Category Archives: Comment and Opinion

NZ’s Tampa and a week of political and media spin

Posted on by Brad Heap

On Monday night news broke that a boat of asylum seekers supposedly destined for New Zealand had been detained in Indonesian waters. Immediately the NZ Prime Minister, John Key, came out with a hard-line ‘we won’t take illegal boat people’ stance. Since then the continuing news stories on both sides of the Tasman has left me convinced that the majority of this story is spin and the group of asylum seekers currently being used as political prawns by both politicians and the media.

Over the last week I have been collecting some of the news stories to piece together the bigger picture, starting with Tuesday:

‘No evidence’ asylum seekers heading to NZ (stuff.co.nz)

New Zealand Immigration Minister Jonathon Coleman said there was “no concrete evidence” that the Sri Lankan people were actually trying to reach New Zealand.

“When they had a look at the boat, there was no evidence that they were truly intending to come here, so I’m sure there is a range of things that the people on that boat are trying to do to leverage their position,” Coleman said.

“While there is obviously the capacity for them to come to New Zealand, we feel in this case it was pretty unlikely that that was their intended destination.”

“The reality is that you would expect there to be things like maps on board, charts that would indicate that that was their true destination and I haven’t had any information that any of that material has been found on that boat.”

Asked why they had been holding signs indicating they wanted to come to New Zealand, Coleman said: “Obviously, if they could create a wave of political pressure to come here, I’m sure they would be pretty keen to get to somewhere but look, they won’t be coming to New Zealand.”

So on Monday night we had Key telling us these people were definitely coming, however, on Tuesday morning we have the immigration minister telling us they weren’t. What is most interesting is the last line where Coleman even suggests these people were set up to create a political storm.

Of course Key wasn’t happy about his hard-line stance being undermined by the truth so he came out with this gem (via nzherald on Wednesday):

“He hasn’t had an intelligence briefing, he’s had a briefing from his officials, there’s a difference.”

One wonders if his intelligence briefing was run by his political and media advisors… anyway… this hardline approach by Key then saw all the vested interest groups and individuals (Amnesty International, Kiwiblog, Helen Clark, etc) come out to add their 2c into the debate.

The most interesting of these comments came from the United Sri Lanka Association who claimed Sri Lanka was “as peaceful as Wellington” and “There’s no violence there right now, the violence there caused by Tamil terrorism has been quelled, it’s been put to rest two years ago.”

Well if this was the case then you would expect Sri Lanka to be somewhere near NZ in the Global Peace Index right? Last year NZ ranked 2nd most peaceful country in the world, Sri Lanka ranked 126th, and as for their argument it has improved, sure the year before they ranked 133rd, but the year before that they ranked 125th so their peace ranking isn’t improving, and it is certainly nowhere near the same as NZ.

Also by this time the Australian media commentators had picked up on the NZ asylum boat story claiming it as proof that the Gillard Government’s Malaysia Solution was working. The best of these stories was the SMH with “Message received: asylum seekers give Australia a wide berth” which claimed that the boat supposedly headed to NZ may have also tried to go to Canada!

Then yesterday the nzherald had an article about how a person who came from the Tampa has been caught up in a car rebirthing ring.  A story that was worded in such a way that it clearly made out that this guy was bad because of the country he had came from – not because bad apples can occur in any country or situation.

And now a week after the story first broke, the Sunday Star Times is claiming they have got a reporter onboard and reporting there is a stalemate going on about where these people should go… the saga continues…

Right now there is a conspiracy filled cynic in me saying the Nats and the media is feeding us bullshit. Yes there is a refugee boat in Indonesia, yes these people are in need – and we should help them!

But instead there is a whole lot of media and political spin going on to make it look like these people are evil zombies out to destroy everything we hold dear. Of course that is crap, but if you read enough stories about how these people will steal your cars, are secretly violent terrorists, and are so lazy they will use all your taxpayers’ dollars on welfare you’ll believe it right?

Sydney’s Historical Revisionism – divisive not productive

Posted on by Brad Heap

Last night the City of Sydney Council voted to use the word ‘invasion’ to describe the arrival of European settlement in Australia in official council documents. The decision was made under the threat of the resignation of the Aboriginal advisory panel if the word was not used. However, instead of moving Sydney and Australia forward, the decision by the City of Sydney has opened up a can of historical worms with its attempts at revisionism.

The reality is Australia was settled not invaded. If Australia was invaded it would have involved guns, wars and people conquered. However, for the most part the initial establishment of Australia was peaceful. Sure there are stories about violence against some Aboriginal communities, however, there are equally as many stories about the trade between the European arrivals and established Aboriginal communities. The main problems in Australia’s history, such as the White Australia Policy, came later.

I believe it is right to attempt to amend the wrongs of the past. It is especially important to help those people where as a result of the past there is still pain, disadvantage and suffering today. However, this change does not seek to make any difference to the lives of people; instead it is mere political pandering to a select few who play politics.

What the city of Sydney (and Australia) really needs to do is work to be inclusive to all, acknowledging its indigenous heritage, and building partnerships with all communities to move forward together as a united nation. However, while Europeans continue to be seen as invaders and Aboriginals as lazy this will not happen. It is time for both sides to stop living 220 years in the past and instead have a cultural perspective change and focus on future.

 

We can do better than mandatory detention of refugees #gobacksbs

Posted on by Brad Heap

Throughout this week SBS’s Go Back To Where You Came From sparked a number of discussions in my workplace. One key topic of discussion was on the life of refugees compared to those living in extreme poverty. Just because you are poor doesn’t make you a refugee, and just because you are a refugee shouldn’t confine you to a life of poverty.

Unfortunately, however, the problems of poverty and displaced peoples are often connected. The west has also been trying to solve both problems for decades now with little success. The reality is no matter how hard we try, it is human nature to start wars, which naturally displace people. Also with wars, famine, floods, and a growing global population there is always going to be hunger.

The two extremes of the refugee debate in Australia are “Stop the boats. Close the borders.” and “Let everyone who wants to come in, we have enough room.” Of course neither extreme is workable so we end up with a compromise position somewhere in the middle.

At the moment the current Australian Government policy is to make it as hard as possible for refugees to enter Australia through the use of mandatory detention and the threat of deporting people to Malaysia. We are like the big bully picking on the weakest most vulnerable kid in the playground. We act tough when in reality we just have a warped sense of entitlement.

Too often we forget that being a refugee gives you a ticket to the most unlucky lottery in the world. Some people are fortunate they win the lottery easily and make it to the west relatively quickly. Others face years of going from country to country running from the constant threat of death. By the time someone gets in a rusty, old, overcrowded boat they are at a state of desperation.

Upon arriving in Australian territory asylum seekers are thrown into prison – after all these people have gone through to make it alive this far you think they would have a little more luck in the lucky country. Quite simply the approach taken by the Australian authorities is inhumane, unjust and unnecessary.

In an opinion piece on theage.com.au Former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser outlines a 10 steps to solve the refugee crises in a much better way. He writes:

Australia should not seek to avoid its obligations by shifting asylum seekers to another country. There are many questions and problems relating to the so-called agreement with Malaysia. The whole idea of swapping asylum seekers including children in this way, as if they are commodities, is odious. It is trading in people. It is neither an appropriate nor a just solution.

Mandatory immigration detention centres should be abolished. Detention for the purpose of health, identity and security checks alone should be permissible.

We should be especially concerned about children in detention. The previous government made a commitment to get children out of detention, yet in February there were more than 1000 children in detention

The punitive approach taken to asylum seekers who come to Australia by boat – who are detained often for years – and to those who have come by air – who are living in the community but are denied any form of government support – should be replaced by a humane and compassionate policy where support is given to those in distress.

A strong, multicultural Australia that draws strength from its diversity, that debates real issues of importance to ourselves and to common humanity, has contributed so much in the past. It must do so again.

The pettiness and meanness of the current debates about asylum seekers and indeed on other issues that are dealt with on a totally partisan basis must be put aside.

We should also ask ourselves what we as Australians need to do so that politicians will learn to appeal to the best of our natures and cease playing politics with the lives of vulnerable people.

You can read the full article here: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/how-australia-can-solve-its-asylum-seeker-problem-20110624-1gjlt.html

Fraser’s ideas make sense and are completely workable. One can only hope that somehow the politicians in Canberra hear him, and the voices of everyone else who are saying that there is a better way.

#gobacksbs What now? How can we go from passive watchers to active change makers?

Posted on by Brad Heap

Over the past three evenings SBS have aired Go Back To Where You Came From – their Amazing Race meets Survivor reality TV documentary on refugees. It is compelling and emotional watching and the interactive feedback via Twitter and Facebook has seen it get decent media coverage.

Now that the show has concluded the question that lingers is “What now? How can we go from passive watchers to active change makers?” As of this morning smh.com.au is reporting that the government is continuing to push on with negotiations to send asylum seekers to Malaysia for “processing”.

The Malaysian solution is the first thing that needs to be stopped. Even refugee advocates believe Nauru is a better alternative than Malaysia. As #gobacksbs showed Malaysia is home to 100,000 refugees who live in extreme poverty and are at risk of beatings just because they are refugees. UNICEF Australia has a letter writing campaign in force to object to the Malaysia solution, it may only be a symbolic action to get involved but please do.

In the long term Australia needs to close its detention centres and take a much more humane approach to dealing with refugees. Richard Ackland makes these comments in another smh.com.au article:

“…people who were treated humanely and in non-detention environments were more likely to be compliant with authorities, including those facing return to their country of origin. Rates of absconding were also very low – about 1 per cent.

We’re talking about countries where asylum seekers are processed in the community, including open reception centres. This is the norm in many European countries, as well as South Africa and New Zealand.

In Australia people held in detention deteriorate quite quickly, they develop grievances and are less able to engage with the authorities. There are the inevitable pitched battles and rarely are those facing removal compliant.”

Unfortunately the only way we are going to see change in Australia is through political pressure. I hope that some back-bench Labor MPs saw #gobacksbs last night and will put internal pressure on the Labor party to stop pandering to racists. I also hope that in the wake of the grass roots action will increase. Imagine seeing a day of action for refugees like we saw for the carbon tax a few weeks back.

Most importantly it is time for those 600,000 viewers of #gobacksbs last night to find their voice and speak up. Start local – talk to friends and family about the refugee crises and the myth of “illegal immigrants”. Send letters to MPs and media outlets voicing your opposition to mandatory detention and let them know there is a better way. Finally, if you want to take direction action, get involved with UNICEF, World Vision, and other NGOs. The only way change can be made is through people power.

 

Censoring Royal Wedding Commentary Will Only Increase Popularity For Republicanism

Posted on by Brad Heap

This afternoon ABC TV was forced to cancel its plans for The Chaser comedy team to provide satirical commentary of the royal wedding on Friday night. The official reason for the cancellation of the broadcast was because the conditions of use of the BBC footage cannot be used “in any drama, comedy, satirical or similar entertainment program or content“.

Personally, I am disappointed. I was looking forward to The Chaser’s very dark sense of humour and satire being dished out upon the royals. Yesterday some media commentators were arguing that nobody’s wedding should be subject to ridicule or cruel jokes. However, on the flip side, how many people’s weddings are broadcast live to people around the world? If you are going to have something extremely public then expect some people to ridicule it.

The news of the forced cancellation of The Chaser’s coverage comes after it was also revealed that the previous two English Labour Prime Minister’s Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have not been invited to the wedding, however, the two previous Conservative Prime Minister’s Margaret Thatcher and Sir John Major have.

So much for the Royal Family supposedly having no ‘perceived political preferences‘. It is very obvious they favour those people who hang onto the past, protect the class structure, and don’t challenge the rule or power of the establishment.

Earlier today I was having a discussion with colleagues about the need for Australia and New Zealand to become a republic. The feeling amongst my colleagues was there wasn’t the mood or need to change. However, the censorship of the media, the political bias in the wedding invitations, and the ability for the Crown to overrule any law of Australia and New Zealand is reason enough for us to move on.

For me, the monarchy is a thing of the past. While the pomp and ceremony of the wedding is fascinating to watch, it is merely a sideshow designed to reinforce and strengthen the rule of the Crown while other parts of the world are in revolution. The sooner we abandon the monarchy, eat our own cake, and have our own revolution the better.

Finally, regarding the censorship of the broadcast, The Chaser’s Julian Morrow makes a very valid point: “For a monarchy to be issuing decrees about how the media should cover them seems quite out of keeping with modern democratic times …. but I suppose that’s exactly what the monarchy is.”

Hear hear.

Sydney Domestic Security Meltdown – The Day Paranoia Reigned

Posted on by Brad Heap

About 3.30pm yesterday one of the security scanners at Sydney’s Domestic Terminal lost power resulting in 16 passengers passing through security without being correctly screened. Out of the many thousands of passengers who pass through Sydney Domestic every day this is a very minor problem.

However, the paranoia that has strangled the airline industry since the September 11 attacks saw what was a minor security machine malfunction turn into a farce that affected flights and travellers across Australia. All passengers in the terminal, and on flights that were still boarding at Sydney Domestic were forced to leave the air-side area of the terminal and planes landing at the airport were made to queue for hours on the tarmac until every passenger was re-screened.

In other words the failure to correctly screen 16 passengers resulted in thousands of people being stuffed about by overbearing and unnecessary security regulations which see public freedom curtailed in the name of fighting an invisible and mostly physiological enemy.

This paranoia and curtailing of public freedom has sees us live in a society where you are many times more likely to be killed in a plane accident than a terrorist attack. Yet in the United States $8.1 billion is spent on the TSA to enforce compulsory child molestation air-line security while only $77 million is spent on investigating airline accidents.

It is all a bit ridiculous isn’t it? Which reminds me of this infographic:

Terrorist Attack Infographic

My hope is one day we will wake to the realisation that the biggest threat to our safety and freedom is not a few men who live in dusty caves in the middle-east but instead our own governments curtailing our freedoms in a manner akin to that of Orwell’s 1984.

Slow Death By Rubber Duck

Posted on by Brad Heap

I have just finished reading Rick Smith & Bruce Lourie’s excellent book Slow Death By Rubber Duck – The secret danger of everyday things. I can now tell you I have a very different perspective on just how much human created and introduced chemicals are poisoning our lives. The book isn’t designed to be something that scares you into becoming a homeless hippy but instead a guide to how we can reduce the amount of dangerous chemicals in our lives and improve our lives as a result.

The book analyses chemicals in our toys, clothes, tools, and food and through a combination of history lessons and self experimentation shows the dangers in a lot of products that we wouldn’t even think for one second would be dangerous. In particular highlighting the risks of phthalates, teflon, PCB flame retardants, mercury, triclosan, and plastics including bisphenol A. In the end the conclusion is not to run for the hills but instead to look at what we are putting into our bodies and how can we can stop poisoning ourselves.

This book is a must read for anyone who wishes to improve their health, it isn’t overtly science heavy and is easy to read. At the end of the book there are some fantastic tips about what foods and plastics to avoid and other ways to eat better and live healthier. As a result of reading it I will be watching what I eat and by to try and reduce things the impact of things like mercury, phthalates and BPA in my body. Living more organically has never seemed so simple, or so important.

An example of why NZ will never catch Australia

Posted on by Brad Heap

Yesterday I saw a friend link to an advertisement for a full time graduate programming job on Student Job Search. The employer is seeking someone who is competent in C#, ASP.NET, HTML, CSS and Silverlight.

None of these skills in particular are very difficult or uncommon but what got me was the pay rate. $20/hour at 35 hours/week. On the surface that doesn’t look that bad and probably a lot better than the $12.75/hour most people are getting working in retail, but lets do some maths.

$20/hour * 35 hours/week * 48 working weeks/year = $33,600 NZD per annum.

Now lets convert that to AUD (using xe.com) we get just under $26,000 AUD per annum.

Now the minimum full time wage in Australia is $27,355 per annum (based on 38 hour week).

So a full time graduate job in a growth sector in New Zealand pays lower than the minimum full-time wage in Australia.

So this got me thinking, what is the minimum full-time wage in NZ, converted into Australian dollars?

The minimum is $24,480 NZD (based on 40 hour week), which converts to just under $19,000 AUD per annum.

To put it simply at the minimum wage level in Australia you earn 44% more for two hours less work per week.

Now of course none of this takes into account tax differences, superannuation, living cost differences etc. But it is still a remarkable gap.

Prime Minister John Key may talk about a goal of catching Australia but I don’t believe it is possible. Politics can’t fix the problem, only business paying their employees more can, and of course this idea flies straight in the face of capitalism.

In the meantime it is little wonder why so many young people are leaving when a graduate job is paying less than the equivalent minimum wage of the next door neighbour.

Auckland Councillor fails to understand meaning of ‘Public Holidays’

Posted on by Brad Heap

Yesterday Auckland Councillor Cameron Brewer tweeted:

What’s with cafes charging a surcharge today when the statutory public holidays are not till Mon and Tues. Unimpressed.

Yesterday was a public holiday and this tweet shows that Brewer is completely ignorant of the law which is rather surprising given he is the former head of the Newmarket Business Association.

This afternoon Brewer tweeted again:

I had a whack at the 2003 Holidays Act – http://www.voxy.co.nz/politics/brewer-holidays039-legislation-clearly-not-working-any-more/5/77547

Before even opening the link it is obvious that Brewer is going to have a whine over surcharges. Surcharges that are illegal in other countries. One would hope that he would be campaigning for the banning of surcharges but as others have pointed out companies are entitled to charge what they like when they like.

The opening paragraph of the press release shows Brewer does not understand the point of a Public Holiday

The 2003 Holidays Act is failing those it was meant to protect. It was meant to boost the pay packets of those working on public holidays but instead it’s forcing most businesses to shut and leaving employees with less pay not more this holiday season.

The intentions of the 2003 legislation were honourable, but now we’re seeing one big unintended consequence – that is it’s actually forcing businesses shut and workers to cut back their hours when they probably need extra money the most.

I don’t know how Brewer could spin this any more. The purpose of the Holidays act is to set out the minimum legal amount of leave an employee is entitled to. It includes provisions for payments for working Public Holidays which are time and a half plus a day in lieu.

The purpose is not to boost the pay packets or force companies to close. It is designed to set out the national days of significant where everyone should be entitled to the choice of marking them. If companies do not want to observe the public holiday then they are allowed to open (excluding Christmas, Good Friday, Easter Sunday, ANZAC Day morning), but if they do open on these days then it is to be expected that staff required to work be treated above and beyond their normal conditions, because they are going above and beyond their normal duties.

The legislation is actually forcing holidays on staff and cutting their pay packets, not boosting them. What’s more the surcharge seems to be upsetting people more than ever. The Government now needs to assess just how counterproductive the legislation is becoming, and look to repeal it.

“It’s tragic that young cafe workers keen to earn a buck are being told by their bosses that there’s no work for them over Christmas and New Year. It’s becoming abundantly clear that what was actually designed to protect workers is now seeing them lose work opportunities.

Again Brewer is completing wrong here. If a business is not open on a public holiday on which an employee would otherwise work they are required to be paid their normal daily pay for this day. This includes casuals if they have worked two out of the previous four weeks.

What Brewer is actually arguing for in his press release is a return to a two class system. Where those who ‘have’ are able to take a holiday and put their feet up, or shop. While those who ‘have not’ work for slave wages and not getting to enjoy the Public Holidays that other people take for granted.

I for one would rather pay a small surcharge as a mark of respect to those who do not get the benefit of a day off.

NSW Labor’s Public Transport Solution – Paint All Buses Blue

Posted on by Brad Heap

The SMH today reports that the state government wants to paint all private buses blue and white, the same livery used on STA buses. The government will pay for the repainting of the buses arguing that it will make buses easier to identify.

Metrobus in sydney

Labor Red Metrobus

Sydney Buses, PMC bodied Mercedes-Benz O405 (Mark 5)

Liberal Blue STA Bus

Buses being different colours depending on location actually makes sense and is used in many different cities around the world. If you see a yellow bus you will know it is most likely going to Castle Hill for instance. Painting them all one colour means you have to stare at the small location display of every bus going by. This isn’t easier, it is in fact a lot harder to identify a bus.

There are some days I wish that NSW Labor was just a comedy group like The Chaser and real governance happened somewhere else. However, these clowns are actually in government and are extremely good at wasting money on silly ideas.

Painting all the buses the same colour will do nothing to improve public transport. Spending money on more buses, bus-lanes, and integrated ticketing will.

The cynic in me wonders if NSW Labor is working with a genius marketer to paint all the buses blue and white to subliminally represent the opposition Liberal Coalition. While the new, flash, and fast state-run Metrobus network has bright Labor red buses.