Left in charge of New Zealand's ship of state whilst Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern takes maternity leave for her and partner Clark(e) Gayford's newborn - the entire six weeks, evidently, from *Midwinter's Day itself (i.e. the winter solstice, otherwise known as **'Matariki') - Winston Peters has undergone another twenty-year metamorphosis, stepping up to the political plate once more as the nation's 'man for the hour'. And did he start off on a high note or what!
Despite el usual media attempts to trip him up and serve him **** his own medicine, Peters acquitted himself well (superbly) at his first official news/press conference as NZ's Acting Prime Minister: with exquisite calm and composure ("Let's get things right from the outset, sonny/dearie, I've never suffered fools gladly") - with due gravitas and statesmanlike aplomb; as perfectly befit the occasion.
My gut/instinctive reaction to WP during the TV1/TV3[Newshub Nation] *****6 p.m. News Programme - on the evening of June 25th (following the public presentation and announcement of the naming of the nation's 'first baby' live on Sunday morning television the day before) - was more positive than ever; but substantially less so (to put it mildly) as far as his media would-be 'interrogators' were concerned.
Full of undue self-importance after her premature (and arguably, unwelcome) return from 'Brexiting' Britain - ******where her innate political biases against the same were only all too evident for all to see upon the United Kingdom's *******clear-cut decision to exit the European Union, the uppity and full-of-herself, newly-appointed Newshub Nation Political Editor Tove O'Brien(sp?) readily gave sheer, undisguised vent to her own highly partisan political prejudices as she sought to waylay PM Peters as he addressed the media and then proceeded to exit the scene.
O'Brien was quite literally beside herself (with an odd combination of barely-veiled umbrage and contempt alongside schadenfreude-like glee, at Mr Peters' utter gall for ignoring the popular zeitgeist of naming Ms Ardern's special occasion 'an historic(al) moment' worthy of thus being enshrined in New Zealand's collective psyche for now and for ever as such: no ifs, buts or maybes allowed (to borrow PM Peters' own characteristic turn-of-phrase).
Yes, Winston Peters' evident refusal to simply fall in line with media-sanctioned niceties of public decorum and thereby acclaim Ardern's situation a unique snapshot in time/the history - or rather, her-story - of NZ Inc, instantly rendered him offensive to public sensibilities - a public pariah as it were; a cultural barbarian, philistine if you will...totally oblivious evidently to what was the accepted thing in present-day Aotearoa.
In response to O'Brien's desperate search at all costs to somehow uncover some peg or angle to hang her rather 'out there' obvious as personal agenda, even vendetta to, to effectively label Peters a public outcast for simply refusing to deem and publicly declare 'on the record' the first on-the-job prime ministerial birth the best thing since sliced bread, Peters simply and calmly, ever so deftly, deflected all such pious pretence (admittedly worthy of a special guest appearance in 'the Importance of Being Earnest', let's give O'Brien all due 'credit') with his winning, characteristic, 'grinning from ear to ear', all-so-knowing smirk (for which he is so justly renowned).
A superb, no, a class act...though methinks any forthcoming media acknowledgement to that effect will be about as forthcoming as the imminent freezing over of hell...or the deathbed conversion of Adolf Hitler. Not very likely...ever.
*I.e. June the 21st, the day many kiwis indulge in the highly unseasonable annual 'polar plunge' (into a local ocean, lake or river). Interestingly, though I was hoping said 'Neve Te Aroha Ardern Gayford' might've been born just a tad earlier (upon my Mum's 84th or a sister's 57th), the P.M. not only christened her girl with a family name (of my own kith and kin), but paid tribute to said winter solstice ***as a basis for aspects of her naming.
Just as intriguingly to me, a half dozen years back (around the very same time of year, perhaps a few weeks on) when I began this and my other blogsite, I'd concluded - whether stated in my various, Dunedin weather-related posts at the time, or not - that one basically needs to count six weeks off from midwinter's day till we start to finally de-thaw from our annual winter's hibernation. As they say, things always get darker before the dawn, and there's invariably quite a time lag till the weather 'hollows out' or suchlike (though one might naturally assume that the shortest day is likewise the coldest; but not so...) .
And so PM Ardern looks set to resume official duties pretty much right on that stipulated schedule (legislated period of maternity leave), as her fellow kiwis lift up their heads and hearts and hopes in anticipation of brighter days to come; a fitting metaphor if ever there was one (i.e. for a leader resuming her duties on a positive note).
**Though I believe 'Matariki' - actually named after a constellation known as the 'Seven Sisters' in the Southern Hemisphere's night sky (according to Newstalk ZB evening host Marcus Lush the other night) - depicts the entire midwinter 'season' (rather than one specific day only).
***I'd volunteered (c/o a previous blogpost and Ardern's PA in the Beehive) that name 'Matariki' (though I'm sure it or something similar was frequently suggested, and obviously the actual day of birth would've made such a possible choice rather obvious anyhow).
****An allusion to the fact that Mr Peters has never been what one would call a 'media darling' (in terms of enjoying an acrimony-free relationship with the same, that is; not in terms of his at times
great popularity (as potential Prime Minister) - at least way back in the mid-later nineteen-eighties).
*****Including via Freeview Television's TV1/TV3 Plus (one hour on) channels.
******See for example numerous blogposts of my own at the time (upon both this and my other blogsite: http://nuffsaid:consideryourself-frombothsidesnow.blogspot.co.nz/ (or .com/), especially the one titled (I believe) 'the Morning After').
*******Whether mathematically or numerically, a 52:48 margin/ratio/percentage differential of the popular vote is not only determinative ('a miss being as good as a mile', and hence vica-versa) but moreover both significant (signifying 13 people supported the Brexit and 12 opposed it, in every 25 voters) and meaningful (in sheer numbers alone, I believe a million-and-a-half more people voted 'Yes' than 'No' in the referendum - surely not an inconsiderable figure in terms of numbers of voters).
And, though the generally anti-Brexit (non-tabloid and print media, admittedly) mainstream (broadcast) media tended to vehemently oppose leaving the European Union, if it hadn't been for the awful and completely unexpected cold-blooded murder of staunchly pro-Remain M.P. Jo Cox by a crazed neo-Nazi in the closing days of the referendum, the result might well have been - indeed every (opinion polling) indication was that it would have been - far more decisive in terms of leaving the EU; (some polls just prior to this absolutely unforeseen turn of events, which some (like myself) might well have conjectured was a last-ditch conspiracy attempt by Remainers to turn the tide the other way - which it actually largely succeeded in doing (if that was indeed the case) - were indeed then indicating a margin as wide, as huge as 55:45 for leaving the European Union - which lead suddenly vanished 'overnight' as it were.) However unless said hate-filled lunatic had been bribed or set up to do his dastardly deed, then any conspiracy theory appears to hold no water, admittedly.
Thursday, June 28, 2018
Friday, June 22, 2018
Let's get these (long-promised) comments up upon the board...
Time now having well passed me by, before my various aforementioned editorial-ets become hopelessly outdated, let me - as succinctly as I know how - in this my 202th blogpost upon http://davidedwinisms.blogsite.co.nz/ (or .com/), provide a *'rundown' of what I've been promising:
*Sticking with New Zealand (for starters):
With all due greetings to the nation's 'first baby/girl/child', may I suggest a date-appropriate name: Matariki...and it's advantages were - till the kid's gender was known - that it's non-gender-specific.
Anyhow, may the nation's 'first couple' enjoy their first six weeks 'on the job' as full-time parents!
Re: the default decision to give the heave-ho to the Stand Children's Services Roxburgh children's village (or whatever it's hifalutin' name actually is): a great disappointment to all involved/concerned - primarily the kids themselves...but clearly not at all unexpected at this stage. And at least the relevant (Children's) Minister, Tracey Martin, has used the occasion (in her speech the other day) to set out a whole new philosophical approach by the Government to the placement of kids in other homes, let alone such state-run institutions per se...choosing, in a complete about-face from the approach adopted for literal decades by governments of all sorts and stripes, to work with existing families and whanau to help such children in their own, original homes.
Good luck, is all I can say, and certainly on talkback there's been a lot of support of - and some strident opposition to, let's be honest - such a new approach. But that doesn't deal with those kids already in such state-run care, surely? They can hardly be drop-kicked back into the homes from which they were rescued in weeks, months, years and decades past, can they...in all realism?
So I'd like to make a personal appeal, as I indeed suggested to Clutha Mayor Brian Cadogan via his PA the other day, that local/national benefactors/philanthropists be approached...and asked to help. As used to happen in the pre-welfare state days of the likes of America's underrated, unlucky (pre-Depression-era) President Herbert Hoover, someone who deeply and passionately and even philosophically believed in local communities 'helping their own', thus obviating the need for central, federal 'big government' involvement in its default-setting stead... And whose name was as a result 'immortalized' throughout Europe post-WW1 and post-WW11 for giving disinterested, benevolent aid to orphans and war refugees in their teeming millions...
Yes, the old-fashioned idea of 'helping (in Jesus' words, loving) your neighbour' would not go amiss!
*Or at least the first (ongoing) instalment thereof, as my hands are 'killing me' (utterly freezing in this most unprecedented of cold, awful, relentless as winters)...and needing some precious Vitamin D, as I seek to recover from a mild, if inexorably persisting cold, I'd better get warmed up (and meanwhile, out into some much welcome and almost forgotten sunshine). But following instalments will most assuredly come, in due course, I guarantee...
*Sticking with New Zealand (for starters):
With all due greetings to the nation's 'first baby/girl/child', may I suggest a date-appropriate name: Matariki...and it's advantages were - till the kid's gender was known - that it's non-gender-specific.
Anyhow, may the nation's 'first couple' enjoy their first six weeks 'on the job' as full-time parents!
Re: the default decision to give the heave-ho to the Stand Children's Services Roxburgh children's village (or whatever it's hifalutin' name actually is): a great disappointment to all involved/concerned - primarily the kids themselves...but clearly not at all unexpected at this stage. And at least the relevant (Children's) Minister, Tracey Martin, has used the occasion (in her speech the other day) to set out a whole new philosophical approach by the Government to the placement of kids in other homes, let alone such state-run institutions per se...choosing, in a complete about-face from the approach adopted for literal decades by governments of all sorts and stripes, to work with existing families and whanau to help such children in their own, original homes.
Good luck, is all I can say, and certainly on talkback there's been a lot of support of - and some strident opposition to, let's be honest - such a new approach. But that doesn't deal with those kids already in such state-run care, surely? They can hardly be drop-kicked back into the homes from which they were rescued in weeks, months, years and decades past, can they...in all realism?
So I'd like to make a personal appeal, as I indeed suggested to Clutha Mayor Brian Cadogan via his PA the other day, that local/national benefactors/philanthropists be approached...and asked to help. As used to happen in the pre-welfare state days of the likes of America's underrated, unlucky (pre-Depression-era) President Herbert Hoover, someone who deeply and passionately and even philosophically believed in local communities 'helping their own', thus obviating the need for central, federal 'big government' involvement in its default-setting stead... And whose name was as a result 'immortalized' throughout Europe post-WW1 and post-WW11 for giving disinterested, benevolent aid to orphans and war refugees in their teeming millions...
Yes, the old-fashioned idea of 'helping (in Jesus' words, loving) your neighbour' would not go amiss!
*Or at least the first (ongoing) instalment thereof, as my hands are 'killing me' (utterly freezing in this most unprecedented of cold, awful, relentless as winters)...and needing some precious Vitamin D, as I seek to recover from a mild, if inexorably persisting cold, I'd better get warmed up (and meanwhile, out into some much welcome and almost forgotten sunshine). But following instalments will most assuredly come, in due course, I guarantee...
Sunday, June 17, 2018
Wary of Justifiably Now Being Labelled a False Prophet...The Following is a (Necessarily-Succinct) Representation of What I Promised last Sunday
Also well aware that this blogpost contains a veritable mishmash of geo-political 'bits 'n bobs', and that not all of these show the ideological right-of-centre in (what I claimed a week ago as) a favourable light, I'd contend anyhow that they do nevertheless show and depict that side of Western societal affairs, and moreover some of their various spokespeople and representatives (whether obviously so or chosen as simply symbolic thereof) in a far more nuanced and complex manner than the mainstream media would ever care to. And consequently I'd suggest is worthy of portrayal.
The first three of these relate to 'local' (as in kiwi/New Zealand) issues and matters, the latter three to world (especially American-related) affairs. The subjects traversed will include 'law and order' (in regards to police profiling and politically-motivated convictions, as well as 'getting tough on crime'); a fourth to being tried and convicted/found guilty in the court of public opinion; a fifth to the il/legality of upholding one's religious convictions as opposed to ensuring the constitutional rights of one and all; with one - totally unrelated - 'postlet'(as in mini-blogpost, how's that for a 'david-edwinism?) pertaining to the big global news event of the past week; (any guesses, folks?)
Part One: Re God's Own Boys (and Gals) in Blue
New Zealand Police Commissioner Mike Bush: No, the Cops Ain't Altogether A Bad Bunch
So let's begin. First up, all power and plaudits to (I believe his correct title is) Police Commissioner (of Aotearoa-New Zealand), Mike Bush, a position normally, traditionally held/dominated by someone of not only 'right-wing' (at least moral) sensibilities, but arguably status quo-upholding instincts - as in culturally reactionary and loathe to grant even honest-hearted radicals and dissenters a dignified place at the table of public discourse.
So what a refreshing contrast - with some of his well-known predecessors, whether of the/his own Police Association or the Police Union - shown by Mr Bush of recent days upon one minorly-reported, and another much more majorly-covered matter of national interest. But breaking news (just now: Newshub Nation 6 p.m. News Show) also reports a secret meeting of late in which Commissioner Bush has guaranteed still-grieving Pike River families of the NZ Police's intention/ determination to do all in their power/s to facilitate re-entry into that trouble-fraught mine. So is the 'new look' Bush-led New Zealand Police on somewhat of a roll? Hey, you be the judge.
'First' (or rather second) up, then, is Mike Bush, as NZPA Head, the other day (Friday the 8th of June or thereabouts, on one (i.e. TV1 or TV3) of the 6 p.m. TV News Programmes), not only generously (if simply) acknowledging the concerns that had been recently expressed by new Greens co-leader Marama Davidson - vis-a-vis the police profiling of certain suspected offenders - but moreover openly conceding she'd raised some very pertinent, highly valid points thereabouts. Which in itself is quite a concession for any police chief to make, whether in New Zealand or elsewhere.
Secondly (or thirdly) we heard this past week of all police charges against *inveterate conspiracy theorist Nicky Hager being summarily dispatched. Though I've admittedly yet to appraise myself of all the ins and outs of this, out-of-left-field decision, I have heard criticisms from both 'left' and 'right' thereabouts: from (latterly) those who simply hate Hager's guts because they consider him an unregenerate and incorrigible radical and conspiracy theorist (and certainly he is both), and (formerly) from those who (at the other end of the political spectrum) hate the police and law enforcement agencies with a ferocity which would not be appeased if all they were all forthwith closed, disbanded and dealt to by certain aggrieved citizenry.
Reassuring many if not most of us that the police have thus gotten matters 'about right', so often the case when decisions are subjected to el typical and predictable relentless criticism from the usual suspects; that is, whatever the actual decision might happen to be in any particular instance.
Whatever, the basic gist of what the cops have done here is something to behold, so rare (if hardly unreasonable) is such a public apology and/or concession by the boys and girls in blue.
So I'll concede here that my own impeccable credentials as a ****self-styled false prophet may well seem to have been confirmed in this multi-layered blogpost, as it's hardly a tribute to 'the Right' in any capacity (in God's Own), much more clearly to the Left's newfound success with our law and order folk. But personally I see it all in rather different terms altogether, and more as - poignant - examples of where 'the Establishment' has moved into the modern era; not that they're trying to curry public favour and sympathies by getting in step with current, politically-correct public sensibilities and the like, but rather that they've been prepared to see and acknowledge the error of their ways...and that in itself is a great step forward. Oh yes, it most assuredly is, make no mistake!
*But please don't get me wrong, I heartily endorse not only **/***all the work I've thus far seen of Hager, but moreover his very right to pursue such sadly all too rare investigative journalism in this our day of sentimental tabloid-style sensationalism. And in terms of the man himself, whether 'in person' (while once attending one of his talks in the Dunedin City's Education College Auditorium) or c/o an in-depth interview on the radio, he shines out in an unmistakable manner as a beacon of light and truth, a pillar of integrity and honesty, amidst a field strewn with hacks, political partisans and operatives and other assorted media darling cronies who both in New Zealand and worldwide/ Westernwide have given modern media such an awful rap and general, well-earned infamy.
**I.e. balanced reportage of Hager's various - mainly pre-election - books, for I've regrettably failed to read any of them yet myself. I know off-hand the names of two, Corngate and The Hollow Men.
***In saying all of that, insofar as Hager et al really see no value in/need for nations such as 'lil 'ole New Zealand even possessing their own security intelligence operation - properly conducted and lawfully undertaken, that is - let us be perfectly clear: on this critical point he and his fellow, 'eternal' radicals may be ever so well-intentioned, but frankly they are idealistic to a fault and moreover hopelessly out of touch with present-day international realities. In case you also have been living under a rock in recent times, we're faced these days not only with cyber-terrorism/war on every hand (in addition to the 'real' variety) but we live in the backwash of 2001 and 2012; and thus the 'likes' of not only Sissii International but their African fellow-travellers such as Les Kebabs and Marah Ocob. Quite apart from seemingly innumerable, never-ending threats of all kinds from all sorts of places.
****But of course I don't really believe myself to be false in any way, let alone in such contexts as these, I simply say this to concede that I don't and have never claimed to be a model of perfection myself. No, only One is Such, and last I heard (and understood) He shares that Unique Status with no-one, although I've also 'heard' that He's more than willing to do so on a free gift basis...
The first three of these relate to 'local' (as in kiwi/New Zealand) issues and matters, the latter three to world (especially American-related) affairs. The subjects traversed will include 'law and order' (in regards to police profiling and politically-motivated convictions, as well as 'getting tough on crime'); a fourth to being tried and convicted/found guilty in the court of public opinion; a fifth to the il/legality of upholding one's religious convictions as opposed to ensuring the constitutional rights of one and all; with one - totally unrelated - 'postlet'(as in mini-blogpost, how's that for a 'david-edwinism?) pertaining to the big global news event of the past week; (any guesses, folks?)
Part One: Re God's Own Boys (and Gals) in Blue
New Zealand Police Commissioner Mike Bush: No, the Cops Ain't Altogether A Bad Bunch
So let's begin. First up, all power and plaudits to (I believe his correct title is) Police Commissioner (of Aotearoa-New Zealand), Mike Bush, a position normally, traditionally held/dominated by someone of not only 'right-wing' (at least moral) sensibilities, but arguably status quo-upholding instincts - as in culturally reactionary and loathe to grant even honest-hearted radicals and dissenters a dignified place at the table of public discourse.
So what a refreshing contrast - with some of his well-known predecessors, whether of the/his own Police Association or the Police Union - shown by Mr Bush of recent days upon one minorly-reported, and another much more majorly-covered matter of national interest. But breaking news (just now: Newshub Nation 6 p.m. News Show) also reports a secret meeting of late in which Commissioner Bush has guaranteed still-grieving Pike River families of the NZ Police's intention/ determination to do all in their power/s to facilitate re-entry into that trouble-fraught mine. So is the 'new look' Bush-led New Zealand Police on somewhat of a roll? Hey, you be the judge.
'First' (or rather second) up, then, is Mike Bush, as NZPA Head, the other day (Friday the 8th of June or thereabouts, on one (i.e. TV1 or TV3) of the 6 p.m. TV News Programmes), not only generously (if simply) acknowledging the concerns that had been recently expressed by new Greens co-leader Marama Davidson - vis-a-vis the police profiling of certain suspected offenders - but moreover openly conceding she'd raised some very pertinent, highly valid points thereabouts. Which in itself is quite a concession for any police chief to make, whether in New Zealand or elsewhere.
Secondly (or thirdly) we heard this past week of all police charges against *inveterate conspiracy theorist Nicky Hager being summarily dispatched. Though I've admittedly yet to appraise myself of all the ins and outs of this, out-of-left-field decision, I have heard criticisms from both 'left' and 'right' thereabouts: from (latterly) those who simply hate Hager's guts because they consider him an unregenerate and incorrigible radical and conspiracy theorist (and certainly he is both), and (formerly) from those who (at the other end of the political spectrum) hate the police and law enforcement agencies with a ferocity which would not be appeased if all they were all forthwith closed, disbanded and dealt to by certain aggrieved citizenry.
Reassuring many if not most of us that the police have thus gotten matters 'about right', so often the case when decisions are subjected to el typical and predictable relentless criticism from the usual suspects; that is, whatever the actual decision might happen to be in any particular instance.
Whatever, the basic gist of what the cops have done here is something to behold, so rare (if hardly unreasonable) is such a public apology and/or concession by the boys and girls in blue.
So I'll concede here that my own impeccable credentials as a ****self-styled false prophet may well seem to have been confirmed in this multi-layered blogpost, as it's hardly a tribute to 'the Right' in any capacity (in God's Own), much more clearly to the Left's newfound success with our law and order folk. But personally I see it all in rather different terms altogether, and more as - poignant - examples of where 'the Establishment' has moved into the modern era; not that they're trying to curry public favour and sympathies by getting in step with current, politically-correct public sensibilities and the like, but rather that they've been prepared to see and acknowledge the error of their ways...and that in itself is a great step forward. Oh yes, it most assuredly is, make no mistake!
*But please don't get me wrong, I heartily endorse not only **/***all the work I've thus far seen of Hager, but moreover his very right to pursue such sadly all too rare investigative journalism in this our day of sentimental tabloid-style sensationalism. And in terms of the man himself, whether 'in person' (while once attending one of his talks in the Dunedin City's Education College Auditorium) or c/o an in-depth interview on the radio, he shines out in an unmistakable manner as a beacon of light and truth, a pillar of integrity and honesty, amidst a field strewn with hacks, political partisans and operatives and other assorted media darling cronies who both in New Zealand and worldwide/ Westernwide have given modern media such an awful rap and general, well-earned infamy.
**I.e. balanced reportage of Hager's various - mainly pre-election - books, for I've regrettably failed to read any of them yet myself. I know off-hand the names of two, Corngate and The Hollow Men.
***In saying all of that, insofar as Hager et al really see no value in/need for nations such as 'lil 'ole New Zealand even possessing their own security intelligence operation - properly conducted and lawfully undertaken, that is - let us be perfectly clear: on this critical point he and his fellow, 'eternal' radicals may be ever so well-intentioned, but frankly they are idealistic to a fault and moreover hopelessly out of touch with present-day international realities. In case you also have been living under a rock in recent times, we're faced these days not only with cyber-terrorism/war on every hand (in addition to the 'real' variety) but we live in the backwash of 2001 and 2012; and thus the 'likes' of not only Sissii International but their African fellow-travellers such as Les Kebabs and Marah Ocob. Quite apart from seemingly innumerable, never-ending threats of all kinds from all sorts of places.
****But of course I don't really believe myself to be false in any way, let alone in such contexts as these, I simply say this to concede that I don't and have never claimed to be a model of perfection myself. No, only One is Such, and last I heard (and understood) He shares that Unique Status with no-one, although I've also 'heard' that He's more than willing to do so on a free gift basis...
Tuesday, June 12, 2018
Certainly Crowned Champion by his Superlative Attitude alone: Nick Willis, Apparently Ultimately Denied the 1,500 metre Beijing Olympics' Gold despite his two 'superiors' both now being implicated as drug/doping cheats, proves by his superior spirit he really won that top spot in not just the technical sense
It seems that New Zealand's contemporary running star, the frequently-selected 1500-metre Commonwealth Games' and Olympics' competitor Nick Willis, is to be ultimately denied the much-coveted prize he has now been shown to evidently and eminently deserve. Apparently through officialdom's inertia and/or the bane of technical re-evaluation deadlines and the like. Too bad.
Nevertheless, though his two Beijing 'superiors', *both the original winner, Rashid Ramzi, and after Ramzi's disqualification in 2009 for failing a drug test, the then-'winner' Kenyan Asbel Kiprop, (who over a month ago **now failed his own 'off-competition' doping test), have now been shown to have - ***in all likelihood - been invalidated as gold and silver winners of the 2008 Beijing Olympics, it would appear that technical niceties and such like now render any re-assignment of those original placements to be, as Willis himself reflected over a month ago himself, a mere 'moot point'.
More's the pity. For if Willis had indeed been given a paper 'bump-up' with hindsight's wonderful benefit, he'd have joined some illustrious company, and become only the ****fourth kiwi 1500-metre gold medal winner/champion; quite some achievement indeed.
But that's if the assigning of external glories really means all that much in the long run, and apparently, from Willis's extremely gracious standpoint, that seems much less of an issue to him. Such is made abundantly clear in a piece by the online NZ Herald Sports Editor (or Reporter) Andrew Alderson on May 3rd. It's a report in which Nick Willis shines forth in all his attitudinal glory unlike so many other contemporary would-be/'wannabe' sportstars, showing that there still remain a few such athletes in our modern era who are actuated neither by 'filthy lucre' or fame; but who compete for the sheer joy and challenge of the competition, and who race more against themselves and their own previous personal bests than so much against their various rivals as such.
Yes, Alderson's article is well worth a read, and shows how Nick Willis' exemplary attitude is such a refreshing and unexpected contrast to that of so many of his erstwhile competitors overseas and athletes in general from across the globe of recent years and decades. And Willis' top quality outlook is shown no less in his extreme unwillingness to jump to conclusions and gratuitously bag his last remaining Beijing rival, Kiprop, choosing to believe the best of him, but simultaneously likewise expressing a deep desire to see such antics - which he believes have sadly though justifiably dragged the once-great name of athletics through the mud - exposed, censored, dealt with and ultimately eliminated from the sport.
Yes, Nick, in my book anyhow you've been crowned king of Beijing's 1500 metre final in absentia...and however unrecognized (like Yours Truly in my mid-twenties, in a sense) by Officialdom Incorporated.
*Though I cannot seem to get the precise info thereabouts (online today), it would appear, in Kiprop's case also, to at best be an extremely problematic award. (Both Kiprop and Willis were respectively re-assigned from silver to gold, and bronze to silver winners, after Ramzi's 2009 disqualification.)
**Though how this (apparent) recent test (failure) relates to or should result in a re-examination of Kiprop's success a good ten years ago now is anyone's guess.
***At best, in Kiprop's case anyway (as mentioned above), an extremely problematic (unchallenged Olympics') placement.
****Perhaps I'm missing something somewhere, but I'd have assigned him as the fifth such winner, seeing as (see for example my most recent blogpost) the just-deceased Dick Quax *****himself scooped up a number of 1500 metre wins (or maybe these weren't wins, only well-placed seconds and third etcetera) as five (half-plus) of his (overall) nine successful race placements in his (essentially) seventies-era prime. 'After' and alongside such kiwi running greats/legends evidently as Sir John Walker, Sir Peter Snell and Jack Lovelock.
*****Yes, my memory must be a little tackier than I'd supposed - or at least in regard to the fact (after just re-checking my Dick Quax 'in memoriam' blogpost of the other day) that Quax's own highlights were not in the 1500 metres at all (as I'd recalled - or was that Rod Dixon, rather?), but in the 5000 metres, though Quax did get a silver at the 1,500 metre once.
Nevertheless, though his two Beijing 'superiors', *both the original winner, Rashid Ramzi, and after Ramzi's disqualification in 2009 for failing a drug test, the then-'winner' Kenyan Asbel Kiprop, (who over a month ago **now failed his own 'off-competition' doping test), have now been shown to have - ***in all likelihood - been invalidated as gold and silver winners of the 2008 Beijing Olympics, it would appear that technical niceties and such like now render any re-assignment of those original placements to be, as Willis himself reflected over a month ago himself, a mere 'moot point'.
More's the pity. For if Willis had indeed been given a paper 'bump-up' with hindsight's wonderful benefit, he'd have joined some illustrious company, and become only the ****fourth kiwi 1500-metre gold medal winner/champion; quite some achievement indeed.
But that's if the assigning of external glories really means all that much in the long run, and apparently, from Willis's extremely gracious standpoint, that seems much less of an issue to him. Such is made abundantly clear in a piece by the online NZ Herald Sports Editor (or Reporter) Andrew Alderson on May 3rd. It's a report in which Nick Willis shines forth in all his attitudinal glory unlike so many other contemporary would-be/'wannabe' sportstars, showing that there still remain a few such athletes in our modern era who are actuated neither by 'filthy lucre' or fame; but who compete for the sheer joy and challenge of the competition, and who race more against themselves and their own previous personal bests than so much against their various rivals as such.
Yes, Alderson's article is well worth a read, and shows how Nick Willis' exemplary attitude is such a refreshing and unexpected contrast to that of so many of his erstwhile competitors overseas and athletes in general from across the globe of recent years and decades. And Willis' top quality outlook is shown no less in his extreme unwillingness to jump to conclusions and gratuitously bag his last remaining Beijing rival, Kiprop, choosing to believe the best of him, but simultaneously likewise expressing a deep desire to see such antics - which he believes have sadly though justifiably dragged the once-great name of athletics through the mud - exposed, censored, dealt with and ultimately eliminated from the sport.
Yes, Nick, in my book anyhow you've been crowned king of Beijing's 1500 metre final in absentia...and however unrecognized (like Yours Truly in my mid-twenties, in a sense) by Officialdom Incorporated.
*Though I cannot seem to get the precise info thereabouts (online today), it would appear, in Kiprop's case also, to at best be an extremely problematic award. (Both Kiprop and Willis were respectively re-assigned from silver to gold, and bronze to silver winners, after Ramzi's 2009 disqualification.)
**Though how this (apparent) recent test (failure) relates to or should result in a re-examination of Kiprop's success a good ten years ago now is anyone's guess.
***At best, in Kiprop's case anyway (as mentioned above), an extremely problematic (unchallenged Olympics') placement.
****Perhaps I'm missing something somewhere, but I'd have assigned him as the fifth such winner, seeing as (see for example my most recent blogpost) the just-deceased Dick Quax *****himself scooped up a number of 1500 metre wins (or maybe these weren't wins, only well-placed seconds and third etcetera) as five (half-plus) of his (overall) nine successful race placements in his (essentially) seventies-era prime. 'After' and alongside such kiwi running greats/legends evidently as Sir John Walker, Sir Peter Snell and Jack Lovelock.
*****Yes, my memory must be a little tackier than I'd supposed - or at least in regard to the fact (after just re-checking my Dick Quax 'in memoriam' blogpost of the other day) that Quax's own highlights were not in the 1500 metres at all (as I'd recalled - or was that Rod Dixon, rather?), but in the 5000 metres, though Quax did get a silver at the 1,500 metre once.
Monday, June 11, 2018
A Week With A Difference: One Where the 'Right'/more accurately Political-Moral Conservatism - Globally - has well and truly, unlike el usual situation, possessed the moral high ground/supremacy
Coming (relatively succinct) blogposts will thus encompass American/global and New Zealand/Aussie political (and societal) developments, especially as these relate to both so-called 'moral issues' and those pertaining to law and order. Yes, and insofar as anyone has achieved victory or possessed the moral 'high ground' therein, I'd have to give it to those 'on the [so-called] right'...for in these particular contexts they've won hands down in my view...in unqualified fashion - this past week, anyhow.
Hold onto your seats, folks, I'll fill in all the details tomorrow: hasta manana!
Necessary caveat: No, my essential political views haven't really changed, though I still - as ever - remain a moral conservative (as opposed to what media and the ignoramus commentariat these days gratuitously slag off as 'right-wingers' - knowing neither the real meaning of said term, much less its abhorrent offensiveness (to anyone with any real sense of personal dignity let alone historical political perspective)). Although in this context it's not so much that I now embrace views on the centre-right or even (supposed) 'far right' of politics, it's rather that those (relevant individuals, whether political actors or otherwise) cited in my various blogposts-to-be maintain a commonsensical (despite at times unorthodox), useful and effective approach to said issues.
And moreover 'cut to the chase' of what really matters (in their particular contexts). As opposed to the highly overrated ability to have all their Ps and Qs lined up proper with all their i's appropriately dotted and t's crossed. So, no, all the current, oh so fashionable social media-endorsed political correctnesses are entirely bypassed - thank God!
Hold onto your seats, folks, I'll fill in all the details tomorrow: hasta manana!
Necessary caveat: No, my essential political views haven't really changed, though I still - as ever - remain a moral conservative (as opposed to what media and the ignoramus commentariat these days gratuitously slag off as 'right-wingers' - knowing neither the real meaning of said term, much less its abhorrent offensiveness (to anyone with any real sense of personal dignity let alone historical political perspective)). Although in this context it's not so much that I now embrace views on the centre-right or even (supposed) 'far right' of politics, it's rather that those (relevant individuals, whether political actors or otherwise) cited in my various blogposts-to-be maintain a commonsensical (despite at times unorthodox), useful and effective approach to said issues.
And moreover 'cut to the chase' of what really matters (in their particular contexts). As opposed to the highly overrated ability to have all their Ps and Qs lined up proper with all their i's appropriately dotted and t's crossed. So, no, all the current, oh so fashionable social media-endorsed political correctnesses are entirely bypassed - thank God!
Tuesday, June 5, 2018
Another Good 'Un Bites the Dust: New Zealand's Quixotic Dick Quax Exits the Earthly Stage
"The days of our lives are
seventy years...
...[their boast] is soon cut off, and we
fly away."
So declares a stanza in Psalm 90, 'A Prayer of Moses the man of God'.
And so it proved in the shortened life of New Zealand athletics 'icon' Dick Quax, a runner associated with my earliest recollections of growing up in this land we once called 'God's Own'. He made the final stretch of the last lap...to complete his own 'appointed'/allotted lifespan of 'threescore and ten' - if only just making it over that seemingly arbitrary line (before dying last week). But make it he did.
Dick Quax's running achievements were many and varied, and truly legend...indeed to my surprise 'the half had never been told' me - or I'd simply never bothered to check things out; whichever.
From 1969 through 1980 (or thereabouts) I've worked out - c/o the ever-ready assistance of Wikipedia - that Dick Quax 'scored' significantly in nine out of ten major competitions entered. Five of these nine/ten were in the 5,000 metres, in which he managed three New Zealand records, one world record, and one Olympics silver medal; he achieved a New Zealand first in the one mile; another Olympics silver medal in the 1,500 metres; a New Zealand record in the 15 km marathon; and a New Zealand record time in the Nike OTC Marathon (distance unspecified) in Eugene, Oregon.
Quax forms an unforgettable part of my middle childhood years, alongside his contemporary running 'legends', Rod Dixon and the fabled John Walker. The three are all 'conflated' in my mind, inextricably associated with such memorable happenings as the 1974 Christchurch Commonwealth Games and the 1976 Montreal Olympics, 'TV events' we sat glued to as we cheered on our own 'greats', among whom Walker, Dixon and Quax were right up there - with the best.
Competing in their respective races to the finish, chiefly against the African greats (such as Tanzanian Filbert Bayi), themselves oftentimes haling from that renowned strip of Kenyan rural real estate which nurtured so many of the continent's athletic champions, they gave sporting success a whole new meaning, inspiring many of us including Yours Truly... .
And though my own achievements were somewhat modest, I did tear off into the lead during my first or second year at intermediate (at the tender age of eleven or twelve), ultimately arriving 21st or 22nd at the finish line (amidst a pack of a couple hundred of us, prizes going only to the first twenty). And later - at around double that age, 24/25 years - I finally succeeded (at an annual church camp at Pascoe's Park in my birth-town, Christchurch) and won the 4km race...though as I ever remind Pastor Paul Gredig whenever I happen to bump into him again, I'm still oh so patiently awaiting my certificate for first place... .
Though having little time nor truck for Quax's later politics - as an ardent Act NZ local body politician in Auckland - I understand he was ever regarded as a man of principle who actually stood for something, perhaps a rarer thing in modern-day politics of whatever realm or geographical locality than many might imagine. Yes, the word integrity readily springs to mind, however much one at times might happen to disagree with the specifics of his particular politics.
It's sad to me that Dick Quax evidently held such implicit faith in orthodox medicine, as the chemotherapy and radiation treatment he was eventually subjected to as he closed his days, not only no doubt dealt to his inoperable cancer (of whatever sort), but in the process finished him off as well. (Something he did acknowledge as he ended his days, which seemingly he'd resigned himself to anyhow.) Yes, when the supposed 'cure' is as lethal as the disease, is it any wonder that so many are so readily turning to unconventional treatments such as Vitamin C therapy and the like? After all, survival is all that ultimately matters, and whatever successfully effects this is worth a go, surely?
But his final admonition is worth repeating, however often: the 'desperately ill DQ wanted to warn fellow kiwis: "Get your health checked!" ' Something Yours Truly, outside the conventional health system now for a few years, needs to ever bear in mind, especially since a major change in a certain regular feature of my otherwise excellent health profile, after a major personal crisis which escalated from awful to absolutely dreadful just under three weeks ago. Yes, 'twould appear Quax's appeal has much personal resonance indeed!
I cannot conclude with anything more meaningful than reflecting back upon the words of the memorable theme song of that aforementioned '74 Commonwealth Games, admittedly a 'meet' that Quax himself achieved no success at (whether he was actually there or otherwise; I'm a little unsure.)
As Steve Allen declared - to my piano accompaniment in years gone by (as I successfully rendered the sheet music into something reasonably tuneful - if I do say so myself):
We've got to...jo-in to-gether, let our laugh-ter fill the air...
it's time for every race and creed...to throw away their every care...
let sport un-ite us all as one...in the Spirit of the Lord a-bove...
And let us all re-mem-ber...the Games are for the fos-tering of peace and love...
Once in ev-ery fo-ur years, the Commonweath be-comes
a un-it to which ev-ery-one from anywhere belongs
They gath-er in the place that's named,
This time it's in Christ-church,
And get-ting it on to-geth-er,
Playing sport with a fee-ling that should sur-round the earth
Here in our own cou-n-try...the Games will now be held
And peo-ple black and white will come from all parts of the wor-ld
For the time that they are here, we'll get to know them well...
And hope that in the fu-ture, our rel-at-ion-ships...will tell...
We've got to - join together, let our laughter fill the air
it's time for every race and creed to throw away their every care
let sport unite us all as one in the spirit of the Lord above
And let us all re-mem-ber, the Games are for the fos-ter-ing of peace and love
Thank you, Dick, for yourself wearing that spirit well...throughout your shortened life...whether on the field or off the field...you indeed 'played [your] sport' with a feeling that should surround the world...and contributed in your own small way to helping unite us all as one...people/humanity...
seventy years...
...[their boast] is soon cut off, and we
fly away."
So declares a stanza in Psalm 90, 'A Prayer of Moses the man of God'.
And so it proved in the shortened life of New Zealand athletics 'icon' Dick Quax, a runner associated with my earliest recollections of growing up in this land we once called 'God's Own'. He made the final stretch of the last lap...to complete his own 'appointed'/allotted lifespan of 'threescore and ten' - if only just making it over that seemingly arbitrary line (before dying last week). But make it he did.
Dick Quax's running achievements were many and varied, and truly legend...indeed to my surprise 'the half had never been told' me - or I'd simply never bothered to check things out; whichever.
From 1969 through 1980 (or thereabouts) I've worked out - c/o the ever-ready assistance of Wikipedia - that Dick Quax 'scored' significantly in nine out of ten major competitions entered. Five of these nine/ten were in the 5,000 metres, in which he managed three New Zealand records, one world record, and one Olympics silver medal; he achieved a New Zealand first in the one mile; another Olympics silver medal in the 1,500 metres; a New Zealand record in the 15 km marathon; and a New Zealand record time in the Nike OTC Marathon (distance unspecified) in Eugene, Oregon.
Quax forms an unforgettable part of my middle childhood years, alongside his contemporary running 'legends', Rod Dixon and the fabled John Walker. The three are all 'conflated' in my mind, inextricably associated with such memorable happenings as the 1974 Christchurch Commonwealth Games and the 1976 Montreal Olympics, 'TV events' we sat glued to as we cheered on our own 'greats', among whom Walker, Dixon and Quax were right up there - with the best.
Competing in their respective races to the finish, chiefly against the African greats (such as Tanzanian Filbert Bayi), themselves oftentimes haling from that renowned strip of Kenyan rural real estate which nurtured so many of the continent's athletic champions, they gave sporting success a whole new meaning, inspiring many of us including Yours Truly... .
And though my own achievements were somewhat modest, I did tear off into the lead during my first or second year at intermediate (at the tender age of eleven or twelve), ultimately arriving 21st or 22nd at the finish line (amidst a pack of a couple hundred of us, prizes going only to the first twenty). And later - at around double that age, 24/25 years - I finally succeeded (at an annual church camp at Pascoe's Park in my birth-town, Christchurch) and won the 4km race...though as I ever remind Pastor Paul Gredig whenever I happen to bump into him again, I'm still oh so patiently awaiting my certificate for first place... .
Though having little time nor truck for Quax's later politics - as an ardent Act NZ local body politician in Auckland - I understand he was ever regarded as a man of principle who actually stood for something, perhaps a rarer thing in modern-day politics of whatever realm or geographical locality than many might imagine. Yes, the word integrity readily springs to mind, however much one at times might happen to disagree with the specifics of his particular politics.
It's sad to me that Dick Quax evidently held such implicit faith in orthodox medicine, as the chemotherapy and radiation treatment he was eventually subjected to as he closed his days, not only no doubt dealt to his inoperable cancer (of whatever sort), but in the process finished him off as well. (Something he did acknowledge as he ended his days, which seemingly he'd resigned himself to anyhow.) Yes, when the supposed 'cure' is as lethal as the disease, is it any wonder that so many are so readily turning to unconventional treatments such as Vitamin C therapy and the like? After all, survival is all that ultimately matters, and whatever successfully effects this is worth a go, surely?
But his final admonition is worth repeating, however often: the 'desperately ill DQ wanted to warn fellow kiwis: "Get your health checked!" ' Something Yours Truly, outside the conventional health system now for a few years, needs to ever bear in mind, especially since a major change in a certain regular feature of my otherwise excellent health profile, after a major personal crisis which escalated from awful to absolutely dreadful just under three weeks ago. Yes, 'twould appear Quax's appeal has much personal resonance indeed!
I cannot conclude with anything more meaningful than reflecting back upon the words of the memorable theme song of that aforementioned '74 Commonwealth Games, admittedly a 'meet' that Quax himself achieved no success at (whether he was actually there or otherwise; I'm a little unsure.)
As Steve Allen declared - to my piano accompaniment in years gone by (as I successfully rendered the sheet music into something reasonably tuneful - if I do say so myself):
We've got to...jo-in to-gether, let our laugh-ter fill the air...
it's time for every race and creed...to throw away their every care...
let sport un-ite us all as one...in the Spirit of the Lord a-bove...
And let us all re-mem-ber...the Games are for the fos-tering of peace and love...
Once in ev-ery fo-ur years, the Commonweath be-comes
a un-it to which ev-ery-one from anywhere belongs
They gath-er in the place that's named,
This time it's in Christ-church,
And get-ting it on to-geth-er,
Playing sport with a fee-ling that should sur-round the earth
Here in our own cou-n-try...the Games will now be held
And peo-ple black and white will come from all parts of the wor-ld
For the time that they are here, we'll get to know them well...
And hope that in the fu-ture, our rel-at-ion-ships...will tell...
We've got to - join together, let our laughter fill the air
it's time for every race and creed to throw away their every care
let sport unite us all as one in the spirit of the Lord above
And let us all re-mem-ber, the Games are for the fos-ter-ing of peace and love
Thank you, Dick, for yourself wearing that spirit well...throughout your shortened life...whether on the field or off the field...you indeed 'played [your] sport' with a feeling that should surround the world...and contributed in your own small way to helping unite us all as one...people/humanity...
Thursday, May 31, 2018
A Depressingly Dumbed-Down Generation: Bookless and Simply Clueless (in the USA and even God's Own)
So revealed the affable Hillary Barry - alongside her simply incomparable sidekick - upon tonight's 'Seven Sharp', as they showed anecdotal interviews done with both Americans and kiwis, the latter apparently all within 100 metres or so of the Birkenhead (Community) Library. Hard to say which was more plain-as-daylight evident - staggering - simply awful: the respondents' ability to recall *even just one book they'd ever read, or their clear as the proverbial mud utter cluelessness - in the case of many of them (of either younger or older generations, but especially the former, and **surprisingly more so among the female participants) - the majority evidently hardly even aware of what a book actually was.
One particularly stunningly bright gal even gave the interviewer an odd, quizzical, double-take look, conjecturing as to whether a magazine constituted a book...!!!
"Good God" - which I say with all due reverence, addressing the Almighty with the dignity He (and only He) ever deserves: "help us all!"
*In the American sample only one in four could recall the title of a book they'd - ever! - read, though truth be told, I'd doubt those Aucklanders sampled here - and in what's a well-to-do, affluent as suburb to boot - statistically outdid the yanks.
**In view of the anecdotal observation (of many, through the years) that - at least in New Zealand - women (at least of a previous generation) tend to read books an awful lot more than do men.
One particularly stunningly bright gal even gave the interviewer an odd, quizzical, double-take look, conjecturing as to whether a magazine constituted a book...!!!
"Good God" - which I say with all due reverence, addressing the Almighty with the dignity He (and only He) ever deserves: "help us all!"
*In the American sample only one in four could recall the title of a book they'd - ever! - read, though truth be told, I'd doubt those Aucklanders sampled here - and in what's a well-to-do, affluent as suburb to boot - statistically outdid the yanks.
**In view of the anecdotal observation (of many, through the years) that - at least in New Zealand - women (at least of a previous generation) tend to read books an awful lot more than do men.
Bill English, Now Another Former (National Party) Member of Parliament (Clutha-Southland): Bowing Out With Old-Fashioned Civility, Good Humour and Grace
'They say' one learns more about 'our' politicians from their opening (maiden) and closing (valedictory) addresses in Parliament's debating chamber than the rest of the time they spend up in Wellington 'on our behalf'. Whether that is true in every instance is of course highly debatable, and doubtless oftentimes wholly untrue, but in the case of William *Simon English, perhaps more true than for most. Anyhow, he completed his 29-year - and precisely 10,000 day - stay in New Zealand's unhallowed corridors of political power with what can only be termed, and is widely acknowledged as being, a great valedictory: one which I consider displayed real panache and aplomb - stylistic flair, to be sure, but even more some real, nitty-gritty, and moreover meaningful and memorable substance.
But first, may I make a couple disclaimers: and yes, admittedly this has been written somewhat 'after the event', and even - today - is being completed on the very day, and just as I hear for the first time that Mr English will now be referred to as a Sir. Be that (latter fact) as it well may - and it matters not one iota to this commentator, anyhow, it's hardly a sign of real sainthood simply to have been acknowledged, in however high-falutin' a fashion, as a knight, a dame, a lady or a sir (in the annual Queens Honour's List or in the New Years Honours). Either in New Zealand or anywhere else.
And moreover, and more pertinently by far, though long a contemporary of the political fortunes of **Bill English, of his rise and rise and rise - and then fall - and then rise and rise and rise, and again, eventual and final fall, I have very mixed views about the politician let alone the policies he espoused and pursued and the principles he arguably stood for - or oftentimes compromised, depending upon one's viewpoint. For the record, I tended to think well of him...except for four things in particular.
These were and are, as follows. Firstly, his sudden about-face upon his fundamental moral/religious principles on becoming Prime Minister, to wit the issue of homosexual marriage: vociferously and persuasively opposing such and maintaining it would insidiously serve to undermine the age-old institution of marriage (if my memory serves me aright), then recently declaring that the sky hadn't fallen in as he'd expected and so it really hadn't been such a big deal after all.
Secondly, his unwillingness - as leader of the entire nation - to be willing to subject his own (Roman Catholic) communion, let alone state institutions throughout the land, to the sort of proper sexual/psychological abuse inquiry that has been so effective and successful in Australia especially, and thus stand up for the victims of this scourge upon society and individual 'souls'.
Thirdly and fourthly, his rather shady, vague and more pertinently, highly questionable and problematic involvement in what's become known as the 'Todd Barclay Affair'; and - from both my recollection and moreover, the confirmation of then-contemporary newspapers - his continual denial of a pending challenge to his then leader, now 'Dame' Jenny Shipley, until of course he expeditiously mounted just such an extremely effective coup d'etat.
But be all that preceding guff as it very well may...and taking away not an iota from any or all of it: English made a number of very notable and memorable and moreover highly commendable and useful, important points in his valedictory speech which not only deserve a mention, they warrant placing upon the record for years, even decades to come - if our present world has that long, which is extremely unlikely. But nevertheless... .
Anyhow, let me cite a number of these (in bullet-point fashion, as seems most convenient) and then comment upon (some of) them, as the case may be. Firstly, let me simply quote (parts of) some of his best one-liners, the standouts among them anyway, for due reflection and consideration.
*"Everybody can teach you something" - the pauper as well as the prince "has something useful to tell you", so "listen to everybody": it's "an excellent way to get/arrive at the best product/decisions."
*"Jack's as good as his master." So "give everybody a fair go", "Treat everyone with respect and kindness."
*"Stay grounded in the real world" (rather than putting on airs and graces).
*"[The] integrity of the individual person" "matters much more than petty (bureaucratic) processes". "[We] need to be sensitive to the plight of suffering, institutionally-used and -abused individuals."
*"Just throwing money at everyone (and everything) is extremely unwise", since money-showering/spraying was ***"no substitute for well-targeted/focused/directed help". It was "(far) better to back people to make the changes they need to make (in their own lives)."
And head and shoulders above all his other insightful, admittedly simple but simply profound observations upon New Zealand's (and doubtless the Western World's) political scene was this one: "the dangerous complacency of good intentions." What others have called 'do-gooderism', and still others 'God-bothering'.
Opposing the establishing of yet another royal commission, this time upon the need for proper 'social investment' in citizens in welfare dependency, this much-praised, increasing focus of the National Government has been seen as English's own baby. Though he cited it in another breath entirely, National's ongoing liaison with the Maori Party over Whanau Ora (from early days) was a case in point: it had been "an excellent programme" which "exemplified these very (local, grass-roots) values/principles" of helping the individual on a case-by-case basis (as opposed to simply showering them with money).
Bill English also heaped praise upon (former Maori Party co-leader) Tariana Turia for her involvement in this and other such innovations, "giving credit where credit is due"; likewise recalling his own hands-on engagement with the 'iwi group' and its intense discussions, the profound lessons he learnt from these, and their singular effectiveness and successful outcome, citing them as being the highlight of his own tenure in Parliament.
Recollecting some memorable personal examples, and without engaging in self-pity, English yet stoically reflected upon the innate unfairness of the politician's lot - "Yes, people blame politicians for anything and everything" - and how being heartily bashed about by the brother of one successfully-enrolled Olympic/Commonwealth athlete taught English some extremely valuable lessons in personal composure under very stressful, difficult circumstances when fortitude was required.
On a similarly personal level - but vis-a-vis his political colleagues - English lavished high praise on his erstwhile leader. John Key, (who indeed was unquestionably one of, if not in fact New Zealand's all-time most popular politician/s/leader/s), had 'relentless optimism' ("in dealing with everyone, every day, on every detail of every issue".
Even more generous was his singling out of Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee. "In a wonderful testimony to his sterling character", "displaying the sense of selflessness required" in his handling of the Christchurch recovery, GB "never once mentioned his own (family's) personal circumstances", which BE "years later discovered had been dire".
Bill English exemplified (and enunciated in his valedictory) an old-fashioned individual-centred (as opposed to individualistic) ethic, political purposes formed and fashioned by his Roman Catholic convictions ("which often coincided with those of the National Party"). And which were based upon mutual respect (between citizens and their government), and humility and teachability on the part of politicians. Yes, he well understood, from personal experience, the serious limits of big government.
Yes, good 'ole-fashioned kiwi values which no-one would argue with, based upon giving everyone 'a fair go'. A pity then that those various governments of which English was an integral part rarely seemed to practice these oh-so-worthy virtues and values.
For me, Bill English's own star never shone out brighter than when he - around 2010-2012 or so - decried and earnestly inveighed against the 'moral failure' of simply building ever more prisons; rightly understanding that that in itself represented an utter failure of our society. Though truth be told his own Government kept on building ever more and bigger ones.
In conclusion, Sir Bill (William Simon) English in his justly-celebrated final address to Parliament
espoused and advocated some, indeed many, just, praiseworthy and significant goals, aims and aspirations, ideals and values - let there be no mistake. Ones which deserve commendation and note - from anyone who happened to say or promote them, in fact.
And who would dare to second-guess him or even argue that it''s easy to sound all high and mighty as you prepare to exit the scene without really achieving said aims and objectives, or at most only getting the actual debate underway? Or that he only really ever managed to get a few of those well-intentioned ideas up-and-running or posted upon the political dartboard of actual accomplishments?
Well admittedly, some verily might, but that's for another day (of the historians' assessments and all). But it is somewhat more problematic for one's legacy if it is argued - and in Mr English's case it can easily be - that the policies he and the various long-serving Governments of which he himself constituted a not inconsiderable or powerful part actually often completely contradicted such aims and objectives, even at times effectively nullifying them; whether that be by deliberate design or simply unfortunate (by-product) consequence.
And nowhere more glaring can that, those innate contradictions between the earnest politician's wistful reflections and the actual, on-the-ground realities...of what actually transpired under his (and his party's) long leadership of this nation...be seen, that in the widespread de-institutionalization of New Zealand's mental health facilities from the time of the fourth Labour Government on into the nineties when English's own party was ruling the nation's roost.
Yes, there was indeed "massive disruption" to peoples' lives, great dislocation and all the rest. The pertinent question, however, for Mr English was and will remain: did his, the Bolger (and then Shipley) Governments reverse any of these awful changes?
Yes, the question is rhetorical, and the answer is unequivocal, and reflects poorly upon English et al. Hardly! Not on your nelly!
No, the gulf between the very best of intentions, that Mr, I mean, Sir Bill English, himself bemoans and decries and the actual, on-the-ground realities that in fact played out while he and his mates manned and womaned the ship of state is a not inconsiderable one, and indeed cannot feasibly be bridged...except maybe by political spin-doctoring and the like. Because unavoidably words like inconsistent, self-contradictory and even hypocritical spring readily to mind, and cannot easily be refuted. And I've only cited one particular glaring instance in this case.
However, since none of us either can really know or indeed has any right to sit in judgment upon another's true motives or intentions, I'll conclude by giving Bill English the benefit of the doubt and let his own final, self-chosen 'epitaph' be his 'final word' here. After quoting a poignant line from a favourite James K Baxter poem, English mentioned how his brother ****Connor informed him 'the other day' that he'd be leaving Parliament exactly 10,000 days to the day he'd first been elected.
Footnoting Baxter's inimitable words - These unshaped isles...won't fit/fix the chisel of the mind - English signed off with deep feeling, barely holding back the tears, by saying that he believed and was satisfied (in his own mind) that every day (he'd been in Parliament) he'd turned up to take his turn up/on the chisel...
In conclusion, it sadly seems to me that Bill English himself contradicted the very things, values and principles he so ably and often articulated, advocated and championed - aka the suddenly-acceptable Marriage Amendment Act, his inexplicable refusal to countenance a commission of inquiry into state and private/religious et al institutional abuse, his disingenuousness re mounting a challenge to his former leader - one of the worst-kept secrets in modern NZ politics - or his questionable, unethical involvement in the Todd Barclay Affair, or, for that matter, in apparently 'rorting the system' (in terms of rental subsidies allowed for politicians) for his own (family's) financial benefit.
While none of that makes him the worst politician of all time - by a very long shot or stretch of the imagination - unfortunately it does tarnish his 'high-integrity' political brand, in my view anyway, and somewhat irretrievably. However, in championing a series of 'old-fashioned' political values when they were increasingly going out of fashion, in maintaining a level of personal decency and civility and simple good manners at all times in his political discourse and interactions with other politicians and the public-at-large whether inside or outside the chambers of Parliament, and in sticking it out and keeping on keeping on however his oft-waxing, oft-waning political fortunes were fluctuating, after just under thirty years in the high pressure cooker that is modern Western and kiwi political life Bill English can hold his head high that he seemingly survived with his *****personal integrity intact.
*A name he shares with two of National's most outstanding MPs of my lifetime: former Minister of the Environment/MSD & all sorts, plus later ambassador to France, Simon Upton; and former Minister of Finance and one-time wannabe (and highly likely) National Party leader (& future PM) Simon Power.
**Curiously, he (former National Party Deputy Leader) and John Key, thrice elected Prime Minister in landslide proportions (in terms of MMP, anyhow), respectively shared the exact ages of two of my older siblings, one of whom I'd still maintain shared a remarkable facial resemblance to Mr Key; or is that now also Sir John Key? Whatever.
***English even claimed the use of the word 'customer' in the WINZ system of Government-beneficiary relationships was a personal triumph of his; that it was intended to put it upon the basis of treating the welfare recipient with more respect and due deference and the like, rather than as
merely another faceless statistic. I must sadly inform - and can verily assure - Mr/Sir Bill English et al that in practice it's done, if anything, the very opposite; if he'll excuse the unintended 'pun' - of all his 'good intentions'.
****A former Federated Farmers Chairman (occasionally on Q&A and/or The Nation) whose face I noted having once encountered (the resemblance to Bill being uncanny) as I recalled having passed him outside NZ Post as I ensured I was on the Electoral Roll in the run-up to General Election 2002.
*****In his own mind anyway, though I well realize that the rental fiasco and the Barclay Affair have inevitably left at least a cloud of doubt and/or uncertainty over even that (in both my own and the eyes of many of the public, no doubt). But I at least am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt (in both instances, however outwardly troubling), as neither seem to fit his public persona.
Though of course it has well been said that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, and none of us are immune to the subtle eroding effects of that inescapable aspect and reality of human nature. But for my part I believe a few have managed to do just that historically, to wit the biblical heroes and heroines Joseph and Daniel, each Prime Minister of the world-ruling heathen empires of their respective day/s, and Mordecai and Esther who also served as high official and even Queen in a similar context of a non-Jewish world-ruling empire.
So it can be done. And in our day and age such notable personages as Sir Winston Churchill, Nelson Mandela, Robert Kennedy, George McGovern, even Barry Goldwater and Margaret Thatcher spring to mind. Sure, they might occasionally have infuriated the hell out of some, but true integrity is something else altogether, and cannot be so easily judged and determined, as some 'on the tip of my tongue' quote from Shakespeare would itself only corroborate...
But first, may I make a couple disclaimers: and yes, admittedly this has been written somewhat 'after the event', and even - today - is being completed on the very day, and just as I hear for the first time that Mr English will now be referred to as a Sir. Be that (latter fact) as it well may - and it matters not one iota to this commentator, anyhow, it's hardly a sign of real sainthood simply to have been acknowledged, in however high-falutin' a fashion, as a knight, a dame, a lady or a sir (in the annual Queens Honour's List or in the New Years Honours). Either in New Zealand or anywhere else.
And moreover, and more pertinently by far, though long a contemporary of the political fortunes of **Bill English, of his rise and rise and rise - and then fall - and then rise and rise and rise, and again, eventual and final fall, I have very mixed views about the politician let alone the policies he espoused and pursued and the principles he arguably stood for - or oftentimes compromised, depending upon one's viewpoint. For the record, I tended to think well of him...except for four things in particular.
These were and are, as follows. Firstly, his sudden about-face upon his fundamental moral/religious principles on becoming Prime Minister, to wit the issue of homosexual marriage: vociferously and persuasively opposing such and maintaining it would insidiously serve to undermine the age-old institution of marriage (if my memory serves me aright), then recently declaring that the sky hadn't fallen in as he'd expected and so it really hadn't been such a big deal after all.
Secondly, his unwillingness - as leader of the entire nation - to be willing to subject his own (Roman Catholic) communion, let alone state institutions throughout the land, to the sort of proper sexual/psychological abuse inquiry that has been so effective and successful in Australia especially, and thus stand up for the victims of this scourge upon society and individual 'souls'.
Thirdly and fourthly, his rather shady, vague and more pertinently, highly questionable and problematic involvement in what's become known as the 'Todd Barclay Affair'; and - from both my recollection and moreover, the confirmation of then-contemporary newspapers - his continual denial of a pending challenge to his then leader, now 'Dame' Jenny Shipley, until of course he expeditiously mounted just such an extremely effective coup d'etat.
But be all that preceding guff as it very well may...and taking away not an iota from any or all of it: English made a number of very notable and memorable and moreover highly commendable and useful, important points in his valedictory speech which not only deserve a mention, they warrant placing upon the record for years, even decades to come - if our present world has that long, which is extremely unlikely. But nevertheless... .
Anyhow, let me cite a number of these (in bullet-point fashion, as seems most convenient) and then comment upon (some of) them, as the case may be. Firstly, let me simply quote (parts of) some of his best one-liners, the standouts among them anyway, for due reflection and consideration.
*"Everybody can teach you something" - the pauper as well as the prince "has something useful to tell you", so "listen to everybody": it's "an excellent way to get/arrive at the best product/decisions."
*"Jack's as good as his master." So "give everybody a fair go", "Treat everyone with respect and kindness."
*"Stay grounded in the real world" (rather than putting on airs and graces).
*"[The] integrity of the individual person" "matters much more than petty (bureaucratic) processes". "[We] need to be sensitive to the plight of suffering, institutionally-used and -abused individuals."
*"Just throwing money at everyone (and everything) is extremely unwise", since money-showering/spraying was ***"no substitute for well-targeted/focused/directed help". It was "(far) better to back people to make the changes they need to make (in their own lives)."
And head and shoulders above all his other insightful, admittedly simple but simply profound observations upon New Zealand's (and doubtless the Western World's) political scene was this one: "the dangerous complacency of good intentions." What others have called 'do-gooderism', and still others 'God-bothering'.
Opposing the establishing of yet another royal commission, this time upon the need for proper 'social investment' in citizens in welfare dependency, this much-praised, increasing focus of the National Government has been seen as English's own baby. Though he cited it in another breath entirely, National's ongoing liaison with the Maori Party over Whanau Ora (from early days) was a case in point: it had been "an excellent programme" which "exemplified these very (local, grass-roots) values/principles" of helping the individual on a case-by-case basis (as opposed to simply showering them with money).
Bill English also heaped praise upon (former Maori Party co-leader) Tariana Turia for her involvement in this and other such innovations, "giving credit where credit is due"; likewise recalling his own hands-on engagement with the 'iwi group' and its intense discussions, the profound lessons he learnt from these, and their singular effectiveness and successful outcome, citing them as being the highlight of his own tenure in Parliament.
Recollecting some memorable personal examples, and without engaging in self-pity, English yet stoically reflected upon the innate unfairness of the politician's lot - "Yes, people blame politicians for anything and everything" - and how being heartily bashed about by the brother of one successfully-enrolled Olympic/Commonwealth athlete taught English some extremely valuable lessons in personal composure under very stressful, difficult circumstances when fortitude was required.
On a similarly personal level - but vis-a-vis his political colleagues - English lavished high praise on his erstwhile leader. John Key, (who indeed was unquestionably one of, if not in fact New Zealand's all-time most popular politician/s/leader/s), had 'relentless optimism' ("in dealing with everyone, every day, on every detail of every issue".
Even more generous was his singling out of Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee. "In a wonderful testimony to his sterling character", "displaying the sense of selflessness required" in his handling of the Christchurch recovery, GB "never once mentioned his own (family's) personal circumstances", which BE "years later discovered had been dire".
Bill English exemplified (and enunciated in his valedictory) an old-fashioned individual-centred (as opposed to individualistic) ethic, political purposes formed and fashioned by his Roman Catholic convictions ("which often coincided with those of the National Party"). And which were based upon mutual respect (between citizens and their government), and humility and teachability on the part of politicians. Yes, he well understood, from personal experience, the serious limits of big government.
Yes, good 'ole-fashioned kiwi values which no-one would argue with, based upon giving everyone 'a fair go'. A pity then that those various governments of which English was an integral part rarely seemed to practice these oh-so-worthy virtues and values.
For me, Bill English's own star never shone out brighter than when he - around 2010-2012 or so - decried and earnestly inveighed against the 'moral failure' of simply building ever more prisons; rightly understanding that that in itself represented an utter failure of our society. Though truth be told his own Government kept on building ever more and bigger ones.
In conclusion, Sir Bill (William Simon) English in his justly-celebrated final address to Parliament
espoused and advocated some, indeed many, just, praiseworthy and significant goals, aims and aspirations, ideals and values - let there be no mistake. Ones which deserve commendation and note - from anyone who happened to say or promote them, in fact.
And who would dare to second-guess him or even argue that it''s easy to sound all high and mighty as you prepare to exit the scene without really achieving said aims and objectives, or at most only getting the actual debate underway? Or that he only really ever managed to get a few of those well-intentioned ideas up-and-running or posted upon the political dartboard of actual accomplishments?
Well admittedly, some verily might, but that's for another day (of the historians' assessments and all). But it is somewhat more problematic for one's legacy if it is argued - and in Mr English's case it can easily be - that the policies he and the various long-serving Governments of which he himself constituted a not inconsiderable or powerful part actually often completely contradicted such aims and objectives, even at times effectively nullifying them; whether that be by deliberate design or simply unfortunate (by-product) consequence.
And nowhere more glaring can that, those innate contradictions between the earnest politician's wistful reflections and the actual, on-the-ground realities...of what actually transpired under his (and his party's) long leadership of this nation...be seen, that in the widespread de-institutionalization of New Zealand's mental health facilities from the time of the fourth Labour Government on into the nineties when English's own party was ruling the nation's roost.
Yes, there was indeed "massive disruption" to peoples' lives, great dislocation and all the rest. The pertinent question, however, for Mr English was and will remain: did his, the Bolger (and then Shipley) Governments reverse any of these awful changes?
Yes, the question is rhetorical, and the answer is unequivocal, and reflects poorly upon English et al. Hardly! Not on your nelly!
No, the gulf between the very best of intentions, that Mr, I mean, Sir Bill English, himself bemoans and decries and the actual, on-the-ground realities that in fact played out while he and his mates manned and womaned the ship of state is a not inconsiderable one, and indeed cannot feasibly be bridged...except maybe by political spin-doctoring and the like. Because unavoidably words like inconsistent, self-contradictory and even hypocritical spring readily to mind, and cannot easily be refuted. And I've only cited one particular glaring instance in this case.
However, since none of us either can really know or indeed has any right to sit in judgment upon another's true motives or intentions, I'll conclude by giving Bill English the benefit of the doubt and let his own final, self-chosen 'epitaph' be his 'final word' here. After quoting a poignant line from a favourite James K Baxter poem, English mentioned how his brother ****Connor informed him 'the other day' that he'd be leaving Parliament exactly 10,000 days to the day he'd first been elected.
Footnoting Baxter's inimitable words - These unshaped isles...won't fit/fix the chisel of the mind - English signed off with deep feeling, barely holding back the tears, by saying that he believed and was satisfied (in his own mind) that every day (he'd been in Parliament) he'd turned up to take his turn up/on the chisel...
In conclusion, it sadly seems to me that Bill English himself contradicted the very things, values and principles he so ably and often articulated, advocated and championed - aka the suddenly-acceptable Marriage Amendment Act, his inexplicable refusal to countenance a commission of inquiry into state and private/religious et al institutional abuse, his disingenuousness re mounting a challenge to his former leader - one of the worst-kept secrets in modern NZ politics - or his questionable, unethical involvement in the Todd Barclay Affair, or, for that matter, in apparently 'rorting the system' (in terms of rental subsidies allowed for politicians) for his own (family's) financial benefit.
While none of that makes him the worst politician of all time - by a very long shot or stretch of the imagination - unfortunately it does tarnish his 'high-integrity' political brand, in my view anyway, and somewhat irretrievably. However, in championing a series of 'old-fashioned' political values when they were increasingly going out of fashion, in maintaining a level of personal decency and civility and simple good manners at all times in his political discourse and interactions with other politicians and the public-at-large whether inside or outside the chambers of Parliament, and in sticking it out and keeping on keeping on however his oft-waxing, oft-waning political fortunes were fluctuating, after just under thirty years in the high pressure cooker that is modern Western and kiwi political life Bill English can hold his head high that he seemingly survived with his *****personal integrity intact.
*A name he shares with two of National's most outstanding MPs of my lifetime: former Minister of the Environment/MSD & all sorts, plus later ambassador to France, Simon Upton; and former Minister of Finance and one-time wannabe (and highly likely) National Party leader (& future PM) Simon Power.
**Curiously, he (former National Party Deputy Leader) and John Key, thrice elected Prime Minister in landslide proportions (in terms of MMP, anyhow), respectively shared the exact ages of two of my older siblings, one of whom I'd still maintain shared a remarkable facial resemblance to Mr Key; or is that now also Sir John Key? Whatever.
***English even claimed the use of the word 'customer' in the WINZ system of Government-beneficiary relationships was a personal triumph of his; that it was intended to put it upon the basis of treating the welfare recipient with more respect and due deference and the like, rather than as
merely another faceless statistic. I must sadly inform - and can verily assure - Mr/Sir Bill English et al that in practice it's done, if anything, the very opposite; if he'll excuse the unintended 'pun' - of all his 'good intentions'.
****A former Federated Farmers Chairman (occasionally on Q&A and/or The Nation) whose face I noted having once encountered (the resemblance to Bill being uncanny) as I recalled having passed him outside NZ Post as I ensured I was on the Electoral Roll in the run-up to General Election 2002.
*****In his own mind anyway, though I well realize that the rental fiasco and the Barclay Affair have inevitably left at least a cloud of doubt and/or uncertainty over even that (in both my own and the eyes of many of the public, no doubt). But I at least am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt (in both instances, however outwardly troubling), as neither seem to fit his public persona.
Though of course it has well been said that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, and none of us are immune to the subtle eroding effects of that inescapable aspect and reality of human nature. But for my part I believe a few have managed to do just that historically, to wit the biblical heroes and heroines Joseph and Daniel, each Prime Minister of the world-ruling heathen empires of their respective day/s, and Mordecai and Esther who also served as high official and even Queen in a similar context of a non-Jewish world-ruling empire.
So it can be done. And in our day and age such notable personages as Sir Winston Churchill, Nelson Mandela, Robert Kennedy, George McGovern, even Barry Goldwater and Margaret Thatcher spring to mind. Sure, they might occasionally have infuriated the hell out of some, but true integrity is something else altogether, and cannot be so easily judged and determined, as some 'on the tip of my tongue' quote from Shakespeare would itself only corroborate...
Tuesday, May 29, 2018
Pretty Please Jacinda (Ardern) and Tracey (Martin): Just Let the Stand Children's Services Roxburgh children's village Stand: Yes, with Adequate Funding (to boot)
It's surely not a very big ask...is it? Amidst budget outlays last week of tens and hundreds of millions of Government-surplus induced funds for this, that and especially the other - to meet the endless medley of promises and pledges solemnly undertaken by the Opposition on last year's campaign trail - stands a seemingly rather small request from Central Otago for a measly three million. For no less than the 'Stand Children's Services Roxburgh children's village' (at one time Roxburgh Health Camp).
Providing 31 local, Roxburgh-based jobs, and, much more importantly, ongoing help annually for 380 traumatized, vulnerable kids, this is surely one of the standout institutions at the very coalface of the endemic social problems afflicting Aotearoa-New Zealand. Seemingly intractable matters that the constituent parties of our new Coalition Government profess to care so very much about; having argued incessantly and quite convincingly about the desperate need to fix once and for all, not only during last year's general election campaign, but for years prior.
Something's wrong here, surely? Something simply doesn't compute, doesn't 'add up'. So let's 'cut', as my former acting associates might have put it, in a brief 'discursion' to a seemingly unrelated topic:
On a 'Trending Now' repeat of one of her weekend interviews - with the Akina Foundation's 'Growing Social Enterprise' Louise Aitken - and for what interviewer Kim Hill herself characterized as a modest outlay of $5 million, a certain Maori-based initiative had just been granted funds to make a real difference. To make an impact through a wise and bold investment - of Government monies; into their own well-chosen (and apparently effective) pathways.
"Wunderbar!" as my German backpacker friends might put it. Money well spent - indeed. Putting one's money where one's mouth is, carefully targeting the funds required to where they would make the best and most successful impact. "Not rocket science, eh!" as ye average punter might have put it.
So Madames Ardern and Martin, we're all - even your recently-deposed opponent, the former P.M. (and social investment guru) Bill English - solidly (even philosophically) behind such carefully-delineated targets to achieve your impassioned pleas and aims to eradicate child poverty from God's Own. And to render whatsoever assistance is needed to NZ's PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) juvenile underclass, who, in the vast bulk of instances, through absolutely no fault of their own, have sadly ended up on the scrapheap of our society.
Yes, who can possibly argue with your well-intentioned aims and goals and priorities? Who indeed?
And likewise, who can possibly argue - especially yourselves, Prime Minister, Minister for (eradicating) Poverty, and Children's Minister, Tracey Martin - that the Roxburgh children's village is not an especially worthy recipient of just such - specially-targeted - help? Which moreover has been providing sorely-needed assistance for a very long time (since 1941): as the ODT (May 14th) puts it, 'an intensive, residential, wrap-around trauma service' for highly vulnerable children in the South.
A critically-situated service which experts, those 'on the ground' in this field who are fully conversant with what this long-running Roxburgh-based children's service has managed to achieve, tell us is simply without a peer (and, what's more, acceptable alternative) for the children involved; and hence is still needed by kids throughout the village's large catchment area (everything south of the Waitaki River). It is a longstanding child support facility that has literally resulted in changed lives.
As a fully qualified teacher aide myself, who admittedly (since 2002/2006, and a voluntary stint a couple years ago) has only limited experience in the field after being effectively sidetracked through some serious physical and mental health issues over the past decade, I can at least attest that through my personal interventions around a decade-and-a-half ago (spending a couple hours most weekdays), one young boy with major presenting behavioural issues was helped to turn his life around; at least for awhile thereafter (if sadly, not long-term), according to the intermediate principal I contacted a year or two down the track.
And so, no, not all interventions are ultimately successful, admittedly. But if they can help just such vulnerable youth even begin to get their fraught lives back on track, hey, let's not just arbitrarily jettison them; especially not without an adequate replacement in existence. And folks - that is, all politicians still seriously considering this (last-ditch appeal) - the last I heard the Stand Children's Services Roxburgh children's village was doing an effective job.
And surely, at the end of the day, Ms Ardern and Ms Martin - and I speak as one who's been vocally (and blogwise) highly supportive of you up till now - 'if it ain't broke, why (even try to) fix it (much less let it fall and fail)?' No, it's your absolute duty to admit you stuffed up here, have seen the error of your ways, and are indeed prepared to stump up now - however belatedly - with the needed cash.
Which surely isn't all that much - is virtually small change in the overall scheme of things, in light of your other budgetary expenditures. Hey, please do it - if not for any grand ideological imperatives, simply because these kids, who have so few advocates rooting for them in the real world, are counting upon you...to do the right thing...for and by them.
Pretty please, Prime Minister, and Minister Martin? And move forward without regrets. For the kids' sake.
Yours Sincerely (a long-time admirer of you both)
David Bernhardt
Providing 31 local, Roxburgh-based jobs, and, much more importantly, ongoing help annually for 380 traumatized, vulnerable kids, this is surely one of the standout institutions at the very coalface of the endemic social problems afflicting Aotearoa-New Zealand. Seemingly intractable matters that the constituent parties of our new Coalition Government profess to care so very much about; having argued incessantly and quite convincingly about the desperate need to fix once and for all, not only during last year's general election campaign, but for years prior.
Something's wrong here, surely? Something simply doesn't compute, doesn't 'add up'. So let's 'cut', as my former acting associates might have put it, in a brief 'discursion' to a seemingly unrelated topic:
On a 'Trending Now' repeat of one of her weekend interviews - with the Akina Foundation's 'Growing Social Enterprise' Louise Aitken - and for what interviewer Kim Hill herself characterized as a modest outlay of $5 million, a certain Maori-based initiative had just been granted funds to make a real difference. To make an impact through a wise and bold investment - of Government monies; into their own well-chosen (and apparently effective) pathways.
"Wunderbar!" as my German backpacker friends might put it. Money well spent - indeed. Putting one's money where one's mouth is, carefully targeting the funds required to where they would make the best and most successful impact. "Not rocket science, eh!" as ye average punter might have put it.
So Madames Ardern and Martin, we're all - even your recently-deposed opponent, the former P.M. (and social investment guru) Bill English - solidly (even philosophically) behind such carefully-delineated targets to achieve your impassioned pleas and aims to eradicate child poverty from God's Own. And to render whatsoever assistance is needed to NZ's PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) juvenile underclass, who, in the vast bulk of instances, through absolutely no fault of their own, have sadly ended up on the scrapheap of our society.
Yes, who can possibly argue with your well-intentioned aims and goals and priorities? Who indeed?
And likewise, who can possibly argue - especially yourselves, Prime Minister, Minister for (eradicating) Poverty, and Children's Minister, Tracey Martin - that the Roxburgh children's village is not an especially worthy recipient of just such - specially-targeted - help? Which moreover has been providing sorely-needed assistance for a very long time (since 1941): as the ODT (May 14th) puts it, 'an intensive, residential, wrap-around trauma service' for highly vulnerable children in the South.
A critically-situated service which experts, those 'on the ground' in this field who are fully conversant with what this long-running Roxburgh-based children's service has managed to achieve, tell us is simply without a peer (and, what's more, acceptable alternative) for the children involved; and hence is still needed by kids throughout the village's large catchment area (everything south of the Waitaki River). It is a longstanding child support facility that has literally resulted in changed lives.
As a fully qualified teacher aide myself, who admittedly (since 2002/2006, and a voluntary stint a couple years ago) has only limited experience in the field after being effectively sidetracked through some serious physical and mental health issues over the past decade, I can at least attest that through my personal interventions around a decade-and-a-half ago (spending a couple hours most weekdays), one young boy with major presenting behavioural issues was helped to turn his life around; at least for awhile thereafter (if sadly, not long-term), according to the intermediate principal I contacted a year or two down the track.
And so, no, not all interventions are ultimately successful, admittedly. But if they can help just such vulnerable youth even begin to get their fraught lives back on track, hey, let's not just arbitrarily jettison them; especially not without an adequate replacement in existence. And folks - that is, all politicians still seriously considering this (last-ditch appeal) - the last I heard the Stand Children's Services Roxburgh children's village was doing an effective job.
And surely, at the end of the day, Ms Ardern and Ms Martin - and I speak as one who's been vocally (and blogwise) highly supportive of you up till now - 'if it ain't broke, why (even try to) fix it (much less let it fall and fail)?' No, it's your absolute duty to admit you stuffed up here, have seen the error of your ways, and are indeed prepared to stump up now - however belatedly - with the needed cash.
Which surely isn't all that much - is virtually small change in the overall scheme of things, in light of your other budgetary expenditures. Hey, please do it - if not for any grand ideological imperatives, simply because these kids, who have so few advocates rooting for them in the real world, are counting upon you...to do the right thing...for and by them.
Pretty please, Prime Minister, and Minister Martin? And move forward without regrets. For the kids' sake.
Yours Sincerely (a long-time admirer of you both)
David Bernhardt
Friday, May 11, 2018
On the Imminent New Zealand Institutional Abuse Commission
Pursuant to (my blogpost) 'Jacindamania', and as previewed therein:
As to Prime Minister Ardern's relationship with New Zealand's churches/Christianity a la Aotearoa, though I'm prepared to believe she is quite well-intentioned - yes, I'm willing to give her the full benefit of the doubt at this stage of proceedings - her (and her Government's) decision to omit private institutions such as churches from the forthcoming commission of inquiry into historic (sexual and physical - and even psycho-emotional?) abuse in God's own...is a dreadful, misguided mistake.
And will serve no useful purpose at all. Even allowing for the inclusion of those in such private institutions where their referral/placement therein was due to the state itself; that still doesn't give it a broad enough ambit.
This has been strongly echoed, rather emphasized by a couple vocal victims, fellows who were the subjects of such abuse, who understandably simply cannot accept the limiting of the terms of reference in this regard. Nor should they; it simply makes no logical sense whatsoever.
Sure, I'll grant that Ms Ardern in particular is reluctant to and wary about needlessly antagonizing the Christian community here by otherwise apparently attempting to mount what might well appear a veritable witch-hunt aimed at said religious organizations, delving into all the ins and outs, the nitty-gritty of how said churches have conducted themselves over the past half century. That is quite, perfectly understandable, especially in view of how upset and outraged many of them were made by the last Labour Government's ongoing 'progressive' social legislation - though at the same time a large number of liberal churches were foremost in actively supporting said reforms.
Moreover, for P.M. Ardern - quite unlike former Labour Prime Minister Helen Clark, it would seem - haled from a church/'Christian' background (though of course many evangelical believers and orthodox churches still regard the Mormons as a 'cult'), and so has an understandable personal stance ('skin in the game' so to speak) in the matter. And knows that, as I referred to a little earlier, sufficient offence and umbrage has already been given in recent years to said Christian community, and moreover is sure to come from the new Government, especially as the euthanasia and abortion overhauls are progressed during its first (or second) term.
The problem for Ardern and her government here, is that, having been made abundantly aware on numerous occasions over recent weeks and months (on RNZ National's Morning Report especially) - in relation to the commission of inquiry to be headed by former Governor General Sir Annan Satchanan - there's absolutely no good reason - no reasonable argument whatsoever - for restricting the mandate of said commission to only state-run institutions. No, absolutely none whatsoever.
Abuse, wherever it occurs, is an absolute scourge and knows no arbitrary physical bounds. Ever.
As to Prime Minister Ardern's relationship with New Zealand's churches/Christianity a la Aotearoa, though I'm prepared to believe she is quite well-intentioned - yes, I'm willing to give her the full benefit of the doubt at this stage of proceedings - her (and her Government's) decision to omit private institutions such as churches from the forthcoming commission of inquiry into historic (sexual and physical - and even psycho-emotional?) abuse in God's own...is a dreadful, misguided mistake.
And will serve no useful purpose at all. Even allowing for the inclusion of those in such private institutions where their referral/placement therein was due to the state itself; that still doesn't give it a broad enough ambit.
This has been strongly echoed, rather emphasized by a couple vocal victims, fellows who were the subjects of such abuse, who understandably simply cannot accept the limiting of the terms of reference in this regard. Nor should they; it simply makes no logical sense whatsoever.
Sure, I'll grant that Ms Ardern in particular is reluctant to and wary about needlessly antagonizing the Christian community here by otherwise apparently attempting to mount what might well appear a veritable witch-hunt aimed at said religious organizations, delving into all the ins and outs, the nitty-gritty of how said churches have conducted themselves over the past half century. That is quite, perfectly understandable, especially in view of how upset and outraged many of them were made by the last Labour Government's ongoing 'progressive' social legislation - though at the same time a large number of liberal churches were foremost in actively supporting said reforms.
Moreover, for P.M. Ardern - quite unlike former Labour Prime Minister Helen Clark, it would seem - haled from a church/'Christian' background (though of course many evangelical believers and orthodox churches still regard the Mormons as a 'cult'), and so has an understandable personal stance ('skin in the game' so to speak) in the matter. And knows that, as I referred to a little earlier, sufficient offence and umbrage has already been given in recent years to said Christian community, and moreover is sure to come from the new Government, especially as the euthanasia and abortion overhauls are progressed during its first (or second) term.
The problem for Ardern and her government here, is that, having been made abundantly aware on numerous occasions over recent weeks and months (on RNZ National's Morning Report especially) - in relation to the commission of inquiry to be headed by former Governor General Sir Annan Satchanan - there's absolutely no good reason - no reasonable argument whatsoever - for restricting the mandate of said commission to only state-run institutions. No, absolutely none whatsoever.
Abuse, wherever it occurs, is an absolute scourge and knows no arbitrary physical bounds. Ever.
Sunday, May 6, 2018
Good on ya, Paddy Gower: A Well (even Superbly) Handled Scoop on Gloriavale
In sharp and distinct contrast to Lisa Owen - especially of late - I'd like to heartily commend a much-overlooked and often underrated tele-broadcaster, as it so transpires another TV3, now Newshub Nation, political commentator/correspondent: the redoubtable Paddy Gower.
Admittedly often mistaken for ye proverbial cheshire cat for his inimitable grin - or a budding child chess champion for his sheer inability not to insert a know-it-all smirk into any and every story he's involved with, or in which he feels he has the 'special goods', the inside scoop on secret proceedings - Gower's special Newshub Nation 6 p.m. report the other night (Tuesday, May 6th, I believe) was in verity 'one out of the box'.
In what was an extensive piece of investigative journalism - which had obviously taken a lot of blood, sweat and tears to produce - upon the now infamous *Gloriavale Christian community on New Zealand's West Coast, Gower made it clear that these days he is well and truly the adult journalist in the room amidst a vast field - a veritable school - of rank amateurs. At least on television.
In complete contradistinction to the extensive coverage previously given during the days of Campbell Live - especially from, I would argue (and any fellow Christians I've discussed the matter with have concurred), a somewhat jaded, cynical, inherently anti-Christian bias - Gower provides a very fair and balanced approach. (Here I will limit myself to canvassing his treatment of the head honcho and the community as a whole.)
As far as the overall community is concerned, Gower readily and generously conceded that the vast majority of residents - especially (apparently) beautifully innocent children looking as if they've come out of a reworked version of Sound of Music or a Dutch tale - were eminently good and decent folk.
As for the community's 'main man', their leader, **'Hopeful Christian', despite giving yet another unvarnished account of this man's dealings not only with the visiting media but moreover and far more concerningly with those residents who from time to time have actively dissented from the basic narrative that the community reverberates to (and lives according to), Gower yet gave a certain measure of respect, or let's just say due deference, to 'Hopeful' on account of the sheer position he holds within Gloriavale; and thus is 'endowed with' by its 550-some residents.
Though utterly undeserving, in the quite understandable view of ye average NZ citizen looking on, and rather askance, of any commendation whatsoever - in light of his heavy-handed approach to all manner of dissent and dissenters in said community over any number of years apparently - Paddy Gower makes a nuanced tweak to this general narrative (which no doubt he otherwise fully subscribes to). And the reason I'm singling this out is due to its relevance to all manner of other situations in especially modern Western society.
It is essentially the difference between the particular office-holder (at any one moment in history) and the actual institution s/he happens to lead. And thus between the honour and esteem rightly and properly accruing - hopefully! - to the institution itself, even when that organization, which may well be political or governmental in nature, is headed by a complete buffoon or imbecile. Yes, no great imagination is required as to at least one pertinent application in our current geo-political world!
It is interestingly a quality that the man who was reputably the greatest and most respected (not to mention popular) of the pre-Christian era kingdoms of Israel and Judah had in literal spades. (Perhaps one of the many reasons he was considered a wonderful type of Jesus Christ, being given that rarest of commendations: 'a man after God's own heart'.) Of course I refer to the great King David (who naturally I've a certain degree of partiality to, if regrettably lacking in the personal warmth (and hence popularity) and charisma/personal magnetism which made him so beloved to his own countrymen and women - if not to his envious first wife Michal!
To what in David's life here do I allude, and how does Paddy Gower exemplify that in regards to Hopeful Christian? Twice David, ever on the run (for 13 years all up) from the murderous hatred of the intensely envious symbolically deposed (yet still reigning) then King Saul, had Saul right in his power: once when Saul was relieving himself, supposedly privately, in a cave wherein David and his men were holed up!, David's men urged him to get the job over and done with once and for all and finish Saul off for good now he was finally in his grip, and a second time when David and his men encountered Saul asleep around a campfire.
And both times David responded to his bloodthirsty loyalists in this way: "The LORD forbid that I should do this thing to my master, the LORD's anointed, to stretch out my hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the LORD." And once he adds: "For who can stretch out his hand against the LORD's anointed, and be guiltless?"
*Coincidentally (though my life's ever been full of them), I picked up a tome at a favourite second-hand shop just two days later, Daughter of Gloriavale: My Life in a Religious Cult (by Lilia Tarawa); and almost purchased another, Trust No One, about abuse (of all sorts, especially sexual and physical, but also psychological) in state-run institutions, I believe in the United Kingdom.
**A misnomer is ever there were one! Though I'm quite familiar with the classic tale by John Bunyan, Pilgrim's Progress, and moreover the character therein from whom he takes his name, Gloriavale's head honcho appears anything but a bringer of hope much less the love Jesus often denoted would be the hallmark, the lingua franca, of His earthly disciples.
Admittedly often mistaken for ye proverbial cheshire cat for his inimitable grin - or a budding child chess champion for his sheer inability not to insert a know-it-all smirk into any and every story he's involved with, or in which he feels he has the 'special goods', the inside scoop on secret proceedings - Gower's special Newshub Nation 6 p.m. report the other night (Tuesday, May 6th, I believe) was in verity 'one out of the box'.
In what was an extensive piece of investigative journalism - which had obviously taken a lot of blood, sweat and tears to produce - upon the now infamous *Gloriavale Christian community on New Zealand's West Coast, Gower made it clear that these days he is well and truly the adult journalist in the room amidst a vast field - a veritable school - of rank amateurs. At least on television.
In complete contradistinction to the extensive coverage previously given during the days of Campbell Live - especially from, I would argue (and any fellow Christians I've discussed the matter with have concurred), a somewhat jaded, cynical, inherently anti-Christian bias - Gower provides a very fair and balanced approach. (Here I will limit myself to canvassing his treatment of the head honcho and the community as a whole.)
As far as the overall community is concerned, Gower readily and generously conceded that the vast majority of residents - especially (apparently) beautifully innocent children looking as if they've come out of a reworked version of Sound of Music or a Dutch tale - were eminently good and decent folk.
As for the community's 'main man', their leader, **'Hopeful Christian', despite giving yet another unvarnished account of this man's dealings not only with the visiting media but moreover and far more concerningly with those residents who from time to time have actively dissented from the basic narrative that the community reverberates to (and lives according to), Gower yet gave a certain measure of respect, or let's just say due deference, to 'Hopeful' on account of the sheer position he holds within Gloriavale; and thus is 'endowed with' by its 550-some residents.
Though utterly undeserving, in the quite understandable view of ye average NZ citizen looking on, and rather askance, of any commendation whatsoever - in light of his heavy-handed approach to all manner of dissent and dissenters in said community over any number of years apparently - Paddy Gower makes a nuanced tweak to this general narrative (which no doubt he otherwise fully subscribes to). And the reason I'm singling this out is due to its relevance to all manner of other situations in especially modern Western society.
It is essentially the difference between the particular office-holder (at any one moment in history) and the actual institution s/he happens to lead. And thus between the honour and esteem rightly and properly accruing - hopefully! - to the institution itself, even when that organization, which may well be political or governmental in nature, is headed by a complete buffoon or imbecile. Yes, no great imagination is required as to at least one pertinent application in our current geo-political world!
It is interestingly a quality that the man who was reputably the greatest and most respected (not to mention popular) of the pre-Christian era kingdoms of Israel and Judah had in literal spades. (Perhaps one of the many reasons he was considered a wonderful type of Jesus Christ, being given that rarest of commendations: 'a man after God's own heart'.) Of course I refer to the great King David (who naturally I've a certain degree of partiality to, if regrettably lacking in the personal warmth (and hence popularity) and charisma/personal magnetism which made him so beloved to his own countrymen and women - if not to his envious first wife Michal!
To what in David's life here do I allude, and how does Paddy Gower exemplify that in regards to Hopeful Christian? Twice David, ever on the run (for 13 years all up) from the murderous hatred of the intensely envious symbolically deposed (yet still reigning) then King Saul, had Saul right in his power: once when Saul was relieving himself, supposedly privately, in a cave wherein David and his men were holed up!, David's men urged him to get the job over and done with once and for all and finish Saul off for good now he was finally in his grip, and a second time when David and his men encountered Saul asleep around a campfire.
And both times David responded to his bloodthirsty loyalists in this way: "The LORD forbid that I should do this thing to my master, the LORD's anointed, to stretch out my hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the LORD." And once he adds: "For who can stretch out his hand against the LORD's anointed, and be guiltless?"
*Coincidentally (though my life's ever been full of them), I picked up a tome at a favourite second-hand shop just two days later, Daughter of Gloriavale: My Life in a Religious Cult (by Lilia Tarawa); and almost purchased another, Trust No One, about abuse (of all sorts, especially sexual and physical, but also psychological) in state-run institutions, I believe in the United Kingdom.
**A misnomer is ever there were one! Though I'm quite familiar with the classic tale by John Bunyan, Pilgrim's Progress, and moreover the character therein from whom he takes his name, Gloriavale's head honcho appears anything but a bringer of hope much less the love Jesus often denoted would be the hallmark, the lingua franca, of His earthly disciples.
Lisa Owen: NZ Media Inc Interrogator Extraordinaire
(Regrettably a much-deferred - and for me, unusually brief - opinion piece.)
It would seem that Newshub Nation's main interviewer over recent years, the (commendably) painstakingly diligent and thoroughly issue-conversant - let's give her all due credit - Lisa Owen, somewhere along the way missed her true calling in life: that of appointment to the modern-day *(Office of the) 'Inquisition', i.e. The Vatican's Department of Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy.
The interviews upon 'the Nation' which elicit this judgment upon my part are numerous, and in recent times include one with the P.M. and another with the two then would-be Green co-leaders. Though no big fan of either Marama Davidson or Julie-Ann Genter, and someone moreover who believes Genter - admittedly, like the rather notorious Mike Hosking - was eminently better qualified for the post than Davidson, however appealing the latter to the Greens' base, they both can only be commended for their admirably self-restrained responses to Lisa Owen.
Variously resembling anything and everything from stunned to agasp to absolutely horror-stricken at Owen's take-no-prisoners, lay it on the line, in-your-face, "I'm waiting on ya'll, now stop messin' around with me!" demeanour and approach, they could have taken a leaf out of the book from a subsequent interview Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern had with the Newshub Nation host. With measured grace - though I've since misplaced the exact comments being made - Ardern quickly cut Owen down to size and put her back in her place by simply and matter-of-factly, in her own inimitable 'Now let's stop being foolish kiddies, okay?' style, effectively dismissing the entire line of questioning with a frank and firm, gentle but unyielding "No!" or the like, which simply could not be argued further with. Owen had finally met her match and seemingly immediately realized as much.
*Known by various names at different times, what was up until 1908 the 'Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition' then became simply the 'Holy Office' until 1965, and thereafter has been the 'Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith'. All this according to the 'World Socialist Website', which I quote from in my treatise-length 2013 exposition 'Pope Francis (the First): A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing, or "surprise, surprise": A Sheep in Wolf's Clothing?'
It would seem that Newshub Nation's main interviewer over recent years, the (commendably) painstakingly diligent and thoroughly issue-conversant - let's give her all due credit - Lisa Owen, somewhere along the way missed her true calling in life: that of appointment to the modern-day *(Office of the) 'Inquisition', i.e. The Vatican's Department of Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy.
The interviews upon 'the Nation' which elicit this judgment upon my part are numerous, and in recent times include one with the P.M. and another with the two then would-be Green co-leaders. Though no big fan of either Marama Davidson or Julie-Ann Genter, and someone moreover who believes Genter - admittedly, like the rather notorious Mike Hosking - was eminently better qualified for the post than Davidson, however appealing the latter to the Greens' base, they both can only be commended for their admirably self-restrained responses to Lisa Owen.
Variously resembling anything and everything from stunned to agasp to absolutely horror-stricken at Owen's take-no-prisoners, lay it on the line, in-your-face, "I'm waiting on ya'll, now stop messin' around with me!" demeanour and approach, they could have taken a leaf out of the book from a subsequent interview Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern had with the Newshub Nation host. With measured grace - though I've since misplaced the exact comments being made - Ardern quickly cut Owen down to size and put her back in her place by simply and matter-of-factly, in her own inimitable 'Now let's stop being foolish kiddies, okay?' style, effectively dismissing the entire line of questioning with a frank and firm, gentle but unyielding "No!" or the like, which simply could not be argued further with. Owen had finally met her match and seemingly immediately realized as much.
*Known by various names at different times, what was up until 1908 the 'Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition' then became simply the 'Holy Office' until 1965, and thereafter has been the 'Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith'. All this according to the 'World Socialist Website', which I quote from in my treatise-length 2013 exposition 'Pope Francis (the First): A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing, or "surprise, surprise": A Sheep in Wolf's Clothing?'
Tuesday, May 1, 2018
Yemen: Nothing New Under the Sun - Just As The Epitome of Wisdom, King Solomon Might've Put Things
"Next I observed all the oppression and sadness throughout the earth - the tears of the oppressed, and no one helping them, while on the side of their oppressors were powerful allies." (The Living Bible.)
"I looked again and saw all the oppression that goes on in the world; there were the oppressed in tears, with no one to redress their wrongs - tyrants in power, and the oppressed in tears, with no one to redress their wrongs!" (James Moffatt: A New Translation of the Bible.)
Those two versions of Ecclesiastes 4:1 pretty well say it all, don't they...not only about the awful humanitarian tragedy daily unfolding in Yemen, but of course in Syria - Afghanistan - Iraq et al? No, the world has learnt very little down the years - decades - centuries - millennia, and far from humanity ever progressing onward and upward, as we're so often told, it simply repeats the old patterns so familiar to human nature. There is indeed hardly anything truly 'new under the sun'.
So once again, while celebrating wedding parties and other civilians simply go about their day-to-day lives 'minding their own business', they are periodically blown to smithereens and otherwise gunned down, picked off by drones, or simply gassed out of existence in whatever gruesome fashion happens to be currently in vogue with those who sadistically could care less about the lives of innocents and other 'pawns' in the path of their murderous (but ever-'justifiable') ambitions, plans and purposes.
And so the world looks on impotently and stands idly by whilst yet another ghastly episode of 'man's inhumanity to man' unfolds on the Saudi Peninsula, where vast multitudes in the tiny nation of Yemen die every day of cholera; and vast swathes of others are mown down as 'collateral damage' in the war.
This occurs as often as not via Western military aid to the brutal Saudi (Arabian) regime/war machine...whose 'misdeeds' are increasingly overlooked and apparently condoned - turned the proverbial blind eye to - supposedly, if we're to believe the mainstream media's only other coverage of those two nations, because the Saudi regime is undergoing radical reforms in its monarchy: i.e. it has a bright new (modernist, 'progressive') 'thing' as its leader. Hey, they're even now allowing women to drive on their roads!
And to think that New Zealand Inc - c/o its Government of the day (only 3-4 years ago or so) - had the effrontery (to all those values we apparently hold so very dear - as witnessed once again 'just the other day' in our annual Anzac Day commemorations) to fly our national flag at half mast upon the death of the last Saudi crown prince. Yes, all for a nation which regularly beheads its (dissenting) citizens and otherwise de-limbs them (for lesser offences) - are women still stoned for committing adultery (while the male participants get away scot-free presumably)? Doing so apparently all in the name of a religion which makes its God into a supremely unworthy representation of all that's noblest and best in life.
When, oh when, will our supposedly 'enlightened' modern-day world - c/o its supposed representatives in the United Nations et al - get its act together and do something about Yemen (and these various other 'intractable' conflicts? Not anytime soon, you can bet. No, I'm not holding my breath, either - nor will Yemen's suffering innocents be.
"Then I looked again at all the injustice that goes on in this world. The oppressed were weeping, and no one would help them. No one would help them, because their oppressors had power on their side." (The Good News Bible.)
"I looked again and saw all the oppression that goes on in the world; there were the oppressed in tears, with no one to redress their wrongs - tyrants in power, and the oppressed in tears, with no one to redress their wrongs!" (James Moffatt: A New Translation of the Bible.)
Those two versions of Ecclesiastes 4:1 pretty well say it all, don't they...not only about the awful humanitarian tragedy daily unfolding in Yemen, but of course in Syria - Afghanistan - Iraq et al? No, the world has learnt very little down the years - decades - centuries - millennia, and far from humanity ever progressing onward and upward, as we're so often told, it simply repeats the old patterns so familiar to human nature. There is indeed hardly anything truly 'new under the sun'.
So once again, while celebrating wedding parties and other civilians simply go about their day-to-day lives 'minding their own business', they are periodically blown to smithereens and otherwise gunned down, picked off by drones, or simply gassed out of existence in whatever gruesome fashion happens to be currently in vogue with those who sadistically could care less about the lives of innocents and other 'pawns' in the path of their murderous (but ever-'justifiable') ambitions, plans and purposes.
And so the world looks on impotently and stands idly by whilst yet another ghastly episode of 'man's inhumanity to man' unfolds on the Saudi Peninsula, where vast multitudes in the tiny nation of Yemen die every day of cholera; and vast swathes of others are mown down as 'collateral damage' in the war.
This occurs as often as not via Western military aid to the brutal Saudi (Arabian) regime/war machine...whose 'misdeeds' are increasingly overlooked and apparently condoned - turned the proverbial blind eye to - supposedly, if we're to believe the mainstream media's only other coverage of those two nations, because the Saudi regime is undergoing radical reforms in its monarchy: i.e. it has a bright new (modernist, 'progressive') 'thing' as its leader. Hey, they're even now allowing women to drive on their roads!
And to think that New Zealand Inc - c/o its Government of the day (only 3-4 years ago or so) - had the effrontery (to all those values we apparently hold so very dear - as witnessed once again 'just the other day' in our annual Anzac Day commemorations) to fly our national flag at half mast upon the death of the last Saudi crown prince. Yes, all for a nation which regularly beheads its (dissenting) citizens and otherwise de-limbs them (for lesser offences) - are women still stoned for committing adultery (while the male participants get away scot-free presumably)? Doing so apparently all in the name of a religion which makes its God into a supremely unworthy representation of all that's noblest and best in life.
When, oh when, will our supposedly 'enlightened' modern-day world - c/o its supposed representatives in the United Nations et al - get its act together and do something about Yemen (and these various other 'intractable' conflicts? Not anytime soon, you can bet. No, I'm not holding my breath, either - nor will Yemen's suffering innocents be.
"Then I looked again at all the injustice that goes on in this world. The oppressed were weeping, and no one would help them. No one would help them, because their oppressors had power on their side." (The Good News Bible.)
Monday, April 30, 2018
Wednesday, April 18, 2018
'Jacinda-Mania': Sure, Some of the Gloss has now Worn Off, But Folks, There's a Perfectly Good Reason, There Really Is: Various Reflections and Observations Upon the First 100/175 Days of New Zealand's 'new' Coalition Government
Seemingly incapable of putting a foot wrong for some considerable time, we're now informed by all and sundry - of the media commentariat, political pundits, never mind all those politicoes with a vested interest in the question - that New Zealand's 'new' Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, has now lost some/much of her initial gloss/*'stardust'; the 'glory' which has hitherto attended her unconventional rise and rise and rise to the top of Aotearoa's political landscape, and up to recently appeared a seeming, virtual 'given' to accompany her way on into and beyond the political sunrise.
That may well be so (i.e. the diminishing of the glitter), especially in light of the previous few weeks of scandal, supposed indiscipline in the ranks, and increasingly controversial decisions in the environmental space in particular. As happens for every newbie government, invariably, though admittedly for the Labour-NZ First-Green Coalition Government this has occurred somewhat more readily, certainly than the previous John Key walk-on-water Government, anyway. Although four-and-a-half months or so is otherwise a pretty good innings for most NZ Inc Governments, especially of the MMP variety, to so seamlessly maintain their political honeymoon.
And 'Jacindamania', like Canada's equivalent 'Trudeaumania', can really only last so long: political 'glory' and stardom, as we all know, has a built-in use-by date, however unknown till hindsight's benefit eventually discloses the truth. A sentiment, incidentally, Americans have been realizing each and every new day as they awake once more to yet another instalment in the ongoing, 'Give a Little' saga - or rather fiasco - better known to ye average punter as the Trump Presidency. Political 'celebrities' really do come in all shapes and sizes these days, don't they... .
But first, let's take a breather to reflect upon the first 100 days of our Jacinda Ardern, Labour-led Coalition Government. The following, then, is the personal assessment (scribbled months ago) of a long-time/lifetime political 'junkie'/Political Studies (and English) graduate on Prime Minister Ardern's personal performance, as such - only; and not upon the Government as a whole (much less the policies either merely advanced/advocated thus far, or already implemented).
A double, even triple A-plus. Not for her - (nevertheless) quite outspoken and commendably open - on-the-public-record support for stuff I personally regard as wrong, bad, or just plain awful, such as yet more 'progressive' social legislation - such as euthanasia and even more liberalized abortion law. But at least these issues do tend to be voted upon separately as 'conscience' issues, enabling MPs to avoid being simply 'whipped' into line as otherwise occurs; though it's a worrying trend of recent years and of governments of both, but especially the left persuasion, that these are more and more being treated as **purely party political matters.
But as I say, what I really do and very much appreciate about our new P.M. is that at least she's completely open and honest thereabouts: one knows precisely where she ultimately stands upon such issues, and why. However unwelcome discussion of such matters might ordinarily be to career-minded (and ***poll-driven fruitcake) politicians.
Which is conspicuously unlike our now former Prime Minister Bill English, who, despite his one-time, even lifetime, ****strident and implacable opposition to all manner of legislation advanced as part and parcel of the last Helen Clark-led Labour Government's grocery shopping list of social reform - The Matrimonial Property Act; Prostitution Decriminalization Act; Civil Unions Act; and the 'Sue Bradford Smacking Ban' - and more recently (under John Key's Government) his supposed (firm as steel) opposition to the (Homosexual Marriage-enabling) 'Marriage Amendment Act'; upon acceding to the prime ministerialship, Bill English jettisoned his longstanding opposition to *****'gay' marriage almost overnight.
Which, again - please overlook my old-fashioned values if you must - does look oh so conveniently like, to re-work the description of the comic book hero (of my youth), Luke Cage, 'Hero for Hire': 'Bill English, Politician for Rent' (to the highest bidder). Sure, not all that big a deal, I readily concur, since that's pretty well your average politician's middle name/modus operandi/job description (if you will), is it not? Indeed.
But for someone whose 'moral principles' were ever such an intrinsic part of his particular political brand and appeal - to effectively sell those selfsame 'bedrock fundamentals' out, and at the very earliest opportunity - smacks of either political cowardice or at least insecurity (in arguing his own 'corner' once the nation's political leader), or just of sheer political expediency at its most basic, and I would add, despicable.
Sure, political observers like myself are well aware that much/most of what our politicians do is for strict public consumption - and thus the phrase 'swallowing dead rats' to describe their tendency to occasionally not only tolerate but even vote for stuff that otherwise they'd have no bar of, simply to progress their particular party's overall agenda - but there's even an acceptable limit to that, surely? Especially when the matter in question goes to the very heart and soul of why that individual politician supposedly stood up for elected office in the first instance.
And so, yes, we can readily see how such a political tactic might well have been employed by English so as not to alienate the ever-more-vocal and politically active GLBT (Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transgender) lobby/voting bloc. Why, Mr English - if I remember rightly, not necessarily a certainty unlike my 'photographic memory' brother - even attended the past year's annual 'Big Gay Out' in Auckland (though doing so while effectively 'holding his nose'). Yes, even regular attendees could see he felt uncomfortable, being essentially conflicted, yet (some there) seemed to enjoy, even revel in the discomfort the spectacle created for the thoroughgoing ******Catholic, 'morally conservative' *******English.
*A term employed by the naturally somewhat envious then-P.M. Bill English in the run-up to the last election.
**Though this opinion piece, as I mentioned, will not deal with policy concerns, I'll still note here the worrisome advancing of Winston Peters' 'waka jumping' pet project, the so-called 'Electoral Integrity Bill', whose provisions would quickly relegate NZ Inc to a position alongside the likes of Zimbabwe in terms of parliamentary freedom, and which has accordingly been termed a concerning development by virtually all independent legal eagles in this land. Though at least Mr Peters himself did walk the walk 25 years ago or so when he left the National Party and forthwith sought re-election as the New Zealand First Member of Parliament for Tauranga.
***A memorable term once employed by that unforgettable Prime Minister of yesteryear, David Lange.
****How could this social conservative ever forget some of those very vociferous parliamentary debates, including (ofttimes) then National Party leader Bill English's part therein, especially when listening in while gardening via my trusty transmitter radio?
*****Again I am reminded of the title of a book I've consumed over recent months, Tim La Haye's The Unhappy Gays: What Everyone Should Know About Homosexuality.
******Chancing shortly thereafter upon an ofttime independent general election candidate - who I'd myself stood alongside and against, incidentally, in a one-off similarly independent candidacy in Dunedin South in the 2008 General Election - at the (streetside) Speight's 'watering-hole' (for pure water fiends and freaks), he let me know in no uncertain terms that such openly-avowed apostasy (especially of someone in Bill English's position) from such fundamental tenets of the Catholic faith, effectively meant he really wasn't a real Catholic anymore.
*******Nevertheless the long-serving public servant Bill English gave an obituary - I mean, valedictory - like few others have in recent times, and I'll give my own take on that in due course (after re-listening to it on-line etc). Suffice to say for now, he 'went out' (of Parliament and politics) not only in some self-assured style but - what's infinitely more important - in real substance. Yes, a polished performance in every way, as commentators pretty well unanimously agreed.
Part Two: Various Other Reactions, Musings and Stances of NZ's Jacinda Ardern:
Whether Jacinda Ardern is - I mean, was - the perfect foil to National's Bill English, or simply Labour's answer to John Key, matters little; she simply has that essential pizzazz apparently critical to any modern-day leader hoping to be more than a one election 'show pony'. Call it charisma - or whatever - it is that indefinable sense, which, notwithstanding *vociferous critics to the contrary, is an intuitive, instinctive sense/ability to not only correctly judge, but - much more importantly - to embody/'incarnate' that innate/inherent sense of what the nation and its citizenry want; what pleases and displeases them, and without even so much as trying (to suss this out).
I.e. it just comes quite naturally, almost accidentally. Ardern's a 'spontaneous act' if you will, there's no forcing of a smile etc...everything happens without conscious effort or any self-consciousness, being oftentimes simply the most appropriate reaction to events and issues she is suddenly confronted with or has thrust upon her. Such as a whole host of various and sundry 'stuff' of recent months. Be they:
D J Trump's **one-time foolhardy ratcheting up and escalating of the North Korean nuclear missile crisis/standoff awhile ago with his temperamental alter ego Kim Jong Un (I believe it is), through unwise words of personal oneupmanship and locker-room style boyhood banter and macho bravado; perhaps no big deal in their place (and out of the public arena, no doubt), but when a deadly nuclear face-off might well result, it's clearly high time the boys in the cot put down their toys and toned down their language. Ms Ardern - without a minder or one of Trump's teleprompters to assist her - ***simply responded promptly, decisively and adroitly to his childish antics, in a firm and serious, tacitly dismissive "Let's be adults here, folks!" rejoinder befitting the occasion.
Then we have her perhaps unexpected and extraordinarily self-possessed, articulate and un-politically correct reaction to the long-term Aussie numbskull interviewer/media personality Michael Worsley (I believe), who's since been pilloried from pillar to post by all and sundry in ****New Zealand's 'Who's Who' of media personalities and political commentators. This was of course in response to an interview in which her pregnancy and the precise circumstances thereof were subjected to all manner of petty probing and impertinent inquisitioning; a situation which, in another time in not-too-distant history, would've simply seen the fellow *****delivered a not too touchy-feely clip to the ears!
The supremely self-effacing manner in which P.M. Ardern summarily dismissed well-intentioned concerns expressed on her behalf as actually not ones she happened to share, was indeed a spectacle to behold, verily a sight for sore eyes in this day and age of faux, trumped-up media-led outrage, shock and horror; whereby anyone happening to diverge - in whatever way - from the Western World's once sacredly-cherished value of free speech, in regards to certain groups that said media has deemed simply off-limits and sacrosanct, is forthwith summoned to a public flogging by all and sundry and given a lesson they'll never forget.
Jacinda Ardern conceded that it was perhaps her upbringing in small-town Morrinsville that gave/allowed her such a (generous) perspective, and not to be overly sensitive, an indirect if quite unintentional but nevertheless well-deserved and welcome slap in the face, an indirect serve to all those folk - especially among the present-day university population throughout the Western World, who, by dint of their constantly being on their guard and so very precious over perceived indignities and insults and slights to their political sensibilities, over-sized egos and super-thin skins; which characteristic has earned them the monicker 'snowflakes', an insult in itself in my book to that most exquisite of natural delights the humble, ever unique and individuated flake of snow.
And last but by no means least, while she spoke at Waitangi Day commemorations up at the Treaty Grounds this year, refreshingly positively inviting honest and robust feedback from Maori whenever they happen to feel the Government of the day has gotten the wrong end of the stick about some situation and/or simply to air grievances they might well have from time to time.
Labour's Well-Aired Youth Camp Scandal: Much Fury But Little (En)Light(enment):
In terms of the Labour Party's youth camp scandal, these are my own simple comments. So reputation rules, right? Supposedly. 'Victims' rights' the number one concern? Yeah, right (as the tui billboard says)!
Do I say this in regards to the Labour Party's handling of said scandal? Actually, no; not at all. But rather upon the ongoing, seemingly endless media beat-up about it (over a number of weeks).
Why? Because my opening two paragraphs (immediately above) actually apply not to the Labour Party's - and especially not to the P.M.'s - ******supposed poor handling thereof, but rather to the actual, nitty-gritty focus of the pollsters and political pundits, the media commentariat, the supposed experts on and off the cyber- and blogger-sphere...whose #1 concern - correct me if I'm wrong - appears to be: the way the whole deal reflects upon the new Government (and its reputation, its good name if you will); and especially its popular as Prime Minister. I.e. its 'political management' as such.
Not the rights of the actual victims involved. Surely the most important, nay, the one and only worthwhile aspect to justify getting one's knickers in a knot over, surely? No, I mean, really and truly! And these are supposedly the sorts of concerns that 'anti-PC' especially National Party politicians and self-styled media 'pundits' such as Kate Hawkesby and her self-righteous husband, the irrepressible (though admittedly often brilliant and incisive) Mike Hosking, supposedly care about.
These self-styled, self-righteous media elites - eat yer heart out, Lisa Owens - in making a song and dance upon Jacinda Ardern's Government, in raising merry hell thereupon - actually reveal, not the Govt et al's lack of ethics, but instead their own abject, scurrilous race-to-the-bottom-of-the-pit; and indeed into the subterranean regions thereof. For, let me simply repeat - what I, anyhow, see as the one essential aspect in the whole matter: the victims of this sexual abuse (if such it was and amounted to, rather than unwanted physical advances nipped off at the bud, however distasteful and unpleasant: not to condone such in any way, shape or form, simply to get things into some perspective in light of the kinds of incidents that we hear about all too frequently in New Zealand and around the world in this day and age) themselves evidently requested that the matter be taken no further.
And, quite frankly, if their well-considered views and deep-seated concerns don't matter, are judged irrelevant, don't you dare talk about how important *******'victims' rights' are to you. You're simply using them to have a rather cheap, even shabbily tawdry, shot at the Government.
Yes indeed - when(ever) it suits their own particular political purposes and partisan politics. While on this topic, like vultures circling in for the kill on a fresh piece of carrion, having smelt the faintest whiff of blood upon the ground, they're instantly in and at it like hammer and tongs, like there's no tomorrow... .
*Such as my beloved brother ever was of John Key, P.M.. Incredibly, a politician with whom said bro has shared an uncanny facial resemblance of recent years.
**These days it'd be hard to find anyone, except inveterate Trump-haters and political partisans - and admittedly, a fair proportion of Western women generally (for obvious reasons) - who'd not be willing to give 'the Donald' credit upon North Korea, anyhow. As folk say, 'it takes one to know one', and thus the secret magic of DJT's dealings with such rogue despots as Jong Un and Putin to name the two most worrying.
***Indeed, P.M. Ardern's forthright and unambiguous response to reporters' questions then (in February I believe) vis-a-vis President Trump's then 'injudicious' (to state it mildly) remarks re the North Korean leader were - alongside her quite refreshingly unpolitical request, during the Waitangi Day commemoration, for Maori to thenceforth tender herself and the Government honest feedback about their various gripes and grizzles - as a breath of fresh air. All the more with the backdrop of both recent 'poll-driven' governments in view, and completely unlike P.M. Clark's (and 'Minister of Everything' Stephen Joyce's) ever measured political focus group-driven (or ever-so-closely-calibrated and nuanced) comments on so many matters to pass the acceptable muster for public consumption.
****Though the (decidedly left-wing) respected British 'Guardian' featured such a critique as well.
*****In days gone by not only did Sir Bob Jones, but (Sir) Rob(ert) 'Piggy' Muldoon did just such to various protesters outside public meetings in Dunedin, as well as punching one-time Race Relations Conciliator and All Black Chris Laidlaw at an international Gleneagles Summit.
******Though, it would appear, the way their Party Secretary dealt with matters might well have left somewhat to be desired.
*******However, having now raised that whole matter of the victims of sexual abuse (and physical/emotional) abuse in this land, the 'new' Government does not get off so lightly in regards to another matter currently 'doing the rounds' in the media spotlight, and destined to stay there for some considerable time to come. But more upon that another day...
That may well be so (i.e. the diminishing of the glitter), especially in light of the previous few weeks of scandal, supposed indiscipline in the ranks, and increasingly controversial decisions in the environmental space in particular. As happens for every newbie government, invariably, though admittedly for the Labour-NZ First-Green Coalition Government this has occurred somewhat more readily, certainly than the previous John Key walk-on-water Government, anyway. Although four-and-a-half months or so is otherwise a pretty good innings for most NZ Inc Governments, especially of the MMP variety, to so seamlessly maintain their political honeymoon.
And 'Jacindamania', like Canada's equivalent 'Trudeaumania', can really only last so long: political 'glory' and stardom, as we all know, has a built-in use-by date, however unknown till hindsight's benefit eventually discloses the truth. A sentiment, incidentally, Americans have been realizing each and every new day as they awake once more to yet another instalment in the ongoing, 'Give a Little' saga - or rather fiasco - better known to ye average punter as the Trump Presidency. Political 'celebrities' really do come in all shapes and sizes these days, don't they... .
But first, let's take a breather to reflect upon the first 100 days of our Jacinda Ardern, Labour-led Coalition Government. The following, then, is the personal assessment (scribbled months ago) of a long-time/lifetime political 'junkie'/Political Studies (and English) graduate on Prime Minister Ardern's personal performance, as such - only; and not upon the Government as a whole (much less the policies either merely advanced/advocated thus far, or already implemented).
A double, even triple A-plus. Not for her - (nevertheless) quite outspoken and commendably open - on-the-public-record support for stuff I personally regard as wrong, bad, or just plain awful, such as yet more 'progressive' social legislation - such as euthanasia and even more liberalized abortion law. But at least these issues do tend to be voted upon separately as 'conscience' issues, enabling MPs to avoid being simply 'whipped' into line as otherwise occurs; though it's a worrying trend of recent years and of governments of both, but especially the left persuasion, that these are more and more being treated as **purely party political matters.
But as I say, what I really do and very much appreciate about our new P.M. is that at least she's completely open and honest thereabouts: one knows precisely where she ultimately stands upon such issues, and why. However unwelcome discussion of such matters might ordinarily be to career-minded (and ***poll-driven fruitcake) politicians.
Which is conspicuously unlike our now former Prime Minister Bill English, who, despite his one-time, even lifetime, ****strident and implacable opposition to all manner of legislation advanced as part and parcel of the last Helen Clark-led Labour Government's grocery shopping list of social reform - The Matrimonial Property Act; Prostitution Decriminalization Act; Civil Unions Act; and the 'Sue Bradford Smacking Ban' - and more recently (under John Key's Government) his supposed (firm as steel) opposition to the (Homosexual Marriage-enabling) 'Marriage Amendment Act'; upon acceding to the prime ministerialship, Bill English jettisoned his longstanding opposition to *****'gay' marriage almost overnight.
Which, again - please overlook my old-fashioned values if you must - does look oh so conveniently like, to re-work the description of the comic book hero (of my youth), Luke Cage, 'Hero for Hire': 'Bill English, Politician for Rent' (to the highest bidder). Sure, not all that big a deal, I readily concur, since that's pretty well your average politician's middle name/modus operandi/job description (if you will), is it not? Indeed.
But for someone whose 'moral principles' were ever such an intrinsic part of his particular political brand and appeal - to effectively sell those selfsame 'bedrock fundamentals' out, and at the very earliest opportunity - smacks of either political cowardice or at least insecurity (in arguing his own 'corner' once the nation's political leader), or just of sheer political expediency at its most basic, and I would add, despicable.
Sure, political observers like myself are well aware that much/most of what our politicians do is for strict public consumption - and thus the phrase 'swallowing dead rats' to describe their tendency to occasionally not only tolerate but even vote for stuff that otherwise they'd have no bar of, simply to progress their particular party's overall agenda - but there's even an acceptable limit to that, surely? Especially when the matter in question goes to the very heart and soul of why that individual politician supposedly stood up for elected office in the first instance.
And so, yes, we can readily see how such a political tactic might well have been employed by English so as not to alienate the ever-more-vocal and politically active GLBT (Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transgender) lobby/voting bloc. Why, Mr English - if I remember rightly, not necessarily a certainty unlike my 'photographic memory' brother - even attended the past year's annual 'Big Gay Out' in Auckland (though doing so while effectively 'holding his nose'). Yes, even regular attendees could see he felt uncomfortable, being essentially conflicted, yet (some there) seemed to enjoy, even revel in the discomfort the spectacle created for the thoroughgoing ******Catholic, 'morally conservative' *******English.
*A term employed by the naturally somewhat envious then-P.M. Bill English in the run-up to the last election.
**Though this opinion piece, as I mentioned, will not deal with policy concerns, I'll still note here the worrisome advancing of Winston Peters' 'waka jumping' pet project, the so-called 'Electoral Integrity Bill', whose provisions would quickly relegate NZ Inc to a position alongside the likes of Zimbabwe in terms of parliamentary freedom, and which has accordingly been termed a concerning development by virtually all independent legal eagles in this land. Though at least Mr Peters himself did walk the walk 25 years ago or so when he left the National Party and forthwith sought re-election as the New Zealand First Member of Parliament for Tauranga.
***A memorable term once employed by that unforgettable Prime Minister of yesteryear, David Lange.
****How could this social conservative ever forget some of those very vociferous parliamentary debates, including (ofttimes) then National Party leader Bill English's part therein, especially when listening in while gardening via my trusty transmitter radio?
*****Again I am reminded of the title of a book I've consumed over recent months, Tim La Haye's The Unhappy Gays: What Everyone Should Know About Homosexuality.
******Chancing shortly thereafter upon an ofttime independent general election candidate - who I'd myself stood alongside and against, incidentally, in a one-off similarly independent candidacy in Dunedin South in the 2008 General Election - at the (streetside) Speight's 'watering-hole' (for pure water fiends and freaks), he let me know in no uncertain terms that such openly-avowed apostasy (especially of someone in Bill English's position) from such fundamental tenets of the Catholic faith, effectively meant he really wasn't a real Catholic anymore.
*******Nevertheless the long-serving public servant Bill English gave an obituary - I mean, valedictory - like few others have in recent times, and I'll give my own take on that in due course (after re-listening to it on-line etc). Suffice to say for now, he 'went out' (of Parliament and politics) not only in some self-assured style but - what's infinitely more important - in real substance. Yes, a polished performance in every way, as commentators pretty well unanimously agreed.
Part Two: Various Other Reactions, Musings and Stances of NZ's Jacinda Ardern:
Whether Jacinda Ardern is - I mean, was - the perfect foil to National's Bill English, or simply Labour's answer to John Key, matters little; she simply has that essential pizzazz apparently critical to any modern-day leader hoping to be more than a one election 'show pony'. Call it charisma - or whatever - it is that indefinable sense, which, notwithstanding *vociferous critics to the contrary, is an intuitive, instinctive sense/ability to not only correctly judge, but - much more importantly - to embody/'incarnate' that innate/inherent sense of what the nation and its citizenry want; what pleases and displeases them, and without even so much as trying (to suss this out).
I.e. it just comes quite naturally, almost accidentally. Ardern's a 'spontaneous act' if you will, there's no forcing of a smile etc...everything happens without conscious effort or any self-consciousness, being oftentimes simply the most appropriate reaction to events and issues she is suddenly confronted with or has thrust upon her. Such as a whole host of various and sundry 'stuff' of recent months. Be they:
D J Trump's **one-time foolhardy ratcheting up and escalating of the North Korean nuclear missile crisis/standoff awhile ago with his temperamental alter ego Kim Jong Un (I believe it is), through unwise words of personal oneupmanship and locker-room style boyhood banter and macho bravado; perhaps no big deal in their place (and out of the public arena, no doubt), but when a deadly nuclear face-off might well result, it's clearly high time the boys in the cot put down their toys and toned down their language. Ms Ardern - without a minder or one of Trump's teleprompters to assist her - ***simply responded promptly, decisively and adroitly to his childish antics, in a firm and serious, tacitly dismissive "Let's be adults here, folks!" rejoinder befitting the occasion.
Then we have her perhaps unexpected and extraordinarily self-possessed, articulate and un-politically correct reaction to the long-term Aussie numbskull interviewer/media personality Michael Worsley (I believe), who's since been pilloried from pillar to post by all and sundry in ****New Zealand's 'Who's Who' of media personalities and political commentators. This was of course in response to an interview in which her pregnancy and the precise circumstances thereof were subjected to all manner of petty probing and impertinent inquisitioning; a situation which, in another time in not-too-distant history, would've simply seen the fellow *****delivered a not too touchy-feely clip to the ears!
The supremely self-effacing manner in which P.M. Ardern summarily dismissed well-intentioned concerns expressed on her behalf as actually not ones she happened to share, was indeed a spectacle to behold, verily a sight for sore eyes in this day and age of faux, trumped-up media-led outrage, shock and horror; whereby anyone happening to diverge - in whatever way - from the Western World's once sacredly-cherished value of free speech, in regards to certain groups that said media has deemed simply off-limits and sacrosanct, is forthwith summoned to a public flogging by all and sundry and given a lesson they'll never forget.
Jacinda Ardern conceded that it was perhaps her upbringing in small-town Morrinsville that gave/allowed her such a (generous) perspective, and not to be overly sensitive, an indirect if quite unintentional but nevertheless well-deserved and welcome slap in the face, an indirect serve to all those folk - especially among the present-day university population throughout the Western World, who, by dint of their constantly being on their guard and so very precious over perceived indignities and insults and slights to their political sensibilities, over-sized egos and super-thin skins; which characteristic has earned them the monicker 'snowflakes', an insult in itself in my book to that most exquisite of natural delights the humble, ever unique and individuated flake of snow.
And last but by no means least, while she spoke at Waitangi Day commemorations up at the Treaty Grounds this year, refreshingly positively inviting honest and robust feedback from Maori whenever they happen to feel the Government of the day has gotten the wrong end of the stick about some situation and/or simply to air grievances they might well have from time to time.
Labour's Well-Aired Youth Camp Scandal: Much Fury But Little (En)Light(enment):
In terms of the Labour Party's youth camp scandal, these are my own simple comments. So reputation rules, right? Supposedly. 'Victims' rights' the number one concern? Yeah, right (as the tui billboard says)!
Do I say this in regards to the Labour Party's handling of said scandal? Actually, no; not at all. But rather upon the ongoing, seemingly endless media beat-up about it (over a number of weeks).
Why? Because my opening two paragraphs (immediately above) actually apply not to the Labour Party's - and especially not to the P.M.'s - ******supposed poor handling thereof, but rather to the actual, nitty-gritty focus of the pollsters and political pundits, the media commentariat, the supposed experts on and off the cyber- and blogger-sphere...whose #1 concern - correct me if I'm wrong - appears to be: the way the whole deal reflects upon the new Government (and its reputation, its good name if you will); and especially its popular as Prime Minister. I.e. its 'political management' as such.
Not the rights of the actual victims involved. Surely the most important, nay, the one and only worthwhile aspect to justify getting one's knickers in a knot over, surely? No, I mean, really and truly! And these are supposedly the sorts of concerns that 'anti-PC' especially National Party politicians and self-styled media 'pundits' such as Kate Hawkesby and her self-righteous husband, the irrepressible (though admittedly often brilliant and incisive) Mike Hosking, supposedly care about.
These self-styled, self-righteous media elites - eat yer heart out, Lisa Owens - in making a song and dance upon Jacinda Ardern's Government, in raising merry hell thereupon - actually reveal, not the Govt et al's lack of ethics, but instead their own abject, scurrilous race-to-the-bottom-of-the-pit; and indeed into the subterranean regions thereof. For, let me simply repeat - what I, anyhow, see as the one essential aspect in the whole matter: the victims of this sexual abuse (if such it was and amounted to, rather than unwanted physical advances nipped off at the bud, however distasteful and unpleasant: not to condone such in any way, shape or form, simply to get things into some perspective in light of the kinds of incidents that we hear about all too frequently in New Zealand and around the world in this day and age) themselves evidently requested that the matter be taken no further.
And, quite frankly, if their well-considered views and deep-seated concerns don't matter, are judged irrelevant, don't you dare talk about how important *******'victims' rights' are to you. You're simply using them to have a rather cheap, even shabbily tawdry, shot at the Government.
Yes indeed - when(ever) it suits their own particular political purposes and partisan politics. While on this topic, like vultures circling in for the kill on a fresh piece of carrion, having smelt the faintest whiff of blood upon the ground, they're instantly in and at it like hammer and tongs, like there's no tomorrow... .
*Such as my beloved brother ever was of John Key, P.M.. Incredibly, a politician with whom said bro has shared an uncanny facial resemblance of recent years.
**These days it'd be hard to find anyone, except inveterate Trump-haters and political partisans - and admittedly, a fair proportion of Western women generally (for obvious reasons) - who'd not be willing to give 'the Donald' credit upon North Korea, anyhow. As folk say, 'it takes one to know one', and thus the secret magic of DJT's dealings with such rogue despots as Jong Un and Putin to name the two most worrying.
***Indeed, P.M. Ardern's forthright and unambiguous response to reporters' questions then (in February I believe) vis-a-vis President Trump's then 'injudicious' (to state it mildly) remarks re the North Korean leader were - alongside her quite refreshingly unpolitical request, during the Waitangi Day commemoration, for Maori to thenceforth tender herself and the Government honest feedback about their various gripes and grizzles - as a breath of fresh air. All the more with the backdrop of both recent 'poll-driven' governments in view, and completely unlike P.M. Clark's (and 'Minister of Everything' Stephen Joyce's) ever measured political focus group-driven (or ever-so-closely-calibrated and nuanced) comments on so many matters to pass the acceptable muster for public consumption.
****Though the (decidedly left-wing) respected British 'Guardian' featured such a critique as well.
*****In days gone by not only did Sir Bob Jones, but (Sir) Rob(ert) 'Piggy' Muldoon did just such to various protesters outside public meetings in Dunedin, as well as punching one-time Race Relations Conciliator and All Black Chris Laidlaw at an international Gleneagles Summit.
******Though, it would appear, the way their Party Secretary dealt with matters might well have left somewhat to be desired.
*******However, having now raised that whole matter of the victims of sexual abuse (and physical/emotional) abuse in this land, the 'new' Government does not get off so lightly in regards to another matter currently 'doing the rounds' in the media spotlight, and destined to stay there for some considerable time to come. But more upon that another day...
Friday, April 6, 2018
Thursday, April 5, 2018
Just For Peoples' Interest (vis-a-vis my two previous Ed Sheeran concert-related blogposts)
Firstly, I was unable to access my major blogpost (of Easter Monday) today (in terms of editing it) when I came onto my computer, and so I decided, wanting to publish my retraction/mea culpa asap, I'd simply post an addendum (extra blogpost) as I just have.
Secondly, which folk reading this may well regard as rather odd, I've decided to leave - as opposed to delete - that earlier blogpost...despite the issues now outlined. Why? Essentially because I'm rather attached to said piece - despite its 'issues'; but having now explicated my bulls-up (in a detailed blogpost just posted) I don't see the need to; and moreover, perhaps it'll serve - for anyone reading it, anyhow - as a rather salient object lesson in the perils of simply believing and running with everything you hear...without and before first checking it out.
Nuff said...I'm off for some rest.
POSTSCRIPT (December 2nd):
Due to the inordinate interest, evidently, in this particular blogpost - from way back yonder - I now feel the need to insert an addendum (to these self-deprecating comments of mine)...not least in view of a certain traffic source/referring site/URL (I've noticed of late) suggesting I might be one of those who traffics in those much-canvassed 'false facts' of our peculiar era...-although admittedly such a site with the word 'boobs' in its address...could mean something else altogether, I well appreciate...
Guess what, folks? To adopt for my own purposes here what ye 'ole song put so beautifully and tunefully: hey, Yours Tru-ly was right all a-long...Yours Tru-ly was right all-a-long...
-Vis-a-vis the Dunedin Ed Sheeran concert, apparently...as my brother mentioned a couple months back (concerning not only that item I'd commented upon, but as regards another - where it initially appeared, post-script, that I was well and truly up the creek without ye proverbial paddle - as well)...
So - and I'm just suggestin', folks - you're perfectly entitled to do what ya want with my observation - perhaps you could do a whole lot worse than regularly consult this (and my other blogsite)... for the real doss upon what's really happening in our mixed-up, present-day world...
...for indeed Dunedin (retail and other) workers were evidently verily treated shabbily during that (multiple) concert time...as I later heard upon RNZ National, following my brother reading about the same in our local rag - The Otago Daily Time (otherwise oft-known as The Odious Daily Slime)...
...that is, in terms of being required - with their arms tied behind their individual and collective backs as it were - to work during the regular, long-established, statutory Easter holidays provided for in law...at the cost of their jobs/positions...
P>S> I believe I did a couple months ago make reference to these updated facts upon this blogsite ...but blown if I can find it, having now spent quite enough time trying to do that very thing!
Good - and moreover, profitable - reading upon this blogsite, folks...-KEEP IT UP!
Secondly, which folk reading this may well regard as rather odd, I've decided to leave - as opposed to delete - that earlier blogpost...despite the issues now outlined. Why? Essentially because I'm rather attached to said piece - despite its 'issues'; but having now explicated my bulls-up (in a detailed blogpost just posted) I don't see the need to; and moreover, perhaps it'll serve - for anyone reading it, anyhow - as a rather salient object lesson in the perils of simply believing and running with everything you hear...without and before first checking it out.
Nuff said...I'm off for some rest.
POSTSCRIPT (December 2nd):
Due to the inordinate interest, evidently, in this particular blogpost - from way back yonder - I now feel the need to insert an addendum (to these self-deprecating comments of mine)...not least in view of a certain traffic source/referring site/URL (I've noticed of late) suggesting I might be one of those who traffics in those much-canvassed 'false facts' of our peculiar era...-although admittedly such a site with the word 'boobs' in its address...could mean something else altogether, I well appreciate...
Guess what, folks? To adopt for my own purposes here what ye 'ole song put so beautifully and tunefully: hey, Yours Tru-ly was right all a-long...Yours Tru-ly was right all-a-long...
-Vis-a-vis the Dunedin Ed Sheeran concert, apparently...as my brother mentioned a couple months back (concerning not only that item I'd commented upon, but as regards another - where it initially appeared, post-script, that I was well and truly up the creek without ye proverbial paddle - as well)...
So - and I'm just suggestin', folks - you're perfectly entitled to do what ya want with my observation - perhaps you could do a whole lot worse than regularly consult this (and my other blogsite)... for the real doss upon what's really happening in our mixed-up, present-day world...
...for indeed Dunedin (retail and other) workers were evidently verily treated shabbily during that (multiple) concert time...as I later heard upon RNZ National, following my brother reading about the same in our local rag - The Otago Daily Time (otherwise oft-known as The Odious Daily Slime)...
...that is, in terms of being required - with their arms tied behind their individual and collective backs as it were - to work during the regular, long-established, statutory Easter holidays provided for in law...at the cost of their jobs/positions...
P>S> I believe I did a couple months ago make reference to these updated facts upon this blogsite ...but blown if I can find it, having now spent quite enough time trying to do that very thing!
Good - and moreover, profitable - reading upon this blogsite, folks...-KEEP IT UP!
Completely Getting The Wrong End of the Stick: A Serious Mea Culpa vis-a-vis my last blogpost
As popstar Elton John so profoundly sang, and his co-creator Bernie Taupin wrote, 'sorry' does indeed at times 'seem[.] to be the hardest word' It ain't here, though I do nevertheless need to be devouring some rather serious humble pie. So perhaps it's just as well that apparently next to nobody at all (especially here in NZ) reads my blogposts. A terrible admission, I well realize, but nonetheless quite true, and as I say, just as well, or I could be in for some serious defamatory/libel action - by local authorities. Again, that is, if anyone even cared less, which perhaps they don't or wouldn't!
Nevertheless, in the interests of that wonderful and increasingly lonely 'thing' known as journalistic integrity - something I've ever tried to maintain since my high school days in the dim, distant past as reporter upon and later Chief Editor and finally Editor of our once famous *KVHS school newspaper 'Mercury', let me say the following:
In this day and age of 'fake news', though I wouldn't go as far as to put my offering several days ago quite into that invidious category - although who needs facts when one's opinions can carry the day (and everything in their path)?; and we've all heard at some time that old saying about 'My mind is made up; I won't let the facts get in the way of a good opinion!' - how very easy it really is to get half the (particular) story, from a partially reliable source, and then go off half-cocked to share it with one and all, supposing you've got a real scoop in your precious little lap.
And so I was misled, no, not so much perhaps by Jim Mora's **weekday Panel discussion - though I do now upon reflection feel and believe that Jim et al got mighty exercised over what was really the proverbial storm in a teacup. But quite clearly I simply wasn't paying proper attention at the time (to the aforementioned radio chat), that's all I can conclude.
But none of that gets me off the hook from not having done my proper research and background investigation for my strongly-worded opinion piece about the recent Ed Sheeran concerts in my hometown of Dunedin. Essentially paragraphs three through six are out of order...in that evidently local workers of all sorts were apparently not required to work over the special Easter 'holy-days' (as some would see them), i.e. Good Friday and Easter Sunday in particular...which as I stressed (to the nth degree) in said article/blogpost would've indeed been a violation of those peoples' (and their families') right to observe (away from work, with their loved ones) such annual days of special spiritual significance (to many people).
No, I discovered today (at the local library, since we stopped getting the ODT delivered probably a good decade ago now) that the only real fuss over Ed Sheeran's concerts was over the cost of a mural done in his honour (about which I won't comment, even if it indeed was a gross mis-expenditure of local council monies, as some might justifiably claim). In terms of my own pointed remarks, however, I frankly care not about the particular hours purveyors of death and destruction (i.e. local liquor shops and bars) were allowed to open on either of the two major days, since this is an ongoing saga of musical chairs effectively each and every year throughout New Zealand: vis-a-vis opening hours and days for Good Friday and/or Easter Sunday, and prosecutions undertaken - or not as the case may well be - as a consequence of outfits across the land or at least in special tourist hotspots often openly (and without repercussions) flouting such laws.
Sadly such alcohol-fuelled carnage and mayhem - filling hospital emergency departments on a regular basis - seems likely to continue unabated, irrespective of rather arbitrary limitations essentially 'around the edges'...and hey, since supermarkets became 'open slather' vis-a-vis alcohol sales two decades ago or so, what difference if certain places have certain restrictions placed upon them on what are essentially 'bits' n' bobs' of the greater picture? And after all we're hardly likely to see prohibition revisited in our lifetime; though I did chance upon an interesting bit of historical info awhile ago in which it was stated how there had been no-one before the courts one year (a hundred years ago or so) in Invercargill due to its being one of several 'dry areas' in NZ.
But more majorly, as I've already alluded to, locals were not required to work on those two days...unless bus drivers and other transport operators (such as shuttle drivers to and from the airport etc) were indeed required to. However, the ODT seemed to indicate that Good Friday was not involved for transport providers (and indeed there was no concert then), and local bus operators were only slotted on Easter Sunday afternoon, though of course that could well have posed issues for some workers and their families, I have little doubt (and am not denying that).
*Kaikorai Valley High School, now Kaikorai Valley College, in Dunedin.
**Unfortunately I've also long since 'lost' the date that that particular discussion took place.
Post Script: Please, somebody, help (as the Beatles once famously requested)...I need somebody, help! So any and every opinion will be well considered and seriously reflected upon - just give me some, a little feedback, d'ya hear?!?!?! That's what the 'Comments' section is all about. No, I mean, really!
Especially - pretty please - if you happen to share the same name as a pen-pal I once had by the name of Toni...
Nevertheless, in the interests of that wonderful and increasingly lonely 'thing' known as journalistic integrity - something I've ever tried to maintain since my high school days in the dim, distant past as reporter upon and later Chief Editor and finally Editor of our once famous *KVHS school newspaper 'Mercury', let me say the following:
In this day and age of 'fake news', though I wouldn't go as far as to put my offering several days ago quite into that invidious category - although who needs facts when one's opinions can carry the day (and everything in their path)?; and we've all heard at some time that old saying about 'My mind is made up; I won't let the facts get in the way of a good opinion!' - how very easy it really is to get half the (particular) story, from a partially reliable source, and then go off half-cocked to share it with one and all, supposing you've got a real scoop in your precious little lap.
And so I was misled, no, not so much perhaps by Jim Mora's **weekday Panel discussion - though I do now upon reflection feel and believe that Jim et al got mighty exercised over what was really the proverbial storm in a teacup. But quite clearly I simply wasn't paying proper attention at the time (to the aforementioned radio chat), that's all I can conclude.
But none of that gets me off the hook from not having done my proper research and background investigation for my strongly-worded opinion piece about the recent Ed Sheeran concerts in my hometown of Dunedin. Essentially paragraphs three through six are out of order...in that evidently local workers of all sorts were apparently not required to work over the special Easter 'holy-days' (as some would see them), i.e. Good Friday and Easter Sunday in particular...which as I stressed (to the nth degree) in said article/blogpost would've indeed been a violation of those peoples' (and their families') right to observe (away from work, with their loved ones) such annual days of special spiritual significance (to many people).
No, I discovered today (at the local library, since we stopped getting the ODT delivered probably a good decade ago now) that the only real fuss over Ed Sheeran's concerts was over the cost of a mural done in his honour (about which I won't comment, even if it indeed was a gross mis-expenditure of local council monies, as some might justifiably claim). In terms of my own pointed remarks, however, I frankly care not about the particular hours purveyors of death and destruction (i.e. local liquor shops and bars) were allowed to open on either of the two major days, since this is an ongoing saga of musical chairs effectively each and every year throughout New Zealand: vis-a-vis opening hours and days for Good Friday and/or Easter Sunday, and prosecutions undertaken - or not as the case may well be - as a consequence of outfits across the land or at least in special tourist hotspots often openly (and without repercussions) flouting such laws.
Sadly such alcohol-fuelled carnage and mayhem - filling hospital emergency departments on a regular basis - seems likely to continue unabated, irrespective of rather arbitrary limitations essentially 'around the edges'...and hey, since supermarkets became 'open slather' vis-a-vis alcohol sales two decades ago or so, what difference if certain places have certain restrictions placed upon them on what are essentially 'bits' n' bobs' of the greater picture? And after all we're hardly likely to see prohibition revisited in our lifetime; though I did chance upon an interesting bit of historical info awhile ago in which it was stated how there had been no-one before the courts one year (a hundred years ago or so) in Invercargill due to its being one of several 'dry areas' in NZ.
But more majorly, as I've already alluded to, locals were not required to work on those two days...unless bus drivers and other transport operators (such as shuttle drivers to and from the airport etc) were indeed required to. However, the ODT seemed to indicate that Good Friday was not involved for transport providers (and indeed there was no concert then), and local bus operators were only slotted on Easter Sunday afternoon, though of course that could well have posed issues for some workers and their families, I have little doubt (and am not denying that).
*Kaikorai Valley High School, now Kaikorai Valley College, in Dunedin.
**Unfortunately I've also long since 'lost' the date that that particular discussion took place.
Post Script: Please, somebody, help (as the Beatles once famously requested)...I need somebody, help! So any and every opinion will be well considered and seriously reflected upon - just give me some, a little feedback, d'ya hear?!?!?! That's what the 'Comments' section is all about. No, I mean, really!
Especially - pretty please - if you happen to share the same name as a pen-pal I once had by the name of Toni...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)