So after the environment minister said the 13th chapter was inaccurate, it gets released. How ridiculous is that?

How can anyone have any faith in a government which is so transparently incompetent. It’s good to read Simon Upton calling for the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment to take charge of the next report.

13: unlucky for some.

I wasn’t going to bother with this really. Who needs another dose of reality? But there is an interesting story here.

The Greens have come out with a story about a buried chapter in this report. They claim that Chapter 13 was pulled due to a very negative slant on the dairy industry. It pointed to dairy as the “largest cause of environmental decline” in New Zealand. Anyone who likes to swim in their local stream, river or lake could attest to that.

The dairy industry is also one of the biggest earners for the country. There you have it. New Zealand is no more immune to political lobbying than any other country except its pretty transparent. It’s hard to keep anything a secret here.

The Greens propose that this report come under the auspices of the Parliamentary Commissioner of the Environment rather than the government.

Yes to that!  The government simply cannot be trusted to be objective. Yes it’s a sad statement to make but that’s the way it is until we get a more distributed form of democracy and power.

If you can’t sleep then here is the link to the various reports.

I came across this new journal on basic income and thought it would be worth passing. there are many good and thought provoking articles available. What I have found interesting is this political slant given to some of them. Quite frankly who cares?

It actually falls neatly into and out of most of the political spectrum. Where it diverges is on the issue of control. Politics is all about who is in control whether Blue, Red, Yellow or Green or any shade in between. Basic income is about giving everyone access to the financial commons and allowing them the just get on with it. It isn’t a social policy its an expression of freedom and a right.

It will be interesting to see how this debate develops but I’m glad to see it taking on a more formal conversation.

Than you to Owen McCaffrey for this new political party for NZ focused on money and land reform. Recently born, it focuses on bringing in a land tax and money reform, issues that have been discussed widely on this blog.

Added to that is a citizens income, disestablishment of welfare, better infrastructure and importantly a compulsory health insurance.

It will be interesting to discuss these issues further. I may invite Owen to expand on them here. The name is a bit of a mouthful but that can be worked on.

It’s a very good start though.

Two interesting piece of news on the geopolitical spectrum caught me eye this week: Firstly Gordon Brown and his secret talks with other world “leaders” to establish a “new world order”. This will have the conspiracy theorists running amok with versions of the Trilateral Commission and Bilderberg Group stories. Suffice to say that the “New World Order” project has been going quietly in the background for over 30 years.

Alongside this is a new manifesto from top Pentagon, Nato and EU players, past and present. The premise is that a first up nuclear strike is a legitimate and warranted policy option. Their reasoning is that it will be impossible to control the proliferation of nuclear weaponry and that the best approach is to simply nuke those nations who might be a bit aggro with the odd nuclear warhead.

So that probably takes the Middle East, North Korea and other such spots off the tourist map for a while. Unfortunately this sounds like one of those crazy ideas that gets the green light. Time to re-watch “V for Vendetta” and “Children of Men”.

Brave New World and all that.

I guess the upside is that NZ property prices will hold up for some time.

I finally got round to watching the film “V for Vendetta“. Shades of 1984 and more recently Children of Men. It’s quite topical given the current issue of domestic terrorism and how to deal with it.

In New Zealand we are still experiencing protests against the mass raid on people suspected of unlawful activities under the Supression of Terrorism Act. What constitutes terrorism on a domestic scale? And more to the point how far can the authorities go in their protective capacities?

This is not an easy question to answer. Intelligence services are meant to forewarn and forestall any action against the State. This will always lead to a presumption of guilt even though an act may not have been carried out. This leaves a bit of a vacuum in the traditional legal process of innocent until proven guilty.

The authorities are stuck in a tight spot here. Blamed for not preventing an attack and blamed for arresting innocent people.

For activists of a more moderate nature this presents potential pitfalls. How far can you go? Certainly for activists with a bent for civil non-violent disobedience this can put them squarely in the firing line.

It seems to me that New Zealand is better than most. At least the media, with their general liberal bias, have no problem in reporting openly what takes place. In the US this may not be so easy. There is considerable concern over the loss of civil liberties and privacy for even the average citizen.

There’s no easy answer. That’s why governance and participation in the democratic process is so important. As long as there are clear sanctions against governments and those in power, through the ballot box, and freedom to air grievances then there is a balance.

However, when fear takes over then there is a big problem. If this is really happening in the US then one can only hope for some change and for the issue to be aired openly in the electoral debate.

Fear and freedom have a lot in common. You cannot be free if you live in fear.  Whilst I think we are still fortunate in NZ in our openness we still need to keep an watchful eye.

Meanwhile be careful out there on the 5th November