Kiwiblog

A superb article by Roger Kerr in the ODT today. Not online but here are some extracts:

Thomas Malthus, in his 1798 Essay on the Principle of Population, predicted the certain depletion of the earth’s resources by man, leading to famine and ultimately starvation. Despite plenty of criticism, the theory was profoundly influential at the time, as political interests used it to advance their social agendas.

Self-proclaimed propagandist Paul Erhlich picked up the baton 170 years later with his alarmist manifesto The Population Bomb, in which he argued that the world had reached its carrying capacity. “The battle to feed all humanity is over”, he announced, adding that any action to prevent certain, self-inflicted, global environmental and societal disaster would merely provide a “stay of execution”.

Hysteria’s History goes on to explore the phenomenon of Rachel Carson’s 1962 Silent Spring, the book credited with launching modern environmentalism. Carson was the most successful in a long line of environmental activists convinced that human beings were on the verge of entirely eliminating various animal species. Her book sparked an outcry over the environmental impact of synthetic pesticides and other chemicals, specifically warning of the effect of DDT and the impending “silent spring” where “no birds sing”.

The report acknowledges there were elements of truth in Carson’s warnings, and the book put an end to the idea that all synthetic chemicals were harmless and benign. But its unbridled alarmism gave rise to hysterical claims about robins and bald eagles teetering on the brink of extinction and birds dropping dead out of trees and falling from the sky by the thousands.

The ensuing public pressure to ban DDT brought to a halt life-saving efforts to combat malaria in many parts of the world. With the use of DDT in Venezuela, for example, cases of malaria dropped from more than eight million in 1943 to 800 in 1958. Today malaria kills approximately one million annually, mostly children in sub-Saharan Africa.

The tide of opinion on DDT has since turned with, among others, the World Health Organisation and the Endangered Wildlife Trust now promoting indoor spraying of DDT in developing countries, and, surprise, surprise, the birds are still with us. Robins (which were never in jeopardy) continue to flourish, and the bald eagle was this year taken off the US threatened and endangered species list.

But the wild claims and alarmist projections continued. In 1975, in an article titled ‘The Cooling World’, Newsweek described ominous signs of an impending ice age and warned of catastrophic famines, “drought and desolation”, “floods, extended dry spells, long freezes [and] delayed monsoons”. Sound familiar?

Today, of course, global warming is the major cause du jour, having well outstripped acid rain, peak oil, Y2K and bird flu. It’s being blamed for just about everything, even increased teenage drinking, stray cats, poison ivy and sharks, as well as some very serious events such as widespread malnutrition, outbreaks of disease and the crisis in Darfur.

Among the long litany of predicted apocalyptic disasters, many have a basis in a legitimate issue. But alarmism often obscures that. It plays on people’s natural inclination to expect the worst to happen and polarises the debaters into groups of ‘believers’ and ‘sceptics’.

The challenge for policy makers, in developing appropriate evidence-based responses to such issues, is to avoid knee-jerk reactions intended to appease their alarmist constituents and the media. Where a real problem exists, responses should be based on rigorous scientific investigation and cool-headed analysis.

They key part is the last two paragraphs.  There is usually some substance to an issue, but apocalyptic alarmism polarises the debate and that policy in response to an issue should be evidence-based.

It’s less than a week to go to Iowa, and suddenly the talk is about John McCain making a late surge.

McCain’s campaign had faded into the background months ago, but he has kept plugging away and as criticism of Romney’s policy u-turns get louder (two newspapers have run a anyone but Romney editorial) McCain has started to rise in the polls again.

Power Line has an interesting take on McCain:

The real reason why non-conservatives prefer McCain is because he opposed President Bush’s tax cuts, supported comprehensive immigration reform, sponsored McCain-Feingold, denounced effective but harsh interrogation techniques, etc. In other words, precisely the kinds of things the Romney campaign is legitimately pointing to. And the reason why independents like McCain is because he himself is, in many respects, an independent (with all the positives and negatives that go with that status). When the next controversial issue comes up, McCain will stake out his position based on his personal “take,” not on party, or conventionally ideological, principles. The other leading candidates (except perhaps Huckabee) are less likely to do so.

None of this means necessarily means that conservatives shouldn’t vote for McCain. In my view, he is easily the most electable Republican and, if the environment is hostile enough next November, quite possible the only electable one. He’s also sound on more issues than he’s unsound on, including most of the biggest ones. But conservatives should not doubt that a President McCain will infuriate them on more than a few occasions.

McCain is indeed relatively independent.  He would be hard for the Democrats to associate with Bush as Kerry asked him to be his VP candidate in 2004.

I’ve long held only Rudy or McCain can win it for the Republicans.  McCain had faded from view, but it looks to be all on again.

It’s a bit of a pity that the US doesn’t use preferential voting (like in Australia) for it’s primaries.  McCain and Rudy to some degree are competing for the same voters.

Woke up to the news that former Pakistani PM Benazir Bhutto was shot dead last night. Her killer then blew himself up.

A real tragedy both for her family, and for Pakistan.

Poneke has a look at how and why India has turned out so much better than Pakistan, since their separation. The bottom line is one is a secular state.

The photo above shows the awful reality of the aftermath of the homicide bomber.  The photo is by John Moore of Getty Images – hat tip : Andrew Sullivan.

Someone has scanned in and e-mailed me the ODT editorial.  Some extracts:

Labour’s revenge

Maori Party MP Hone Harawira had it about right: “If this was only about election finances, then why did this Labour Government push through special legislation to validate their $800,000 over-spend at the last election, rather than let the legal process take its natural course . . . why didn’t this Labour Government ask the Auditor-general and the Electoral Commission to present a range of options for public consideration, and presentation to the House. . . how come the Human Rights Commission says this Bill is a dramatic assault on fundamental human rights – freedom of expression, and the right to participate in the election process . . . how come the Human Rights Commission says that even this rewritten; flea-bitten, revised and patched-up version should still have been given back to the public for full discussion and debate?”

By limiting the amount so- called “third parties” can spend on political campaign activities of any kind – be it support or opposition, saving the whales or completing Dunedin’s motorway – the Bill is anti-democratic for it will tend to restrain and discourage dissent from those who wish to make such causes .influential in electoral terms by advocating for or against political parties or candidates; it will thus tend to weigh the balance further in favour of incumbent governments in election years. Nor will the Bill prevent unlimited party donations from overseas persons, from which Labour in particular benefited in 2005, nor from organisations with a relationship with the Labour Party, such as trade unions.

If the “law of common sense” is to guarantee our basic freedoms against political manipulation, then we are indeed in peril. The most offensive aspect of this legislation, however, is the Government and its supporters’ distrust of the people: that we voters are too stupid to recognise “undue influence”, too ready to believe any propaganda thrust in our faces.

And the cartoon which went with it:

The Hive reflects on the Curran report and mention that the private secretary who referred to Curran as Parker’s “right hand woman” is a very experienced professional staffer who would not have used that term lightly.

Poneke compares NZ’s treatment of Maori with Australia’s treatment of Aboriginals. Short version is Australia really needs to say sorry.

Tyler Cowan at Marginal Revolution blogs on why he is not supporting Ron Paul.

Iain Dale blogs about being No 28 on the 50 most influential gay (including lesbian, bisexual) people in politics. He jokes that no one does a 50 most influential straight people in politics as one would run out before you make 50

Sea Shepherd captain Paul Watson talks about how he is happy to risk his life to save whales from Japanese whalers.

Takes a lot to make Greenpeace seem moderate.

Today’s editorial looks at all their editorials over 2007, and is a useful tonic to the hysterical nutters who claim the Herald is a mouthpiece for the right.

Of their 300 editorials, around 60 were on political issues.  Now they have counted up how many were in support of or against a party or their policy.  The figures are:

• Labour 18 positive, five neutral, 20 negative
• National five positive, six neutral, five negative
• NZ First two positive, three negative
• ACT one negative
• Greens one positive

Interestingly half (ten) of the negatives for Labour were on the Electoral Finance Bill.  If they had not tried to gerrymander the next election with it, then they would have had almost twice as many positive editorials as negative.

They also talk about the ones they got wrong:

Events showed us up over the relatively harmless Mt Ruapehu lahar, preparations for which we had strongly criticised the Conservation Minister over, and President George W. Bush’s “surge” of extra troops to Iraq, which has demonstrably helped to reduce the carnage in that country.

Informed opinion is an inexact science, let alone prescience. And, hopefully, the more interesting for it.

It would be interesting to do this analysis to other major newspapers.

The NZ Herald reports that Hayley Stephenson (on left) was stripped of her fashion title at the Ellerslie Boxing Day races because she is only 17. She misses out on a year’s lease of a Mercedes-Benz and a a year’s supply of Deutz.

It’s a pity the organisers can’t be flexible, and just say give the Deutz to the person who came second but still give Hayley the credit for designing the best costume. Why should she be discriminated against because she is only 17? Yes I know it was in the rules and they have the right to enforce them, but why have it as a rule in the first place?

I know sometimes there is a good need to have an age limit, but designing clothes doesn’t seem to be one of those.

Iain Dale has tagged me to do an Eight for 2008 wish list, so here goes:

1. A long hot summer
2. A slump in Wellington commercial property prices as I need a bigger (around 150 square metres) office next year
3. A 15 November election so I can slip away early September to the RNC Nominating Convention
4. I acquire two tickets to the Wellington Sevens
5. An Israel/Palestine agreement
6. A lobby group for taxpayers
7. A ski season which starts early and finishes late
8. A National-led Government

To carry on the meme, I tag Cactus Kate, Trevor Loudon, Poneke, Tim Selwyn and Kiwigirl.

Been enjoying some sun while it lasts, walking around Thorndon Hill. It’s one of the great things about living in Thorndon to have some nice greenery nearby.

Also when walking through Katherine Mansfield Park, just noticed a plaque stating that Samuel Marsden School used to be on this site before it moved to Karori.  Learn something new every day!

Anyway just been looking at what has been on TV over the last two days.  One channel had Love Actually while the other had Borat.  Can hardly get two more different films.  Luckily I love them both and have My Sky (not that they were on at the same time!

I can never decide which is my favourite sub-plot in Love Actually. Most of them are so well done.  My ratings would be:

• Juliet, Peter and Mark – saddest – but who wouldn’t fall for Keira Knightley
• Jamie and Aurelia – happiest – the restaurant scene never fails
• Sam and Joanna – sweetest
• Colin and American girls – most surprising
• John and Judy – funniest – I love the polite courting while filming sex scenes

Watching Borat again is also great.  You remember all the side splitting parts such as the Jew Eggs, the naked wrestling, the rodeo etc. But I had forgotten haw much more there was such as telling the comedian he made love to his mother in law, as he tries to teach him some jokes.

This isn’t online yet (and weirdly is in the NZPA general feed instead of political feed), but interesting to see what the top ten political stories are according to NZPA:

• 10 – The rise and fall of the religious right (self explanatory)
  
• 9 – A tale of many countries (Winston’s diplomacy)
  
• 8 – Labour’s attempts to rejuvenate marred by numerous stumbles
• 7 – The fumbled war against terrorism (referring to NZ, not internationally)
• 6 – The politicisation of the public service (which has been on going for some years)
• 5 – It’s not easy being green (Labour and National stealing green voters)
• 4 – The rise of National (self explanatory)
• 3 – It’s the economy, stupid (low unemployment, high interest rates, high dollar)
• 2 – Labour takes a smacking (Section 59 – interesting that Labour si mishnalded this, they got blamed for a Green bill)
• 1 – Electoral Law (very pleased to see this rated as the number one story)

A funny pisstake of Hooters set to the music of the Little Drummer Boy.

And below for those who like the original, is a very young David Bowie and Bing Crosby singing it.

Poneke makes a plea for MPs to also take a holiday break and spare us from the non stop press releases which should start up tomorrow.

As Poneke alludes to, in fact the MPs are hardly working at all.  All these press releases have been written in advance and just have to be e-mailed out.  The MPs concerned just have to take the odd phone call generally. National did this quite well last year:

… the National Party unleashed a torrent, 41 between December 28 and January 15, the last day of the holidays for many people. It probably issued more, but its website has a technical hitch and is not showing any statements at all between November 27 and December 28, when there would have been scores up to Christmas Eve, so I was unable to count them. Some Nats seemed not to have gone on holiday at all, particularly Simon Power, battering away punitively about the Corrections Department and its minister; and Tony Ryall, a one-man accident and emergency department of health crises.

The reality is that media are short of stories over the next month, so releasing some stats you got a couple of months ago can get more publicity than normal.  And it really doesn’t interfere too much with MPs enjoying the holidays.  Their press secretaries though get screwed over as they do actually have to work to get these out!

In Government it is slightly different.  Government popularity goes up when there are no scandals, and everyone is happy in the sun.  So normally they are not as organised as the Opposition in cranking out the PRs.  What they do is just have one Minister who is the Duty Minister for all portfolios.

Now it is interesting to observe how different Ministers handle the responsibility.  You don’t actually have to plant yourself in the Beehive but you are (or were) meant to be in Wellington so you can sign things and go into the office if something big happens.

Now the more junior Ministers love being Duty Minister.  They love the idea of being in charge of the country for a day and will head into the Beehive at 9 am and spend the day as Lord of the Manor.  Closest they get to being Acting PM.

The more senior Ministers see it as a bit of a burden and chore, and have been known to be less than totally diligent about the application of the stay in Wellington rule.  One Minister did two days as Duty Minister from his holiday home in the Marlborough Sounds.  It was Government by remote control.  Never mind he had no landline and no fax – the patchy cellphone kept him in contact.

So don’t feel too sorry for MPs working over the summer break – keep that sympathy for their staff who really do have to go into work!

A rare poll has been done in Saudi Arabia. Results are mixed.

Opinion of:
Iranians – 51% favourable to 40% unfavourable
Jews – 6% favourable to 88% unfavourable
Christians – 39% favourable to 54% unfavourable

If Iran develops nuclear weapons and does not respond to diplomacy:
Favor US Accepting A Nuclear Armed Iran 27%
Favor US and Other Countries Taking Military Action to Prevent Nuclear Armed Iran 38%

Israel and Palestine:
favor a peace treaty recognizing the State of Israel, if an independent Palestinian state is established 30%
favor all Arabs continuing to fight until there is no State of Israel in the Middle East 51%

Saudi Nuclear Arms
Favour 52%
Oppose 31%

The response on the Israel question are probably the most disappointing.  The signal it sends to Israel is that it has nothing to gain from giving up territory and allowing an independent Palestine because the true aim of many will still be to wipe them out.  Now this is not to say that Israel shouldn’t still do this, but it’s hardly an incentive.

NZPA has a review of the year’s blunders, bloopers and bad behaviour by MPs.  It includes:

• Trevor Mallard for everything
• David Benson-Pope for lying
• John Key for saying he leads Labour, the Coldplay song etc.
• Tim Groser regarding accusations by his ex wife re caanabis use
• Jacqui Dean for asking whether water should be banned
• Gordon Copeland for everything
• Chris Carter for his typos in his e-mail to Simeon Brown

There’s a couple of other websites which do this also, but the matcher at news.com.au seems the best to me as it now only asks you six sets of questions, but it allows you to state how important each set is.

My best match was Rudy followed by Hillary.

It’s US-centric but still quite funny. I love the final line in each rendition.

Hat Tip: Grouchy Old Cripple

NZ Conservative has a copy of the new improved ballot paper brought in by the Government to make the 2008 election fairer.

It opts you in to voting for Labour as an efficiency measure.  You can opt out if you confirm twice you really really do not want to vote for them.

It also allows you to pre-cast your vote for Labour for all future elections.

The Dom Post editorial is on consequences.  One segment I’ll repeat:

Perhaps those with the most to ponder in relation to unintended consequences, however, are Prime Minister Helen Clark, chief of staff Heather Simpson and anyone else responsible for the Electoral Finance Act. It comes into effect in eight days’ time and will curtail the rights of those wanting to spend their own money in election year trying to gain a particular outcome, be it the return of a Labour-led Government or its ousting.

None of its architects could have expected the unholy row their intransigence has created; Labour goes into 2008 uncomfortably far behind in opinion polls. If Miss Clark cannot turn that around, Labour’s downfall will be at least partly down to her inability to tolerate dissent.

The NZ$ has been creeping back up against the US$ since the high and subsequent fall in July and August. Some traders are talking about a permanent shift in the normal range from 50c to 70c up to a new range of 70c to 85c.

The very beginning of this series shows the 20% devaluation that Muldoon wouldn’t agree to, sparking a constitutional crisis. The data is all from the Reserve Bank and is their monthly averages.

It has been a long time since we were below 60c.

But still if you think 80c is unbearable, look at the full historic series:

The main reason we can’t survive at those rates any more is because our inflation was higher than those of the US.