Showing posts with label Tuvalu. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tuvalu. Show all posts
Friday, May 17, 2024
Point of Order: Buzz from the Beehive - 17/5/24
Labels: charter schools, Financial Markets Authority, Judges, New Caledonia, Point of Order, Tuvalu, Water safetySeymour appeals to PPTA to call off meetings on charter schools – but does he seriously believe he can mollify their taniwha?
Associate Education Minister David Seymour is urging the PostPrimary Teachers Association to put learning ahead of ideology.
He wants the union leaders to call off their teachers meetings around the country where they hope to muster the strength to undo the government’s plans to establish several charter schools.
Tuesday, November 14, 2023
Mike Hosking: We need to closely watch the Tuvalu deal
Labels: China, Climate change, Mike Hosking, TuvaluIs Anthony Albanese a genius, or has he landed us with a headache we don’t know how to get out of?
In signing up Tuvalu the way he has and offering an easy entry into Australia, who is next? Are we expected to do the same, or similar?
If we are, what is the criteria? We save a place from climate change? How does that work?
Monday, October 2, 2023
Point of Order: Buzz from the Beehive - 2/10/23
Labels: EV chargers, Pacific languages, Pay equity, Point of Order, TuvaluVerrall is chuffed by govt’s latest push into pay equity while Woods enthuses about an $11m spend on EV chargers
The headline on a ministerial press statement curiously expresses the government’s position when it declares: Government shows further commitment to pay equity for healthcare workers.
Is it not enough to declare just one commitment?
Or is the government’s commitment to pay equity being declared sector by sector?
Tuesday, November 15, 2022
Mike Hosking: As COP27 goes nowhere, the Govt is still lost in climate ideology
Labels: Climate change, James Shaw, Loss and damage, Mike Hosking, TuvaluI wonder as James Shaw sits in Egypt watching yet another COP gabfest go nowhere, whether he has worked out the $20 million our country has offered for loss and damage is essentially the same mistake they have made with the farmers in their He Waka Eke Noa response.
We are one of just three countries, as I understand it, which has offered any money at all.
Loss and damage is this year's pet theme. It's around the broad idea that poor countries cop the worst of climate change damage, so the rich countries should pay for that.
The sad fact is, even if they did, what would it achieve in terms of climate change?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



