Below are some of the more interesting and insightful New Zealand politics items from the last 24 hours.
1) Former Green MP Golriz Ghahraman has now been charged by police with two counts of shoplifting, and the debate continues on the role of mental health in politics. Stuff’s Tova O'Brien today cites Mental Health Foundation chief executive Shaun Robinson previously saying that mental health isn’t a card to be played to get out of trouble: “When people are experiencing mental distress they do need support, they do need our compassion but that does not excuse people for their actions at that time.” Furthermore, he said: “I live with bipolar disorder [and] I would actually be furious if people used that as a kind of way to judge my actions at a lower standard of ethics and responsibility because that is another form of stigma and discrimination” – see: We need to be careful about how we talk about mental health and politics
2) Liberal documentary maker David Farrier complains that the way the New Zealand has been covering the scandal is “like they’ve caught a serial killer”. Writing for an international audience, he laments that although New Zealand has a lot of beauty, sometimes the “mask drops” and “it’s not very pleasant underneath”. He says: “With the entire country laser focussed on this one woman, this woman who allegedly took some fancy clothes, the online discourse set in with a level of savagery only reserved for certain people. It was full of a level of sexist and racist vitriol that New Zealand is very, very good at” – see: The Savagery Directed at Golriz
3) With a political system that is apparently failing female politicians – especially young women of colour – does there need to be a change in how places like Parliament operate? The harsh institution of Parliament is therefore the focus of Anna Whyte story in the Post today, with the suggestion that it is not a safe workplace for some politicians – see: Attitudes to abuse of female politicians needs to change: critics (paywalled)
4) Is this all a cop out? Ani O’Brien clearly thinks so, and writes today for Newstalk ZB Plus, that while we need to have empathy for the likes of Ghahraman, we shouldn’t allow people to use excuses: “Recently, we are seeing mental health being used as a shield by powerful individuals to excuse bad, and sometimes criminal, behaviour. That is not to say that they aren’t experiencing poor mental health, but I question the degree to which the New Zealand public is being expected to excuse appalling personal decisions by elected representatives because they cry ‘mental health’. It is evident that all is not well for the Iranian-born ex-Green MP. She has demonstrated a severe lack of judgment and recurring moral failings” – see: Making excuses isn’t taking responsibility (paywalled)
O’Brien argues that a huge proportion of society experiences mental health problems and cyber-bullying (84%), and yet it doesn’t mean they turn to theft. Normal working class people are unlikely to be extended the privileged position that Ghahraman is getting.
The arguments made are likely to be controversial, but O’Brien does raise some interesting points about the “identity politics” brought up by defenders of Ghahraman (and those similarly in trouble like Kiri Allan and Tory Whanau), and are worth quoting at length: “They are doing women, and women of colour, no favours whatsoever with this garbage. Attaching negative, antisocial behaviour to immutable characteristics, like sex and race, is an appalling idea and one that will inevitably backfire. The narrative that they are victims of identity and that they cannot cope with the pressures of their jobs opens up conversations that you would hope we would have resolved in 2024. The question will arise that if women and people of colour, and whatever other identity marker you want to include, are so susceptible and vulnerable to mental breakdowns due to the pressures of office, perhaps they shouldn’t be there in the first place. This nonsense discredits and sells short every woman who has climbed to the top and works hard every day to not only do her job, but to manage the pressures associated with it. Ghahraman does not find herself in her current situation because she is a woman or a refugee or an Iranian-born New Zealander. She is where she is simply because she, on more than one occasion, allegedly chose to slip things in her bag and walk out without paying.”
5) While the current government seems determined to reverse much of the radical constitutional reforms of the last government in terms of te ao Māori, this doesn’t mean that they aren’t focused on improving practical outcomes for Māori according to Ben Thomas, writing for the Post today. He says that the new government also want to “turbocharge iwi and Māori service providers to lift their communities up” – see: Luxon sticking closely to the norm as Rātana and Waitangi Day loom (paywalled)
Here’s Thomas’ key point: “On the final sitting day of Parliament, Health Minister Dr Shane Reti announced an extra $50 million to boost Māori vaccination rates. What stood out was not just the size of the increase, with all spending under intense scrutiny, but the way in which it would be deployed. Rather than handing it on to Health NZ (Te Whatu Ora) to distribute through arcane procurement processes, funding goes directly to whānau ora commissioning agencies and trusted frontline service providers. It's an early stake in the ground for what Luxon hopes will be defining facets of his Government: setting and achieving concrete public service targets; bypassing bureaucracy, including the moribund Māori Health Authority, which had struggled to get money out the door; and targeting need (the providers will also reach at-risk non-Māori and Pasifika children). Vaccination rates are just one example of many social indicators where reaching better standards nationally means addressing poor outcomes for Māori, whose rates lag the average by 10-15 percentage points.”
So, although “constitutional scholars and radicals” might be disappointed with Luxon’s focus on “practical actions and outcomes for Māori, Thomas says, “The iwi leaders who gather at Waitangi to discuss issues like housing, healthcare, education, resource management and regional development may be less concerned.”
6) Does the new government actually have any real vision beyond just cancelling things Labour was doing? Stuff columnist Verity Johnson has her doubts: “I can’t be the only one thinking that this Government doesn’t feel like a new CEO and dazzling exec team. It feels more like a bunch of middle managers, three months through a half-baked brainstorming session. And Luxon certainly doesn’t feel like a dynamic new Boss. He feels more like an overpromoted mid level exec who’s there because the old Boss left, and he’s the only one who knows how to use the IT system. Say what you want about Jacinda Ardern or John Key. But they were leaders. They had a goal. You knew what they believed in and where everyone was going. And really, that’s all you need as PM. You need to have a destination, and take us with you” – see: This is a government of managers not CEOs
7) The National Party begins its two-day caucus retreat today in Christchurch. The Herald’s Thomas Coughlan has the agenda: “It begins this morning and will be mostly private but for a brief sermon from the leader, before going into private session again and breaking up midday Friday”. He says there will be no real announcements – see: National starts its political year on a high, as Prime Minister Christopher Luxon prepares first speech of 2024 (paywalled)
The focus of National’s retreat will be on the 22 new backbench MPs, who help make up the huge 49-MP caucus. This presents two risks according to Coughlan: “the first is that a large backbench can breed instability if kept idle (see 2017-2020), though this is less of a risk when in government. The second is that without a crop of experienced MPs on the backbench, the class of 2023 won’t have anyone to show them the ropes.”
8) The government has decided that state agencies should use their English name first, in order that the public can better understand what certain government departments do. The problem is bigger than that according to former local government councillor and Act MP Hilary Calvert, who reviews in the ODT the various websites of government agencies and finds them rather oblique – see: Changing words not solving problems (paywalled)
Calvert discovered that the spin-doctored websites are fairly useless for the public, and that Wikipedia was much more useful in getting descriptions and details about the government agencies. The official websites have lots of nonsense saying “we aim to be bold, invested and collaborative” and “the weaving of wellness”.
9) Because electric vehicles don’t use petrol, they don’t contribute to the government’s petrol tax revenues used to finance the transport system. Hence, owners of EVs are about to have to pay road user charges in the same way that users of diesel cars do. The problem is, according to Chris Keall article in the Herald today, “the amount they’ll pay will be roughly double what fuel-efficient petrol car owners pay in fuel excise duty (or “petrol tax”) – see: EV owners: Road user chargers will cost us twice what petrol car owners pay in fuel tax (paywalled)
10) Wellingtonians seem to be revolting. The apparent problems of a city council that has prioritised vanity projects over crucial infrastructure is a case of “chickens coming home to roost” according to the editor of the Post, Tracy Watkins. Watkins has written a scathing editorial today about the increasing water crisis created by politicians: “While Wellington bakes in atypically warm weather, the city’s leaky pipes have been merrily spewing out thousands of litres of water a day – even while the capital’s residents are asked to conserve water and we are warned that it may not be long before we are restricted to two-minute showers” – see: The leaky city (paywalled)
Here’s Watkins key point: “Yes - Wellington City Council has allocated tens of millions of dollars to fixing the leaks. But Wellington Water, which does the work, says there’s still a massive shortfall. And when it asked for a $10 million top up to keep on top of the leaks last year, the council slashed that back to $2.3 million. That was despite the pleas of councillor Nicola Young and others to give Wellington Water what it needed to do the job. The council’s finance committee chair Rebecca Matthews sanctimoniously suggested it was because they weren’t persuaded Wellington Water could deliver. So here we are, nearly a year down the track, facing an entirely predictable crisis… Critical infrastructure has been neglected in favour of ‘nice to have’ projects by successive councils. They have left the capital with a massive infrastructure deficit and a bill for billions of dollars over the next 10 years.”
Dr Bryce Edwards is the Political Analyst in Residence, Democracy Project, School of Government, Victoria University of Wellington. This article was first publshed HERE
2) Liberal documentary maker David Farrier complains that the way the New Zealand has been covering the scandal is “like they’ve caught a serial killer”. Writing for an international audience, he laments that although New Zealand has a lot of beauty, sometimes the “mask drops” and “it’s not very pleasant underneath”. He says: “With the entire country laser focussed on this one woman, this woman who allegedly took some fancy clothes, the online discourse set in with a level of savagery only reserved for certain people. It was full of a level of sexist and racist vitriol that New Zealand is very, very good at” – see: The Savagery Directed at Golriz
3) With a political system that is apparently failing female politicians – especially young women of colour – does there need to be a change in how places like Parliament operate? The harsh institution of Parliament is therefore the focus of Anna Whyte story in the Post today, with the suggestion that it is not a safe workplace for some politicians – see: Attitudes to abuse of female politicians needs to change: critics (paywalled)
4) Is this all a cop out? Ani O’Brien clearly thinks so, and writes today for Newstalk ZB Plus, that while we need to have empathy for the likes of Ghahraman, we shouldn’t allow people to use excuses: “Recently, we are seeing mental health being used as a shield by powerful individuals to excuse bad, and sometimes criminal, behaviour. That is not to say that they aren’t experiencing poor mental health, but I question the degree to which the New Zealand public is being expected to excuse appalling personal decisions by elected representatives because they cry ‘mental health’. It is evident that all is not well for the Iranian-born ex-Green MP. She has demonstrated a severe lack of judgment and recurring moral failings” – see: Making excuses isn’t taking responsibility (paywalled)
O’Brien argues that a huge proportion of society experiences mental health problems and cyber-bullying (84%), and yet it doesn’t mean they turn to theft. Normal working class people are unlikely to be extended the privileged position that Ghahraman is getting.
The arguments made are likely to be controversial, but O’Brien does raise some interesting points about the “identity politics” brought up by defenders of Ghahraman (and those similarly in trouble like Kiri Allan and Tory Whanau), and are worth quoting at length: “They are doing women, and women of colour, no favours whatsoever with this garbage. Attaching negative, antisocial behaviour to immutable characteristics, like sex and race, is an appalling idea and one that will inevitably backfire. The narrative that they are victims of identity and that they cannot cope with the pressures of their jobs opens up conversations that you would hope we would have resolved in 2024. The question will arise that if women and people of colour, and whatever other identity marker you want to include, are so susceptible and vulnerable to mental breakdowns due to the pressures of office, perhaps they shouldn’t be there in the first place. This nonsense discredits and sells short every woman who has climbed to the top and works hard every day to not only do her job, but to manage the pressures associated with it. Ghahraman does not find herself in her current situation because she is a woman or a refugee or an Iranian-born New Zealander. She is where she is simply because she, on more than one occasion, allegedly chose to slip things in her bag and walk out without paying.”
5) While the current government seems determined to reverse much of the radical constitutional reforms of the last government in terms of te ao Māori, this doesn’t mean that they aren’t focused on improving practical outcomes for Māori according to Ben Thomas, writing for the Post today. He says that the new government also want to “turbocharge iwi and Māori service providers to lift their communities up” – see: Luxon sticking closely to the norm as Rātana and Waitangi Day loom (paywalled)
Here’s Thomas’ key point: “On the final sitting day of Parliament, Health Minister Dr Shane Reti announced an extra $50 million to boost Māori vaccination rates. What stood out was not just the size of the increase, with all spending under intense scrutiny, but the way in which it would be deployed. Rather than handing it on to Health NZ (Te Whatu Ora) to distribute through arcane procurement processes, funding goes directly to whānau ora commissioning agencies and trusted frontline service providers. It's an early stake in the ground for what Luxon hopes will be defining facets of his Government: setting and achieving concrete public service targets; bypassing bureaucracy, including the moribund Māori Health Authority, which had struggled to get money out the door; and targeting need (the providers will also reach at-risk non-Māori and Pasifika children). Vaccination rates are just one example of many social indicators where reaching better standards nationally means addressing poor outcomes for Māori, whose rates lag the average by 10-15 percentage points.”
So, although “constitutional scholars and radicals” might be disappointed with Luxon’s focus on “practical actions and outcomes for Māori, Thomas says, “The iwi leaders who gather at Waitangi to discuss issues like housing, healthcare, education, resource management and regional development may be less concerned.”
6) Does the new government actually have any real vision beyond just cancelling things Labour was doing? Stuff columnist Verity Johnson has her doubts: “I can’t be the only one thinking that this Government doesn’t feel like a new CEO and dazzling exec team. It feels more like a bunch of middle managers, three months through a half-baked brainstorming session. And Luxon certainly doesn’t feel like a dynamic new Boss. He feels more like an overpromoted mid level exec who’s there because the old Boss left, and he’s the only one who knows how to use the IT system. Say what you want about Jacinda Ardern or John Key. But they were leaders. They had a goal. You knew what they believed in and where everyone was going. And really, that’s all you need as PM. You need to have a destination, and take us with you” – see: This is a government of managers not CEOs
7) The National Party begins its two-day caucus retreat today in Christchurch. The Herald’s Thomas Coughlan has the agenda: “It begins this morning and will be mostly private but for a brief sermon from the leader, before going into private session again and breaking up midday Friday”. He says there will be no real announcements – see: National starts its political year on a high, as Prime Minister Christopher Luxon prepares first speech of 2024 (paywalled)
The focus of National’s retreat will be on the 22 new backbench MPs, who help make up the huge 49-MP caucus. This presents two risks according to Coughlan: “the first is that a large backbench can breed instability if kept idle (see 2017-2020), though this is less of a risk when in government. The second is that without a crop of experienced MPs on the backbench, the class of 2023 won’t have anyone to show them the ropes.”
8) The government has decided that state agencies should use their English name first, in order that the public can better understand what certain government departments do. The problem is bigger than that according to former local government councillor and Act MP Hilary Calvert, who reviews in the ODT the various websites of government agencies and finds them rather oblique – see: Changing words not solving problems (paywalled)
Calvert discovered that the spin-doctored websites are fairly useless for the public, and that Wikipedia was much more useful in getting descriptions and details about the government agencies. The official websites have lots of nonsense saying “we aim to be bold, invested and collaborative” and “the weaving of wellness”.
9) Because electric vehicles don’t use petrol, they don’t contribute to the government’s petrol tax revenues used to finance the transport system. Hence, owners of EVs are about to have to pay road user charges in the same way that users of diesel cars do. The problem is, according to Chris Keall article in the Herald today, “the amount they’ll pay will be roughly double what fuel-efficient petrol car owners pay in fuel excise duty (or “petrol tax”) – see: EV owners: Road user chargers will cost us twice what petrol car owners pay in fuel tax (paywalled)
10) Wellingtonians seem to be revolting. The apparent problems of a city council that has prioritised vanity projects over crucial infrastructure is a case of “chickens coming home to roost” according to the editor of the Post, Tracy Watkins. Watkins has written a scathing editorial today about the increasing water crisis created by politicians: “While Wellington bakes in atypically warm weather, the city’s leaky pipes have been merrily spewing out thousands of litres of water a day – even while the capital’s residents are asked to conserve water and we are warned that it may not be long before we are restricted to two-minute showers” – see: The leaky city (paywalled)
Here’s Watkins key point: “Yes - Wellington City Council has allocated tens of millions of dollars to fixing the leaks. But Wellington Water, which does the work, says there’s still a massive shortfall. And when it asked for a $10 million top up to keep on top of the leaks last year, the council slashed that back to $2.3 million. That was despite the pleas of councillor Nicola Young and others to give Wellington Water what it needed to do the job. The council’s finance committee chair Rebecca Matthews sanctimoniously suggested it was because they weren’t persuaded Wellington Water could deliver. So here we are, nearly a year down the track, facing an entirely predictable crisis… Critical infrastructure has been neglected in favour of ‘nice to have’ projects by successive councils. They have left the capital with a massive infrastructure deficit and a bill for billions of dollars over the next 10 years.”
Dr Bryce Edwards is the Political Analyst in Residence, Democracy Project, School of Government, Victoria University of Wellington. This article was first publshed HERE
2 comments:
10) Wellingtonians seem to be revolting.
Yep!
"Say what you want about Jacinda Ardern ............. But they were leaders."
Only Stuff would print rubbish such as this.
A solid overview of weekly political events - just one observation is that out of 10 links, 7 are behind a paywall. I don’t bother to watch MSM for obvious reasons so there’s no chance I’ll pay money to access their propaganda.
Post a Comment