Silence in the face of injustice is complicity with the oppressor.

The ink is not yet dry on the near three week old coalition agreement between the National, ACT and New Zealand First, yet this new government has been beset with protest action across the country.  On the day Parliament resumed, Tuesday 5 December, and all the MPs would be sworn in, iwi with support from Te Pāti Māori, had mobilised thousands of New Zealanders to protest in many towns and cities across the motu.

What was the new Prime Minister Christoper Mark Luxon's response?

"I think it's pretty unfair to be honest, I think the reality is we're in government for a week, we are going to get things going - and for Māori and for non-Māori - and that's what our focus is going to be."

Yet when one looks at the new coalition government's coalition agreement, it appears to be a laundry list of taking things away from Māori as well as repealing everything the former Labour government put in place - including legislation passed when New Zealand First was in coalition with Labour between 2017 and 2020.

So what in the coalition agreement sparked this protest?

• the Māori Health Authority to be abolished.
• co-governance to be removed from the delivery of public services.
• government agency names will be required to be primarily in English.
• a Treaty Principles Bill, based on existing ACT policy, to be introduced.
• rewriting existing legislation to make mentions of the principles of the Treaty more specific.

And that is just the tip of the ice berg.

To boot, it emerged on Wednesday the Minister of Finance, Nicola Willis, was seeking advice on how to disestablish bonuses (which are actually negotiated allowances in Individual and Collective Agreements) for public servants who are proficient in te reo Māori.  These public servant provide something extra to their agency colleagues may not be able to provide, which is why they receive the allowance - so it really does look like a blatant attack on te reo speakers by the new government when they say such things.

On that Tuesday, ACT party leader (and Deputy Prime Minister in waiting for 18 months) David Seymour claimed that the protest focus was unclear, which demonstrated Mr Seymour truly can not read the room, because there was a clear message from the protest:

"This national protest is in direct response to the government changes that seek to rapidly dismantle three generations worth of work under an agenda that blatantly disregards the place of Māori in Aotearoa and looks to marginalise us as Tangata Whenua," the pānui said.

It was not just Māori New Zealanders who attended the protests on that Tuesday.  A cross section of New Zealand society who value Te Tiriti o Waitangi and te reo Māori also joined those protests on Tuesday 5 December.  I even heard an RNZ reporter say they had met someone visiting from Ireland who came to the protest out at Hobsonville in West Auckland to tautoko the kaupapa.

This week there have also been protests against the repealing of the Smokefree Act and the Fair Pay Agreements Act, as well as two large marches on Sunday calling for the government to call for a ceasefire in Gaza.

And this brings me to why I have called this post "Silence in the face of injustice is complicity with the oppressor".

I have not made a post for nearly three years.  Have I always been happy in the last three years with events or government actions?  Hell no, and I supported the previous government.  However, I did not feel the absolute disgust and abhorrence I feel towards the actions of this new government.  I can not "give them a chance" because I can see they are undoing everything that evidence shows we need.  

So I can not be silent in the face of injustice.  I will not be complicit with the oppressor.

This quote, "The oppressor would not be so strong if he did not have accomplices among the oppressed" also speaks to me because I see Māori in the new government become complicit, being accomplices to the detriment of all Māori.

Dr Shane Reti, a medical doctor, a GP, the new Minister of Health, is complicit in his silence over the repeal of the Smokefree Act, considering the huge percentage of Māori, especially in Northland, who smoke and the opposition of his fellow health professionals to repealing the Smokefree Act.  He has earned the moniker of Dr Ciggareti.  Dr Reti will be an accomplice in the demolition ot the Māori Health Authority - explicitly set up to redress the fact that Māori are not on the right side of any health statistic.

Tama Potaka, the new Minister for Māori Crown Relations, Māori Development, Whānau Ora and for Conservation as well as Associate Minister for Housing with Social Housing being his delegation, is also complicit in his silence against the diminishment of te reo Māori by this new government, the attacks on Te Tiriti o Waitangi, disposal of co-governance, and more. 

Matua Winston Peters and Shane Jones have not covered themselves in glory at all during Question Time since the House resumed.

There are other Māori members of the government scattered through ACT and New Zealand First.  New Associate Health Minister Casey Costello is a founding member of the group Hobson's Pledge who oppose pretty much everything Māori and part of the Tax Payers Union (not a union) who are sponsored by British American Tabacco.  None of them are standing up against these measures.  They too are complicit.  They too are accomplices.

A former MP recently posted on X (formerly known as Twitter): Two of these words wasn't used today Kaupapa, Kukupa and Kupapa. #Reo  My response was there are a few kupapa within this government.  To be a kupapa is to be complicit, to be an accomplice.

This quote, "When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression" explains the new government.

Back when Pākehā first came to New Zealand, the Māori were the owners of the land, the economic powerhouse, the most educated.  But then colonialism happened, pushing Māori of their land, destroying their economic base, pushing them to the land that was not so prosperous and healthy, forcing urbanisation alongside punishing children who used te reo and alienating generations of Māori from their hāpu and marae.

Fifty-one years ago, on September 14 1972, a group of Māori stood on the steps of Parliament to reclaim their right to te reo Māori.  The land march by the great Dame Whina Cooper followed in 1975, the establishment of the Waitangi Tribunal, then Bastian Point.  Kohanga Reo and Kura Kaupapa were established by iwi.  Te reo Māori was made an offical language of New Zealand in 1987.  The first Treaty settlement happened with Tainui in 1992.  And so much more has happened since then to advance the growth of te reo Māori and address breaches to Te Tiriti o Waitangi and more.

But all these advances threaten some sectors of society.  It threatens those who currently hold the land, who currently have the economic power.  In 2023 they spoke with their cheque books and funded the National, ACT and New Zealand First parties, as well as the astroturf groups associated with the Tax Payers Union (not an actual union).  And enough New Zealanders believed and voted.

Now we are stuck with the Circus Coalition and the three clowns at the top.

Christopher Mark Luxon* claims he will unite New Zealand.  But the ink is not even dry on his coalition deal, it hasn't quite been three weeks and protestors are not willing to be complicit with his government's oppression.

References:

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/503955/prime-minister-christopher-luxon-says-maori-protests-against-government-pretty-unfair

https://newsroom.co.nz/2023/11/24/luxon-coalition-national-act-nz-first-peters/

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/504003/te-reo-maori-govt-seeks-to-halt-extra-pay-for-public-servants-fluent-in-the-language

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korihi/503892/te-pati-maori-calls-for-nationwide-protest-against-government-s-co-governance-policies#:~:text=%22This%20national%20protest%20is%20in,Whenua%2C%22%20the%20p%C4%81nui%20said.

https://newsroom.co.nz/2023/11/14/the-nz-first-mp-picked-for-a-big-future/

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/496933/astroturf-accusations-over-we-belong-website-run-by-anti-co-governance-group

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/439960/ex-act-staffer-grant-mclachlan-says-party-created-fake-grassroots-groups

Notes:

* I will be using Christopher Mark Luxon's full name because he is a naughty child in my eyes.

I am back and I have more to say.
 

Why didn't teachers strike when National was in? I'll tell you what we did!!

Why were teachers so quiet when National was the government?  They didn't kick up a fuss then.

Why didn't teachers go on strike when National was the government?

They've been offered heaps more that National offered.  So why are teachers being so unreasonable?

Teachers get so many holidays and only work from 9 until 3, so why are they complaining about workload?

If teachers don't pull their head in, Labour will be a one term government.  Then where will that leave them?

You know, I've seen these statements and questions a lot.  I've heard them from Labour party members.  I've seen them on the NZ Teachers Facebook page.  I've seen them on various Facebook pages.  I've seen them in the Stuff/Herald comments.  I've even seen and heard it from teachers themselves.

This blog post aims to put that to bed.  Because teachers did not sit quietly during National's tenure.  They, with the NZEI and PPTA, stood strong against #GERM neoliberal policies set up to destroy our free quality public education system.  Because of teachers, Minister of Education Chris Hipkins and the coalition government have the bones and a bit of flesh still left.

Teachers opposed National Standards - this could have evolved into a national testing system like in the UK or Australia or the US, all countries sliding down educational world rankings.  NAPLAN in Australia, Key Stage Testing in the UK and the plethora of testing across the US has dragged those countries down.  National had a national testing regime on their radar back in the 1990s and it was only a Labour led government being formed in 1999 and continued union opposition alongside quality academic information that prevented it from coming to fruition then.

We stood firm against allowing PaCT to take traction within our education system.  This tool would have been used to monitor teachers and as a gateway to introduce performance pay.

Our teachers, with the unions, stood firm against performance pay - this system does not work.  It does not promote a core value of teaching: collaboration.  It is ripe for fraud by teachers and being used by senior leaders unethically, clearly demonstrated in the US and UK.

Teachers opposed privatisation of our state schools - how many more charter schools and public private partnerships would have been established without the teachers standing firm against these measures that have devastated the English education system and the education systems of US cities like New Orleans, Chicago and Detroit?  NZEI and PPTA led the opposition to charter schools.  But really, the evidence from overseas speaks for itself.

Remember that time in 2012 when Hekia Parata had the brilliant idea of increasing class sizes?  Remember the impact that was going to have, particularly on intermediate schools and their specialist teachers?  That was a campaign led by NZEI, PPTA and AIMS (Association of Intermediate and Middle Schools) to raise public awareness and get the parents onside.  And it worked.  Poll numbers showed National losing core support from middle New Zealand, from the "Mums and Dads" John Key always blah blahhed on about.  So he made the call to Hekia from Europe, and nek minute, the back downs of all back downs saw Ms Parata back down.

Teachers, through NZEI and PPTA, vehemently opposed many of the changes to the Teachers' Council.  Hekia Parata, despite 90+% of submissions opposing, changed it to the Education Council and removed the right of teachers to vote on their own representatives to their professional bodies.  Other changes made by the new Education Council have also directly led to the issues we face with a shortage of teachers and relief teachers.  We are incredibly thrilled to see the changes go back through Parliament during September to return the democratic right of teachers to elect their own representatives to our governing body.

Us teachers not only thwarted efforts by previous Education Minister Hekia Parata to increase class sizes, but also her attempt to reintroduce the failed policy of the 1990s, bulk funding (disguised as global funding).  That took a concerted effort.  In fact we can thank Hekia for doing something no Education Minister had previously achieved: uniting NZEI and the PPTA in a common cause.  Add in E Tu, who represent cleaners and caretakers in our schools, and we ran a formidable campaign that forced Ms Parata to back down from global funding including the #betterfunding for #betterlearning bus and campervan tours.  NZEI and PPTA remain close and united while advancing their own kaupapa.

We were not quiet during the National years; we were considerate. 

Considerate that the country was suffering from the Global Financial Collapse.

Considerate of the country needing to put Christchurch first after the September 2010 earthquake and the February 2011 earthquake and all the aftershocks. 

We saw the Rockstar Economy proclaimed and received none of the benefits promised to us. 

We saw the silverware sold off and John Key's promises that the asset sales would benefit health and education.... but nothing.

The decision was made last year, well before the election and endorsed by members at our Annual Conference in early October before the new coalition government was established, that no matter the hue of the government, we would no longer be patient.  We would fight for our profession and our students because we are at crisis point. 

We've warned for several years we were in a state of a shortage of teachers. 

We've warned for many years that teachers were burning out under the workload. 

We've warned for many years that too many students are falling through the systematic cracks and teachers are powerless to prevent it.

We made the decision that now #ItsTimeNZEI #KuaTaeTeWa.  Thats why we decided to strike on Wednesday 15 August for a full day.  It's why we are now planning action geographical rolling strikes for the week beginning Monday 12 November.

Many of us worked to put this government in.  They promised to fix things. 

There's more wrong than they knew (but we knew that and have been saying it for years) and it is harder than they expected - but everyone knows Labour coming into government always has to fix a complete disastrous mess created by National. 

But when you have the country's leading economists saying, " Bugger the Budget Responsibility Rules - borrowing is currently cheap and education and health need fixing"... then don't you think that might be a good idea?

Otherwise we condemn yet another election cycle of children to not receiving the Education they are entitled to and we increase the crisis in our teacher workforce.

We need to end poverty for New Zealand families

During the last week, both Labour and the Greens have released their policies for families, their incomes and how to end poverty in New Zealand.  It comes partly in response to the tax cuts announced by the National led government duing the Budget bribery in May, but mostly has an inducement by all three parties to woo the voter for the general election on the 23rd of September.

 

The stark reality is that too many of our nation's children and their families are in poverty, as this infographic below illustrates:

 

Source:  www.childpoverty.co.nz

 

Poverty is something that successive governments in New Zealand have battled to overcome since it began to govern itself with a parliament.  After the Great Depression, a constructive decision by consecutive governments for nearly five decades meant that New Zealand engaged in a policy of full employment via the public sector and public works to ensure every man was able to support his family and children would not be subjected to the poverty they endured during the Depression and war years.

 

However, with the event of Rogernomics during the fourth Labour government in the 1980s and then the subsequent National government duing the 1990s with agressive New Right policies implemented by then Finance Minister, Ruthless Ruth Richardson, poverty was once again well and truly ingrained in the framework of New Zealand society and has developed to a point where it can no longer be ignored and swept under the carpet by any political party leading up to the 2017 election.

 

The following is an exert from my Masters essay last year that I blogged in the post How does child poverty affect access to education and success in achievement for New Zealand children?

 

In 1972, the Royal Commission on Social Security had reinforced the role of welfare as “to ensure, within limitations which may be imposed by physical or other disabilities, that everyone is able to enjoy a standard of living much like that of the rest of the community, and thus is able to feel a sense of participation in and belonging to the community” (Kelsey, 1995, p.271).  The new National government of 1990 decimated this social contract in 1991.

 

Treasury’s Social Policy Branch decided they needed to determine what American economists called a minimum income standard – a poverty line.  They contracted some home economy researchers in Dunedin, who investigated four dietary budgets on which to feed a man, woman and several children of various ages for a week.  They came up with four budgets: liberal, moderate, basic and low.  At the low end, the researchers determined it would take careful shopping and considerable time and cooking skill to ensure a healthy diet, but that it was not healthy or sustainable long term.

 

Treasury took the lowest plan, without telling researchers, and reduced it by 20%.  They called this the New Zealand Income Adequacy Standard and used it as the recommendation for the new beneficiary payment levels.  The unemployment benefit was cut by one quarter.  Jenny Shipley, the Minister of Social Welfare, claimed it was required to “create a gap between work and welfare” (In a Land of Plenty, 2002).  The family benefit was also stopped and merged into a means-tested family support tax credit (Baker, 2011).

 

The impact of this move was devastating across the country and plunged families below the poverty line.  If Porirua alone had $400,000 a week slashed from its local economy, other communities around the country also faced similar circumstances, including the flow on of businesses closing and further job losses. 

 

The changes to the employment laws, continued restructuring and redundancies, plus the impacts of less money in the local economies caused unemployment to rise to over 11%, as can be seen in the graph below (Trading Economics, 2016).  This was key to poverty gaining a foothold in many communities who had lost significant and large, long term employers forever.

As a result, both Labour and the Greens have released their policies.  You can access their policies from this links:

• Labour: A Families Package that delivers
• Greens: Mending the Safety Net

Essentially both will cancel the tax cuts and amendments to the tax thresholds that National has proposed.  Instead they will put in place interventions to support families to be able to pay for the necessities of life.  These policies will allow both parties to enact change and opportunities in other areas in order for families to earn more and become independent from state interventions.  Naturally, the Green's policy reaches further than the Labour policy, but that is expected considering the Greens sit further to the left than Labour on the political spectrum. 

 

And I think that is a good thing, as these two parties have strongly shown they intend to form the next government and therefore they both need strong policy platforms that both complement each other and differentiate from each other.  Part of a coalition government is being able to find the common ground and then compromise on other aspects to get the best outcome for the voters, New Zealand's wider society and the balancing the economy.

 

I'm not going to sit here and compare the merits of these two policies to each other, I leave that to you as a voter.  But I do want you to compare which of these sits with you better in comparison to what National has done for nearly nine years.  I want to consider:

• Is New Zealand the better for the policies of beneficiary bashing and sactions this government has enacted? 
• Is it more economic to persue the benefit fraudsters or those who avoid tax - considering that tax avoidance is costing our economy far more but is rarely persued to recoup the loss or convict the avoider?
• And is our welfare system still delivering the goal set in 1972, that everyone is able to enjoy a standard of living much like that of the rest of the community or is it condemning generation after generation to a life entrapped in poverty?

I want you to consider if the situation today is something you are comfortable with and what are the consequences for your children and grandchildren in years to come if we allow poverty to further entrench in our society.


I want to refer you to two other blog posts I have written about my experience and reflections with our welfare system:

• When Life Gives You Lemons, Dealing With WINZ Sucks Even More
• An Open Letter to Anne Tolley, the Minister for Social Development - a Ministry that is systematically broken

I acknowledge that Rod Emmerson drew this very poignant illustration of the reality of family poverty.
Thanks for being such an awesome commentator of New Zealand, Rod.

And from the essay I quoted previously, I leave you with the symptoms and consequences of poverty....
The symptoms of poverty are clear: acute and chronic health conditions, poor quality housing, low attainment of education success, a greater potential to be either a victim or a perpetrator of crime (or both), increased risk of mental health issues, increased chance of abuse.


And the solutions to solve child poverty....
The solutions to poverty are clear: put children at the centre of all policy developments and implementation plans; stop using the unemployment rate as a mechanism to control inflation and keep wages low; increase all benefits to a level which enables a healthy diet to be maintained; increase the minimum wage to the level of the living wage; ensure free universal access to health, dental care and education; and improve the housing stock of New Zealand by demanding a minimum standard for state and private rentals.

Dirty Politics by Nicky Hager - my review of this book

I'm not usually one to buy books about politics.  As avidly as I follow, read, comment and live politics, I would not normally purchase a book about politics.

But this book, Dirty Politics by Nicky Hager, was about something I had been suspecting for a while as a follower of politics, so I bought it.  Nicky has had a history of writing provocative books about politicians and their deeds, such as Helen Clark's alleged cover up of GM seeds being imported into New Zealand as covered in the Seeds of Distrust book in 2001, and the expose of Don Brash's dodgy as National Party 2005 election campaign in the book The Hollow Men.

The book is sub-titled How attack politics is poisoning New Zealand's political environment and this book pulls few punches and confirms my worst fears of modern New Zealand politics and commerce.

Alas, due to it being term time and also being actively involved in Election 2014 as a party activist (supporting a candidate), among many other busy reasons, I didn't get past chapter one for a long time.  Finally in the term break I began to read more.  By the end of chapter 5 I had to have a shower.  I felt dirty inside and out, sickened to my stomach.

And that sensation did not leave me at any chapter.

I was horrified at the depth and lengths in which Slater (Whale Oil), Farrer (Kiwiblog), Ede, Lusk, et al, went to discredit credible people, manipulate politics and commercial endeavours, change laws, direct candidate selections, and generally destroy people's lives.  Personally, I have been oiled, and the person I was oiled with is still fighting for her career.  I know others that have lost their careers due to Slater and his devious ways.  And always with lies, innuendo, slander and defamation.

However it did confirm many suspicions I had over the National led government and their tactics since 2008.  This comment by Hager in the Afterword confirmed what I had believed in recent years:

John Key's government was unusually aggressive at attacking and trying to silence scientists, journalists, academics, public interest groups and any other people who publicly criticised its actions.  It cut public funding for a wide array of organisations that represented and advocated for communities.  The essence of democratic government is that the widest possible range of people have their share of influence and an equal chance of being heard.  The politics revealed in this book is about small numbers of people trying to have much more than their fair share.

What astounds me is that even after Hager has exposed Slater and Farrer and their ilk, demonstrated the extent to which John Key, Judith Collins and their staff were involved, the general public of New Zealand still voted the National Party back into government and no action has been taken against Slater, Farrer, Ede or Lusk.  Yet Nicky Hager has his house raided with equipment and documents seized, despite him saying from the day the book was released that he no longer held any documents or electronic files linked to the data given to him by the hacker Rawshark.

Followers of this blog are under no illusions as to my views of the Whale.  In April 2013 I published a post called Beware the bullies who don't want you to exercise your democratic rights in which I exposed the Whale's blatant bullying, slander, defamation and lies in a few cases I was familiar with.  I find it interesting that some things I pointed out in that post are equal to the experiences described by Hager in Dirty Politics.

In conclusion, this is a book every New Zealander should have read before the election, and if they haven't, it should be compulsory reading now.  It exposes the dark arts of political manipulation and corruption and if there is no changes to the laws and procedures in New Zealand as outlined by Hager in the Afterword then we truly have a corrupt society.

Nicky Hager definitely meets the standard in my opinion, but will New Zealand politics ever meet any standard that is not subterranean?

Dear Hekia Parata, diddums about the chalk in your car park, but $359 million could be spent so much better.

These two pictures came through my Facebook timeline over the last ten hours.  They were posted by Hekia Parata, the Minister of Education, herself, condemning primary teachers and principals for defacing public property with.... CHALK!!!

Gee those teachers were bad arsed!! 

But if you went to her page and checked out the comments you would be shocked.  Apparently teachers should be arrested for doing such a thing!

Naturally I couldn't not post responses to some of the ignorant posts made in regards to the actions and the intent of the teachers who protested up and down the country yesterday morning.  Not only was Hekia's office targeted, but many of her National party MP colleagues as well as opposition MPs such as Chris Hipkins, Phil Goff, Phil Twyford and Tracy Martin.  Some choose to go out to meet and greet the teachers.  Hekia did not.  Here is a smattering of photos I have gleaned off the Stand Up For Kids - Protect our Schools Facebook page where there are so many more - you people are magic:



Trevor Mallard's Hutt South office.



With Tracy Martin of New Zealand First - some did a 1.5 hour round trip to meet with Tracy.



Phil Twyford of Te Atatu.



Mark Mitchell's office in Rodney.



Iain Lees-Galloway's office in Palmerston North



John Key's electorate office.



Nick Smith's office in Nelson.



Phil Goff in Mt Roskill listening to NZEI.



Maggie Barry's North Shore office.



Hone Harawira was also delivered a message for Internet Mana to consider.



Chris Hipkin's electorate office.

Anyway, I was so incensed by Hekia being offended by a little chalk that I wrote this wee posting on one of her photos.  I wonder if she will read it.

Dear Hekia Parata,

If you really want to make a difference in the lives of our children, in their learning outcomes, then I urge you to listen and work with our primary sector to make meaningful progress.

You want me to be a more effective teacher? Then give me the support (teacher aides and specialists) to support the children with special needs in my class - and for more than an hour a day, because anyone one of those three kids can spin out for no apparent reason at any point in time.

The biggest things that stop me from being the best teacher I can be are managing the erratic behaviour of the above kids, paperwork that doesn't benefit my kids and lack of support for kids who should be getting special ed funding.

That is why I support the assertion by NZEI that the $359 million for IES would be better off spent directly on the students themselves.

Currently we have a group of students alienated from our education system due to the fact that their behaviour and/or learning styles are not being catered for at secondary level and they end up being excluded.

I heard a mother speak about her son in Hamilton at your PAI meeting and your response was appalling.

Schools work blimmin' hard to keep these kids in, but they are not financially resourced to put into place personnel to support these kids without MOE funding. GSE is so understaffed now that a school is lucky if they see anyone or get a case worker appointed. The system does not work for these kids no matter how great the quality of the teachers involved are or the decisions the BOT makes. And the reason many of these kids get excluded is because they become a safety risk for the other kids and teachers because they have not been catered for due to the previously mentioned reasons.

I have a friend who has been in the same situation with her son. He lasted 8 weeks in year 9 at College this year. I know how hard the DP and HOD of learning support there worked to keep that boy in school. They were lucky to get support for him, but it was not enough - the wrap around service didn't go all the way round. That boy is intelligent but his conduct issues do not suit main stream schooling. In his rural town what are his schooling options now he is 14 and been out of school for two terms? What does his future hold: a lifetime of being a productive member of society or one of being a drain on society? What would cost less in the long run: giving this boy a true wrap around service or the cost of possibly a life involving benefits and jail?

I'm sick of seeing kids who clearly need help that I'm not skilled in, such as speech language therapy, turned down for help because they don't meet a threshold or there's no funding or a lack of staff to take them on. By denying those kids help you condemn them to a life of struggle in their education journey and limit their options for further study and work when they leave school. You also end up taking away from the rest of the class because I spend more time working with that child who did not get the speech language therapy they needed and now have ongoing learning issues.

Spend the money on the kids who need it and then they have a more effective learning journey and become productive members of society. Don't, and you extend all of societies problems in crime, violence, child abuse, substance abuse, homelessness, reliance on benefits, poor health.....

Meeting the candidates for election 2014

It's election year.  There are election hoardings competing for space on every fence and scrap of green grass facing a busy thoroughfare.  There are politicians up and down the country door knocking, pressing the flesh and kissing babies.  And the television debates have started.

Different groups are also holding meet the candidate breakfasts, lunches and evening meetings.

On Monday 4 August, Matamata NZEI Branch held a meet the candidates night at the Matamata Club.  In attendance were the following candidates and representatives:

• Susan Cullen - Maori Party candidate for Hauraki-Waikato electorate
• Tracy Martin - New Zealand First Deputy Leader and Education Spokesperson and current List MP
• Dr Ron Smith - ACT candidate for Hamilton East
• Lindsay Tisch - National candidate for Waikato and current MP for Waikato
• Catherine Delahunty - Green Party Education Spokesperson and candidate for Coromandel electorate and current List MP
• Christine Greer - Labour Party candidate for Waikato electorate

All the speakers were wonderful participants, and you can read the Storify below to see how the night went.

On Tuesday 19 August, the Waikato NZEI Branch held a meet the candidates night at the Methodist Hall in Hamilton.  In attendance were the following candidates and representatives:

• David Bennett - National candidate for Hamilton East and current MP
• Nanaia Mahuta - Labour candidate for Hauraki-Waikato and current MP
• Sue Moroney - Labour candidate for Hamilton West and current List MP
• Cliff Allen - Labour candidate for Hamilton East
• Mark Servian - Green Party candidate for Hamilton East
• Katrina Day - Conservatives candidate for Hamilton East
• Ray Calver - Internet Mana candidate for Hamilton East
• Carolyn McKenzie - Democrats for Social Credit candidate for Hamilton East

Sadly Tim McIndoe was not present and no representatives attended from New Zealand First, ACT or the Mäori Party.

Below is a Storify of the tweets I sent out and received that night and after reflection the next morning.  There is also some commentary I have put in to round out the night.

Meet the candidate nights are all very well to get a gage of the person who may well be representing you in parliament after the election, but it is also vital that you do the following:

• Read the policies of the parties different parties, including National (who has released stuff all policy so far) and ACT and the Conservatives (who have scary ideas about education!).
• Meet any and all of the candidates in your electorate
• Most NZEI branches are organising meet the candidates nights, so are many other groups.  So find one and go to it.
• Find out where/how you can meet your candidates. Follow them on fb and/or Twitter.  Read their blogs.
• Go to the party websites and read the policies.  Follow their blogs, fb pages and Twitter feeds.  Labour even has an Instagram account now.
• Don't rely on the media to tell you what each party stands for. All you'll get is John Key & co telling you that everyone else is wrong and the personality sideshow of Colin Craig & Dotcom.  So dig a little deeper.

I have published this blog much later than I intended.  This was due to a lot of events happening including a busy time at school and moving house.  Thanks for reading anyway, and I hope it was helpful.

First Home Buyers are the Political Football.

I think almost everyone can agree that New Zealand has a housing crisis.  In Auckland housing affordability and supply is an issue.  In Christchurch supply is in hot demand, and this also affects affordability.  But for many first home buyers it is being able to get onto the home ownership bandwagon that is difficult.  The above barriers are part of the problem, and saving for a deposit is the third barrier.

 

I am a first home buyer. I've been looking properly since January in a rural Waikato town.  The limit, if you are accessing KiwiSaver funds and Housing New Zealand's as part of your deposit, is a house costing $300,000 in the Waikato outside of Hamilton city.

 

I admit I am picky.  I want at least a 700m2+ section so I can have a vege garden and fruit trees (sustainability and knowing where your food comes from springs to mind).  I want a house at least 120m2 (I hate small spaces and I'm thinking to the future).  I want a house with indoor/outdoor flow (or at least the potential).  I want a kitchen with generous bench space, a good oven (preferably with fanbake) and a dishwasher space (I have my own). I want a wicked shower (long hair needs good pressure).  I want a safe place for my cats, free of mean dogs and vehicles that will squash them.

 

If I'm going to spend in the high $200s I don't want there to be things that still need doing that cost lots.  If it's going to be in the low $200s it has to have location and great bones.  I want a house with the X factor. Hardiplank properties need not apply.

 

I don't want much (ha ha), but I do want a house I'll love living in, because once I have mortgage, I won't have a life, so I'd better like like hanging out at home!  But finding the right house at the right price - that is the challenge!!

 

It concerns me greatly that my pre-approved mortgage term is rapidly coming to an end.  It worries me that I haven't found a house and that the Reserve Bank is beating its chest repeatedly over an over inflated housing market.  The Reserve Bank wants banks to cut back on lending to people like me who do not have a 20% deposit.

 

On Sunday John Key announced National's new housing policy.  It comes into action on 1 October.  In some cities and regions they have upped the top cost of a house for those buying using their KiwiSaver and HNZ subsidy.  But not in the Waikato (outside of Hamilton).

 

They expect you to have a 10% deposit.  For a $300,000 house that means I'd need a $30,000 deposit.  I'll be at least $7,000 short currently. 

 

The newspapers claim that Auckland is the big winner out of National's latest housing policy.

 

But I feel for those purchasing in the Auckland market.  While it is great news that they are pushing the house cost up from $400,000 to $485,000 for Auckland first timers, the government (typically) has moved the deposit goal posts, because an Aucklander will need $48,500 at least for their deposit.

 

Labour of course have said that the government has come up short with its tweaking without addressing the drivers of the housing problem.  The Greens are calling the policy "poly filler".  Even first home buyers are saying that they doubt the changes John Key is bringing in will make any difference to the situation.

 

There are some good reasons for that.

 

Currently Auckland needs 30,000 new homes built each year to keep up with the population that requires housing in Auckland.  However, only 4,000 houses annually are currently being built.  That's well short of what is required.

 

In Australia they give each new first home buyer (on application according to criteria like here) $7,000 to put towards paying for their new home.  In some states they offer an additional $4,000-$8,000 if it is a new build.

 

Is anyone actively encouraging new builds in New Zealand?

 

It is a bit hard with developers land banking and councils dragging the chain on consents for new housing developments (which National has announced changes to combat this).

 

Then there are the supposed overseas buyers coming in and buying up our housing stock to rent out, or the property "mum and dad" investors that have been encouraged to build up their "housing portfolio" who snap up house after house.

 

We have a shortage of state houses.  Once upon a time a state house was usually accessible for the average family.  Not now.  It is well documented in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch (especially since the earthquake) the number of families double bunking with other families, living in garages or living in one room at a boarding house due to the high cost of market rents and availability of rental accommodation. 

 

Recently David Shearer and several Labour colleagues did a tour of empty state houses in the wider Wellington city region.  There has been a 40% increase in vacant state houses since the beginning of the year.  Yes some are damaged, some don't meet the earthquake code... but maybe these should be a priority to be fixed.  It seems that Housing New Zealand and the government are dragging the chain on ensuring there is sufficient housing for those in need of it.

 

National's Amy Adams announced as part of the budget an injection into social housing of $16.4 million.  However when we have councils selling their social housing stock it negates any gains and causes bigger problems.

 

I think what we have here is a lot of chest puffing over how to solve the housing problems we have in New Zealand, but no one has hit on the silver bullet. 

 

But as a first time buyer, what I would like to see is that we are treated fairly and not as the political football we are currently.  But right now it is just a cloud dream for too many of us first time buyers.