Two political polls with similar results

Newshub released a Reid Research a poll on Sunday with ridiculous headlines and claims. 1 News released a Colmar Brunton poll last night with less dramatic but still over the top claims. Polls are just polls, especially this far from an election, but they try to get value from the expense of polling by making stories out of them that aren’t justified.

Last time the two polled the biggest talking point was how different their results were. The Reid Research poll was regarded as an outlier, being quite different to any other polls this term.

The most notable thing about the polls this time is that the results are very similar, taking into account margins of error of about 3% for the larger results, and the fact that Colmar results are rounded to the nearest whole number.

  • National: RR 43.9% (+6.5%), CB 47% (+2)
  • Labour: RR 41.6% (-9.2), CB 40% (-3)
  • Greens: RR 6.3% (+0.1), CB 7% (+1)
  • NZ First: RR 4.0% (+1.2), CB 4% (+1)
  • ACT: RR 1.4% (+0.6), CB 1% (-)
  • TOP: RR 1.1% (+1.0), CB 1% (-)
  • Maori Party: RR 0.7% (+0.2), CB 1% (-)

I don’;t think it’s surprising at this stage to see National a bit ahead of Labour, Labour has had a mixed month or two and is struggling to make major progress due to the restraint of coalition partner NZ First.

Green support looks at a safe level, but is well below what they were getting last term (about half).

NZ First are still polling below the threshold and will be in a battle to stay in Parliament.

Is is fairly normal these days there are a number of borderline governing scenarios with these numbers, with National+ACT and Labour+Greens thereabouts but not certainties.

A lot may depend on whether NZ First make the threshold or not next election. Both other times they have been in a coalition government they have lost support at the next election.

Trends from Opinion polling for the next New Zealand general election (Wikipedia):

That shows the last Reid Research anomaly well.

Preferred Prime Minister:

  • Jacinda Ardern: RR 38.4% (-10.6), CB 38% (-3)
  • Simon Bridges: RR 6.7% (+2.5), CB 9% (+3)
  • Judith Collins: 5.2% (-1.9), CB 5%
  • Winston Peters: CB 4%

Ardern a bit down, Bridges a bit up but still a big difference.

Newshub also did a poll on performance:

  • Ardern: performing well 62.4%, performing poorly 23.1%
  • Bridges: performing well 23.9%, performing poorly 52.7%

UPDATE: 1 News/Colmar Brunton have also started asking a similar question:

  •  Ardern handling her job as Prime Minister:  +33
    approve 62%
    disapprove 29%
    don’t know or refused 8%
  • Bridges’ handling his job as National Party leader: -22
    approve 29%
    disapprove 51%
    don’t know or refused 20%

Ardern performance is well above her party support, while Bridges is well below National support (about half).

  • Newshub-Reid Research Poll was conducted between 2-9 October 2019.
    1000 people were surveyed, 700 by telephone and 300 by internet panel
  • 1 News-Colmar Brunton poll conducted between 5-9 October
    1008 eligible voters were polled by landline (502) and mobile phone (506)

So both now rely on some polling by something other than landline, Reid Research 30% by internet panel and Colmar Brunton 50% by mobile phone.

1 News link here.

Newshub/Reid Search links here and here.

The Newshun headline says “Jacinda Ardern, Labour take massive tumble in new Newshub-Reid Research poll” but a more accurate description would have been “Newshub poll looks more likely following last rogue poll”. It wasn’t a massive tumble for Ardern, more like a large correction by Reid Research.

Japan beat Scotland, top poll and into RWC quarter finals

The outstanding performance of Japan has been the biggest talking point of pool play in the Rugby World Cup. They have done it again, beating Scotland 28-21 in the final pool match.

Japan played very well again. There forwards matched Scotland’s most of the time, their tackling and defence was epic, but the difference was their back play. A number of times they passed wide and beat Scotland down the sidelines, with both Japanese wings featuring strongly. In contrast, when Scotland were chasing the game a number of times they passed wide, they had a numbers advantage, but they failed to take advantage.

So Japan top their pool, which means runner up Ireland will face the All Blacks in one quarter final, with Japan needing to step up again, this time against one of the tournament favourites South Africa.

Quarter finals (NZ times) – Saturday 19 October:

  • England v Australia at 8:15 pm
  • New Zealand v Ireland at 11;15 pm

Sunday 20 October:

  • Wales v France at 8:15 pm
  • Japan v South Africa at 11:15 pm

The early games are well timed for watching here in the evening, and streaming the following morning will be good for the late games.

 

Open Forum

14 October 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).

Local body elections – results as they become known

Voting for the 2019 local body elections closed at midday today. I handed in my voting papers with half an hour to spare. I admit that my voting was a last minute rush job, but I did it.

Reported voting numbers vary but generally seem to be down again. Initial totals for Dunedin:

  • 2010: 52.96%
  • 2013: 43.49%
  • 2016: 45.17%
  • 2019: 42.29%

So possibly the lowest turnout recorded. There will be combined factors, including postal voting, too many candidates that most voters know nothing or very ,little about, and a voting system (STV) that requires ranking of candidates, which is quite complex especially when you know little to nothing about most candidates.

Results will become known later today.


 

Many results are linked here at electionz.com

Stuff – Local body elections 2019: Who’s in and who’s out in your local government?

Wellington’s mayoral race has turned into a nail biter, with Andy Foster just ahead of incumbent Justin Lester.

With 90 per cent of votes counted, the Sir Peter Jackson-backed Foster is leading Lester by 715 votes.

But, with 5563 last minute and special votes yet to be counted, the mayoral chains could still stay around Lester’s neck for a second term.

A bit of a surprise perhaps, but Lester had some problems with conflicts with Labour party influence.

Phil Goff has retained the Auckland mayoralty, comfortably defeating his main challenger and one-time Labour caucus colleague John Tamihere.

Goff won with a margin of 155,957 to 70,000 votes, beating Tamihere and 19 other candidates.

Not a surprise. I don’t think Goff has been a great mayor, but as with many contests the opposition was weak.

Christchurch mayor Lianne Dalziel has fought the mood for change and won back her job for another three years.

Dalziel has romped home with a clear majority of 44,811 votes in the 2019 local body elections. Her next closest rival, businessman Darryll Park, received 28,260 votes. Veteran activist John Minto was third with 8739 votes.

Also not a surprise.

Sir Tim Shadbolt has now won the Invercargill mayoralty for the ninth time.

Is there no one younger and better in Invercargill? Obviously not standing for mayor.

Paula Southgate is Hamilton’s new mayor, defeating incumbent Andrew King.

Progress results show Southgate got 11,079 votes, a clear majority over second-placed King on 8606 votes.

King mustn’t have been doing enough to retain support of enough voters.

Aaron Hawkins is 35 years old, a vegetarian, cannot drive and often hitch-hikes to work.

He’s also now Dunedin’s mayor.

He’s the first ever to be elected on a Green ticket, party co-leader James Shaw says.

Also not a surprise. It was a generally disappointing field of 14 candidates, with no other standout apart from Lee Vandervis, who led after a number of iterations in the count until transfers from other candidates shifted the lead to Hawkins. Vandervis is back on council, but I think is too abrasive and volatile to be mayor.

Hawkins has earned some credit as a councillor, but also criticism as arrogant and condescending towards newer councillors, and disdainful of policy positions he doesn’t agree with.

In a way it’s a big deal getting a Green party mayor (but outgoing mayor Dave Cull wasn’t far away from Hawkins politically anyway).

A mayor has influence, but only has one vote. The line-up of councillors seems to be quite varied, so Hawkins will have to work hard to get support for what he wants.

As well as a Green mayor there is councillor who stood as a Labour Party councillor (Steve Walker), and an ex Labour MP (David Benson-Pope.

It’s notable that more and more mayors have close political party affiliations. I don’t think that is a good thing. Councils have to lobby Government and often fight against national policies.

 

Economics and ecology of electric vehicles questioned

Electric vehicles are becoming more available and more popular, but there are questions about how much sense they really make as far as emissions and convenience go.

The range of EVs (fully battery powered vehicles) is improving, but recharging still takes substantially longer than refueling a fossil fueled vehicle, which is an issue if you want to travel further than the range of a battery powered vehicle.

There is also a major issue of where all the electricity will come from to charge the batteries.

On top of that, a study claims that even the supposed emissions advantage is questionable.

Stuff:  When will we finally admit that electric vehicles aren’t the solution?

Replacing fossil fuel cars with electric vehicles seems to be a logical, correct, and even necessary solution to our climate problem. But the issue is far more complex than our intuition tells us.

The banning  of further production of internal combustion engines by 2050, 2040 or as soon as 2030 is talked about, even though it could take us into dangerous uncharted territory we know almost nothing about.

A few months back, German physic professor Christoph Buchal, with his colleagues from the IFO think tank in Munich, published a study – subsequently widely challenged – in which they found that electric vehicles in Germany produced 11 to 28 per cent more carbon dioxide (CO2) than  “dirty” diesel cars.

More than diesel powered vehicles? Not surprisingly that was controversial.

“Considering Germany’s current energy mix and the amount of energy used in battery production, the CO2 emissions of battery-electric vehicles are, in the best case, slightly higher than those of a diesel engine, and are otherwise much higher,” says the think tank’s release.

Even Volkswagen, the German car maker, joined the discussion. Despite VW’s response being clearly “pro-electric”, it admitted that in current German conditions its new electric Golf emits more CO2 than the one with an internal combustion engine.

It depends a lot on how the electricity needs to be generated.

And it’s not just emissions that are a problem. Batteries need materials that need to be mined. Ecologists (like the New Zealand Green Party) tend to oppose mining.

Earlier this year, scientists from the University of Technology in Sydney published a study, in which they concluded that the rising production of electric batteries will increase the need for certain metals such as lithium, manganese or cobalt. The research “shows that as demand for these minerals skyrockets, the already significant environmental and human impacts of hardrock mining are likely to rise steeply as well”.

For example, the cobalt is found predominantly in the Democratic Republic of Congo and mining in this African country is detrimental to the whole region. Amnesty International warned about the increasing demand for these metals, but its researchers have also noticed the exploitation of child labour and violation of human rights during mining.

So there are a number of benefits and problems.

We also know that electric cars aren’t very popular among blue-collar workers. Indeed, cars with alternative propulsion are – as various statistics show – a matter of predominantly richer social groups; poor people cannot afford them despite government incentives. As a result, they subsidise the rich to buy their new, shiny Tesla.

“In effect, the wealthy owners of electric vehicles will enjoy the benefits of their clean, silent cars, while passing on many of the costs of keeping their vehicles on the road to everyone else, especially the poor,” pointed out Jonathan Lesser of the Manhattan Institute in an article for Politico.

Poorer people not only are less likely to be able too afford an EV, they are more likely to use older less efficient, more polluting petrol or diesel powered vehicles.

At least if this unprecedented change could be justified by the fight against environmental pollution, for the future of our planet, people would be willing to accept the radical transition to electric vehicles regardless of their ideology.

But we cannot even say with certainty what consequences such a 100 per cent transformation would have on our society and the environment itself; we don’t know where we will take the extra electric energy, how to solve the metal problem and what it could do to  our economy.

However, because climate change makes us all so nervous, citizens demand some kind of action, and as politicians don’t know exactly which kind, they chose the most populist one that could cost our society and the environment much more than we are willing to admit.

Maybe our Government has effectively admitted something.

Newsroom:  Govt quietly abandons electric vehicle target

There are 15,473 vehicles in the government fleet and only 78 are electric. When the coalition Government came into power in late 2017, the agreement between Labour and New Zealand First stipulated that the entire fleet would be emissions-free by mid-2025, “where practicable”.

Making the government fleet fully emissions-free would have been a daunting task, even with the “where practicable” caveat. The Government’s progress so far has been abysmal.

Out of around 15,000 vehicles, less than half of a percent of the Government’s fleet is electric. This has been the case for at least the past nine months, according to data from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.

Electric vehicles have trickled into the fleet at a snail’s pace. In the third quarter of the 2018/2019 financial year, there were 71 electric vehicles. The next quarter, that number rose to 73 and has now reached 78.

In the most recent quarter, in addition to adding five electric vehicles, the Government added a net of 514 non-electric vehicles.

That sounds like Kiwibuild scale underperformance.

Although it was repeated as recently as June, that goal has been quietly revised to a commitment that, after mid-2025, all new vehicles entering the fleet will be emissions-free.

And that sounds a bit like an Animal Farm style revision of the wording.


I have been looking at getting a new vehicle at some stage. Currently I’m tending towards a hybrid that uses a petrol powered engine to power low capacity batteries. I think these are a good balance now that they cost little different to petrol only vehicles. They are more efficient than petrol only cars, using about two thirds the fuel, so i think they make economic sense and they don’t have the range and recharging disadvantages of electric only vehicles.

But I am currently waiting and seeing how things evolve.

Immigration policy changes – families for the rich

Winston Peters is claiming the credit for a toughening up of the Parental Visa Scheme which makes it possible for only high income earners to sponsor family members immigrating too New Zealand.

Peters must see votes for NZ First as more important than families.

RNZ:  NZ First pushed for tightening of parental visa scheme

New Zealand First leader Winston Peters says the tightening up on who can move to New Zealand is a direct response to his party’s demands during coalition negotiations with Labour.

That sits uncomfortably against the posturing of the Prime Minister and Immigration Minister who this week celebrated the lifting of the moratorium on the parent category visa.

In the last fortnight the government has announced three significant changes to its immigration policy.

The Recognised Seasonal Employer scheme will be boosted by just over 3000 in the next two years, the government has overturned the family link policy that stopped refugees from Africa and the Middle East resettling in New Zealand unless they had family here and it’s reinstated the parent category visa – but with a cap on the number of parents who can come in and a high income test for the child sponsor.

Speaking to RNZ, Mr Peters said the parental category visa changes that switch the financial onus from the parent moving to New Zealand to the child sponsor, and almost doubles the income test is “precisely” what New Zealand First pushed for at the Cabinet table.

“Where in the world can you decide to go and take your parents as well? That’s the reality here,” he said.

Only when a skilled migrant is living in New Zealand, who is critical to the workforce, and is in demand internationally does it make sense to allow them to bring a parent in, Mr Peters said.

“It is a significant tightening up of the parental visa scheme.”

“What we had here was up to 31 percent of the so-called sponsors having left this country to go off to other countries, including Australia, and leaving the cost to the taxpayers.”

The change is going to make it more likely that skilled immigrants will desert the country if they can’t bring in their family members.

For New Zealand First it’s about upholding a nationalist approach, something Mr Peters said always existed until the “neo-liberal experiment unleashed itself on the idea that more immigration meant cheap labour”.

Immigration has been an essential for the growth of New Zealand since long before the so-called “neo-liberal experiment”.

“All these things were meant to be part and parcel of a planned population policy but there was no plan other than to drive up consumption with mass immigration,” he said.

Peters keeps using the term “mass immigration”, which is nonsense but deliberately panders to a small intolerant section of society (and voters). NZ First needs more than them to keep their support levels up – and those who expected him to fulfil his promise to slash overall immigrant numbers (to 10,000, currently about 50,000) may still feel he hasn’t delivered anyway.

Nicky Hager complaint upheld – SIS acted unlawfully

The Acting Inspector General of Intelligence and Security has upheld a complaint by Nicky Hager that the SIS unlawfully attempted to uncover his journalistic sources. This was in relation to Hager’s 2011 book Other People’s Wars.

The Police had been found to have unlawfully attempted to uncover Hager’s journalistic sources when investigating the hack of Cameron Slater after Hager published Dirty Politics.

In both cases the sources were not identified.

Regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees, or supports or opposes, with what Hager has written about, illegally trying to out his sources (by both the SIS and the Police) should be a real concern.

At least by making successful complaints Hager has exposed the unlawful actions, which will put pressure on both the SIS and the Police to do things properly in the future.

Hager’s lawyer Felix Geiringer (@BarristerNZ) tweeted:

The full Report into a complaint by Nicky Hager against the NZSIS

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

For the reasons given I have found that NZSIS unlawfully provided investigative assistance to
NZDF in efforts to determine whether a specific NZDF officer had been a source for information
published in Mr Hager’s book Other People’s Wars. Specifically, NZSIS provided that assistance
despite a lack of grounds for reasonable suspicion that any activity had occurred that was a
matter of national “security” as that was defined in the governing legislation of NZSIS at the
time. I have been unable to find that the Service showed the kind of caution I consider proper,
for an intelligence agency in a free and democratic society, about launching any investigation
into a journalist’s sources.

Mr Hager’s complaint against NZSIS is therefore upheld.

To the extent that Mr Hager was the subject of NZSIS inquiries that I have found were not within
the lawful scope of NZSIS activity at the relevant time, I consider he was adversely affected by
the agency’s activities. The Service acquired two months of call metadata for Mr Hager’s home
telephone line. In the circumstances I think an apology from NZSIS to Mr Hager is an appropriate
remedy. I recommend accordingly.

There should be greater repercussions than a recommendation of an apology.

Turkey launches attack on Kurds in Syria

In a surprise and widely criticised move President Donald Trump announced that US troops were being withdrawn from Syria. This was seen as a green light to Turkey to go in and attack the Kurds, who were US allies.

Turkey has announced they have launched attacks on the Kurds.

Fox News: ‘Huge panic’ as Turkish warplanes bomb Kurdish civilian targets in Syria after US withdrawal: report

President Trump is calling Turkey’s ongoing military assault in Syria a “bad idea” Wednesday as reports are emerging of civilians being caught in the crossfire of a long-standing feud between Ankara and Kurdish forces.

Many said his sudden withdrawal of US troops was a bad idea which was predicted to result in what is happening now.

His comments come hours after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced the launch of Operation Peace Spring — a mission that will “neutralize terror threats against Turkey and lead to the establishment of a safe zone, facilitating the return of Syrian refugees to their homes.”

Trump has been heavily criticized throughout the week following his decision Sunday to pull American troops out of northern Syria, leaving the Kurdish forces — who have been longtime U.S. allies in the fight against ISIS in Syria — in peril. Ankara views the Syrian Kurdish forces as terrorists allied with a Kurdish insurgency within Turkey.

“The United States does not endorse this attack and has made it clear to Turkey that this operation is a bad idea,” Trump said in a statement released by the White House. “Turkey has committed to protecting civilians, protecting religious minorities, including Christians, and ensuring no humanitarian crisis takes place—and we will hold them to this commitment.”

“There are no American soldiers in the area,” he added.

No US troops, just ex-allies of the US that Trump suddenly abandoned.

A spokesperson for the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces says Turkish warplanes on Wednesday have “started to carry out airstrikes on civilian areas,” causing a “huge panic among people of the region.”

The Kurds requested air support from American forces in response to the strikes. But U.S. military officials tell Fox News that Trump has ordered them to not get involved.

Fox News: Lindsey Graham warns Trump on Syria troop withdrawal: ‘It’d be the biggest mistake of his presidency’

If President Trump follows through on his proposed troop withdrawal from Syria, it would be one of the biggest follies of his presidency and cause ISIS to reemerge in the region, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Wednesday on “Fox & Friends.”

Trump tweeted about the issue on Wednesday and said the United States should never have been in the Middle East in the first place. He also put the onus on Turkey to stabilize the region and take up arms against any remaining ISIS elements.

“That’s a pre-9/11 mentality that the Middle East is no concern to us,” Graham told Fox News. “I hope President Trump’s right. I hope we can turn the fight against ISIS over to Turkey. I hope that Turkey, when they go into Syria, they won’t slaughter the Kurds… If [Trump] follows through with this, it’d be the biggest mistake of his presidency.”

He claimed that if Trump doesn’t continue with safe zone border patrols, ISIS will fill the void and the fault will lie squarely with the Trump administration.

“I hope that Turkey, when they go into Syria, they won’t slaughter the Kurds…” seems to have been a forlorn hope.

Turkey, Syria, Kurds and Trump threats

The complicated political situation in Syrian is far from over, with Turkey wanting to keep Syrian Kurds away from their border, Trump allowing them to make a move into Syria but warning them not to go too far.

Reuters – U.S. expects Turkey to take over IS fighters if Kurdish militia forced to withdraw: official

The United States expects Turkey to take responsibility of captive Islamic State fighters, a senior State Department official said on Monday, if Ankara’s planned incursion into northeast Syria seizes areas where the detained militants are held.

The official said as of now, U.S. allied Kurdish militia was still going to be in control of the detention facilities. “If they (Turks) come into an area with obvious prisons and the SDF withdraws from those security positions around those prisons, we expect the Turks to take them over,” he said in a briefing.

That sounds a bit vague, and is a mixed signal given a threat from Trump.

Fox News; Trump pulls back troops from northern Syria ahead of Turkish assault, Pentagon officials ‘blindsided’

The White House announced late Sunday that Turkey will soon move forward with a planned military operation in northeast Syria, as U.S. troops who have been deployed and operating with Kurdish-led forces in the area began pulling back from their positions.

The decision sent shockwaves through the region and Washington, with U.S. officials telling Fox News that top Pentagon officials were “completely blindsided” and “shocked” by the order to pull back hundreds of U.S. troops, a move that effectively green-lights the Turkey operation. President Trump spoke with Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan by telephone.

Some officials see the move as a betrayal of the Kurds, whom the U.S. supported against ISIS for years.

Speaking on “Fox & Friends” Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., called it an “impulsive decision” by Trump that would undo U.S. gains in the region and give ISIS fighters a “second lease on life.”

Reuters: Trump threatens to ‘obliterate’ Turkish economy over Syria incursion plan

President Donald Trump on Monday launched a harsh attack on NATO ally Turkey, threatening to destroy its economy if Ankara takes a planned military strike in Syria too far even though the U.S. leader himself has opened the door for a Turkish incursion.

Turkey has repeatedly threatened to carry out an incursion against U.S.-backed Kurdish fighters in northeastern Syria who have links to Kurdish guerrillas operating next door in Turkey.

The United States began pulling troops back from the northeast Syrian border on Monday, effectively giving Turkey a green light to move into the area.

But:

Trump said he would “totally destroy and obliterate” Turkey’s economy if it took action in Syria that he considered “off-limits” following his decision on Sunday to pull out U.S. forces from northeastern Syria.

Trump’s stern words seemed to be an attempt to placate critics, even from within his own Republican Party, who complain he was abandoning the Syrian Kurds by pulling out U.S. forces.

Trump tweeted:

This doesn’t seem too be a great or wise approach by the vain Trump. Under pressure with a possible impeachment hovering over him in Washington, Trump has been increasingly agitated and shrill, even by his standards.

He sounds to me like an increasingly unhinged megalomaniac, with emphasis on the maniac (or at least manic).

That was before Trump’s threat tweet.

Fox News: Turkey’s Syria incursion may allow ISIS to attempt mass prison break amid US withdrawal, Kurdish fighters warn

ISIS fighters and other terrorists comprising the more than 10,000 Islamic militants jailed in northeast Syria could launch a mass prison break as U.S. troops withdraw from the region in response to Turkey’s impending incursion, Syrian Kurdish fighters warned Monday.

Reuters Explainer: Turkey set to redraw map of Syrian war once more

A looming Turkish incursion into northern Syria is set to reshape the map of the Syrian conflict once again, dealing a blow to Kurdish-led forces that have battled Islamic State while widening Turkey’s territorial control at the border.

This would be Turkey’s third such incursion since 2016. Motivated largely by the aim of containing Syrian Kurdish power, Turkey already has troops on the ground across an arc of northwestern Syria, the last stronghold of anti-Damascus rebels.

Turkey has two main goals in northeast Syria: to drive the Kurdish YPG militia which it deems a security threat away from its border, and to create a space inside Syria where 2 million Syria refugees currently hosted in Turkey can be settled.

It had been pushing the United States to jointly establish a “safe zone” extending 20 miles (32 km) into Syrian territory, but repeatedly warned it could take unilateral military action after accusing Washington of dragging its feet.

President Tayyip Erdogan has recently talked about pushing even deeper into Syria, beyond the proposed “safe zone” region to the cities of Raqqa and Deir al-Zor, in order to allow still more refugees to return to Syria.

HOW WILL THE KURDS BE AFFECTED?

The Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) have spent years expanding its control across northern and eastern Syria, helped by the U.S.-led coalition against Islamic State.

A rare case of a winner in the Syrian war, the Kurds and their allies have set up their own governing bodies while always insisting their aim is autonomy, not independence.

All of this could unravel in the event of a major Turkish invasion that would plunge the area into warfare. The SDF-affiliated Syrian Democratic Council said an attack would trigger a new wave of mass displacement.

DO RUSSIA AND IRAN BACK TURKEY’S MOVE?

Russia and Iran, the other two major foreign powers in Syria, strongly support President Bashar al-Assad – unlike Turkey and the United States which both called for him to stand down and supported rebels fighting to overthrow him.

Russia has said that Turkey has the right to defend itself, but Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Monday that Syria’s territorial integrity must be preserved and that all foreign military forces “with illegal presence” should leave Syria.

So the situation remains quite complex, and not helped with the apparent impetuousness and unpredictability of Trump .

 

 

Extinction Rebellion civil disobedience in Wellington today, aims remain vague

The worldwide attempt at revolution – using climate change as a reason to change established democratic and financial systems – hits Wellington today.

With the return of ‘weka’ The Standard has morphed into an anti-Government website in promoting the revolution: NRT: Climate Change: Join the rebellion, retweeting No Right Turn who says:

If you care about the climate crisis, and want the government to act, join in.

But if you read Extinction Rebellion’s vague aims they seem too want to overthrow the Government and impose some soort of people power.

 “…support and encourage a citizens’ uprising in Aotearoa New Zealand”.

“When ready, create a participatory, democratic process that discusses and improves a draft manifesto for change and a new constitution.

“This will involve creating a genuine democracy, alongside an economy to maximise well-being and minimise harm.”

They don’t explain how a ‘genuine democracy’ is created by revolution, nor what sort of democracy it would be. Neither do they want to explain at The Standard.

Weka (with help from Robert Guyton and Sacha) again show how intolerant extreme greens are of their messages being questioned, with lame attacks and threats of bans – see from here.

I note that until I posted a comment at 12:30 pm yesterday there had been no comments on the post that was up at 7:10 am. It appears to be not a popular topic. What was popular was dumping on me for asking questions.

Weka promotes today’s protests under her own name today: Extinction Rebellion on Lambton Quay, in which she says:

In case it’s not clear, the objective here is to cause as much disruption to the state as possible until it changes. Affecting the consumer economy, sustained tying up of the courts and eating into the police budget, along with regular disruptions to the normal business of city life, are potent motivators for change. Key to XR’s strategy is the research that shows sustained actions from 3.5% of a nation’s population have never failed to effect radical change.

Time will tell whether they manage to get large numbers to sustain their actions.

And whether they will succeed in getting our Government and our MPs to decided to hand over all their power and baubles to ‘the people’.

XR are not presenting a complex, detailed plan of what we should do. That’s for our governments.

They don’t seem to be presenting any plan, just vague aims. I’m not sure how disruptive protests will convince the New Zealand Government to work out a complex detailed plan to relinquish their party based power, and their jobs.

They’re also saying that in that process we should shift to more participatory democracy rather than relying on simple representative democracy (which patently isn’t working and isn’t suitable to the task at hand given the timeframes).

Our current representative democracy isn’t exactly simple, but it is patently working. It just isn’t doing what the Rebels want it to do.

Promoting some vague sort of “more participatory democracy” will probably struggle to get wide public (or MP) support.