Greens MP, Sue Bradford has certainly opened a can of worms with her anti-spanking bill. She is either condemned for taking parents rights away from them in disciplining their offspring, or she is congratulated for having the courage and intestinal fortitude to put the way New Zealanders discipline their children onto the political agenda and platform. Who is right?
Ms Bradfords solution to the scenario where New Zealand has been accused of being one of the most dangerous places for children, has been to put forward a bill to repeal a certain section of the Act that allows parents reasonable force to discipline their children. Its purpose has been described as sending a signal that the use of force against children is not acceptable. Its effect will be to outlaw smacking. Police will have to prosecute anybody who broke the law. No assurances can be given that it won't happen. But will the law become an ass?
There will not be a flood of prosecutions of bewildered parents to the courts, because most incidents of parents disciplining their children will be behind closed doors anyway. The occasional case of parents losing their cool in supermarkets will be just that, an isolated case. However those parents who beat their children with whips,bamboo sticks, hosepipes, pieces of wood and other articles are actually more likely to be prosecuted now that disciplining of our children has become a public debate, and rightly so!
Don't condemn Ms Bradford and the Government who may support her bill at the third reading in a few weeks time, just be grateful that our childrens interests have been considered and debated on the national stage. Just remember this, also, that it is never right or legal to assault adults in public ever, even if they are playing up and making a total pest of themselves in a supermarket or a public bar somewhere!
Finally, we have to ask ourselves the following question: Is teaching children that violence is an acceptable solution to problems in anybody's interests? Perhaps Sue Bradford's stimulated public debate has already caused many parents to personally think about their own disciplinary methods towards their own children. Ms Bradford is not an ogre or threat to society, she is a politician who has never sought physical force of any degree to discipline her own five children. Does she deserve personal threats? Of course not! Those people who have taken such a negative reaction towards their perceived right to physically discipline their children have a few issues of their own to sort out!
Incidently, the state of California and its residents are having their own particular debate about banning physical force against those children who are under three years of age!
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Friday, February 16, 2007
New Zealand's welfare state not the cause of NZ's social decline!
New Zealand's welfare state is not the cause at all of our social decline and the creation of an underclass, as claimed by Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten which published a full page report headlined The Kiwi miracle that faded, this is the liberal conservative newspaper attacked for publishing those controversial Islamic cartoons that insulted and infuriated Islam last year.
The above newspaper regularly attacks the Danish Government's welfare policies that are based on New Zealand's. A welfare crisis; an underclass heralding social disaster in New Zealand? I don't think so. New Zealand has problems and has had these social problems that were caused by the economic reforms of the late 1980's and the excesses that followed with the policies of the Bolger/ Shipley National Government, 1990-1999.
The Employment Contracts Act, the most fascist piece of legislation since Sid Holland's emergency regulations created during the infamous Watersiders lockout in the early 1950's, was designed to emasculate the NZ trade union movement, and it did; to reduce real wages, and it did; and to create flexiibility for NZ employers on a scale not seen since the great depression, and it did. There were a variety of insidious changes created to our society because of that legislation alone. Some of the biggest victims of that legislation were mature workers, many of whom have never had long term employment since that time. Awards were scrapped and employers soon did away with overtime and holiday double time rates. The side effects to these employment changes caused corresponding social changes which have deterioated to such a degree that there is a real and existing underclass of New Zealanders, a severe and worsening drug problem and violence on such a scale in parts of our country never seen before, not even during the great depression era. That is where John Key's underclass originated!
We all know what the problems are, where they originated and what should be done. The problem is they are now so deep-seated and difficult it will take time to eradicate. The Labour Government and its allies have started well by reducing unemployment rates to the lowest in 20 years. Its Working for Families policy will have a positive effect on poverty, but wage rates have to be increased dramatically as will welfare benefits in the short term!
John Key and his National Party are irrelevant and do not have positive policies to improve the lot of the lower socio-economic sector of this country, or even the middle and lower middle classes of New Zealand!
The above newspaper regularly attacks the Danish Government's welfare policies that are based on New Zealand's. A welfare crisis; an underclass heralding social disaster in New Zealand? I don't think so. New Zealand has problems and has had these social problems that were caused by the economic reforms of the late 1980's and the excesses that followed with the policies of the Bolger/ Shipley National Government, 1990-1999.
The Employment Contracts Act, the most fascist piece of legislation since Sid Holland's emergency regulations created during the infamous Watersiders lockout in the early 1950's, was designed to emasculate the NZ trade union movement, and it did; to reduce real wages, and it did; and to create flexiibility for NZ employers on a scale not seen since the great depression, and it did. There were a variety of insidious changes created to our society because of that legislation alone. Some of the biggest victims of that legislation were mature workers, many of whom have never had long term employment since that time. Awards were scrapped and employers soon did away with overtime and holiday double time rates. The side effects to these employment changes caused corresponding social changes which have deterioated to such a degree that there is a real and existing underclass of New Zealanders, a severe and worsening drug problem and violence on such a scale in parts of our country never seen before, not even during the great depression era. That is where John Key's underclass originated!
We all know what the problems are, where they originated and what should be done. The problem is they are now so deep-seated and difficult it will take time to eradicate. The Labour Government and its allies have started well by reducing unemployment rates to the lowest in 20 years. Its Working for Families policy will have a positive effect on poverty, but wage rates have to be increased dramatically as will welfare benefits in the short term!
John Key and his National Party are irrelevant and do not have positive policies to improve the lot of the lower socio-economic sector of this country, or even the middle and lower middle classes of New Zealand!
Monday, February 12, 2007
John Key's a dick - ask his son!
The new National Party leader in New Zealand learned his first personal hard lesson - don't ask children for advice, especially your own!
He recently asked his eleven year old son, Max, for feedback on a television appearance.
Apparently Max's response was something like this: " Well Dad, you looked like a dick. You sounded like a dick. And the guy interviewing you was convinced you were a dick!"
He won't be asking for advice from young Max again in a hurry. Was Max right? Most people really think he is a dick. I think he is a dick because he and National still don't have anything positive to offer New Zealanders. As for the people of South Auckland, they know he is a dick!
He recently asked his eleven year old son, Max, for feedback on a television appearance.
Apparently Max's response was something like this: " Well Dad, you looked like a dick. You sounded like a dick. And the guy interviewing you was convinced you were a dick!"
He won't be asking for advice from young Max again in a hurry. Was Max right? Most people really think he is a dick. I think he is a dick because he and National still don't have anything positive to offer New Zealanders. As for the people of South Auckland, they know he is a dick!
Monday, February 5, 2007
Waitangi Day is not the real New Zealand Day celebration in my book!
Waitangi day is not the real New Zealand Day celebration in my book! Not any more. The divisiveness caused by the radical Maori leadership up in Waitangi for many years now has destroyed for ever any notion that Waitangi Day can be a day for New Zealanders of all races to embrace the concept of real nationhood in this country; radical Maoridom doesn't want it. It has some concept of its own in this regard. It is obsessed with the colonialism of the past - something now despised by non-Maori as much as the present generation of Maori society. I'm of Scandinavian/ Celtic descent and don't hold any brief for the former British empiracal social concept.
Twenty years or so the Waitangi Day holiday was popular by most New Zealanders of all races and was universally celebrated throughout New Zealand. For a short while it was renamed "New Zealand" Day by the late humanitarian prime minister, Norman Kirk, remembered historically for taking the hand of a young Maori boy as he strode up to the Marae at Waitangi. It was quickly changed back to Waitangi Day by Robert Muldoon a few years later; a man and prime minister ironically known for his own particular brand of political divisiveness. Norman Kirk wanted February 6th to be known and remembered for more than just its historical significance - he wanted it to have the same meaning among New Zealanders as Australia Day has with Australians, and Independence Day has with Americans. Sadly it has been demeaned by representatives and descendants of one of the so-called partners of the Treaty of Waitangi - the tangatawhenua - Maori themselves, who lack cultural respect for the descendants of the other partner to the treaty, and all those other non-Maori who have become New Zealands by birth or through immigration to these shores since 1840. It is really of historical significance that Maori are immigrants to New Zealand as well - they are the first people of this country who arrived here in the 13th century and adopted this country as their own after the great migrations during that century; they are not indigenous to New Zealand which was not inhabited by humans until they arrived.. They came from the general South Pacifica area of modern day Rarotonga and Tahiti - migrating here by ocean-going waka or canoes. This fact alone is one of the great migrations of the last millenium.
I personally believe that another day should be set aside to recognize and celebrate New Zealand nationhood, perhaps Dominion Day which commemorates that day in 1901 when NZ ceased to be a colony of England and Britain. Waitangi Day can continue to be celebrated for its historical significance. Once the outstanding treaty claims are resolved during the next ten or so years, the treaty will gradually lose much of its significance and become more of a historical founding document.
Twenty years or so the Waitangi Day holiday was popular by most New Zealanders of all races and was universally celebrated throughout New Zealand. For a short while it was renamed "New Zealand" Day by the late humanitarian prime minister, Norman Kirk, remembered historically for taking the hand of a young Maori boy as he strode up to the Marae at Waitangi. It was quickly changed back to Waitangi Day by Robert Muldoon a few years later; a man and prime minister ironically known for his own particular brand of political divisiveness. Norman Kirk wanted February 6th to be known and remembered for more than just its historical significance - he wanted it to have the same meaning among New Zealanders as Australia Day has with Australians, and Independence Day has with Americans. Sadly it has been demeaned by representatives and descendants of one of the so-called partners of the Treaty of Waitangi - the tangatawhenua - Maori themselves, who lack cultural respect for the descendants of the other partner to the treaty, and all those other non-Maori who have become New Zealands by birth or through immigration to these shores since 1840. It is really of historical significance that Maori are immigrants to New Zealand as well - they are the first people of this country who arrived here in the 13th century and adopted this country as their own after the great migrations during that century; they are not indigenous to New Zealand which was not inhabited by humans until they arrived.. They came from the general South Pacifica area of modern day Rarotonga and Tahiti - migrating here by ocean-going waka or canoes. This fact alone is one of the great migrations of the last millenium.
I personally believe that another day should be set aside to recognize and celebrate New Zealand nationhood, perhaps Dominion Day which commemorates that day in 1901 when NZ ceased to be a colony of England and Britain. Waitangi Day can continue to be celebrated for its historical significance. Once the outstanding treaty claims are resolved during the next ten or so years, the treaty will gradually lose much of its significance and become more of a historical founding document.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
A National past-time - dreaming of political office in New Zealand
The New Zealand National party, the opposition party in this country look like staying there for a long, long time!
The new leader, in a string of leaders since Jenny Shipley stabbed Jim Bolger in the back and lost the Treasury benches for National after nine years, eight with Bolger as PM. New Zealand had had a gutsful of the right wing party which had become obsessed with what had become known as New Rightism and privatisation for the sake of it.
Well, the Don of the National Party has gone - before he became another Julius Caesar and was knifed in the back too! The foolish, politically naive Brash, who was a bit like Bill Clinton and couldn't keep his fly done up and his long fingers out of another man's snatch has been replaced.
But is John Key the " key to the kingdom" for National? If his keynote address ( all these puns?) is any example they will be in opposition for a total of twelve years!
He concentrated on society, claiming that an underclass exists, kids go without breakfast, others leave school without qualifications; gangs are a problem in NZ etc. Spare the bloody rod, John, your party turned a social problem into a bloody catastrophe, for god's sake. We see and hear about an underclass, drugs like methamphetamine ( known here as "P"), which is involved in every major crime or murder in this country, every night on TV.
He really showed how out of touch he was with NZ society. This millionaire who happened to be brought up by his widowed mother in a state house in Christchurch and went on to become a millionaire. A NZ dream? Hardly! During his address he spoke about NZ kids - the Samoan, the Maori, the Asian and... the Kiwi kids? You have to be white to become a "Kiwi kid"? Ask John Key - he said it and it was not taken out of context or was a misquote! What does that tell you?
I don't think Labour will have too much to worry about with Key at the National helm. Bill English may have been a different story, second time around with his Bolgeristic attributes - a big Catholic family!
The new leader, in a string of leaders since Jenny Shipley stabbed Jim Bolger in the back and lost the Treasury benches for National after nine years, eight with Bolger as PM. New Zealand had had a gutsful of the right wing party which had become obsessed with what had become known as New Rightism and privatisation for the sake of it.
Well, the Don of the National Party has gone - before he became another Julius Caesar and was knifed in the back too! The foolish, politically naive Brash, who was a bit like Bill Clinton and couldn't keep his fly done up and his long fingers out of another man's snatch has been replaced.
But is John Key the " key to the kingdom" for National? If his keynote address ( all these puns?) is any example they will be in opposition for a total of twelve years!
He concentrated on society, claiming that an underclass exists, kids go without breakfast, others leave school without qualifications; gangs are a problem in NZ etc. Spare the bloody rod, John, your party turned a social problem into a bloody catastrophe, for god's sake. We see and hear about an underclass, drugs like methamphetamine ( known here as "P"), which is involved in every major crime or murder in this country, every night on TV.
He really showed how out of touch he was with NZ society. This millionaire who happened to be brought up by his widowed mother in a state house in Christchurch and went on to become a millionaire. A NZ dream? Hardly! During his address he spoke about NZ kids - the Samoan, the Maori, the Asian and... the Kiwi kids? You have to be white to become a "Kiwi kid"? Ask John Key - he said it and it was not taken out of context or was a misquote! What does that tell you?
I don't think Labour will have too much to worry about with Key at the National helm. Bill English may have been a different story, second time around with his Bolgeristic attributes - a big Catholic family!
Friday, January 26, 2007
And a good morning to you too friend!
And a good morning to you too friend!
This is Pete's Kiwi Forum - all I need now is some Kiwis to make some comment.
Now if you are not a Kiwi, you may ask, and rightly so, just what is a Kiwi?
Kiwi is New Zealand idiom for a New Zealander. Thats my first lesson for visitors to my forum.
I will be giving more free lessons on what I hope will be a weekly forum.
Regards,
Pete
This is Pete's Kiwi Forum - all I need now is some Kiwis to make some comment.
Now if you are not a Kiwi, you may ask, and rightly so, just what is a Kiwi?
Kiwi is New Zealand idiom for a New Zealander. Thats my first lesson for visitors to my forum.
I will be giving more free lessons on what I hope will be a weekly forum.
Regards,
Pete
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)