-
-
Donate – Register for Newsletter
-
Weekly Poll
Loading ...-
-
Your Views
-
-
-
Social Media
-
-
-
NZCPR CAMPAIGNS
-
In an op-ed in a Polish weekly I commented recently on a remarkable decrease of global temperature in 2008, and over the past decade. Not surprisingly the op-ed evoked a strong reaction from Polish co-workers of IPCC, denying the existence of cooling. Surprising, however, was that the criticism dwelled upon a “global climatic conspiracy”, and “colossal international plot”. I did not use these words nor even hinted at such an idea. The idea was probably apparent from the data and facts I presented, showing weaknesses of the man-made global warming hypothesis. Without irrational political or ideological factors, it is really difficult to understand why so many people believe in human causation of the Modern Warm Period, which was never plausibly proved by scientific evidence. Some of these factors I will discuss here.
On Saturday November 8th Helen Clark will be asking voters for their support as she attempts to win an election that would elevate her to the rarefied ranks of four-term New Zealand Prime Ministers alongside Richard Seddon, William Massey and Keith Holyoake. During the address in which she announced the election date, Helen Clark explained that the 2008 general election will be about “trust” - whether the public can trust a Labour Government led by her, or a National Government led by John Key.
Many years ago when I first joined the staff of a teacher’s college, education practice in the primary sector was dominated by the notion of ‘open-plan’. No more single-cell classrooms. Instead, there would be large, well-resourced, open spaces with several teachers offering their different expertise to a much larger, broadly structured group of students. At a Board of Studies meeting, early in my time at the college, someone (not me) asked ‘what were the supposed benefits of the model’, since there were some obvious disadvantages in terms of order and the quality of the learning environment. A couple of senior colleagues undertook to do the research. They reported at a subsequent meeting that there was little evidence that open-plan was better and (as the questioners had supposed) substantial evidence of disadvantage.
In this politically correct world that we now live, it is important to hear again the words of Voltaire which echo the essence of free speech – “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”. Increasingly our right to free expression is being eroded by the apparent rights of others who disagree with what we say.
There is currently a growing body of literature being produced by scholars in many parts of the world which suggests that traditional cannibalism – of the sort that was practiced by Maori in New Zealand – either never occurred at all, or that if it did, it was done to perform for Europeans, and was not a part of the true culture of those ‘performers’. This sort of historical revisionism seems to elevate the novelty of an academic position above what I have always considered to be the primary object of any historical endeavour: to try to move closer to what Gibbon termed ‘the naked, unblushing truth’ of the past.
I cannot remember a time when Parliament - our country’s highest governing institution – has been brought into such disrepute. And the Parliamentarians have only themselves to blame.
The major impediment to growth in New Zealand is our poor productivity performance. With the general election approaching, the New Zealand Chambers of Commerce ( NZCCI ) has just released its three-yearly Election Manifesto and we have decided to focus on the policies needed to correct this poor productivity performance. This document provides a pragmatic stance on business and economic policy issues for political parties to consider - both before and after the election – if we are to improve our productivity growth rate.
If the pundits are right, we could have an election within eight weeks. All around the country, halls which are traditionally used for polling booths have been booked for October 18th. With some public opinion polls showing that the gap between National and Labour is narrowing and tax cuts due on October 1st, many believe that Labour will be anxious to capitalise on the “feel-good” factor that tax cuts will generate.
National Radio reported a few days ago that Energy Minister David Parker was taken aback by the public backlash against the Government’s decision to phase out incandescent light bulbs. Associate Justice Minister Lianne Dalziel is known to be concerned about a similar adverse reaction against her proposal to ban liquor sales in suburban dairies. Last month, we witnessed the unusual spectacle of city streets being blocked by truckies protesting at an increase in road user charges – and the even more remarkable spectacle of the public and the media cheering them on, despite the inconvenience caused.
The release of the National Party’s welfare policy has brought a predictable clamour from the defenders of the present welfare system. Such was the protest that one could be mistaken for thinking National was proposing to abolish welfare entirely! Hardly.
