Monthly Archives: Jun 2015

Degrees of religious indoctrination

Posted on by
1

Have you ever had a representative of a religious group come to your door or approach you in public and try to spread their chosen message? How did you deal with them? Were they pushy or combative, or friendly and polite? The recent debate in the media about religious studies at school and whether or not it is appropriate has made me wonder about the degrees of religious indoctrination, and where to draw the line.

There are degrees of indoctrination. Gloriavale, the West Coast sect near Greymouth, which has recently featured in the media for the indoctrination of their residents who are led to believe that the rest of the world is evil is at one end of the spectrum. Gloriavale, it has to be said, has actually met Ministry of Education standards for curricula being taught – they get taught science, mathematics, English and so forth; are self sufficient. On one hand they are keen for the world to see how Gloriavale function, but on the other hand when members have fled for a better life, they have been systematically cut off from any family that they might have had in the sect and told they are sinning against God. Those brave enough to attempt to visit their families have been barred from entry, or met at the gate by members who appear to be devoid of personality.

There are degrees of inappropriateness – regardless of how one looks at it – too. The best example I can think of was that of a pair of Jehovah’s Witness members turning up on someones door step with a young boy who cannot have been more than five years old and trying to impart their message to the shocked householders who later said they should have called the Police. The suggestion that the householders should have called the Police might have been a bit extreme, but a boy of that age – I assume his parents knew what he was doing – should have been at school, at home or playing with his friends.

And then there are degrees of legal wrong doing, sometimes with violent results. It is worthwhile pointing out at this stage, that the wrong doing could be the sort of common crimes such as sexual violence/incest that Gloriavale leader Hopeful Christian was convicted for in 1994. But it could also involve more sinister elements with the potential for armed violence. With the exception of a couple of isolated cases in New Zealand where sects have had to be raided/shut down by the police on grounds of criminal activity, this country has been free from cases of religious violence.  These belong to the militant sects who believe some sort of apocalypse is coming, or that the Government is out to destroy their religion and only an armed stand will enable them to continue. Two notable cases come to mind: that of Ruby Ridge where a right-wing U.S. family took an armed stand against the U.S. Federal Government that ended in violence – notably the F.B.I. thinks one of the highest risks to the United States in terms of domestic terrorism is from religious fundamentalists. The other is the Tokyo subway attack by Aum Shinrikyo a Japanese apocalyptic sect that released sarin into a subway, killing 12 people. As the latter committed an act of violence against people and property, Aum Shinrikyo was designated a terrorist organization.

But the very vast majority of people who adhere to a particular faith, are perfectly normal people trying to go about their lives like you the reader and I the author of this article are. When they go to their place of prayer, they do so out of an honest belief in a higher being. Whether it is Mass or afternoon prayers at the Mosque; whether it is Sunday service or simply for reflection, it is entirely their right. They mean no harm to the world and no suspicion should be held against them. They might be colleagues of yours or friends or even family. Nothing wrong with that.

Implications of Grexit for New Zealand

Posted on by
Reply

So, after nearly four years of lurching from crisis to crisis, with no small amount of financial aid, reality might be about to bite Greece. Or should I say the European Union and its struggling currency, the Euro? Or perhaps I should just say both. From afar it is hard to imagine what life must be like for the average Greek at the moment, with money pouring from a country like a dam has burst. Which makes it all the more interesting to contemplate the implications of a Grexit for New Zealand.

So, first, what is a Grexit? In short it is the possibility that as a result of failing to repay loans, Greece exits the Euro currency and – presumably – reverts back to the former Greek currency, the Drachma. The consequences of this for Greece would be significant. Aside from employers not being able to pay their employees and a cocktail of associated social problems, the essential services such as medical care would be crippled for lack of resources and staff.

What is the probability of this happening? If no solution can be found in the next 48 hours, very good. Why? Because after many extensions, the European Central Bank has decided it will not extend deadlines for Greece to meet its repayment obligations for the month of June. That deadline is 30 June 2015.

So, if this happens, what does it mean for New Zealand?

Although we are nearly half way around the world from Greece, to think there will be no impact is misleading. Because this is bringing the credibility of the Euro currency into question as well, were the Euro to fail because of a Grexit, there would be a world wide shudder, and New Zealand would notice it just like everybody else. Given the weakness of the Euro, I imagine the New Zealand Dollar would suffer turbulence in the immediate fallout, whilst the consequences of a Grexit become clear, but then it would probably climb before tapering off. For New Zealand exporters, this will not be good news as their commodities will lose value. Depending on the ability of the European Union nations to contain the fallout it might also mean less demand for those commodities. On the flip side, those planning a trip to Europe might find the New Zealand Dollar stronger against the Euro.

A bigger problem would be the geopolitical question of how the European Union at large copes. It would be a major blow to it to have its dream of a single currency covering all of its members come unhinged just because one nation could not/would not meet its bailout obligations.

But the crisis is real. Greece essentially has 48 hours before it enters economically uncharted waters to reach a deal. The E.C.B. has issued a deadline, which is 30 June 2015. The Greek leader Alexis Tsipiras has called a snap election for 05 July 2015.

For all the wrong reasons Grexit watch is about to get really interesting.

A great big gay rainbow over the United States of America

Posted on by
2

When New Zealand passed the Marriage (Definition of Marriage)Act  in April 2013, there were a number of rather witty speeches given. Some came from unexpected quarters, and others were from proponents of the legislation. But one, by Member of Parliament for Pakuranga, Maurice Williamson especially hit home. The morning of the final debate in Parliament, it had been raining heavily in his electorate and as the rain cleared there was a magnificent rainbow, which in his speech that night he referred to as a “big gay rainbow over Pakuranga”.

But this is not about New Zealand. This is about the fact that the Supreme Court of the United States of America has seen fit to make same sex marriage legal in all 50 states of the Union. This is something I thought might be another generation or two away and involve innumerable court challenges (probably now only a matter of days or weeks away, as the states of the rust belt, which I think of sometimes as the God and Guns belt, as well as the proponents and opponents square off in support of their morals. But there is no doubt that right same sex marriage proponents have won a huge victory, and with out further ado:

 WELL 

DONE

UNITED

STATES

OF

AMERICA

 

Reforming corporate justice laws

Posted on by
Reply

One of the reasons so many people are becoming concerned about the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement are rumours that corporate court cases might be heard in a secret court that the public and mainstream legal system have no access to, much less jurisdiction over. Although not substantiated, the shroud of secrecy that envelopes the whole T.P.P.A. means that unless legal documents referring to the court are leaked from within, no one will ever know. And in a nation where a functional justice system is considered central to the law, that should be a scary thought.

The unwillingness of this Government of Prime Minister John Key to address the short comings of corporate law was highlighted again this week by division amongst Ministers of the Crown over whether or not to introduce provisions in a proposed law change that enable companies to be punished for corporate manslaughter. The proposed law changes stem from recommendations made by the inquiry into the Pike River mining disaster in which 29 people died and corporate management of Pike River was found severely wanting.

Another concern that needs to be addressed is whether a corporate body can be tried in a secret court, such as the alleged one that is fuelling the rumours around the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement. To me this is not an acceptable practice. Where possible court proceedings need to be transparent and accountable to the laws of the nation where they were had. Why should corporates be any more less accountable than the Ma and Pa businesses you see on street corners, the regional brands such as Briscoes or national brands such as the Warehouse? Given New Zealand’s reputation overseas as a nation that promotes a fair go – although some of the companies operating here such as Oyang Corporation seem to think it does not apply to them – corporate law needs to be revisited with a view to closing existing loopholes.

The third concern, and one that inspired the Occupy Movement, is corporate tax evasion/fraud. Few things probably anger me more in terms of dealing with cheats than corporate fraud. And I can see how the Icelandic move to jail the bankers who perpetuated the collapse of so many financial institutions there caught on. Although I am not sure how well a similar move would have played out in New Zealand, there is no doubt it was a brave call to make. My own views about dealing with tax cheats/fraudsters are that they should be put on a register of convicted criminals whose crimes were of a financial nature and be legally blocked from ever holding financial or other corporate directorship again, along with a combination of jail sentences and/or property seizures if the defendant has significant assets such as yachts, apartments or private jets.

Like I said, corporates are no more above the law than your local Ma and Pa business, their customers, suppliers or anyone else. Nor should they be.

The end of Colin Craig?

Posted on by
1

Colin Craig was a complete unknown to me and probably the very vast majority of New Zealanders when he and his Conservative Party bolted from the blue, into our midst in August 2011. Who was he? What did he do for a job? They were among many others the questions New Zealanders asked themselves.

They did not have long to find out. Although his Conservative Party failed to enter Parliament in 2011, which would have been a phenomenal achievement for a three month old party, the 2.2% of public support  was probably sufficient to stop National picking up the necessary M.P.’s to make a majority Government. That said, introducing his party with just three months campaign time to get ready for the election seemed like an odd time to do so.

But Mr Craig for all his attempts to woo New Zealanders, all of his work trying to get a conservative party into Parliament, seemed to be having an identity crisis in terms of policies. Some days I wondered if he was trying to be an A.C.T. stooge with his support for gutting the Resource Management Act. But then on other days he would be touting protection for many of the components of the natural environment that the R.M.A. provided for. In terms of where he got his policies from, on several occasions it appeared that the Conservative Party had simply taken lines from New Zealand First policies.

Maybe in the absence of United Future having any more obviously Christian links, and having for the most part lost any sense of a moral compass, Mr Craig thought he was going to be leading the next Christian party in New Zealand politics. The latter was forced to shed his Christian M.P.’s by a combination of election results and some view points in far right field. On marriage and abortion, the Conservative Party was loud and clear: No. No. No.

By the time the 2014 General Election rolled around, Mr Craig had an established Party. Its policy platform was still a mish mash of other political parties standpoints, but it had some high profile people such as former Department of Work and Income boss Christine Rankin to sell them as a uniquely Conservative platform. There were however some ominous signs, such as the abrupt resignation of the Press Secretary just days before the election. The Conservative Party managed 3.97% which was still not enough to get it seats in Parliament, though it did perhaps show a degree of disgruntlement amongst right leaning voters with the A.C.T. and National Party’s.

Mr Craig and his Conservative Party seemed to disappear from the radar after the election as the public focussed on the disaster that befell the Labour Party and how National managed to maintain all of its Members of Parliament. So, when I heard that Mr Craig was resigning from the Party last week, I was surprised. Why now? Then the rumours about him sexually harassing the Press Secretary surfaced. The resignations that followed, which included his brother and Christine Rankin suggest a far deeper problem than what is being admitted to.

So now Colin Craig is gone. Will his political career survive the inevitable damage that such serious allegations can do? It seems doubtful The man who tried to give hope to frustrated conservatives not affiliated with National and A.C.T. has left the vehicle that was his brain child. The party that railed against the Marriage (Definition of Marriage)Amendment Act in 2013 is in crisis. Will this be the end or will the Conservative Party rise anew from the wreckage?