Media watch

25 May 2019

MediaWatch

Media Watch is a focus on New Zealand media, blogs and social media. You can post any items of interested related to media.

A primary aim here is to hold media to account in the political arena. A credible and questioning media is an essential part of a healthy democracy.

A general guideline – post opinion on or excerpts from and links to blog posts or comments of interest, whether they are praise, criticism, pointing out issues or sharing useful information.

World view

Friday GMT

WorldWatch2

For posting on events, news, opinions and anything of interest from around the world.

School pupil climate change protests

Thousands of school pupils took to the streets today in protest about a lack of action on climate change. They had also protested on 15 March but that was overshadowed by the Christchurch mass shooting.

It’s good to see teenagers prepared to speak up about issues that are important to them, and to many, climate change inaction is of extreme importance and urgency.

RNZ:  Thousands of children across New Zealand turn out for climate change strikes

The second round of climate change strikes have been taking place today with thousands of school and tertiary students around Aotearoa skipping classes to take part.

Around 1000 turn out in Auckland

The Auckland Schools Strike for Climate wrapped up after 1000 students lay down on Queen St in protest with students from at least 20 schools taking part.

They were chanting and holding signs, and with police escorts, shut down entire blocks of Queen St as they lay down, and chanted “Wake Up”.

Wellington students call for declaration of climate change emergency

In Wellington, student leaders at the school strike for climate have urged the government to toughen up its zero carbon bill.

Thousands of students marched from Civic Square, through downtown Wellington to Parliament in Wellington, where they urged MPs to move the goal for net zero carbon emissions from 2050 to 2040.

They also called for Parliament to declare a climate emergency.

Strike leaders told the rally the world is in an emergency and political leaders need to act.

Christchurch students also turn out after 15 March strike cut short

More than 200 students and parents gathered in Christchurch, where the first school strike on 15 March was cut short by news of the mosque attacks.

Zahra Husseini said the well-being of the environment is emphasised in her religion.

“It’s very important we look after our nature, our environment because it affects our personal well-being as well in our community.”

‘Our education won’t mean anything … if the world is in flames’ – Nelson student

In Nelson, hundreds of students from schools throughout Nelson and Tasman marched down the main street.

A large crowd gathered on the Church Steps, before the students chanted their way along Trafalgar Street, attracting huge support from onlookers.

Stuff: Kiwi school students strike again for urgent action on climate change

Thousands of youngsters nationwide dropped pens for placards on Friday, calling for urgent action on climate change for the second time.

In Wellington, students gathered in Wellington’s Te Ngākau, Civic Square, before marching through the streets to Parliament.

The crowds shouted “no more coal, no more oil, keep your carbon in the soil”, calling for “climate justice” and drastic action by political leaders to enforce change. Adults shouted support to protesters as they bee-lined toward the Beehive.

Stuff – Hear our voice: Waikato and Coromandel students demand climate change action

In Hamilton, about 300 students converged on Civic Square on Friday afternoon to chant slogans, wave banners, and to grill politicians on environmental issues.

In Thames, students called on MPs and the council to take urgent action to address climate change.

Meanwhile, south of Hamilton, the Cambridge Tree Trust put on its own climate strike outside Cambridge Town Hall.

Charlotte Matthews, nine, took the day off school to support the protest and said politicians need to treat climate change as an emergency.

ODT:

School pupils and students marched along George St in Dunedin today, as part of strike action aimed at sending a message to New Zealand politicians about the urgency of climate action.

Zedd reports from Dunedin:

just got back, about an hour ago.. about 1000 attendees, mostly school kids, but also; quite a crowd of ‘we older folks too’

whilst they are often seen as ‘all noise’.. at least they are out there making it, as opposed to APATHY !

nga mihi ki a koutou 🙂

Expect this to be ongoing.

Social media switches attacks to partner of MP, Kiwiblog prominent

Yesterday the social media bash wagon continued attacking Green MP Golriz Ghahraman, but also widened attacks to her partner Guy Williams, by dredging up historic tweets.

David Farrar chose to feed red meat to his baying crowd at Kiwiblog, further inflaming a nasty campaign against Ghahraman

Particularly this one.

Williams is a comedian, but that was a crap joke about Don Brash. Fair enough to criticise it.

But to bring it up nearly two years later to add to the Ghahraman pile on is also crappy.

Ghahrama’s past also keeps being dredged up and misrepresented (more than she misrepresented it herself) – for example I have seen a cropped photo of her and a criminal she was involved in defending as a lawyer.

David Farrar chose to include the two year old tweet in this post David Seymour on free speech – he claimed ” this tweet this morning” even though it is clearly dated September 11 2017, which was before Ghahraman became an MP.

Seymour used strong language about a political opponent (and they are not words I would use) but compare that to this tweet this morning:

Joking about running someone over because you don’t like their politics.

Now don’t get me wrong. I don’t have a problem with Williams’ tweet by itself. But I ask people to imagine this.

Think if the partner of a National MP tweeted about whether they should run over a Green MP. The media would be denouncing it as hate speech and inciting violence.

Ghahraman does have legitimate security concerns, based on the vile messages about lynching her on a private Facebook group. The people responsible should be held accountable.

I think it was particularly poor of Farrar to include this tweet in an op ed by David Seymour that he posted.  He would have known this would have fed Kiwiblog commenters already at times raging rampant over his revised site rules.

Comments on the thread include:

Brian Marshall:

She is a menace to freedom. Huge threat.
If anyone can’t see what David Seymour is referring to, then I suggest they don’t belong in a New Zealand Parliament.
The most disgusting thing is that David Seymour is described as some sort of Nazi, but those proposing Hate Speech laws are acting like Fascists of which Nazi’s are branch.

hullkiwi:

I am in total agreement with you Brian. Her utterances on this topic and other matters are an affront to democracy and with it, she is a menace to democracy.

David Garrett:

Yeah but did she actually get death threats?? Please refer to my comment above… In short, if the polis think you have been credibly threatened they are in there for you…some little snowflake who thinks she’s been threatened: Not so much…

alien:

It is interesting that in a week that a report on bullying etc in parliament we see some of these people and media bullying the leader of the act party. I’m sure we’ve all heard these green mps say far far worse about national mps and a prime minister.

Given the levels of vitriole directed at Gharaman on Kiwiblog over the last few days that’s rather ironic, defending Seymour and implying ‘green mps’ must be far worse (with no evidence given).

Lipo:

As the discussion on Free Speech is being had, I heard Peter Williams this morning say that he thought Hate Speech should be decided by (and only by) the recipient of the intended words. While this has some merit I think this is wrong.
Hate speech should only be defined as “Hate Speech” by the person speaking the words.
It is always what the words meant to say not on how the recipient received them

That’s a novel approach.

I don’t know if Peter Williams is being quoted correctly, but claims like that are ridiculous, and Isee no chance of the scaremongering claims getting anywhere near law.

the deity formerly known as nigel6888:

So a refugee politician who specialises in abusing and baiting anyone who doesnt share her communistic objectives has managed to get a few cretins to abuse her back.

and……….. trumpets……….. she’s the victim!

Utterly remarkable for its predictable banality.

I have seen quite a few cretins claiming to be victims in this debate. Seems to be a common approach these days (prominently used by Donald Trump) – attack, then claim to be the victim.

GPT1:

I do not understand the carry on re. Seymour’s comment. I guess it could be argued that he should have said “her position on this issue is a threat to freedom” but it seemed to be a robust political – rather than personal – rebuttal.

As it happens I agree that Ms Ghahraman’s attempts to regulate free speech have the effect of being an attack on our free society.

‘Attempts to to regulate free speech” have been grossly overstated in this debate. Ghahraman has expressed her opinion, as has Seymour. That is free speech in action.

There is a lot of hypocrisy on this, defending Seymour’s right criticise as he sees fit, but attacking Ghahraman for doing the same thing, trying to shout and shut her down.

Defenders of Ghahraman also come under fire. Wangas Feral:

That Collins and other National women MPs jumped in as White Knights to come to the aid of GG is the most upsetting thing in this whole affair. Making it a gender issue shows that they are no better than the professional victims of the left. Collins has really gone down in my estimation now.

Kiiwiblog has always had a smattering of worthwhile comments amongst the noise. Fentex:

Finding someone representative of something relevant is needed to make the point – ideally DPF wants to find a quote by Golriz Ghahraman representing the position he wants highlighted.

And wouldn’t finding quotes from her supporting Seymour’s position she’s uniquely dangerous go some way to that?

This is what she’s quoted saying…

“it is vital that the public is involved in a conversation about what speech meets the threshold for being regulated, and what mix of enforcement tools should be used.”

…and I think she’s been vilified because that statement takes the implicit position there is speech that must be regulated.

While I beleive people do accept incitement to riot or murder is a crime and is properly outlawed and punishable I think some, and clearly Seymour, suspects Goriz means something altogether more oppressive and intrusive which constitutes a “menace to freedom.”

After all what we all broadly accept as improper speech (incitement to commit crimes etc) is already illegal, so therefore any conversation about new restrictions must be about something else – something not yet illegal.

I think I understand his point, and I suspect many objecting to his attitude misunderstand the subject and have interpreted it in a different context (i.e if they already suspected Seymour of racism they may see different implications and meaning in his statement).

If you keep your eye on the subject and don’t let identities distract you there’s a continual ongoing debate about hateful speech and discussion of what might be done to avoid dangers it engenders*, but please don’t go haring off on tangents about different issues – it doesn’t help and only emboldens those who wish to use tactics of distraction and tribalism.

Maggy Wassilieff:

Ghahraman has made her position clear…
she believes our law does not protect groups identified by gender, sexual orientation, religion, or disability.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/112708601/we-need-laws-with-real-teeth-to-protect-our-online-safety

Ghahraman has stated what she believes, and we should be debating things like that. But we are nowhere near any sort of  legal clampdown on ‘free speech’ that some are claiming.

 

 

National – “Robertson concedes defeat on budget rules”

National’s finance spokesperson Amy Adams has responded to Minister of Finance Grant Robertson’s announcement yesterday that the Government core debt target would change to a range (see Grant Robertson: shift from net debt 20% target to 15-25% range).


Robertson concedes defeat on budget rules

Finance Minister Grant Robertson has today thrown in the towel by scrapping his self-imposed debt target, National’s Finance Spokesperson Amy Adams says.

“Grant Robertson has been backed into a corner by allowing the economy to slow, over promising and making poor spending choices. Now, instead of a fixed target Grant Robertson has lifted the debt limit by 5 per cent. That loosens the purse strings by tens of billions of dollars.

“This is a blunt admission the Government can’t manage the books properly, it is not wriggle-room. This makes the fiscal hole look like a puddle.

“You can almost guarantee that means debt at the upper end of the range of 25 per cent. This is an admission of defeat from a Finance Minister who has repeatedly used these rules to give himself the appearance of being fiscally responsible.

“This decision will mean billions of dollars more debt because the Government can’t manage the books properly and wants to spend up on big wasteful promises in election year.

“This will pay for things like Shane Jones’ slush fund, fees-free tertiary and KiwiBuild – in other words, it’s wasteful spending.

“Debt isn’t free. It will have to be paid for by higher taxes in the future.

“The debt target is the latest broken promise by the Government as the ‘year of delivery’ continues to be an embarrassing string of failures.

“It took the last Labour Government two terms to lose its fiscal discipline. This Government has given up in 18 months. This confirms you simply can’t trust Labour with the economy.”

Grant Robertson: shift from net debt 20% target to 15-25% range

One of the biggest talking points coming out of Minister of Finance Grant Robertson’s pre-budget speech to Craigs Investors Conference yesterday was a shift from a net debt target of 20%, to a much more flexible range of 15-25% dependent on economic conditions.

The 20% target was a feature of the Labour-Green fiscal responsibility agreement prior to the 2017 election.

Robertson 24 March 2017: Labour and Greens commit to rules for responsible financial management

The Labour Party and the Green Party have agreed to Budget Responsibility Rules, which will provide the foundation for sound fiscal management after the election.

“New Zealanders rightly demand of their government that they carefully and effectively manage public finances. We understand that and are committed to delivering this,” says Labour Finance Spokesperson Grant Robertson.

“These rules demonstrate how Labour and the Greens in Government will manage the economy prudently, effectively and sustainably.”

Under the Budget Responsibility Rules the Government will:
• Deliver a sustainable operating surplus across an economic cycle
• Reduce the level of Net Core Crown Debt to 20 per cent of GDP within five years of taking office
• Prioritise investments to address the long-term financial and sustainability challenges facing New Zealand
• Maintain its expenditure to within the recent historical range of spending to GDP ratio
• Ensure a progressive taxation system that is fair, balanced, and promotes the long-term sustainability and productivity of the economy.

The Government will establish an independent body to make sure the rules are being adhered to.

Since the Labour-Green-NZ First Government took over in late 2017 the target (and fiscal prudence) has been strongly criticised by people on the left who have been demanding much more spending for ‘urgent needs’.

Relevant section of yesterdays speech under Budget 2019 Economic Priorities – Fiscal sustainability:


We are reducing the level of net core Crown debt to 20 percent of GDP within five years of taking office. New Zealand has low levels of Government debt by international standards, but we remain vulnerable to shocks that are beyond our control, such as earthquakes and other natural disasters. We have made our commitment to keeping debt under control to ensure that future generations of New Zealanders are in a position to be able to respond effectively to any such shock.

This Government will prioritise investments to address the long-term financial and sustainability challenges facing New Zealand. This is apparent in the intergenerational wellbeing priorities we have identified in this year’s budget and restarting contributions to the NZ superfund and our focus on issues such as climate change.

We will maintain Government expenditure within the recent historical range of spending to GDP, which has averaged around 30 percent over the past 20 years. We are also focussed on the quality of spending, with Ministers running prioritisation exercises across their portfolios to identify spending that doesn’t fit with the Coalition Government’s priorities.

I am pleased to announce today that on the 30th of May the Budget will show that we are meeting these rules again, as we did in last year’s budget.

I know there has been some criticism of this approach – particularly around the debt target. For me it is a question of balance. We have made, and will continue to make, significant investments in our future, but we also know that the volatility of the world, be it economically or through natural disasters, biosecurity incursions or unexpected events, is never far away.

The Public Finance Act obliges Governments to outline their long-term fiscal strategies at Budget time. One of the key elements of this is the Government’s approach to debt.

People in this room will all have different views on what it could or should be. That in part depends on the levels of investment you believe the Government should be making and in what areas.

We also have to take into account capacity constraints at any point in time – like in our construction sector. With this in mind, I am comfortable with the 20% point that we have been targeting. But circumstances can obviously change.

Beyond the Budget Responsibility Rules, our fiscal intentions in this budget will signal a shift to a net debt percentage range, rather than a single figure. At this point we are looking at a range of 15-25% of GDP, based on advice from the Treasury. This range is consistent with the Public Finance Act’s requirement for fiscal prudence, but takes into account the need for the Government to be flexible so that it can respond to economic conditions.

Essentially, our current 20% target falls in the middle of the new range that will exist from 2021/22 onwards.

A range gives governments more capacity to take well-considered actions appropriate to the nation’s circumstances – circumstances that change over time. It establishes boundaries within which debt is kept to sensible and sustainable levels and where fiscal choices are driven by impact and value.

For example, a government may choose to move higher up the debt range to combat the impact of an economic recession, or where there are high value investments that will drive future economic dividends. At other times it may be prudent to reduce debt levels to the lower end of the range to provide headroom for future policy responses.

Grant Robertson: Budget 2019 Economic Priorities

Minister of Finance Grant Robertson outlined economic priorities for the 2019 budget, due next week, in a speech to the Craigs Investors Conference yesterday.

He is pushing the ‘wellbeing’ focus, mentioning it 15 times in his speech overall.


Budget 2019 Economic Priorities

In next week’s budget you will see investments to support our economic strategy.

This year’s Budget is different. There are three fundamental elements to the Wellbeing Budget.

First, a whole-of-government approach. This is about stepping out of the silos of agencies and working together to assess, develop and implement initiatives to improve wellbeing.

Secondly, a wellbeing approach means looking at intergenerational outcomes. We have to focus on the long-term thinking about the impacts of policy on future generations as well as thinking about meeting the needs of the present.

Thirdly, we need to move beyond narrow measures of success. This can be seen through the development of the Living Standards Framework Dashboard and from the Indicators Aotearoa New Zealand work led by Statistics New Zealand.

We have developed our Budget priorities on the basis of a wellbeing analysis. We looked at the evidence and got expert advice to assess where we have the greatest opportunities to make a difference to New Zealanders’ wellbeing. We have focused our efforts on those opportunities.

This approach has led to some significant and different programmes, like the $320 million investment announced last weekend to address domestic and sexual violence. This is the wellbeing approach in action. The evidence shows the long-term impact that domestic violence has, especially on children. We are taking a joined-up government response to start addressing this long term challenge. We have brought together eight government agencies, working with the community to take on this scourge that has such massive social and economic consequences.

From an economic perspective, our wellbeing analysis showed that we have some way to go in achieving our vision of a productive, sustainable and inclusive economy.

Productivity growth is a key driver of incomes both at a household and country level. Despite working longer hours on average than workers in many developed countries, New Zealanders’ incomes have for some time remains in the bottom half of the OECD.

In addition, the Government has set ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets to meet the 2015 Paris Agreement goal of keeping temperature rise to no more than 1.5 degrees.

As a result, two of the priorities in this year’s budget are:

• Creating opportunities for productive businesses, regions, iwi and others to transition to a sustainable and low-emissions economy; and

• Supporting a thriving nation in the digital age through innovation, social and economic opportunities.

Come Budget day you will see targeted investments in these areas to support more productive, sustainable and inclusive economic growth.

Fiscal sustainability

Of course, fiscal sustainability is an inherent part of maintaining and improving intergenerational wellbeing and a sustainable economy.

That’s why this Government made a commitment to our Budget Responsibility Rules when we came into office.

These include:

Delivering a sustainable operating surplus across the economic cycle. The key word here is sustainable.

That means our surpluses will exist after we have funded our policy objectives, so that issues are not kicked further down the road for the next government or generation to deal with, as I discovered after coming into my role as Finance Minister.

We are, reducing the level of net core Crown debt to 20 percent of GDP within five years of taking office. New Zealand has low levels of Government debt by international standards, but we remain vulnerable to shocks that are beyond our control, such as earthquakes and other natural disasters. We have made our commitment to keeping debt under control to ensure that future generations of New Zealanders are in a position to be able to respond effectively to any such shock.

Thirdly, this Government will prioritise investments to address the long-term financial and sustainability challenges facing New Zealand. This is apparent in the intergenerational wellbeing priorities we have identified in this year’s budget and restarting contributions to the NZ superfund and our focus on issues such as climate change.

Fourthly, we will maintain Government expenditure within the recent historical range of spending to GDP, which has averaged around 30 percent over the past 20 years. We are also focussed on the quality of spending, with Ministers running prioritisation exercises across their portfolios to identify spending that doesn’t fit with the Coalition Government’s priorities.

I am pleased to announce today that on the 30th of May the Budget will show that we are meeting these rules again, as we did in last year’s budget.

Our Budget Priorities are focussed on the outcomes New Zealanders want to achieve and all Ministers and agencies will be collectively accountable for delivering them. And in their delivery, this Government will follow a disciplined fiscal strategy. The strategy gives the balance to be both a responsible manager of public finances and responsive to New Zealand’s intergenerational wellbeing needs.

We’ve prioritised spending that improves the wellbeing of all New Zealanders. This means tackling the big long-term issues, by investing in an economy that is more productive, sustainable and inclusive.

Come Budget day you will be able to see that this is not simply the same old Budget repackaged with softer edges and brighter colours. You will see a Budget that is new, with a more structured approach and a new, explicit emphasis on what we want to achieve for the long term for our country.

 

Media watch

24 May 2019

MediaWatch

Media Watch is a focus on New Zealand media, blogs and social media. You can post any items of interested related to media.

A primary aim here is to hold media to account in the political arena. A credible and questioning media is an essential part of a healthy democracy.

A general guideline – post opinion on or excerpts from and links to blog posts or comments of interest, whether they are praise, criticism, pointing out issues or sharing useful information.

Open Forum – Friday

24  May 2019

This post is open to anyone to comment on any topic that isn’t spam, illegal or offensive. All Your NZ posts are open but this one is for you to raise topics that interest you, or you think may interest others.. 

If providing opinions on or summaries of other information also provide a link to that information. Bloggers are welcome to summarise and link to their posts. Comments worth more exposure may be repeated as posts. Comments from other forums can be repeated here, cut and paste is fine.

Your NZ is a mostly political and social issues blog but not limited to that, and views from anywhere on the political spectrum are welcome. Some ground rules:

  • If possible support arguments, news, points or opinions with links to sources and facts.
  • Please don’t post anything illegal, potentially defamatory or abusive.

FIRST TIME COMMENTERS: Due to abuse by a few, first comments under any ID will park in moderation until released (as soon as possible but it can sometimes take a while).

Sometimes comments will go into moderation or spam automatically due to mistyped ID, too many links (>4), or trigger text or other at risk criteria. If they pass muster they will be released as soon as possible (it can sometimes take hours).

Social chat

“Is there any way we could have a thread for the more lightweight stuff like music and general chat?”

Do it here. Social only, no politics, issues or debate.

Please no personal attacks or bickering. Anything abusive, provocative or inflammatory may be deleted.