Monthly Archives: Dec 2016

New Zealand in a leaderless world

Posted on by
Reply

25 years ago, there were two nations striving to lead the world. The choice was clear: Communism or Capitalism. Communism was on the way out, with the U.S.S.R. about to fall, having shown itself to be unable to adapt to changes and mired in corruption. Capitalism was about to win the contest and political theorists such as Francis Fukuyama thought everyone would flock to embrace the winner.

25 years later New Zealand is entering a leaderless world. This is a world where the United Nations is no longer, despite being the official world body, a place of leadership or inspiration, with individual Security Council members working for their own perceived interests. This is a world where the rule of law no longer has the respect of many nations including those who have spent much of the post World War II era promoting just such a common legal structure that nations could abide by. The idea of a leaderless world is by no means mine, but I am increasingly of the opinion this is what it has come, or shortly will – i.e. anytime after Donald Trump is inaugurated as President on 20 January 2017.

New Zealand needs to think and act for itself, as our traditional allies and friends start to dance to their own tunes or embrace the America that Mr Trump is going to unleash. It is fair to say that after the principled stand against Israel’s occupation of the disputed territories, New Zealand probably not so highly rated in terms of nations Mr Trump wants to curry favour with. Our pandering to Saudi Arabia over agriculture, at the expense of the well being of thousands of sheep whose fate would horrify animal welfare activists however shows we need to be more consistent in our message.

Our leadership does not need to involve big bold gestures on the international stage. Indeed some of the best moves we can make are internal ones. By making New Zealand stronger domestically we are placing ourselves closer to “pole position” in terms of dealing with the domestic challenges that are going to buffet us. Among the steps I recommend New Zealand take to improve its internal strength are:

  1. Immediately making the purchase of property something only New Zealand permanent residents (1 property)and New Zealand citizens can do. Purchases already in progress would not be affected
  2. Ring fencing with “gates”, the path to holding permanent residency or citizenship so that neither can be purchased
  3. Introduce Civics as compulsory subject matter at High School – this will help address issues we are having with young people not knowing how the law works; apathy towards democratic practices
  4. Hold binding referendum to determine once and for all whether or not New Zealanders want a formal constitution, so that all parties in Parliament are bound by the outcome

Rather we need to be sensible about what a little island nation of 270,000km² is going to achieve, set some realistic yet challenging goals and stick to them. I have thought out a few below:

  1. Immediately raising our annual refugee quota to 1,500 refugees and 2,000 by the end of the decade
  2. Ratchet up our foreign aid to 0.4% of G.D.P. by 2020 – right now it sits at 0.2%, which is much lower than that of some nations with smaller economic bases than ours
  3. Offer to host a disarmament conference of the United Nations Permanent Five with a focus on getting rid of remaining chemical and biological weapons stockpiles; an amnesty to surrender existing stockpiles and implementing common protocols to ensure such programmes cannot be restarted
  4. Review our involvement in the “Five Eyes” surveillance programme so that it works for New Zealand

Sometimes, nationalism is a bad thing, as we saw in the 1930’s with Adolf Hitler, and more recently with the rise of the far right in Europe. But when you are a small island nation no longer wholly certain of who your friends and allies are, a bit of bravery and independence is not an altogether bad thing.

Is it?

New Zealand’s road toll problem

Posted on by
Reply

To anyone who has driven down a section of State Highway One in Waikato there are two depressing things that stand out. One is the large number of white crosses, each symbolizing a life taken in a road accident. Some sites have recorded multiple fatal crashes, each one devastating a family and upending lives in ways only the victims and their families will understand.

The causes are often speed, alcohol or some horrible combination of both. A failure to drive according to the conditions and fatigue may also be factors. Officers who have the grisly job of scraping bits of people off the roads and piecing together what happened will also have an equally horrible job of having to tell someone that their loved one is not coming home, ever.

So, why are we – after years of steady progress – going backwards again? This Christmas period, despite having a few days still to run is deadlier than the whole equivalent period in 2015-16. What can we do about it?

The adverts on television regarding the road toll are as blunt as the topic matter is hard. New Zealand has a road toll that is disproportionate for a nation of four million people. There is much emphasis on making sure people do not drive drunk, but not so much about people driving under the influence of narcotics. Making roads safer will only go so far, when there should be stronger emphasis on making people drive to the condition of the road on the day.

One idea could be to overhaul the demerit point system to include residual points that are permanent and the only way to avoid them is not earn them in the first place. The idea behind them would be to assign – I am not by the way trying to make a death simply something with a quantitative value, because there is none that can be realistically assigned – certain types of offences a certain number of demerit points, of which only a portion ever dissolve. An example could look like this:

A person is allowed 1,000 demerit points before they lose their driver license. A fatal accident where murder was the intention might be worth 1,000 demerit points; and manslaughter is 700 points of which 200 dissolve. For the sake of this example we will say a person committed murder using a vehicle as a weapon, thus 1,000 points are initially applied. The demerit points are applied at the end of the sentence handed down, and 200 points will eventually dissolve. However 800 remain and another event involving death – murder or not – will result in the permanent loss of license, thus right to be driving, with any breach being one for which the offender can be arrested.

Another suggestion, which would go some distance towards addressing driver behaviour, could be to institute a “driver insurance”, that anyone holding a New Zealand license is required to obtain. Either that or tipping the balance in the law so that the the onus of responsibility is on the driver in the first instance and individual passengers after that.

There will be about 90-95% compliance, but just as with all laws there will be a select few who think that the law does not apply to them. They will have no remorse or understanding of the consequences or any empathy with the victims. For them jail can be the only option.

New Zealand right to co-sponsor Israel/Palestine resolution

Posted on by
Reply

On 24 December 2016 I heard the news that a United Nations resolution had condemned the Israeli construction of illegal settlements in the disputed territories. Accompanying it was the news that Israel was taking retaliatory measures against the nations that sponsored the resolution.

The recalling of ambassadors to New Zealand and Senegal was petulant, bullying behaviour by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has said from the outset he has no desire for a peace with Palestine. New Zealand, which has a history of diplomatic ruptures with Israel, will survive this just as it survived the fallout from the Mossad forging New Zealand passports in 2004.

New Zealand has a largely good record on the subject of Israel and Palestine. It has always seen a two state solution as the only sustainable way forward, regardless of who has been in Government. This National led Government to its credit has been no exception to the rule. New Zealand led the voting in favour of the resolution that enable Israel to become a nation in 1948 when other nations were having second thoughts.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 was passed by 14 votes with 1 abstention (United States). It condemned the Israeli construction of illegal settlements on disputed lands claimed by Palestine, calling for the immediate halt to construction and forbade the building of new settlements.

Contrary to what Mr Netanyahu believes, there is also a segment in it which demands that Palestine maintain efforts to stop militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah launching attacks on Israel. The last paragraph of Page 1 reads:

Recalling also the obligation under the Quartet roadmap for the Palestinian Authority Security Forces to maintain effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantling terrorist capabilities, including the confiscation of illegal weapons,

Condemning all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation, incitement and destruction,

It should be pointed out that contrary to what some on the left believe, the Hezbollah and Hamas rocket attacks, must be as terrifying as they are destructive. Whilst the Israeli Iron Dome anti-missile/rocket system will down 98% of the rockets fired, the ones that get through arrive with very little warning, are not targetted to hit anything in particular and almost always strike civilian targets. The rockets are increasing in reliability, range and destructive power.

I support the right of Israel to exist within its 1967 borders. Within these borders it has the absolute right of self defence that every other nation has. Prior to the Six Day War (5-10 June 1967), Israel was within it legitimate borders as set out by the United Nations resolution. It had not annexed any land at that point as it did in the 1967 Six Day War, the 1973 Yom Kippur War and since then by stealth using the construction of illegal settlements. The second sentence of the resolution reads thus:

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and reaffirming, inter alia, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,

For me religion is not a valid justification for Israel’s conduct on the world stage, because if one party or another uses religion as a justification every other religion in fairness should be allowed to as well. Millions will try to use it in justifying their standpoint, but the only justifiable stand point for me is international law and what I call “common decency” which transcends all ethnicities, nationalities, genders, religions, political ideologies and so forth.

This is why I am proud to say New Zealand was a co-sponsor of Resolution 2334. It was the right thing to do.

Tourist season begins; New Zealand not ready

Posted on by
Reply

Each day as a mild aviation enthusiast I have the pleasure of watching an Airbus A380 arrive and depart most days I am working in my rental car job near Christchurch airport. The size of the aircraft never ceases to amaze. With 550 people on board and an aircraft worth $100+ million it is an immense responsibility.

So too are the opportunities that they pose as tourists and the responsibilities that we as the host people have towards them. Each visitor that is here overnight will need somewhere to stay, a means of travel as well as information about services we provide, places to see and things to do. Whilst New Zealand welcomes them generally with open arms, our amenities and balancing the needs of our own with theirs falls down badly. We are not ready.

But with tourists as with other visitors there are things we need to do to make sure our own communities, our own people can cope with the influx. The last thing the tourist wants is a hostile welcome because we cannot cope. The last thing we want to give them is a hostile welcome because they go back to their nation of origin they will tell people back there that New Zealand did not treat them well and they felt unwelcome. This is where a combination of local council and government co-operation is needed to determine how we can get the balance right so everyone is happy.

In this respect I think New Zealand falls down considerably. This is where I think all visitors to New Zealand should pay say a one off $75 levy at the border which goes into a fund to pay for the construction of amenities in those popular places. I am specifically thinking of such as Twizel and Mt Cook in the South Island or Waiouru or Turangi in the North Island near popular tourist attractions. It might be new toilets or upgrading existing ones or more information kiosks or new camping facilities. If it takes the pressure off existing facilities and reduces problems for locals then it is a good thing. It might setting up an area where so called freedom campers can go. That is fine if it gets them of suburban streets and parks where there is the potential for run-ins with the locals.

New Zealanders generally enjoy meeting tourists. I know I have had a lot of fun meeting them in bars and getting to know where they are from, what brings them here – how can we help them. It has nothing to do with the fact that I work in the rental car industry and everything to do with being a New Zealander who wants to see this country grow in a way that benefits both us and the tourists who come.

So enjoy your holiday season. If you see a tourist be nice and wave. If you talk to them, ask them how their holidays are going – can you help? If not, that is fine and wish them a good trip. If you see them doing something they shouldn’t be, don’t be aggressive about it. Just also remember – I know from having dealt with quite a few on work visas – that English will not be their first language. Politely point out what is wrong. If they are threatening and its in a public place look for a public warden or ring the local council for advice. All of them should have hotlines to ring.

Oh, and….

Merry Christmas.

 

The commercialization of Christmas

Posted on by
Reply

It was in early October when I walked into my local shopping mall to do a spot of shopping when what did I see? Contractors erecting Christmas decorations. Yes, Christmas decorations even though the fat man in the red suit was still nearly 90 days away.

I was disgusted. The commercialization of Christmas is nothing new, but starting the hype fest – one person sometime ago called it commercial masturbation – in October was a bit too much. Although I could not do anything about the decision to put the decorations up, I did resolve to buy all of the Christmas presents elsewhere as well as much of the related shopping as possible in other places.

The commercialization of Christmas ignores the entire Christmas message that gets taught in school and in churches – one of the few times I actually pay attention to something out of a religious institution. It reminds me of a story read to me by my parents when I was little about the Christmas message. The story features two children, a boy and a girl and they are asked about the meaning of Christmas. The boy answers about how he gets lots of toys and has fun with them, whilst the girl talks about the gift of sharing and the importance of family and friends.

It is also a very stressful time for a lot of families. For some who have lost loved ones through out the course of the year, there might be little incentive to have Christmas as the pain of knowing they won’t be able to share it with those they lost will be too much. For others working in low income jobs such as retail and service sector jobs, the Christmas period is often the most frantic time of year. Dealing with grumpy customers, tight deadlines in places such as shopping malls all the while having commercial radio reminding you every hour or so that it is Christmas by playing carols and other Christmas themed songs into the ground is enough to test even the most experienced worker in these sectors. For them Christmas cannot come fast enough, because once it has passed, they can relax.

Spare a thought for those working on Christmas Day. They might be Police officers making sure everything is orderly and that the only work they have to do is paper work. They might be firefighters hoping the bell signalling an emergency doesn’t ring, or St John Ambulance officers hoping their pagers stay silent the whole day. They could be Civil Defence staff making sure that if something happens – earthquake, etc – the emergency management office is read to go.

When I think about this, I think sometimes it would be a good experience for everyone to undertake at some point to spend a Christmas day helping at the City Mission. Just one Christmas Day. Not everyone can afford presents or to have a big meal with all the trimmings.