New Fisk

Do those who flaunt the poppy on their lapels know that they mock the war dead?

Climate change: National's record

What's National's record on climate change? A study [Paywalled] by University of Otago and VUW researchers published in the New Zealand Medical Journal today says it is dismal.

The study looks at five key areas of climate change policy: contributing to international action, giving price signals to markets, supporting domestic R&D, supportive regulation and policy development, and supportive infrastructure investment. The government response is assessed from its media statements and policy releases, and they tell a sorry tale. Since coming to power, National has failed to take the lead in pushing for international action on climate change (or indeed, shown any real commitment at all). They've gutted the ETS and signalled a further extension of pollution subsidies in future, making it clear that polluters won't pay. They've failed to fund R&D on renewable energy (and the new Ministry of Science and Innovation’s Statement of Intent doesn't even mention the term, or climate change). And they've failed to regulate to improve the energy efficiency of the housing stock or vehicle fleet. Only in infrastructure has there been good news, with some upgrades to public transport and a promise to fund broadband (which might make it easier for people to work from home) - and even that is undermined by their overwhelming focus on roads.

This is absolutely damning. Climate change is the biggest challenge facing our civilisation, and our government's response is a mixture of sticking their fingers in their ears and hoping it goes away (their international and domestic foot-dragging) and leaving it to the next generation to fix (their inadequate "50% by 2050" target). Given the costs of inaction, they must do better.

New Zealand and the Open Government Partnership

Back in September, the Open Government Partnership was launched in New York. The partnership's purpose is to promote transparency, accountability and participation in government, all principles practiced by New Zealand. Oddly, however, the New Zealand government didn't sign up for it.

I was curious about this, so I sent off an OIA request. Then I got distracted, and left the response sitting in another mailbox for over a month (sadly, this isn't that unusual). However, it is good news: contrary to the media report, New Zealand has not decided not to join the partnership. Our non-attendance at the launch was due to the short notice received and Murray McCully having other things to do (likely involving rugby). We are considering joining, and MFAT will be advising the Minister on the process, "including the development of a national action plan on open government". Given the speed this sort of policy moves at, hopefully we'll be seeing some good news on this front in the next year or so.

Absurd

The University of Otago has apparently published a review of New Zealand's climate change policy, arguing that our action falls well short of what is required and that instead of real policy we've had

public relations, watered-down policy, and media releases with ‘aspirational’ goals which are unlikely to result in a major reduction [in] emissions

I'd like to post about it, but I can't. Why? Because it's hidden behind the New Zealand Medical Journal's academic paywall and can only be read by NZMA members.

This is utterly absurd. Not to mention self-defeating. To point out the obvious: if you want to fulfil your duty as a "critic and conscience" of society (and these University of Otago academics clearly are), society actually needs to be able to read your work. And that can't happen when its walled off from us, restricted to a small clique of paying customers.

The Greens' conservation policy

The Greens launched their conservation policy today, promising higher funding for DOC and greater protection of native species. They're both good ideas. DOC has been an easy target for the government, which has starved it of funds and demanded it "do more with less". But it has enormous responsibilities, managing a third of the entire country as well as 33 marine reserves. And it needs to be funded to do this properly. The Wildlife Act changes [PDF] seem to be a sensible response both to smuggling and the need to protect and preserve our native species.

Neither of the main parties has released their conservation policy yet - its just not a priority for them (National doesn't even list the environment on its policy page, which shows how much they care; Labour has a high country policy with significant conservation components). Both of them will likely promise extra national parks without addressing the core question of funding. But I'm expecting at least some of the Greens' policy to be implemented eventually, either through an explicit support agreement, or the slower process of transmission through Labour.

No referendum on austerity

Well, that was quick. Three days ago, Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou offered his people a referendum on austerity. The markets freaked out (democracy apparently being bad for business), Papandreou's foreign masters jerked the puppet strings, and now the vote has been cancelled and Papandreou looks likely to lose his job tonight, to be replaced by another NeoLiberal stooge. As for the Greek people, they're back where they started, with a government of foreign-backed quislings imposing austerity on them to make them suffer for the sake of rich Greek tax evaders and richer German bankers. That'll go down well.

Something to go to in Palmerston North

The Campaign for MMP is holding a public meeting in Palmerston North on "the case for MMP":

When: 17:00 - 19:00, Wednesday 16 November
Where: Sound and Vision Zone, Palmerston North Central Library
Who: Dr Sandra Grey

Be there, and show your support for a fair voting system.

The law takes its course

Julian Assange has lost his appeal against extradition from the UK. Which means that unless he appeals to the Supreme Court, he will be extradited to Sweden to face charges of rape, sexual molestation and unlawful coercion.

This is as it should be. The allegations are serious and deserve to be heard in court. While Assange is a whistleblower who has done humanity a service by exposing government secrets, that doesn't put him above the law.

The real risk is that the US will then attempt to extradite Assange from Sweden on political charges. But they are not likely to be successful. The European Court of Human Rights has prevented extraditions to the US in the past on the basis that the accused would likely face torture by being incarcerated in a "supermax" prison if convicted, and given the treatment meted out to accused leaker Bradley Manning (who spent almost a year in solitary confinement in a supermax while awaiting trial) Assange would have a strong argument that he faced the same risk.

52,000 out of work under National

The Household Labour Force Survey is out, and it shows an increase in unemployment, from 6.5 to 6.6 percent. All up there are now 157,000 people out of work - 52,000 more than when National took office, and almost twice the level which prevailed under Labour. There are also 80,000 more people classified as "not in the labour force", who have basically given up.

That's National's economic record right there. Faced with the worst recession in recent memory, they did nothing and left the market to sort itself out. The result was entirely predictable. And their "solution"? More of the same inaction. They're not going to spend any effort trying to create jobs or get the economy back on its feet, they're just going to kick the poor to make themselves feel better. 52,000 more unemployed says that that just isn't a credible policy.

The Human Development Report

The United Nations has released its annual Human Development Report, showing that New Zealand is the fifth most developed country in the world. This is dramatically at odds of the perception our business class tells us, of a country of economic losers in need of NeoLiberal "reform" to get us back to the top of the ranking tables, so what's up? Simple: The HDR takes into account not just living standards, but also life expectency and education, things NeoLiberals do not care about. And on those measures, we do very well indeed. The result is that we rank a full 30 places above our GDP ranking, just behind the United States.

Which just goes to show that these rankings are a matter of what you care about. If all you care about is money, then you hide our real achievements as a nation. And if you impose austerity and neoLiberlaism, then those achievements stand a good chance of being destroyed.

Nothing changes in Egypt

Back when Egypt was still a dictatorship, there was no such thing as freedom of speech. Bloggers who criticised the government or wrote satirical poems about Hosni Mubarak were jailed. The revolution was supposed to have changed all that, and turned Egypt into a democratic society which respects human rights. But guess what's just happened?

One of Egypt's most prominent revolutionaries has been taken into custody by the country's military rulers, provoking the biggest crisis yet in relations between pro-change activists and the increasingly repressive army junta.

Alaa Abd El Fattah, a 29-year-old who has been at the forefront of anti-regime struggles for a decade and was a political prisoner during the Mubarak era, was arrested on Sunday on charges of inciting violence against the military. He refused to recognise the legitimacy of his interrogators or answer their questions and is set to be held for 15 days, a period that can be renewed indefinitely by the authorities.

Which shows that nothing has really changed after all. Mubarak may be gone, but the army remains, its authoritarian instincts (and laws) fully intact. If Egypt is to be truly free, they need a second revolution, to rid themselves of the generals.

New Fisk

Al Jazeera - 15 years in the headlines

The lists

Candidate and party lists are up for the election. The Progressives, of course, are out, ending a twenty-year political schism. Their other half, the Alliance, is basically dead, standing only five electorate and fourteen list candidates - fewer than the ALCP. The Democrats - the local branch of the Social Credit cult - seem to be on their last legs as well. Meanwhile, it looks like the Conservatives are making a serious go of it, standing in almost every seat. If Colin Craig maintains his interest in politics, then they could become a serious force.

Among the minnows, the sexist Republic of New Zealand party is finally dead, as is the Worker's Party. And as usual, a host of boldly announced new parties (Ordinary Kiwis, Student, Reform) didn't even make it as far as running candidates. The Pirate Party will however be running two, putting them on the same level as the Communist League.

Overall, only thirteen parties are contesting the list - the lowest ever. We seem to be in a consolidating phase at the moment, with a number of old minor parties on the verge of disappearing, and its not clear who, if anyone, will replace them. On the other hand, if no-one votes for those parties, they don't really need to be replaced.

Women going nowhere under National

The World Economic Forum released their annual Global Gender Gap Index today, and the news is bad. After years of steady improvement under Labour, our score is now stagnant (it actually dropped last year). As a result, we've slipped down the rankings, and been overtaken by Ireland.

This is what a National government means: a focus on expanding economic opportunities for rich white males means everyone else gets left behind. And with the number of women in Parliament expected to drop after the election thanks to National's sexist party list, we'll likely be dropping even further in the future.

Kiwis support same-sex adoption

Our adoption laws are archaic and discriminatory. They forbid same-sex couples (and straight civilised couples) from being legal parents to their own children. The law has to change. The good news is that the public now recognises this. A Herald poll released this morning shows that a clear majority backs adoption reform, with 54.3% in favour, and only 38% opposed. There's no age or gender breakdown, but I expect it will show the same sort of gender and intergenerational divisions as the recent poll showing majority support for same-sex marriage.

The good news is that some of our political parties are in step with the public on this. Labour is committed, as are the Greens. Sadly, National is not one of them; ensuring fundamental equality for all New Zealanders simply isn't a priority for them. As for ACT, they don't care either (which shows you again that the only freedom they care about is the freedom of the rich not to pay taxes).

Fortunately, we have an election in a little over three weeks. So if you want to see this law changed, then you can vote accordingly.

The obvious question

Today National announced another centrepiece of its election campaign: welfare "reform", shoving people between different benefits in an effort to force them, by pure bureaucratic unpleasantness, into work. Which probably sounds fine to the analysts in Treasury who see it simply as a matter of "incentives". Meanwhile, out here in the real world, there's an obvious question we should ask in response: where are the jobs?

Currently, we're in a recession. We have 154,000 unemployed, and thousands are queuing for a handful of jobs every time a new supermarket opens. This suggests that we have a mismatch between supply and demand for workers. And National's response is to try and increase supply even further? That seems to be getting things exactly arse-backwards.

If National wants to get people off benefits, then it needs to actively create jobs. If its just going to leave that to the market, in the mistaken belief that it will solve the problem naturally, then it needs to accept that logic for benefit numbers as well. Quite apart from questions of consistency, punishing people for being on benefits when there are no jobs to go to is simply a pointless exercise in sadism. But then, its so very, very National, isn't it?

A referendum on austerity

For much of the year, Greece has been teetering on the brink, with the government attempting to impose foreign-driven austerity on a population which will not accept it. Now, having got the EU to agree on another bailout, they've bitten the bullet and taken the democratic path, offering a referendum on austerity:

The Greek prime minister, George Papandreou, stunned Europe's leaders on Monday after he proposed that his country should hold a referendum on the landmark European debt deal reached last week.

A Greek vote against the deal could scupper weeks of negotiations over how to rescue the country's economy and prevent a debt crisis to match the Lehman Brothers crash of three years ago.

This is what the Greek government should have done in the first place: sought a democratic mandate for their actions. By refusing to do that for so long, they have undermined their own legitimacy, and Greece's democracy. A Greek Minister was almost lynched last week in Thessaloniki, the President was forced to flee an annual remembrance parade when a large angry crowd started yelling "traitor" at him, and government buildings are under occupation. This is not the sort of political climate you expect in a democracy, but then Greece's government have been going around acting like medieval tyrants, and the people are reacting accordingly. Now, the message finally seems to have gotten through that they're not going to take it any longer - fortunately before there was any serious bloodshed.

On current policy settings, the referendum will almost certainly fail. Which means the bankers will either need to moderate their demands, or watch their entire corrupt edifice come crumbling down around their ears.

Out of touch

The way the leaders of the two major parties are talking, this election is all about the economy. "Balancing the books", raising the retirement age, savings, deregulation, growth - other issues have trouble getting a word in edgewise. Given that these parties are chasing our votes, and spend a lot of effort trying to find out what we care about, you'd think therefore that the economy was foremost on our mind, right?

Wrong. According to a 3 News Reid Research poll last night, the most important issue to kiwis this election is the cleanliness and quality of our natural environment. Economic issues come well down the list:

3 News gave 21,000 voters a list of 21 options and asked for a ranking; 10 being most important, 1 being least important.

The environment came out on top at 8.2.

Second equal were food prices and the quality of our schools at 7.9.

Hospital care was third at 7.8.

The price of petrol was fourth at 7.7.

The number of people living in poverty was fifth 7.5.

This isn't an aberration. The environment consistently beats the economy on surveys such as the New Zealand Values Survey and the Growth and Innovation Advisory Board survey. Our politicians, however, seem absolutely blind to this. For them, its "economy, economy, economy", with the environment and quality of life issues as an afterthought.

The conclusion? Our major parties are completely out of touch with the electorate. They reflect the interests of their big business donors, not us. The only way this will change is if we vote them out, and replace them with people who do reflect our concerns.

Something to go to in Wellington

The New Zealand Council for Civil Liberties is holding a public lecture in Wellington this Thursday on "The Importance of Protest" by Steven Price:

A look behind the scenes of the Valerie Morse flag-burning case - how the law in NZ and elsewhere protects protesters and whether it goes far enough.

When: 18:30, Thursday 3 November
Where: Mezzanine Meeting Room, Wellington Public Library
How much: Free!

They'll also be holding their AGM afterwards just before, at 6pm, so if you're interested in joining and supporting this valuable voice for human rights, its a convenient time to sign up.

Correction: Corrected AGM time.

Standing on Zanzibar

Back in 1968, science fiction author John Brunner wrote the first of his great dystopian novels, Stand on Zanzibar. The novel was about one of the great worries of the age, overpopulation, and was set in far-off 2010, when there were an unimaginable seven billion people. As you may have gathered from the news over the last week, we're now living in that dystopia. Though its turned out to be not quite as dystopian as Brunner imagined.

Stripping away the ephemera from the book (the continuation of 60's racism and sexism, the Catholic schism, the awful slang), Brunner's future can be described in one word: crowded. With seven billion people, humanity is apparently squashed together so tightly that no-one can live in a house, and even the wealthy are forced to share apartments. This produces a state of mass-psychosis, with the human race like too many rats sharing too small a cage. Some people can't handle the stress, go berserk and run amok as "muckers". As a result, everyone is in a constant state of fear of the people around them, or drugged out of their mind to avoid it.

We seem to have largely dodged that bullet. Yes, the US has mass-shootings - but they seem to be a result of permissive gun laws and a culture of violence, not of crowding-induced insanity. In most of the world, it seems that we still have enough room left in our cage. Which is pretty scary when you see how crowded some parts of that cage are. Singapore has 7,000 people per square kilometre, Macau more than twice that. Clearly we can go quite high, globally speaking, before we hit our psychological limits (our physical limits, resources and pollution, are another question entirely, but that's another book).

Oddly, for a dystopian novel about overpopulation, population control doesn't get much of a mention. A lot of effort is spent on eugenics, but this is seen more as a means of saving medical resources than limiting growth (there's even an odd moment when it becomes clear that you can be forced to have an abortion for eugenic reasons, but can't get one voluntarily). The effects of this are primarily psychological as well, with large numbers of people forbidden to have children due to some defect, and going neurotic as a result. We dodged that bullet too, thanks to a man with a moustache discrediting the entire idea. Meanwhile, we now have an increasing number of people who are voluntarily childless, and quite happy about it (though I suppose some people would regard this as a social pathology and a symptom of Calhoun's "second death").

Brunner clearly thought that things couldn't go on much longer with seven billion people. In reality, the population is still growing. While the demographic transition looks like it will deal with it in the end, the global population is likely to peak at between nine and ten billion. Which means that even if we manage to cope with the resulting resource and pollution problems, we're still going to need a bigger island. Brunner allowed two square feet (0.186 square metres) per person for standing-room-only, which means something like 1860 square kilometres for ten billion people. Bintan, anyone?