Five Questions for Dr Don Brash..............................
Nobody today in so many different roles and for quite so long has stood at the centre of public life so enduringly as Don Brash. Economist, businessman, banker, politician, the former Governor of the Reserve Bank and leader of the National Party has defied typecasting. At one and the same time severe yet extravagant, austere yet colourful, scholarly yet populist, he has contrived always to reconfigure himself around the times. Now he has stridently intervened in institutionally-fuelled separatism. Shrouded in a protective veneer of high-minded fashionable purpose that makes ordinary people fearful to question it, Dr Brash vehemently, unequivocally declares the voguish syndrome as ultimately destined to tear the nation apart......
You are often considered to be at heart primarily concerned with matters economic and their corresponding data. Yet here you are now immersing yourself in what many might consider a socio-ethical issue?
Yes, most of my career has been about monetary policy, banking, and economic issues more generally. But my interest in economics has always been because of my interest in the well-being of society more generally. I have long felt, for example, that it will be difficult or impossible to maintain a broadly egalitarian society in New Zealand – the kind of society in which I was brought up – if average living standards fall too far below those in Australia because of the ease with which skilled New Zealanders can cross the Tasman for very much higher incomes in Sydney or Melbourne.
If we want the kind of healthcare which those in advanced developed countries take for granted, we have to have the living standards to support that healthcare. A few years ago, there was a big debate about whether Pharmac should subsidize the provision of Herceptin for the treatment of certain kinds of breast cancer, and it was noted that Australia did so. The fact of the matter was that at that time virtually all the countries which subsidized access to Herceptin had higher living standards than New Zealand did; those which did not provide a subsidy, had lower living standards – we were right on the cusp. For me, interest in economics has always been about the implications of economic policy for the well-being of society.
Hence, I was strongly opposed to inflation in part at least because of the totally capricious effects which inflation has on wealth distribution – those who save in fixed interest instruments being thoroughly gutted by inflation, while those who borrow heavily to invest in, say, property, make huge and totally untaxed gains with little or no effort. That has always seemed to me to be grossly unjust.
Will the Hobson’s Pledge Movement become a force in the pending general election?I certainly hope so. I find it very depressing that the National Party has moved such a long way from its roots in this policy area. In 2002, Bill English gave a lengthy and very thoughtful speech, demonstrating clearly that Maori chiefs had ceded sovereignty in signing the Treaty and arguing that the only way for a peaceful future for New Zealand was a “single standard of citizenship for all”.
In May 2003, he pledged that a future National Government would scrap separate Maori electorates, as the Royal Commission on the Electoral System had recommended in the late eighties if MMP were adopted. I made similar commitments when I was Leader of the National Party, as did John Key in the election campaign of 2008. And yet we’ve seen the National-led Government retreat a very long way from that position.
I applaud the fact that the current Government has accelerated the resolution of historical grievances, but utterly deplore the fact that too often resolution has involved not just financial redress but also “co-governance”.
We see the proposed amendment to the RMA requiring all local councils to invite their local tribes into so-called “iwi participation agreements”, involving co-governance on a grand scale. We saw the legislation establishing the Auckland super-city requiring an Independent Maori Statutory Board, with the Auckland Council giving members of that unelected Board voting rights on most Auckland Council committees.
We see the Government negotiating behind closed doors with the so-called Iwi Leaders Group to give tribes some form of special influence over the allocation of water, despite pretending to believe that “nobody owns water”. We see a proposal to make half the members of the Hauraki Gulf Forum tribal appointees.
The myth that the Treaty of Waitangi created some kind of “partnership” between Maori on the one hand (or more accurately, those who can claim at least one Maori ancestor, always now along with ancestors of other ethnicities) and the rest of us on the other is increasingly accepted as Holy Writ, subscribing to which is becoming essential for many positions in the public sector.
So I’m very much hoping that Hobson’s Pledge can help to substantially reverse this highly undemocratic drift after the next election.
You say that the National government is “pandering” to “separatist demands.” Which of these demands do you consider the most dangerous?
Where do I start? I’ve just listed some of the specific policies which are totally inconsistent with any reasonable definition of democracy. Most of those specific policies stem from the underlying myth that the Treaty established some kind of “partnership” between those with a Maori ancestor and those of us without, as I’ve just mentioned. But as David Lange said in the Bruce Jesson Memorial Lecture in 2000, “the Court of Appeal once, absurdly, described [the Treaty] as a partnership between races, but it obviously is not. The Treaty itself contains no principles which can usefully guide government or courts.... To go further than that is to acknowledge the existence of undemocratic forms of rights, entitlements, or sovereignty.”
All the specific examples I gave in answer to the previous question stem from the underlying nonsense that there are two (and only two!) distinct groups of New Zealanders, those with preferential constitutional rights and those without them. This is leading New Zealand to disaster with a whole generation of part-Maori believing that they really do have superior constitutional rights to the rest of us.
To what degree would you ascribe this separatist development agitation as being primarily a project of the political class from whatever background?
Certainly, I think what you call the “political class” is the main driver of this separatist agitation, together with arguably most of the educational establishment, where adherence to so-called “Treaty principles” seems to be an absolute prerequisite for appointment to any teaching or leadership position.
The same is true in the public healthcare sector. But there is plenty of evidence that large numbers of the “general public” do not support the separatist agenda but are literally cowed into silence on the issue.
I regularly get people sidle up to me in the street and, after looking furtively up and down the street lest they are recognized by friends or acquaintances, tell me that they strongly agree with me. One university professor did this recently, but swore me not to mention his name or university department. And some of these people are Maori.
Of course, Hobson’s Pledge has two official spokespeople, one of whom is me and the other is Casey Costello, a woman of Ngapuhi and Anglo-Irish ancestry. But two of our very strongest supporters (though not members of our council) are Maori – one a prominent member of the Ngapuhi tribe and the other Ngati Porou.
The latter was a member of our council when we first established Hobson’s Pledge but, because he is closely associated with a political party, withdrew lest his membership of Hobson’s Pledge raise a question about whether we are a front for the political party he is closely associated with.
He resents the separatist agenda because he believes strongly that it is patronizing, implying that Maori aren’t quite good enough to make it successfully without these constitutional preferences.
Bearing in mind your underpinning career in banking, economics and looking now at the broader picture: where is the country now in your view in terms of nuts and bolts things such as balance of payments and foreign debt?
Compared with some other countries, we are in a good spot, with the economy growing, unemployment fairly low and government debt modest relative to GDP. Our banking sector is in reasonable shape. Even the extent of the country’s (public and private sector) total net external indebtedness is somewhat better than it was a decade ago, though still high by developed country standards.
But there are significant problems just below the surface of that apparently rosy picture. Yes, the economy is growing, but that is largely because the number of people in the workforce is growing strongly because of a high level of net immigration: productivity, and thus per capita income, is growing very slowly indeed, and the Government’s initial objective of closing the income gap with Australia by 2025 is not only not going to be achieved, the gap hasn’t reduced materially over the last eight years.
The ratio of government debt to GDP is modest by the standards of many other developed countries, but the Key Government did absolutely nothing to prepare the population for the need to adjust, for example, the age of eligibility for New Zealand Superannuation if government debt is not to explode, relative to GDP, over the next few decades. (Mr English, to his credit, has refused to renew Mr Key’s pledge on this issue.)
And while the country’s net external indebtedness, relative to GDP, has improved somewhat in recent years, that external indebtedness remains at a high level, the consequence of New Zealand’s running a current account balance of payments deficit every year since 1974. Much of that deficit has been funded by banks borrowing on the international markets to fund the explosion of private sector housing debt, the result in turn of another serious policy failing, the failure to deal with the enormous increase in the price of housing (or more accurately, of residential land).
| From the This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | Friday 3 March 2017 |
Will alert environmentalists, Greens, to renewable value , emissions reduction, organics
Napier advanced agri process technology specialist TEKAM is bringing to New Zealand Peter Franke a world leader in turning agricultural waste into electricity and in the process ridding farms of the effluent which increasingly threatens drinking water.
Mr Franke is the founder of Germany’s Bio Ost which is a leading developer of closed loop systems which collect effluent, notably the dairy version, and convert it into energy for refrigeration and other milking systems, and also for distribution into the national grid.
These closed loop effluent-to-power systems are commonplace in Germany where installers are offered generous subsidies to install them.
The other Baltic nation leading in closed loop effluent-to-power is Denmark.
The Danish government has set a short term target of up to 50% of livestock manure to be made into this green energy supply.
Power derived from biogas and fed into the national grid is exempt from taxation in Denmark.
Mr Franke will advise on the installation and commissioning of on-farm plants and will outline returns to users in terms of energy recovery and in obtaining fertiliser by-products.
He is expected also to talk to local government officials about the value of the plants in reducing runoff contamination threats and also how the plants reduce methane emissions.
Similarly he will outline the benefit in which weed seeds and pathogens are killed during the biomass digestion process, thus lessening the farm need for synthetic herbicides and pesticides.
Ken Evans of TEKAM said that in his New Zealand visit Mr Franke will focus exclusively on discussing the technology and the cost-benefits of the on-farm bio gas installations.
Mr Evans’ TEKAM organisation is working in conjunction with Napier Engineering & Contracting on introducing the effluent-to-energy technology to New Zealand.
He noted that he did not anticipate any discussion of introducing state incentives, subsidies for these plants such as exist in Europe.
Mr Franke instead he said would focus on the practical evidence of his company’s world wide effluent-to-energy installations.
The problem in New Zealand of effluent finding its way into ground water would though be a priority topic, he said.
According to Mr Evans, New Zealand had been an early developer of dairy waste into energy conversion systems. But these early plants along with their associated research and development had been abandoned when the millennialist energy crisis scare failed to materialise.
| From the This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | Monday 27 February 2017 ||
Five questions for Washington insider Scot Faulkner
The newly installed Trump Administration continues to catch New Zealand officialdom by surprise. So MSC Newswire asked Washington insider Scot Faulkner (above) what Wellington’s response should in fact be? Mr Faulkner was elected the first Chief Administrative Officer of the U.S. House of Representatives. His reforms became a model for the operation of national parliaments around the world.
The New Zealand Foreign Ministry has set up a special focus group solely for the purpose of identifying early warning of new policies promulgated by President Trump, the ones which will have an impact on this country. Can you short circuit this by helpfully forecasting any of these pending surprise policies?
The New Zealand Foreign Ministry’s Trump Task Force will only be of value if it discards long held assumptions and embrace a totally new way of thinking and acting. Trying to predict Trump through traditional means, such as monitoring after-the-fact media, is like using ouija boards, tarot cards, and horoscopes.
The Ministry’s primary objective should be to move at “Trump speed” and navigate in Trump’s world. Non traditional sources, non traditional methods will be keys to success. Thinking like a visionary risk-taking entrepreneur instead of a politician is the first step into this new reality.
Trump is unique. No one like him has ever been the President of the United States. While a few Presidents had business experience, their main credentials were either the military or government. America usually faced political or military crises. The 2007-2008 economic collapse convinced most Americans that something radical was necessary. So they rallied around a businessman who was known to most as a reality television star. As Trump stated, “everyone else has failed you – what do you have to lose? Try me.”
Trump’s unique background means unique thought patterns and processes. President Trump gets his ideas, news, and validation from places never before involved in governing. He is fearless, non linear. He embraces chaos, acts on intuition, moves quickly, and uses surprise as a strategic weapon. Sometimes only he knows the ultimate objective. He is a student of military history, especially Sun Tzu. That is what gave him the winning edge in business, the Republican primaries, and the 2016 general election.
Trump’s new Administration is already being tested by China, Russia, and a variety of other nations. President Trump’s responses will indicate many things: how fast he responds, how he responds, how he views the challenge and the challenger, how he frames the challenge within his existing world view, how willing is he to vary from stated positions to address a unique situation, how willing is he to escalate, whose advice does he value, who he collaborates with, and who, how, and what does he communicate regarding the challenge to Congress, the American public, and other nations.
New Zealand needs to understand that the next four to eight years has a very different global player. Trump’s approach will be very personal, intimate, intuitive, immediate, chaotic, and against all conventional wisdom, very successful.
All the indications are that the New Zealand diplomatic apparatus in New York and Washington was wrong footed by the Trump ascendancy. This led to falling in line with the Obama era last moment positioning of New Zealand as co-endorser of the UN anti-Israel resolution. Does New Zealand need to backtrack here?
New Zealand should always be wary of being pulled into American politics. Obama’s last minute swipe at Israel during his waning days as President should have been avoided at all costs. Obama’s behind the scenes orchestration of the resolution, which was being delayed until the new Administration, was ill-advised and dilatory. It undermined decades of America being a positive force in the region.
President Trump is a great friend of Israel. He and his team believe that, historically, enemies of America have funded the radical elements of the Palestinian cause.
Trump is committed, heart & soul, to destroying radical Islam and reining-in Iran. His priority is working with those nations that share his view. He sees Israel, and the moderate Arab governments, like Egypt and Jordan, as allies in eradicating ISIS, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and their regional and tribal affiliates throughout the Arab world, Asia, and Africa.Trump and his foreign policy team fundamentally differ from the Neo-conservatives who surrounded President George W. Bush. They adhere more to the Reagan-Thatcher/John-Paul II approach of destroying tyranny, but not trying to second guess centuries of local custom through nation building. America’s role is to inspire, not intervene, in a nation’s journey toward a freer society.Israeli settlements are far more complex than the media portrays. Palestinian contractors and workers build Israeli settlements. West Bank unemployment soars whenever Israel slows or suspends new settlements. The chasm between peaceful, free, and democratic Israel and violent, oppressive, Islamic failed states in the region is stark. Land for Peace has been a chimera for Israel. De-radicalizing Palestinian leaders and their movement would go further in creating lasting peace than continuing to place the onus on Israel.
The Anti-Israel Resolution validated Trump’s view that the United Nations is currently there to promote radical anti-Western policies while wasting vast sums of money. It further proves his wisdom of pursuing America’s interests through bilateral, not multilateral, arrangements.
New Zealand has supported in spirit the US-EU trade embargo against Russia called up by President Obama. Is there a defined timetable to conclude this embargo?
There is no defined timetable for ending or modifying the trade embargo against Russia.
President Trump and his inner circle have a non-ideological practical “America first” world view. It harkens back to the 17th/18th Centuries. During that era, Western nations united to stop the expansion of the Ottoman Empire then competed, sometimes violently, to dominate world trade.
President Trump wants to build relationships with Russia and China for ridding the world of rogue players – radical Islam, Iran, and North Korea. This is why he picked Rex Tillerson, who has strong relationships with Russia as his Secretary of State, and Iowa Governor Terry Branstad, who is friends with President Xi Jinping, as Ambassador to China. This is also why Trump picked a skilled fighter, James Mattis, as his Secretary of Defense.
Trump’s trade and business team is equally ready to help America win in world commerce. Wilbur Ross, Steve Mnuckin, and Robert Lighthizer will aggressively negotiate favorable trade agreements and rebuild U.S. competitiveness.
Russia remains problematic as its adventurism in Ukraine and intimidation of the Baltic States complicates Trump’s desire to be “frenemies”. Tillerson will be challenged to craft the right mix of incentives and punishments to refocus Russo-American relations. The current US-EU trade embargo will be assessed within this context.
The Transpacific Partnership Agreement signed in Auckland last year was No 1 on President Trump’s hit list. Looking at the longer term where do you see the advantages/disadvantages in this?
President Trump is all about building one-on-one personal relationships with world leaders. Bi-lateral relationships were his strong suit in business and will serve him well as President. They allow him more flexibility and agility. He has little interest in multi-lateral agreements or entities.
This is why TPP was in his cross hairs as a candidate and now as President. New Zealand and other TPP nations need to offer their best “value proposition” for trade relationships that will benefit the U.S. as much as themselves. These are the kinds of agreements that will get Trump’s attention and become his priority.
Trump prides himself on the foreign investments in America he has facilitated or promoted. He wants American companies to “come home” to America, and foreign companies to settle in America. Trump’s goal is to bring the best of the world to America to rebuild infrastructure and generate lasting employment opportunities. There is a new world of opportunity for New Zealand investment and partnering in America.
Given the available evidence it is hard not to conclude that officials here have only a threadbare understanding of what is going on in the relevant circles of United States policymaking. Where should they be looking? Who should they be talking to now?
Trump’s tweets remain the best original source. Trump won the nomination and the general election by going directly to the public. Over 50 million Americans follow Trump on Twitter and Facebook. The Washington-New York media have become completely irrelevant to the Trump Administration and to Trump’s America.
President Trump has revolutionized the way policy is created, promoted, and implemented. The establishments within the Federal Government, Congress, media, academia, and policy forums, still do not have a clue about what is happening before their eyes.
America’s post-Cold War drift through four failed Presidents has come to an end.
Reagan won the Cold War by using skills he developed in movies and television to command the world stage. Those skills destroyed the Soviet Empire, relaunched the U.S. economy, and redefined the role of government. Trump is using his business and reality television skills to command the world stage for himself and the United States. Like Reagan, Trump is seeking to defeat tyranny, in this case radical Islam, relaunch the U.S. economy, and not just redefine, but completely reinvent government. The establishment dismissed Reagan until he succeeded. The establishment is dismissing Trump, and will be just as embarrassed should he succeed.
Conservative talk radio speaks for Trump and puts his actions and tweets into context. They aggressively expose the liberal media and the Democrats when they promote fake news and conspiracies about Trump. Trump watches Fox news, listens & calls into conservative talk radio, and avidly follows their social media posts. Each validates the other. The most articulate and insightful conservative commentators are Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levine, and Chris Plante. Washington-based WMAL radio hosts all three.
Broom to Boardroom Career Path Praised & Recommended for Public Sector Take up .
The MSC Newswire service sector panel again this year highly commended the New Zealand service sector for the way in which it consistently presented a cheerful and helpful approach to customers. The retail sector was singled out for special praise.
Panelists singled out the way in which the grocery and hardware multiples especially infused their staff work with a sense of promotion scope and therefore opportunity.
The multiples were also praised for their staff selection procedures which at the outset and regardless of age or formal qualifications obviously identified two key personal elements---aptitude and attitude.
In the technical category of proficiencies observed the panel included inventory/re-stocking, along with IT and credit and cash-handling skills, and also product knowledge.
Also singled out was what the panel described as a “broom to boardroom” career path, meaning that staff were presented at the start with the opportunity of a through career path starting with everyday chores and culminating at top management.
The multiples were praised for blending their own mix of on-the-job training with targeted tertiary academic study.
The panel considered that the multiples had struck the optimum balance between applied and theoretical induction and training.
In this survey the panel evaluated both New Zealand and foreign-owned multiples.
Also singled out for mention was the way in which the multiples had integrated staff of all ages.
The panel identified employment selection based on age as elsewhere a continuing New Zealand personnel problem.
The panel made special note of the way in which the multiples offered opportunities to mothers returning to the work force.
The survey was empirical and based on impressions gained nationwide.
The panel suggested an official and formal study of the way in which the multiples had successfully solved the problem of blending basic operating technical skills with people skills. Elements could and should be implemented in the public sector, the panel advised.
| From the This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. || Monday 13 February, 2017 ||
Uninitiated can wreck their public service careers by mishandling them
Jargon in its politically correct form it is now being actively promoted and thus its adoption officially encouraged.Instead of relying on jarring clunky acronyms or neologisms, made-up new words, the new jargon is dangerous in that it is comprised of everyday words that have become re-purposed.
Peter Isaac is the author of The Definitive Bureaucrats’ Survival Guide to Workplace Jargon and also The New Gobbledygook. This selection cites the face-value innocuous words that in recent years, months even, have suddenly become perilous to their unindoctrinated users.
Community Now refers only to pressure groups or voters especially in the gender and sexual orientation category. No longer now used to describe and locations or places such as villages, towns, or settlement.
Equity Refers now to opportunities available to, or being currently enjoyed by, minority categories, even if the minority is in fact a majority. Usually refers to women, ethnics, and other groups considered to be disadvantaged. It does not encompass the aged. It was once applied as “social” equity. But the short form has now become standard. It has nothing to do with investment stocks & shares.
ConversationNow substitutes for word discussion. Or sometimes, dialogue. Its application is to avoid conveying any hint at all that one side in the exchange is superior in any way to the other. Or that the exchange might contain any implied threat as in saying “I will talk to him about what he did.” Indicates equality, or “equity.”
He, she, him her, Mr, Mrs Specific gender definitions have turned lethal. This is an area of intense rawness and all the more so because it is mostly unrecognised. If you are referring to an individual simply identify them by using their first and last names. Unless you happen to be demonstrably female yourself, do not use the term Ms because it is considered condescending. In this gender value judgment context you must deliberately sidestep conventional bureaucratic formality and protocol.
Wellness Health has taken on taboo status and fitness now refers to athletes or to business managers and their schemes. Health has been abandoned because it is considered to refer to ill-health, and to convey a biblical image of the halt and the lame. This may be the reason why when the word is actually spoken broadcasting officials pronounce it as ”halph.” Health is also shunned because of its association with health spas and luxury resorts, i.e. not equitable. Wellness is a rare example in the politically correct glossary of concocted jargon instead of the more usual changed meaning .
Evidence Actually now means research. Used as replacement for proof, as in evidence-based. It avoids implying anything pejorative or suspect. It conveys opinion-neutrality. Rarely now refers to anything legal.
| From the This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | Thursday 9 February 2017 ||
Exporters Must Persuade Government to Start Backtracking.
Russia’s ban on importing New Zealand beef on the grounds of discovering additives in it has in fact all the characteristics of a reprisal for participating in the United States-invoked embargo.
New Zealand is viewed as an easy target as the Russians now start retaliating against those nations which supported the blockade.
The embargo mainly involved the United States and the EU. But anxious to appease the United States New Zealand deliberately demonstrated “solidarity” with the US, in the words of former premier John Key.
In return for this New Zealand took pole position in the now defunct Trans Pacific Partnership Treaty and as a special reward Auckland was chosen as the venue for participants to sign it.
There are indications that Russia will use several hygiene scares in recent years to choke off supplies of New Zealand dairy products.
At one time Russia was considered as New Zealand’s prime emerging market. But since the 1980s Russia has been supplanted by Asia.
It is here though that the US embargo on Russia did its most serious damage to New Zealand trade.
This occurred when France was prevented from sending its milk to Russia, along with milk exports from several other EU nations.
The result was the EU milk surplus now found its way to China, severely depressing demand for New Zealand milk.
New Zealand’s position in the US-led blockade of Russia will remain a problem for some years to come even though the embargo itself has now become moot under President Donald Trump.
Commodity exporters are trying to cool the ardour of New Zealand legislators in the matter of supporting the embargo.
This will allow them to mend fences with the Russians.
One advantage here will be the resignation at the end of last year of New Zealand premier John Key, known to be an ardent supporter of former United States president Barack Obama.
The public and indeed New Zealand’s legislators in the matter of the long-running embargo have something in common in that they have both been unaware of the consequences of participating in the blockade.
In France, in contrast, the consequences are well understood. Russia’s president Putin (pictured) deliberately called up well-publicised bulldozings of French produce found to have entered Russia via bills of ladings sourced in its old African colonies.
France, under pressure from the United States, was forced to abandon its showpiece advanced technology export which was its Mistral Class vessel for Russia’s navy.
Combined with the loss of its Russia disposal market for milk products the embargo is one of the factors behind the elimination of France’s ruling Socialist Party from any contention in this year’s presidential election.
| From the This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | Wednesday 8 February 2017 ||
Lesson on Danger of Issuing Unenforceable Edicts
New Zealand’s sponsorship of the United Nations resolution condemning Israeli house construction on its occupied territories has had a result opposite to the one intended.
Israel has now launched the construction of sufficient housing in these territories to accommodate the equivalent of a New Zealand city i.e. more than 20,000 people.
In the event New Zealand as a temporary member of the security council was the instrument of a long incubated policy, now turned punitive, of former US president Barack Obama.
President Obama had long been determined to persuade Israel to cease new buildings on the occupied territories—for however brief a period of time.
In 2010 then president Obama promised a bounty of incentives including a flight of the latest fighter aircraft if Israel would cease these new buildings. Also vouched was an undertaking to scotch any moves in the UN to issue any resolution of the type to which New Zealand was co-sponsor at the end of last year.
In the event Israel’s long-running premier Benjamin Netanyahu (pictured), fearful of his coalition crumbling held fast to his construction scheme even though a three month freeze would have been enough to mollify president Obama, under pressure from his liberal wing.
The former president was now on the war path and determined to punish Israel with a condemnatory resolution at United Nations.
To make it remotely effective he had to have among the sponsors a christian anglo saxon nation.
Enter now New Zealand with its modest Jewish lobby and, even if there was any outcry, a pc media reluctant to give any pick up to it.
The New Zealand New York-Washington diplomatic presence meanwhile was listening to the politico-media-entertainment class.
The legations had become convinced that Hillary Clinton was the next president.
By sponsoring the resolution they were assured, they would build points with the incoming president.
They understood that as a ruling family the Clintons remained acutely aware of those who render favours, and those who do not.
Even so, if the New Zealand diplomatic stations had maintained contacts with the FBI, they would have had access to quite a different opinion.
The FBI with its field offices in the United States hinterland was receiving consistent reports of the dissatisfaction with the status quo in general and with the Clinton ascendancy in particular.
In any administrative staff college treatment of any kind of governance whatsoever there is usually one outstanding caution.
It is the danger of issuing an edict that cannot be enforced and that therefore will be flouted.
Worse still, if it is seen to be obviously being ignored, as with the no-building resolution.
| From the MSCNewsWire reporters' desk | Monday 6 February 2017 ||
Under fire for misguided hand-outs, government dithered instead of issuing instant public health warning
When Muhammad Ali visited New Zealand even boxing aficionados failed to recognise his traveling companion Jimmy Ellis (pictured) the former champ. Ellis shrunken in size and bent over we know now was then in the grip of dementia pugilistica.
Muhammad Ali was shortly afterward himself to start succumbing to the effects of his pugilistic career.
The willingness at the end of last year for government cabinet members even to entertain the notion of public funds being devoted to a professional boxing spectacle in Auckland implicitly supported the promoters.
It gave tacit encouragement to an activity dedicated to causing human injury and so also creating an unnecessary drain on public health funds.
It was announced that the Joseph Parker heavyweight boxing match was “borderline” for government funding according to economic development minister Steven Joyce ..
The National Government is under constant assault from the well-funded whistle-blower Taxpayers Union for unnecessary or frivolous spending.
Boxing spectacles obviously fall into this category. This should have been stated at the outset.
Boxing is the only permitted activity in which one participant deliberately seeks to inflict injury upon the other.
Frank Bruno another former champ and suffering from the effects of repeated blows to his head has had this said of himself:-
“Bruno was known for his excellent punching power: he won 40 of his 45 bouts and 38 by knockout, giving him a 95% knockout rate from the fights he won; his overall knockout percentage is 84.44%.”
These “knockouts” amount to an impact paralysis and seizure of the brain, the body’s most delicate component, and which in a free state cannot support its own weight.
The failure of the government to swiftly state that no public funds under any circumstances would be devoted to this activity only added to an increasing suspicion that the government is unable to say no to anyone on anything at all.
A government events panel assessed the boxing spectacle donation.
This involved a group of ministers, including Mr Joyce, sports minister Dr Jonathan Coleman and arts minister Maggie Barry.
Jonathan Coleman is a medical doctor.
The promoters had said they needed a decision in a few weeks. Normally the Government would take a couple of months to assess an application, but it had moved more quickly in a couple of cases, Mr Joyce obligingly indicated.
With its immense public relations apparatus at its disposal none of these appears to have weighed up the pros and cons of some supporting materials for the benefit of the public at large.
A background communique could have said for example that the American Association of Neurological Surgeons claims that 90 percent of boxers suffer some kind of brain injury while boxing.
Because of these brain injuries, the surgeons claim, boxers are more prone to mental deterioration during their later years that can lead to Parkinson’s or Alzheimer’s.
This was an opportunity for the government to issue a cigarette packet style of warning
Instead the burden of the government’s argument against dedicating public money to the boxing spectacle was that it was a private enterprise corporate promotion and therefore run for profit and therefore did not qualify for a hand-out.
Petrified into silence for fear of being seen as remotely anti sport, the mainstream media stood aside from deliberations.
The episode again starkly reveals the need for a samizdat boom-lowering voice such as that of the Taxpayers’ Union, an organisation whose disclosures consistently stand up, unrefuted.
| From the This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | Thursday 2 February 2017 ||
US bungling must not be repeated
A National Front victory in the pending presidential/general election in France shows every sign of wrong-footing the New Zealand government in the same way that the United States presidential outcome did, writes our European correspondent.
Now rated as the front-runner a National Front victory will also see France quit the EU which in turn will signal the end of the entire EU project.
The New Zealand Foreign Ministry must now forcibly and unambiguously direct its officials to now actively consider a National Front victory in the elections in France---and to adjust their own forecasts around this possibility.
On Wednesday, 25 January 2017 MSC Newswire forecast:-France’s Marine Le Pen is Looking Increasingly Presidential—Likely to pick up Socialist Party Votes in Runoff.
Since then the main challenger to the National Front, the Republican Party’s Francois Fillon has become enmeshed in a high profile corruption case in which his wife appeared to receive a substantial public salary for doing work that has still to be defined.
New Zealand’s foreign service officials should now receive a directive to the effect that they must contemplate an outcome that they passionately and personally abhor - - a National Front electoral victory.
On this occasion the closed-loop elitist nature of foreign service practitioners, far removed from the cares and fears of ordinary people, must be prevented from igniting the same partisanship that unreservedly forecast a victory for Hillary Clinton.
These saw New Zealand taxpayers enmeshed in the Clinton fund, and in taking at the United Nations an unnecessary stance on Israel designed to put New Zealand in an unfavourable light with the unanticipated incoming administration.
The directive to officials should accommodate the understanding that, yes, they may have to reveal their misgivings about the National Front.
But that in operational terms they must be prepared on this occasion for an outcome that horrifies they and the people they professionally associate with.
In short, foreign service officials who tend to be cut from the same rather exquisite cloth, must recall in the words of the French saying that though they talk to the captains “it is the crew that does the voting.”
The outcome of the recent primaries of France’s ruling Socialist Party have been more of an upset than most had imagined.
Manuel Valls, until recently France’s young and tough prime minister was swept out of any party presidential flag bearing role by a much lesser-known outsider Benoit Hamon (pictured) advocating a 32 hour week and a capitation tax on robots.
Wellington, on this occasion, must make it clear to its foreign service and trade representatives that it wants facts rather than hopes.
| From the MSCNewsWire reporters' desk | Wednesday 1 February 2017 ||
Isolation imposed time lag continues as New Zealand characteristic
The delivery of the earthquake struck coastal township of Kaikoura with the second syllable pronounced as in “cow” has become the signal shibboleth or password designed to reveal the utterer, and the organisation that employs them, as being politically correct.
Kai- COW – ra has now replaced as the dominant pc call sign the previous place-name pronunciation which was KIDDY –KIDDY for the far northern township of Kerikeri.
Both these hallmark pronunciations had their genesis in New Zealand’s government broadcasting operation.
This was in spite of the state broadcasting corporation’s late doyen of the Maori language Bill Kerikeri always pronouncing his own name with the two rs firmly sounded.
The continuing trend for New Zealand official commentators – broadcasters to dolly up the delivery of longstanding Maori names continues to demonstrate the way in which the fashionable delivery of targeted place names especially remains such an encoded hallmark of modish conformity.
Other Maori-derivation place names continue to be pronounced with the kou syllable pronounced in the traditional way as coo.
Some officials continue to go counter-stream meanwhile. For example the ubiquitous cabinet member Steven Joyce MP continues to use the koo rendition of Kaikoura.
The flourishing of the state-broadcasting engendered movement to put a smooth modernist emollient spin on strong Maori word pronunciation is another indicator that New Zealand remains in its customary time-lag in regard to international societal trends.
This in turn continues to support the belief that communications globalisation is no substitute for geographical isolation, the tyranny of distance.
Another indicator of this was the broadcasting use of the term happy festivity as a substitute for happy christmas thus sidestepping the invocation of any christianity.
Meanwhile in order of frequency of usage these were the other modish substitutes that have become standardised in the government broadcasting system.
Conversation DiscussionBirthing Maternity...(nothing to do with ships)Choices Decisions/options/ alternativesEarly childhood KindergartenFamily now refers to staff/employees/ previously “team”Interventions Social welfare involvementIssues ProblemsParenting this gerund replaces the old “bringing up” of children (“raising” in the US)Procedure Surgical operationResilient SustainableSecurity Supply of something, as in food “security.”Wellness HealthFishers FishermenMedical event Usuallly refers to coronary or stroke
| From the This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. | Monday 30 January, 2017 ||
Palace of the Alhambra, Spain
By: Charles Nathaniel Worsley (1862-1923)
From the collection of Sir Heaton Rhodes
Oil on canvas - 118cm x 162cm
Valued $12,000 - $18,000
Offers invited over $9,000
Contact: Henry Newrick – (+64 ) 27 471 2242
Mount Egmont with Lake
By: John Philemon Backhouse (1845-1908)
Oil on Sea Shell - 13cm x 14cm
Valued $2,000-$3,000
Offers invited over $1,500
Contact: Henry Newrick – (+64 ) 27 471 2242