Posts by Hebe
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Speaker: Not even a statistic, in reply to Emma Hart,
Women like me, like Katrina, like Lucy, we’re right here, in this community with you. We’re sitting right here, talking about what’s happened to us. When it comes to rape and rape culture, we are your experts. We are. On these topics, we’re your Ngs and Edgelers. Give us the same respect for our knowledge as you would them in their areas of expertise.
Yes.
-
Speaker: Not even a statistic, in reply to Jackie Clark,
And Katrina, you have my love. Thank you for telling this part of your story. You never know where words will land, and on whom they will have an impact.
Katrina, Jackie says it well. Thanks for your courage.
-
Capture: See Into the Trees, in reply to JacksonP,
Nice ferns. I have an idea I would love Raglan.
-
Capture: See Into the Trees, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
Poor man.
-
Hard News: It was 30 years ago today, in reply to Mr Mark,
My cheekbones were high, my dark eyelashes were long and my hazel eyes were unusually pretty to the women-folk. It was a period in which I received an enormous amount of attention from the femme fatales and, so, strangely enough, I greatly miss it – despite the viciousness of the Friedmanite loons in power.
Lol. We may well have met.
-
Hard News: It was 30 years ago today, in reply to Grant McDougall,
at uni I wrote an essay on the fourth Labour gov’t and in one book (sorry, forgotten which one) a Labour MP was quoted as saying that the senior caucus was far too busy dealing with other policies and / or uninterested in economics that they just let Douglas have his way policy-wise, genuinely unaware of the implications until it was too late.
To quote Christine Keeler, he or she would say that, wouldn’t they?
There was enough published on the front page, in political news, in features, and also in his 1980 book “There’s Got To Be A Better Way” for every voter to know Roger Douglas’ views. Most people appeared to vote Labour in the belief that Douglas would be muzzled by the party – that he wasn’t real Labour and would be outnumbered by the rest so his ideas would not be taken seriously.
It was serendipitous for Douglas that the books were a dog’s breakfast when opened after Labour won: his 20 per cent devaluation was hustled through via TINA. That gave him the economic levers for the next few years.
It’s interesting reading views about the time written by the children of Rogernomics, and what is accepted as fact.
-
Capture: See Into the Trees, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
That's dreadful. The state of the roads will send many into survival mode. All the best Sofie to you and Steve and your community.
-
I'm not feeling that I'm being picky in expecting the police to investigate an allegation of a home invasion and rape against a clearly identified suspect, and in expecting my representatives in government to assist that investigation. Or at the very least not to actively block the investigation by colluding in helping the suspect leave the country.
This sequence attacks the heart of the country's justice system. Diplomatic immunity is clearly inappropriate.
Then for various news media to attack the complainant -- when she dares to tell the public about her treatment and why she believes it is unjust -- is beyond appalling.
Justice is for all, no matter their beliefs, or gender.
I'm not feeling relaxed about this.
-
Hard News: It was 30 years ago today, in reply to Euan Mason,
I welcomed the Labour government of 1984 without realising that, as one of my right wing friends puts it, “It was one of the best National governments we ever had”. Lange realised only belatedly what his Pandora box contained and by then he couldn’t close it.
On the contrary: Roger Douglas was open and clear about his agenda. I was working at The Dom as a sub-editor in 84/85, and spent a lot of the year before the election doing the op-ed and leader pages then news subbing. There was keen awareness of Douglas’ views on the direction in which to take the New Zealand economy. Repeated and lengthy analysis and counter-argument was published in the Dom at least.
This Wiki entry puts the sequence reasonably clearly:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogernomics#Douglas_and_the_Development_of_Economic_Policy.2C_1969.E2.80.931983At the end of 1983 there was a marked change in Douglas’s thinking. He prepared a caucus paper called the “Economic Policy Package” which called for a market-led restructuring of the economy. The key proposal was a 20 per cent devaluation of the dollar, to be followed by the removal of subsidies to industry, border protection and export incentives. The paper doubted the value of “picking winners” and saw only a limited place for government funding of economic development
Labour scrapped viciously about that paper. It beggars belief for Lange to claim he was unaware of Douglas’ “Pandora’s box”. Many believe that Lange was allowed to take NZ nuclear-free in return for Rogernomics.
I was buoyed by Muldoon’s exit – and it was one hell of a good ride working through it all – but I was somewhat less than starry-eyed about Labour and its potential for change. Lange and co were being talked up as ‘young’: my cohort saw them as old squares in suits, a bit less wrinkled than Muldoon’s rugby, racing and RSA men.
The Dom was electric the night Muldoon called the snap election; it was one of those nights that journalism hooks you in and you never quite come back. The Dominion editor, Geoff Baylis, was at the Governor-General’s media dinner at Government House with journalism grandees from around the country. He noticed mid-meal Deputy PM Jim McLay being given a message. McLay paled, and excused himself.
Baylis found the nearest phone and whispered commands to the sleepy Dom newsroom to get themselves up to the Beehive quick-smart with a snapper or two because big doings were afoot. And hold the front page. Thrilling all round.
-
Hard News: Going solar?, in reply to James Green,
I remember this article: I bored Beloved senseless about it. Where can the systems be obtained?