Sexual abuse stats are the huge & uncomfortable elephant in the room for men

 Yet again violence against women is in the news. Yet again we are hearing the age-old and, quite honestly, tired response of “not all men”. Personally, it is a phrase I am sick of!

To the men reading this, are you going to tell me that you are so threatened by the issue that you happily throw all kinds of BS up like “not all men” in an attempt to deflect and avoid dealing with the truth? 

And yes, I said the truth. Don’t believe me? Statistics don’t lie and anyone trying to argue “not all men” has to contend with the statistics. What statistics are those? There are many we could look at, but today I just want to focus on two specific ones.

Firstly, in New Zealand, 1 in 3 girls may be sexually abused before she turns 16 years old. Most of this abuse (90%) will be done by someone she knows and 70% will involve genital contact (see Sexual Abuse Statistics). Then, connected to that, approximately 1 in 5 New Zealand women experience a serious sexual assault. For some women, this happens more than once. 1 in 3 girls. 1 in 5 women. Uncomfortable reading isn’t it? That means that men are abusing women and girls at atrocious rates. And before you claim that these statistics can’t be real, let’s look at the second statistic.

By conservative estimates, 92% of rape complainants are telling the truth*. 92%! There have been multiple studies done on this across the world and they all arrive at the same conclusion - that the overwhelming majority of women who claim to have been sexually assaulted are telling the truth. Combining this statistic with the first makes for truly grim reading. The use of “not all men” suggests that these sexual assaults are done by a small minority of men who are outliers, social misfits who are not adhering to the norms of society. This simply isn’t true as these statistics show. 

The reality is that we are living in a society designed for the elevation and gratification of men. It is a society where men are the powerbrokers, and while we here in New Zealand have had three women Prime Ministers, they have had to achieve that fighting tooth and nail, with men constantly questioning their sexuality, slandering, and infantilising them.

So what can we do?

Firstly, we need to confront the reality that far too many men are committing sexual assault at alarming levels instead of trying to bury our heads in the sand with “not all men”. We need to realise and admit that sexual assaults and rape are not a problem for women, but rather they are a problem for men. It is men who rape, it is men who sexually assault, it is happening at alarming rates, and it must stop now!

Secondly, we men must change our responses from a defensive “not all men”. I believe the change required is a simple one but one which is radical. We need to listen to and believe women. It is the first step, and requires little effort on our part but has a huge impact on changing the narrative.

But we can’t stop there and this next step is a challenging one. We need to stand up to our mates, our colleagues, our brothers, dads, sons, nephews, uncles, and grandads when they say something sexist or derogatory towards women. Why? Because our culture is steeped in this sexism. This sexism is considered normal and the normalisation of reduced women to sex objects is a major contributor to the number of rapes and sexual assaults that women and young girls are experiencing at our hands. 

Finally, we need to educate our fellow men. Change happens when we share what we have learned. This includes teaching our sons, nephews, and the young men we are in contact with. The reality is that a rapist looks like you and me, but equally, a change-maker (I prefer feminist but I know some men bristle at that term) looks just like you and me as well. Let’s teach the next generation the importance of consent first and foremost. If you don’t know what consent looks like, then get educated. A great first place is this video, made as part of an excellent series targeted at teenagers called The Real Sex Talk.  

It isn’t going to be easy and we all will stuff up from time to time. But, and here is the important thing, making these changes will have a significant positive impact on the lives of all women in our society. And that is the point. Making this society a better and safer place for all women in Aotearoa.

--------

* One of the findings of the 2009 report labelled Responding to Sexual Violence: Attrition in the NZ Criminal Justice System by Sue Triggs, Elaine Mossman, Jan Jordan and Venezia Kingi and commissioned by the Ministry for Women

----------

Today The Guardian UK posted an episode on their Today in Focus podcast labelled "Men! What can you do to help fight misogyny?". I personally think it is an incredible podcast and challenges many assumptions, including the language we use around sexual abuse. I highly recommend listening to it.

How long is too long New Zealand?

Auckland’s War Memorial Museum, ANZAC Day 2016

Yesterday was ANZAC Day and I took my kids to the Dawn Service at Auckland’s War Memorial Museum. It's become an annual trek for me.

I prepare the night before, pinning my father’s medals to the jersey I will wear in the morning, making sure they go on the right hand side. I pin a poppy to the left chest of my jersey and below that is pinned a Mururoa Nuclear Veterans Group badge.

My Dad’s medals 2016 ANZAC Day.

I am proud of the service my father gave to his country. He was called upon in 1973 by then Prime Minister Norman Kirk and he, like his shipmates, answered that call. As a nation we were proud of them. Heading off to French Polynesia in the middle of winter to be New Zealand’s official on-site presence as France commenced another round of nuclear testing.

They were sent there to remind France that New Zealand and other South Pacific countries did not approve of what the French were doing. By sending our sailors there we forced the world’s spotlight to be shone on France and their nuclear testing at Mururoa.

That spotlight proved too bright and like startled bugs when a rotting log is lifted, the French government hastily retreated, taking their nuclear testing underground. We had won! 

Our boys had shown the world the shameful and embarrassing, not to mention scandalous, actions of the French government and military on that little Pacific atoll. It was a victory for right and justice and became the foundation upon which our nuclear free stance has been built.

HMNZS Otago is welcomed home after her Mururoa duty. 

However in the ensuing years, as a nation, we have forgotten what happened in that fateful winter of 1973.

We attend ANZAC Day commemorations and we say “we will remember them”. But that is becoming simply lip service.

How can we stand there on ANZAC Day and repeat those words when we have forgotten a whole campaign?

We remember South Africa, both World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, Malaya, Thailand, Falklands, East Timor, Kuwait, Afghanistan. All rightly so.

But to neglect the Mururoa veterans as we have, does them a disservice. 

It says to them that their service and sacrifice (and the ultimate sacrifice that many of their shipmates have made) was for nothing.

It says that their medals mean nothing to the country that have dished them out. The neglect in the annual ANZAC Day services turns those medals into little trinkets not worth the ribbon that they hang off.

It’s almost as if we as a nation don’t want to remember them because it is deemed too hard. It forces us to ask of ourselves whether we willingly sent our men to be exposed to nuclear radiation. So instead we collectively say, “here’s a fancy medal. Now go away. We don’t want to remember you”.

They are the forgotten heroes. They’ve had to fight for everything they have got thus far and there are more battles yet to come. 

Harsh words? Perhaps. But then these sailors are suffering and dying thanks to their service of their country. Health complications and cancers are common amongst these veterans and anecdotally, occur more regularly than the general population of their age.

During the annual get togethers their society organises, talk often turns to how the health of each veteran and their descendants is before the inevitable talk of who crossed the bar in the past year.

They suffer, we fail to remember or even acknowledge they exist. Norman Kirk promised those men that a grateful nation would remember them. Instead we have discarded them on the scrap heap of history.

It’s been forty-five years of neglect. How much longer will it take for us to get it right and properly acknowledge these heroes as we should?

----------------------

DISCLAIMER: I sit on the executive committee of the Mururoa Nuclear Veterans Group Inc as the co vice-president as well as the Media Officer. The group is made up of former sailors on the HMNZS Otago and Canterbury and the HMAS Supply, wives, partners and children of those sailors who served during the 1973 "tour". The group provides support and assistance to veterans and their families as well as continuing to ensure that the health of families and children (affected by the veterans service at Mururoa) are taken care of including generational testing to prove a link between nuclear exposure and illness. 

What's the Truth About Waitangi?

I’ve read and watched a lot of the media reports on Waitangi this year. As someone who worked full time in broadcast news till last year, and is now a contractor whilst studying, I am always intrigued and interested in how the media portrays and reports on our national day. After all, it is the way that many of us experience our national day and how we understand what goes on at the birthplace of our nation. I once thought that overall those reports were reasonably accurate and represented what happened up north. This year I finally had the opportunity to see for myself what happens and to be honest, I am deeply disappointed by how our national day is presented to us. I also don’t want to forget what I saw and learned while up there, so here are my personal reflections and observations of Waitangi Day.

I have been on a journey of discovery of late. I’m not sure when it began but a key moment for me was watching Whale Rider in Singapore where I heard snickering and laughter directed at Māori culture. It was then that I realised how much Te Ao Māori (the Māori world) had influenced me and become a part of who I am as a Pākehā New Zealander. It has laid dormant for years since then but has re-emerged like a sleeping volcano waking up over the last two years. So it was with a desire to learn more that I headed up to Waitangi with a Christian group called Karuwha Trust (in Te Reo Karuwha is “four eyes”, the affectionate nickname local Māori gave to Henry Williams the missionary who lived amongst them for years and who, along with his son, translated Te Tiriti into Te Reo) to learn more about what Waitangi is, what the significance of Te Tiriti is and how do the events of early February 1840 affect and shape us today and heading into the future?

My Waitangi journey was late in starting this year because I had a commitment on Saturday night, but in reflection it was the perfect time to go. As I weaved my way up SH1 from Auckland I prepared myself by listening to a range of beautiful songs either bilingual or completely in Te Reo. As I swung over the hill on the outskirts of Kawakawa, I saw a hitchhiker looking for a lift to Paihia. Normally I drive right on past - the voice of my father echoing in my head about picking up strangers. But I stopped this time to offer him a lift and what a true blessing it turned out to be. That was because he was a direct descendant of Henry Williams and he was heading to the same place I was. Our conversation was like the road between Kawakawa and Paihia, weaving and winding its way through history and the land but always coming back to the story of Te Tiriti, Henry and the iwi who allowed him to setup a mission station in the middle of their rohe.

After saying farewell to my hitchhiker, I helped out in the kitchen of Te Tii Marae as they prepared dinner for the hundreds of guests. Now in the national sphere Te Tii has a reputation of being the place of trouble-making. It is perceived to be where all the raruraru occurs. In the past protesters have thrown mud at politicians, aggressively confronted politicians, and one protestor even threw a dildo at a politician last year. However, to label the marae as the place of trouble-makers is to do it and the people there a huge disservice. The people I met and interacted with were beautiful, gentle and big hearted. They were serving and were grateful for the help that myself and others gave. They didn’t judge us on the colour of our skin but sought to look after us if others did. After all, in their eyes, were we their Kaimahi (workers) and they wanted to look after us.

The day ended with a three hour korero (talk) with a group of men who were equally on a journey - two Māori, one Pākehā. All on a journey of understanding better the significance of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and its impact on our nation. That was the first big take away - Waitangi is a place to learn, to understand and to grow. Those who are students and willing to sit, engage and listen are welcomed with open arms. Others are welcomed too, in the hopes that their trip to our nation’s birthplace will start them on a journey of learning and engagement.

The next day I had the opportunity to head up to the Treaty grounds themselves to observe the official side. I saw powhiri on Te Whare Runanga (“The House of Assembly” or more commonly known as the upper marae) on the Treaty grounds. I saw our Prime Minister, a woman, being allowed to speak from the verandah of the wharenui (meeting house). I heard her speak of working together, of changing things for all New Zealanders, of opening herself and her government up to be challenged, of wanting to earn the right that Nga Puhi had extended to her of speaking on the marae. I heard the words of one who had sat and listened and engaged for five days with locals, with iwi and with those at the front lines. I heard the spontaneous applause from the public who were simply observers. And I heard the kaumatua who responded to Ms Ardern’s speech with respect and who acknowledged the public - something out of the norm for that kind of gathering. At the end of proceedings, people emerged with tinfoil containers filled with hangi food and all on the Treaty grounds were invited to come and eat. Manaakitanga (hospitality) in a very tangible and practical way. That were the second and third take homes: change and manaakitanga. Waitangi is where the winds of change were blowing and that change was embedded in manaakitanga.

Everywhere I went I heard calls of “Kia ora”; “morena”; “hey bro!” People happy, some reconnecting after decades, some catching up since the previous year. I saw people highlighting their concerns in the Forum Team on Te Tii Marae, people eating, drinking (boy it was hot up there), swimming, sitting, and enjoying themselves. Kids (and some adults) ignoring the small sign on the bridge to jump off into the gloriously cool water below. Laughter, smiles, joy. It was all there. The fourth take away was celebration. Waitangi was swelling with celebration. Heading to bed that night early I went to sleep with gratitude and excitement in my spirit.

4:00am. In tents all around me alarms went off and zips were opened. Thus began the hikoi across the bridge to Te Whare Runanga. The dawn service was beautiful. Prayers offered, waiata sung, scripture read. The Māori bishop of Te Tai Tokarau led while other clergy prayed as did representatives of the Navy, Police and local government, MPs read scriptures and CIndy Ruakere (accompanied by Jay Ruka on guitar) sung beautiful Christian waiata before leading us all in a heart warming powerful rendition of our National Anthem. So I learnt the fifth take home: Christian heritage. Whether we like it or not, want to deny or embrace it, the reality is that the Christian faith played a huge part in the foundation of our nation. It was the missionaries who the Māori chiefs trusted, it was missionaries (and the members of the Clapham Sect back in England who were in the Foreign Office) who saw Māori as their equal and saw the importance of an agreement between tangata whenua and the Crown to prevent the exploitation of Māori by the increasing numbers of British settlers moving to New Zealand, it was the missionaries who translated the negotiations and then Te Tiriti, it was the missionaries who traveled the length of Aotearoa convincing iwi and hapu of the importance of signed Te Tiriti. Whilst there were wrongs and injustices done in the name of the faith, we cannot deny the desire and passion of the likes of Henry Williams, William Williams, Edward Williams, William Colenso of wanting to do right by Māori (see https://nzhistory.govt.nz/people/henry-williams for a brief overview, but I highly recommend Jay Ruka’s book “Huia Come Home” and Keith Newman’s “Bible and Treaty” to learn more).

Having my time in Waitangi come towards a conclusion with the PM’s BBQ breakfast - following in Nga Puhi’s steps in manaakitanga - before involving myself with the celebrations and also having time to reflect on what I would take home from Waitangi was the perfect way to say farewell to the deeply significant place that Waitangi is.

So what will I be taking home and trying to put into practice after Waitangi? Seeking to learn, understand and grow. As a Pākehā I truly believe that that requires us to get off the pedestal that we have been placed on by our forebears, and sit at the feet of our Māori brothers and sisters, elevating them to the place of being a true partner (as Te Tiriti was original intended to provide). I do not believe that we can truly advance as a nation until we embrace and listen to tangata whenua with grace, honour, love, respect and humility. I learned that we are in a period of change as a nation. That we have an opportunity to do things differently from now on and if done with what I mentioned above, will steer us into unchartered but beautiful waters of true reconciliation, true partnership, real investment in each other and surrounded and infused with manaakitanga. I learned that what happened at Waitangi is something to be remembered and celebrated. After all, it was a radical covenant between two peoples which was unheard of at the time. Yes it has been ignored, primarily by Pākehā and the government, in the years since (the land wars were a direct result of the British ignoring Te Tiriti and just taking land), but it is still worth celebrating. And I learned that our Christian heritage is a part of that story and needs to be included in the remembering and celebrating.

I truly believe that things are going to get better and better for Aotearoa if we continually seek to keep Te Tiriti at the heart of all we do. After all, as a man I hugely respect said, the Treaty is like a marriage covenant. A healthy marriage is one where a person puts aside their desires and wants to allow room and space for the other’s desires and wants. A true marriage sees both parties serving the other to create opportunities for them to be all that they are created to be. That is what we should be doing. If we grasp that then the world is our oyster and we can guide the world into true partnership and reconciliation. Kia Kaha whanau.

A quick addition note: Check out the video on this link. It shows well what Waitangi is about. https://tehiku.nz/te-hiku-tv/haukainga/6437/another-waitangi-video

The Morning After the Night Before

Yesterday was Election Day here in Aotearoa NZ. I, like many of you, watched with interest to see what the next three years will bring. Here are my key observations from last night.

1. Low Voter Turnout:
This one stunned me. 66% of eligible voters voted in this year's election. Only two-thirds voted, which means for one-third of eligible voters either they don't see how politics affects them, they don't believe in the political process or they don't feel that their vote can make a difference. I have to admit that I thought this year we would see an upturn in participation. I headed along to the Labour Party campaign launch to check it out and was amazed that there was a line of people stretching from Auckland Town Hall down to the Civic Theatre! The Town Hall was full, the Q Theatre (next to the Town Hall) bar was full and a theatre upstairs was opened up and that was full too. I've seen a constant flow of university students voting early. People wanted to talk politics and it seemed everyone had an opinion. Now some so-called pundits (aka pro right wing Matthew Hooten who seems incapable of saying a good word about the left but is still used to give analysis) say this isn't a problem for the country but a problem for Labour and the Greens to solve. I disagree. You cannot have a strong democracy without good participation. On the basis of the numbers from last night, National, as the party who won the majority of any party on the day actually only won 30% of the potential vote. The combined efforts of Labour, NZ First and the Greens only won 32% of the potential vote. Is this truly representative of New Zealand? I'm not so sure. But at the moment I don't have answers on how we increase our collective participation. One thing I am sure of though. We as a nation, need to improve our participation in our democratic process.

2. Smear, Scare and Fear was the winner:
I like good robust political debating. It is part and parcel of politics and how we can see parties policies head to head. However, what I don't like is outright lying and deceit. We saw it with the claims by Family First and a down syndrome group around Jacinda Arden's stance on abortion. But worse than a couple of small pressure groups lying and deceiving, was a major political party using it as a deliberate ploy to win votes. For the record, National's continued rhetoric that there was a huge hole in Labour's budget was a lie. National's claim that Labour would tax everything was a lie. The traditional rhetoric that National are good with the books while Labour are irresponsible is also a lie. Not one leading economist backed Steven Joyce's claim that there was a hole. Regardless of their political persuasion the economists backed Labour's budget as being slightly on the tight side but by far and away totally above board. Key economists like Shamubeel Eaqub reminded us that taxes pay for things like our health system and our education system. He also told us that we are one of the lowest taxed nations in the OECD. We get off pretty lightly. We were also reminded of the number of taxes introduced by National in its 9 years in government. There were quite a few. Finally treasury figures show clearly that Labour are just as astute with the purse strings as National claim to be. In fact in comparison between the 9 years of Helen Clarke's government and John Key's government, it was Helen Clarke's that reduced our government debt down to something like 7 billion. Currently it stands at 80 something billion and seems to be climbing everyday (yes two earthquakes in Christchurch have affected our economy, but there is more to the spending than just rebuilding Christchurch). But as the old adage goes, don't let the facts get in the way of a good story. At least that's what National pushed and we as a collective bought into the narrative. Instead of calling them out on their tactics we were happy for National to smear Labour with lies. We allowed National to scare us into thinking that anything Labour and particularly Labour-Greens was bad. We allowed National to dictate the narrative and we voted out of fear. The negative tactics won. In fact they've been winning for a while now, so much so that we shrug our shoulders and say "but that's just politics". I don't agree. I think we can do better. I think we should do better. And most certainly we should expect better from those who want to run our country.

3. The Māori Party shocker:
This will be talked about as one of the key aspects of this campaign and election. The Māori party will not be in Parliament for the next three years. My personal opinion is that they have suffered from being in a nine year coalition relationship with a party that doesn't seem to care about the same things that the Māori Party does. Under the National-led government of the last nine years, homelessness has increased, child poverty has increased, the queues for food parcels have increased, while housing affordability and home ownership rates have significantly reduced. Māori are over represented in the negative side of these areas and it looks like the constituents have had enough. It's a shame because I honestly believe that New Zealand politics are weaker without the Māori Party. Can they do a Winston next election and make a political comeback? Who knows, but I hope so.

4. Labout pat yourselves on the back ... but you still have work to do:
The party swing percentages to Labour across the country were a fascinating watch. Throughout the night the Electoral Commission released figures and percentages and whenever they did the swing percentage was also published. It showed in many places a double digital swing to Labour which is a good sign for them but also for our form of democracy and a positive voter engagement with the left. We need Labour to do better than they have in the past, but Labour cannot sit on its laurels yet. Of much concern for the leadership of the party are six seats: Napier, New Lynn, Palmerston North, Port Hills and West Coast-Tasman. All six electorates were won by Labour candidates. However, the party vote in these electorates feel in favour of National. That has to worry the Labour Party and it is something they will have to rectify by the next election.

5. Could we see a truly MMP government?
Our form of government is mixed member proportional. It is meant to give us a clearer, more fair system than what we had under First Past the Post. Now after 20 years of MMP, we might get a government that is truly MMP. What we've had to date is the party with the biggest margins on the night tends to form government with a couple of small parties joining in. That majority party tends to dictate to the smaller parties how things will be run. Now we face the very real prospect of a truly MMP government where the next best three combine to form a government. Collectively, those parties in opposition did win the election on the day. Now we have to wait and see who is the better negotiator to form government. This is quite a common thing in countries with MMP so it is nothing we need to be scared about. We have three strong parties with strong ideals who could decide on policy and be forced to work together for good of the country. Can they put aside their differences and focus on what unites them? Who knows. But one thing is for sure, it will be an interesting time.

So hang in there Aotearoa. We don't have a clear winner. We'll have to be patient. At the moment all we can do is speculate, calculate and wait. This election is far from over.

---------------------------------------
NOTE: I have learned, thanks to some people I follow on Twitter, that the voter turnout didn't account for the specials which are expected to take the turnout to 78% (I was basing my original comments on pundits and journalists I trust who may have jumped the gun). This is only slightly higher than 2014, so still low in comparison to previous elections. The concern about low turnout still applies, as over 20% (1 in 5) eligible voters didn't cast their vote. Thanks to those who helped clarify this for me.

Compulsory Te Reo, Implicit Bias and Privilege

Finally it’s happened. A political party has had the courage to put one of the biggest wrongs in this country to right. It seems pretty innocuous at first glance. But the Green’s announcement to make Te Reo compulsory for all students from Year 1 to Year 10 is a game shifter and the reaction to the announcement is a strong reminder that we still have a long way to go in Aotearoa. In fact it shows that implicit bias and privilege are still strong and prevalent in our society. So strong that many people can’t see the damage that both of them consistently inflict on New Zealand. The reality of that sobered me up very quickly and it saddens me.

What do I mean by implicit bias and privilege? Implicit bias, also known as unconscious bias, is a set of presumptions, thoughts and ideas of which we are unaware but which is can be easily become a default way of thinking without us realising. An example of it was in the news recently when Sir Bob Jones referred to Māori as fat and lazy in his attack on beggars. Or less confrontational is the perception that we all start on the same page and if Māori simply worked hard they could be successful (for a helpful test on our implicit or unconscious bias click here). Privilege, meanwhile, is simply elevating one race over another. More than likely that’s a “white” majority dominating a minority, and for those of us of European extraction, it is an invisible privilege. A great insight into invisible privilege in Aotearoa came from Sacha Norrie four years ago. The reality is that Pakeha in New Zealand are in a privileged position and we need to recognise that and seek to change it. We also need to challenge the implicit bias and privilege (mild forms of racism) when we encounter them.

So for all the people who commented on the Green’s announcement saying “no way”, “only make it optional”, “it should be up to Māori alone to learn”, “it’s not my language so why should I learn it?”, “it’s a dying language so what’s the point?”, “we should make more useful things compulsory before Māori”, I say you may be entitled to hold that opinion but it is wrong, racist and shows a complete and utter disdain for our history and the Treaty of Waitangi. It’s you sitting on a pedestal  of superiority. It’s high time us Pakeha got down off the pedestal.

So is there a point in making Te Reo compulsory? Absolutely! Are there advantages? Definitely! Firstly, it is an official language of this nation. We all have to learn English at school so why neglect Te Reo? Not only is it an official language but the Treaty of Waitangi was signed by two signatory parties - English and Māori. It is time we elevated Te Reo to the place that English has held by itself for over 150 years. Not only would it be recognising, honouring and fulfilling the Treaty promises, but by making Te Reo compulsory, we as a nation will grow closer together. Learning Te Reo will see the future generations understand Māori thinking and view points better than we do now, leading to greater appreciation and respect. Also it will show to Māori, the indigenous people of Aotearoa that they, their culture and language are accepted and embraced. For too long they have been ostracised, isolated and abused simply for being Māori. It was only a few generations ago that children were physically punished for speaking Te Reo at school. By embracing Te Reo as a language we validate Māori. Finally, studies show that bilingual children have greater opportunities in life. Being bilingual makes learning a third, fourth or even fifth language easier. I can’t think of a better start in life for our children and grandchildren.

So, for all non Māori in this beautiful land, it’s time to acknowledge the privileged position we have held in the past and it’s time to set the wrongs of history to right. By making Te Reo compulsory for our children and learning it ourselves, we have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Let’s embrace this idea and encourage the other political parties to get on board too.


———————————————————

For a great resource on issues of race and racism, I have found the On Ramp Podcast immensely helpful. Each episode is short - normally around 15-20 minutes and are created for an American audience but those outside of the US can learn plenty from it as well.

Only for Profit? The Commercialisation of Aotearoa's Natural Heritage

The Tongariro Alpine Walk, Tongariro National Park

Walking the Heaphy Track in Kahurangi National Park

It was with great dismay and disappointment that I read on Radio NZ that four key tourism leaders are mooting the idea that the Great Walks be privatised. Personally, this is one of the worst ideas around. Forget the fact that very rarely have we seen successful examples of privatisation in this country in recent history (think rail, think Solid Energy), the reality is that some things should never be taken out of public hands and the Great Walks, as part of our National Parks is such an example.

Our Great Walks are a national treasure. All of them are situated in National Parks and as the Department of Conservation puts it, "contain some of most treasured wilderness areas". The National Parks were established for the benefit, use and enjoyment of the public. They are part of our national, natural heritage. Our first National Park was established after Ngāti Tūwharetoa gifted the three mountains of Tongariro, Ngāuruhoe and Ruapehu back in 1887. The nine Great Walks (a tenth will be added in 2018 as a living memorial for the men who died at Pike River Mine) are our opportunity to experience the wilderness of our land through accessing our National Parks safely, without damaging the unique landscape and wilderness that they are situated in. They are not designed to be used for profit and that is the sickening thing about this proposal.

Powelliphanta, Kahurangi National Park

.

So what if the Great Walks don’t make a profit? We as a nation have become so obsessed with money and profit that we forget some things are priceless and should never be reduced to their money-making potential. If anything, for the sake of the landscape and our heritage, we should be cutting back on the amount of people who access some of these Great Walks, not looking at more ways to bleed the countryside for more money by exploiting the natural resources we have.

I think if Ngāti Tūwharetoa could have foreseen the walking highway that Tongariro in particular has become, perhaps they wouldn’t have gifted the mountains to the people of Aotearoa. Having tramped

A normal day on the Tongariro Alpine Walk during peak season.

both the Northern Circuit (a 3-4 day circuit around Mt Ngāuruhoe) and the Tongariro Alpine Walk I have been shocked at the amount of people who traverse this mountain (many ill-equipped with a considerable number every year requiring rescue or airlifting off the track) and how poorly not just visitors, but Kiwis treat this beautiful taonga. I have walked off the mountain at the end of the day with rubbish that had been simply discarded by people traversing this maunga. We don’t deserve these gifts. And Tongariro is a glimpse into the future if privatisation of our Great Walks occurs.

I firmly believe that profit ahead of conservation never works. This would be an absolute disaster for our native flora and fauna, for our heritage, for DoC, for us all if the government ever took this proposal up. Our National Parks are a taonga from those who have gone before us for those who will come after us. We in the present are simply stewards, guardians of that treasure. Let’s make sure that we hand that taonga over in a state that is the most natural and pristine it can be. 

Lake Angelus in the Nelson Lakes National Park

The Destiny of Tax Exemption

This week, like many, I was disgusted by claims from Brian Tamaki that earthquakes are caused by sin, and in particular homosexuality. Whilst the comments were a small part of his talk, it was still wrong. The outage that followed was understandable and justified. I even understand the calls to remove the tax free status from Destiny, with organisers of the petition calling the church a "hate group".

Yet, while I understand and agree with the outrage I am concerned about the petition and will not be signing it. Not because I don't agree with the sentiments of the petition organisers, not because I feel uneasy about the way money donated to Destiny is spent and how a pastor and his wife can live such extravagant lifestyles while people who attend their church are struggling, but because I feel it would set a dangerous precedent which could be harmful for a number of churches and charities throughout the country, the majority of which are doing amazing work that warrants the tax-free status they currently utilise.

In the wake of this outrage I came across a tweet by Peter Dunne, United Future MP, former Minister of Revenue and current Minister of Internal Affairs (the department responsible for the running of the Charities Services and therefore the department that signed off on Destiny’s charity status). Being someone who has worked in politics for a number of years I would think he would be slightly more careful and cautious, but it seems his outrage got the best of him:

  

Curious, and slightly alarmed I re-tweeted his message, asking the question of how it might work: 

 

I was somewhat surprised to get a fairly immediate response:

This got me curious on a few counts. 1. If Destiny has failed the charitable purpose test, then why is it still able to claim tax free status? 2. If promotion of religion is not a charitable purpose, then  how can most churches claim tax-free status, and 3. How would you go about applying a religion test to churches?

I set out to find the answers through some research. Of particularly help was the Charities Services website, where you can search a database of registered charities. There are a number of sectors available, one of which is Religious Activities. So religious activities are permitted under the Charities Act, but many churches don’t just provide religious activities. Whilst that may be the main activity, they also provide many other services that play a significant role in our society (for example, care, counselling, facilities for the community). Looking on the database, Destiny provides those services as well. So, according to the Charities Services database, Destiny meets the charitable purpose test that Dunne claims it fails. It is upfront that its main activity is to provide religious services / activities. In addition to that main activity it also provides a number of listed activities that help the community in which Destiny lies in.

But what of my third question: How to apply a religion test to churches? According to Peter Dunne, it would be based on history, tradition and theology. However, despite Mr Dunne’s comment, it isn’t as clear cut as that. How long a history does a church need to have? 10 years? 20 perhaps? Or is it more like 100 or 200 years plus? And again with tradition and theology - how do you measure these? What traditions do you set as a benchmark? Many pentecostal churches are often new and sit outside of an established tradition. And what theology? An obvious starting point would be the Apostles’ Creed, but after that it gets messy. It’s the reason we have many different denominations. Finally, who would decide how to measure these definitions - the government? If so, that is state run religion and something we want to stay far far away from. A group of clergy? If so, which clergy from which denominations? And what of shrines, mosques, temples and the like for New Zealand Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus etc? The implications are much much wider than just a few churches.

I was concerned about where this might be heading so asked Dunne for clarification. He replied: 

Dunne’s comment highlights the danger in this petition and the precedent it could set. We have a very robust and strong charity sector in New Zealand. Many charities would cease to exist if the rules changed. Organisations already have to abide by guidelines in order to receive their tax-free status. Peter Dunne is wrong to claim that Destiny doesn’t fit the criteria. Changing the rules to exclude one organisation could do irrevocable damage to many churches and charities as well as the parts of the community at large that they help. We as a society don’t want to see that happen. So while I understand the outrage and the disgust over the horrible, theologically questionable and morally reprehensible comments of Brian Tamaki, I cannot endorse the petition. There is too much greater good at stake.