Drawn

A ballot for three member's bills was held this morning and the following bills were drawn:

• Films, Videos, and Publications Classification (Interim Restriction Order Classification) Amendment Bill (Chris Bishop)
  
• Charter Schools (Application of Official Information and Ombudsmen Acts) Bill (Nanaia Mahuta)
  
• Crimes (Increased Penalty for Providing Explosive to Commit Crime) Amendment Bill (Alastair Scott)
  

So, no death with dignity this time. But a sensible fix to the problems exposed by the temporary classification of Into the River last year, and another extension of the OIA. The latter will be interesting, and it will be fascinating to see whether National and the Maori Party will publicly take a stand against transparency for their little boondoggles.

There were 79 bills in the ballot today. Just a few years ago we were lucky to see half that, and its another example of how the importance of the member's ballot has changed as we get more experience with MMP.

Why are the NZ police working for Fiji's despot?

Radio New Zealand reports this morning that an online critic of Fiji's regime was approached by New Zealand police and warned to tone down his posts:

An advisor to two former Fiji Prime Ministers says the New Zealand police have asked him to tone down his Facebook page which posts messages criticising the current Fiji government.

Shailendra Raju used to work for the deposed prime minister Laisenia Qarase and is involved with the Fiji Labour Party. He now lives in New Zealand.

He said the police approached him in August about his postings.

Mr Raju said he had not broken any laws but now had a mutual understanding with the New Zealand authorities.

Raju's Facebook page is here. He's a racist, anti-Muslim bigot (sadly, Fijian politics has become more racist and bigoted since the coup, on both sides). His numerous posts criticise the government for corruption, disrespect for the rule of law, and attacks on Fiji's indigenous people. But having skimmed back to July, there's no obvious threats of violence or anything which could be considered illegal in New Zealand. Which invites the question: why are the New Zealand Police "warning" people about behaviour which does not violate the law? And isn't this a direct and unlawful interference with the right to freedom of expression?

Criticising the government and saying nasty things about Fiji's Attorney-General may be a crime in Fiji, but it isn't one here. Unless there is a clear incitement to violence in New Zealand, this is none of the police's business.

Austerity violates human rights

Its official: austerity is a human rights violation:

Austerity policies introduced into welfare and social care by the UK government amount to “systematic violations” of the rights of people with disabilities, a UN inquiry has concluded.

It says a range of measures aimed at reducing public spending since 2010, including controversial changes such as the bedroom tax, and cuts to disability benefits and social care budgets have disproportionately and adversely affected disabled people.

The highly critical report, published in Geneva on Monday afternoon, says the rights of disabled people to live independently, to work, and achieve an adequate standard of living have been negatively affected by austerity measures.

It makes 11 recommendations, including calling on the UK government to carry out a study of the cumulative impact of all spending cuts on disabled people, and to ensure the human rights of disabled people are upheld.

The British government is in denial about the consequences of their policy, but they would be, wouldn't they? Sadly, they've decided to reject the report in its entirety. And meanwhile, the body-count continues to rack up...

New Fisk

The Middle East will present Donald Trump with a terrifying choice – and he won't be able to handle it

Trumpocalypse Now

So here we are: President Trump. He's not in office yet, but barring the USA being struck by a giant meteor (at which the rest of the world will shrug and say "good riddance", while desperately trying not to starve to death due to impact winter), he will be come January 20. An actual fascist in the White House.

I use that word deliberately. What else do you call someone who repeatedly calls for people to be deported on the basis of their religion, for the military to use torture, for the arrest and imprisonment of his political opponents? He's exactly the sort of tyrant the US's system of "checks and balances" is supposed to protect against. I guess we'll get to see if that actually works. And if not, well, Americans will get to experience their government how the rest of the world experiences it: as a force of terror and destruction, which murders people at random or drags them away to be tortured in the middle of the night. All of those Americans who were stupid enough to think that it was fine to let the NSA construct a mass-surveillance state because it was only used against "bad people" - good luck with that.

What's the quote? "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard". America is going to get exactly what they voted for. Hopefully they'll learn something from it. And hopefully it won't fuck up our lives too much.

As for NZ, the silver lining is that the TPPA is dead, hooray! But the bigger looming cloud is that Trump won't just continue the US's warmongering ways, but probably get them involved in even bigger and more pointless clusterfucks - which our spineless government will feel obliged to get us involved in in the name of the free trade treaty he's going to tear up. Which is why we simply shouldn't talk to the US, ever: no good can ever come of it.

Member's Day

Today is a member's day, though not an especially exciting one. After a private bill, there's the committee stage of Chris Bishop's Financial Assistance for Live Organ Donors Bill and likely wrapping up Chris Hipkins' Education (Charter Schools Abolition) Amendment Bill. After that the House should make a start on Ruth Dyson's Rates Rebate (Retirement Village Residents) Amendment Bill, and might even get as far as Andrew Little's Our Work Our Future Bill.

The two National spam bills passed in the Statutes Amendment Bill have been withdrawn from the Order Paper, so there will be a ballot for at least two bills tomorrow, and more if the House moves quickly.

This is not what democracy looks like

(Image stolen from the Straits Times)

Its election day in the USA, complete with the usual stories of lawsuits, manipulation, and long queues to vote. The latter is amazing - not because its a sign of the strength of US democracy, but a sign of how weak it is. To point out something which is obvious to everyone outside the US, this simply does not happen in civilised countries. Down here in New Zealand, its in and out in ten minutes, not queue for hours (oh, and we get paid time off to vote too).

The reason the queues exist because the US electoral system itself is politicised. So you get a deliberate under-supply of polling places in areas where people might vote the "wrong" way, purges of the voter rolls targeting opposing demographics, and numerous petty checks aimed at stamping out non-existent "voter-fraud" (i.e. black people voting). Again, civilised countries don't do this. Instead, we try (with varying degrees of success) to let everyone vote. But then, civilised democracies don't see selectively disenfranchising your opponents' supporters as a valid political tactic - that's what makes them civilised democracies.

(Oh - and civilised democracies don't have gerrymandering either. Because voters should choose governments, not the other way round).

Its not hard to get a democracy immune to this sort of political manipulation and which allows the will of the people to be heard. But it appears that the US political establishment simply isn't interested in that.

Duopoly of chickenshits

Parliament is currently holding a select committee inquiry into death with dignity. Public opinion seems to support it. But the Prime Minister has pre-emptively ruled out acting on the committee's recommendations:

There is zero chance of Government introducing legislation to legalise euthanasia even if an inquiry strongly recommends it, Prime Minister John Key says.

A select committee is part-way through a major inquiry on public attitudes to euthanasia in New Zealand, and is considering more than 20,000 public submissions and holding hearings around the country.

Key said today that regardless of the committee's conclusions and the level of public support, the Government would not propose a change.

"There is no chance of it being a Government bill," Key told reporters at Parliament this morning.

And he's quite clear about the reason: he has bigots in his caucus - bigots named Bill English and Gerry Brownlee - who he feels a need to pander to. But Key isn't alone in this chickenshittery: here's Labour's Andrew Little, displaying his usual spine of jelly:

Leader Andrew Little said the Government should "at least" allow a euthanasia bill to come before the House so a debate could take place.

However, he said a law change would not be a priority for a Labour-led Government.

He would personally support the legalisation of euthanasia if it had the same safeguards as former MP Maryan Street's proposed bill.

So,he supports it, would vote for it, but wouldn't put up a bill. Because he too has bigots he needs to pander to.

There is almost certainly a majority in Parliament this time to pass such a bill. There's definitely public support. And yet, our two major political parties just don't want to go near it, because bigots will criticise them. And they're afraid of that rather than welcoming it as a sign of what they're against. Next, no doubt, they'll offer a (non-binding, of course) "plebiscite".

And people wonder why I have such contempt for the establishment parties: because of this. Because we have a duopoly of chickenshits, who have to be dragged kicking and screaming to doing the right thing. Marriage equality, child beating, and now death with dignity. The sooner these political dinosaurs are eradicated, the better.

No hate referendum in Australia

Australians support marriage equality. But their bigoted government doesn't. And rather than accept that society has moved on from the 1950's and legislating accordingly, they've been insisting that equality will only happen if they can hold a giant bigot hatefest and dodge responsibility for it via a referendum (or "plebiscite" as they call it over there). But now, that plan has gone down in flames:

The Turnbull government's proposed plebiscite on same-sex marriage has formally been killed off by the Senate, where it was defeated 29-33 in a late-night vote on Monday, amid a warning the decision would delay marriage equality "for years".

Months of speculation and political posturing culminated in Labor, the Greens, the Nick Xenophon Team and Derryn Hinch combining to defeat the proposal, which would have seen same-sex marriage decided by the Australian people in February.

The decision - an inevitability since Labor pledged to oppose the plebiscite four weeks ago - will force a new conversation about marriage equality that will divide the Coalition and threatens to destabilise the Turnbull government.

Good. Fundamental rights should not be subject to the votes of bigots. And now the only option is for Parliament to do its job and legislate. Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull once supported that path; now he opposes it in order to pander to bigots in his caucus.

Stuffed

Faced with increasing competition and declining advertising revenues, New Zealand's two biggest newspaper publishers, Fairfax and NZME, had a brilliant idea: "let's form a monopoly!" Fortunately for the rest of us, the Commerce Commission has said "no":

Two of the country's largest media groups should not be allowed to combine their businesses, the country's competition watchdog says.

The Commerce Commission has given a preliminary "no" to a merger of Fairfax Media and NZME in a draft ruling released on Tuesday. A final decision on the media shake-up is due by March 15.

NZME's shares crashed 23 per cent to a record low of 51c in late morning trading, sending the company's market value under $100 million for the first time.

Good. The proposed level of media concentration is simply unhealthy, both for our democracy and our society, and I'm surprised that the two companies thought they had any chance of getting away with it. You'd hope that this would result in NZME and Fairfax trying to find some other way forward - making a better product that people actually want to pay for, perhaps? Instead, I expect they'll whine, sue, and then demand the government legislate to exempt them from monopoly protections. Because the last thing NZ business management ever does is its job...

Who does the UK MoD work for again?

We know the UK is in bed with the Saudis, and willing to look the other way on pretty much anything they do if they keep buying British guns and supporting "British interests" (whatever they may be) in the Middle East. But the rot goes deeper than that. It turns out that the UK Ministry of Defence lied to a Cabinet Minister so it could continue selling bombs to the Saudis:

The Ministry of Defence has been accused of “seriously misleading” a cabinet minister in a desperate effort to get export licences for British-made missiles for use by Saudi Arabia in its controversial bombing campaign in Yemen.

The former business secretary Vince Cable has told the Guardian he was given specific assurances by the MoD about oversight of potential targets – which he deemed an essential safeguard to minimise the risk of civilian casualties in the increasingly bloody conflict.

He says he was told that the UK would enhance its oversight to the level given by the Saudis to the US – which would include involvement in decisions about what was being bombed.

It was on this basis, Cable says, that he agreed to sign licences for a consignment of laser-guided Paveway IV missiles, which he had blocked amid concerns about civilian deaths.

While denied by the MoD, Cable's story has been backed by other witnesses. Which raises the question: who does the UK Ministry of Defence work for? The elected government, or a pack of child-murdering foreign despots? And if its the latter, why do they expect the British public to pay for them, or permit them to operate on UK soil?

We need an independent animal welfare regulator

Another day, more tales of gratuitious animal abuse by farmers:

Animal rights supporters are calling for an independent watchdog to take over animal welfare responsibilities from the Ministry for Primary Industries following more allegations of farm animal abuse.

Comments made by members of a dairy farming Facebook group about how to stop a cow from kicking and to get it to let down milk have been called "sickening".

Complaints based on the Facebook comments have been made to the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI), which has started "several investigations" as a result, with some already completed.

Some of the suggestions included inserting a hose into the cow's "fanny" and blowing into it (called "tubing" in the industry), which is a breach of the Dairy Cattle Code of Welfare.

Unfortunately, MPI is utterly captured by the industry it is supposed to be regulating, and the police just aren't interested. These farmers won't be punished for their cruelty. Which is why we need an independent body to investigate and prosecute these sorts of offences. Sadly, we won't get it from National - the farmer's party has no interest in holding farmers accountable for their crimes.

A good idea

Human Rights Commisisoner Dr Jackie Blue thinks its time to force companies to disclose their gender pay-gaps:

Women's pay and their presence in the workplace hierarchy aren't progressing quickly enough, says Equal Employment Opportunities Commissioner Jackie Blue.

So she's now calling for a law forcing major New Zealand companies to declare their gender pay gap.

Dr Blue says she would like to see New Zealand adopt a new UK law which applies to every company with more than 250 employees.

"They tried the voluntary approach, didn't work, so they're bringing in legislation. There's going to be a penalty if they don't comply of about £5000. It's still too low," she told the Nation.

"But just across in Australia, they've been doing that since 2012 for companies over 100, so this is not like a weird idea."

I agree. Public information - and the public pressure that results from it - is one of the best ways to force employers to obey the law. At present, they get away with discriminatory pay rates because its done in secret: they don't tell us (or the government) that they're doing it, while gag clauses in employment contracts prevent their employees from discussing pay rates and finding out. But whether a company is breaking the law is not private information. Instead, sunlight is the best disinfectant. Employers should be forced to provide this data, and justify any pay gaps that exist.

National will never do it: their dead white male caucus is deeply in the pocket of the dead white male business class which benefits from this discrimination. If we want a more equal society, we need to change the government.

New Fisk

A view of the Syrian war from the Golan Heights

Why we need inheritance taxes

The Herald yesterday pointed out the long-term consequences of Auckland's unrestrained housing bubble: increased disparities of wealth and the rise of an English-style class system:

Beckett faces becoming a victim of a new phenomena that is poised to create a tale of two Aucklands.

Economists say there are those who will inherit houses and those who will never afford one.

This "bequest bulge" driven by a combination of crazy house prices and baby boomer housing wealth may spark a return to the Victorian-style class system.

And that places Auckland at the precipice of an unprecedented shift back in time.

An Auckland house is expected to cost more than $3 million in 20 years time. And at that price, even people with university degrees and good jobs will be locked out of the housing market. The only people able to afford to own their own home will be those who inherited one from their parents.

This is not the sort of New Zealand anyone wants to live in. Inherited wealth disparities on this scale are exactly why many of our ancestors fled Britain - and why we strangled our incipient would-be aristocracy at birth in the 1890's with land taxes. As for how to stop it again, the answer is simple: tax it. We used to have inheritance taxes, which limited the ability of the ultra-wealthy to pass on social disparity. We should bring them back.

Another spy agency caught illegally hoarding metadata

The Canadians aren't just spying on journalists. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service has been caught illegally hoarding metadata:

A Federal Court judge says Canada's spy agency illegally kept potentially revealing electronic data about people over a 10-year period.

In a hard-hitting ruling made public Thursday, Justice Simon Noel said the Canadian Security Intelligence Service breached its duty to inform the court of its data-collection program, since the information was gathered using judicial warrants.

CSIS should not have retained the information since it was not directly related to threats to the security of Canada, the ruling said.

"Ultimately, the rule of law must prevail," Noel wrote, adding, "without it, the actions of people and institutions cannot be trusted to accurately reflect the purpose they were entrusted to fulfil."

There's shades of GCHQ here, which was recently found to have spied illegally on the public for 17 years. And it really makes you wonder whether the New Zealand SIS or GCSB are doing the same thing here. Five Eyes agencies share techniques and strategies, and if one has been doing something for a long time, its a good bet that the others are too. Clearly there's a consensus among the Five Eyes that mass domestic metadata surveillance is a useful counter-terrorism tool. But our Parliament has never approved such a thing, and it seems to go well beyond the particularised suspicion the warrant mechanism has been sold to us on. I think we need some assurances that our intelligence agencies are not doing this. And if they won't give such assurances, we can only conclude that they are guilty and need to be shut down.

Canada spies on journalists

Another week, another example of police spying on journalists - this time in Canada:

Rights campaigners are among those sounding the alarm over the erosion of press freedom in Canada after it emerged that police in Montreal had spent several months monitoring the phone of a journalist in order to identify his sources.

La Presse, one of Canada’s oldest and largest newspapers, said on Monday that at least 24 surveillance warrants were obtained by Montreal police to track the phone of columnist Patrick Lagacé. The warrants enabled the force’s special investigation unit to track Lagacé’s whereabouts using the GPS in his phone, as well as monitor incoming and outgoing text messages and calls.

The revelations left Lagacé shaken. “I was appalled,” he said. “I was living in the fiction that police officers wouldn’t dare do that, and in the fiction that judges were protecting journalists – and hence the public – against this type of police intrusion.”

Lagacé isn't alone. It turns out that Quebec police have spied on at least six other journalists (and another one today), all in an effort to uncover their sources, often for the dubious purpose of shutting down leaks. All of these cases of spying would have been judicially authorised, though as with the Hager case here there are natural questions about whether they disclosed all that they should have done in seeking the warrants. The Quebec government has set up an inquiry to try and get the issue out of the media, but the fundamental problem is that Canadian (and New Zealand) law allows this sort of spying in the first place, with no special protection for the public interest work journalists do. The solution is to write those protections into the law, rather than just relying on caselaw, to create a strong presumption against police and spy agencies interfering in the work of the media.

New Fisk

The poppy has become a symbol of racism – I have never worn one, and now I never will

About as popular as a dead cat

Recently when looking over the list of NZ political parties I was lamenting the shrinking number of small parties in our political system. I should have been careful what I wished for: infamous cat-hater Gareth Morgan has decided to play Bob Jones and found his own political party:

Mr Morgan, a philanthropist and economist who set up The Morgan Foundation - a charitable trust "primarily for the purpose of reducing the wealth disparities between people" - said he has resigned from his position as a foundation trustee to launch his political career.

In a statement, Mr Morgan said The Opportunities Party would aim to improve fairness, environmental sustainability and national pride while reducing poverty and housing prices.

He said fear of losing votes made established parties "champions of inertia and only ever reluctant proponents of incremental change".

On the plus side, it sounds like he's interested in action on climate change. On the minus side, he's interested in superannuation (that is, getting rid of it). The former isn't a hugely popular issue, but the latter means that he'll be about as popular as a dead cat. Or ACT.

Still, even cat-haters deserve Parliamentary representation. Its just a shame that our undemocratic 5% threshhold is likely to prevent it.

That for your royal prerogative, you blaggard!

The UK High Court has ruled that it is for Parliament, not the executive, to trigger Article 50 and exit the European Union. And the reason for the judgement? Good old Fitzgerald v. Muldoon:


Basicly, Brexit means the effective repeal of legislation - and legislation of such constitutional significance that it is the UK's only higher law protected from implied repeal, at that. And that can only be done by Parliament, not the exercise of monarchical prerogative power.

The judgement is of course being appealed, and will go straight to the Supreme Court. It may be upheld, it may be overturned. But in the meantime it's a welcome blow for Parliamentary sovereignty against the executive - and the decaying legacy of the monarchy.

(Title of course thanks to pterry. You can find the source in Monstrous Regiment).