Musicians as cultural icons: Peter Green

Guitarist and songwriter Peter Green died in London a week ago, and I have been going back through my Fleetwood Mac records, and Peter Green CDs since then. I have tried to find an iconic photo, and have chosen this one, probably from 1969:


Peter Green’s Fleetwood Mac were huge in 1969, as he released his spellbinding singles from Albatross to the scarifying Green Manalishi (with the Two-pronged Crown). Green had actually moved on from being something of a blues purist, during the blues boom specific to British music at the time, but, like some of the old style black musicians of an earlier era, was obviously still haunted by something, which he could not quite express. This is despite the rather obvious lyrical content of songs like Man of the World.

Anyway, 1969 was the big year in rock music internationally, and was of course when Woodstock and other things made certain figures into cultural icons. It was also the year before Jimi Hendrix and Janis Joplin died, and the cult figure was established as a youthful sacrifice of sorts. But in England the end of the 1960s became the moment of the genius as drug casualty, something that may have been true of Syd Barrett, and has been assumed to be true of Peter Green. Most of the reports and obituaries in the press just have to mention Green taking LSD and it all falling apart. Even some sympathetic writers and fans accept this version of events, even though it involves some exaggeration and distortion. One would expect the media to do this, even music magazines such as Mojo had one of its first issues include articles on both Barrett and Green, and the madness.

These articles were in 1994, but by 1997 Peter Green was back playing live, and though the same old cliches were still being written, the reviews had to note the enthusiasm of the crowd for their lost hero. And the fact that he could still play guitar in style, only somewhat diminished by age and all the turmoil of the interceding years. I too was pleased to hear of his comeback, and bought some of the new releases from Peter Green’s Splinter Group. Green was assisted by his friend Nigel Watson on guitar, and they managed to recruit one of Britain’s best rhythm sections in the form of Neil Murray (bass) and Cozy Powell (drums). Powell had played with some of the other English axe heroes, such as Jeff Beck and Ritchie Blackmore, and didn’t last too long. On the night that the Splinter Group was recording their Soho Session live, Cozy Powell died in a car crash near his home aged 50. It seems that some kind of jinx still haunted this music.

However, Peter Green’s new group mostly played the American blues music that had so entranced young white men with six string guitars in the 1960s. This involved both the acoustic country blues of the 1930s, as exemplified by Robert Johnson, and the urban electric blues from Chicago, especially the so-called West side version, mainly created by Otis Rush. Peter Green’s Splinter Group did useful versions of Robert Johnson songs, but it was the urban blues of Otis Rush that remained the core of the set, including classics like It Takes Time and Homework. John Mayall’s Bluesbreakers had played the West side songs in the mid 1960s, with the young Eric Clapton on guitar, as well as Freddie King instrumentals; and Green of course replaced Clapton in the Bluesbreakers. Green’s Fleetwood Mac had even gone to Chess Records’ studio in Chicago, in early 1969, and recorded with some of the side musicians there, including a great version of Rush’s Homework. Fast forward to 1997 and Green could still play the song in that way.

There was always something odd about those young English white boys taking the old blues music back to America, with an added dose of enthusiasm and technique. Green and company could play the music, but did not sound like black blues men in timbre or phrasing. Yet it was Green most of all, who tried to understand more about it than say groups like Led Zeppelin, who used songs and blues phrases without crediting the original authors. But as players the Fleetwood Mac guitarists, Green, Jeremy Spencer, and Danny Kirwan, did contribute to the remaining blues cannon, such as it was in the late 1960s when the music was actually in decline in the black community. Green and company played on new LPs by Eddie Boyd, and the pianist Otis Spann, on an album called The Biggest Thing Since Collossus. These sessions were set up by the English producer Mike Vernon, whose Blue Horizon label gave some new opportunities to some of the older black players. Indeed, Otis Spann actually died not long after his LP was released.

It’s true that my Splinter Group CDs had been gathering dust for some time, though I listen to early Fleetwood Mac quite regularly. But listening to this 1997 incarnation is a pleasure, and the music still swings. Though his voice did deteriorate, Green could now sing the blues, and sound affected. It was actually his famous Fleetwood Mac songs that didn’t sound quite right. In truth, the young white guys put the rock into blues music, when it was only an element of the Chicago blues, and was exemplified by Otis Rush, one of the more unlucky of the black performers in terms of (not) being recorded in his prime. If one wants to hear rock meeting the blues full on, then there are the recordings of Fleetwood Mac at the Boston Tea Party in early 1970. Green and Danny Kirwan’s guitars duel on Black Magic Woman, and harmonise in other songs, while Jeremy Spencer really plays slide guitar on Can’t Hold Out and a swinging version of Madison Blues. But it is the ferocity of Green’s playing in the Green Manalishi which is astounding, certainly that of a man possessed, if not in anguish. If you like heavy blues playing that was it, there and then, but not a space which most players should want to get into, or could again. So Peter Green joins Danny Kirwan, lost souls but never to be forgotten.




Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Seismic shifts and political earthquakes

Back to politics again. But first, it is the shortest day of the year in the southern hemisphere today, and I woke up at 6am to a rumbling earthquake. It turned out not to be a big earthquake, by our standards, but it was close by. And it came a couple of weeks after two rather larger ones off the west coast of the North Island, jolting the Wellington region. Just as we are enjoying the post-Covid 19 freedoms, and the ability to shop in actual shops now, there are natural disasters to worry about again.

Usually if I wake up early enough I try to catch the Sky News bulletin that is screened live on the Australian Sky News channel overnight. Of course, this is mostly to catch up on the political news in Britain, before reading the Guardian on-line later in the day. But it is rather difficult to watch British news now, for obvious reasons, but not just because of the pandemic and other losses of life. It is rather irritating watching the bumbling right wing ideologues pretending to be world-beating leaders, whether in Westminster or Washington. Yet, despite the obvious fiasco taking place, the Conservatives still lead on.

Certain sections of the international media like to focus on New Zealand, or, more particularly, Jacinda Ardern, our Prime Minister. In the first place this is because of the elimination of Covid-19 here, and the accessibility of a leader speaking to the public without the baffling waffle and nonsense that conservative white men offer. Of course there was a bit of a wobble this week, when two women returning from the UK were let out of quarantine and turned out to have the virus, after not being tested while they were in their luxury hotel accommodation. There were also questions for the health administrators, after they claimed that the women drove from Auckland to Wellington without having to stop for petrol or for other reasons. It actually takes 9 hours to do this drive and I always have to re-fuel somewhere when I take the trip. But after these questions were raised Jacinda stepped in and the right corrective measures were taken.

Jacinda Ardern was already riding high in the opinion polls before the Covid crisis, but this was based on personal popularity. Her Labour Party was not the most preferred party, it had been the conservative National Party, which had lost the last election even though it had the higher party list vote than the Labour Party. But because of the pandemic crisis, and the visibility of the Prime Minister, the Labour Party’s polling has been surging past that of National. It’s leader had never really registered as a preferred Prime Minister, so he has been replaced without having fought an election, with another right wing man from the provinces taking over. The only question is whether Jacinda’s personal popularity will translate into a majority in the party vote. The next election has been called for September, and it seems unlikely that National can form a government.

But New Zealand has a proportional representation system, and no single party has ever got a clear parliamentary majority since the change in the electoral system was made in 1996. The point here is that, even if one party did achieve this milestone, they would actually choose to include other parties, either as coalition partners, or through having a ‘confidence and supply’ agreement. This has been the preferred arrangement for the National Party, which always seems to think that it wins by having more seats than Labour. It looks like they will have the biggest reduction in the party vote since 2002, when Helen Clark won a second term very easily. But Clark sought out a coalition partner to her right, and shunned the Green Party, which has always been to the left of Labour. At the moment that is the status quo, although the Green Party has a confidence and supply agreement, as well as having some minor ministerial portfolios.

Now the international media see Jacinda Ardern and Labour as a centre-left party, but this is only relative to the National Party, which is usually in government. The New Zealand Labour Party is not a socialist party, as the British Labour party has been, at least while Mr Corbyn was leader. In fact, the term ‘socialist’ is very seldom heard in Wellington. There may be some individuals who call themselves socialists in the Labour Party, but they are not MPs. This is because of a seismic shift in the late 1980s, when the fourth Labour Government implemented Thatcherite policies, including a very dodgy privatisation programme. The result was that the left of the party broke away as individuals, with some outsiders, to form New Labour (which later formed an alliance with the nascent Green party). The trade union movement did not support the break, but was decimated by legislation introduced after the National Party won a landslide election in 1990. And it was the National Party which changed the electoral system, after a referendum in 1993, for retaining First Past the Post, or creating a proportional system.

I recently read a comment on the Labour List website, in which someone named Ollie Middleton was singing the praises of Jacinda Ardern, and suggesting there were lessons to be learned by the UK Labour Party. There were some nice words here, but mostly some misinterpretation of events in New Zealand. Middleton suggested that Ardern had pursued a radical domestic policy agenda. This is not really true. She was not able to implement a capital gains tax measure, even at the height of her popularity; and even if she had a radical agenda, her coalition partner (called New Zealand First) has been putting the brakes on. Her one large policy promise involved a large house-building programme, based on heroic assumptions about what the building industry could do, and which has already failed and been largely curtailed. Back to the drawing board then.

In fact, the significance of the Ardern phenomena is not about policies at all, it is based on the ability to respond to crisis events, and rally the public to her side. Or just her popularity in opinion polls. This would be the lesson for the Labour Party in Britain when it chose a new leader. But instead, the Labour Party there chose a safe option, Sir Keir Starmer, a competent and solid performer in Parliament, when they could have gone for a woman from up North. It seems that their major concern is the unpopularity of Jeremy Corbyn in the 2019 election, judging by the Labour Together Election Review that has just been published. It essentially blames Corbyn for the loss and, implicity, his version of British socialism.

It is easy to be critical of this document from afar, but the analysis is deeply flawed. It also seems to assume that there is still a two party system, even when it acknowledges that the SNP control most of the Scottish seats. It claims that it is not impossible for Labour to win a parliamentary majority, but it looks incredibly unlikely under the First Past the Post system, which appears to be set in stone. While it is navel-gazing at Labour’s campaigning problems it ignores the seismic shift that seemed to occur in 2014-15, when the Scottish Nationalists almost swept all the other parties away. While the nationalists are in power in Edinburgh, Labour cannot expect to form a majority in UK elections again, with the ‘English Nationalism’ of the Tories still relevant to the white working class. Having a Labour Government in Wales is about the best it seems able to do.

The really extraordinary thing in this election review is how much Labour are in thrall to the Conservative Party, and not just because of the trauma of losing the ‘red wall’ seats in the north of England. The analysis is that there is a long term trend of Labour losing working class seats to the Tories, outside of the big cities, and university towns. This is portrayed as a kind of inexorable process, where there are even more seats that could be lost, and despite the incompetence of the current Conservative government. The really amazing thing is the idea that the good result under Corbyn’s leadship, in the 2017 general election, somehow ‘masked’ the underlying demographic trend. The goodish result in 2017 was only because the public didn’t really know a lot about Corbyn; or the view of the right faction within Labour was that voters who stayed with Labour did so in the expectation that Corbyn could not win anyway. This does not explain how Labour won so many Tory held seats in 2017. It also does not explain how Corbyn’s Labour managed to hold on to seats that were gained in 2019, some very narrowly, but others comfortably in the south of England. And if the Liberal Democrats had been able to win more seats off the Conservatives in their former strongholds in the south west the overall result would look rather different. But the Liberal Democrats gained over 1 million more votes without winning any more seats at all; and there are still half a million Labour voters in Scotland who are left unrepresented, apart from one seat in Edinburgh.

In any other country, without an archaic electoral system, winning an extra 1 million votes would have been a triumph. Not in dear old Blighty though, where 43% of the overall vote is good for a landslide win. If the British were to learn anything from its former colonies like New Zealand it would be about how to create a modern electoral system, and one which reflects representation of a multi-ethnic society. And if the British Labour Party were to learn anything from Jacinda Ardern and her Labour Party, it would have been to take a chance on a female leader, and to no longer expect to have to win an absolute parliamentary majority before getting into government again. And it is not just the different electoral system that makes this possible.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The so-called Lockdown is not actually over in New Zealand

New Zealand has gained some more publicity after the Prime Minister announced that the so-called Lockdown was over, and the coronavirus Covid-19 has been ‘eliminated’. Contrary to this public relations, the lockdown actually continues, and it is doubtful whether ‘community transmission’ ever occurred here, in the way that it swept across other countries. When I said we had been lucky in the previous post this has continued, if the virus had not got into some rest homes the death toll would still be in single figures. The number of people in intensive care has always been in single figures; and while some care workers and a few nurses got he virus, it has only been fatal for elderly people with underlying conditions. Was this good luck, or good policy management. Time will tell. The lockdown was imposed in a panic measure because of what was happening overseas to other health systems, and because a viable testing practice was not in place.

On a personal level the lockdown continues. I’ve been based north of Wellington on the Kapiti Coast, trying to look after a difficult octogenerian, while my mother is alone in our family apartment in the city. In principle, at the new level 3 form of lockdown, I can only go back to Wellington if I can prove to a police checkpoint that I live there (this is more difficult than it seems), and it is a single journey; and my mother would have to come  back up north, and stay here until level 3 ends. So the only change is that the aging octogenerian can go to the shops when likes, and I could go back to work if I still had a job.

So the central part of the day is my bike ride to the Waikanae River, and a bench seat with this view, looking towards Waikanae. It’s been fine, and could be worse I suppose.


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The current pandemic and Survivors (1975)

It is difficult to write, or even think about, anything apart from the current pandemic, and the so-called novel Corona-virus. I haven’t got much to say, other than that we have been lucky so far in New Zealand. But I just wanted to mention the British TV programme made in 1975, Survivors, which was created by Terry Nation. I did write about the first four episodes not so long ago, but that was before life started to imitate art. So I have borrowed an image from the Archive TV Musings blog, of Lucy Fleming, who played Jenny in Survivors, and made it through all three series, from 1975 to 1977.


This is from the first episode, where Jenny has escaped London, and is wandering aimlessly somewhere near the Welsh borders. She has just encountered the character Tom Price, played by Talfryn Thomas, and wearing her iconic blue coat (I think it is anyway). Both characters are adjusting to the fact that the death toll from the plague outbreak has been huge, and so the social structure has completely gone. This includes all the preparations for post-apocalypse that are not mobile: in other words, there is no use hoarding toilet paper because you can’t carry it around. And if you do drive, there is only so much petrol left etc. Terry Nation coined the term ‘future hour’, but was not able to really explain it, even though he used it as the title for an episode late in the series. But it captures the idea that there is no actual plan for the future that can be made, in units of time, when there is complete uncertainty. Or complete certainty that all your existing habits or ways of life have to change. But we have not quite got there yet, this time.

In hindsight of course, one could go back to 1975, and say that environmental crises and pandemics were inevitable. It was only a matter of time, or, perhaps, living on borrowed time.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

What is Mike Moore’s legacy, really?

Mike Moore was briefly the Prime Minister of New Zealand in late 1990, just before the Labour Party’s richly deserved loss in a landslide. Apparently he saved the Labour Party from completed annihilation under the previous leader, Geoffrey Palmer, a former law professor, whose academic approach to everything did not have any electoral appeal. Moore was still Labour leader for the next general election in 1993, which the National Party nearly lost, after vigorously pursuing Thatcherite policies, including swingeing welfare cuts, and passing employment legislation that removed the role of trades union.

So now Mike Moore has died aged 71. The eulogies continue, as do the myths about his abilities and achievements. Although this may seem bad form to try to correct the historical record, someone has to. The current Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, has called him a “huge intellect”, but she is too young to remember the disastrous period in the late 1980s, and the effect of opening up completely to international finance. Moreover, the news media in New Zealand love to call Mike Moore a ‘working class hero’. This is more interesting, since the media almost never talk about class. True, Moore came from very humble beginnings, lost his father when young, grew up in poverty etc. But the result of the government policies that he voted for was mass unemployment in the 1980s. This severely weakened the trade union movement, which was permanently undermined in 1991 by the National Party, and is no longer capable of mobilising the working class.

full_moore1 This is a particularly appropriate photo of Mike Moore in the 1980s, seen here with the financier, H. Michael Fay, the principal of the merchant bank Fay Richwhite. Those that have read certain previous posts, or heard of the Winebox, will know exactly who Fay was. The photo of the sheep is a fantastic metaphor, both because Fay is obviously the wolf (in an expensive suit), and Moore was the one being led astray. For someone who was apparently a working class hero, Moore spent an awful lot of time fraternising with the rich, and perhaps famous, once he became the director-general of the World Trade Organisation. A working class warrior would have been more wary of rich white men.

But rather than name-calling I want to highlight a few key points about H. Michael Fay, as an example of how the Auckland-based money men compromised the Labour Party and the process of government in New Zealand. Fay, in particular, knew the value of good publicity. This saw Fay Richwhite sponsor all sorts of events, from ballet to the emergent sport of triathlon. But Fay is mostly associated with the New Zealand challenges for the Americas Cup, the rich men’s yacht race, and for succeeding with the New Zealand team. This followed Australia’s successful challenge in 1983, which was bankrolled by Perth businessman Alan Bond. Sadly, Bond’s dodgy business dealings, including in tax havens, led to him going to prison. Whereas, the New Zealand money men, such as Fay, donated money to the Labour Party and got knighthoods. Although you could argue that Fay was more deserving of his than Ron Brierley, for example.

Less well known is Fay’s role in quangos like the Market Development Board, and his chairing role, which is no doubt where he worked closely with Mike Moore. As I noted in my book, Tax Haven New Zealand Part 1, one of the reports that Fay put out argued for the removal of non-resident withholding tax for foreign investors. This was initially rebuffed by officials because it was too obvious as a creation of a tax haven. As we now know, there was a change in the trust law in 1988, approved by the Labour finance minister, R.O. Douglas, that did create a tax haven. But the officials continued to debate the role of the removing the non-resident withholding tax during the second term of the Labour Government. Besides the advocacy of domestic players like Fay, the American bank Citicorp also wanted to get in on the action, and their proposal was actually supported by Mike Moore in 1990. So you have to question whether Moore was too easily led by associations with financiers, and supported proposals which were too good to be true.

Of course, a bigger problem by 1990 was that the Bank of New Zealand was on the verge of collapse, after disastrous lending practices in Australia during the 1990s. This had followed the collapse of DFC NZ in 1989, the former Development Finance Corporation, which had been ‘privatised’ the year before, but was actually owned by the State department for government employee pension savings, known as the National Provident Fund. To cut a long story short, the obvious strategy of the Auckland financiers was to get control of the government institutions that had a financial presence, whether through its savings or foreign exchange deals. The NPF chairman was Paul Collins, the chief executive of Brierley Investments, and Ron Brierley himself had been the chair of the BNZ up until the time of the privatisation phase in the late 1980s. After a brief reprieve H. Michael Fay became the chairman, despite the fact that his own firm owed the BNZ hundreds of millions, and having the bank involved in all of his firm’s tax evasion deals. BNZ Papers I have seen show that Fay Richwhite was actually insolvent through this time.

But what happened in late 1990, after the general election, was that the BNZ had to be bailed out. In actual fact this was a bail out of Fay Richwhite, and a cover up of the BNZ’s financial position, which even Treasury and Reserve Bank officials could not follow. The new management for the BNZ had already sacked most of the managers in the Australian branch, and dismantled its investment banking operation there. The National Party leader, Jim Bolger, continued to claim that there was no evidence of fraud in the BNZ. But he did use the enormous sum that had to be used to save the BNZ in 1991, and to maintain confidence in the financial system, to justify the savage cuts in welfare benefits and parts of the public service. These cuts were never restored by subsequent Labour Governments, especially those led by Helen Clark. But the Labour Party continued to observe its 1980s commitment to open borders, and free trade, which is Mike Moore’s legacy, as well as turning a blind eye to tax evasion and money laundering.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Environmental Cataclysm in Australasia

This is the first post of the year, and probably the last year of the blog. Hard not to be totally disheartened, firstly by events in the Northern Hemisphere, but mostly by the complete and utter ecological disaster in Australia. While it seemed that the fires in the Amazon region were bad, and the Brazilian reaction appalling, this is eclipsed down under.

I put Australasia in the title because the fires on mainland Australia are affecting the whole region. Certainly the smoke and haze has drifted across the Tasman Sea to New Zealand. The remains of the Australian forests have landed on the South Island glaciers, and added to our own loss of alpine environment. And only the strong winds in the North Island prevent the smoke affecting the inhabitants here, at least the humans.

The Australian cataclysm is primarily that of the livestock and wildlife that have died in millions. Firefighters are trying to protect humans and their properties, but can’t save the animals, fauna and flora. The drought made it hard for farm animals anyway, but they were still being fed. The climate emergency that white Australia mostly ignores was already threatening wildlife and its habitat, but now it is being wiped out cruelly. Everybody knows about indigenous Australian species, especially the marsupials, kangaroos and wallabies, that can at least hop away to safety sometimes. The koala bears and wombats attract sympathy and are sometimes saved by humans, but what of all the other species.

The Australian Liberal Party was re-elected on an anti-environmental policy, and weren’t they proud of it. In the key areas of Queensland and Tasmania, where they would react to strong Green lobbying, the coal communities and loggers ensured that the Labor party lost the key seats that would have made the difference. The anti climate change brigade are still in full denial mode, and are currently blaming the ‘greenies’ for the extent of the fires, if not the cause. Inland Australia swelters in the heat of over 40 degrees celsius, and even the coastal holiday resorts are in peril, but the climate change deniers in the Liberal and National Parties claim it is the other side that are the ideologues. These gang of fools and right wing zealots still have a propaganda arm at Sky News Australia to dissemble.

Life in Australia carries on as normal. There are international cricket games to play, and an international tennis tournament to go ahead in Melbourne. The cricket tests were against New Zealand this year, the first time since the 1980s that our test team has toured in the holiday period, and played the Boxing Day test at the MCG instead of England. Our guys played poorly overall, and were affected by illness during the third test in Sydney. The Australians were as aggressive as ever, and continued to ‘sledge’ on-field, which is form of invective and swearing to intimidate the opponents, and trying to injure them. Not cricket at all, as played in other areas of the world, but the Australians always have to win.

In a previous post I criticised some of the reactionary policies of the Australian government, concerning refugees, and the deportation of petty criminals to New Zealand. All of these things have cost us, as does the upcoming trial of the Australian terrorist who killed 51 people in Christchurch last March. But since then a number of tourists have died in the White Island eruption, including Australians. Their politicians could have criticised the decision to allow tourist to go onto an active volcano, and right into the crater, when it seemed inherently unsafe. But any such criticism was moderated and efforts to assist the victims was the focus. So maybe there is still an underlying ANZAC spirit. In any case it is in our interests to send firefighters to Australia now, since the impact of the fires there are so widespread, but the environmental crisis is too far gone to change, even if the climate change deniers did not hold power in Australia.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How the insidious smears infect public broadcasting, even in New Zealand

Everybody is still writing about the UK election. Didn’t he do well, that Boris. When he wasn’t hiding in a fridge, running down the clock, like the ice sculpture at the TV debate that the Conservatives didn’t see as a priority. Seriously, given the opinion poll lead they had, were all the evasions and dirty tricks campaigns necessary? Obviously the attention span of the electorate is now so low, that all they had to do was repeat that 3 word slogan (GBD). True, it was a bit more effective that ‘Strong & Stable’, or ‘Brexit means Brexit’.

What does Brexit mean? Nobody knows, but they will know when it’s over, and the Tories’ new friends in the North of England go back to being forgotten. What a very British farce, when is the next referendum? Of course, when Scotland leaves the UK and joins the EU, and that’s when the English finally get to go it alone, with some northern Welshmen. It’s all about the people now: and the problem for Labour is that it only represents the metropolitan areas; despite the millions residing there, you have to win in the provincial towns.

I was going to write about media bias, and the hapless BBC, who have had to come out with their heavy hitters to assure the readers of the quality press that they weren’t played by the Conservative Party. In fact, they were played, perhaps willingly, by the tabloid press. In the previous post I described how the BBC have a tendency to invite a so-called journalist from the Tory press on for commentary. They must realise that the tabloid person is going to smear Corbyn, usually for links to terrorists, and sometimes to ellide any nuance at all, and just call him a terrorist. This does have an effect, as we saw from John McDonnell’s speech on election night, in his electorate. The camera feed that was broadcast on CNN fixed on a heckler, who called his new MP a terrorist, alternating with calling him a liar, until the inevitable brawl broke out. The BBC never mentioned it.

In the election aftermath the BBC’s Emily Maitlis, fresh from snookering Prince Andrew, had some fun berating Labour spokespeople for their humiliating loss. Not getting the required humble apology she moved on to the triumphant Tories. When no more Labour people opened themselves up for a slagging she had to have two Tories on. For example, she had one man from a Conservative friendly think tank, and one woman from the tabloid press: the Tory man went into some convoluted technical reason why the Labour manifesto was naive and unworkable; while the tabloid woman called it ‘communism’. If Maitlis had felt witty she might have called the 2019 Communist Manifesto. I decided to make a formal complaint anyway, after navigating the BBC website that seemed to make it impossible to make a complaint from overseas, even though BBC World TV was broadcasting the domestic news channel. I might post the reply if I get one.
Public broadcasting is free in New Zealand, but only exists in radio form, a station known as RNZ. And RNZ National has a very popular programme called Nine to Noon, which is hosted by Kathryn Ryan. Ryan is a former political editor for RNZ, and they have traditionally been right-leaning, establishment types. But when she took over Nine to Noon it became clear just how right wing she is. Not only does she admire Sky News Australia, but, in the longstanding weekly segment on British politics she has ensured that there is never anyone from the Guardian. The usual commentators include Kate Adie, formerly BBC of course; Mr Dathan from The Sun; and former Conservative MP, Matthew Parris. In the past it was Dame Ann Leslie who initiated the Corbyn-bashing.

A few years ago Ryan was made international radio personality of the year, probably by the BBC, but I stopped listening to the British segment because of the Corbyn-bashing and Tory worship. It’s such a colonial thing, this underlying allegiance to the British Conservative Party. But last Thursday I did listen, knowing that Mr Parris would be on. He seems to have gone all Liberal Democrat on us, because he doesn’t like Boris, but he obviously still loathes Jeremy Corbyn. He made it clear to the New Zealand audience that Corbyn was a Marxist with terrorist tendencies, without a shred of evidence. He was probably frothing like Mark Francois, way over there in chilly High Peak, a place known for a good smear or two. But there are also locals who enjoy the old terrorist trope.

RNZ have the local politics discussion slot on Monday mornings, but this week it was all about the effect of the British election. The slot is dominated by Matthew Hooton, a P.R. consultant from Auckland, and former ministerial staffer for the National Party. Hooton is the bullying type of right winger, and the National Party are not right enough for him. He also likes to be contrary, so when Ms Ryan asked him about the implications of the British election he said there was no direct comparison, because no local politician had “terrorist connections” like Corbyn has. The other man in the discussion, a Labour Party hack, said nothing about Corbyn at all, certainly not in his defence. Meanwhile, Hooton comes from the Auckland milieu that created Prime Minister John Key’s dirty politics squad, formed around a Cameron Slater. Slater has recently been mired in defamation suits, but the more recent Auckland alumni include Messrs Topham and Guerin, who have been the key additions to the Conservative Party’s dirty tricks social media team.

Postscript: 19/12/19

It was reported yesterday that a High Court judge has found Matthew Hooton guilty of defamation. Hooton was writing for the National Business Review, not RNZ. The complainant was none other than Steven Joyce, the former cabinet minister in the last National Party government; Joyce is also known for setting up commercial radio stations, and is another wealthy man in the National Party. Although the NBR only has to pay costs it is still significant, despite being a case of friendly fire. Or perhaps Mr Hooton is an equal opportunities slanderer, but only someone wealthy can afford to stand up to him.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

U.K. electoral campaign reaches it nadir

I don’t bother with social media any more, unlike during the previous UK election in 2017. Prospective electoral candidates should avoid it too, since writing rubbish on Facebook is bound to catch up with you. But there was something awfully familiar about this graphic from the Tory Party’s twitter feed, as seen on the Guardian‘s live blog yesterday:


It reminded me of something the New Zealand National Party came up with in the 2005 general election, when they tried to get redneck votes by playing the ‘race card’, as we call it:


By way of explanation, that is Helen Clark of Labour on the left; and Don Brash of National on the right, Brash being the former governor of the central bank who got back into politics to complete the so-called Neoliberal revolution. It is a brutally effective sign, once you know that ‘iwi’ refers to the Maori word for tribe, and the referent is to the legal conflict at the time over the ownership of the foreshore. What might have been a technical legal argument became a major faultline in New Zealand politics ; Brash did not win the 2005 election, but he got very close, paving the way for another finance man, John Key, to win in 2008, and to remain in power until the Panama Papers were released.

Anyway, back to the British election, it might have been slightly more effective if Corbyn was on the left, but it still puts the dichotomy at its most stark. And, of course, it is abhorrent that the latest terrorist attack in London has been politicised by the Tories. For all the talk about Jeremy Corbyn being anti-Semitic, and associating with Palestinian groups and other terrorists, this had just been words before the UK citizens died in London.

Now we also see the blatant bias, and partisanship of the UK media, including the BBC. Not only is Corbyn portrayed as ‘soft’ on terrorism, but the trope of his links with muslim terrorists is back in play. To give an example that the BBC’s international viewers would have seen, take the BBC World News programme Newsday, which screens at around midday in New Zealand. Yesterday the London presenter was Kasia Madeira, and she had on a guest from the Sunday Times, Katherine Forster,to discuss how the terrorist attack had become political. Apparently this was because Corbyn had put the blame on austerity, and specifically on the cuts to spending on the Parole Board and related services. With facilitation from Madeira, Forster then went on to state that Corbyn was known to ‘side’ with terrorist organisations such as Hamas in the occupied part of Palestine, and of course the I.R.A.

Now ‘sided’ sounds a relatively innocuous word. But it is much stronger than ‘sympathiser’ for example, or supporter, and much closer to being a ‘collaborator’. So there we are, back to the Tories’ favourite trope, identifying Corbyn and Labour as the enemy within, not just soft on terrorism. Of course, Kasia Madeira never challenged the use of the term ‘sided’, or the claim that Corbyn abets terrorists. This was either because the BBC does not do that to guests chosen from the Tory press, or she is as right wing as Ms Forster.

But, unlike the Tory press, the BBC is meant to be objective and balanced. Having a smear artist like Forster on proves that the BBC is both biased and partisan, on behalf of the Conservative Party. There is certainly no balance on any of the BBC World News programmes that screen here in the evening, and there is a lot of commentary coming from business guests who are, if not inevitably Tory, then certainly not sympathetic to Labour. In a binary system the side with the most money usually wins, but having media stooges also helps.


Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Johnson’s Sophistry and the slow boat to China

More on the British election from a New Zealand perspective. Boris Johnson continues an incredibly erratic performance, and the Conservative Party are full of tricky manoeuvres and funny games on social media. Johnson launched the Welsh Conservatives campaign and the broadcast highlights included a diversion on the prospective trading relations with China. He asked the audience to check on-line if Wales was closer to China than New Zealand, ‘as the crow flies’. It turns out this was true, as the crow flies. Why he thinks that this makes any difference to the trade in sheep meat, who really knows. The fact remains that New Zealand is closer to China by sea, and already has a free trade deal.

This means that New Zealand farmers will always be able to out compete little old Wales, no matter what the geography is according to BoJo. And in today’s LBC radio interview, Johnson also claimed that there were more  free trade deals in the pipeline, besides the U.S. one, including with New Zealand. That’s news to us, but maybe the New Zealand government has got high up in the queue. Even with the Labour Party in government here, the free trade fetish continues. Indeed, in the last election campaign they misled progressive voters into believing that they would no longer pursue the Asia-Pacific trade agreement known as the TPPA. This was before Trump threw out his toys over it. But, after the election the Labour Party returned to form, and agreed to a bowdlerised version of the TPPA, the CTTPA, or a similar acronym. The key part of this was that it would not include the clauses allowing for corporations to sue governments that were not allowing domestic market competition, including for pharmaceuticals.

So the major controversy with the TPPA had been over pharmaceuticals, and the role of American drug companies. New Zealand has an organisation called Pharmac which organises the purchase of drugs for the public health system, and therefore can obtain the best prices through this form of collectivism. Of course, this was anathema to the Americans drug companies, who want to extract monopoly prices for their patented medicines. Pharmac is therefore similar to the British organisation that is called Nice, and any free trade deal with the U.S. would always have drug purchases on the agenda.

Therefore the British Labour Party didn’t really need the leaked document, detailing the trade talks with the U.S. Government, to know that the role of Nice would be up for discussion at the very least. But having got an un-redacted version of the Tories trade talks, it would have been nice if the media have covered it, rather than banging on about anti-Semitism, which appears to be far more important than the health of millions of poor people. In the broadcast version of events seen here, via Sky News Australia, Sky’s Diana Magnay was asked every hour about the veracity of Labour’s claims. She was apparently with Corbyn’s campaign in Falmouth, but it could have been anywhere, Magnay stated that the document did not back up Corbyn’s claims, even though she can’t have read it; and went on to say that everything had changed under BoJo. Besides the partisan bias, Magnay could not provide a coherent statement, despite doing it all afternoon for the Sarah-Jane Mee Show. Magnay used to be a CNN correspondent, so really has drawn the short straw being assigned to Corbyn. By contrast, Kate McCann gets to luxuriate on BoJo’s campaign bus. And Sky continued to show footage of Johnson meeting with nurses in Cornwall, but not the audio part of the event, especially when one of the nurses asked where he would get his ‘nurses tree’ (for new nurses).

The other mention of New Zealand last week was also in the context of health, and it happened during the feisty Question Time Special, where a partisan audience got to roast their enemies. Johnson was accused of being dishonest in his first question, and was later called a racist, but otherwise appeared to be doing fine. But the questions on the NHS were difficult. One of the audience was a GP (general practitioner) who stated how onerous the conditions for local doctors were, and compared it to Australian and New Zealand GP practices, which had similar earnings but far less stress. It might be true that health is less of a political football than in the UK, but the picture is not so rosy. The vacancies for GPs are in rural areas, where shortages mean doctors do have to work long hours. In the cities the hospitals have similar maintenance issues, and problems with treatment times for cancer, which vary on a geographical basis. And there are similar shortages of doctors and nurses, even though it is nowhere near as bad as in the UK.

Johnson’s best bit of sophistry must be his claim that there will be 50 000 new nurses over his next term. This was despite the lack of trainees caused by the Tory removal of the student maintenance grant, and the effect of student loan debt; and the claim that more nurses would arrive as immigrants from the EU, despite the fact that Brexit means less immigration to most BoJo supporters. But the real doosie was the claim that 19 000 of the 50 000 figure would be contrived from the number of nurses that would be retained, when they would have otherwise left the NHS. So 19 000 nurses already in the NHS are counted twice, or are not really ‘new’ nurses at all. Maybe they will be receiving offers from American drug companies that they cannot refuse.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Immigration and the end of the ANZAC Spirit

I got an email yesterday from Amnesty International in Australia, entitled ‘Behrouz is finally free’, with a photo of the Amnesty man greeting Behrouz Boochani at Auckland airport. Behrouz Boochani is an Iranian Kurd, an asylum seeker who has been held at one of Australia’s offshore detention centre for years. An award winning journalist, who wrote a book on a smuggled smart phone while stuck on Manus Island (in Papua New Guinea), Behrouz got a visa to visit New Zealand for one month, including an appearance at a literary festival in Christchurch, and is never going back in to Australian detention again.

This was a publicity coup as well as being a personal liberation. Behrouz quickly flew down to Christchurch with Golriz Ghahraman, another Iranian refugee, who is now a Green Party MP, and met the mayor. She gave him a greenstone (poumanu) pendant while the local news media filmed. Rather surprisingly the news item was high up on evening news bulletins, despite the fact that the refugee aspect of the punitive Australian immigration regime has not been covered well here, in comparison to the Australian practice of deporting New Zealand born residents who have committed a crime. Speaking of crimes, arriving in Christchurch was symbolic, given the massacre there by an Australian citizen in March this year. The media speculated that the release of Behrouz would annoy the hard-line far right Australian government, but the story was actually covered on Sky News Australia, the only Australian TV channel carried on the pay TV package here.

Behrouz later appeared on the Al Jazeera channel from his Christchurch hotel room, where he described the Australian detention practices as ‘barbaric’, and claimed that the remaining adult refugees in detention were starving. Many have attempted suicide, and most have developed psychiatric illnesses; some have even been assaulted by the indigenous people running the island prisons, whether on Manus or on Nauru, another island territory that is paid by the Australian regime to hold asylum seekers indefinitely. Nauru has a long history of colonial intervention, and used to have its minerals harvested for Australasian farmers to spread over their fields as fertilizers from planes (this was called Superphosphate).

It would have been a long time since Behrouz was on an airplane, and he barely survived the boat journey from Indonesia to Australian waters over seven years ago. There has been much comment about the USA and the United Kingdom imposing an Australian style ‘points-based’ immigration system. But rather than debate how the points would work for desirable immigrants, it needs to be understood that the Australian system is admired by conservatives for its systematic brutality and punitive aspects. Long before there was Trump and his wall on the Mexican border, a small Australian man named John Howard was winning federal elections for his Liberal Party with a policy of ensuring that asylum seekers would never get on to the Australian mainland. This has always been justified on the basis of not rewarding people smugglers.

In more recent times it has been a man named Peter Dutton as Home Affairs minister in the Liberal-National Governments that has been the face of the detention policy. An ugly man, with even uglier policies, Dutton hails from the state of Queensland, known for its corruption, but which heavily favoured the Liberal Party at the last election, based on an anti-Climate change agenda. Dutton was even the preferred candidate when the far right wing of the Liberal Party tried to depose the sitting Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, last year; but the party preferred Scott Morrison, an evangelical Christian, who is a better retail politician. Nonetheless, the Liberal Party were prepared to lose their seats in the aflfuent areas of Sydney, where the soft ‘liberals’ objected to the harsh treatment of those detained offshore, even though some of their sick children were allowed to leave the islands.

The brutality of this immigration policy is that the detention is indefinite. Dutton does not really want any detainees to leave, even when there are genuine offers to take the refugees off Manus Island and Nauru. New Zealand’s Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, has offered to take 150 asylum seekers per year, but this has been rebuffed. The flimsy excuse for this has been the belief among Australians that, once the refugees become New Zealand citizens, they will then be able to travel to Australia eventually. It is of course hard to believe that anybody would still want to go to Australia after detention in ghastly camps on offshore islands, but the Australians refuse to budge on Ardern’s offer.

There used to be something called the ANZAC spirit, which is a sense of co-operation between Australia and New Zealand. ANZAC refers to the army tradition, begun in the First World War, when Australasian troops were flung into a hopeless attack on Turkey at Gallipoli. The senseless slaughter there led to the dawning of an identity separate from the imperial masters in London. But it is now time to admit that this is an historical remnant only, and should really only be seen in a military context. At a government level the Australians simply don’t respect us or our Prime Minister (who is ridiculed on Sky News Australia), whether that be on immigration or climate change in the Pacific.

The most egregious examples of Australian contempt comes with the deportation of petty criminals, who are technically New Zealand citizens. Due to free movement in the past, many working class New Zealand families have re-located to Australia, usually in search of better paying jobs. But if they do not become Australian citizens they also do not get welfare payments, even after paying tax for years. And if they happen to commit a crime, which is often the result of domestic disputes, they will be punished twice: a custodial sentence will result in sequestration in an offshore detention camp, and then eventual deportation. Often these men have not been in New Zealand since their childhood, and have no relatives left here, or any other kind of support, let alone job opportunities. This approved deportation of petty criminals leads to crime here in New Zealand, and is against any residual sense of  ANZAC co-operation and goodwill that might remain.

So, to take a recent example, of the serious bush fires raging in Australia, we have sent firefighters to help them. Why should we continue to send our people over to Australia, and potentially sacrifice them in dangerous situations? Even if there is some financial compensation, or some other benefits, such as it being good training, we should no longer just automatically send our people. I don’t recall the Australians reciprocating, but maybe they have in the past. But until they treat New Zealand and all our offers of help with respect, let alone observing international human rights and norms with regard to the treatment of migrants and asylum seekers, we should not be sending help to them.

Postscript 25/7/2020:

Yesterday the New Zealand media announced that Behrouz Boochani had been given refugee status in New Zealand. He seems to have been resident in Christchurch since arriving for the literary festival. It was also made apparent that he had become a research fellow at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, and had his own research project to conduct. This is presumably good publicity for that university, but it is one of the worst places in New Zealand for an outsider to try to do something new in terms of research. At least it was for me. Anyway, a good outcome for Behrouz, but not for the others left in Australian detention camps.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment