Betrayal

Who the heck do I vote for now?

I was so proud to be a New Zealander when the Maori Party entered parliament. I had enormous respect for Pita because he’d done the yards and although I wasn’t a Turia fan I had to respect the fact that a: she walked and b: she came back on her own terms. I saw a country come of age when they took their seats.

The moment they went with the Tories they lost my vote but now the Maori Party have supported National in their disgusting rip off of an ETS. Not only supported them but done a dodgy deal for their mates at the same time.

So basically the Maori Party is now a Tory party. That leaves us with the Greens (sort of ) and Alliance if we want to vote for social justice and sensible economics in New Zealand.

There has been a lot of hot air expelled over Phil Goff's speech today - many claiming it is his "Orewa". I think not. I've just listened to it and I think Goff was expressing the disappointment and anger that many of us feel at the Maori Party betrayal of their fellow New Zealanders - white, brown, purple and puce.

The Maori Party are now clearly a brown Tory party and therefore fair game to opposition politicians. Their agenda MUST be called into question if they are to continue to sleep with the enemy.

Goff’s speech was completely different from the Orewa speech. Brash’s was a clear call to arms to NZ racist voters. In Goff’s speech he’s asking legitimate questions about the Tories’ (and that now includes the MP) agenda.

There's talk about Labour burning it's bridges too soon. That they might need the MP after the next election. Putting aside the very real possibility that the MP will eat itself before then - if I was Goff I'd be saying clearly "We wouldn't do a deal with John key's Tories. Why would we do a deal with Pita's?"

How can you see the light at the end of the tunnel from the bottom of the hole you're in?

I sometimes fluctuate between being a social democrat and a socialist. I guess it's because on a good day I can live with and even see the value of a capitalist system. On a bad day, however, all I can see is the damage and injustice and hypocrisy of our international monetary system. All I can see some days is the brutal effects on the many by the pursuit of profit by the few.
Today is one of those days.

The link is to a New York Times story about the tent cities cropping up in every U.S. state as the depression (for that is what these people are experiencing) bites in the American heartland. This is one of just many stories you'll find if you search the interweb. The stories tell of the struggles of ordinary Americans dispossessed by an economic system (and a society for that matter) that is premised on the idea of the pursuit of happiness through profit and faux meritocracy in lieu of any sense of collective responsibility for the well being of our fellow citizens.

It makes my blood boil to see these people abandoned by their country. Just as it makes my blood boil when I hear that the NZ government caved in when it decided against including pay cuts for executives in the 9 day fortnight policy. Just as it makes my blood boil when I see the same government giving billions of dollars to polluters while denying young New Zealanders the sort of support they really need right now. Just as my blood hits 100 degrees when I see the number of (unreported) lockouts going on in this country as business sees the opportunities offered by a Tory government.

The young unemployed in New Zealand, the locked out workers and the people forced to live in tents in the USA do not see an end to the recession. If and when the world pulls itself out of this self inflicted malaise these people will still be struggling. If they ever "recover" at all it will take years to get back some sort of balance and security. The backward step they have been forced to take will limit their options for the rest of their lives. It is all very well for executives earning half a million dollars a year to talk of an end to this recession - they don't have to start from scratch again. They don't have to drag themselves out of the hole in which this disaster has left them. The highly paid executive isn't in the hole because their workers have taken the hit for them. While the guy they laid off is living in a tent the executive can still afford to run his boat on the weekend.

One of the most galling things for me is to see the almost complete lack of analyses in the New Zealand media. We don't see these stories on New Zealand TV. Why not? Because they ran out of time after the story about Paris Hilton's fallout with her new "friend". We don't see this article in our Sunday paper because they ran out of space after the two page puff piece on the cigarette industry. We don't see this in our daily or hear it on our local radio station because they can't be seen by their advertisers being "negative". You won't see this on TVNZ's morning programme because Paul Henry is too busy interviewing psychics or the guy who thinks he's found and alien skull.

We don't see these stories in New Zealand's media because the deregulated media is the mouth piece for the capitalist system.

That's why today I am a socialist.

Agent of their own demise

I've finally worked it out. I was always pretty good at maths but it seems putting two and two together on this occassion has challenged me.

I couldn't work out why if Nick Smith is so hell bent on taking ACC apart at the seams he would install his own man at the top. Why not just run the NACT campaign of lies about the financial state of ACC and blame it on incompetent management. The New Zealand public, always ready to blame bureaucrats for the ills of the world, would have applauded from the sidelines as Smith unpicked ACC and sold off the bits even as this cornerstone of our civil society was hocked off to the highest bidders.

But now I get it. Smith has installed his man as a dummy runner. Instead of going for a patsy to blame for the failure of ACC the NACT party have set up ACC as the TARGET. As ACC start to limit access to entitlements and raise levies the public is going to start throwing their bricks at the organisation while Smith and his cronies stand back, wring there hands and softly sigh "Well, there's nothing to be done about. If you hate ACC so much we'll offer you an alternative. It seems to be what you want". The New Zealand public, also ready to believe a headline or a sound bite rather than looking for actual information, will meekly walk into the offices of multi-national corporations and part with their hard earned pennies for an inferior service - a service with no investment in the people of New Zealand.

In other words NACT are going to get the victims to do their work for them.

I came to this conclusion after watching this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Znsx_wEi4c&feature=player_embedded

As much as I support their campaign, I believe the people who made this vid have got the wrong target. While they ride their Harleys(ies?), Suzukis and Trumpies to the local ACC office the real culprit for this situation slapping his Tory mates on the back and sniggering "It's working! They've taken the bait!"

I don't know if that SmileySmurf John Key's teeth have blinded voters or whether New Zealanders are just gullible but it seems there is a resistance to seeing what is actually going on here. This government will get keep getting away with this blue murder so long as we keep shooting at the decoys.

The Trav

I was at our local last night. The Travellers' Rest. The name sounds like one of those appalling, '70s, faux-Spanish jobs with a stuck-on brick facade and a "family restaurant". It's not, though. The Trav is the real deal. The building is at least 80 years old, wooden, two stories and was once actually a travellers' rest being positioned, as it is, in the middle of the Waimea Plains.
It would have been a stopping off point for coaches and carts headed for Mapua and Motueka from Richmond. The Waimea River mouth at Rabbit and Best Islands is not far away and Pearl Creek on the old Rabbit Island road was once the site of landings for boats moving between Nelson, the plains, Motueka and Golden Bay.

These days the Trav is a locals' pub. Farmers and farm workers gather there for an after-work confab of an afternoon and the local community tends to congregate on a Friday evening. Local news and gossip is shared, people catch up with neighbours and business is conducted over a beer and a basket of chips or a plate of nachos. Families and couples come in for a meal. There is always a traveller or three there - usually staying in the camping ground or the motel next door. It's a friendly, convivial scene with an interesting mix of people. The local market gardeners mix with young builders, the potter and the green stone carver. Farmers chat with accountants and the guy that owns the biggest local horticultural business talks nets with the fisherman in on his four week lay over. The same scene is replicated in pubs all over the country.

I really like the way the local community gets together at The Trav. There are locals, of course, who don't show up very often - some not at all. Some don't drink, some don't enjoy the friendship of the regulars, others are just in a different circle - but going to our local was the best thing we ever did on arriving in Appleby. We made friends there, got support for our business and found all the trades people we'd ever need (except a sparky. If you're an electrician and want to live the good life - the Trav needs a sparky). By visiting the local pub we became part of the local community with all of the emotional and practical support that entails.

The Trav(or the Office as many call it) is the focal point of a number of community activities including regular community pot-luck dinners, an all-ages, all comers cricket team, fundraisers for the local fire brigade and quiz night teams who head off to support various local kids raising money for sports trips and the like. Locals gather at The Trav dressed in their finery before heading to town for birthday and anniversary dinners and it's often the departure point for van loads and convoys heading into the city for concerts and other events. Just as many birthdays, anniversaries and wakes are held at the pub itself.

Last night was a regular Friday. We'd been around the corner celebrating the return to the district of a couple friends and then popped in on our way home. Kylie, one of the owners, was - as usual - beating the boys at pool. One of the locals was fretting because his fifteen year old daughter was off to town with her friends for a big event. He was being "supported" by a bevy of local women regaling him with stories of their antics when they were his daughter's age. A bloke who lives nearby was trying to interest tour groups to pop back to his place to try some lambs' tails he was roasting on an open fire. I engaged in a conversation about our local team, the Makos, and the injustice of their pending relegation while I kept half an eye on the Manwatu/Bay of Plenty game. We discussed the poor whitebait season, the prospects for the scallop season and the pros and cons of our district council amalgamating with the city. Parents put out the word - looking for summer jobs for their kids. We introduced ourselves and included in our conversations a couple who were looking after the business of local growers who are taking a well earned holiday. It was the chatter and stuff of local community and as I paused to take it in I felt optimistic.

There is huge diversity at my local. The Trav hosts people with a range of policical and religious beliefs. But there's a certain acceptance at The Trav that allows all sorts of difference while knitting together a community that can be and has been very cohesive when it needs to be. We manage to discuss politics and religion without anyone getting too wound up. We laugh at each others' foibles without anyone getting upset. Not all of us are close friends but we are all to some extent involved in each others' lives. New comers are welcomed and accepted because they too are now "locals". And if push comes to shove we can and do band together to support those in need. That need might be something as simple as building a deck or picking up some hay. It might be planning a wedding or dealing with a family crisis. Whatever the galvanising issue there is a willingness in the community to not only offer but also request help.

It seems to me that none of this is hard. We don't struggle in Appleby to be a cohesive community and if we find it this easy then I'm sure others do too. If the communities that seem to manage this cohesiveness can do it then so can the communities that currently don't and that makes me feel optimistic.

Fit? I don't fink so.

Since the new Tory government took power there has been a lot of talk about whether or not some of its Ministers are fit to do their job.

The likes of Kate Wilkinson, have clearly shown they're out of their depth.

Paula Bennett and Judith Collins have so far toed the party line and really only initiated the sort of populist agenda on which their party was elected - boot camps and container prisons. Neither has shown they have the vision needed to be truly effective ministers.

Bill English, while probably a very good Minister of Finance (depending on your economic views, of course), has exposed the self righteous, born-to-rule mentality that is the underbelly of modern Tory outfits.

There are several National ministers who are simply doing what all Tory Ministers will do and probably doing it competently (again depending on your political views) and there are those such as Phil Heatley and his Hoki quota - a stupid, ideologically driven move that reeks of the old boys' club and gins with the Talleys (Open Country, anyone?).

And then there is Anne Tolley. It seemed she'd been in the chair for seconds before she poured millions into private schools while gutting long standing and valuable community education courses nationwide. Now, we know that Tories hate any kind of adult, community or further education that isn't focused on producing factory fodder. Some of us are old enough to remember the attacks on the WEA. A conspiracy theorist might suggest that this attitude has to do with keeping the prols in their place but I couldn't possibly comment. I am, however, gobsmacked by Tolley's latest cock up. The link at the top of this post refers to Tolley backing out of plan to cut 770 teachers from our educational workforce. Many will view this as a good decision but let's look at the process. Tolley is quoted as saying she backed out of the plan at the last minute when she realised that it referred "actual" - well - people. I'm not sure what she thought cutting staff must have meant but you've got question her competency - and her motives.
She has clearly said that she has promised to carry through on a commitment to cut $50 million from the education budget. I'm not sure where she intends to make these savings but an amount like that has to affect staffing levels at some point. So we can start to come to some sort of conclusion about her fitness to do her job:

Either Anne Tolley is willing to gut education to reach her budgetary goal, in which case she’s leaving an appalling legacy behind her;

or she’s not competent enough to read the difference between actual cuts and cuts to recruitment.

I am sadly afraid it is probably the former but if not it has to be the latter.

Either way - like too many of her colleagues her fitness for office has to be questioned.

Now it's a Campaign

I'm just going to keep pointing them out and maybe someone will take notice. They probably won't.

Samantha Hayes last night in Nightline: "[Kanye West] should of..."
It's not local usage. It's not a debatable grammatical point. It's not some arcane aspect of English grammar that nobody cares about. She just wasn't speaking English.
It might not be her fault. She would have been reading an auto-cue. I don't know which reporter wrote the story.

Dominic Bowden on TV1 this evening: apparently someone sent Patrick Swayze's family "Well wishes".
No such expression, Dominic, so it's meaningless.
When you've been communicating as long and as well as Clive James or Margaret Mahy you can start inventing aspects of our language. Until then stick to speaking it......properly.

I like telly. I like Dominic and Samantha. But they are professional communicators so I reckon the ability to speak English is a job requirement.

Talking Good English

I'll keep this short, I promise.
I am no pedant when it comes to language. I acknowledge and even celebrate changes in the way we use and speak English. I don't buy the argument that the way New Zealanders speak English is somehow inferior to the way our British cousins speak our language. I've accepted that we don't pronounce L any more and that in New Zealand women and woman are pronounced the same way.

I have to draw the line somewhere, however, and the I've decided the line will be drawn on the ground where professional language users meet their public. Malapropisms from reporters on the TV and radio news - people who ought to know better (or at least have superiors who ought to know better).

Tonight it wasn't even a Malapropism because the word the reporter used didn't actually exist. I've linked the story. Notice how she twice says "a fluent". She means effluent, of course. It's not a mispronunciation so much as a reinvention. The way she says the word suggests she would spell it with an A. She has no idea what she is saying.

Last week it was reporter who (once again) misconstrued the meaning of the expression "lucked out" so that she said the opposite of what she meant to say. I heard "overtly" used instead of "overly" this week. John Key makes that mistake, as well.
Other recent examples: the oft misused "hypo" when she probably meant "hyper";
"illusion" used instead of "allusion" (although that might have been
pronunciation); "less" when she wanted to say "fewer"; a news reader, a reporter and a radio presenter all misusing "literally"-one actually said, "he was literally expiring from fatigue".
That is not only about as clumsy as a sentence can get but - unless the subject was dying - also patently untrue. I heard all of these instances in the last ten days.

Am I being pedantic? Overly sensitive? Doesn't it behove a professional communicator to use the language properly? I know that "properly" is always going to be subjective but aren't there some standards worth preserving? Too many rhetorical questions?

I think there are some standards worth preserving. I believe that some words change their meaning over time and that's the nature of language. I don't believe that "illusion" will ever mean "allusion". You can tell from the elements of my style that I'm no Strunk or White but I don't believe "a fluent" will ever be commonly used as a term meaning "that which flows out".