PARLIAMENT | PARTY | GRASSROOTS

Red Alert

The Sad State of Key’s Nation

Posted by Grant Robertson on January 27th, 2012

There is an old joke about the politician who dies, and arrives in heaven to find that market forces have taken hold, and that heaven and hell are offering one day trials so that he can decide where to spend eternity. The politician takes up the offer and spends a delightful, restful day in heaven listening to harp music. He goes down to Hell and has a great time partying, eating, drinking and generally having fun. He goes back to heaven and tells St Peter his decision’s made, its Hell for him. When he gets back there he finds none of the fun, but just a brutal, cold, barren landscape. He seeks out Satan, and asks what’s happened to the Hell he saw the day before, and Satan says, ” you’re a politician you should understand, yesterday we were campaigning, today we’re in office.”

In the election campaign we have just had, the paying down of debt and the return to surplus were big issues. The “show me the money” moment was just one where John Key brandished his credentials to lead us to the promised land of surplus by 2014-15. It was a certainty, and it could happen even earlier. Yet, six weeks on, the dampners are on. Key now says its only a “reasonable probability”. Another $1 billion have been knocked off the forecast. Truth is little is different in the challenging global environment now from when the promises were made, except the PM is not campaigning any more, he is in office. Not for the first time he gave the public the message they wanted to hear about economic growth, but now its time to lower expectations.

The so-called State of the Nation speech from the PM yesterday was a dull and miserable affair. Gone is the brighter future we were all promised just a few weeks ago. What plan there is has at is centrepiece more cuts to the public service. Regardless of the wisdom of those, they will be a drop in the bucket of improving the government’s finances.

No one is underestimating the challenge in front of the government. But what’s happened to the sunny optimisim of our PM? Actually there is every reason to be optimistic about New Zealand’s future if the government is prepared to do things differently. The world has changed, will the government? There is opportunity to reset fiscal and economic policy, and make the investments that will support innovative growing companies, grow our skills base and ensure that everyone reaches their potential.

But there was none of that in the speech. Not just a lack of economic vision either. And as Pita Sharples (yes, he is a Minister in the government) points out nothing on dealing with poverty or inequality. Nothing on the issues that need to be dealt with to unlock the potential of thousands of New Zealanders.

It was a defeatist, sad and tired effort. A bit like an old joke.

Tags: ,
Filed under: economy, inequality, national
28 Comments

Red

Posted by Clare Curran on January 24th, 2012

Though our aim divine/
The delivery is human/
A labour of love

A haiku about Red Alert dedicated to John Hartevelt

Tags:
Filed under: Red Alert
33 Comments

A nation of makers #8

Posted by Clare Curran on January 24th, 2012

The ODT reports today yesterday:

Dunedin-based technology company PocketSmith is one of six finalists in the BNZ Start-Up Alley competition.

The competition is to help grow New Zealand’s web and technology start-up businesses.

Pocketsmith has a competitive personal finance management tool that allows users to track their expenses.

Pocketsmith is part of the University of Otago’s Centre for Innovation Distiller community.

I first visited Pocketsmith at the Distiller about two year’s ago. They were starting to make an impact then. The Distiller is a group of people (they call themselves technopreneurs) who work on their own projects, but work co-operatively and sometimes collaborate. They share space, ideas out of their creative enviroment comes great ideas. They call it social entrepeneurship.

NBR wrote about them mid last year;

PocketSmith co-founder Jason Leong told NBR his company’s success was all down to the power of open source development, the software-as-a-service (or SaaS) model for delivering your product over the internet, and the viral power of social networking and professional community sites.

Read more about how they have become a success story here.

Good on them.

Tags: ,
Filed under: comms & IT, economy, internet
2 Comments

OIO on where the decision is at – inter alia

Posted by Trevor Mallard on January 23rd, 2012

On Friday they told most media the Crafar decision wasn’t with Ministers yet but Campbell Live filmed Friday morning had a document which we were told said it was.

Can’t both be true.

If the media were misled by the OIO then either the Chief Executive or the State Services Commissioner will undoubtably be involved in the future.

And why can’t the application and recommendation be made public. It just looks like Williamson has something to hide.

If there is some massive public interest in selling to people who can add no value we need to be told what it is.

It might be as simple as the Aussie bankers who stand to make $25m from the Chinese sale putting the pressure on Key. If that is the case they should be told to piss off.

Key said he was opposed to the sale to offshore interests pre election. His Ministers can stop it dead. They have all the discretion necessary.

The time is coming where we have to stop selling any rural and to foreign interests and have a debate about whether other land is sold or not.

As Key said – we don’t want to become tenants in our own land.

Tags:
Filed under: #ownourfuture
25 Comments

Destroy Dangerous Dogs

Posted by Damien O'Connor on January 22nd, 2012

It is about time we stopped pussyfooting around and advocated and implemented the destruction of any dog and breed of dog that is considered dangerous in New Zealand. No one is allowed to carry around a loaded gun and these dogs are just that. The defenseless children are the premanent victims of this outrageous situation. If you love dogs and have to own one get an intelligent but obedient retired working dog. And rid New Zealand of these dangerous weapons

Filed under: Uncategorized, democracy
47 Comments

What are the Crafar farms worth ?

Posted by Trevor Mallard on January 19th, 2012

$150m if you value them commercially with no added value. Landcorp.

$170m if they have the added value of including farms next door to established blocks already owned, especially if some of them are ancestral blocks. Kiwi landowners including Maori bid.

$200m + if you are trying to establish the principle that foreigners are able to buy any farms they choose to here. Pengxin bid.

I can understand why the receiver wants the highest bid.

But it is the government’s duty to ensure we don’t become tenants in our own country.

Tags:
Filed under: #ownourfuture
52 Comments

Bon voyage to more whanau in 2012

Posted by Darien Fenton on January 19th, 2012

There’s been a lot of baloney in the media recently about the role (or control) of unions in Labour and a view that by supporting fairness at work means Labour must be anti-employer or anti-business. Mind you, none of this is new, but it’s reached a new peak of hysterical comment from some on the right with the PoAL dispute.

There’s no mystery about Labour’s values when it comes to working people. Our  founding values are about decent Kiwi jobs, the right to a fair day‘s pay for a fair day’s work, the right to join unions and bargain collectively, the right to have a voice at work and the right to be protected from unfair or unsafe treatment at work. We believe that there must be a balance between work demands and family/community responsibilities.

This doesn’t mean business is harder to do – in fact decent wages and effective employment relations should enable New Zealand business to lift productivity, to perform well and to grow.

Labour supports decent work (which is also supported by the National government at the ILO) and fair incomes for all New Zealand working people  - whether in low or middle income jobs, dependent contractors or self employed.  I know that constructive workplace relationships are important and good management is crucial. I don’t believe all employers are “bad” and all employees “good”.  You may be surprised how much sympathy I have with sole operators and small business who can barely make ends meet.

Some of the workers who get the rawest deal are those who are not in formal employment relationships, or in unions, such as self-employed and dependent contractors. Labour has been active in trying to make improvements for these Kiwis, but there’s nothing on the government’s agenda that makes any difference to them and a whole  lot that will impact on all working Kiwis.

Consider these comments from backbench National Party MP Jami-Lee Ross :

Unions still occupy a privileged position in New Zealand’s employment law; a relic of the last Labour administration which has not seen significant overhaul for some years. Few non-government organisations can boast clauses in legislation specifically designed for their benefit. Despite only 18 percent of the nation’s workforce being unionised, trade unions can look to whole sections of the Employment Relations Act written exclusively to aid union survival through legislative advantage.

My question to Jami-Lee is whether the Minister of Labour, Kate Wilkinson, who likes to present her government’s approach to employment relations as “pragmatic” and “what works” agrees with Jami-Lee’s views.  I want to know if she thinks unions are “privileged” and “relics”.  If she does, she better tell Kiwi workers soon, and fess up to the ILO at her annual sojourn in Geneva this year that she doesn’t believe that unions are social partners anymore, leaving only employers and government – and that our government is opposed to international labour conventions and human rights conventions. That will be interesting.

National’s manifesto already boasts “reforms”, such as :

1. Minimum wage : consultation on the annual review has been completed and we can expect an announcement in February.  $15 an hour?  Don’t think so.

2. The government’s plan for a “starting out” rate for 16 and 17 year old workers and also for 18 and 19 year olds who have been on a benefit may be one of the early pieces of legislation in front of parliament.

3. National’s policy commitments to weaken collective bargaining – no requirement to conclude, no requirement for workers to be on the terms and conditions of a collective agreement for 30 days where one exists, and the effective abolishing of multi employer agreements, along with allowing pay reductions for “partial” strikes – such as go-slows, work to rule etc and a review of constructive dismissal.

Then there’s all of the rest :

Bills carried forward from the last parliament : Meals and rest breaks legislation (Kate Wilkinson said this was urgent a couple of years ago, but it’s been bumped) and Tau Henare’s Secret Ballot for Strikes members’ bill, which is neither needed nor wanted. The hardy annual of Easter Sunday Shop Trading will also be up again, via a National members’ bill.

The inquiry into the treatment of workers in Foreign Crewed Vessels in NZ waters and the Pike River Mine Commission of Inquiry will report back this year  - both shameful NZ scandals that arose because of deregulation and declining standards for workers.

The ACC portfolio and the “opening up to competition” will be a big issue; Labour MP Andrew Little will take that on for Labour.

And I’m becoming more suspicious about another agenda – not spelled out in the National Party’s manifesto.  The recent productivity commission report, for example, made some recommendations that, if taken up by this government, would have a huge impact on New Zealand working people.

Bottom line : none of this will help the wages of Kiwi workers catch up with Australia. None of it will stop the weekly exodus across the ditch.

I’m sorry, but unless we see some something other than the old hoary chestnuts of cutting workers’ rights and pay from National soon, you should get ready to say goodbye to more of your whanau.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: ACC, Employers, Health and Safety, Work and Wages, Workers, jobs, union, value of work
14 Comments

Health Target Tinkering

Posted by Iain Lees-Galloway on January 19th, 2012

Yesterday, Tony Ryall announced he is tinkering with his narrow and simplistic health targets. The changes in of themselves are positive but the targets are flawed. Even the Medical Association thinks so.

Association chairman Paul Ockelford said the health targets were commendable, but the emphasis on targets was flawed.

The targets needed to work alongside other approaches, such as housing and education, that influenced people’s health.

“If these are not addressed we will continue to have glaring health disparities in our communities and a high prevalence of preventable diseases that affect not only quality of life, but life expectancy,” Dr Ockelford said.

The targets were “narrow and simplistic”.

“They do not give a full picture of how our health system is performing because of the difficulty of linking these targets to information about patient and public health outcomes.”

The real challenges for our health system are the projected increasing cost of delivering healthcare and the increasing prevalence of preventable diseases such as diabetes and heart disease as well as depression and anxiety disorders.  

Tackling both of these requires that a much greater emphasis be placed on keeping people well and preventing the need for costly treatments. This is desperately lacking in National’ approach to health.

To me, two of the most glaring omissions from National’s priorities are mental health and chronic disease management. The lack of resources to respond to people with low acuity need in these areas means they end up with much bigger problems than necessary and the taxpayer foots a much bigger bill than we ought.

Tony Ryall will enthusiastically point to short term output data that my look impressive now, but what is his strategy doing to improve long term health outcomes for our nation?

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Filed under: health
5 Comments

Farrar on censorship

Posted by Clare Curran on January 18th, 2012

This morning, this is what David Farrar blogged on the US SOPA Bill which was blocked by Obama:

My views are simple. No Government should censor the Internet.

Earlier this morning he was on Radio NZ commenting (in his role as right wing commentator)  on the NZ on Air fiasco saying it is:

 ”perfectly reasonable for programmes that NZ on Air fund to have small scheduling restrictions during politically sensitive periods.

So it’s ok to censor the broadcaster and use the government agency that funds it to restrict New Zealander’s access to well produced evidence-based documentaries that raise legitimate concerns about important issues facing the nation during an election campaign.

But we mustn’t censor the internet. According to Farrar.

Inconsistent. I don’t agree with the scheduling of many programmes on television. I certainly don’t think that politicians should be interferring in, when and if material can be shown on television during an election campaign. If the issue was lack of balance, then there are places to complain. The BSA and the Electoral Commission. That’s what should have happened.

NZ on Air should never have got involved in the issue. That they did, appears to be because of inappropriate politically motivated pressure.

Suggestions that publicly funded programmes should not be aired during an election campaign reveal serious cracks in our democratic process and must be resisted.

Tags:
Filed under: broadcasting, comms & IT, internet
80 Comments

Labour and the POA

Posted by Darien Fenton on January 18th, 2012

There’s been some chatter around about Labour’s position on the Ports of Auckland dispute.

At our core Labour believes that all Kiwis deserve decent jobs with fair pay, that they should have certainty around their work hours and conditions and their families need to know that they will come home safe and sound at the end of the day.

And while I’m at it, Labour will strongly oppose any suggestion that the Ports of Auckland be privatised. It is a public asset belonging to the people of Auckland, and needs to be kept for the benefit of future generations.

Sure, employers can seek reasonable efficiencies, effective labour utilisation and a fair return on investment. The Ports are an important part of our transport infrastructure and they need to be operating as productively and efficiently as possible.

But good faith bargaining and working together to find common ground is the way to achieve this, not wholesale redundancies and contracting out.

Labour is concerned about the increasing casualisation of the workforce in New Zealand. What this does is create uncertainty and stress for workers and their families – and, as we have seen, can cost lives.

Surely, we’ve learned something from the Pike River Mine tragedy about the folly of recruiting inexperienced workers and contractors into highly dangerous jobs and cutting corners on health and safety?

I’m worried that the pursuit of greater returns at the Ports of Auckland through contracting out will mean we could all be learning another tough lesson in a couple of years.

Stevedoring is difficult and sometimes dangerous work, and that should be recognised.

Three deaths at the Ports of Tauranga in the last 15 months should make us all question the safety of contracted out stevedoring firms who compete with each other for business.

No worker has died at the Ports of Auckland for 18 years.

Contracting out and competitive tendering is often used as a means to lower labour costs, through cuts to wages, reduced staff numbers, casualising work hours and cutting “red tape” such as health and safety.

Deregulation, short cuts and disregard for safety has already taken a terrible toll in some of our workplaces.

Let’s learn the lessons.

Tags:
Filed under: Health and Safety, Work and Wages, Workers, privatisation
32 Comments

iPredict – and why I post it

Posted by Trevor Mallard on January 18th, 2012

I post iPredict regularly because it is a VUW startup, sometimes has interesting inside information and because it gives the opportunity for a general political discussion based on changes or trends.

I know Farrar is a Director, presumably on a pro bono basis, and that his mate Hooton does the PR. That means that one has to take the selection of issues priced and the media statements with a grain of salt. Most Red Alert readers are bright enough to do that.

To those who don’t like it I suggest you don’t read it. Here is this week’s advertisement:

Read the rest of this entry »

Filed under: ipredict
10 Comments

Another fortnight of Key’s kowtowing

Posted by Trevor Mallard on January 17th, 2012

I posted last week indicating that I thought that Landcorp should buy the Crafar farms, clean them up and on sell them to Kiwis.

A usually (90%+) reliable source has since told me that Ministers have recently been told that the company with the live bid is owned by the Chinese government.

They can of course afford to pay more because it is the thin end of the wedge – a strategic investment in a move towards vertical integration that would result in an even high percentage of value being added offshore. And of course the establishment of the beginning of a massive chain of farms – because the principle would have been accepted.

And Key is desperate not to offend by turning the bid down – as he indicated was likely pre election.

So look for a further delay in decision making until after to bid lapses in a fortnight.

All because Key hasn’t got the gonads to say no.

And to make it clear, it is my view that there is no reason whatsoever to sell these farms offshore. To anyone. Landcorp could probably hock off a couple of its non core farms and then buy Them all using its very strong balance sheet to raise debt finance for the balance.

Tags:
Filed under: #ownourfuture
35 Comments

How important is IP to our economy

Posted by Clare Curran on January 17th, 2012

Last night a proposed law passing through the United States Congress was blocked by Obama.

California congressman Darrell Issa, an opponent of Sopa, the Stop Online Piracy Act, said he had been told by House majority leader Eric Cantor that there would be no vote unless there is consensus on the bill.

Congressional leaders are preparing to shelve controversial legislation aimed at tackling online piracy after president Barack Obama said he would not support it.

The tech community has fought hard to stop Sopa and a rival bill, Protect IP, also known as the Enforcing and Protecting American Rights Against Sites Intent on Theft and Exploitation Act, or the e-Parasite act. Websites including Reddit and Wikipedia are planning to “go dark” on Wednesday in protest against the legislation. Issa said he remained concerned about Protect IP, which will go before the Senate on 24 January.

But both bills now look severely damaged after the White House came out firmly against their biggest proposals at the weekend.

“Let us be clear – online piracy is a real problem that harms the American economy, threatens jobs for significant numbers of middle-class workers and hurts some of our nation’s most creative and innovative companies and entrepreneurs,” the White House said in its first official comment on Sopa and Protect IP.

However, the White House said it would not support legislation that “reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risks or undermines the dynamic, innovative global internet.”

Though it doesn’t get a lot of coverage in mainstream media, and it’s not a well understood issue, the battle between the entertainment industry and the technology sector has been raging for some time. (Rupert Murdoch has weighed into it in the last few days as well).  The biggest manifestation of that battle has been the row over online piracy and the punitive laws  that countries across the world are being pressured to comply with. Laws that include a provision to disconnect people from the internet from infringing copyright. Laws concerning patents are also under the spotlight.

In New Zealand, there’s a law waiting to complete its passage through parliament which excludes computer software from being patented. The Commerce Committee recommendation, which was accepted by the then Minister Simon Power, believed this would free up NZ software developers to be innovative without fear of being trampled on by big patent suits. Copyright was seen as the appropriate form of protection for software (which is built on code), along with music, books and other creative endeavours. But that law has sat on our books for more than 18 months.

There have been worrying signs for a while that New Zealand’s creative and innovation sector could get caught up in the international battle being waged.

In December, Paul Matthews, the head of the NZ Computer Society wrote a column about how how changes to NZ’s patent law could be caught up in the negotiations going on for the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA).

I’ve been watching the SOPA issue develop over the summer with concern. Others may have views about the implications for NZ and our part of the world.

Thankfully Obama has stepped into the fray. The issues are complex. Online piracy is an issue. But it’s mostly an issue because ordinary people can’t access the material they want easily through legal means. Sensible laws are required to protect creators and their intellectual property. Laws and policies are also required to help promote new business models that use the enormous power of the internet to give people more access to services and material and to help spark innovation.

What lies behind this is about who controls the internet. Thankfully the White House seems to understand that.

The two bills aim to tackle online piracy by preventing American search engines like Google and Yahoo from directing users to sites distributing stolen materials. The bills would also allow people and companies to sue if their copyright was being infringed.

The White House expressed concern about both these elements and about passing legislation that threatened the openness of the internet. In the online statement it said any new legislation must be “narrowly targeted”.

Vikram Kumar, the CEO of InternetNZ, a respected and thoughtful think tank, also wrote about the two US laws in yesterday’s NBR. He warned of threats to our national interest by:

laws written by powerful corporates and expeditiously passed into law word-for-word.

He was echoing the sentiments of internet guru Lawrence Lessig,  who spoke at last year’s Nethui in NZ about the corruption destroying the United States’ democratic foundations.

Chris Keall from NBR wrote about the streetfight battle in yesterday’s NBR.

These issues aren’t always easy to get your head around. But like most things they have some principles at their core. Ownership of intellectual property is one. Intellectual property  means exclusive rights to a variety of intangible assets, such as musical, literary, and artistic works; discoveries and inventions.

Yesterday I got a tip off that the mysterious visit to our shores by a high powered US delegation of congress and senate reps last week wasn’t just about a first-hand look at Christchurch’s earthquake damage. Talks were also being held about the TPPA. Who with? and what was the substance?

I think New Zealand needs to consider its own best interests and the importance of our intellectual property and innovation to our own economy. Quantifying that should be a priority. We can’t sell ourselves short.

We are a lot more than a high protein export nation.  I’d like more discussion about this issue across the parliament. The copyright debates we’ve had in the last few years are just a subset of a much bigger economic discussion. What is the value of our IP to our nation?

Tags:
Filed under: #ownourfuture, comms & IT, economy, internet
18 Comments

The passing of Ben Hana, aka Blanket Man

Posted by Grant Robertson on January 16th, 2012

BlanketMan3_sized

I felt a real sense of sadness hearing the news of the death of Ben Hana, known to most Wellingtonians, and others as Blanket Man. Like many Wellingtonians I had a few conversations with Ben over the years. Early on in Cuba Mall when he used to talk a lot more, and more latterly when he enjoyed the sunshine in Courtenay Place, with less to say, but still a nod of acknowledgement.

Ben was a polarising person. For many he was an iconic figure, part of the unique and quirky Wellington. A number of people had close relationships with him, and supported him with gifts and food. The gift of an IPod a few years ago saw him rocking out even more in his own universe. For others how he looked and acted was affronting and challenging and they felt threatened by him.

He was the face of homelessness in Wellington. It is true to say that he shunned the idea of moving off the streets in recent years, and indeed of taking on much in the way of formalised help. He was beyond that, and wanted none of it. But this is a misleading view of the experience of the homeless. For most of the homeless in Wellington it is not such a choice, and indeed for Ben earlier in his life as things went wrong, and he became unwell mentally, and his addictions developed I am sure he would have liked and benefited from some more support and somewhere to call home.

Homelessness is not necessarily about sleeping on the streets, its about not having a stable place to live, to be your base. It is often associated with mental illness and addiction, and there is far too much of it in our city. A number of organisations, especially the Downtown Community Ministry do a great job supporting those who are homeless, but we are falling short.

We have a real shortage of emergency accomodation, affordable accomodation and accomodation for those with mental illness. The different agencies involved are getting better at working together to find solutions, but still need to be more coordinated and flexible if we are to truly address these issues. Its not just government either, the community has a responsibility too. Many private landlords will not take on those who have a history of mental illness. I will be continuing to advocate and organise on these issues in Wellington. This is a nationwide issue though, and I believe it merits a select committee inquiry, as Labour has pushed for in recent years.

For me the best memorial for Ben would be that we as a city and community come together to say that we will look after and look out for all the residents of the city. We will make it a priority to deal with homelessness and the issues that lie behind it. We will respect those who are homeless for who they are, and work with them to give them real choices that will address the issues that cause their struggles and put them back in charge of their own lives. RIP Ben.

Filed under: housing, wellington
10 Comments

A nation of makers #7

Posted by Clare Curran on January 16th, 2012

Profiled in today’s Dom Post Nathan Li’s online application Educa, which allows parents to see and comment on their pre-schooler’s e-portfolio – an online record of their development, including photos and videos, created by teachers at her preschool.

Li developed Educa with input from early childhood teachers and parents, and launched the web application in April last year.

22 pre-schools using it so far. They are hoping to expand  into Australia.

Wish this was available when my kids were in pre-school.

We need more Nathan Li’s.

Tags: ,
Filed under: comms & IT, economy
7 Comments

Tenants in our own land – the Crafar decision is pending

Posted by Trevor Mallard on January 13th, 2012

John Key said last year :-

“As a general and broader principle I think New Zealanders should be concerned if we sell huge tracts of our productive land.

“Now, that’s a challenging issue given the state of the current law and quite clearly it’s evidentially possible and has been achieved that individual farms can be sold. Looking four, five, ten years into the future I’d hate to see New Zealanders as tenants in their own country and that is a risk I think if we sell out our entire productive base, so that’s something the Government will have to consider.”

Let us be absolutely clear. John Key can ensure the farms stay in NZ hands. English can reject the sale. He has grounds.

There is an alternative ragtag group of buyers around. But my preference would be for Landcorp to buy, bring the farms up to acceptable environmental and vetinerary standards and flick all those that don’t form a logical part of Landcorp’s ongoing operation onto Kiwis. Preferably sharemilkers not corporates. That is Landcorp’s principal role – farm development and sale. They could probably sell a few they currently hold to help finance the purchase.

Filed under: #ownourfuture
30 Comments

How to win

Posted by Trevor Mallard on January 13th, 2012

Bainimarama v Kim Jong-il

Filed under: humour
No Comments

Become an MP – lose your right to comment on policy

Posted by Trevor Mallard on January 11th, 2012

I’m slowly working my way back from the summer break. Not spending much time looking at blogs but had my attention drawn to one by a green who uses the psudenom Zetetic on the Standard.

He starts off by stating the obvious – that the next Labour government must focus again on employment – but then denies the right of members of the Labour Party to have policy ideas on how do do some things better and to discuss them.

He doesn’t like the idea that I suggest it is worth thinking about the tax benefit interface as we develop policy. And that every now and again I link to speeches and articles that have a different approach.

He suggests a conspiracy with John Pagani who I haven’t seen for nearly a month and haven’t had a conversation with for three.

And he suggests that Labour MPs should only be allowed to have one post a week. Channelling Whaleoil.

Well I’ve got news for Zetetic – people in Hutt South elected me and they didn’t do it with the expectation that a person who prefers to be anonymous would dictate what I say and how often.

Filed under: #OpenLabourNZ, democracy
49 Comments

ICT curriculum to change in UK

Posted by Trevor Mallard on January 11th, 2012

Guardian reporting major change in UK curriculum for ICT. Interesting as it appears to be a knee jerk reaction to a Guardian campaign.

Probably not that relevant here. UK curriculum generally very prescriptive and lacking flexibility and space for teacher initiative available in NZ.

Compulsory open source does seem a bit of a contradiction..

The teaching of computer science in school is to be dramatically overhauled, with the existing programme of study scrapped to make way for new lessons designed by industry and universities, Michael Gove will announce on Wednesday.

In a speech, the education secretary will say the existing curriculum in Information and Communication Technology (ICT) has left children “bored out of their minds being taught how to use Word and Excel by bored teachers”.

Instead he will, in effect, create an “open source” curriculum in computer science by giving schools the freedom to use teaching resources designed with input from leading employers and academics, in changes that will come into effect this September.

The announcement follows pressure from businesses critical of a shortage of computer-literate recruits – a deficit highlighted by a Guardian campaign launched this week.

Filed under: education
15 Comments

Christchurch

Posted by Trevor Mallard on January 8th, 2012

Just spent a couple of days there. The second time beyond the airport since February. And then in was just for a quick meeting.

We went for a wander around the edge of the central city. Even worse than I had expected from TV and colleagues.

Experienced the 4.7 and 5.2 overnight Friday. And the smaller ones that aren’t reported any more. Frightening.

Talked with a woman whose water connection to the house had survived September and February but broke on Saturday morning. Stoic but scared.

Brilliant feedback on the work MPs are putting in – and have been for 16 months now.

But there are thousands of people down there who are working incredibly hard to make life better for others in circumstances that most of us could not tolerate.

We need to find a way of acknowledging that.

Filed under: Canterbury Earthquake
8 Comments

« Older Entries