Cultural Safety and No-Go Belief Systems Meant Storm Severity, Clouded Response

An official single-issue focus on forestry in order to conform to an international climatic regime blinded regulators to the compounding threat of logging leaving in its wake mounds of debris to be washed away in bridge-busting waves.

Since it took office over five years ago climate has been the proclaimed centrepiece of all the Labour government’s objectives and along with it forestry as the instrument of sequestration and related offsets.

It was the “tool” of the nation being on the “right side of history.”

Mesmerised by the climatic taboo surrounding forestry a community of interest refrained from inquiring why the practice of removing all the tree components such as branches mandatory in other nations was ignored in New Zealand.

Commentators imbued with reverence for anything to do with forestry voiced concern over the heaps of timber debris building up on beaches, yet ignored the effect of the hinterland detritus, tailings, stockpiles in the event of flooding.

By the same token unquestioned cultural ideals imposed on wider emergency handling hampered the initial response to Cyclone Gabrielle when it initially broke on the Auckland conurbation.

An official and exhaustive and long-running review of the umbrella civil defence agency known as Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) ignored operational effectiveness.

It concentrated instead on what was described as “workplace culture.”

It was not focussed on the ability of the organisation to respond in operational terms to catastrophic events such as those inflicted by Cyclone Gabrielle.

Instead the attenuated review procedure delved into what was described as personnel “behaviours,” and especially into “bullying.”

The Auckland initial uncertain chain of command and ill-defined areas of responsibility coupled with an emphasis on holidays may one day be attributed to this priority given to the sociological rather than operational performance of the first-reaction emergency structure.

An obstacle to a lucid assessment of the effects of Cyclone Gabrielle will be the inability of the politico media sphere to climb down from its hallowed ideological imperatives.

The approval of housing estates on low-lying land has long been considered a known risk yet one worth taking.

Yet the ideological version of the extension of this in the form of the official encouragement to build industrial generating sites on flood plains now seriously requires questioning.

One example is the Helensville, Auckland, solar generating plant scheduled to be built on a neighbouring town dairy farm site which now demonstrably after two inundations in two years lies on an active river bed in the form of the Kaipara River estuary.

Similar large scale solar sites are planned for low-lying flood zones in the Wairarapa Valley.

In the doctrinal drive to meet international approval with such vulnerable showpiece sites there are now demonstrably being ignored the all-too-visible and present dangers posed by floods.

The series of government reviews on the Fire and Emergency sector’s sociological behaviour continued until right up to the advent of Cyclone Gabrielle.

The government for the past five years has strained all its ample communications sinews to warn of climate change and this has been echoed by its compliant media outlet chorus.

Yet in practical and operational terms the threat was treated as a long term one curable by variations in human behaviour in certain countries.

In the event and as the Nelson floods among other auguries indicated it was a short to medium term one. Imminent in fact.

Tangible evidence of the diffusion into sociological doctrines of natural disaster emergency management was evident by for example the determination of officials throughout the cyclone and its aftermath to inject in for government policy diversity’s sake linguistic words and nomenclature not immediately understood by the population as a whole.

An obvious recommendation is that in any real emergency the words used to describe any situation are the words that are understood by the bulk of the people listening to them.

The government and its bureaucracy preach that hostile weather “events” are on the increase.

The lesson of Cyclone Gabrielle indicates measures to be taken to ensure that the velocity of official belief systems is firewalled from the spheres of risk assessment and the parallel emergency management structure.

A separation of cultural and operational powers, in other words.

No time to Spare in Finding Freedom as Titles Deprivation Axe sharpens in UK

A Pretender is of the blood royal yet who has somehow found themselves sidelined from the royal line of succession and who insists on maintaining their right to the throne. Paramount is their own Restoration and in Harry’s case this recovery manoeuvre will be by proxy.

It is achievable by his wife Meghan in the mooted bid to enter United States politics probably as a congresswoman in a Democrat-run city such as New York or Los Angeles.

This chimes with the Hanoverian succession because Britain acquired and then lost the United States while ruled by this same dynasty now known as House of Windsor.

King Charles meanwhile will be advised that if the stormy pair get on the Coronation invitation list it inflates their value for another round of media stunts at the monarchy’s expense.

The couple’s alternative trans Atlantic option has been made more intense by the threatened re-activation of the Titles Deprivation Act originally applied after World War 1 to prevent the German-based branch of the Hanoverians from flaunting their titles and Honours in Britain.

Applied to Harry and Meghan this is serious because by law they could be restricted to just plain Mr & Mrs with the consequent evaporation of their mass media value.

This sector’s formula is an inverse one. Low doings in high places.

The lower the doing and the higher the status of the person doing it, the greater the demand and thus the value

The Danish monarchy (pictured) in the last few months picked up on the problem of princely titles becoming lightning rods for excitable institutional commercial media prurience and reduced Its own surplus familial title-holders to the more manageable rank of Count.

In the United States, a republic, titles are only applied to those in elective public service.

This means that upon election Meghan would forever be known by her highest ranking obtained such as Congresswoman, Senator, or given fevered speculation, Madam President.

Harry meanwhile would be endowed with the title Ambassador once he becomes a United States citizen and officially represents it overseas.

Historically the Pretender has gathered around them a court which proclaims the justness of their cause and which also served as a focal point to exhibit the force of arms ready to expedite the restoration.

As a modern Pretender Harry has combined the roles of a princely court and men-at-arms.

He uses as propaganda and attack arm various media institutions such as broadcasters, live streamers, newspaper chains, book publishers and assorted hagiographers.

In the will-he-wont-he? Around whether or not he will attend his father King Charles’ coronation he may decide for example to turn up as a commentator for a United States broadcaster.

Family feuds it is said start at weddings and are resolved at funerals.

The high hatting of Meghan began at their royal wedding as we are constantly and confidently informed.

The wrath instead of cooling only heated up upon the funeral of Her Majesty head of the family that Harry declares must be “saved from itself” and upon which Harry has imposed a standing order for an “apology” of imperial dimensions.

In Germany the Pretenders remain socially rather than politically prominent. Residual Hanoverian Pretenders are the Dukes of Brunswick and Cumberland.

Yet within living memory there lingers an experience leading to an impression that highly entitled and disaffected Hanoverians pose a threat to stability.

An evolving body of documentary evidence supports the suspicion that following his Abdication King Edward V111 and his consort now the Duke and Duchess of Windsor intrigued with Nazi Germany about becoming puppet rulers of Britain and its Empire in the event of a German victory in World War 2.

Harry and Meghan are hardly in this league, to be fair.

Commonwealth governments were consulted prior to the Abdication of Edward V111.

As Duke and Duchess of Sussex there can be no royal parade without them raining on it. Their white anting of the monarchical structure imperils the Commonwealth and as the Coronation draws near Commonwealth leaders will advocate sterner measures than the existing hope-for-the-best ones.