State housing in New Zealand is a mess and it is killing our fellow Kiwis. Poor maintenance and lack of investment has resulted in this embarrassing situation. But first a bit of history.
The concept of state housing was introduced to the country in the 1930s by the first Labour government led by Michael Joseph Savage. The idea was to provide housing for those that were living in inner city "slums" who, despite a nationalisation of the Mortgage Corporation offering low cost mortgages, were unable to purchase their own homes and move out of the slums. The government wanted to not just provide housing, but also wanted to stimulate jobs and manufacturing. The homes were to be made for NZ products as much as possible. All the houses were built in new suburbs as the government felt it would be too expensive to build in the inner city and they believed that children were best raised in suburban sections rather than the inner city streets. Most of the houses were detached dwellings with enough land for the tenants to grow vegetables and/or own some animals. So the point was to help people and create spaces for families. It was a helping hand for people.
Fast forward to today and the state houses are no longer the helping hand they were created to be. This current government have sold off a lot of the state housing stock. Of those that remain, many are old and not up to any housing standard.
In July this year Housing Minister Nick Smith announced changes to the Residential Tenancies Act that would strengthen the act and force landlords to install ceiling and underfloor insulation. They have 4 years to get this done. Failure to do so will see the landlord prosecuted under the act.
Then this wek, after a series of stories on the poor condition of some state houses and after Labour suggested the dividend the government received from Housing NZ should be re-invested in improving state housing John Key ridiculously tried to lay the blame on Labour's doorstep saying, "It is a joke for the Labour Party to come here and talk about this. They
ran the housing stock down. They should hang their heads in shame". What is disappointing about this comment from John Key is that it is a red herring. Both major parties are equally guilty of the problem we now have with the state housing. Both have been in power over the last 3 decades and none of them have done much (if anything) to improve the standards of our state housing. What John Key did was try and score political points as if this was a game. Well, Mr Key, this isn't a game. This is serious and needs addressing NOW!!! New Zealanders are suffering because of years of no investment in the state housing stock.
The reality is that too many of our state houses are cold, leaky, mouldy, old and in desperate need of either serious investment in renovation or demolishing completely. To try and attribute blame avoids the issue altogether.
Housing New Zealand, and by proxy the government, is the worst landlord in the country. The standard of the state housing stock is disgusting. Far too many have been poorly maintained. Yes, Housing NZ have some new housing stock but there are still many of its housing stock that was built in the 1950s. It has no insulation and walking into one of the houses feels like walking into a mouldy version of a timewarp.
Nick Smith's announcement last month got me wondering. If the government is strengthening the rules in order to force landlords to insulate and plans to prosecute serious breaches then surely Housing NZ should be top of the list? State houses run by Housing NZ are the classic example of poorly maintained homes with serious breaches. That is why we are hearing more tragic stories of people dying as a result of where they live. Our state housing stock is slowly killing our fellow Kiwis. It is that simple. It is also an embarrassing reflection on our governments (successive governments over numbers of years) as our representatives that this has been allowed to happen.
So what should be done? Well, as much as John Key mightn't like it, what Andrew Little suggests makes a lot of sense. Re-investment into our state housing needs to take place. Selling off the housing stock is not the solution. There will always need to be state owned housing to help those most in need. But just because they are in need doesn't mean they should be treated this poorly. They deserve decent housing as much as they rest of us so money spent in insulation and heating is worthwhile.
In fact, there is a growing body of research that shows that an investment in making our homes warmer and drier results in a multitude of savings in the long term including saving on sick days taken, less pressure put on our health system which means the system is freed up for the more needy cases.
I know change can take place. I also know that it can be done across the political spectrum. It has happened before on this very issue when National and the Greens worked together to bring to fruition the Greens warm housing policy. Unfortunately, whilst many home owners took up the offer, not as many landlords did and worse, the government's own stock was only fractionally done. Shame really.
So, come on John Key. Come on National. Stop trying to score political points. Start fixing the problem now. It isn't important whose to blame. What is important is getting rid of the mould and dampness in our homes. Show the way for private landlords. We as a society can turn this problem around. It's time you led the way.
Thursday, 27 August 2015
Tuesday, 11 August 2015
Where are the artists and designers?
So the flag consideration panel have voted for their top 40 flag designs. What a disappointing let down that was. No originality from most of them - one is essentially the same as what we have now, simply changing the background to black and some koru design to the Union Jack in the corner. A bit farcical that some of these designs have made the top 40 to be honest.
Unimaginative too. It seems that for many whose designs made "the grade", they seemed to want to get John Key's tick of approval so threw a silver fern in there. Really? And then there are those that threw both the silver fern and the southern cross in for good measure. Talk about cluttering the flag.
Now don't misunderstand me. I am keen for us to change our flag. I want something that represents us as a nation. I have been keen on a flag change for a number of years now. Having lived overseas I have had people ask why we and Australia have the same flag. No doubt it is confusing. And as a lesson in history shows, our current flag was not even something we as New Zealanders chose. It's origins come from the Imperial Colonial Naval Defence Act of 1865, which ruled that all ships owned by a colonial government must fly the Blue Ensign with the badge of the colony on it (see http://www.nzflag.com/history1902.cfm). So, we have a flag based on the Royal Navy ensign with a few stars thrown in.
But getting back to the "top 40". The disappointing thing about the list is that there is no design that is something that makes you go "wow!" They are either a slight variation on a theme or an interpretation of what people think John Key wants. There is not enough boldness. Also there are too many that are just simply too hard to replicate. A flag should be bold, stand out from a crowd and symbolise the nation. It should also be easily recognised in the distance and in the wind. For the reason of replication I personally would dismiss all silver fern designs. Now before people get up in arms, try drawing a silver fern. Not easy is it? If it is a challenge to adults, how hard is it for a child? That would discount 12 flags. Throw in the koru inspired Union Jack and we have culled the "top 40" to 27.
In fact of the designs that have made the "top 40" only two really stand out for me - Huihui or Together (https://www.govt.nz/browse/engaging-with-government/the-nz-flag-your-chance-to-decide/gallery/design/20157) and Land of the Long White Cloud (https://www.govt.nz/browse/engaging-with-government/the-nz-flag-your-chance-to-decide/gallery/design/30754). Huihui is my favoured of the two although I would like to change the blue to a different shade of blue and maybe change the read too. However, it is bold. the koru connects our flag to our land and it is easy to replicate as well as stand out from the crowd.
An alternative which marries the tradition of the southern cross with the Tino Rangitiratanga is this one - taken from Gareth Morgan's blog (https://garethsworld.com/flag-page/)
Unimaginative too. It seems that for many whose designs made "the grade", they seemed to want to get John Key's tick of approval so threw a silver fern in there. Really? And then there are those that threw both the silver fern and the southern cross in for good measure. Talk about cluttering the flag.
Now don't misunderstand me. I am keen for us to change our flag. I want something that represents us as a nation. I have been keen on a flag change for a number of years now. Having lived overseas I have had people ask why we and Australia have the same flag. No doubt it is confusing. And as a lesson in history shows, our current flag was not even something we as New Zealanders chose. It's origins come from the Imperial Colonial Naval Defence Act of 1865, which ruled that all ships owned by a colonial government must fly the Blue Ensign with the badge of the colony on it (see http://www.nzflag.com/history1902.cfm). So, we have a flag based on the Royal Navy ensign with a few stars thrown in.
But getting back to the "top 40". The disappointing thing about the list is that there is no design that is something that makes you go "wow!" They are either a slight variation on a theme or an interpretation of what people think John Key wants. There is not enough boldness. Also there are too many that are just simply too hard to replicate. A flag should be bold, stand out from a crowd and symbolise the nation. It should also be easily recognised in the distance and in the wind. For the reason of replication I personally would dismiss all silver fern designs. Now before people get up in arms, try drawing a silver fern. Not easy is it? If it is a challenge to adults, how hard is it for a child? That would discount 12 flags. Throw in the koru inspired Union Jack and we have culled the "top 40" to 27.
In fact of the designs that have made the "top 40" only two really stand out for me - Huihui or Together (https://www.govt.nz/browse/engaging-with-government/the-nz-flag-your-chance-to-decide/gallery/design/20157) and Land of the Long White Cloud (https://www.govt.nz/browse/engaging-with-government/the-nz-flag-your-chance-to-decide/gallery/design/30754). Huihui is my favoured of the two although I would like to change the blue to a different shade of blue and maybe change the read too. However, it is bold. the koru connects our flag to our land and it is easy to replicate as well as stand out from the crowd.
An alternative which marries the tradition of the southern cross with the Tino Rangitiratanga is this one - taken from Gareth Morgan's blog (https://garethsworld.com/flag-page/)
Whakapehapeha
Which
means “proudly” in te reo. Paul’s design incorporates elements from both
flags and quite cleverly brings in a brand new colour – green – to
symbolise our land and a new beginning.
Basis
is bringing together traditions of Southern Cross and more recent Tino
Rangatiratanga symbols (reversed to reflect long white cloud or sea, as
well as a fern) – but adopting new colour (green) uses in neither to
symbolise our land and new beginnings.
Designed by: Paul from Canterbury
It stands out. It is simple and easily replicable.
But enough of the designs. The concern I have and it was re-enforced by the selection of a "top 40" is this is being treated as some sort of "winner takes all" talent contest. "Text now but remember texts cost 50c!" It has been reduced to a popularity contest. Where were the designers and artists on the panel? Yes, the panel says designers and artists were consulted, but there was no obligation to listen to what they suggested. However, to have a designer or an artist or one of each on the panel makes sense and should be done as soon as possible.
Failure to do this right will result in two possibilities. One, we keep the flag we have. Two, we get lumped with a design that is unimaginative, boring and dumb. We had a chance to this well and properly but I feel we are doing this the wrong way which is sad and also a waste of money.
Saturday, 1 August 2015
An Open Letter to Tim Groser about the TPPA
Dear Tim,
Thank you for representing New Zealand in Maui this last week or so during the latest round of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement negotiations. It cannot be easy trying to negotiate with the likes of the US, Canada and Japan over trade issues, particularly when it comes to dairy and intellectual property rights.
However, it was very concerning to hear you speaking in the subsequent press conference of investing too much of your time into the negotiations to date to walk away. Your use of this type of language is quite alarming. Are you prepared to sign New Zealand up to the TPPA come hell or high water? What if there are little to no benefits to New Zealand at all? What if signing the TPPA will result in our dairy industry struggling? It's concerning because you seem to be putting ego ahead of what is best for our country, even conceding that you don't feel " ... emotionally in the space of wanting to leave the party".
Please Tim, don't be so bullheaded. Yes you have invested a lot of time, blood, sweat and tears into these negotiations (as well as a lot of money from the public purse in order to travel and stay at multiple rounds of negotiations). Yes, you even wrote the first paper on the agreement. I get that you may feel personally invested in these negotiations and that as a country we have played a significant role in this trade agreement from the very beginning. But is it still worth it?
The more we hear about this agreement the more people are speaking out against it. And those who are speaking out are not just some fringe elements from what your party's leader has referred to as the "loopy left". Rather the voices that are becoming more and more vocal are the voices of business, economic professors, medical doctors, as well as a multitude of everyday normal New Zealanders.
Tim please remember that your time on this will not be wasted if as a country we walked away from the trade deal. There are countless examples in science and research where people were convinced of something but after years, even decades of study and research found that what was initially thought has been proven wrong or too dangerous. Spending time on this trade agreement is not justification enough to continue to push it through if it is fundamentally going to be damaging to our country.
Also concerning is your reference to "winning the war". This isn't some conflict to win. Perhaps you are feeling very emotional and tired but using language like this is not helpful for anyone. The opponents of the deal want to have transparency so that in our democratic nation we can all have a say about the agreement. What is so wrong with that? Surely if there is nothing sinister or shady about this deal, make it public so we can all decide on it. What we are hearing is that the TPPA will erode our nation's sovereignty, make our ability to honour the Treaty nigh on impossible and give far too much power and control to big multi-national corporations. If this is wrong, show us. Put our minds at ease.
Tim, please consider what the best thing for our country is and if needed, have the courage to walk away from a trade deal that threatens our very right to govern ourselves. Please do not sacrifice our nation's sovereignty or our ability to honour the Treaty for a few more markets opening up. It's not worth it.
Thanks,
A concerned voter & average Kiwi.
Thank you for representing New Zealand in Maui this last week or so during the latest round of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement negotiations. It cannot be easy trying to negotiate with the likes of the US, Canada and Japan over trade issues, particularly when it comes to dairy and intellectual property rights.
However, it was very concerning to hear you speaking in the subsequent press conference of investing too much of your time into the negotiations to date to walk away. Your use of this type of language is quite alarming. Are you prepared to sign New Zealand up to the TPPA come hell or high water? What if there are little to no benefits to New Zealand at all? What if signing the TPPA will result in our dairy industry struggling? It's concerning because you seem to be putting ego ahead of what is best for our country, even conceding that you don't feel " ... emotionally in the space of wanting to leave the party".
Please Tim, don't be so bullheaded. Yes you have invested a lot of time, blood, sweat and tears into these negotiations (as well as a lot of money from the public purse in order to travel and stay at multiple rounds of negotiations). Yes, you even wrote the first paper on the agreement. I get that you may feel personally invested in these negotiations and that as a country we have played a significant role in this trade agreement from the very beginning. But is it still worth it?
The more we hear about this agreement the more people are speaking out against it. And those who are speaking out are not just some fringe elements from what your party's leader has referred to as the "loopy left". Rather the voices that are becoming more and more vocal are the voices of business, economic professors, medical doctors, as well as a multitude of everyday normal New Zealanders.
Tim please remember that your time on this will not be wasted if as a country we walked away from the trade deal. There are countless examples in science and research where people were convinced of something but after years, even decades of study and research found that what was initially thought has been proven wrong or too dangerous. Spending time on this trade agreement is not justification enough to continue to push it through if it is fundamentally going to be damaging to our country.
Also concerning is your reference to "winning the war". This isn't some conflict to win. Perhaps you are feeling very emotional and tired but using language like this is not helpful for anyone. The opponents of the deal want to have transparency so that in our democratic nation we can all have a say about the agreement. What is so wrong with that? Surely if there is nothing sinister or shady about this deal, make it public so we can all decide on it. What we are hearing is that the TPPA will erode our nation's sovereignty, make our ability to honour the Treaty nigh on impossible and give far too much power and control to big multi-national corporations. If this is wrong, show us. Put our minds at ease.
Tim, please consider what the best thing for our country is and if needed, have the courage to walk away from a trade deal that threatens our very right to govern ourselves. Please do not sacrifice our nation's sovereignty or our ability to honour the Treaty for a few more markets opening up. It's not worth it.
Thanks,
A concerned voter & average Kiwi.
Friday, 31 July 2015
Trade, a Nation's Sovereignty and Economic Slavery
I have been following the progress of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement on and off for a few years now. Working in the broadcast media has meant I have been exposed to more information about it than the average Kiwi and what little I know and hear concerns me.
Let me say first up that I am not anti-trade. I think trade is a good thing and necessary to keep the economy going, help keep Kiwis in jobs and is important for New Zealand to survive in the world today. I also understand that many free trade deals are negotiated behind closed doors, and that there are good reasons for that. However, from what little is coming out about the TPPA, there is genuine cause for alarm.
One thing that concerns me is that once signed into the agreement, as a nation we cannot sign out of it. Surely there should always be an exit clause. Imagine signing up to a job where there is a clause stating that once signed, you are locked into that job for the rest of your life! There is a word for that - slavery. If this clause is indeed in the agreement this potentially locks us as a country into a system of economic slavery, where we lose our rights to economic freedom and choice.
I am also significantly concerned about how medical costs will increase under the agreement. There have been many articles about how Pharmac, our national drug buying agency, is hated by big pharmaceutical companies and how the TPPA will undermine the agency's very existence by stopping it from getting the best deal on medicines for all New Zealanders. See http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11488237 and http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1507/S00504/real-cost-of-pharmac-betrayal-revealed.htm as examples. As an asthmatic I rely on regular use of medicine. Pharmac's ability to get good deals on asthma medicine is passed onto people like myself and I for one and pleased they do. Life is financially hard enough without watching my medical bills go through the roof because of the TPPA.
One of the things that the National led government has used as a justification for being involved in he TPPA is that it will open up markets for our dairy industry - one of the pillars of our economy. However, as the negotiations enter into their final stages, many economists and industry leaders are speaking out, saying that the TPPA will actually be disastrous for our dairy industry - see http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/dairy/70707583/dairy-deal-disastrous-as-tpp-talks-near-end
So, this so called free trade agreement that we will be locked into will see an increase in the cost of our medicines and will negatively affect the biggest industry in our country. And then there are the potential threat of our country being sued by big businesses for "anti-competitive policies". In fact, all that is on offer at the moment is all negative for New Zealand and almost no positives. Come on John Key et al, have some courage, listen to your constituents and back out of this deal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As another self imposed deadline looms there are more and more good articles out there regarding the TPPA and the potential problems it can cause for New Zealand. Here is an excellent summary from Radio NZ: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/280132/the-tpp-a-guide-for-the-perplexed and this good article from Al Jazeera about the impact of the TPPA on Pharmac: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2015/07/pacific-rim-free-trade-deal-high-price-150729064048268.html
All of this opposition against a trade deal that is supposedly in the best interest of our country and I haven't even touched on how the TPPA will cause major headaches with the Treaty of Waitangi.
Let me say first up that I am not anti-trade. I think trade is a good thing and necessary to keep the economy going, help keep Kiwis in jobs and is important for New Zealand to survive in the world today. I also understand that many free trade deals are negotiated behind closed doors, and that there are good reasons for that. However, from what little is coming out about the TPPA, there is genuine cause for alarm.
One thing that concerns me is that once signed into the agreement, as a nation we cannot sign out of it. Surely there should always be an exit clause. Imagine signing up to a job where there is a clause stating that once signed, you are locked into that job for the rest of your life! There is a word for that - slavery. If this clause is indeed in the agreement this potentially locks us as a country into a system of economic slavery, where we lose our rights to economic freedom and choice.
I am also significantly concerned about how medical costs will increase under the agreement. There have been many articles about how Pharmac, our national drug buying agency, is hated by big pharmaceutical companies and how the TPPA will undermine the agency's very existence by stopping it from getting the best deal on medicines for all New Zealanders. See http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11488237 and http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1507/S00504/real-cost-of-pharmac-betrayal-revealed.htm as examples. As an asthmatic I rely on regular use of medicine. Pharmac's ability to get good deals on asthma medicine is passed onto people like myself and I for one and pleased they do. Life is financially hard enough without watching my medical bills go through the roof because of the TPPA.
One of the things that the National led government has used as a justification for being involved in he TPPA is that it will open up markets for our dairy industry - one of the pillars of our economy. However, as the negotiations enter into their final stages, many economists and industry leaders are speaking out, saying that the TPPA will actually be disastrous for our dairy industry - see http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/dairy/70707583/dairy-deal-disastrous-as-tpp-talks-near-end
So, this so called free trade agreement that we will be locked into will see an increase in the cost of our medicines and will negatively affect the biggest industry in our country. And then there are the potential threat of our country being sued by big businesses for "anti-competitive policies". In fact, all that is on offer at the moment is all negative for New Zealand and almost no positives. Come on John Key et al, have some courage, listen to your constituents and back out of this deal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As another self imposed deadline looms there are more and more good articles out there regarding the TPPA and the potential problems it can cause for New Zealand. Here is an excellent summary from Radio NZ: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/280132/the-tpp-a-guide-for-the-perplexed and this good article from Al Jazeera about the impact of the TPPA on Pharmac: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2015/07/pacific-rim-free-trade-deal-high-price-150729064048268.html
All of this opposition against a trade deal that is supposedly in the best interest of our country and I haven't even touched on how the TPPA will cause major headaches with the Treaty of Waitangi.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)