Court thoughts

Court reporting was usually the chief reporter’s job but when he was away or had something more important to attend to it became mine.

Court started at 10am and the paper went to the presses around mid-day. That meant for the first couple of hours I had to take notes on the current case while writing -neatly by hand  because we didn’t have laptops then – the story of the previous one for a runner to pick up and take to the office.

It wasn’t easy for someone just out of journalism school but most of the cases were pretty simple – variations on traffic, alcohol and drug offences.

After a few stints as court reporter I realised I wasn’t just seeing the same charges again and again, I was often seeing the same people, or members of their families.

I was back in court this morning (not in the dock), talking to a former prison pastor who still works with prisoners, their families and victims. He told me nothing’s changed, he keeps seeing the same people time and time again.

This is a sorry reflection on them, their failure to learn and their lack of regard for the law. But doesn’t it also tell us there needs to be a lot more effort put into preventing crime and ensuring those who err once learn not to do it again?

Full marks Mr Speaker – updated

One of the reasons MPs aren’t held in very high regard is the low standards of behaviour and language some of them descend to in parliament.

Lockwood Smith has made it quite clear he expects higher standards of behaviour and accountability.

This hasn’t always been appreciated by his colleagues who had to endure lame answers from cabinet minsiters in the previous administration and were aniticiapating giving those people now in opposition a taste of their own medicine.

But Smith has made it quite clear what he expects and yesterday Trevor Mallard was sent out of the house for falling well short of those expectations..

Keeping Stock has the transcript of Hansard  which shows what happened. 

I give the Speaker full marks for his ruling and his efforts to lift standards.

UPDATE: Whaleoil has the video.

How far is too far for fuel?

The petrol station at Hampden, north of Moeraki on State Highway 1, has closed.

There are fuel stops at Herbert and Maheno about 10 and 14 kilometres further north so it’s not too much further for travellers, but how long will petrol stations stay in very small towns?

When I stopped for fuel at a small town petrol station yesterday the owner told me that if he hadn’t recently put in new tanks he’d have been tempted to stop selling petrol and diesel and stick to servicing vehicles because the margins on fuel were hardly worth the trouble.

I’m training myself  to check the fuel gauge before leaving bigger towns on long journeys because it can be a long way to the next petrol station, especially outside business hours.

However, the training isn’t complete and I’ve been fortunate to find bowsers which enable you to pay by credit or Eftpos card which have saved me from running out of fuel late at night a couple of times.

Travellers not used to long distances between fuel stops could easily get caught short.

It’s also a problem is for people living in or near the small towns which no longer have fuel outlets. Some, particularly the elderly, do most of their driving within a relatively confined area of where they live and they’re forced to do a longer trip simply to refuel.

June 24 in history

On June 24:

1441 Eton College  was founded.

 

1901 The first exhibition of Pablo Picasso’s work opened.

1905 New Zealand Truth was launched.

1916 Canadian film star Mary Pickford became the first woman to get a million dollar contract.

If not the market then what?

Europe “should not leave the food industry in general, and the milk sector in particular, just to the law of market forces, which is the least social, ecological and economic law,”  . . . 

That’s the  French Agriculture Minister Michel Barnier urging his EU colleagues to listen to protesting farmers in Luxembourg.

He was responding to EU Agriculture Commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel.

 She had no magic wand to address their grievances, she said.

She implicitly criticised countries such as France and Germany for continuing to question the decision to lift quotas.

“It’s dangerous and irresponsible to foster unrealistic hopes on what we can do,” she said.

Quite.

If it’s not left to the market it’s up to governments and what can they do?

Government means the taxpayers who are also the consumers who’d pay more if quotos were lowered or producers subsidised.

Goverments have a role in welfare but any interference by them in the marekt will merely prolong the pain and delay the recovery.

Tuesday’s answers

Monday’s questions were:

1. What’s the gestation period of a sheep?

2. Who said: I married beneath me, all women do?

3. Who wrote Motherhood, the Second Oldest Profession?

4. What did tamarillos used to be called and where did they originate?

5. Where is this statue (bonus point if you can name the dog and his master).

Paul Tremewan gets the electronic bunch of flowers (perhaps the sweetpeas in the post above?) – for the second week in a row, but this week he’s lost half a point – he said Erma Bomberg when it’s Erma Bombeck, but he does get the bonus for the whole answer on Greyfriars Bobby and another one for being specific on the location.

Kismet gets 2 1/2 – right about tree tomatoes but not Chile-with a bonus for amusing me.

PDM get 1 and two halfs – tree tomatoes again but not Peru and Greyfriars Bobby but not Glasgow.

I’m open to debate on tamarillos – my source said Andean regions of Bolivia and Argentina but they may be found in other parts of the Andes.

The answers follow the break.

 

Oh, sweet peas

The sweet peas which normally bloom bountifully from mid-summer were slow to start this year, but they’ve also been slow to finish.

However, I think these will be the last until next year.

Pregorexia developing problem

“You really shouldn’t comment on a woman’s body when they’re pregnant . . . ”

This comment from Maggie Baumann a counsellor who learned from experience the dangers of pregorexia – anorexia during pregnancy.

As models, film stars and other media lovelies get even scrawnier the pressure on women to be unrealistically and unhealthily underweight has grown.

That is bad enough for the mental and physical health of women at the best of times, the dangers are more than doubled during pregnancy when too much exercise and too little food not only endangers the mother, it harms the developing baby.

A post on pregorexia last year is one of the most read on this blog. It was prompted by this story in The Press . It said pregorexia was real and caused by exposure to images of unrealistically underweight celebrities and figure-hugging maternity clothes.

Canterbury District Health Board psychiatrist Sue Luty, who specialises in eating disorders and perinatal mental health, said women limiting their calorie intake during pregnancy or overexercising was becoming “a huge issue”.

Women’s views of pregnancy were being distorted by images of celebrities who “miraculously” got back into shape soon after giving birth, she said.

This was unrealistic as the stars usually had personal trainers and many were too thin before their pregnancy, Luty said.

“It’s not normal for women to be skinny throughout pregnancy but they are seeing pictures in the media that say something completely the opposite.”

Luty said pregnant women were more fashion conscious than before and slinky, form-fitting maternity wear which showed off expectant figures was commonplace.

This put more pressure on pregnant women to stay thin, she said.

“A normal pregnancy shape is chunkier and bumpier but women don’t like that look in tight maternity clothes.”

Maternity clothes available when I was pregnant did their best to disguise the growing baby and I’ve admired the modern fashion for literally being upfront about the bumps but I hadn’t thought about the pressure this put on women to show without growing.

Too much of what passes for women’s fashion in clothes and bodies is misogynistic at the best of times. When unrealistic and unhealthy images become something to aspire to in pregnancy it’s time for a campaign to show that real women have real bodies with curves. A little bit of fat is not only healthier it’s also more attractive than the plastic stick figures the misogynists would have us become.

It could start with people refraining from commenting on other people’s body shapes, whether or not they’re pregnant.

Would you like sex with that?

The answer from a Dunedin man who heard sexually explicit lyrics in piped music while shopping with his 10 year old daughter in Farmers didn’t.

An overreaction?

I don’t think so and, to their credit nor did the store. Farmers responded to the man’s complaint, agreeing the lyrics weren’t acceptable and said their music policy would be reviewed.

Piped music tends to wash over me, unless it’s too loud in which case I do my best to get away from it. But such is the power of music, tunes and lyrics can sneak into your head even when you’re not listening.

People playing music in public spaces need to take a precautionary approach to this and ensure we can shop without the risk of hearing things best listened to in private.

Although, perhaps that’s not easy with modern music. While station surfing in the car I’m unpleasantly surprised by how often I come across lyrics on the radio that I wouldn’t want young children listening to and wouldn’t choose to listen to myself.

Perhaps it’s time to bring back The Seekers 🙂

June 23 in history

On June 23:

1314 The first war of Scottish independence, the War of Bannockburn started.

1894 The International Olympic Committee  was founded in Paris.

1894 Alfred Kinsey  USA entomologist and sexologist was born.

1958 The Dutch Reformed Church accepted women ministers.

1973 World Court condemned French nuclear tests in the Pacific..

Fawlty Towers

It’s Prunella Scales’ birthday which is a wonderful excuse to rewatch a little Fawlty Towers:

Prison for sale

The suggestion that prisoners be housed in containers has got a lot of attention, to which debate Not PC and Stephen Franks add  some facts.

Meanwhile the now disused Dunedin Prison is up for sale and the ODT is running a poll on options for what it might be used for: a boutique hotel, backpackers, exhibition space, museum or bar.

I think it would be easy to market it as a backpackers. Young travellers would take a lot of delight in sending postcards home saying they’d spent a night in gaol.

Monday’s Quiz

1. What’s the gestation period of a sheep?

2. Who said: I married beneath me, all women do?

3. Who wrote Motherhood, the Second Oldest Profession?

4. What did tamarillos used to be called and where did they originate?

5. Where is this statue (bonus point if you can name the dog and his master).

What’s humane and how much does it cost?

The row about sow crates has slipped from the headlines but the debate over reasonable standards for farming livestock continues.

In the USA poultry producers fear a referendum by the Humane Society of the US could spell an end to their industry. Ohio State University economist Luther Tweeten said:

. . . it is important to recognize that nearly everyone supports humane treatment of animals, but at issue is what constitutes humane treatment. He says the HSUS proponents believe legislation will enhance animal welfare, provide healthier food because animals will contract fewer diseases and will reduce soil, water, and air pollution. On the other hand, confinement philosophies are associated with protection of animals from temperature extremes, predators, soil-borne diseases and parasites. He believes the general public has looked to science-based research to narrow the differences, but only with partial satisfaction.

The Ohio economist says market forces have dictated animal production practices, forcing producers to ensure animals are well treated. And he says, “Socially acceptable production practices for animal welfare ultimately rest on the public’s values and attitudes and not just on science. Such values range from indifferent observers to animal rightists who object to animal confinement and would end use of animals as sources of food, clothing (leather), fiber, draft-power, or companionship (pets).” To satisfy consumers with those preferences, Tweeten proposes, “to label animal products by production practices. Preferred animal welfare practices may be more costly to producers, but consumers can “vote” their preferences with dollars in the market.”

There is no excuse for inhumane treatment of livestock. But the question of what constitutes humane standards is open.

Tweeten is right that what’s acceptable ultimately rest on the public’s values and attitudes as well as science.

But basing standards on emotion rather than science could impose unnecessary costs on the industry which put produce beyond the budgets of many consumers and force producers out of business.

If eggs were available from other states or countries with lower standards and lower costs it won’t do anything for animal welfare either.

The lesson for farmers here is that perception rules. We need to be ever vigilant about animal welfare and ensure all our practices meet accepted, scientifically based standards.

Government intervention isn’t the answer

Thousands of farmers from the European Union’s 27 member states are taking to the streets of Luxembourg today to demonstrate against poor returns.

“Food production is the single biggest economic activity in Europe and it is facing serious problems,” said the organisation’s secretary general Pekka Pesonen. “Dairy in particular is in a very severe crisis, and other sectors, from pig meat and olive oil to sheep and goats are suffering, too.

“Even as the causes of the problems differ, the result is always the same – we are not getting a fair share of the value of the final product.”

Producers all over the world could no doubt say the same thing but those of us who’re in the real world know that’s mostly to do with the market and very little to do with the government.

The crisis affecting the dairy sector is likely to be a major focus of attention. Despite a decision by the EU dairy management committee this week to raise export refunds for milk powders, Irish Farmers’ Association leader Padraig Walshe called for a “much more aggressive approach”.

“Prices have fallen to their lowest level in recent history, in some countries to those of 1983. To make matters worse, production costs have remained at an all-time high. This is disastrous for farm incomes, endangering the very existence of dairy production in the EU.”

A taste of the protest to come next week was given in Brussels on Thursday (18 June), when hundred of farmers from Germany, France, Belgium and Holland drove their tractors to the city centre as EU heads of state met for a summit meeting. . .

Their principle demand was for an immediate 5% quota cut, to tighten the market and allow cost covering prices to be achieved. But the EU Commission says production is already well below quota and such a cut would make no difference.

A 5% quota cut to tighten the market means a forced reduction in supply to force prices up so consumers pay more. That’s not a subsidy from the taxpayer but from the consumer which amounts to the same thing in the end.

Farming in Europe is facing a crisis. But if government intervention in the market by way of subsidies and quota controls is the answer they are asking the wrong question.

Unintentional arrogance #2

David Garret said on Q&A yesterday morning that he’d apologised unreservedly for comments which offended a parliamentary services staff member.

PAUL . . . did you make an inappropriate remark to a female staff member?

DAVID I believe that’s perfectly possible Paul.

PAUL Yes or no?

DAVID Well what’s inappropriate, Paul I come from a background – I’m probably the only Member of Parliament who has been an oil rig worker for ten years, it was a big adjustment to become a lawyer, and even bigger adjustment to become an MP, I’m on a very steep learning curve, I now understand very clearly that the kind of thing that might have been okay in a law firm in Tonga is not okay in parliament.

PAUL The perception of course of the woman obviously is that it was an inappropriate remark, Rodney Hide worked on oil rigs too but he doesn’t made inappropriate remarks. Have you apologised to the woman?

DAVID Oh I have Paul, yes, unreservedly.

PAUL Do you regret making the remark?

DAVID I do, very much so yes.

An unreserved apology and regret for having made the remark ought to be the end of the matter.

But I’m left with some questions:

What’s the difference between a law firm in Tonga and parliament?

Shouldn’t you understand what’s appropriate before you enter parliament?

If you don’t whose responsibility is it to ensure you do?

June 22 in history

On June 22:

1856 English author H. Rider Haggard  was born.

1906 US author and aviator Anne Morrow Lindbergh was born.

Charles and Anne Morrow Lindbergh

 

1932 English Actress Prunella Scales  was born.

 

1969 The Cuyahoga River in north east Ohio caught fire, leading to a crack-down on pollution and providing impetus for the environmental movement.

Did you see the one about . . .

Thought for a Friday at Not PC – putting ladies in their place.

An essential accessory for men at Frenemy – the only difference between men and boys is the price of their toys.

Driving made illegal  at NZ Conservative

10 illnesses and their effects on history  at Listerve (warning some disturbing images).

A NZ blog ranking tool at Open Parachute (because of the cartoon).

Thank God I’m a country (and city) girl  at Tugging the String

‘Neath the tractor woes  at The Collie Farm Blog

Animals were definitely harmed in the production of this story at Front Porch Republic

Old view or new?

The photo which used to top the blog was the view from my kitchen window at dawn:

The one which now tops it was the same view on a spring afternoon:

Except that it can’t be cropped to show the fence and fit the header.

Which do you prefer?

The answer’s more important than the question

Kerre Woodham has got to grips with the referendum question:

. . . What he was saying was, should a bunch of poxy lefties, many of them childless, be telling me what to do in my own home? Although the question reads: “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence?”

For the terminally confused and bewildered, commas will help you out enormously. Using commas, the question basically reads as: “Should a smack be a criminal offence?” See? Easy.

The other side would have asked: “Should the striking of children as part of lazy parenting be allowed?” Put in the commas and it’s: “Should the striking of children be allowed?” You can see the loaded messages behind each brief question.

Kerre points out that most of the almost 92% who voted in favour of Norm Withers’ petition on violent crime, weren’t answering the convoluted question which included a prescription for hard labour. They were expressing their anger and concern about increasing violence and an apparent disconnect between the law and justice.

They answered another question and by doing so made the answer more important than the question.

I suspect there will be a similar result in the child discipline referendum. Partly because, as Kerre said, many people don’t like being told what to do. But even more so because they don’t believe parents should be criminalised, or even at risk of it, for administering a minor smack.

Some people aren’t going to vote because the question is loaded.

Loaded or not the intent is clear and I’m going to vote because I value the right to do so.

I’m not going to vote yes because I think the current law is a bad one. Stephen Franks explains why:

. . . everyone is criminalised for smacking.

That’s the way criminal law works in rule of law countries. It applies to everyone equally. Whether or not you are an offender does not depend on the mood or political inclinations of those armed with the state’s coercive authority. It depends on what the law says, and what you’ve done. The law is not the plaything or the tool of the ruler. All are subject to it, whether or not the ruler decides not to enforce it, or enforces it the way he’d prefer it was written.

The right of private prosecution is precious for that reason. Otherwise rulers can play favourites, and decide who benefits and who is damaged by the law. In other words the enforcer is given the power to effectively make up the law as they go along.

And that is exactly what the compromise in the current law does. It says everyone who smacks is criminal, but the the Police are to decide which ones pay the price. Not the Courts, not Parliament, but the Police.

 I could make an invalid vote by crossing out both yes and no and I haven’t yet discounted that option.

But nor have I discounted voting no.

Smacking is not a good way to discipline children and anyone who thinks they can smack a child “lovingly” has a corrupted view of love.

But should a parent who lightly smacks a child – in what is almost always a spur of the moment reaction to dangerous or disruptive behaviour be criminalised for doing so ?

Should police time be wasted on investigating a minor smack?

My answer to both those questions is no and because of that I am beginning to think that I will vote no .

In spite of a concerted effort from highly regarded organisations which advocate on behalf of children to get people to vote “yes”, I think the result of the child discipline referendum will be a resounding no.

National and Labour both know the damage this issue did to the previous government and both would like it to go away.

But I think they’re underestimating the strength of feeling about it. Not just from the extremists but from moderate people who don’t think smacking is good but don’t want parents criminalised for doing it.

Chester Burrows had a way round that problem with an amendment which meant no-one could get away with violence through a “reasonable force” defence in Section 59 of the Crimes Act. John Bowscawen offers a similar option in a private member’s bill.

The government doesn’t want to get sidetracked on relatively unimportant issues. But bad law makes little issues big issues and until this one is dealt with it will fester.