Winston Peters speech in Norway on international relations

New Zealand’s Minister of Foreign Affairs has just given a speech to the Norwegian Institute of International Relations:


Takk og Velkommen (Greetings)

For many of you living here in Norway it must seem New Zealand is a country at the very end of the earth.  Having made the flight here, we can confirm that you’re absolutely right!

While New Zealand is about as far from Norway as you can travel, this is just a geographic separation.  Despite distance we are close partners. We share a great number of similar values and experiences; but there is much potential for Norway and New Zealand to be closer partners still.

Sadly, the terrorist attack that took place in Christchurch recently means that we also share the experience of a horrific attack on our home soil.  It is no exaggeration to say that something of New Zealand’s innocence was lost that day.  We endured an utterly callous act of terrorism, perpetrated by a coward against people at prayer in their mosques.

We know that Norway has suffered a similar, brutal act of terrorism, with the 22 July 2011 attack.  We are deeply grateful for the messages of sympathy, support and solidarity we received from Norway, including from His Majesty King Harald V and Prime Minister Erna Solberg.

Following the attack in Christchurch, we are grateful that Norway also offered its very practical support, and to share the lessons learned following your own experience eight years ago.  We will visit the memorial today in Oslo and lay a wreath in remembrance of those lives that were lost.

Friendships such as ours assume even greater significance in these difficult times.

Many have asked whether New Zealand’s foreign policy settings have shifted in the wake of the Christchurch attacks.  The answer is that while the act of terrorism disrupted our national life, for a time, New Zealand’s foreign policy continuity is not disturbed because its foundations are deeply rooted in our national values and experience.  The values that drive us remain strong:

  • Equality, tolerance and fairness;
  • Democracy – New Zealand is one of only nine countries with an uninterrupted sequence of democratic elections since 1854;
  • Freedom, from fear, and from want;
  • Human rights, as set out in the 1948 Universal Declaration;
  • Guardianship for our environment;

Our foreign policy has, and will always be driven by clear-eyed assessment of New Zealand interests and these bedrock New Zealand values.

But we recognise that achieving solutions that advance our interests and align with our values, depends on the ability to work with other countries.

The New Zealand Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, said in her first major foreign policy speech: “we speak up for what we believe in, stand up when our values are challenged, and work tirelessly to draw in partners with shared views.”

There are few places in the world that are as close to us in terms of values and how they see the world as Norway and your Nordic neighbours.

Domestically, we both enjoy high standards of governance, consistently taking out the top spots in international surveys reflecting transparency and the absence of corruption.

Norway and New Zealand lead the world in most global measures of equality, peacefulness, personal freedom and respect for human rights.

We also share a record of being trailblazers in terms of social justice.

You may know that New Zealand was the first country in the world where women achieved the vote – in 1893.

Nordic countries have also been global leaders on gender empowerment.  Given the leadership Nordic nations have shown in providing for the poor and vulnerable in their societies, it may interest you to know that New Zealand created the first comprehensive welfare state in the 1930s.

Our countries have also applied this value-driven approach on the global stage, often in partnership with each other.

We share similar world views on global issues. These include trade, the environment, human rights, disarmament, peace and security – as evidenced by our close collaboration when New Zealand recently served on the UN Security Council – and adherence to the international rules based system.

We are instinctive and active multilateralists who are unafraid to stand up for what we believe in. Within the United Nations, Norway and New Zealand collaborate pragmatically and effectively within a small like-minded grouping of States, appropriately known as “the Mountains”.

New Zealand and Norway are both active contributors to international peace and security, including as mediators and regular contributors to peace operations.  We both have strong histories working as principled, independent and constructive partners in the Middle East.

In South Sudan, where Norway likewise has a deep and proud history of engagement in the pursuit of peace, New Zealand personnel for a number of years have also added real value to the UN peacekeeping mission. And a former Parliamentarian colleague, David Shearer, is doing a seriously important job as the head of that UN mission.

Given our close alignment of values and perspectives, it is only natural that we should do more together, both bilaterally and on the global stage.

To take this important work forward, New Zealand has strengthened our presence in the Nordic region. The re-opening of the New Zealand Embassy in Stockholm, with accreditations to Norway and our other Nordic friends, will allow us to engage more effectively and achieve more.

In times of global uncertainty New Zealand and Norway need to be working more closely together.

States like us have much to lose from global instability and the disregard of rules.

In times like these, when multilateralism is under threat, when our values of fairness, equality, and respect for human rights are being increasingly challenged, and when formerly open trading nations are increasingly turning to protectionism, we need to be prepared to fight for our values.

And we need to deepen our cooperation with friends who share these values.

We would like to highlight a number of areas where we need to cooperate more closely in asserting our values and tackling key issues on the global stage.

Foremost amongst these is the critical issue of climate change and environmental sustainability.

Norway and New Zealand are countries whose histories and national identities are informed by our deep connection to the ocean and environment.  Climate change calls for global unified action and that’s why the New Zealand government has made climate change policy a priority.

Norway and New Zealand work closely together in climate change negotiations at the UN as well as through various coalitions, including the Carbon Neutrality Coalition and the Friends of Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform.

Both Norway and New Zealand have set ambitious targets in achieving carbon neutrality, and there is much to learn from each other as we work toward these, and encourage others to play their part.

We are also natural partners on polar issues.  As original signatories, we work together in the Antarctic Treaty System to protect Antarctica’s pristine environment and manage the pressures of tourism.

Norway made a significant contribution to the negotiations when a New Zealand and United States proposal to establish the world’s largest Marine Protected Area in the Ross Sea region in Antarctic got over the line in 2016.  It is critical that we continue to work together to see more of the proposed marine protected areas in Antarctica gain agreement.

New Zealand welcomes Norway’s focus on ocean issues, particularly as they relate to Pacific Small Island Developing States.  We share common interests in supporting these countries to realise the full potential of their blue economy in a sustainable way.

Our own region – the Pacific – matters deeply to New Zealand; our prosperity and security are intertwined.  We appreciate Norway’s interest in the Pacific, both in its role as a principled partner and as a potential champion for the Pacific, and other Small Island Developing States, within the multilateral system.

There is much we can do together in championing open, rules based trade, both in the WTO and bilaterally.  This is more important than ever, given the serious threat posed to the WTO.

At the same time, we want to promote trade policies which ensure trade benefits are shared among all members in our societies, and that support our broader social and environmental goals – for example, by imposing disciplines on harmful fossil fuel subsidies.

We are also reliable friends and partners to each other in our respective regions.

New Zealand values Norway’s knowledge of Europe, and the unique perspective it has as a European Union neighbour.

In turn New Zealand has much to share from its knowledge of East Asia and experience in the Pacific.

The Pacific may seem distant, but it is a strategically important and increasingly contested space. And it is a region that welcomes the positive and constructive contribution made by European partners.

But it is in our bilateral cooperation where the greatest potential lies.

Given our close alignment of values and perspectives, there is considerable scope for mutually beneficial cooperation and dialogue on domestic policy issues.

New Zealand believes there is much we can learn from each other in areas such as social policy, climate change, and innovation. That is why we are here, to learn from Norway’s success in marrying economic policy with environmental stewardship.

We especially admire your prudence in using your oil and gas wealth, with the ‘Government Pension Fund Global’ now valued at over $1 trillion, to shift from being a petro-state to an investor one.

We admire, too, Norway’s sustainable fisheries management regime.

New Zealand is therefore keen to learn from Norwegian successes as a way of furthering our national interests.

And we are barely scratching the surface of the potential in our trade and investment relationships.

Two-way trade in goods and services between New Zealand and the Nordic countries amounted to USD$848 million for the year ending June 2018.  Services trade was slightly more, at around USD$660 million.

New Zealand imported NZ$139 million in goods from Norway in the year ending June 2018, up 80% on the previous year due largely to the New Zealand Defence Force’s purchase of a second-hand Norwegian hydrographic vessel. New Zealand’s goods exports to Norway for the same period totalled NZ$46 million.

But this isn’t just about lifting trade volumes; it is about forging mutually beneficial partnerships, tapping into expertise, and drawing on our respective strengths.

Nordic countries are amongst the most innovative and technologically advanced countries in the world.  As a region, you represent one of the largest investors in industrial research and development.

We are enthusiastic partners with you in these endeavours.  Technology is New Zealand’s fastest-growing sector and our highest earning industry per capita.

New Zealand boasts one of the best business environments in the world, having been consistently ranked number one in the world for ease of doing business by the World Bank, as well as second in the annual prosperity index and third in the economic freedom index.

New Zealand is ranked second in the world for lack of public sector corruption by Transparency International.

New Zealand also offers opportunities in the fast-growing economies of the Asia-Pacific.

We were the first developed country in the world to sign a Free Trade Agreement with China in 2008 and the only country with trade agreements with China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. The recently adopted Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement also provides access to eleven of the region’s most dynamic and prosperous economies.

It is of course the links between people that lie at the heart of any strong relationship. Despite our geographic distance, New Zealand and the Nordic countries are not strangers. Indeed travellers from the Nordic region were amongst the first Europeans to reach our shores.

Nordic whalers graced our shores in the early nineteenth century. Later that century, in the 1870s, a large cohort of Scandinavians immigrated to New Zealand, including 365 Norwegians, alongside Danes and Swedes. They established communities called Norsewood and Dannevirke that still thrive today.

The Premier of New Zealand at the time, Julius Vogel, ordered a study into how well the Scandinavians migrants had settled in New Zealand. Norwegians were rated the most successful of the Scandinavian migrant groups, which will come as no surprise to today’s audience.

There was another wave of Nordic migration after World War II, so while relatively small, our historic people to people links remain strong. Today, for instance, I have with me Jon Johansson, my Chief of Staff, whose father was one of those Danes who immigrated with his family as part of the post-War Scandinavian diaspora.

My Senior Private Secretary, Helen Lahtinen, is also here this afternoon. Helen is Swedish born of Finnish parents. My Chief Press Secretary’s family are of Norwegian origin. My office, therefore, embodies New-Zealand-Nordic relations about as well as is possible.

Today, New Zealand continues to be a popular destination for Norwegians.  Nearly 5,000 Norwegians visited New Zealand in 2017.

An uncapped working holiday scheme has also been in place since July 2005, enabling young Norwegian and New Zealand nationals to work for up to a year in our respective countries.

In conclusion, we have a solid and warm foundation for our bi-lateral relations. We are here to build upon that foundation because as small democracies with so many shared values we can learn much from each other to the benefit of both Norwegian and New Zealand interests.

Jordan Carter on how to eliminate terrorist and violent material online

Jordan Carter, CEO of InternetNZ, has some ideas on how to help make Jacinda Ardern’s ‘Christchurch call’ work.

(I really wonder if labelling the attempt by Ardern to get social media companies to ‘eliminate’ terrorism online the ‘Christchurch call’ is a good idea. I think it is inappropriate.)

The Spinoff:  How to stop the ‘Christchurch Call’ on social media and terrorism falling flat

If we take that goal of eliminating terrorist and violent material online as a starting point, what could such a pledge look like, and what could it usefully achieve?

The scope needs to stay narrow.

“Terrorist and violent extremist content” is reasonably clear though there will be definitional questions to work through to strike the right balance in preventing the spread of such abhorrent material on the one hand, and maintaining free expression on the other. Upholding people’s rights needs to be at the core of the Call and what comes from it.

The targets need to be clear.

From the media release announcing the initiative, the focus is on “social media platforms”. I take that to mean companies like Facebook, Alphabet (through YouTube), Twitter and so on. These are big actors with significant audiences that can have a role in publishing or propagating access to the terrorist and violent extremist content the Call is aimed at. They have the highest chance of causing harm, in other words. It is a good thing the Call does not appear to target the entire Internet. This means the scale of action is probably achievable, because there are a relatively small and identifiable number of platforms of the requisite scale or reach.

But online media keeps changing so it will be difficult to set a clear target. I think that limiting ‘scale and reach’ to a small number of companies would be a problem, it would be very simple to work around. If there are worldwide rules on use of social media it would have to cover all social media to be effective.

The ask needs to be clear.

Most social media platforms have community standards that explicitly prohibit terrorist and violent extremist content, alongside many other things. If we assume for now that the standards are appropriate (a big assumption, one that needs more consideration later on), the Call’s ask needs to centre around the standards being consistently implemented and enforced by the platforms.

Working back from a “no content ever will breach these standards” approach and exploring how AI and machine tools, and human moderation, can help should be the focus of the conversation.

That’s not very clear to me.

There needs to be a sensible application of the ask.

Applying overly tight automated filtering would lead to very widespread overblocking. What if posting a Radio New Zealand story about the Sri Lanka attacks over the weekend on Facebook was automatically blocked? Imagine if a link to a donations site for the victims of the Christchurch attacks led to the same outcome? How about sharing a video of TV news reports on either story?

This is why automation is unlikely to be the whole answer. We also will need to think through carefully about how any action arising from the Call won’t give cover for problematic actions by countries with no commitment to the free, open and secure internet.

It will be extremely difficult to get consistent agreement on effective control between all social media companies and all countries. If there are variances there will be exploitation by terrorists and promoters of violence.

Success needs measuring and failure needs to have a cost.

There needs to be effective monitoring that the commitments are being met. A grand gesture followed by nothing changing isn’t an acceptable outcome. If social media platforms don’t live up to the commitments that they make, the Call can be a place where governments agree that a kind of cost can be imposed. The simplest and most logical costs would tend to be financial (e.g. a reduction in the protection such platforms have from liability for content posted on them). But as a start, the Call can help harmonise initial thinking on potential national and regional regulation around these issues.

How could cost penalties be applied fairly and effectively where there is a huge range of sizes and budgets of social media companies? A million dollars is small change for Facebook, a thousand dollars would be a big deal for me.

The discussion needs to be inclusive.

Besides governments and the social media platforms, the broader technology sector and various civil society interests should be in the room helping to discuss and finalise the Call. This is because the long history of Internet policy-making shows that you get the best outcomes when all the relevant voices are in the room. Civil society plays a crucial role in helping make sure blind spots on the part of big players like government and platforms aren’t overlooked. We can’t see a situation where governments and tech companies finalise the call, and the tech sector and civil society are only brought in on the “how to implement” stage.

I don’t know how you could get close to including all relevant voices. The Internet is huge, vast.

A Call that took account of these six thoughts would have a chance of success. To achieve change it would need one more crucial point, which is why the idea of calling countries, civil society and tech platforms together is vital.

I think it is going to take a lot more than this. It’s a huge challenge.

 

Louisa Wall: “The Media have a responsibility to do no harm”

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced yesterday that she is is chairing a meeting in Paris next month in a attempt to find a way to prevent terrorists from being able to social media to promote and publicise terrorism.

Labour MP Louisa Wall on Facebook yesterday widened her focus to ‘The Media’:

Kia Ora. The Media and those that transmit their political content and other political content generated for these public mediums, are defined as The Fourth Estate or fourth power that refers to the press and news media both in explicit capacity of advocacy and implicit ability to frame political issues. It is time that it was formally recognized as part of a political system, as it wields significant indirect social influence.

This would impose a Duty of Care on The Media – a formalisation of the social contract, the implicit responsibilities requiring adherence to a standard of reasonable care while performing any acts that could foreseeably harm others.

The Media have a responsibility to do no harm. Kia Kaha PM Jacinda Ardern for the meeting on May 15 – two months after the Christchurch terror attacks which claimed the lives of 50 people – which aims to see world leaders and tech company bosses agree to the “Christchurch call” – a pledge to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content online.

Linked to NZ Herald: Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern to lead global attempt to shutdown social media terrorism

This prompted a reaction from some journalists.

Andrea Vance (@avancenz):

Uh, what? Bringing media under control of Parliament … is this govt policy ?

(Facebook post image included)

Liked by SamSachdeva, Hamish McNeilly, Hamish Rutherford, Stacey Kirk, Laura McQuillan, Richard Boock, Paul Harper, Kim Baker Wilson, Tracey Watkins, John Campbell (all media/journalists) plus Chris Bishop (MP).

Two lawyers add their views:

Graeme Edgeler (@GraemeEdgeler):

It sounds bad, but I kind of feel most of these things are already present, certainly for online and broadcast media anyway. Duty of care is not a ridiculous paraphrase of the duties on media in some defamation defences, and under the HDCA.

Stephen Franks (@franks_lawyer):

Without the defences of truth and honest opinion it is completely sinister and as far from the law that protected both freedom and honest public discourse as we could get.

Graeme Edgeler:

I was thinking, for example, of the defamation defence of responsible communication on a matter public interest as provided in Durie v Gardiner [2018] NZCA 278.

Stephen Frank:

I understand that and am very conscious of NZ judges massive indifference to the vital role of liability for lies, as a condition/corollary of free speech, but your comment is still misleading rationalisation of sinister nonsense from Ardern and her fumbling Minister of Justice.

That is widening somewhat from what Wall posted.

Despite the concerns shown by journalists I don’t think Louisa Wall has much sway in Labour let alone in Government. She is ranked 23 (Clare Curran is 22), despite being an MP for 11 years, a term and a bit from 2008 as a list MP, and since 2011 as MP for Manurewa (2017 majority 8,374).

Ardern and Macron to attempt to “to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content online”

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and French Prime Minister Emmanuel Macron will chair a meeting in Paris next month which will seek to “to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content online”.


NZ and France seek to end use of social media for acts of terrorism

New Zealand and France announced today that the two nations will bring together countries and tech companies in an attempt to bring to an end the ability to use social media to organise and promote terrorism and violent extremism, in the wake of the March 15 terrorist attacks in Christchurch New Zealand.

The meeting will take place in Paris on May 15, and will be co-chaired by New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and French President Emmanuel Macron.

The meeting aims to see world leaders and CEOs of tech companies agree to a pledge called the ‘Christchurch Call’ to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content online.

The meeting will be held alongside the “Tech for Humanity” meeting of G7 Digital Ministers, of which France is the Chair, and France’s separate “Tech for Good” summit, both on 15 May. Jacinda Ardern will also meet with civil society leaders on 14 May to discuss the content of the Call.

“The March 15 terrorist attacks saw social media used in an unprecedented way as a tool to promote an act of terrorism and hate. We are asking for a show of leadership to ensure social media cannot be used again the way it was in the March 15 terrorist attack,” Jacinda Ardern said.

“We’re calling on the leaders of tech companies to join with us and help achieve our goal of eliminating violent extremism online at the Christchurch Summit in Paris.

“We all need to act, and that includes social media providers taking more responsibility for the content that is on their platforms, and taking action so that violent extremist content cannot be published and shared.

“It’s critical that technology platforms like Facebook are not perverted as a tool for terrorism, and instead become part of a global solution to countering extremism. This meeting presents an opportunity for an act of unity between governments and the tech companies.

“In the wake of the March 15 attacks New Zealanders united in common purpose to ensure such attacks never occur again. If we want to prevent violent extremist content online we need to take a global approach that involves other governments, tech companies and civil society leaders

“Social media platforms can connect people in many very positive ways, and we all want this to continue.

“But for too long, it has also been possible to use these platforms to incite extremist violence, and even to distribute images of that violence, as happened in Christchurch. This is what needs to change.”


RNZ: ‘This is about preventing violent extremism and terrorism online’

Ms Ardern told Morning Report that since the attacks, there had been a clear call for New Zealand to take on a leadership role in combating violent extremism online.

“There is a role for New Zealand to play now in ensuring we eradicate that kind of activity from social media, in particular to prevent it from ever happening again. We can’t do that alone,” she said.

“This isn’t about freedom of expression, this is about preventing violent extremism and terrorism online.

“I don’t think anyone would argue that the terrorist, on the 15th of March, had a right to livestream the murder of 50 people, and that is what this call is very specifically focussed on”.

Ms Ardern said she’s met with a number of tech CEOs, including Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, and held meetings with executives from Microsoft, Twitter, and Google.

“When we actually distil this down, no tech company, no country, wants to see online platforms used to perpetuate violent extremism or terrorism. We all have a common starting point. It all then comes down to what it is we are each prepared to do about it.”

Technology correspondent Bill Bennett…

…said a voluntary approach was the only option for getting technology companies to sign up to a crackdown on terrorist behaviour through social media.

“They don’t see themselves as being responsible for content that’s published on their sites anyway. They see themselves as being some kind of neutral thing”.

National Leader Simon Bridges…

…questioned whether the global conversation would translate into anything meaningful.

He was cynical about why Ms Ardern was focusing on the issue.

“I think New Zealanders will say, hey, if you’re not also progressing policy, plans and actions around our housing, health, and education, why is this the big thing?

“Is it just a distraction tactic?”.

New Zealand needed to be cautious about going down a path that would see the casual erosion of freedoms, Mr Bridges said.

NZ Herald: Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern to lead global attempt to shutdown social media terrorism

Speaking to Newstalk ZB this morning, Ardern said she was confident all major social media companies would sign up to the Christchurch call.

“We have been working on something behind the scenes for some time now, since the 15th of March. I have also recently had calls with a handful of chief executives.”

The call, she said, would place the onus on Governments, in terms of their ability to regulate, as well as on the social media companies themselves.

“I think that’s where we need to move; this can’t just be about individual country’s [ability to] regulate because this is obviously global technology and we need to have those companies accept responsibility as well.”

She said that the principals of a free, open and secure internet would “absolutely be maintained”.

“If we want to prevent violent extremist content online we need to take a global approach that involves other governments, tech companies and civil society leaders”.

“Social media platforms can connect people in many very positive ways, and we all want this to continue.”

But she said for too long it has been possible to use social media platforms to incite extremist violence, and even to distribute images of that violence, as happened in Christchurch.

“This is what needs to change.”

A worthy aim, but it will be difficult to come up with an effective means of preventing the use of social media by terrorists but maintaining the freedom of use of social media generally.

And even if social media companies do put effective control mechanisms in place, it is likely that those seeking to promote and perpetuate violence online will find ways around the controls.

Fine for Ardern and Macron to be seen to be trying to do something about it, but being seen to be trying, and doing anything effective ongoing, will be a big challenge.

Anzac Day 2019

While it’s worth remembering the sacrifices of wares last century, one of them now over a hundred years ago, and remembering the relations that many of us had who were involved in both World Wars as well as other wars, perhaps it’s time we moved the focus more to the present and the future.

We are very unlikely to see repeats of the large number of boys and men sent into battle, often wantonly and needlessly.

But the same mentality of mostly if not exclusively men abusing power by ordering death and destruction seems to be  all to prevalent. We may be just one bad decision away from a world catastrophe.

So while learning from the past we need to apply those lessons to changed times and a changed world.

We should reach out to our neighbours and all our fellow Kiwis, learn to show more love, more understanding, and more tolerance of differences.

We shouldn’t just sit waiting, dreading what some stupid bastards may inflict on the world.  We should be thinking of how we can reduce the risks.

Sure we should remember the red poppies representing blood spilled in historic wars.

But we should look more to the white poppies of peace.

 

Media watch – Thursday

25 April 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.

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.

Open Forum – Thursday

25 April 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).

World view – Thursday

Wednesday GMT

WorldWatch2

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

Helicopter crash survival in Auckland Islands

When I heard the news that a helicopter had gone missing on Monday night on a flight to the Auckland Islands like many people I presumed the worst. That was reinforced by reports yesterday morning that helicopter ‘wreckage’ had been found.

So it was very good news to hear that the crew had all been found on shore on Auckland Island safe and reasonably well.