explicitly in the Bill. There are very real concerns that this Bill will allow for disabled people to be euthanized…
You seem to be arguing here that the disabled must be excluded from eligibility for voluntary euthanasia, or disabled people could be involuntarily euthanised. On the face of it, that looks like a non-sequitur to me – what’s the logic for your conclusion?
I think we need to tread very carefully around the intersection of euthanasia and disability, and this Bill shows no signs to me that Seymour has even considered this issue. There are hugely complicated histories between the disability community and medical practice. I mentioned involuntary ECT earlier in the thread as an example, and there will be many who will worry that this bill will be abused and people will be killed without their consent, or pressured into taking this option, or that it will create a culture where we devalue people with disabalities even more than we already do. These are all valid feelings given the history of the community, and the Bill needs to address them. I think it has been intended to be cautious, but problems in the drafting mean it isn’t as cautious as it claims to be.
I think we need to be very careful in opening this bill up to people who aren’t already dying that we do so only in situations where their conditions could genuinely be viewed as unbearable and are actually incurable, not simply people who feel that way due to factors not related to their condition, and that we don’t get any sort of definition-creep into euthanising people whose conditions are merely challenging but can be managed and deserve agency and assistance, not stigma. I am not categorically opposed to it, but I think it is a cause for concern as the bill is currently drafted, and I think any concerns that haven’t attempted to be addressed in this area should be a deathblow to the Bill once it’s at second reading, and that all of them need to be sufficiently addressed by third reading.
I’m probably more at the ACT end of the scale on this, but I think there’s only so far that medical authorities should be allowed to overrule the wishes of their patients. I can understand the idea of wanting doctors not to just shrug their shoulders and kill somebody who’s depressed if they request it, but if I was to become a quadriplegic and didn’t fancy continuing living, I wouldn’t want doctors refusing assisted suicide on the basis that being a quadriplegic isn’t fatal and what kind of example would that set for the other quadriplegics? The basis of the bill has to be that people of sound mind get to decide for themselves.
The assumption might be that droves of people with a terminal illness will want to kill themselves. But I suspect the vast majority will choose to carry on living and won’t take up the option of assisted suicide. As David Lange once remarked regarding homosexual sex becoming legal, it’s not compulsory!
we don’t get any sort of definition-creep into euthanising people whose conditions are merely challenging but can be managed and deserve agency and assistance, not stigma
That is surely up to the individual? Personally, I dont like the idea of train drivers having to find another job because they’re sick of watching people walk in front of a train.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=3538206
https://www.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/opinion/83225293/rachel-stewart-a-train-drivers-view-of-death-on-the-tracks
The thing is, Ross, just because something is up to the individual doesn’t mean they’ll necessarily be in their right frame of mind when the decision is made. This bill currently only requires they be mentally competent- it doesn’t specify that people evaluating someone are allowed to rule them ineligible because of temporary emotional distress or other factors. A judge might rule that way if a case ends up in court, but it wouldn’t be due to anything explicitly written into this law, so we’d be relying on judges finding a legal justification for common sense, there. I am hoping for this to be addressed in Select Committee.
I don’t mind people ending their lives if they’re suffering and that’s truly something they would want regardless of what happens in the future. But there are very real implications of mental health and disability that this bill doesn’t seem to consider in its drafting, likely because it’s David Seymour writing it and he’s probably never met anyone willing to talk to him about either topic.
For instance, a bipolar person like Stephen Fry might well be highly mentally competent, but if he had a terminal illness or a qualifying medical condition under this act, it’s possible he’d have a depressive period, and might be able to go through this entire process and kill himself if the law doesn’t allow for the people evaluating him to take that into consideration. Isn’t that incredibly dangerous, given that he might in fact have wanted to continue living once he came out of that period?
I’ll be looking at what my submission should say after Christmas and will read every one one of the comments in this post. Excellent post and many thanks Matthew.
Glad if it helped you. I basically used it to draft my own submission, although since I sent it in early, I’ve since had some thoughts of other things I could have said on it. Go figure. Still, someone will likely submit on most of them.
Enjoy your holidays!
Matthew W
Can people put in more than one submission – provided it is not just repetitious?
And vice versa about holidays to you.
I think probably the best way to ensure you can get your say on anything that comes up is to ask to appear before the committee. (if you are in Wellington) I’m pretty sure it’s set up so that you can’t revise your submission once it’s sent so as to make it easier on Parliamentary staff to process submissions.
Talking about ‘legally enabled killing’…
….as a species ‘we’ could hardly claim that we understand how to ‘live’…
If you’re a member of this species, how can you tell? If you don’t know how to live you don’t really know that you’re not living. Even when I’m out of body, or ‘in the zone’ if you prefer, I’m still a member of the species.
Further, since you’re ignorant of how to live, how can you tell that everyone else lacks the information?
Edit: these are rhetorical questions, by the way.
well we are already killing ill people. We don’t have the beds to heal them in our hospitals when they need them.
but hey, that is ok i guess, its the ‘self determination’ that our more authoritarian moralistic fellows have an issue.
What we see here after all the efforts of all respondents shows that there is great “disquiet here at the throught of anyones life being ended by a decision made by regulatory authorities and/or health agencies/facilities rather than the person/persons involved here.
Our feeling is as always it must be the up entirely to the family first and the person whom is under the subject of “end of life choice’ that must rule the day.
otherwise we will potentially have a contion see as ‘summary executions’ one day by authorities with their vested interests placed before ours.
…there is great “disquiet here at the throught of anyones life being ended by a decision made by regulatory authorities and/or health agencies/facilities…
Well, that’s unsurprising if there are people in every discussion on the subject who conflate voluntary euthanasia or assisted suicide with “a decision made by regular authorities.” You bet we’d feel disquiet at the prospect of those people making those decisions, but that isn’t what’s being proposed, so how about your thoughts on what is being proposed?
Our feeling is as always it must be the up entirely to the family first…
WTF? Where does that come from? Maybe you’re happy to hand over decisions about your life and death over to your family, but please don’t use the verb “our.”
Some of those opposed to this Bill possibly also oppose abortion and gay marriage. Some people will forever be on the wrong side of history.
And as flawed as it is, this bill does actually make sure the decision is absolutely in the hands of the person requesting to end their life. It does allow for a doctor to administer the lethal drugs, if requested, but only after the patient finally consents one last time.
It does not, however, give any special rights to their family, (other than for the practicioner who processes the request to check if the patient wants to consult them about their decision) which I think is absolutely appropriate, as they might have very different views on this matter or be estranged, and a patient with a terminal illness or serious medical condition that qualifies for this process deserves their privacy, even if they’re ending their life. It might be heartbreaking for their family, but if they wanted to be involved in this decision then they needed to have made their family member feel like they could trust them with this information.
https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/346746/woman-granted-permission-to-collect-dead-partner-s-sperm
“…Justice Heath allowed the move before a substantive hearing could be held.
He found the High Court had jurisdiction to make the decision.
But he also said the ethical and moral dilemmas involved in fertility treatment were not well suited to the courts.
Justice Heath concluded the court could protect Ms Long’s right to approach the Ethics Committe…”
The judge wisely concluded that moral and ethical decisions are not well suited to legal (and by implication legislative) solutions. IMHO, the same principle applies to euthanasia.
I am not seeing the connection here. There is no legislation around taking sperm from dead people. If there was, I suspect there wouldnt have been an application to the High Court.
You might recall that Ms Lecretia Seales applied to the High Court to make a judgement about her wish for assistance to end her life. The Court sort of passed the buck and suggested legislation was the answer. So here we are.
Actually concluding an ethical question isn’t well suited to the courts when there is an available ethical committee is very different to concluding that it shouldn’t be legislated on. This is because courts must interpret existing legislation, so if there was no relevant law on the particular subject, (and I don’t think there was here) then an ethical committee is a much better place to hear arguments.
Legislators, however, make the law, so have no such barrier. There is sometimes an argument that sometimes reforming legislation or making legislation is worse than the status quo, (I’ve heard people make that argument regarding abortion law reform) but that’s very different again to saying that Parliament isn’t suited to making those sorts of decisions, it is instead usually one to say we’re divided and that the law is likely to change backwards and forwards if people make decisions one way or another, or at least there will be a backlash of some sort.
As Ross says, it is entirely appropriate for the court in this case to say any remedy would have to be handled by the legislative branch of government if the law is currently silent on a particular matter.
Posted this morning in the Herald….http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11963888
Now, for reasons which might become clear, I’m going to blockquote…
“David Seymour should buy a Lotto ticket
Something unusual happened in Parliament on Wednesday night of last week. Not the 76-44 vote in favour of the first reading of Seymour’s End of Life Choice Bill. That was entirely predictable.
No, it was what happened next which suggests that Seymour is very lucky indeed.
Seymour rose to move that the bill be referred to the Justice Select Committee which would have to report back within nine months. Just a procedural motion, right? Hmm.
The extraordinarily lucky thing for Seymour is that all eight members of that committee had just voted in favour of the first reading. All of them.
Call me suspicious, call me cynical, but that strikes me as … improbable. In fact, it’s a 2.6 per cent probability.
Here’s the maths: 76 of 120 members voted in favour, or a 63.33 per cent likelihood that any individual would vote in favour. The likelihood that 8 randomly selected members all voted in favour is therefore 0.6333 raised to the power of 8, which is 0.02588, or 2.6 per cent between friends.
So either Seymour is very lucky, or it wasn’t random at all. That it was in fact all arranged beforehand.
Now, that’s maybe clever inside politics, but maybe it’s also not very clever outside politics. Because it’s going to raise the level of scrutiny of how the Justice Select Committee goes about its work on this bill. Is it going to be an open, transparent and fair hearing of all New Zealanders who want to have their say?
When you come from a 25 per cent majority constituency (disabled people) who are alarmed to be directly in the loosey-goosey eligibility criteria cross hairs of this bill, open fair and transparent select committee dealings are minimum standard.”
This is an opinion piece by long time disability rights activist and leader of the ‘Not Dead Yet’ campaign.
All good so far?
In typical Herald fashion they have embedded in this article a video clip from a pro – euthanasia commentator…captioned thus…
“Bobbie Carroll, who has terminal blood cancer, fears how she will die if euthanasia isn’t legalised.”
Wendi Wicks’ piece raises some very interesting points and no doubt the more parliamentary procedural savvy in our midst can deduce if she has valid grounds for concern.
But christ on a raft Herald…up your frigging game!
Rosemary, you’re ruling out that the fact they’re on the justice committee having a determination on their opinion about euthanasia.
I would’ve guessed that it’s very rare for conservative MPs to be chosen for the justice select committee. Mostly, liberals of one stripe or another are more likely to be Justice spokespeople for left-wing parties, and if that trend generally holds true relative to the norm for each party, it would make SC members far more sympathetic to the bill.
I’m not surprised at all that in this case he’s referred it to a committee that supports the bill at the moment. The question will be whether it comes out of the SC in a shape that will allow their colleagues to support it to second and third reading.
Thanks Matthew for this post.
Enlightening and a great forum for discussion.
Unfortunately wage slavery calls and prevents me from engaging at any depth.
Cheers too, to the folk who have commented in a largely delicate fashion.
Euthanasia doesn’t sit well with me, (greedy rellies, life ‘seeming’ to have lost quality, growth often accompanies pain, pain is inevitable suffering is optional).
However very limited time and I feel better able to communicate the subtleties in the flesh.
Thanks again.
You’re welcome. I hope you enjoy your holidays, mate. Never apologize for having to focus on surviving or the family. That’s totally reasonable.
Hi Matthew, you may or may not have heard of this story:
https://www.salon.com/2013/10/07/euthanasia_for_emotional_pain_mercy_or_a_culture_of_death/
It has a bearing on some of the issues that have been touched upon in this post + comments. The main point is, in my view, whether we can ever properly evaluate unbearable mental suffering when this is not only inextricably linked to the physical sensation of pain but also when mental and emotional suffering are, in fact, the major cause of wanting to end one’s life even in the absence of physical pain and/or terminal (physiological) illness.