Editorials 31 May 2010

May 31st, 2010 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

The Herald talks All Blacks:

Yesterday’s announcement of the first All Black team of the season, who will play Ireland at New Plymouth, was the subject of even more fascination than usual. …

Henry had already hinted there would be new faces in the squad. Duly, as a matter of necessity rather than of wish, some with high potential as stars of the future were named.

Of the four, Victor Vito, Israel Dagg and Aaron Cruden are players of excitement and skill – potential matchwinners.

The fourth, Benson Stanley, is unfairly painted as a player whose turn has come only through injuries to others. Yet he is a poised, thinking midfielder with a thunderous tackle and highly rated by those in teams he plays in and often leads.

We’ll find out before too long.

Also on , says Haden must go:

The decision by the Rugby World Cup Minister, Murray McCully, to allow former All Black to continue as an ambassador for the 2011 Rugby World Cup, is a serious blunder.

Announcing yesterday that Haden would be keeping his role, McCully wildly missed the point about Haden’s misconduct and tried to suggest that because of some tepid expressions of regret by Haden about the language he used the matter should now be considered closed.

That is very far from the case. Haden has caused deep offence with a false and damaging accusation. He has not atoned for it, or even come close to apologising. Unless and until he does, he is not fit to remain as an ambassador for the Rugby World Cup programme.

Haden is one of the most connected men in rugby. So long as he doesn’t repeat his offence, I think he will be able to add value to the RWC.

Haden’s appointment as a Rugby World Cup ambassador was a questionable one from the outset. His reputation has long been under scrutiny. His dubious display in the lineout against Wales raised persistent questions about his behaviour on the field

Good God, they are carrying a grudge.

The Dominion Post wants a national school of music:

News that the Government is refusing to stump up with $11 million to help fund a New Zealand School of Music is unsurprising, given the economic climate.

But it is disappointing. Wellington is indisputably the country’s cultural crucible, and such a school – to be a joint operation between Victoria and Massey universities – could only enhance its reputation.

Now, however, the school’s backers face a serious obstacle in the shape of Tertiary Education Minister Steven Joyce. He has told the universities to consider their options carefully – they had jointly pledged $10m to the school’s establishment – because the Government refuses to fund capital for new tertiary institutions.

The challenge ahead, therefore, cannot be underestimated, especially since what began as a $20m facility is now estimated to cost $60m.

I’m sure they have looked at this, but music often attracts wealthy patrons. There maybe some philanthropists out there willing to help fund the proposed school.

And the ODT talks three strikes:

There is no doubt many New Zealanders will take comfort in the passing into law last week of the Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill. And if indeed the controversial Act New Zealand legislation enjoys such a popular mandate, that is understandable.

Crime, especially violent crime, is a slur on society, a source of primal fear and unease and, periodically, the cause of crippling grief, loss and financial hardship for innocent individuals and families. …

National campaigned in 2008 on getting tougher on crime, and Act NZ, more specifically, put forward this law as part of its confidence and supply requirements. …

That is to say, while all agree it is right and proper to be tough on violent crime, that there is a retributive element to any punishment, that there are some recidivist criminals who will never respond to attempts at rehabilitation, the problem is not quite as simple as this law might seem to propose.

Its passage into legislation raises legitimate and fundamental questions: Is it good law? Will it make a difference?

I think it will. Those recidivist criminals often go onto commit scores and scores of crimes, bouncing into and out of jail all their life. Under this law, their third serious violent or sexual offence will see them locked up for a very long time, and the community will be safe from them while they are locked up.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

30 Responses to “Editorials 31 May 2010”

  1. MikeNZ (3,234 comments) says:

    Same can be said for burglars and con men/women.
    I’d like to see them included too as theft is just a bad issue even if people don’t get physically hurt.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. wreck1080 (3,865 comments) says:

    Can’t believe the All Blacks are world cup favourites.

    The current AB’s are the weakest team for a long time now.

    The South Africans have a guy who kicks over the post from the other end of the field. We are toast.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    The Press Editor must go. I don’t agree with Haden’s remarks, but I will defend his right to make them, whatever role he may have.

    Its long past time these kind of over the top reactions to what some snivelling PC Progressive somewhere might perceive as “offensive” were put to death. It is nothing but an attack on freedom of expression, and if anyone should be supporting Haden’s right to speak out it ought to be the Press.

    Here we have even further evidence of what stinking Stalinist creeps the news media is made up of. No wonder it is a profession in the deepest disrepute. Haden’s OK, its the Press editor who is the problem. We need people who defend freedom of speech running our newspapers, not wet weak sycophants and propagandists for far left socialist dictates.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. MikeNZ (3,234 comments) says:

    Red
    I don’t agree with Haden’s remarks, but I will defend his right to make them, whatever role he may have.

    yes that is a hard thing some days isn’t it?
    But you are absolutely correct.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Glen (2 comments) says:

    don’t you believe the three strikes law is just basically codifying a principle that judges use at sentencing. Crimes committed repetitively will also be punished more severely each time (ignoring drink driving of course were 5 or even 6 times really doesn’t matter). The only positive taken from this is the sentencing with no parole guaranteed on the third offence

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Murray (8,844 comments) says:

    Until the press starts saying Hone must go they can cram it.

    ONE LAW for all.

    And that includes for poltical adovcacy organisations like “the press” applying the same standards across the board. Not jsut offering sops to plotical correctness from a bunch of do nothing whose only actually work experience was a jump stockign shelves while they were at journalism polytech.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. RRM (9,772 comments) says:

    FFS it isn’t a freedom-of-speech issue. It is a Hayden-is-a-dickhead issue.

    No-one is saying he does not/should not have the right to say what he said.

    People are saying he should be sacked because what he said proves him to be a dickhead.

    Of course he has the right to say what he said. He also has the right to expect consequences from his actions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. eszett (2,392 comments) says:

    Redbaiter (9686) Says:
    May 31st, 2010 at 11:20 am

    The Press Editor must go. I don’t agree with Haden’s remarks, but I will defend his right to make them, whatever role he may have.

    I wonder if you see the irony in your remark.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    All Blacks in Auckland… but not in Canterbury… Haden doubts.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Greg Sands (10 comments) says:

    I don’t see why people even doubt that Haden is correct. For starters, the Crusaders coach is Todd Blackadder – a clear reference to his role in counting the number of “darkies” in the team. And we all know ex-Canterbury forwards have trouble counting past three, so there’s clearly no need to officially set any limit. Further evidence of the Crusaders racist selection policies is that they have three players called “Whitelock”. The fact that only one of these actually plays at lock is just a smokescreen.

    :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Murray (8,844 comments) says:

    Bullshit RRM, reconcile why Hone gets a free pass while Andy gets the pitchfork and torch treatment from the usual suspects. Its not a freedom of speech issue, its a bloody consistancy issue. the beench mark has been set really low but its only applied based on skin colour anyway.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    Good tactics.. National swaying from the Maori Party to Act… so their supporters have someone to blame for their actions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. MikeG (425 comments) says:

    “Good God, they are carrying a grudge.”
    Yea, who would bring up things that happened 20+ years ago? (apart of course from the Nat Party research Unit)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. philu (13,393 comments) says:

    “..Further evidence of the Crusaders racist selection policies is that they have three players called “Whitelock”. The fact that only one of these actually plays at lock is just a smokescreen…”

    (heh…!..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    ” I wonder if you see the irony in your remark.”

    I’ll tell you what I saw Eszett. I saw the damn ignorance of a fool like you who I knew would come along and make some snide reference to “irony” when it isn’t ironic. Not the slightest. If your comprehension skills were not as worthless as every other under-educated socialist dickhead, you would know that my point was that as THE EDITOR OF A NEWSPAPER, the person who wrote the article for the Press should be more compelled to defend Haden’s remarks than anyone.

    The Press Editor needs to go because he sit their posturing as a journalist when, like most of them these days, he has not the faintest fucking idea of what his real role is. Its damn well not defending the stinking PC dictates that are the outcome of a few decades of crude and vulgar and barbaric socialist rule. Its defending the truth no matter who speaks it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. big bruv (13,696 comments) says:

    These Cantabs are a bloody precious lot.

    Despite the mountain of evidence that shows they racially profile their team the still insist that they do not have such a policy.

    The more they demand an apology from Haden the more they show themselves to be nothing more than rednecks pandering to their equally redneck support base.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Murray (8,844 comments) says:

    They can join my Cram It list BB.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. RRM (9,772 comments) says:

    Bullshit right back at you Murray.

    (1) Harawira also is a dickhead for the manner of his comments, and is very lucky not to be gone. But so what…? “But he did it too” is an argument for kindergarten.

    (2) I’D be gone if I started making public statements about companies we work with being supposedly racist. In comparing this to Harawira rather than to what you or I might expect to get away with, perhaps consider that no-one wins in a race to the bottom. Especially not the rest of the country. But hey if you want to advocate lowering standards on behalf of (conservatives/the right), be my guest.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. RKBee (1,344 comments) says:

    Redbaiter do you have the same psychiatrist as Whaleoil.
    Using blogs to help release your anger to dam vulgar and barbaric socialist rule and need to defend the truth no matter who speaks it…. You sound like a Crusader.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Murray (8,844 comments) says:

    RRM hone got a free pass, Hayden hasn’t. I’m flipping though a dictonary here and shit look under “double standard” theres a picture of hone “mother fucker” himself.

    I didn’t use the he did it too argument I said the treatment was a double standard. if you can’t adress the question written in simple English then your aledged debating skills are going to look really lame.

    I have not argued for against the qualtiy of Haydens comment, only how it was treated. That help you out there?

    Its a lot a fucking working helping the opposition pharse their arguments as well as my own you know.

    By the way hone is a fucking leftie in case you missed it. Seems likely given your loose grip on obvious details.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. davidp (3,574 comments) says:

    >an ambassador for the 2011 Rugby World Cup

    Is this a government position? What are the ambassador’s responsibilities? Since the RWC is being held in NZ, do we need an ambassador to it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. SHG (375 comments) says:

    His dubious display in the lineout against Wales raised persistent questions about his behaviour on the field

    OMG, that’s hilarious. The press doesn’t even specify which lineout in which game in which year, assuming as a matter of course that the reader will know what they’re talking about. (/me checks) Sweet zombie jesus, it was in 1978.

    Andy Haden will always be persona non grata to the Baby Boomer editorial clique at the Press for one reason and one reason only: HE PLAYED FOR THE GREAT SATAN.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. RRM (9,772 comments) says:

    And Harawira getting away with white mofos comments is a good reason to re-examine Harawira’s comments.
    But they have nothing whatsoever to do with what Hayden’s comments.

    Unless Murray you are saying that until such time as harawira is removed from his position, we should leave unremarked-upon ANY racist commentary by anyone, [e.g. National Front on Jews? hmmm?] because, as you say, Harawira got away with it so it is impossible to take issue with anyone else… or else there will be, gasp, a double standard?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Rick Rowling (825 comments) says:

    music often attracts wealthy patrons

    Aunty Helen was happy to be a patron of the arts with our money – they should see if she’s as generous with hers and ask for a donation

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. RRM (9,772 comments) says:

    The trouble with a “National School of Music” in Wellington is that music students go to the teachers they want, whether they are teaching as some loftily-named institution in Wellington, or any other University. So however grand the building and its facilities may be, it’s only going to be as good as last year’s recruitment.

    What’s wrong/inadequate with the Vic/Massey conservatorium of music as it currently is, exactly ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. big bruv (13,696 comments) says:

    “And we all know ex-Canterbury forwards have trouble counting past three”

    And in the case of the current coach….have trouble speaking.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. peterwn (3,239 comments) says:

    Three strikes – it has been criticised because those in for long bird on the third strike have lots of grudges and nothing to lose. Hence they will be very prone to violence towards fellow prisoners and guards. It seems to me that their accommodation needs to be on ‘supermax’ principles but be arranged so it is humane and maximum safety is assured, such as being handcuffed before leaving cells. Alternatively an automatic security system can release them successively for exercise so they do not come in contact with guards. “D” block type accommodation is not suitable for the whole sentence – there needs to be some hope. After serving a ‘penal’ component of their sentence I would have no objection to slightly more comfortable accommodation being provided with access to computers etc to compensate for their necessary close confinement.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Rex Widerstrom (5,346 comments) says:

    Those recidivist criminals often go onto commit scores and scores of crimes, bouncing into and out of jail all their life. Under this law, their third serious violent or sexual offence will see them locked up for a very long time, and the community will be safe from them while they are locked up.

    First, when someone who commits a murder or horrendous rape is found to have “100 convictions” or some such in their past, those convictions will almost inevitably be for mostly “minor” offences. The rapist may have been caught peeping, have been found guilty of an indecent assaults at the lower end etc. The murderer will probably have a history of cruelty to animals and a steadily increasing level of violence towards others.

    So NACT’s “solution” is to wait for offences numbers 101 – 104 and then take them out of circulation, brutalise them in some sort of “supermax” facility, then finally kick them back into society with even less self control, empathy and respect than they had in the first place.

    The progression of the majority of potential sociopaths from persistent “minor” offending to more serious incidents is well documented and acknowledged by penal researchers the world over. So the sensible thing to do – the thing that keeps society safest – is to intervene much earlier.

    (And yes, some of those offenders would be true sociopaths and fail to respond. That’s how we’d identify them earlier, provide a report to the judge, and get them locked away for longer terms regardless of any three strikes law).

    Second, the worst levels of recidivism is amongst offeners whose crimes are the most annoying and debilitating to society: the burglars, the car thieves, the vandals, the thugs who commit “lesser” acts of violence… none of whom are caught under this law. Nor should they be… but what’s being done to combat them?

    The answer in both cases is an effective early intervention strategy (call it “broken windows” if you like). But this costs money and it isn’t nearly as satisfying for someone like Garrett or Collins to say “we’ve appointed 500 more probation officers” as it is to say “we’ve appointed 500 more police and built a supermax jail for them to fill”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. MikeNZ (3,234 comments) says:

    Rex
    Second, the worst levels of recidivism is amongst offeners whose crimes are the most annoying and debilitating to society: the burglars, the car thieves, the vandals, the thugs who commit “lesser” acts of violence… none of whom are caught under this law. Nor should they be… but what’s being done to combat them?

    That’s why I want a three strikes for the lessor crimes too as they count as much.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Rex Widerstrom (5,346 comments) says:

    Ah well MikeNZ. we’re always going to disagree on the solution I suspect. But at least we can both see the problem, and know the present responses don’t work… which is more than I can say for anyone in Parliament at present.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.