Monthly Archives: Feb 2016

What the end of the Schengen free travel zone could mean

Posted on by
1

Today there was a quite disturbing, yet quite realistic story that carried on Reuters and RT about the potential end of the Schengen free travel zone in Europe. In it the European Union Commissioner said that unless meaningful progress was made on addressing the challenges posed by the huge influx of migrants from Africa in the next 10 days, the Schengen zone would completely disintegrate.

The consequences were this to happen are immense. The impact will be global. There will be few places that will be spared the economic and political fallout. One estimate of the financial losses that Europe will incur is €1.4 trillion. Outside of Europe there will be costs as well. It is estimated that the impact financially on the U.S. and China combined could be anywhere between €91 billion and €280 billion. For countries like New Zealand that suggests potential costs in the millions of Euros (N.Z.$ currently €0.61).

For the average person travelling to Europe, this means that the cold looking bygone Cold War era border crossings, which have lain dormant for a generation may be reactivated as governments struggle to find a solution. It might mean visa requirements change virtually overnight – the Schengen visa that one might have applied for to go travelling in Europe might suddenly be not worth the paper it was printed on. Indeed border crossing check points have already been set up in several countries in southeast Europe where the influx is now beyond the ability of individual governments to manage. Thus, in the space of the next ten days, if the progress is not good enough, the clock on Europe’s development could be set back decades.

What is more disturbing though is the high probability that the European Union would start to unravel. Member nations all over the continent are being stretched beyond their means by the huge flood of refugees pouring in from Africa. Right wing parties in many countries are experiencing unprecedented growth in membership and in some cases unprecedented growth in their political clout in the Houses of Representatives in individual nations.

So, with the Schengen zone possibly into the last ten days of its life before it starts to disintegrate, I can only hope those with Schengen zone visas make the most of them. And that Europes’s politicians work out a deal before 7 March 2016.

The impact of a changing climate on tourism in New Zealand

Posted on by
Reply

In 2014 I wrote a report for a course I was studying at Massey University. In that report I examined the potential effects a changing climate would have on New Zealand tourism. The report examined how businesses in the tourism sector are adapting to climate change, the opportunities and challenges that they see, how a tourist might perceive New Zealand’s efforts to deal with climate related issues.

Tourism is a significant contributor to the New Zealand economy and one of the most effective ways of show casing to the world what the country has to offer. It is based on niche local venture such as whale watching in Kaikoura, jet boating on the Shotover River, as well as skiing. All of these are susceptible to climate change to varying degrees, or environmental changes caused by climate change such as in the case of the Shotover River jet boating altered river flow regimes.

Some tourist operators have acknowledged the challenges posed by climate change and have invested in necessary technology and changes to known best practices. Not all tourism venture operators are convinced or in the case of the wine industry – perhaps quite reasonably – see opportunities in a changed climate for further development. Others, such as the operators of cultural tourist sites such as Whakarewarewa geothermal/Maori arts and crafts centre, are not likely to be affected as there is little exposure of their activities and exhibits to the climate, and it is possible to build appropriate environments to enable them to proceed.

New Zealand is a country that has some significant challenges ahead as it tries to comprehend how climate change will affect one of its primary industries that, along with its suppliers and associated infrastructure, employs tens of thousands of people. How the stake holders and businesses whether they are in central government, run a tourist venture or work in a supporting industry role approach the topic will to some extent define the outcome.

A number of recommendations with regards to how New Zealand should deal with the impact of climate change can be made on the basis of this reports findings:

  • New Zealand should draw up a long term blue print for dealing with climate change
  • New Zealand should accelerate efforts to reduce the ecological footprint of tourism, but that this will require input from the business sector, tourism officials and local government
  • The blue print should engage Maori, the tourism sector, and other parts of the economy linked to tourism either as a service/goods supplier or providing logistical support
  • New Zealand needs a tourism branding approach that is honest about the country, but promotes the positive aspects – 100% Pure does not do this

The hazard that is Rupert Murdoch

Posted on by
Reply

At more than U.S.$12 billion in value, Mr Murdoch is in the top 100 richest people on the planet. However his wealth is just part of the story. His media empire and all that it influences, makes it one of the most powerful media machines in the world. Across New Zealand, Australia, Britain and the United States, he casts a shadow through his media interests.

The Murdoch empire has some huge ethical flaws that have been used to advance an agenda. It’s commercial unit is called News Corp. His trademark has been advanced by forays into the ownership and running of a wide range of business interests, some in media and some in areas such as sport – he tried to buy up Manchester United in 1998, but the British Competition Commission found that the attempted purchase promoted unfair and unethical practices in both sports media and other aspects of his businesses. He has been blocked in at least one nation from making particular media purchases because the playing field would no longer be level, and that he would be able to simply drown out opponents.

Although it is true that he has used his media to support both socialist and conservative leading heads of Government and State across the west, the degree to which his media have influenced elections is a major concern. In New Zealand in 2014, one example of the bias showed in favour of National was the fact that on the day before the election “Party Vote National” stickers appeared on the print editions of Fairfax owned papers nationwide. Although News Corp no longer holds a stake in Fairfax, the pro-National corporate view is a hang over from when Mr Murdoch had a stake in the company.

Likewise there was the campaign waged by the Murdoch media against former Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard during the 2013 election. The sheer force of the resources put into the campaign by the Murdoch media meant that even if Ms Gillard and her predecessor/successor Kevin Rudd had been resolved peacefully, their Labor Party would have still lost to the Tony Abbott led Liberal Party.

The not guilty verdict handed down to Rebekah Brooks over the News of the World hacking scandal, and alleged attempts to pervert the course of justice, is perhaps more a result of a well paid lawyer knowing his craft than her not knowing or being involved in the hacking activities. Ms Brooks was one of his closest confidants before the hacking scandal and has been allowed to return to News U.K. It has been commonly suggested that she not only knew of the hacking, but might have participated in it herself.

A leopard does not change its spots, so the saying goes. Despite his stated regrets about the hacking scandal and numerous gaffes since, one cannot help but have the impression that the real regret Mr Murdoch has is that his business empire was taken to court over it. The acceptance of his apologies by the victims of his scandal was more so that they could quite understandably move on with their lives – many were probably quietly wishing there was a way to make the mud stick.

Another example of the leopard not changing its spots has been the criticism Mr Murdoch has levelled at President Obama’s skin colour, and more recently suggestions that all Muslims are collectively responsible for the attacks in Paris in 2015. Mr Murdoch back tracked on both, but the fact that there are other instances before these of him criticizing Muslims for not doing more to halt terrorism shows that the leopard could have had a spot change earlier, but did not.

With this  sort of influence, Mr Murdoch is clearly a danger to democracy and the principles on which the nations his media operate in, were supposedly founded on.

Cashless society will not happen in New Zealand

Posted on by
Reply

How often do you withdraw money from the A.T.M. at your bank? I do so semi-regularly, as much out of necessity for paying for small cost items instead of loading them into my E.F.T.P.O.S. card. I also have a bit on hand in case of emergencies or unforeseen/unavoidable spending. And so do many other people. And yet there are people who believe that one day society will be cashless.

There are several reasons to believe that society has definitely reduced its reliance on hard cash. And there is no doubt that for those who are able to use such technology, the benefits are considerable. Constant changes in information technology mean that products and services can be purchased using a smart phone, or even a *relatively* dumb phone (as long as it has internet access). The fact that pay wave technology is now common, means one can simply wave their credit card over the surface of a pay-wave capable E.F.T.P.O.S. machine, and provided can read the card, accept the transaction. The introduction of debit cards to enable the purchase of items paid straight from ones working bank account removes the need to get a wad of cash out to pay for that $600 phone or camera that you have been eyeing up, but didn’t have a credit card to pay for.

But there are significantly socio-economic issues that would have to be addressed before a cashless society can become a realistic prospect. One is a simple perception of trust in banks. Because they are such an integral part of our entire financial system, banks have to have a degree of trust in their customers and vice versa. This is something that has taken a whammy in recent years with perceptions of bankers having ulterior motives, but also following the Global Financial Crisis Mk, good reasons exist for believing . For older people and the socially disadvantaged, being able to adapt to a society that is changing rapidly and sometimes can be quite fairly accused of leaving them behind, the simple act of being able to see/handle ones finances is quite important. For those unable to afford internet access and smart phones making cash a digital commodity is simply impractical, and the number of people who fall into this category is high enough to impact on how the banking system works.

At the end of the day there are several very good reasons why a cashless society is never going to happen:

  1. For a lot of people – and businesses – it is simply inconvienient to only use cards and small change is very useful in dairies, supermarkets, paying to park the car in metered locations, among a whole host of other reasons
  2. Having money on hand in case of an emergency, such as an earthquake where bank A.T.M.’s or E.F.T.P.O.S. might be down or inaccessible for several days is always useful
  3. The potential for cyber crime targetting ones finances is very real, and although reputable banks generally take what steps they can to avoid their clients being cleaned out including guards on the card slots of their devices, passwords, text message notifications and so forth, there is no such thing as a fool proof bank account in the digital age
  4. Perhaps the one most would agree with is that there is something cool about having cold hard cash in your hands
  5. Trust – a corner stone on which banks and banking is founded – take away the corner stone and the whole industry is in a potentially existential crisis

So, as exciting as it might be for proponents of a totally digital age, I sincerely doubt it will happen, and given the potential for wrong doing, accidental or deliberate, that might not be a bad thing.

In the balance: Latest poll shows a hung Parliament

Posted on by
Reply

Think National is cruising to a fourth term in Parliament? Have a look at this.

The most recent Colmar Brunton poll, which came out on 21 February 2016 shows a significant drop of four points for the Green Party. It showed New Zealand First potentially holding the balance of power, which puts its leader Winston Peters in the role of a potential king maker. But is the latest Colmar Brunton poll accurate? For the time being I believe it is probably a fairly accurate depiction of Parliament, though there are some major headaches on the horizon for both sides of the House:

  • The support for a new flag is still quite low and ignoring such strong sentiment from both sides of the House could be seriously damaging to Prime Minister John Key
  • How will the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement shape up? Whilst there is no doubt significant concern about what it might mean for our sovereignty as a nation, Labour, the Greens and New Zealand First need to acknowledge that there is equally significant support on the other side and review how they tackle those constituents

Failure to understand and tackle these appropriately has the potential to cause significant voter unrest, despite the election still being 18 months or more away. Concern about how the Government is dealing with the insurance issues that continue to afflict Christchurch in the post-earthquake environment, unease at the prospect of New Zealand being involved in a war it generally does not seem to want a part in and a stubbornly high unemployment rate is all very real.

I am not wholly surprised that the Greens have dropped as Labour’s tertiary education policy was a solid first effort to release meaningful policy. It targeted a section of New Zealand that is often quite sympathetic to the Green Party causes and appears to have taken them as much by surprise as it did everyone else.

Labour’s gain is in part because its Leader, Andrew Little, continues to perform solidly, though without flair and does not seem to be afflicted with internal rumblings like those that overtook his predecessors David Cunliffe and David Shearer. It is also an acknowledgement after all of this time that perhaps with its tertiary education policy, Labour can launch meaningful policy after all.

I would expect to see National and its support partners suffer if they come out in continued support for a new flag even though the public sentiment seems to be very much in favour of the current flag. Third term blues and a sort of fatigue that comes with being in office for so long can be a lethal combination as New Zealand political history shows. National and its partners would do well to remember that.