Red Alert

Archive for the ‘#OpenLabourNZ’ Category

The law (of NZ) according to Kafka

Posted by on May 21st, 2013

The world’s gone mad! I hear that a lot. Now I’m starting to believe it.

In our own parliament there are a series of laws being introduced (under urgency) which are not able to be properly scrutinised because the advice from officials about their impact is apparently too sensitive for us mere mortals to behold. The long term ramifications of this are not good for our rights as citizens; our privacy and our ability to trust our government.

Andrew Geddis has written eloquently about this, in particular with regard to a  law passed at the weekend which laid out the (deeply inadequate) terms upon which carers could be paid to care for severely disabled family members. The basis of the legislation  is highly questionable but the ability to debate that and any legal risks has been curtailed by the removal (or redaction) of this important official advice from the publicly released Regulatory Impact Statement (or RIS). Keith Ng at Public Address said much the same thing only in less words and in more colourful language.

There has been a growing and disturbing pattern emerging in this government to blatantly redact important information from publicly available documents. The removal of important information from a Regulatory Impact Statement reaches new heights however as it effectively nobbles the Opposition members of parliament in being able to debate and vote on the law in our parliament.

The Disability Bill was the third Bill introduced into the House within a week which removed large tracts of critical information and advice from the Regulatory Impact Statement. I say “critical information and advice”, but we can only assume it was important and critical because we simply don’t know, as it has been removed from the public eye.

The passing of these laws are therefore unable to occur with the full knowledge of their impact on our supposedly democratic and open society.

The first was a Bill which allows the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB)  to assist the SIS, Police and Defence Force to spy on New Zealand citizens and residents, as long as it has the approval of the Prime Minister of the day.  Its Regulatory Impact Statement doesn’t even pretend to contain any real analysis of the risks for human rights, free speech and individual privacy. It boldly says there has been no consultation with the public. The hearings on this bill are very short and will be heard by a special select committee of party leaders. The likelihood is remote of all party leaders being available to hear submissions and then pay the required attention  to ensure good law-making about such an important and controversial matter in such a short time.

The second (which is linked to the first) is the Telecommunications (Interception Capability and Security) Bill which allow the GCSB and the Government extraordinary powers to intervene in a Telco network; from how it is designed, to how it operates in NZ. Should you be charged, then some evidence against you may be too secret (for you) to even hear. This Bill has two Regulatory Impact Statements: here and here. Both are heavily redacted.

In particular, look at page 9 of the  New Framework for network security which sets out the risks of the legislation: Unfortunately, the public is not allowed to know what most of those risks are because they are withheld. The period during which the public can provide submissions has been shortened from six weeks to five. We are now in week two. I urge everyone with an interest in our telecommunications frameworks and in robust democracy to submit.

It’s stranger than fiction. And immensely disturbing for our so-called Open Nation. Consider this:

In Franz Kafka’s The Trial; a man is arrested and prosecuted by a remote, inaccessible authority, with the nature of his crime revealed to neither him nor the reader.

His guilt is assumed, the bureaucracy running it (the remote inaccessible authority) is vast with many levels, and everything is secret, from the charge, to the rules of the court, to the authority behind the courts – even the identity of the judges at the higher levels.

Under the passing of these two laws, this could be our new reality. How did we get to this place? And what are we going to do about it?

 


Systemic data breaches; The wider issues

Posted by on March 28th, 2013

Labour members outlined the shocking systemic information security crisis emerging across government ministries, departments and agencies. This issue needs attention at the highest levels. Instead it is being treated on a case by case basis and the Prime Minsiter even made light of the data breaches earlier this week

 

 


Systemic data breaches continue

Posted by on March 28th, 2013

Shocking revelations in the House from Lianne Dalziel this afternoon of ANOTHER data breach from EQC where thousands of people have had their financial details released to an unauthorised person.

Lianne’s urgent question in the House was granted

 

 


Moving on to the next challenge

Posted by on February 25th, 2013

I have enjoyed the Health portfolio. It is huge and arguably, it takes longer than one year to get around and establish networks. I have been doing that in the past year and I am grateful to all those who were prepared to engage intelligently and repeatedly with me. I have been pleased to stick up for diabetics in the disastrous changeover to the Care Sens blood glucose meters. It was a mistake and should be rescinded. It affects the way people manage their diabetes and directly impacts their well being, especially for Type 1 diabetics.

I have also made a running on the increase in prescription charges, changes to pharmacists’ contracts with the DHBs, and the burden of implementation of changes falling on local pharmacies. This sector is in chaos and Tony Ryall continues to pretend that there is nothing to see here. Shelves full of uncollected prescriptions would say otherwise. If people can’t afford medicines, and some clearly can’t, we are only going to see additional hospitalisations further town the track.  This isn’t rocket science – just medical science.

But now I take up a new challenge with the Environment portfolio.  And there are challenges aplenty.  We would all love our myth of being 100% pure to become fact again but we need aggressive leadership in this area if that is ever to happen. From our waterways to our air quality, and much more besides, there is much to do to restore our natural environment and to protect it for future generations.  I look forward to that challenge.

Thanks again to all you good health folk for working with me over the last year.  Keep up the good work!


Labour’s Summer School: the place to be

Posted by on January 13th, 2013

2013 is the year Labour will start to flesh out our policy process. In two weeks Labour members will get another chance to have in depth conversations about policy, social democracy and ideology.

Labour members from around New Zealand will descend on Wainuiomata in my electorate in to be part of Labour’s largest Summer School ever.

Summer School is Labour’s pre-eminent forum for Labour members of all ages to discuss, debate, and develop ideas on social democracy and how the Labour Party can realise and define its vision. Summer School has been an annual feature in January since 2003 and is organised by Young Labour. It offers Labour members a vital opportunity to think beyond day-to-day politics and to push the boundaries of what we can achieve.

This year is the largest Summer School ever and will culminate in David Shearer delivering a speech on Labour’s priorities in 2013.

The 2013 Summer School theme “Labour’s Unique Narrative for the Future” will encourage us to consider what makes (or should make) Labour unique among the political parties in Aotearoa and what values and history reinforce our uniqueness as the progressive party of change.

We will discuss a slew of interesting sessions on a range of policy, organisational and ideological issues with great speakers such as Rod Oram, Brian Easton, Gavin Ellis, Deborah Russell and Amanda Brydon.

Have a look at the Summer School flyer and programme. It is your chance to have an impact on Labour’s policy process and discuss the big issues: economic challenges of the future, the role of neoliberalism in Aotearoa, human rights and solutions to inequality.

If you would like to attend Labour Summer School you can click here to find out more information and register.


US Virgin

Posted by on September 19th, 2012

Tomorrow I take my first trip to the US. I am enormously privileged to be part of a group of people from multiple nations who will consider the importance of intellectual property rights in the global trade and business communities.

For some of you that might sound deadly dull. For me, it’s the opportunity of a lifetime to have look at the impact of technology on how we live our lives and how our new economy is emerging. And how a thinker, a policy maker and legislator from New Zealand might be able to absorb information, get a few ideas, have a few arguments and come up with some concepts that could add value to New Zealand.

I am sponsored by the US State Department.

I will post some thoughts along the way.


How many electorates aren’t being well served by National MPs?

Posted by on September 4th, 2012

My post yesterday on Bill English and his mostly closed electorate offices in Balclutha and Gore has attracted some interest on Red Alert and on facebook.

A number of people commented that they were experiencing the same issues in other National-held electorates.

I’m wondering how many National Party electorate offices are actually staffed on a regular basis?

And how much direct constituency work they do and what options are open to constituents if they try to approach their local MP and are rebuffed, ignored or can’t make contact because it’s always closed.

Would be interesting to find out.

 


Kiwirail blocks new work for Hillside and Hutt workshops

Posted by on August 24th, 2012

Click on the image to enlarge. Here is the link


The right to know

Posted by on July 25th, 2012

The Law Commission has just released an important and awaited report; The Public’s Right to Know: Review of the Official Information Legislation. I don’t think it’s online yet but keep trying

I haven’t read it yet, but I see that a main recommendation is more proactive release of information so that people don’t have to ask. This is an important advance.

The Commission is recommending a new statutory duty on public agencies to take reasonably practicable steps to proactively make official information publicly available. Professor Burrows stresses that the objective has been to avoid placing an unrealistic burden on agencies to immediately release large amounts of information.

The Commission recommends the Acts could be improved in a number of targeted areas such as:

 • revamping the Ombudsmen’s guidance about release and withholding, using decided cases as examples to provide more clarity

• redrafting unclear and confusing withholding grounds – in particular the so-called “good government” grounds

• new withholding grounds to better protect commercially sensitive information, and information provided in the course of a statutory investigation or inquiry

• giving advance notice to people and organisations whose private, confidential or commercial information is liable to be released

• adjusting the grounds for refusing requests which impose too great a workload on agencies • encouraging proactive release of public information

• new statutory oversight functions to support the legislative framework

• increasing the reach of the legislation by including additional bodies within its scope, either fully or partially, such as specified information about the courts and certain parliamentary bodies


Asking the questions

Posted by on June 18th, 2012

You might remember a couple of months ago there was a flurry of public scrutiny on the National Government’s stonewalling on what it knew about the Chinese company Huawei’s involvement in the roll-out of ultra-fast broadband.

The Australian Govt had blocked Huawei from bidding for contracts to supply services to its massive ultrafast broadband scheme claiming issues of national security. In contrast, the NZ Govt turned a blind eye to Huawei’s involvement here. And refused to comment. Much.

Then a few weeks’ ago, Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce announced a whole of govt deal to save money on mobile phone costs across multiple departments. It included the involvement of 2 Degrees, NZ’s reputable third mobile phone provider, but which has equipment and services provided by Huawei.

Meanwhile, in the US Senate last week, questions continued to be raised about Huawei. Please explain letters have been written to Huawei’s CEO and Chair.

I think it’s valid to continue to ask the questions of the New Zealand Govt. Here’s what I asked Amy Adams (the current ICT Minister) in parliament last week:

Clare Curran: Is she aware of concerns raised by members of the United States House of Representatives Intelligence Committee this week regarding the possible national security threat posed by the potential expansion of Huawei into the US telecommunications infrastructure; if so, has she received any reports about the national security implications of the all-of-Government mobile phone procurement contract recently signed by Steven Joyce, which includes services provided by Huawei?

Hon AMY ADAMS: As that member is well aware, we do not comment on matters of national security, but I can assure her that we take network security very seriously.

Clare Curran: I seek leave to table an article published on 13 June in Computerworld , titled “US lawmakers quiz ZTE, Huawei over spying concerns”.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.

Clare Curran: I seek leave to table a media release by representatives from the US intelligence committee about concerns about the investigation of Huawei and ZTE.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.

Clare Curran: I seek leave to table the correspondence between the US House of Representatives select committee on intelligence, and the chairman and senior vice-president of Huawei Technologies.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection.

  • Document, by leave, laid on the Table of the House.

Rt Hon Winston Peters: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. You would have heard the Minister’s answer. She said: “we do not comment on issues of national security”. However, the very point that the member is asking about is that given Steven Joyce has signed a document that says it is not a matter of national security, why, then, can the Minister not answer the question? Mr Joyce and National have assured us that Huawei’s involvement is not a matter of national security. Therefore, why can the Minister not answer the question she has been asked?

(more…)


John Key’s “ghost followers” Part 2

Posted by on June 17th, 2012

Further to the previous post which analysed John Key’s Twitter followers and found an astounding 57% were not “real” followers, Boolean undertook a further analysis.

This time he analysed  John Key, myself, Russel Norman, Metiria Turei, David Shearer and Gareth Hughes. The results are here

They show pretty clearly that we all have followers who are questionable. But the percentages for all, except Key are pretty standard. More than half of John Key’s followers don’t stack up.

I reckon that’s a bit odd. I’ll be undertaking a cleanout of my followers. And expect a bit of scrutiny of them.

I think the question that remains is how did John Key acquire nearly 30,000 bogus  followers?


John Key’s “ghost” followers

Posted by on June 17th, 2012

JohnKeyInfographic2

I was sent this link  a couple of days ago by Boolean.co.nz which raises some interesting issues about the extent of John Key’s public support on social media.

To be fair I asked for an analysis of my own more modest twitter following to establish the extent of my “true” followers. The results of this analysis speaks for itself. (To see the comparison with my followers see below or click on the link).

Boolean has since done an update, which I’ll post shortly. But the question has to be asked, how come so many of JK’s followers are not real? Where did they come from? Can you “buy” followers?

Chris Keall’s recent article in The National Business Review had John Key @johnkeypm as ‘top of the twits’ with over 50,000 subscribers. With Newt Gingrich and Kevin Rudd amongst others being accused of buying Twitter followers I thought it would be interesting to investigate some of John Key’s followers.

In the comments for the NBR article MikePSmith suggested most of the followers were spambots with CK replying “overall it looks like most are living breathing New Zealanders”. I cast my eye over the followers and decided exactly the opposite: most of the following accounts looked extremely fishy.

The @johnkeypm account is a managed account – that is the man himself does not update it personally. Much like the man it is decidedly bland and delivers the party line more like an RSS feed.

To make the account look as popular as possible accounts that regular users block and report for spam are kept as active followers. If the account isn’t actually being used in the traditional manner those annoying spam accounts aren’t interfering with everyday use.

So with the help of Twitter API I analysed the followers of the @johnkeypm account. The results confirmed almost exactly what my eyes had already told me: most of the accounts were spambots, zombies, or worse.

With a very loose definition of an actual Twitter user as opposed to a spambot zombie (10 followers, 10 tweets, tweeted this year, have bothered to change the display picture from the default) the follower count falls to less than half at 22,000 accounts.
If you care to further refine the criteria to what most of us would consider regular active users the numbers just fall away. Limiting to accounts based in New Zealand (not fair to expats or those who choose not to disclose) then the numbers dwindle even further.

John Key probably remains New Zealand politician with the largest Twitter follower count but with a much smaller margin than the numbers suggest – if one is at all concerned about quality or real accounts.

UPDATE 15/06/2012
Other accounts will be analysed for comparison

Clare Curran @clarecurranmp
No avatar pic 8% (197 accounts)
No tweets 5% (115 accounts)
No followers 1% (15 accounts)
Inactives 22% (538 accounts) Corrected 16/06/2012
‘Real’ followers 85% (2076 accounts)

Update coming


And…….

Posted by on May 8th, 2012

If you think today’s National Board minutes leak was interesting – just wait until documents are tabled in the case Collins plans to take.

Explosive.


Good point

Posted by on May 1st, 2012

On Twitter this afternoon someone mused on the contrast between the UK parliament being granted a couple of days ago a snap debate on the Leveson Inquiry into  the British press following the News International phone hacking scandal whereas today here in New Zealand, our own Speaker would not grant an application for an urgent debate regarding the John Banks investigation and Key not standing Banks down as Minister.

The Guardian has written a good editorial about the role of parliament in holding the government and its Ministers to account. I would hope that our parliament sees its role in a similar vein.

Jeremy Hunt: the court of parliament

Monday 30 April 2012 20.53 BST

If it is parliament’s job to hold ministerial feet to the fire, then a good parliament will make the government sweat.

The Commons got halfway there yesterday, after Speaker John Bercow accepted an “urgent question” about the position of Jeremy Hunt. In opposition, David Cameron proposed Westminster clawing back power from Whitehall, but as prime minister he was dragged across the road from Downing Street in a palpable rage.


Keep our assets. Sign the petition.

Posted by on April 27th, 2012

Labour is supporting the community campaign Keep Our Assets which aims to force a citizens initiated referendum (CIR) on asset sales. The campaign includes a range of community groups and political parties and is led by Grey Power and the CTU. We need your help in supporting this campaign.

In order to get for a CIR we first need to get the signatures of 10% of the voting population. That amounts to a bit more than 300,000 signatures. It is a lot, but on this issue there is no doubt that the public is on our side.

The Clerk of parliament has approved the referendum question. It is:

Do you support the Government selling up to 49% of Meridian Energy, Mighty River Power, Genesis Power, Solid Energy and Air New Zealand?

Labour has created a website to support the campaign.  This is a great chance to put the government under pressure and to remind New Zealanders that the future of their power companies and airline is at stake.

Most Kiwis want to keep our assets in NZ hands. If you agree please sign the petition. You can download it here and circulate to everyone you know, and you can sign up to the campaign here.

You can make a difference.


Red Alert Radio (Auckland)

Posted by on April 25th, 2012

Auckland Labour MPs are now broadcasting every Thursday morning, with Red Alert Radio via PlanetFM (104.6)

We aim to provide in-depth interviews you may not hear anywhere else.  So far, there have been two broadcasts with many more ahead.

Tomorrow morning at 9.05, you can listen to an interview with Alastair Duncan, joint advocate for the Oceania workers about the state of Aged Care in New Zealand.

If you have topics you would like to hear more about, and suggestions for who you would like us to interview, happy to hear from you.


The internet. The new frontier

Posted by on April 1st, 2012

Vanity Fair on who should/could control the internet and whether it’s even possible to. Affects all of us. Great graphic. Worth a read.

World War 3.0

TWO FUTURES? Privacy, piracy, security, sovereignty—the divisions on these issues reflect an even deeper split between those who want tight control and those who want unfettered freedom.

When the Internet was created, decades ago, one thing was inevitable: the war today over how (or whether) to control it, and who should have that power. Battle lines have been drawn between repressive regimes and Western democracies, corporations and customers, hackers and law enforcement. Looking toward a year-end negotiation in Dubai, where 193 nations will gather to revise a U.N. treaty concerning the Internet, Michael Joseph Gross lays out the stakes in a conflict that could split the virtual world as we know it.

Stephen Doyle
Read the rest here

The New Watchdogs

Posted by on February 19th, 2012

A documentary film just released in France, titled Les Nouveaux Chien de Gard (or The New Watchdogs) outlines how most newspapers, radio and television stations are owned by industrial or financial groups closely linked to power.

The film is based on an essay by Serge Halimi about media , published in 1997. The book was made ​​into a film in France in January 2012. It sets out the collusion between government media, political and economic, focussing on television and major French newspapers.

It could translate into pretty much any country around the world. I understand it also sets out a challenge to journalists to not be tame and to stand up for their craft.

Perhaps you’ll find it odd that a politician would care, let alone write about such things. As a former journalist I care strongly about the importance of good journalism, the ownership structures of our media, the lack of investment in public broadcasting and the growing concerns about political interference that is daily undermining the craft, putting more pressure on individual journalists and treating news as a commodity.

Isn’t it time we stood up for independence, more objective reporting and pride in the craft of journalism?More distance between media and governments (any government). The media was named as the fourth pillar of democracy for good reasons. Can we fight for it in this country too?

The promo clip below for Les Nouveaux Chien de Gard is in French. But you might get the gist.

Who are our new watchdogs?

Hat tip: BE


Open and shut

Posted by on February 7th, 2012

Every time there’s a new government elected, each of the Ministries and departments provide their new Minister with a briefing on the policy issues and decisions required in their portfolio. They are called Briefings to Incoming Ministers (or BIMs)

This year, some Ministers have chosen to withhold (or redact) substantial amounts of information in these briefings. The MFAT and Communications and IT portfolios are two examples. There are more.

To understand the importance of the BIM and the basis upon which information is withheld from public scrutiny it’s worth reading this thoughtful post from Lawyer John Edwards:

Briefings to the Incoming Minister – Going Backwards From Openness to Secrecy?

In the months leading up to a general election, officials start preparing their Briefing to the Incoming Minister (BIM).  In the months after the general election, these BIMs start getting released.

There are no strict rules about what goes into a BIM, and no special provisions about how or when they are released.  They are produced under a convention recorded in the Cabinet Manual that “when a new Minister is appointed, the chief executive of the department concerned must ensure that, as soon as the Minister takes up office, he or she is briefed on the department and the portfolio”.

They range in size and approach, from a comprehensive stocktake of what is happening in the department or Ministry to a manifesto of the ideological drivers of the officials favoured approach to the particular policy.

Edwards advises that:

Anyone who is interested in seeing more of the BIMs than the Government has seen fit to release should simply write to the Minister concerned, and if they stick to their predetermined position about the deletions, ask the Ombudsman to investigate.  Perhaps then we will have a clearer idea about the expectations next time around.


Hayden Munro

Posted by on February 5th, 2012

Hayden is one of those doing some thinking about the future direction of progressive politics in New Zealand. Patrick on Progress Report has published a series of three blogs that are certainly worth a look.

One. Two. Three.