The Herald reports:
Paris Jackson, daughter of the late pop icon Michael Jackson, will portray Jesus Christ as a lesbian woman in a new indie film.
Habit, which will also star Bella Thorne and Gavin Rossdale, is a rock-n-roll take on the life of the messiah and will see Jackson play Jesus Christ as a woman with tousled hair and a nose ring.
Jackson will play Jesus opposite Thorne, who will star as a “street smart, party girl with a Jesus fetish [who] gets mixed up in a violent drug deal and finds a possible way out by masquerading as a Nun,” a press release announced.
I’ve got no problem with the movie. In fact I might even go and see it.
But what I’d really like to see is their sequel where they portray Mohammad as a lesbian woman. That would be really edgy.
By many measures, socialist ideas are more popular than ever, with academics and increasingly hip activists unashamedly promoting the collective ownership of wealth and centralised government-led decision making. Louis has a discussion with Dr Kristian Niemietz from the Institute of Economic Affairs, who has written a book named ‘Socialism: The Failed Idea that Never Dies’.Support the show (http://www.taxpayers.org.nz/donate)
Stuff reports:
The teen babysitter who murdered a 9-year-old boy in the quiet Southland town of Otautau last year has been sentenced to life imprisonment.
Daniel Alan Cameron, aged 15 at the time of the offending in Otautau on October 30 last year, appeared in the Invercargill High Court before Justice Rachel Dunningham on Monday for sentence for murder of Hunter MacIntosh.
Dunningham sentenced Cameron to life imprisonment with a minimum of 11 years. …
Justice Dunningham said she saw no real evidence of remorse but that may be a reflection of Cameron’s immaturity.
Cameron, who never had been involved in the criminal justice system, had a relatively untroubled background but may have difficulty coping with stress and provocation, Justice Dunningham said.
Its a tragic and sad case. What I find chilling is that there was nothing in Cameron’s background that would make you think he could do this. You read this, and this that this could have happened to almost anyone’s child.
In our newest episode of Taxpayer Talk, Jordan sits down (in-person!) with Helensville MP Chris Penk who has written a book investigating the claim that the Government had “gone early and hard” in its fight against
COVID-19. Support the show (http://www.taxpayers.org.nz/donate)
The Herald reports:
The Waikato River Authority wants Auckland to pay for more water from the Waikato River and suggested up to 10 cents a litre, or $20 million a day.
$20 million a day is $140 million a week or $600 million a month or $7 billion a year.
This is why National supports a law change to bypass this greed.
Tracy Watkins writes:
Yet my fear is that as a country we have become less tolerant of ideas and differences in the weeks since; our politics even more tribal and blinkered than it ever was.
In recent weeks I’ve written editorials that have prompted a deluge of emails and comments on social media calling me a traitor and accusing me or treason and worse for criticising or questioning the government.
Individual journalists who ask hard questions at press conferences often get singled out for abuse.
It worries me to think that the social media clobbering machine is now so feared that younger reporters feel you have to be brave to question or criticise politicians or the bureaucrats who – literally – have our lives in their hands.
And yet we have seen overseas that its effect is powerful enough to cost journalists their jobs, so I can hardly blame them for being worried.
Of course the pressure is not just from the public. The NYT Opinion Editor lost his job because other NYT staff were unhappy he allowed a Republican Senator to write an op ed they disagreed with.
Ben Kepes writes:
Clark made a more fundamental error, that in utterly misunderstanding what leadership is actually about. A few years ago I had the privilege of being awarded the Sir Peter Blake Leadership Award.
In my conversations around the time, I was forced to think about what leadership means – what is the basic statement one can use to describe at a fundamental basis what leadership is. What I came up with, while not anything earth-shattering, was that “leadership is about giving the credit and taking the blame.”
When things are going well, stand back and let ones’ team bask in the glory. But when things are going badly, step up and, in the way that Netanyahu epitomised, take on the hard stuff. Clark wasn’t even close to this, and I suspect his inability to stand by his DG will come back to haunt him.
Of course, the thing that makes this lack of leadership even more bizarre is the fact that, while his boss is displaying how not to be a leader, Ashley Bloomfield is doing exactly the opposite.
After all, it’s not like Dr Bloomfield personally let those quarantining patients out or missed giving them Covid tests. There are a huge number of Health Ministry employees who all made mistakes that contributed to the situation.
Showing leadership, however, Dr Bloomfield hasn’t mentioned those failings. Rather he stood up and accepted that, as the man in the top chair, he held the responsibility for the errors and omissions.
There are a huge number of Ministry employees who will have seen that and will have further been cemented in their respect and loyalty to their boss. A situation that any leader should aspire to.
Clark, on the other hand, firmly confirmed himself as a slippery operator who will kneecap those around him when he needs to and when he thinks he can get away with it.
I like his description of leadership as sharing the credit but taking the blame.
Paula Bennett announced:
Today I am announcing that I will not be standing at the next election.
I have had an incredible time in politics for the past 15 years and now I am looking forward to my next career.
In 2005 I entered politics on the National Party list. I was absolutely thrilled in 2008 when the people of the then seat of Waitakere chose me as their electorate MP, I served them for six years until that seat no longer existed. I then went on to win the seat of Upper Harbour where I have served for the past six years. Being an electorate MP and working on behalf of constituents has been a privilege and it is work I have really enjoyed. I believe Jake Bezzant, the current candidate for Upper Harbour, will do an outstanding job and I wish him all the best in the upcoming election.
After just three years as an MP, I became a Cabinet Minister in 2008. I have held 14 portfolios, each bringing their own challenges and achievements. I have many people to thank, too many to rattle off here, but I believe that much of my success has been due to the incredible people who have worked with and for me. I am particularly proud of my work as Minister for Social Development and Child Youth and Family for more than six years.
This is not hugely surprising, but still significant. As I blogged last month:
She was one of National’s best performing Ministers, seeing through welfare reforms that saw a huge decrease in welfare dependency. Her office had some of the best staff around, and her office parties were quite legendary. Paula’s sense of humour was awesome.
When Bill English became PM, she became his Deputy PM and it is a shame she only had a year in the role. I ended up attending a couple of CEO meetings with her and she was one of the few MPs who could take questions over pretty much all of Government. She made a good team with Bill, and I think if they had carried on in 2017 they would have made a real difference with their social investment programme of early interventions.
Paula’s tenure as Deputy Leader of National has finished but I think we should consider how remarkable it is that someone who was a solo mother at age 17 should become the Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand. Can’t think of a better example of National’s values in promoting equality of opportunity.
I am sure Paula will have a great career post politics. I wish her well.
Now we don’t know why the Greens cancelled Rose. It is unusual to cancel an MC after you have agreed to them, especially if they are (presumably) doing it for free.
Despite almost every economist alive saying the stupidest thing you can do in a recession is to raise taxes, this is what the Greens are promising.
We now can clearly see what a Labour-Green Government will look like. Labour will say as little as possible on tax, but then sign up to the Greens’ tax plans as a price of coalition after the election.
And what the Greens want is massive. First of all they want the top tax rate to go up 9% from 33% to 42% for those on over $150,000. They’ll also hike it 4% for those earning $100,000 to $150,000.
So every dollar over $150,000 you earn will be taxed 42%. So let’s look at what happens to $10,000 of income over that level. They’ll take 42% in income tax leaving you $5,800. $750 of that will probably go on GST at 15% if they spend it. So that means they get left with $5,000. The Government has taken half.
But it doesn’t stop there. Let’s say you’re worked hard and are now in your late 50s and have a mortgage free house and a KiwiSaver. Say it comes to $1.5 million. Then you’ll be paying another $5,000 in their asset tax.
The Greens tax policies will punish people for saving, for being old and for being female.
A fair few elderly people will have assets of over $1 million when they retire. Their house alone may be worth that and if they want say $50,000 a year income on top of NZ Super you’ll need $1 million in shares, funds, retirement accounts etc. Also they’ll be worried about having to pay for possible hospital level rest home care when they get very elderly which can cost $1,100 a week.
The Greens will punish those retired people by taxing them. If they have $2.5 million in assets, then they’ll pay $20,000 a year in asset tax.
Also their policy is that a $1.5 million home owned by a couple isn’t taxed but owned by a single person is. So you’re not paying the asset tax, and then your partner dies and wham the next day you get a bill from the IRD saying you now need to pay asset tax on your home.
Of course the super wealthy will pay nothing. They will have all their assets in trusts. This asset tax will just affect the prudent retired person or small business owner who has managed to save some money, but don’t have fancy lawyers to hide everything in trusts.
ACT have announced their party list. The top seven are:
1 – David Seymour
2 – Brooke Van Velden
3 – Nicole McKee
4 – Chris Baillie
5 – Simon Court
6 – James McDowall
7 – Karen Chhour
In 2018 I would have said the range of possible MP numbers for ACT was one to two. But now I think they are looking to get somewhere between three and five MPs. They could even end up higher with a good campaign.
Please to see Brooke in a high winnable place. She’ll make a great MP and is the future of the party. Brooke comments:
“I switched from being a Green Party voter to an ACT supporter while studying economics and international trade at Auckland University. The ability for free markets to lift countries from hardship was a revelation for me,” says Ms van Velden.
Something they don’t teach that much at university!
New candidate Nicole McKee has been ranked at number 3. Nicole is a small business owner having delivered firearms safety education in rural and isolated communities for New Zealand Police. She also has a background in law, firearms component imports, was the co-ordinator of the nation’s volunteer firearms safety instructors for the Mountain Safety Council and the spokesperson for the Council of Licenced Firearms Owners and its Fair and Reasonable Campaign.
The law abiding firearms community feel betrayed by NZ First and no doubt will be pleased that Nicole has a winnable ranking.
Chris Baillie is a small business owner, full-time secondary school teacher, former policeman of 14 years. He currently owns a local hospitality venue employing 30 staff. He has a strong interest in sport and music, being an enthusiastic supporter of the local jazz scene. Mr Baillie has been ranked at number 4.
“I believe in personal responsibility and personal freedom, in particular the right to free speech, and believe that less bureaucratic and government intervention in our lives is the way forward for New Zealand,” says Mr Baillie.
Simon Court is ranked number 5 on the ACT list. Simon is a civil and environmental engineer with 23 years’ experience in roles for the private sector and local government. This includes ten years leading engineering, planning, tendering, and construction teams primarily in Auckland, Wellington, and Fiji. Simon has three boys at high school. They share a love of loud music, fast cars, biking, fitness, good science, and good ideas. His youngest son has Down Syndrome and Simon intends to take a disability perspective to Parliament.
“I believe in the principles of the Party where communities, individuals and businesses lead the way. ACT promotes innovation, not regulation – reducing waste to landfill, bringing real sustainability in construction and building, and clean water in towns and country are critical issues. One way of solving them is replacing the RMA, which is not fit for purpose and needs to go.
Dr James McDowall has been ranked at number 6. He owns several small businesses. He also works for a large NGO in the mental health sector. James lives in Hamilton with his wife and young daughter. He has led the development of ACT’s firearm policy in the wake of the Government’s 2019 Arms Amendment Act.
“I have supported ACT for 15 years. Being a member of two pistol clubs in the Waikato is a part of my life. I was proud that ACT stood for common sense when it mattered most. I’m a libertarian who is sceptical of big government. My experience in business and the community sector has taught me that government has a role but when it oversteps that role it becomes part of the problem rather than the solution,” says Dr McDowall.
Karen Chhour is a self-employed mother of four who has lived on Auckland’s North Shore for the last thirty years. She strongly believes that, with the right tools, anyone in this country can make something of themselves. Karen is ranked at number 7 on ACT’s list.
“We have spent way too long trying to make a broken system work. I love this country but we have slowly taken away people’s ability to think for themselves without them even realising it. We have forgotten what hard work and choices mean as there is always someone else to blame. This does not do anyone a favour if we are no longer responsible for ourselves,” says Mrs Chhour.
All of them stand a chance of becoming MPs.
It is highly unlikely NZ First will be back in Parliament. So New Zealand will have a stark choice between a National/ACT Government or a Labour/Green Government.
We’ve just seen what a Labour/Green Government will mean – an $8 billion tax grab not just on your income, but also your assets.
The Herald reports:
The ministry said of the 2159 people in managed isolation from June 9-16, 1186 people had been contacted and had tested negative for Covid.
Of those, 800 were tested before leaving managed isolation and the remaining 386 were tested after.
So 1,359 were in managed isolation and released without a test, and after the Government announced no one would leave managed isolation without two negative tests.
And no one has lost their job for it.
Samira Taghavi writes in Stuff:
As a young woman, I came to New Zealand eleven years ago from the Middle East to undertake my Master of Laws degree.
Early on I was struck by how rights and freedoms are so frequently taken for granted by those born in this country. Because I come from a part of the world with so few protections, fair trial rights that protect people accused of crimes – of any type – are particularly important to me.
Now as a defence lawyer, I feel compelled to explain the very damaging effects to those rights that the Sexual Violence (Legislation) Bill would inflict if enacted.
So what are these rights in danger?
The first major change proposed that is of grave concern is the remarkable idea of prima facie outlawing relevant evidence benefiting the defendant, thereby increasing the likelihood of innocent men being convicted and imprisoned. So what actually is ‘legally relevant evidence’?
The answer is, ‘any evidence that makes a fact in issue either more or less likely to be true’. An example of a ‘fact in issue’ could be, ‘did they have sex?’
The particular evidence in question that this bill seeks to presumptively declare illegal is that of the prior sexual relationship between the defendant and the complainant. The fact that the two of them had had consensual sex on previous occasions could therefore not be traversed, as of right.
Of course prior consensual sex is not proof of current consensual sex, but it can be highly relevant.
Another championed justification is that consent must be given on every occasion – a necessary element recognised by the law for so long now that its mention is truly trite.
While contemporaneous consent is essential, a caveat must be remembered; sexual intimacy does not, in the moment, lend itself to forward-looking legalism.
As a moral certainty, there will never be a contemporaneously signed document proving consent and so instead where the defence of consent is raised, the whole issue before the court will be the reasonable grounds upon which the defendant’s understanding of consent was based.
Thus, the heart of such a defence is the previous concordats that the couple had – their routines, practices and certain ways of doing things, that demonstrate the defendant’s reasonable belief in consent.
This is key. Consent is sometimes implicit, not explicit. Sometimes it is verbal, sometimes somatic. Consent can be for some sexual activities, but not for others. And a defendant should have the right to defend themselves against a charge of not having consent.
One thing I look out for is indexes that measure how countries do on various criteria. They can be economic freedom or women’s equality or environmental etc.
The Human Rights Commission tweeted about one I had not heard of before – the Human Rights Measurement Initiative. NZ tends to do well in human rights indexes. We are No 1 in world in the human freedom index by Cato, No 10 in press freedom index, No 4 on democracy index etc.
So I expected HRMI to have us pretty well off. But instead I found NZ was a hellhole:
So it seems we live in fear of government agents arresting us without charge, making us disappear and killing us.
According to this index we are at higher risk of extrajudicial executions than Jordan!
The data seems nuts. I couldn’t understand it. Then I read their methodology.
This so called measurement of human rights is nothing more than the opinions of self-selecting human rights activists in each country. As far as I can tell there is no objective data at all, it is all subjective.
The Guardian reports:
Keir Starmer is facing a showdown with the left of Labour after his decisive sacking of Rebecca Long-Bailey reignited the party’s internal turmoil over the issue of antisemitism.
In a swift move, Long-Bailey was summarily dismissed as shadow education secretary for sending an approving tweet about an interview in which the actor Maxine Peake said the US police tactic of kneeling on someone’s neck was taught by the Israeli secret service.
Another version of the old “The Jews are to blame”. Good to see Starmer show no tolerance for this from one of his MPs.
Starmer is the most popular leader they have had since Blair. His approval ratings are between +20% and +30% compared to Corbyn who was -40%.
He’s also got them back up to 40% in the polls.
Stuff reports:
A payout of millions of dollars to ensure the survival of AJ Hackett Bungy New Zealand has been criticised as “corporate welfare” for a company with wealthy shareholders.
It was announced on Wednesday that the bungy jump firm could get up to $10.2 million from the Government to help it remain in operation despite the disruption of Covid-19.
It will receive a $5.1m grant in the first year, with a possible loan of up to $5.1m available in the second year if borders remain closed to international tourists. …
But economist Cameron Bagrie said the payout was inappropriate. “I’m not convinced that jumping off a bridge is a strategic asset. I would have thought that’s an asset you can hibernate and wait for the demand to come back. Bungy jumps are now a strategically important asset? You have to look at this through a common sense lens and think, really?”
He said while the operation might have a couple of lean years without tourists, it had a long and successful history that it could draw from to finance it.
I was supportive of the wage subsidies as they were temporary and a level playing field. Any employer who qualified could get one.
But now what the Government is doing is hand picking selected businesses to get money from taxpayers. Should the Minister of Tourism be deciding that a bungy jump operation is more deserving than a jet boat company?
Stuff reports:
The majority of the Otago Regional Council want her gone, but chairwoman Marian Hobbs isn’t going without a fight. …
Nine of the 12 councillors want Hobbs removed, with an extraordinary meeting called for July 8.
Those opposing her argued their concerns were over governance not water, including Hobbs bypassing council and seeking support directly from the Environment Minister’s office.
It takes some effort to get three quarters of your own Council wanting to sack you just 18 months after electing you.
The problem seems to be that she thought her loyalty was to Labour, not to the Regional Council.
A guest post by a reader:
International Education and a Land of Broken Dreams.
It is an industry worth $5.1 Billion, but most of its traversers will tell you it is modern day slavery. Over the past decade it has run amok throwing all care to the winds. Today, over 300,000 of its constituents confront an uncertain future and the more desperate are inches away from starvation. Does New Zealand have any empathy for its migrants?
Since the change of governments in late 2017, immigration has become that elephant in the room which refuses to move out. Other than David Seymour’s regulatory system (“Own Your Future”), there are two perspectives on immigration in New Zealand politics. The “they are on their own and we will pay for their tickets back if they complain” line of thought, and the “we need a more humane approach” line. The former is indicative of the “suck them dry, spit them out” tendency which many temporary migrants are beginning to believe various New Zealand governments favour, the latter is still only a vision. Both ignore one fundamental truth; New Zealand has taken no steps to regulate the commercialization of its international education sector abroad. Take for example the various Indian students who seem to be falling prey to their own countrymen vis-à-vis exploitation. Offshore agents sell them dreams of a better life, a virtuous people and a chance to raise their kids far removed from the hustle-bustle of a developing world. Most often persuade their families to part with their lives’ savings to pay for what they believe to be the best path abroad, education. Once they arrive here, they realize they have been duped. The solution? There is no solution. Innate failures of various governmental departments have isolated many migrant communities whose distrust is highly evident. It is no great wonder then, that these students are then picked up by unscrupulous employers who wring every penny out of them. As for governmental policies, it is often the victims who are penalized and not the employers.
Another ugly corollary which has emerged in the last few years is the phenomena of migrant workers. The country is welcoming them with open arms with the lure of a “new life,” read Residency. We have bakers, chefs, carpenters, electricians, managers, transport officers and what not now employed in various capabilities. Some have gone the hard yard. Let me relate to you the example of my handyman. He arrived in the country still an adolescent, his caretakers were unable to meet the system’s requirements. How could they? Their employer simply vanished after his business burnt down in seemingly mysterious circumstances. The relevant authorities proved blind to their plight and his parents left.
“They currently live on a small farm in almost feudal circumstances back home,” he told me. As for him, he was left here to study and contribute towards the country. Since then, he’s become a proficient jack-of-all trades with almost a decade of experience behind him. “Every time I go to apply for Residency,” he told me, “the laws change.” The day he acquired his 140 points, the government lifted them to 160. When he got his 160, the rate went up to $25.50. When he got the $25.50 rate, he was laid off due to the Covid. Blast me for being a softy, but here is a young man with skills which many builders will kill for. His accent is Kiwi (“yeah-nah” he told me when I asked him why he was not married yet) and he is able to integrate with various ethnicities. “Not a single day off in a year” his previous employer told me proudly. “I paid him $27.00 per hour to work 5 days,” the man elucidated. “Why don’t you find a Kiwi?” I inquired. “In this world,” I was gruffly told, “we have to make do with what we get and if there is such a skilled individual available then of course we will jump to have him even though the legal hurdles are many. And we were offering training along side the $27.00, the few local kids we had turn up did not really last long. It was the safety net which they had which prevented them from displaying any passion.”
But my handy man is not the only victim of a broken system. His circumstances are shared by many. Strangers in their own homes; to be cast adrift while in New Zealand. “This entire system,” a lawyer once told me, “runs on one thing.” “Money, money, money, money.” “International students are paying upwards of $20,000 per year (semester in some cases) in fees. Where does this money go? Towards Kiwi kids. And what do the foreigners acquire? A somewhat quality education, but the initial trap used to lure them from their own homes’ snaps shut in their face. They are pretty much told, ‘thanks for giving us your money. Yes, we allowed some people representing us to make big promises, but we frankly do not care about you beyond your wallet. There is the door, please pull it shut on your way out.’” From the large hue and cry which is raised after any exploitative employer is concerned, two things emerge. The ‘we will go harder’ line from the powers that be who unwittingly abet the culprit rather than the victim. And the fact, that the victims have totally denuded themselves at home. Their assets, properties and bank balances are empty; all in pursuit of a dream sold to them. Some will return to whatever fate awaits them. Others will overstay. And the main factor? Hollow promises. Come on New Zealand, we are a country which shirks from purchasing merchandise from sweatshops but cannot see the virtual slavery in our front yards. And this is a booming trade. Application fees, taxes, medical fees, annual visa renewal fees, rents, bills and whatever these temporary migrants purchase. All go towards financing Kiwis among who a certain portion will cry during election times, “enough is enough! Kick them out!” And the shameful fact? Temporary migrants work themselves to the bone, day and night, to be allowed to live the Kiwi Dream. Most have acquired their experience and skills in country making them proficient teachers to teach our future generations. But in testing times, their voice is the first to be strangled.
And now with the Coronavirus pandemic, the migrant voice has effectively been kicked to the curb. And no, I am not talking about Winston Peters. His smugness is justified. His bluntness immaterial, the man had probably envisioned such a scenario a decade prior. And now that migrants are expectantly looking towards that government to help them whose words brought them to our shores, the empathy and kindness suddenly seems to have evaporated. “The message we are essentially getting,” one concerned activist informed me, “is that we are not welcome anymore. That suddenly we are not good enough to be declared Kiwis and that we will receive nothing from the government.” How shameful was it to see on one hand the media saying that “yes, migrants can approach Civil Defence for aid” and on the other Newsroom running a piece where a migrant is given “two cans of beans” to last the lockdown. “Am I a thing?” a child of a migrant family next door asked me. Her mother is an IT specialist and her father a glazier. Both have lost their jobs. Their companies went “under” along with their fortunes. “We are relying on charity to eat from day to day,” the father told me. I left their house wondering, why indeed would a five-year-old be forced to inquire whether she is an object? Come on New Zealand, we are better than this.
“Now of course the economy is tanking,” a young Filipino labourer tells me. “But hey, we are essential to that economy. Do you really think that after a decade of relying on us, employers are suddenly going to be able to train Kiwi tradesmen by themselves and in time? Their workers will be the teachers and we are those workers” he proudly affirms. “The Immigration system is shattered, everyone knows this” a young Sikh tells me. “And it needs to be rectified. Over the past two years, the Labour government has taken steps towards fixing it.” “But,” as my newfound friend tells me, “migrants are like fish in a leaking tank with the cracks increasing.” “How long,” he muses, “before someone in the higher-up’s decides ‘right, damn it all. Let us just shatter the tank and began anew.’ What happens to the fish?” And this fear is beginning to gnaw at the migrant community’s heart. The acquirement of Emergency Powers by the Immigration Minister a few weeks prior has elicited much fear than relief. “We are truly scared for our futures,” a young Italian woman tells me. “Are they going to constrict the rules further so that we are forced to depart anyway? Is there some mass exit policy in the works? What do we return to when we are forced out from here?” “There will surely be winners and losers,” another studious lawyer tells me, “but we are requesting some form of amnesty for at least those temporary migrants who are working in fields essential to the country’s economic recovery. The tradesmen, doctors, nurses. Those who have been here for 5 years or more. Some of these people are now refugees. Things will never be the same again in their own countries, and as for New Zealand they are instrumental in their fields. Do we really need to show them the door at a time when the economy is our primary concern?”
And the call for amnesty is now not solely a migrant call. Imagine my surprise when I pulled up the Daily Blog on Saturday night only to read Martyn Bradbury, the country’s most opinionated man, supporting calls for a general amnesty for migrant workers. Some salient quotes:
“We can’t entice migrant workers here, have them exploited by unscrupulous bosses and then tell them to piss off back home.” And,
“We should offer an immediate amnesty to all migrant workers in NZ to become permanent residents and make Union membership compulsory for those workers BUT right after that amnesty, we must close all immigration until a vaccine is widely available.”
Hear, hear! Why is this man not a politician yet?
So, what is the main point of my rambling story? There are four actually:
“Be kind,” “compassion,” “they are us,”- these statements follow Labour like ants after honey. But are these principles for voiceless migrants? The ball is in the government’s court.
I’m not a fan of quotas but I’m relatively relaxed about having them for medical schools to ensure we do have a medical profession that can relate to their communities. However I always assumed that those quota places were around 10% of the total. In fact, it seems the quota places now make up the majority!
Stuff reports:
For this year’s intake, Otago had 202 places available for first year students entering from its intermediate year. (Otago does not take first year students from other universities).
Of those, 120 were given to those entering under a raft of categories.
Of those, 58 were Māori, 20 were Pasifika, 1 Māori/Pasifika and 29 entered through the rural gate. Eleven students went in under the low socio-economic category and one under a new refugee category. That left only 82 general entry places (40 per cent).
So 60% of places go to those on quota schemes and only 40% to general entry. That seems massively out of whack.
Looking at percentages for the 2020 intake, Māori and Pasifika students took up nearly 40 per cent of the places at Otago for first year health science students and 28.1 per cent of the total places for first year students at Auckland.
Which means you can get an A+ average and still not get admitted, because you’re the wrong ethnicity.
You need to average 95% in your exams if you’re European or Asian but can get in on 70% average if you’re Maori or Pasifika.
Now it is important to point out this is only about entry. Once you’re in, all students have to meet the same levels of competence to graduate. So this isn’t about quality of doctors. It is about whether it is fair someone with a 93% grade average should miss out just because they are the wrong ethnicity.
Duncan Garner writes:
This Government can barely deliver a letter.
Certainly all its cornerstone, showpiece, flagship promises – call them what you like – have failed, the latest being the so-called transformational billion dollar light rail project from the Auckland CBD to the Airport.
Phil Twyford the builder – could he build it – No, he couldn’t.
What can this lot do? Why are Aucklanders paying the extra 10 cents a litre petrol tax – remind me of the transport projects we’re paying for again?
What a massive fail. And add it to the list of shame.
Kiwibuild – fail.
Capital Gains Tax – fail.
Reducing Child Poverty – fail – the Children’s Commissioner says benefit levels need to rise for that to happen.
Climate Change? Fail – sure the zero-carbon law is here, but farmers and truckies have an out – years of consultation is hardly transformational.
But at least they have suceeded at one thing:
They have had one success though – on Wednesday night – a law passed allowing prisoners who have served less than three years to vote at this election.
Passing this law under urgency!