Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: Local interest

81 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

  • Chris Waugh, in reply to Richard Aston,

    2015? Australasian Super-City. Prosperous. Healthy. Shining. Pumping. First class. NZ’s new capital?

    Convert all of Australasia into a Super-City which would be capital of New Zealand, even though all of New Zealand and Australia would be under the jurisdiction of the new Super-City? Geez, and I thought our current constitutional set-up was hard enough to get my head around.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 2401 posts Report Reply

  • Kumara Republic, in reply to Hebe,

    And anyone standing on the "Affordable" tickets round the country is linked with the Libertarianz and its fan club.

    The southernmost capital … • Since Nov 2006 • 5439 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe, in reply to Richard Aston,

    Jesse Butler has Auckland sorted. Week 7: he could come to Christchurch and sort it.

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2899 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Young, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Nope, sorry, Russell...not when it means that vulnerable Maori and Pacific Island whakawahine and fa'afafine/transgender and cisgender street sex workers will be adversely affected by any such prohibitionist legislation. Anti-soliciting bans haven't worked in France and New South Wales, so why do their backers assume that they will work here? I think you might want to read the excellent work that Dr Gillian Abel at the Otago University School of Public Health has done on substantive reasons why street sex work should not be prohibited.

    Granted, we need to concretely add gender identity to the Human Rights Act and get community groups involved in providing alternative vocational paths for some street sex workers, but I do not believe that the prohibitionist Manukau City Council (Regulating Prostitution in Specified Places) Bill is anything other than populist moral panic territory.

    And I refuse to abandon vulnerable Maori/Pacific Island transgender members of the New Zealand LGBT community.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 573 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Young, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    Thank you, namesake. The Prostitutes Collective is strongly opposed to child prostitution and the New Zealand Police could find no unambiguous evidence of underage children involved in street sex work at either Hunters Corner or Northcrest. There were street kids there, but they may not have been involved in street sex work. Added to which, the (former Manukau and now Auckland) Council refuses to let street sex workers work from council rental accomodation, nor does it open public toilets past midnight, nor does it seem to want to get tough with Manukau City centre pubs and other liquor outlets. Instead, vulnerable cis/transwomen are being blamed and victimised. How is this not a case of attempted social exclusion, Russell?

    Added to which, the defunct vigilante group Papatoetoe Reclaiming Our Streets used the same vigilante tactics as Wayne Hawker is doing down in Christchurch and ended up harrassing and frightening an elderly couple whose motor vehicle registration details were erroneously reported as having been seen frequenting street sex workers in this area.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 573 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Young, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Nope, sorry, once again, Russell. New Zealand is seriously behind the United Kingdom, all Australian federal, state and territory jurisdictions and Canada when it comes to including gender identity within our anti-discrimination laws. And according to Gillian Abel, many of the transwomen involved in street sex work may well be homeless and unable to access social welfare benefits, or want to risk losing their rental council properties if they work out of their rental accomodation.

    This is a moral panic. Some of the cis/transgender street sex workers are just as much Manukau residents as the other residents. And PROS went too far in terms of its borderline vigilante activity. Let's not slide down the slippery slope to Central/South American-style social cleansing, shall we? The Auckland Council needs to be told in no uncertain terms that social exclusion of street sex workers (and beggars too, for that matter) is unacceptable and will be vigorously fought by LGBT and other progressive Aucklanders.

    As for Rev Low, I'd be more impressed if she didn't confuse transsexuals with "transvestites" in that cited article. It's bloody transphobic and trivialises the lived experience of gender identity discrimination amongst transwomen in this context.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 573 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Young, in reply to Hamish N00nan,

    Hamish, thanks for reinforcing what the NZ Prostitutes Collective have been saying all along- the real problem in Manukau City seems to be the unwillingness of local body politicians to crack down on out of control liquor outlets and the antisocial activity that results from them,

    Actually, the real problem here is gender identity. Under the current Human Rights Act and despite the Crown Law Office opinion secured by Labour Attorney-General Michael Cullen, transsexuals are not included and are therefore subject to employment, accomodation and service provision discrimination. And many of the Hunters Corner street sex workers are whakawahine and fa'afafine.

    I refuse to either tolerate or condone a situation in which vulnerable Maori and Pacific Island trans/cis street sex workers are wantonly endangered in the context of their health, safety and lives merely because fundamentalist agitators, New Zealand First and certain Auckland local body politicians want to orchestrate a moral panic against them.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 573 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Craig Young,

    This is a moral panic. Some of the cis/transgender street sex workers are just as much Manukau residents as the other residents. And PROS went too far in terms of its borderline vigilante activity. Let’s not slide down the slippery slope to Central/South American-style social cleansing, shall we?

    I’m not suggesting that. It just seems to me that the only response to community concerns here is to tell the community to shut up. Do you honestly believe that everyone who feels worried there is a bigot? Is there any form of regulation you would countenance? Is there a way to recognise the rights of everyone in the community? I’m just looking for some kind of positive idea.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22843 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Young,

    Hamish's response to your question seems to suggest that there are specific pressure groups trying to make mischief over the issue and blow things out of proportion. I'm basing my observations on what the Ministry of Justice and its Prostitution Law Review Committee have stated in this context. In terms of regulation, the prohibitionists have yet to convincingly explain why existing public order statutes like the Summary Offences Act 1981, Litter Act 1979 et al cannot be invoked in this context. The Auckland Council certainly isn't willing to do so. Indeed, it seems to reject the Prostitution Reform Act 2003 out of hand.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 573 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Craig Young,

    I’m basing my observations on what the Ministry of Justice and its Prostitution Law Review Committee have stated in this context.

    And that MoJ report seems even-handed and comprehensive. Do you know how many, if any, of its recommendations for action by respective parties have been carried out since 2009?

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22843 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Young,

    The Prostitutes Collective conducted negotiations with good faith with the Auckland Council, but it seems that specific elements on that council were unwilling to compromise, or, as I've noted, adequately explain why existing statutory public order legislation is insufficient to combat any public order offences.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 573 posts Report Reply

  • Hamish N00nan, in reply to Craig Young,

    In terms of regulation, the prohibitionists have yet to convincingly explain why existing public order statutes like the Summary Offences Act 1981, Litter Act 1979 et al cannot be invoked in this context.

    I would say that is because there is virtually no police presence in the area. They turn up in a team once every few months and blitz the area for a few hours, but mostly they just drive past that particular strip at full speed. I don't see how a new law would change their resourcing.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 9 posts Report Reply

  • Kyle Matthews,

    I was really trying hard to stay with him until he got to “Exercising Auckland dogs.” In week 5 , WTF !

    I'll happily vote for a Mayor who says they'll turn up and walk my dogs for half an hour a day. Well worth my rates bill!

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Young, in reply to Hamish N00nan,

    And, in fact, the local cops oppose the Manukau anti-soliciting bill because it diverts their attention from intervention and resolution against violent crime in the area.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 573 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Aaaand ... the Generation Zero local voting guide for six cities is now published.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22843 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Wow! In the mayoral section for Auckland, Penny Bright is just a trainwreck:

    Does not believe climate change is man-made. Doesn't agree with a precautionary approach to dealing with the issues.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22843 posts Report Reply

  • Lilith __, in reply to Russell Brown,

    the Generation Zero local voting guide for six cities is now published.

    Oh - thanks! That's a big help.

    Dunedin • Since Jul 2010 • 3891 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz,

    I'm quite disappointed in the ability of pretty much all Wellington's candidates, including our mayor, to give a straight answer to a simple question. They seem to think that if they fudge enough, all the voters will think the candidates views match their own.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • Ian Dalziel,

    Attachment

    Meanwhile back in Chchch anti-graffiti campaigning councillor Arrant Clown, er, Aaron Keown continues his commercial graffiti onslaught...

    Keown is running for Council, Community board and the Health Board (and will want to keep his directorship as well) - he has already had enough problems getting to all meetings of Council and Health Board because of conflicts - greedy sod!

    Christchurch • Since Dec 2006 • 7948 posts Report Reply

  • Christopher Nimmo, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Aaaand … the Generation Zero local voting guide for six cities is now published.

    Hmmm... I don't know about any other city's candidates, but I hope nobody pays to much attention to a survey that turns up Bryan Pepperell as a preferred candidate...

    Wellington • Since May 2009 • 97 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Idiot/Savant has posted his Palmerston North election picks.

    Includes the council for that region, Horizons, who've just won an appeal over their water management plan. The Manawatu River is a filthy disgrace.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19735 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart,

    A couple of my friends are quite disconcerted to discover that a candidate for council in Featherston, whom they'd both already voted for, died this morning.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz, in reply to Emma Hart,

    Does that disqualify one? As opposed to be completely and utterly Upminster* which is a positive requirement.

    * several stops past Barking

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart, in reply to Rich of Observationz,

    Does that disqualify one?

    I’ll be honest and say I don’t know. Graeme? I know it used to be the case that the candidacy stood, and if the dead person won, you had another election, but that was when you had a voting day, not a voting fortnight. It would seem logical to me that in an STV election, her votes would simply knock down to the next preference, but I’ve no idea if that’s the law.

    ETA: Or I could do a quick google. Her votes "won't be counted".

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe, in reply to Ian Dalziel,

    I had the pleasure of giving him number 26 on the Health Board.

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2899 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.