Australia, Whaling and Japan

I see that Peter Garrett (Australia's Environment Minister) is threatening to take Japan to international law over its so-called 'scientific whaling'. He is also threatening to send vessels to monitor the proposed take of about 1000 whales.

This is interesting for several reasons. The first is the use of international legal action. The emergence of global governance (in this case, in the context of the International Whaling Commission) provides increasing opportunity for international legal action. The question is whether sovereign states will accept such rulings, especially when the issue has become a matter of principle. I don't doubt that, in other circumstances, Japan might well have abandoned whaling years ago, but its status as a principle of Japanese sovereignty has made this much more difficult.

Second, a stoush with Japan on whaling may not suit Mr Rudd's opening to Asia as he tries to recover ground lost in the region in the Howard years. Mr Rudd has, as it were, bigger fish to fry than whaling (Oh dear) as he seeks to keep Australia in the various regional groupings that are emerging in Asia, and as he also continues to act as good friend to the USA as it (the USA) seeks to maintain a place in the region.

On the other hand, popular opposition to whaling in Australia makes it a good election issue. Something to be watched.

Plums in Cointreau

Auckland's fruit trees are early this year. My plum tree is laden and about two to three weeks ahead of the last few years. It is a glut, so lots of chutney (plums with shallots, apples, onions, garlic, cider vinegar, spices and fresh chili). The best way of using plums simply (that I know) is this:

• fill a large baking dish with a layer of plums one deep


• slosh some Cointreau, Grand Marnier or any other orange liqueur over them (about two shots). I guess that brandy would work too, but prefer the orange-plum mix.


• sprinkle some cinnamon (a teaspoon or to taste) and brown sugar (depending on how tart/sweet you like them) over the plums


• give the lot a stir to coat


• bake for about 40 mins at 150C (check after 30 mins)


• let cool, and serve with Greek yoghurt, for breakfast or as a dessert.

I think its origin lies in France.

Cathedral Cove and Phil O'Reilly

I walk over the hill to Cathedral Cove a couple of times a year, Despite its popularity, it is usually a quiet, empty and quite beautiful spot along a coast with any number of opportunities to grab an ice cream. Why DOC should allow an ice cream stall to be set up there baffles me. The Herald suggest that the reason is that DOC needs the money, but that makes no sense to me, and this seems to be out of kilter with DOC's usual decisions. I expect that deeper digging into the decision would be fruitful.

However, Phil O'Reilly, CEO of Business New Zealand and scourge of public sector pay rises, also in today's Herald, has given DOC its defence. In a piece on NZ's 'clean and green' image, Mr O'Reilly develops an argument (of sorts) ending in this admonition:

In our commitment to the environment, we need to be careful to avoid an absolutist attitude that can limit our thinking, boxing us in. We need a holistic, not extremist, view.

The sub-text here isn't very 'sub'. We shouldn't be 'extremist' about the environment (think Greens, hemp wearers and smokers, tree huggers). We should be 'holistic' (think ice cream shops at Cathedral Cove, a gutted RMA, mining in the Conservation Estate, weakened MULs).

I don't hug trees, and am rapidly bored by the environmentalist who looks at a glorious oak tree and mutters righteously about 'exotics', but I do see that Mr O'Reilly is stoking the fire lit by Mr Brownlee and the commercial lobbiers who see great profits to be made by reducing environmental protections. We will have industry, mining and the rest of the baggage that goes with economic development, but we seemed to have set ourselves on a sensible path to ensuring a proper balance between industry and environment. Now, under Mr Key, we seem to be rejecting that balance in favour of Mr O'Reilly's 'holism'. This is not a happy prospect.

Motu on broadband

Stuff reports on Motu's assessment of the productivity effects of broadband. Here's the full report:

http://motu-www.motu.org.nz/wpapers/09_15.pdf

Interesting stuff. On the basis of a large scale study (6000 plus firms), the data suggest that broadband does add significantly to productivity, but there is no difference in effect between 'slow' and 'fast' broadband. Also, the report suggests that the take-up of broadband is not as widespread as it should be, particularly in rural areas.

Apart from the implications of this research for the current broadband up-grading focus of government policy, this piece of work highlights the quality of the work done by Motu across a range of areas. The recent work on firm productivity in Auckland is important stuff, as is the series of papers produced on land use and housing. The Motu webpage can be found at:

http://www.motu.org.nz/

Iran: body stealing

As blogged earlier. a nephew of opposition leader, Mir Hossein Mousavi, was killed two days ago in the demonstrations in Iran. It appears that the state has stolen the body, in order to delay or stop the usual funeral, which in this case would be the cause of a major anti-government demonstration. This may work in the short term, but, as the BBC reports, the state appears to have underestimated seriously the level and extent of the opposition, and is now acting contingently, without a plan, and dependent on repression as its only response. Reports suggest that the legitimacy of the government is permanently damaged, including amongst sections of society traditionally allied to the clerical regime.

ONZ for Helen Clark?

Some of the Right Blogs are in a veritable tizz about a rumour to the effect that Ms Clark is to be given the ONZ in the New Year's Honours List. Their rage knows no bounds, especially in relation to the National-led government, which, in supporting such a move, would, it seems, be committing some sort of treason.

I've never understood the the Right's hatred for Ms Clark. I've come to the conclusion that most Right bloggers are men, and they can't cope easily with a highly-competent, intelligent and formidable woman in any position of power. That may be unfair, but the level of vituperation displayed by some Right bloggers must be driven in part by misogyny.

Bryan Gould on inflation

I see that the ideologues have risen from their Xmas excesses renewed in their defence of a single metric approach to running the economy. Mr Farrar, presumably well-grounded in economics, seeks to be purer than most, arguing for a inflation 0-2% range, rather than the weak-willed, soft-brained 0-3% currently in place.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/opinion/3180326/Labour-should-not-take-its-eyes-off-the-target

One would, of course, hardly see the Australian Centre for Independent Studies (whence comes Mr Kirchner, the author) as a hotbed of balance. Its blurb states, rather innocently:

The CIS is actively engaged in support of a free enterprise economy and a free society under limited government where individuals can prosper and fully develop their talents.

I suggest that we might also start reading, amongst others, Bryan Gould, as in:

http://www.bryangould.net/id102.html

As he says:

"The first step we should take is to re-focus our macro-economic policy. The Brash theory has been that, if we focus exclusively on controlling inflation and leave the rest to market forces, everything else will fall into place. The problem has been that the counter-inflationary instruments we chose – ever higher interest rates and a consistently overvalued exchange rate – distorted the operation of market forces and did enormous damage to our productive economy. Little wonder that, by loading the dice against ourselves so that we made it difficult to develop export markets or to resist import penetration, we fell behind those who did not handicap themselves in this way."

Iran: heightened tensions

Scuffles between Opposition and pro-regime students in Tehran University yesterday

Since the death a week ago of Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, a top rank Iranian cleric and, also, a major critic of Ahmadinejad's re-election, Iran has been in turmoil. Nine are reported dead in Tehran yesterday after major demonstrations, and other centres are also reporting major political turmoil on the streets. One of the dead in Tehran is reported to be a nephew of Opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi, which will increase the level of tension across the country.

The Guardian makes an interesting point. We are now in the Islamic month of Moharram, in which war and bloodshed are forbidden. Deaths as a result of demonstrations during this month are likely to lead to major public mourning, much as has fol owed the death of the Grand Ayatollah. It was this cycle of mourning, leading to mass popular mobilisations that brought down the Shah in 1978.

It is clear that a head of steam has been growing for a decade or more against the clerical rule imposed after 1978. There is a powerful desire to 'modernise' the political system, and introduce something akin to full democracy, rather than the current mix of elected power and cleric-run committees. Moreover, there is a desire amongst the modernisers to rid the country of the fundamentalist para-military and security forces that arose after 1978, such as the Basij militia.

Tax reform: Mr Key's mission in 2010?

There seems to be something of a head of steam emerging around tax reform as the leitmotif of government policy in 2010. Mr Bollard has focused on the impact of the current tax system on housing demand, suggesting that it has adverse effects on the economic cycle. In other words, the tax system encourages property investment rather than other types of investment. Then we have the Tax Working Group, which is to report this month, and has floated, variously, increased GST, lower top levels of income tax, and increased land taxes, but has also given rise to some radical (and interesting thinking - especially by Gareth Morgan) about guaranteed minimum incomes as a way of integrating the tax and welfare system. One senses that the Opposition is not opposed to a serious discussion about the tax system, though there are concerns about the direction that it might take, especially in terms of the tax burden on the less well-off. Much will depend on the tenor and ideological content of the forthcoming report and the government's take on it.

Matt McCarten: in bed with the Right

Just flicking through Mr McCarten's weekly musings in the Herald, I can understand his feelings for Hone Harawira. I don't share them, but I can understand them. I didn't like Mr Goff's speech much, but Mr McCarten's anti-Labourism becomes more strident with his nomination of Phil Goff for the "Winston Peters Redneck Whistle Award". However, he joins the Right quite happily in his purveying of the tedious Right chestnut about Helen Clark running LP politics by text from New York. This is par for the course - a confused politics that is, today, pro-Maori Party, anti-Labour and pro-Right agendas. He can, and should, do better than this.

Phil O'Reilly: responsible?

Phil O'Reilly's predictions of public sector industrial strife next year indicate a serious lack of judgement. For the head of the main private sector business organisation to stir the public sector waters in this way helps no-one. It reads like a man who disengaged his brain from his mouth when considering this matter. He would, I imagine, be surprised of the head of the SSC were to launch into an analysis of private sector industrial relations. It's not the best analogy, but will serve.

There is an issue here. The cuts mentality that is being honed for the next budget will create significant problems, and I don't doubt that the PSA has developed a robust strategy to respond to the wage and conditions implications of that budget. However, the PSA is a sensible, modern union, preferring to negotiate a solution, rather than take industrial action. It recognises that short-term points-scoring by the Tony Ryalls of this world will have long-term, debilitating impacts on the public service. And, despite the Right Blogs' witterings, we need a strong and effective, well-motivated public sector.

It would be much better if Mr O'Reilly stuck to his knitting.

Manto Tshabalala-Msimang dies: what of Cyril Ramaphosa?

Cyril Ramaphosa

Manto Tshabalaka-Msimang has died in South Africa at 69. As Stuff points out she was a controversial figure in the ANC government

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/africa/3170041/Health-boss-who-touted-garlic-for-HIV-dies

She was one of the exiled ANC members, 30 years outside the country, who gained the trust of Thabo Mbeki whilst in exile. Thus, she was elevated to the role of Minister of Health, a post she held for nine years, in which she served with mixed success. Mr Mbeki took an 'idiosyncratic' position on HIV, which his Health Minister also adopted, the latter becoming known as 'Dr Beetroot' and 'Dr Garlic', because they were recommended as cures for HIV.

Her position owed a great deal to that internal struggle in the ANC between those who stayed, and those who went into exile, which eventually brought Mr Mbeki to power, and which, I believe, had one particular adverse effect on South African politics - it drove Cyril Ramaphosa into business, where he has made a fortune and become a major player, but also at the cost of his reasonable expectation of the Presidency of South Africa. He remains on the ANC National Executive Committee, and was touted as a possible candidate against Jacob Zuma in 2007, but it remains to be seen if he will one day become president. I must blog on Mr Ramaphosa one day, especially on his extraordinary role in South Africa as head of the National Union of Mineworkers and its role in the creation of COSATU, but the Wikipedia entry gives a brief and informative guide to his work and importance:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_Ramaphosa

Kerre Woodham in the Herald

Ms Woodham writes a column in the Herald on Sunday. I assume that her brief is to write an accessible piece each week on topics of the moment. Today, she reprises the Harris case and calls on Ms Bennett to legislate to expel criminal ingrates from the welfare system.

This is predictable pub-talk, a statement of the obvious rehearsed with no additional insight or information, nothing new on the analytical and policy front, no wit and nothing quirky to make is anything other than a statement of the obvious, populist pap into which our print media often falls. Yes, the Harris family is bad news; yes, perhaps something should be done about them (if we have been given the full picture, always a necessary proviso); and......?

Given that Ms Woodham has written in the Herald in the same vein for a long time, I assume that she is well-received by Herald readers, and she may be a delightful human being, but surely there is potential in NZ to find columnists with some greater sophistication and vision.

Eurostar, Reggie Perrin and other train matters

The funny, if bizarre, idea that the current winter weather in Europe could shut down the Eurostar service under the English Channel brought back memories of Leonard Rossiter's Reggie Perrin, always late at the office because of some hiccup on the London rail system. Hiccups included:

"Eleven minutes late, staff difficulties, Hampton Wick."

"Eleven minutes late, signal failure at Vauxhall."

"Eleven minutes late, staff shortages, Nine Elms."

"Twenty-two minutes late, obstacles on the line at Berrylands."

"Twenty-two minutes late, badger ate a junction box at New Malden."

"Twenty-two minutes late, fed up by train delays, came by bike. Slow puncture at Peckham."

"Twenty-two minutes late, escaped puma, Chessington North."

He never used the famous "leaves on line" excuse, which causes much mirth, yet is true. Leaf fall causes a mulch which stops engine wheels gaining traction, at a cost in the UK of about NZ$200 million per year (seriously).

Thinking about trains, I'm also reminded of Richard Branson's "leaning train" (the Pendolino) designed to "lean " into corners of the line and thus go faster. Unfortunately, old-style tunnels and track did not permit the lean (the engine hit the side of tunnels as it tilted), so the engine had to remain more classically upright.

Ms O'Sullivan on Paul Henry

"Dear Fran, why do I do this? What is it about Susan Boyle and ladies' moustaches? Yours, Paul Henry."
In reply: "Dear Paul, I remember you as a pimply, pathetic young man with pretensions to be New Zealand's Michael Parkinson. You haven't changed, Fran."

Spot on.

Obama and the US project

In an imported piece in today's Herald, the need for reform in the US Congress is canvassed. The argument is that the self-interest (and sheer bloody-mindedness) of Congress members is increasingly at odds with the need for effective policy debate and implementation. The suggestion is that President Obama should move to reform Congress' procedures in the light of the obstructions posed to his health measure.

This is a debate with far greater dimension than simple political, administrative practice. It is now not far-fetched to suggest that the US has lost its status as hegemon, in part to the EU, but mainly to China. The post-war consensus about US hegemony in the West, and the post fall-of-the Soviet-bloc view that the US is the global hegemon, are now deeply questionable. The problem for the US seems to be that its politicians and policy wonks - rather like the Roman Senate in a previous empire - may not understand, or adjust to, this new circumstance. This is reinforced by something that I heard from Copenhagen via the UN, which, contrary to the Brown-Miliband-EU line of argument (let's all blame China) suggests that the US simply failed to understand the shifting balance of power in the world and came with immutable demands and attitudes. In this scenario, the bully was confronted, and forced to yield, which in part explains the post-hoc "blame China" response.

The lesson for the US from this is that "business as usual" is no longer possible. From Congress down (and across its policy-making institutions), it must either reassess both internal and external policy settings to reflect the new reality. If not, then Congress will not only be unable to respond to particular issues, such as the crying need for health reform in the US, but also will generally find itself failing to deal with the challenges facing the US. The model here is, perhaps, that of the UK as it lost its global status after 1945. Mainly under conservative rule, that decline was broadly accommodated, with only a few flurries such as the Malvinas adventure, and the endless sore of Ireland. Britain's wars - Palestine, Cyprus, Kenya, Aden and so on - were generally about how to extract the colonial power, rather than how to maintain it. This contrasted, for example, with the Dutch in Indonesia, the French in Indo-China and North Africa, and the Belgians in the Congo. Graceful (more or less) retreat is preferable to bitter, long-fought decline.

The Gloucestershire Wassail: Happy Christmas

Wassail, wassail all over the town
Our toast it is white and our ale it is brown
Our bowl it is made of the white maple tree
With the wassailing bowl, we'll drink to thee

So here is to Cherry and to his right cheek
Pray God send our master a good piece of beef
And a good piece of beef that may we all see
With the wassailing bowl, we'll drink to thee

And here is to Dobbin and to his right eye
Pray God send our master a good Christmas pie
A good Christmas pie that may we all see
With the wassailing bowl, we'll drink to thee

So here is to Broad Mary and to her broad horn
May God send our master a good crop of corn
And a good crop of corn that may we all see
With the wassailing bowl, we'll drink to thee

And here is to Fillpail and to her left ear
Pray God send our master a happy New Year
And a happy New Year as e'er he did see
With the wassailing bowl, we'll drink to thee

And here is to Colly and to her long tail
Pray God send our master he never may fail
A bowl of strong beer! I pray you draw near
And our jolly wassail it's then you shall hear

Come butler, come fill us a bowl of the best
Then we hope that your soul in heaven may rest
But if you do draw us a bowl of the small
Then down shall go butler, bowl and all

Then here's to the maid in the lily white smock
Who tripped to the door and slipped back the lock
Who tripped to the door and pulled back the pin
For to let these jolly wassailers in.

To make the point about China

This is a salutary graph. It shows where China is normally in terms of global economic power. It shows its short-term decline in the era of Imperialism, but also shows its marked climb back since 1978. If one wants to understand the realpolitik of my last post on Copenhagen, this graph helps, for it is an article of faith in the Chinese government that China will assume once again its rightful global role.

Red Alert: attack and substance?

I read Red Alert and occasionally join the debate, It is an important addition to the Left's world in NZ. I will admit to wondering why some Labour MPs blog, and other don't, and what the internal politics of the blog are within caucus, but that's another story.

The interesting question is how Red Alert will develop. It has two modes at present. The first is attack - taking on the government. This is to be expected and applauded. The second - debate - is present, if less well-developed. There have been some interesting exchanges on the economy, the ETS, Auckland, social policy and so on, but there is a real opening here. Red Alert could become a key pillar of the internal policy debate that the LP needs to sustain across its membership. People are increasingly computer-literate and responsive to electronic debate. Moreover, we in the LP should be willing to have some of the difficult debates in public, for that is one important way in which we show our relevance to NZers.

I wonder if the LP is able and willing to take advantage of this new mode of debate. Red Alert is a good start - will it be taken further?

Shifting the blame: the desire to pillory China

Mark Lynas, a writer on global warming, has jumped to the defence of the Brown-Miliband line on Copenhagen, blaming China for the failure, thus removing culpability from the EU and the US.

See http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/22/copenhagen-climate-change-mark-lynas

Mr Farrar jumps to support this line, while the deniers, accepting the Lynas view, are in a backhanded way supporting China for its alleged responsibility for the failure.

Mr Lynas says that he was correct for he was at the crucial meetings. He may have been there, but the argument is far more complex and starts long before the Copenhagen meetings. International meetings of this order are, usually, pre-scripted by previous work, which removes many of the obstacles to an agreement before any leaders arrive at the table. To cut the story short, the Western developed economies failed to make the adjustment to the new balance of power in which China is now possibly primus inter pares at the top table. China, now with a penumbra of supporters internationally, played two hands in Copenhagen. The first was a deliberate heads-up to the West to the effect that China will not be relegated to second-class status, and much of the West's prior calculation about who would determine the outcomes in Copenhagen was wrong.

Second, China has a specific requirement to maintain growth in its economy (if only to maintain political stability) and wants a deal that allows that growth to continue. It should also be remembered that the global economy is in part dependent on the sustaining of that growth. The prior work on China's needs was not done, for the West did not take on board that new balance of power.

We will, one day, see Copenhagen as a major turning point in the global order, when the Western developed economies were forced to understand that their determination of global outcomes is a thing of the past. Lynas' argument is flawed because he doesn't understand this new reality. He is acting as a voice for Western developed economies in disarray as they come to terms with their new, weakened role.

Maui, Mr Key and his holiday break

Mr Key is off to Maui for his Christmas, exhorting we left-at-home people to "enjoy the best of New Zealand". It's probably not the best leaving comment by a PM - you enjoy NZ, I'm off elsewhere, but, then he can afford to.

Now, this is not a Leftist rant against his wealth. He made his pile before he became an amateur politician (for that, in the proper sense, is what he is - a throwback to the days when parliament was the haunt of made men, for whom political life was an agreeable sideline to the Bar, commerce or the social whirl). My socialism has always been about levelling-up. The Mintos of this world - the hard, protestant, fire-and-brimstone sort of socialists - seem usually to want to level down. It's the "a bowl of proletarian gruel beats pate de foie any day" idea of proletarian heaven (with Pol Potish overtones, I sometimes think). I prefer a socialism which does not eschew the good things in life, but makes them accessible to most, in a context which, God forbid, allows for humour, fun, and enjoyment, rather than an endless cycle of Capital reading groups. I know that "true" socialists of the hard-bitten tradition, will see this as weakness, even liberal deviation, but I'm reminded of comments about Ruth First, made at her memorial service in London after she had been murdered by the apartheid state. She was as staunch an activist as any, as her bitter fate showed, but she loved Gucci too, as one of the eulogies captured so well. Socialism with a love of Blahnik, Petrus and El Bulli is not impossible, though universalisation of such experience, or its equivalent, is something of a challenge, on which I am working constantly.

However, I digress. Mr Key is welcome to the delights of Maui. I hope, quite seriously, that he has a happy family time there. And, as he does, I also hope that he has the ability to think about those in NZ that his government is currently threatening - the unemployed on benefits, people on the domestic purpose benefits, those losing ACC cover, those facing school closures, those on the minimum wage facing a reduction in holiday pay, the people of Auckland who want a democratically-run, effective city, those facing destitution because of the rip-off artists in the finance sector, and many other groups. They will try to make the best of NZ whilst he is away, but, for many, it will be enormously difficult. If he does, then he might return with an injunction to the more feral members of his team to think more respectfully of people, to act in the interests of NZ, rather than sectional groups purveying war stories, and to ensure that the platform of inclusion and respect upon which all successful countries are built is protected.

Ms Bennett: softening up the target

Ms Bennett is playing a traditional political game. First you beat up a group, in this case, beneficiaries, then you beat them up some more, using the original beat-up as the excuse. Yesterday, we were fed the Harris story, and a very partial account of the 6000 or so who have been on the unemployment benefit for a year or more in September, and the small number of people (300) receiving $1000 plus per week on benefit (often because of responsibility for children). This is the initial beat-up: crisis in benefits, look at the Harris'.

Then, the subsequent beat-up. Today, she floats the idea that unemployment beneficiaries should be required to re-apply for their benefit after a year. This was an idea initially proposed by Dr Brash, but abandoned because of its controversial nature. It is controversial because it is punitive in intent. The idea is to threaten beneficiaries with the loss of benefit. It is about requiring beneficiaries to experience serious disruption, uncertainty and stress, and to go through a major administrative procedure after one year. She is also thinking about other changes, including work-testing for domestic purpose beneficiaries.

We are full steam into the traditional conservative debate. Beneficiaries are bludgers, who must be harassed, chivvied, made to feel inferior by the rest of us as a consequence of their position. This plays well in National heartlands, and beneficiaries don't vote National (much).

ACC: The Opposition was right all along

Lame

Treasury papers have confirmed, much as the Opposition argued, that the savings created by the government's ACC cuts are a political figment, in that the cuts will simply cause the expenditures to be transferred to other expenditure lines, such as Vote Health, as claimants move to the next best provider. Moreover, much as the Opposition also argued, real cuts in ACC-related expenditure will require further, larger cuts in provision and/or levy increases, and, presumably, measures to prevent transfer of claims to other government departments.

Pansy Wong argues, lamely, that Treasury is wrong. I must say that, in this case, if I had to choose between Ms Wong and Mr Whitehead, the latter would be my preference. This is a sorry story of government ineptitude and spin, but also a warning that the debate around ACC will become rougher still in coming years.

Ed Miliband on Copenhagen, hijacking and countries that do not know their place

"Ed Miliband: China tried to hijack Copenhagen climate deal: Climate secretary accuses China, Sudan, Bolivia and other leftwing Latin American countries of trying to hijack Copenhagen"
(from the Guardian)

So it's OK for the developed, like-minded economies to have private conversations, backroom deals and the like, and to bully the likes of Tuvalu, but when China (something of a larger player than the UK, one might think) and other developing economies (worse still, "leftwing" in some cases) exert themselves, it's a hijacking. The hypocrisy is striking, and it also looks like sour grapes, as Mr Brown, Mr Miliband's leader, clearly thought he could enhance his reputation by being a major player in the Copenhagen meeting.

It is also slightly scary that there seems to be no recognition on Mr Miliband's part of the changing global balance of forces that the last decade or so has witnessed. China is cultivating assiduously allies across the developing world. The debts will be called in in meetings such as that at Copenhagen. The EU and the US may fulminate, but they are not going to get their way as easily as they did.

I can't help thinking that Mr Miliband might take some time to re-read his father's work on the realpolitik of capitalism. It might help him understand better a changing world.

It's Christmas, so let's bash the beneficiaries

The Harris family, currently in the news as a result of its access to social benefits, appear to be an unprepossessing lot. I don't know them personally, and would not take anyone in the Right Blogs' word about their mores, but I've heard enough to know that they are a challenging bunch. It is a trite point to note that their behaviours, in financial terms at least, are chickenfeed against the tax rorts and other behaviours beloved by the buccaneers of our financial world, so I won't make it.

I would be perfectly happy if, the case having been made successfully within extant regulations, the Harris tribe lost their benefits. I would be unhappy indeed if layers of needy beneficiaries lost access to benefits because of rule changes made to deal with outliers like the Harris', or if decent people are harassed by WINZ (at the behest of Ms Bennett) for the same reason.

I note the timing of the Herald's coverage of this, and the Right Blogs' gleeful frenzy of beneficiary-bashing. The season of goodwill to all (people) clearly does not extend much to beneficiaries. The Herald's lists of high benefit allocations probably hides a multitude of desperately sad cases of broken homes and children in difficulty. The number of cases reported in which someone is responsible for large numbers of children - up to ten - suggests young people in very trying situations. It also probably indicates adults taking on an important caring role in the community. Let the Right bash. My thoughts go to those usually unrecognised people who, through community or church or whanau networks, take on the task of looking after young people who are adrift from the security and love provided by families or other caring environments. Now, there is an image more fitted to the season of goodwill.

King Canute of Australian Cricket?

Ricky Ponting is to speak to his team about inappropriate behaviour on the pitch by his team. This is after four of the eleven (yes, four) were either fined or reprimanded for such behaviour in their close game with the Windies in Perth. The worst offender was Shane Watson, whose screaming charge on Chris Gayle after dismissing him (see above) was beyond parody, If one did not understand how cool is Mr Gayle, one might have expected him to use the bat on Mr Watson, so offensive was the behaviour.

Ricky Ponting may speak to them (a probability). He may mean what he says (a possibility). But a major shift in behaviour? Unlikely. Australian sledging goes back way beyond Merv Hughes and Dennis Lillee. Australian cricket has been long been something akin to a successful blood sport. The Windies, in their heyday, moved with arrogance and menace, and were above much of the personal and often racist backchat that the Australians (and others) used. Some sledging was witty, and there are blogs and sites that cover it (e.g.):

Robin Smith & Merv Hughes – Smith had played and missed to Hughes during a Lords Test, prompting Hughes to taunt: "You can't f**king bat". Smith smacked Hughes to the boundary a few balls later and shouted: "Hey Merv, we make a fine pair. I can’t f**king bat & you can't f**king bowl."

Daryll Cullinan & Shane Warne - As Cullinan strode out to bat, Warne told him he had been waiting two years for another chance to humiliate him. "Looks like you spent it eating," Cullinan replied.

Sledging in Cricket: The Best Cricketing Sledges Suite101.com http://test-cricket.suite101.com/article.cfm/sledging_in_cricket

Some was, and is, much more nasty. Ricky Ponting has developed markedly from the larrikin that first played for Australia, but he is part and parcel of that sledging tradition, and I don't expect to see that much better behaviour. And with the Pakistan team next up in Australia, there will be lots of opportunity for backchat and confrontation to take centre stage once more.

Shane Jones for LP Leader? Really?

The entrails being analysed by political writers at the moment must be from some odd type of fowl. The 'Shane Jones for LP leader' movement has, as far as I can tell without foundation, grasped the imagination of these writers, The 'Shane Jones for Leader; Ruth Dyson for Deputy' take on this is even more bizarre. Perhaps pre-Christmas celebrations have overtaken common sense, but I can't see Mr Goff being challenged soon, if at all, before the 2011 election. The options mooted are no more likely to win the election than Mr Goff, and who would want to be the coup leader that took you to election defeat? If it is renewal that's the issue, it won't be found in the Jones or Cunliffes, but in the Robertson generation .

The issue that will stir people up is the quality of thinking around policy before the next election. Let's see what begins to emerge from whatever discussions are in train at the moment.

Cambodia: disgrace under pressure

Presumably under great pressure from China, the Cambodian government has deported back to China 20 Uighurs, who escaped to Cambodia with the help of christian missionaries. This is direct contravention of international practice on refugees. Hundreds of Uighurs have been prosecuted after the recent riots in Xinjiang and Urumqi; so far, 17 have been sentenced to death. The 20, including children, have been deported to likely prosecution and, possibly for some, the prospect of death. This is a disgraceful act by the Cambodian government, for which they have been rightly condemned internationally.

Proposed holidays changes

Tacky, vindictive

Governments often favour their traditional supporters. There is nothing new in that. But the distasteful proposal to change the basis upon which holiday pay is calculated, in such a way as to reduce that payment in many cases, is, simply, nasty. It is a simple way of reducing employers' wage costs, and transferring that reduction to employees, who will have to make up the difference. The idea that the current system is so complex that it is damaging NZ business is far-fetched. It is, I believe, another war story, of the type that the employers' organisations have been feeding the minister in the hope of anti-union activity.

This is tacky, vindictive stuff.

Matt McCarten: simply wrong, and badly so

Mr McCarten is correct in today's Herald about Il Duce's agenda for Auckland. It is about a "mate's rate" carve-up of Auckland's resources over time, a backdoor route to the latter's preferred ideological outcome for our biggest conurbation, via manipulated political and commercial control. This has never been "an under the radar issue" (as Mr McCarten describes it) for anyone with an ounce of political sense in Auckland. If he's just discovered it, the mote may well be in his eye.

Mr McCarten is, however, quite wrong, and churlishly so, to suggest that the Greens are doing the 'heavy lifting' in terms of the criticism of Il Duce and his strategy. Phil Twyford (with a layer of LP and other activists, some maybe Green, but not corporately so) has been vastly more visible and vocal on these issues than a Green Party that is almost invisible since its loss of Ms Bradford. Mr Twyford has been quartering the city in meetings on this issue, has worked Red Alert tirelessly on the issue, questioned the government at length about the issues, and has generally irritated the government by his persistence and grasp of issues.

I have a lot of time for Mr McCarten's wit and creativity, but his piece today is sectarian nonsense, and does him no credit. I for one would be happy if the Greens had anything like a profile on this matter in Auckland, but its reach has escaped me so far.

Big business grumpy with Mr Key: he didn't share the pastries

Copenhagen has failed despite Mr Brown's attempts to beat up a success. It failed because the big players did not get their way, and they probably won't in the future. Failure now may chart a way for a sustainable success in the future, but lots of attitudes will have to change first.

A side issue of interest is the anger being expressed by our big commercial player - Fonterra etc - at their exclusion from the official NZ delegation. Since Labour came nto power in 1999, MFAT has been much better at accommodating interest groups in their discussions and delegations, and it is noteworthy that the senior official, Mr Macey, specifically attributed the exclusion to a ministerial decision, that is, some combination of Messrs Key, Smith and Groser decided that they didn't want business at their strategy and information exchange sessions. I happen to think that civil society representation (and broader than business groups) should be at such international meetings as part of the official delegation. But, in this case, I am surprised that this government should give two fingers to their traditional supporters, the business community. There is a story here still to be revealed - either of inter-personal issues, or of a government that did not want observers at its discussions, or of simple stuff-up (in which case, MFAT has to be complicit).

Cashing up the fourth week?

I see that there are reports that the CTU is not uncomfortable with a proposed change to the holidays legislation, which, I understand from the SST, will allow the recently-given fourth week to be cashed up. I would be surprised if they were so sanguine about this. It is the case that we work far too long as it is (but not particularly 'smartly') and I reckon that people should have the four weeks, rather than get into the Japanese tradition of not taking breaks (which has resulted in Japan in often draconian measures to get people to take a break). Breaks are good; three weeks a year is not sufficient. This is an issue which goes further than worries about possible extension of the proposed legislation to remove time-and-a-half provisions (though that is an important issue).

Coda: I was correct. One "Helen" (presumably, Kelly) has posted on Red Alert the process whereby the minister leaked materials to the press, which, in turn, has not reflected accurately the CTU position.

Tainui do not need this.

The sudden sacking of Hemi Rau from Tainui, allegedly on the basis of information gathered by Tuku Morgan about alleged leaks to the Waikato Times in relation to the Maori King's office restructuring, is the start of yet another internal turmoil. One understands that the Employment Authority is already in the loop, with Stuff reporting that Mr Rau is demanding immediate reinstatement. Stuff's account of the evidence for the dismissal is worrying, in that it suggests insubstantial reasons for such drastic consequences. The immediate sacking of an employee is a serious act. As the DoL webpage puts it:

Serious misconduct is behaviour within the workplace that creates an immediate need to review the employment relationship. This could include theft, or physically or mentally abusive behaviour to colleagues or customers. In such circumstances, your investigation must be thorough, well documented and undertaken promptly. This is an area where you may consider suspending the employee ......... while that investigation takes place.

The internal politics in Tainui have been complex for many years. This latest event simply adds another difficulty for Tainui to overcome.

Brian Gaynor on the Capital Markets Taskforce

A good piece today. I think that, in this case, the Left (that is, people like me) have to move beyond the knee-jerk stuff about SOE privatisation and look at the report as a whole. Mr Gaynor provides a way to do this His discussion of the regulatory regime that should apply to individual investors aims at the heart of some of the shonky schemes that have caused so much grief in NZ recently. Better, more accurate information, better fee disclosure, fee-based rather than commission-based advice, amongst others, are good ideas. He then moves on to talk about the need for a better enforcement and the failure of the Securities Commission to plug the gap. He is particularly savage about the Commission's failings, and points out the the preferred alternative was first mooted in the Russell Committee 20 years ago, but never implemented.

This is an argument for robust, transparent regulation, which should be considered seriously and carefully.

Il Duce lives to fight another day

The Herald's report of unrest in the ACT caucus and moves to unseat Il Duce covers rumour that has been doing the rounds for some time. Roger Douglas has been critical of Il Duce's populism for a long time, and the latter's series of errors have now made him a political liability for ACT. Equally, Mr Key clearly did not want upheaval in his support party and moved to support Il Duce - which, given what the latter had said about the former's abilities, was probably not done with great civility.

This all adds up to Il Duce being on warning from his own, and from National. Further major stuff-ups will not, I imagine, be tolerated. All this becomes interesting in the context of local government reform and the Supercity. Big problems in the latter before the 2011 election will be a serious problem for National, especially if the Left wins the mayoralty. No amount of distancing will overcome the fact that Mr Key gave the Supercity project to Il Duce. Problems will rebound directly on National, which will be unforgiving towards Il Duce. And one hears that there are issues that will not, and cannot, be sorted by October next year.........

Coda: the Right blogs are in a frenzy of denunciation around the failed coup against Il Duce - noting that a failed coup in a total population as small as that of ACT is laughable. Moreover, the general dislike of both Mr Douglas and Mr Brash amongst the voting public is well canvassed.

Mildly amusing

It is always interesting to watch Christians attempt to be edgy and controversial as they seek to build the flock. St Matthew-in-the-City has stirred the heavy-duty God-botherers into a tizz about its Christmas billboard. The idea that Joseph may have been less than happy to have been replaced in the marital bed by the Holy Spirit is well-tilled ground, with Joseph usually being portrayed as pretty happy with the outcome, him being a good man etc etc. . So the idea that he might have been just a bit miffed , both by the gazzumping and its deliverer seems to me to be safe ground for exploration. But no, there remain the literal ones, who do think that poor Mary was ravished by the Holy Spirit, that she subsequently bore Christ, that the Three Kings wandered by, that Herod slew the new-born etc etc etc. . So up they turn, with paint cans, to destroy this blasphemy, in the process bringing ever more attention to the billboard (which strikes me to have been its purpose in the first place).

Personally, I think that they would all do better by having an annual showing of the 'Life of Brian' every Christmas Eve at St Matthews, laughers on one side, hecklers on the other. For, as we know, blessed are the cheesemakers.

Coda: and it's down again, permanently, after a woman took to it with a knife. For He is a vengeful God, apparently.

Copenhagen and the developing economies

People should not be surprised that the developing countries have made the Copenhagen discussions difficult for the developed world. I was much taken by Secretary of State Clinton's intoning of the view that much time had been wasted at Copenhagen, primarily because the developing world, including that hotbed of radicalism, Tuvalu, had not toed to required line. Why they (the developed world) expected this, is understandable, After all, for decades, they have been stitching up global talks on the basis that might is right, with special dinners for the big players to sort things out, and backroom beat-ups to discipline the 'minor' players. A combination of aid-based bribes and threats has held the line for those many years.

Now, and especially in the long years since the commencement of the Doha Round of trade talks, the BRIC economies , and some of the other larger, developing economies (like Indonesia, in the G20) have refused to be browbeaten. They have mastered the art of saying 'no' until they are broadly comfortable with outcomes. China's rise as a global player has been a key factor in this staunch response, but it also recognises the failing hegemony of the US, and the inability of the EU tom play a similar, global role. Of course, because developing countries are playing a stronger hand does not mean that their populations will benefit equally. As often as not, the developing country agendas are those of their agro-export aristocrats, or their manufacturers, but the capacity for independence in global debates is a building block towards a more democratic global order.

People are already saying that Copenhagen will fail, and that a new conference will have to be convened shortly in Mexico. My guess is that the US and its partners will have to stump up a very large sum indeed to buy off developing country opposition and create a deal there. The strings attached to such a sum will be interesting to observe.

Another take on freedom of the press

"The Committee to Protect Journalists says at least 68 journalists were killed in 2009, the highest one-year tally ever documented by the group."

In part this reflects the recent appalling massacre of journalists in the inter-faction electoral feud in the Philippines, but, in many countries, the act of reporting the news fairly and accurately can mean death. For those of us who value that reporting, and see it as an essential dimension of a civilised society, news of deaths in this number should give pause for thought and reflection. It also makes me think that journalists in New Zealand might take more risks in opening up stories and challenging us with better analysis. They face grumpiness from a minister, or no invitation to the Friday drinks do. Few of them face any of the risks that their colleagues overseas face.

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies

Any book that starts as follows:

"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a zombie in possession of brains must be in want of more brains."

will infuriate Jane Austen purists (amongst whom I tend to number myself). Yet Seth Grahame-Smith's re-write of the classic as a book of manners in a zombie-ravaged early nineteenth century England is amusing and a good holiday read. It is over-laboured at times, and goes on for far too long, but Charlotte's demise made me grin, as did the motley sisters forming the 'pentagram of death' to ward off zombies at the Netherfield Ball.

Hanover, Allied Farmers and the Watson/Hotchin Show

A Dr Earnshaw, clearly a thoughtful man, reported in today's Herald on Allied's take-over of the Hanover debt via a shift into Allied shares:

"Investor Dr Brian Earnshaw said he considered himself a reasonably intelligent person.

"But when it comes to investing money, I am dumber than dumb, as my $70,000 investment in Hanover Finance so-called secured debentures clearly shows.

"We investors have been cunningly manoeuvred into a position where we are virtually forced to vote for the proposal, which allows a small, relatively unknown company with only $10 million in equity and a share price close to its lowest ever to swallow Hanover's $400 million debt with highly probable subsequent indigestion," Dr Earnshaw said.

"One should beware that if Allied goes into receivership, we as shareholders would be last in the queue behind all the other creditors."

Sad to say that the market has opened on Allied shares, which have promptly plunged 31%, reinforcing Dr Earnshaw's forebodings. As many a disgruntled investor has pointed out, at least Mr Hotchin had the gumption to turn up to some of the recent Hanover meetings. Mr Watson seems to be missing in action, presumably letting Mr Hotchin carry the can with the investors.

I am no expert in things financial, but I do wonder how this case would have been handled on other jurisdictions.

Church abuse in Ireland

The Catholic News Service comments:

"Pope Benedict, the statement said, "was deeply disturbed and distressed" by the contents of a report by an independent Commission of Investigation, headed by Judge Yvonne Murphy, which looked at the handling of some 325 abuse claims in the Archdiocese of Dublin in the years 1975-2004.The report concluded that during those years, rather than being concerned about the victims, Catholic leaders were more interested in "the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the church and the preservation of its assets.""

It is another sorry scandal, similar to others in the UK, Australia and elsewhere. I don't doubt that the Pope means what he says, and I also don't doubt that the majority of the Church is incensed and deeply hurt by both the abuse and the Church's response. The problem is that investigations and promises of action seem to do little in the face of systemic behaviours that are found globally in the Church. I'm not a Catholic, or indeed anything, but I have over the years worked with extraordinary Catholic priests, dedicated to social justice, and often putting their lives at risk in ways most of us cannot imagine. I knew one Jesuit, many years ago, who was the armourer for a guerrilla group, who could discuss the intricacies of Thomas Aquinas' thinking whilst stripping professionally an AK-47. People like these, and their adherents, deserve better of the Church. Maybe that old capitalist ploy -restructuring- is called for?

Brown on the move, but let's be careful

The weight of office (or, at least, the chain)

John Banks is not a figure for all Auckland. Most of us involved in Auckland politics have recognised this from Day 1. I've been arguing for many months that the National Party (Cits and Rats) will bring in someone else of national or iconic status in order to try and blow the Brown campaign out of the water. My guess is that there will be a lot of thinking going on about this over the summer, if the current lead of Mr Brown over Mr Banks is sustained. The problem for the National Party is that Mr Banks has been trying his best to be very visible and very nice. He doesn't do cuddly, but he's trying the next best thing - signs of basic humanity. This isn't working. It won't because he has too much National, privatising, pro-Remuera and Epsom, sod the rest about him. Aucklanders know this. And it doesn't help when Mr Barnett propose Supercity leadership is needed which has few of the characteristics displayed by Mr Banks.

The Left needs to be careful about this, There is no room for triumphalism. Mr Banks is a good candidate for the Left. It would be better if he was the National Party's option. The bigger the lead that Mr Brown gets, the more likely that Mr Banks will be rolled. And then a Michael Jones-type figure will appear, with a group of Leclerc du Tramblays around him or her. Its a good time to be positive about the lead, but also to be measured in comments and thinking!.

Elegant argument in Kiwiblog

December 15th, 2009 at 11:50 am

I am a former National voter who changed over to ACT a few years back.
At the last election I saw Helen KKKlarKKK as sooooooo bad I voted National in order to be rid of her.
I am now extremely sorry to have done so and I beg the forgiveness of my fellow New Zealanders.
I hate that low class jewish prick MORE than I have hated that ugly old lesbo.
FUCK YOU JOHN KEY. ROT IN HELL.
That asshole sells my 7 year old son’s future down the Waikato River every day.
Again, FUCK YOU JOHN KEY YOU LOW CLASS YIDDISH PRICK.
(I feel a bit better now)

Well, there we are, then.

Haruki Murakami: 'The Elephant vanishes'

I've just finished this collection of short stories by Murakami (1993). I had previously read 'Norwegian Wood' (1987), but will now seek out more of his work. Elegant, spare, multi-layered in meaning, he sits between an image of traditional Japan and what it has become in the post Second World War period. Japanese is notoriously difficult to translate with any success in terms of meaning, but Murakami seems to make the leap better than many. A delight to read, especially 'The Silence', a short story about adolescence, boxing and innate personal power.

There is only the Labour Party, warts and all

The debate about where the Left is in NZ is interesting, but it can be reduced to something very simple. The Marxist Left - the post 1956 New Left as amended and embellished by the late-1960s and 1970s movements - is so small that it wouldn't even earn the 'splitters' epithet from the 'Life of Brian' sketch. Such as it is, it is also deeply negative - after all, when you've been betrayed by reformism and Stalinism for so long, who wouldn't be fed up (mutter mutter, grumble grumble). The New Social Movements mean far less in NZ than they do in, say, Latin America, where they were, and perhaps still are, a power base for significant, militant social and political organisation. And they are so 'personalistic' here, perhaps as an effect of scale. I know that the politics of the personal are important, but they impregnate political relationships in NZ to a debilitating degree - 'I don't like him or her because ......'. And the idea that Left politics will be saved by Maori activism is so deeply flawed that I wonder about its survival as an idea.

We are left with the Labour Party and its periphery, where I sit in the absence of anything better or more effective to which to belong. I also notice that almost all my peers are in the same boat (or else they are sitting to one side, grumpy, or have given up completely and are making pots of money). So, what to do? One has, I fear, to get stuck into the branches of the LP and become engaged in the debate. And, funnily enough, when one does, one finds layers of people champing at the bit about the need to renovate the LP. I now understand the LP in NZ to be a rank-and-file (in modest number, let's admit) which is increasingly giving candidates and leadership a hard time about the lack of politics and direction in the party's direction. There is a distance between the parliamentary group, particularly the old guard, and the membership which the younger aspirants to power are feeling very clearly. There is, God forbid, the whiff of real politics in the air. It could be easily dispelled, perversely most easily by an electoral victory which would pull the shutters down on debate.

One thing above all is needed to make the change more effective and visible. The stranglehold on policy discussion, in which the likes of Jordan Carter are supposed to be leading policy debates, but in which rank-and-file are not involved, needs to be broken. A combination of branch-level activism and pressure from the younger MPs could do this. They should be encouraged.

Sovereign Policing?

"Operation Unite, which involved police in Australia and New Zealand cracking down on drunken violence, has been described as the largest combined police operation in Australasian history."

Radio New Zealand has been reporting the anti-drink driving campaign currently in progress in NZ as an international operation, in which the performance measures are being reported on a Trans-Tasman basis. Now, I'm all in favour of international co-operation, but I hadn't realised that our policing measures and their performance evaluations were now so fully integrated into the Australian policing process. This appears to be the coercive arm of the state taking ANZCERTA very seriously, and doing its bit for greater co-operation with Australia. Perhaps they know something that we don't know? After all, the policing of a society would have to be one of the first activities requiring unificaqtion as two sovereign states merge into one.

The Copenhagen Negotiations

One thought has been growing in my mind about the conduct of the Copenhagen negotiations. Mr Groser's take on them keeps the thought front and centre. He is a trade negotiator, used to decade-long negotiations which move the boundaries a bit here and a bit there, in the happy expectation that a new round of talks will come round to begin the process again. The logic is that there is nothing finite about the negotiations - they can, in principle, go on forever.

The climate change negotiations are quite different. Many see them bound by finite constraints, if that's how one wishes to see the prospect of the end of life on earth. How immediate are those constraints is not agreed, but most (except the deniers, deeply entrenched head-down in the ideological sand) accept that we do not have the luxury of round after round of negotiations. It dawns on me that we do not have the experience or the apparatus for such 'finite' negotiations. Our mind-set and predilections are not in tune with the scope and potential of the challenge facing us. If so, it may require something akin to an immediate and overwhelming crisis to break the mold, yet that may be too late. This is worrying.

Mr Barnett: Positioning himself?

Michael Barnett is in today's Herald, detailing the 10 qualities required of the Supercity's new 'Leader'.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10615276

We all know that Mr Banks is thought to be damaged goods and probably unelectable in wider parts of Auckland. We know that the National Party, in its Cits and Rats guise, is looking at alternatives. We know that Mr Barnett fancies his chances. So we can see how Mr Barnett scrubs up against them -hmmm, business partnerships, should OK for the CEO of the Chamber of Commerce....

Of course, Mr Barnett will not get the nod, but it's about playing the game.........

Liberal Democracy and Protest

Hamilton 1981

The right to protest is in mind at the moment. Two things in the news raise the issue. The first was Morning Report's worry that the Copenhagen climate protesters may not have told the Danish police about their march (at which about 1000 were arrested); the second is Mr Farrar at Kiwiblog who is exercised by the idea that teachers and principals are campaigning against poorly thought-through national educational standards. He pontificates that an elected government is sovereign and we should do what it says because we voted for it.

He is wrong, of course, from several different perspectives. From a perspective within the liberal democratic tradition, the right to protest, to campaign, take some levels of direct action, is understood to be a reasonable, even necessary, dimension of the political order. From a libertarian perspective, one must protect the minority from the 'tyranny of the majority', thus establishing the right to protest precisely against the voted majority view. From a Marxist perspective, challenging the established bourgeois order is the bread-and-butter of class struggle.

What is always galling, if predictable, is the self-righteousness of the Right on this issue. This is the same mob who supported the threatened 'strike of Capital' in the early years of the Clark governments, or the disruptive protests of the truck drivers in the later years, who support anti-Chavez or anti-Morales marches, but thinks trade union and social movement protest is somehow illegitimate. The response to teachers' and principals' serious professional opposition to the imposition of standards captures this very well. Does Mr Farrar want to deny these professional groups the right to oppose these measures? It seems that he does. He is wrong. To lobby, to send letters, to approach potential allies in opposition to the measure is perfectly acceptable and he should accept this. Of course, his position is consistent with others he holds. He is the classic mouther of democratic platitude, yet the opponent of democratic practice, be it in his blog's editorial policy, or in his one-eyed view of democracy in civil society.

What if groups seek to 'break the law', as Ms Tolley ponders, by, for example, not running the standards at a particular school? No doubt, sanctions can be imposed. But here Ms Tolley faces another traditional aspect of the democratic order: prosecutions or board sackings may be more damaging politically than the application of the standards. It remains to be seen whether we arrive at such a pass, but the standards idea, as proposed, has been pushed through against all professional judgement, without proper trial, by a minister who appears to be incompetent. No wonder protest is in the air, and a good thing too.

Kiwiblog and Open Debate?

Mr Farrar has introduced a system whereby, on the basis of some judgement or other, even polite and courteous posts on his blog are to be hidden if they are not sufficiently popular. He claims that it is about the quality of the posts, but, looking at some of his regulars, his notion of quality must be very particular. It is, of course, the real view of the Right, who parrot lines about free speech and transparency, but who are as willing as any Stalinist regime to 'manage' information flows.

'lprent' at the Standard is perfectly correct to suggest that this is a form of institutionalised bullying - make comments that meet the views of the blog, or be censored, for that is the clear effect of the measure, as the battalion of regular Right commentaries swings into action. Anybody from the Left who has posted on Kiwiblog knows that one does so in clear expectation of a bucket of bile from the less pleasant inhabitants of that world. The saving grace has been the minority who read and respond courteously in return. Clearly Mr Farrar has no interest in such debate.

I have been successfully bullied. I shall not post again on Mr Farrar's blog, for he is shown to be so much like his tradition, a mouther of liberal principle, but a purveyor of censorship and political manipulation. As I have posted on the Standard, Mr Farrar will care not one jot about this decision. and, frankly, nor will I.

Coda: the style of Kiwiblog's debate as per today (14th): "I have to agree with Sonny, Pete, you’re a twat. Welcome to my RIP, I can’t be bothered with your nonsense anymore. You and Philu can compare notes" or' “Pete, I’m bored, you are simply a tiresome troll."
One of the truest things ever said on Kiwiblog. (Dunno what draws these screaming leftist wankers here.)'. And this is mild. The current, thoroughly racist anti-Islam debate on Kiwiblog, quoting a seriously deranged Dutch conspiracy theorist, is perplexing (but it is where fascism comes from - externalise the problem "Jews", "Moslems", "socialists", draw up the laager and start the repression).

Male Age expectation 57 in Russia

I hear on the radio that male life expectancy in Russia has fallen to 57, in part as an effect of Russians drinking, on average, 18 litres of pure alcohol annually, over twice as much as is recognised to be seriously damaging. Stories abound about Russian winters, in which hundreds are found dead in the bitter cold, having wandered off under the influence. But it is a bigger issue. The old Soviet state applied some brakes on alcohol consumption, but once the 'market reform' model swept in, the brakes were removed as the large alcohol-producing firms moved to take up new opportunities in the Wild West that was Russia's neo-liberal reform. Youth drinking has burgeoned massively (though NZ should be wary about being too holy on that front). I seem to remember hearing that vodka, sold by the dozen bottles, was much cheaper than Coca Cola, rather like it used to be in Batista's Cuba (but, in that case, it was rum).

The current crisis, and a massive increase in unemployment, has highlighted the internal consequences of the Russian reform model, The government seeks to blame the crisis on the US and its sub-prime crisis, but no-one with any insight into Russia takes this view. The internal contradictions created by poor governance, corruption, poorly-performing financial institutions and instruments, low investment in the real economy and the rest have been shown starkly. Unemployment is nominally at 8% and growing, but I think that figure is a gross underestimate. The social welfare system that existed under the Soviet model has collapsed, and the government has an explicit policy of trying the protect the 'middle classes' from the consequences of the crisis, leaving the lower socio-economic layers to fend for themselves. It's a mess that has been growing for years since the fall of the Soviet model , and there is no obvious sign that the market model will provide a sustainable answer, particularly given the political control of the model imposed by Putin and the oligarchs.

Education standards

Doris Day teaches Clark Gable (Teacher's Pet)

Like Trevor Mallard, I support education with high standards. Like Mr Mallard, I recognise that they derive from a mix of quality of teaching, quality of resource, and the perennial and difficult issue of background, that complex of expectation, aspiration, family commitment and ability to, or experience in, supporting educational success. Ms Tolley's standards do little to address that difficult equation. What it does is use an old-fashioned commercial model - measure and harass internal performance, miss the significance of the value-chain in which the firm operates. It also uses another old-fashioned commercial model - do as I say, for I am a boss, rather than listen to the people who do the job.

It's the last point that always bugs me. Over on the Right blogs, layers of people attack teachers as useless, defensive, unionised and whatever else seizes their imagination. There are bad teachers, as there are bad professionals in all walks of life - politicians have to be careful here about glass houses. Teacher education in NZ can improve in terms of jettisoning some of its political correctness and some of the less innovative staff therein (early retirement is a good strategy here). But, on the whole, teachers do a hard job, in part picking up the job that families used to do, even doing the feeding and washing in some cases. Sure they have holidays, but most have work to do in some of those 12 weeks. They are moderately paid, given their qualifications and responsibilities. They deserve a break, rather than the public pillorying that Ms Tolley's mob offers. If you want education to improve, you don't make it out to be a lousy job done poorly!

I would like to see some of these barrack-room lawyers be given a week to explain Calculus to 35 16-years old adolescents, or to explain why Lear is such a tragic figure, or how you add and subtract to a 5 year old. They might think again about opening their collective traps!