OPINION: Julia Suryakusuma, the author of Julia’s Jihad, tries to untangle the contradictions of press freedom in Indonesia with the unrelenting stranglehold on West Papua amid controversy over the continuing detention of two French journalists.

When you are a journalist, you know that following your journalistic instincts sometimes means big trouble.

That’s why a slew of films have been made on this topic, including: The Killing Fields (1984) a drama about the civil war in Cambodia; The China Syndrome (1979), an American thriller about the dangers of nuclear power; and Veronica Guerin, a 2003 biographical Irish film about the drug trade in Dublin.

These three films were all based on true stories.

The characters of Dith Pran (Haing S. Ngor), Sydney Schanberg (Sam Waterson), Kimberly Wells (Jane Fonda), Richard Adams (Michael Douglas) and the eponymous character of Veronica Guerin (Cate Blanchett), all risked their lives in their pursuit of the truth — the ultimate aim of investigative journalism. For that Guerin also paid the ultimate price: She was murdered in 1996.

I reckon a film entitled Live from Papua could also be made about the two French journalists, Valentine Bourrat and Thomas Dandois, who have been detained in Papua since August 6 this year. They were arrested while filming the conditions in which the local population lives.

The trouble was, they were there on tourist visas.

So when the authorities caught them not long after they arrived, it would have been pretty easy to hit them with immigration violations and deport them.

A clear-cut case, huh?

Still detained

So how come two months later they are still being detained, especially after they admitted they were working without press visas and have apologised? It turns out that because Bourrat and Dandois had contacted local pro-independence activists, seeking to film their demands, they are facing the possibility of subversion charges.

If brought to trial, they could face up to five years in jail and a fine of up to Rp 500 million (US$41,000). Heavy stuff.

The Alliance of Indonesian Journalists (AJI) has condemned the detention of the two French journalists. They say that it adds to the long list of the failures of the government of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono when it comes to press freedom in Indonesia.

There is certainly precedent for this sort of thing.

In 2010, another French journalist, Baudoein Koening, was also kicked out.

Unlike Bourrat and Dandois, he was legit: He came with a press visa. His crime was filming a peaceful student demonstration in favor of autonomy.

According to Endy M. Bayuni, former editor-in-chief of The Jakarta Post, it has always been very difficult to get permission to go to Papua as a journalist.

‘Go slow’

Even when international news agencies like Agence France-Press (AFP), Reuters or Associated Press (AP) journalists apply, it can take more than a year to get a visa.

This “go slow” approach enables the government to deny there is a ban on foreign journalists visiting Papua.

Tourists on the other hand, can travel freely in Papua. No wonder so many journalists come to Indonesia using a tourist visa. They just have to be careful not to get caught.

Bourrat and Dandois were unlucky. They came at a time when tension and violence were at a peak, with five separatist rebels shot dead in an exchange of gunfire with the Indonesian military just a few days earlier.

The political transition was another factor, with local military authorities exploiting the gap between the end of the Yudhoyono administration and the start of that of Joko “Jokowi” Widodo.

Benjamin Ismail, head of the Asia-Pacific desk of the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders (RWB) has a take on this.

“For the local authorities it might be the last opportunity to send a big message internationally not only to foreign journalists but also to human-rights activists, NGOs and even the UN, as they have tried to send inspectors in the region,” says Ismail.

Foreigner blackout

The reality is that there has been a foreign-media blackout imposed on Papua whereby the central government has restricted the access of journalists, activists, researchers, diplomats and aid workers ever since it was annexed by Indonesia in 1963.

Yet this has not prevented Papua’s separatist movement from becoming well known. Activists are jailed for raising the banned separatist flag, and security forces are heavy-handed, engaging in abuse, violence and even torture.

Despite Papua’s vast natural wealth, most Papuans live in extreme poverty. Is it any wonder they are resentful and want independence?

Indonesia ranks 132 on the RWB press freedom index, lower than Thailand (at 130), and Brunei (at 117). Ismail says that Indonesia’s rank would be much higher if Papua were excluded. They do that for Hong Kong (60) and Taiwan (50), which rank much higher than China (175).

Ismail points out that in 2006 Indonesia ratified the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights. It therefore must be implemented as part of Indonesian law.

The covenant says you cannot discriminate regarding the entry of foreign journalists, especially to sensitive regions where there are allegations of human-rights abuse.

Ah well, it certainly isn’t the first time Indonesia has ratified an international convention and then not applied it domestically.

After his expulsion, Koening wrote of his experience: “Why does Indonesian democracy stop at Papua?” (The Guardian, June 9, 2010).

The answer is that since its annexation, Papua was basically set up as a colony. This has been the case under every single Indonesian government since 1963.

Will things change with Jokowi? While campaigning in Papua, our incoming president stated that the region’s development was a priority program for his Cabinet and he was committed to implementing it immediately after his inauguration on Oct. 20. He also promised to open Papua to journalists.

Will it finally be possible then, to shoot Live from Papua?

Source: The Jakarta Post

As Pacific voters we should seriously consider getting ourselves united into a force to be reckoned with. It’s pretty simple really: unite as a group, work together to get everyone to polling booths, and get them to cast their votes.

By Tuifa’asisina Mea’ole Keil

My last column, ‘3 More Years Hard Labour’ certainly got some people’s attention. A number of readers contacted me direct and we had some great constructive discussions about the issues raised.

What was even better was that some of the callers were Papalagi. And this is the reason why that was great.

At a number of recent community meetings I’ve been to, I have seen one too many of our Pacific people behave badly in them. In short, these Pacific individuals sometimes lose their cool and get emotional when issues debated start getting to the sensitive bits. They end up raising their voices accompanied by some aggressive postulations and finger pointing. They can be an intimidating sight. Don’t get me wrong, these situations we can handle and sort out ourselves however, the non-Pacific islanders in the room get quite uncomfortable with that type of behaviour and worse, it gets in the way of an open debate which leads to recommendations and solutions.

So to have a number of papalagi call and challenge my reasoning in last week’s column was therefore quite refreshing and as a result of it, I learnt quite a lot about what was bothering Papalagi people about us Pacific islanders in the lead up and during the recent election.

The main issue the Papalagi callers had about us PIs is this, that we claim the safe Labour seats full of our people but we do not deliver the voters. I countered that a Pacific MP had the highest party vote total. But two of the callers replied, “have a look at the turnout and compare it to 2011 results”.

It forced me to revisit the numbers and found myself mildly “amused”. Amused in that my Papalagi callers were right. But on the other hand, I was alarmed at the voting trend, especially over the last three General Elections.

Since Labour’s win in 2005, the Labour Party has been losing ground steadily. A trend that forecasted if things stay the same Labour would end up losing by record numbers as that would be the result of the low voter trend from 2005. Lo and behold, the worst Labour result in over 92 years is what happened two weeks ago – so we are not surprised.

This weekend, the Electoral Commission will announce the official 2014 general election results. I believe it is best we leave the more detailed comments until then. However, we do have enough data to provide a preview.

Before I begin, I must point out that Pacific islanders traditionally voting for Labour, does not necessarily mean they will vote for Labour. More correctly, as the Papalagi hypothesise, Pacific islanders will vote Labour, but they are terrible at turning up to cast their votes.

It’s a known fact is that Pacific islanders who do make it to the Polling Booth, historically would give their two ticks to Labour. But an increasing number of Pacific voters are not casting their votes. Even worse, more and more of them do not bother to enrol and vote.

So how should Pacific islanders respond to this voting apathy? Or is it unfair that the Papalagi single us out for blame when an estimated 38 per cent of New Zealanders did not bother to vote or enrol as well.

Well, let’s look at it from another angle. Will this reasoning put us Pacific islanders in a position to advocate against child poverty, better housing, home ownership, better schools, jobs, and other issues that we want the government to address? Or will this throwaway line send the message to the Government that we do not mind if the Government does nothing about the issues affecting us deeply?

Is that what we’re saying? Because the trend is likely to continue as young Pacific islanders have the same poor voting record.

With that in mind, let us conduct a critical analyses in the famous historical Labour fortresses of Maungakiekie, Manukau East, Mangere, Manurewa, and Mana, (the 5 Ms). When a comparison of the party votes for the 2011 and 2014 general elections is made, we find, based on the preliminary 2014 results that Labour lost 14,607 party votes.

A closer look reveals that Manukau East with first timer Jenny Salesa lost 4,330 party votes. While in Maungakiekie, Peseta Sam Lotu I’iga, lost 2,516 party votes for National. Labour also lost 2,436. The Greens lost 700, while NZ First and Conservatives recorded minor increases. So where did National, Labour and the Green’s lost votes went? And herein is proof – that in 2014, we had 5,187 people who decided not to cast their vote.

Mangere which had on the day the highest party vote count of 15,100 (but down by 2,860 on 2011) only had a 70 per cent voter turnout. An estimated 12,579 voters in Mangere did not bother to vote.

Of note, National has sent a clear signal/challenge it is confident to take the fight to the South Auckland Electorates. One cannot ignore the bold public displays National put on earlier in the year that caught Labour napping.

We could go on about how and what to compare from the general results, but I can assure you the results are not pretty to look at apart from a few highlights like Hutt South and Dunedin North.

By now, those that know me would say I had to sing about my home electorate Hutt South. But as a former campaigner one thing that gives you the best chance of a winning result is the campaign’s ability to recruit and retain volunteers.

There are so many things/activities/targets you have to achieve in order to win, and 90% PLUS of it has to do with volunteers. And that is what Hutt South did very well.

If one has a look at the Christchurch East by election last year, Labour’s Poto Williams (LAB) won with record breaking results.

Poto’s campaign manager was the seasoned veteran, Jim Anderton.

Anderton with the old school street by street, door by door, face to face campaign tactic, was ably supported by a campaign committee.

A great combination of experience and new high tech, which they had at their disposal, a huge volunteer army from across the country and on the ground that helped via phone calling, travelled at their own expense to be part of the campaign.

The Labour MPs too pulled their weight. I was part of the Labour campaign then, although I am now no longer a member of the Labour Party, Poto’s campaign is how winning campaigns are run.

I believe Poto’s win is the best byelection result on record in terms of voter turn out.

The volunteer army were great and they helped and picked up all sorts of skills from the campaign trainers/co-ordinators. We were thrilled that these volunteers from all over the country had on the ground live situation training which would have been a great asset to Labour in the General Election.

However that was not meant to be. And Labour must now wonder at what could have been.

One of my observations during the election is when I visited Pacific neighbourhoods, two things stood out, the boarded-up state houses, and the lack of enthusiasm by Pacific community leaders to help get our people registered and to the voting booth.

During the General Election campaign it became clear that PIs were like the people of God in the Old Testament, wandering in the wilderness. It also became clear that the community leaders, and this includes MPs and candidates, were not providing the needed leadership.

In a sense, one could say, no one wanted to step forward to play the role of Moses. Even worse Pacific MPs/candidates fear of their Party machinery did not want the role of Moses. The lesson we learn about Moses is when you don’t obey your boss you get to do all the hard work but you do not get a share of the rewards.

The next three years is critical to us all. With National having the majority to govern alone, we may well see the National Party of the 70s and 90s re-incarnated.

I am not a voice in the wilderness, but I am calling our people out. That if we persist with this voting pattern, then we are setting ourselves up for periods of wins and losses. That when a particular party is in government, our issues are addressed. And when another party is in government then we bear the brunt of whatever their social policies that does not include us as their constituency brings.

So what would change for us if we participate in General elections with high voter turnouts and visible community leadership? The answer is simple: we set ourselves up to win all the time.

How do you know that Tuifa’asisina I hear some of you say.

Well the classic example of that win-win by turning out to vote is Grey Power NZ.

Whether it’s Labour or National governments, they know that Grey Power turns out 98 per cent of the time and so they are force to be reckoned with and they have to be listened to.

The evidence of this power is that the Gold Card has survived the threats by National to cut its benefits because National or Labour or whoever is in government cannot afford to be offside with Grey Power.

As we anticipate what fate others will decide for us, can we start talking amongst ourselves and start getting a disciplined strong voice to speak for us?

I am not asking someone to be Moses, we all know that did not end well for Moses. But as Pacific voters we should seriously consider getting ourselves united into a force to be reckoned with. It’s pretty simple really: unite as a group, work together to get everyone to polling booths, and get them to cast their votes.

Voting is a proven winner.

This is a significant development in international climate policy making. However, we must throw caution to the winds noting that similar pledges in the past, such as those made under the Kyoto Protocol, did not result in real global emissions reductions. Pene Lefale.

The international profile of the Pacific has never been higher at the United Nations. But will that translate into currency for climate change mitigation and sustainable development initiatives after the UN’s General Assembly (UNGA), and Ban Ki Moon’s two-day Climate Summit last week?

There is optimism that the corner has changed and the Pacific is in line to finally gain real support come the Paris 2015 climate meeting.

Optimism last week came from various climate groups and independent experts that after 11 gruelling hours of announcements, pledges and promises in the UN’s New York headquarters, the wheels on the climate change bandwagon had finally been set in motion.

They said that investments geared towards greener and blue economies, low carbon pathways, deforestation will be stopped, and the most vulnerable communities and poorer nations will be supported in their efforts to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change effects. But the questions remain about how much will all that mean in terms of emissions cuts and slowing down global climate changes remain.

But there were areas of clarity that augurs well for positive climate change going forward and the lot for Pacific nations.

According to Catherine Brahic reporting for New Scientist, “What is clear is that the emissions cuts that governments have so far committed to add up to around 3.5^oC of global warming, well above the internationally agreed target of 2^oC. What is not clear is whether the promises made in New York are merely a means to meet existing government pledges, or something extra on top.”

David Waskow of the World Resources Institute in Washington DC said, “It’s critically important that we do the accounting.” He points out that there is now a new range of actors – the private sector.

“It’s very exciting but we need to figure out how all the pieces fit together.”

From a Pacific perspective this is a move in the right direction according to Penehuro Lefale, one of the New Zealand scientists that won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. Now the International Climate and Policy Analyst at Bodeker Scientific based in Wellington, Mr Lefale told Pacific Guardians, “This is a significant development in international climate policy making.”

However, he cautions about such positive developments noting that similar pledges in the past, such as those made under the Kyoto Protocol, did not result in real global emissions reductions. He points to the fact that global emissions continued to increase since the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol in 1997.

Said Lefale, “For example, global emissions jumped 2.3 per cent in 2013 to record levels, according to latest figures released by the Global Carbon Project and published in the journal Nature Geoscience.

“However, the 2013 emissions growth was a bit slower than the average growth rate of 2.5 percent over the past decade. Much of the dip was caused by an economic slowdown in China, which is now the world’s single largest source of emissions.”

Lefale also observed that June 2014 marked the first time that the average levels of carbon dioxide were about 400 parts per million for three months in a row, according to the American Meteorological Society (AMS). The AMS predicts those levels are likely to reach an average of 405 parts per million within a few years.

But last week was quite possibly the best ever profiling and promotion of the Pacific at the United Nations.

The raised Pacific familiarity at the UN rests on three Pacific words that became part of mainstream conversations at the UN General Assembly, and at Ban Ki Moon’s two-day Climate Summit.

The words were “Samoa” and “Matafele Peinem”. The three appeared in UN titles and presentations; were highlighted, endorsed and embedded in concept, conference and official papers; and spoken through lips and sign-language of interpreters and translators speaking the UN’s six official languages simultaneously.

Samoa because that was the Pacific nation where 115 of the UN’s 192 members spent five-days just three weeks ago. The first time the conference on Small Island States (SIDS2014) was held in the Pacific region.

And one of its most enduring image would be of Secretary General ban ki Moon accepting the Samoan high chief title of Tupua from the village of Saleapaga.

It was in Samoa that UN members signed onto the SAMOA (Small Island Developing States Accelerated Modalities of Action) Pathway. A formal outcome document that now includes a registry of nearly 300 partnerships involving 166 countries, 85 international organization and 1,200 major groups all focused on ways to boost the capacity of small island states to achieve sustainable development.

Collectively the Samoa Pathway will mobilize more than USD$1.9 billion, “Many of the initiatives announced are looking at the unique position of small island developing states as an opportunity to accelerate advancements on renewable energy, disaster preparedness and sustainable food systems, to name just a few key areas,” Mr Wu Hongbo, the SIDS2014 Conference Secretary General said.

It is to date, the most expensive and logistically, the most complex conference ever undertaken by a Pacific nation. But according to Samoa Prime Minister, Tuilaepa Sailele Naioti Malielegoai, it was well worth it.

“…the outcome justified the effort. You have to come here and you have to appreciate our reality,” he said at the conference closing ceremony.

‘Matafele Peinem’ is a poem by Marshall Islands poet Kathy Jetnil-Kijiner. Selected from 544 others in a global UN search to find a voice representing civil society, Matafele Peinem became that clarion call at Ban Ki Moon’s Summit.

Kathy captivated world leaders as she testified to the stark reality of climate change and its impacts not only in the Pacific, but other vulnerable nations around the world.

The two-day UN climate change summit drew speeches of warnings and proposals from business and world leaders, including President Obama.

UN officials also submitted ambitious programs in agriculture, forestry, energy, transportation and finance, to fight the greenhouse gasses blamed for contributing to climate change.

All of this is being geared to the climate change conference in Paris next year, aimed to produce a new international agreement on climate change to succeed the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. It will be hosted by the French government, who said on Tuesday [23 September] that it will lead by example. It pledged $1 billion to the Green Climate Fund, matching a pledge made by Germany last summer.

A few other countries also pledged to support the fund, which will channel funding from rich nations to poor ones to help them prepare for global warming. By the end of the day, $2.3 billion had been promised, all of which was new money except for Germany’s contribution.

But the politics of climate change are toxic according to many climate change political experts.

One of them, Doreen Stabinsky, a professor at the College of the Atlantic explained, “It’s hard to step into the international space when many countries, like the U.S., have trouble agreeing at home on what to do.”

This is the situation mirrored in New Zealand as well.

Prof Stabinsky added that making a strong commitment to climate change efforts is difficult for many nations because they would have to admit responsibility for climate change, something she said many countries are loath to do.

It is not lost that this ‘toxic political’ environment has killed off recent efforts, such as 2009′s meeting in Copenhagen, Denmark, leaving behind broken promises and documents unsigned, raise questions on how much will actually get done and why any meaningful outcomes have eluded vulnerable nations like Samoa and the Marshall Islands to the much needed financial help to protect them from the impacts of climate change.

But since last week’s UN meetings, there is an increase in real hope that Paris 2015 will be the real deal.

And it desperately needs to be so as already parts of Kiribati are submerged, those parts of their heritage and history joining the mythical city of Atlantis. There are many others with similar threats to existence.

Even some positive news earlier this year of a Tuvalu family that found a legal way through humanitarian grounds in which climate change featured and were granted permanent residence in New Zealand may be short-lived. Without doubt, the judge in that case hinted that hole could well be stitched up rather than open up.

In other small island region’s the tale is the same.

Grenada’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, Nickolas Steele, told the UN that climate shocks are amongst the “most terrifying” for his country and other small islands around the world and because of those risks, island states must be granted concessionary financing.

Due to high import costs of fossil fuels, electricity in Grenada costs 4 to 5 times higher than in developed countries. He said Grenada cannot educate its people, if its school children have no access to electricity. Islands like Grenada come to the climate table, “not like hapless victims with cap-in-hand”. Renewables must be implemented in the Islands with zero subsidies.

It is these realities that were at the heart of Samoa Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Naioti’s fight to bring the UN to his small Pacific nation of Samoa in September 2014.

A monumental hosting event where the entire country was turned into one conference hall with villages becoming conference wings for the various multilevel meetings taking place.

An ingenious strategy that allowed as many of the 115 UN members and their delegations to see as much of Samoa and its vulnerabilities to the impacts climate change as much as possible.

But that achievement was not enough for Samoa’s indomitable leader’s quest to catalyse developed countries into climate change action.

He showed Samoa was not prepared to rest on the success of the SIDS2014 conference by bringing that as a feather to its cap as its report to the UN General Assembly 17 days later – no that wouldn’t do.

Tuilaepa raised the bar further for such a small nation with minimal greenhouse gas emissions by using the UNGA to announce a new energy transformation initiative.

In his concluding remarks Tuilaepa announced, “I am therefore pleased to launch today [23 September] the SIDS Lighthouses initiative. A joint effort by SIDS and partners, and supported by the International Renewable Energy Agency, the Lighthouses initiative provides a framework for action to move away from a piecemeal approach and transform our energy systems through a structured, holistic and sustainable approach, taking into account medium and long-term requirements and impacts, and ensures that the requisite institutional and human capacity is in place.

“Our commitment to energy transformation through deployment of renewable energy is evident. In just three months, 22 SIDS have joined the Lighthouses initiative. We are heartened by the fact that 12 development partners have committed to support us in this effort and we invite you all to join us in this journey.

“The success of the SIDS Lighthouses will not be measured by giga-tons of reduced emissions.   It will be measured by the commitment of all of us to act in the effort to transform the SIDS’ energy systems. Renewable energy holds the key to stabilizing the climate system and we are ready to lead the way in the transition to a sustainable future because, for many SIDS, this is not only a matter of development and prosperity, but also survival.”

Actions speak louder than words, and there is hope from all small island developing states that their big actions will form the backbone of positive global warming actions by the big developed nations in a 2015 Paris Treaty.

A recent (repeat) migrant, also voted for Annette King because after an absence of 25 years, had to rely on the advice of a cousin who said she was a good MP and after reading a column by Sir Bob Jones who listed her qualities in suggesting she should take over as leader for Labour weeks before the elections.

By Alan Ah Mu

It’s important to vote so go vote.

That was the message which popped up before the screening of Lucy in the movie theatre, a newspaper, on Samoa Capital Radio and Tuifa’asisina Meaole Keil’s articles in Pacific Guardians – to go with greater appreciation of how society works and the need to take part in it that comes with advancing age.

The word is too few Pacific Islanders vote but since too much is at stake and influenced by the reminders mentioned, we did it.  We voted.

Labour would lose badly the polls said and so it proved, despite the two in our household we gave them their electorate and party votes.

One, a casual worker in the service industry, voted for Annette King and couldn’t decide which party to go for so ticked Labour on impulse.

The choice of party wasn’t pre-planned unlike the choice of candidate.

The other Labour voter is a schoolgirl who followed to the voting booth a fellow Samoan school mate whose sister was an election official of sorts who showed them how to vote.

Both the worker and student voters are recent migrants from Samoa.

A longer resident of New Zealand by two years in our household voted for the Greens both ways impressed by their stress on equality.

All bothered to register and vote because of my urgings to do so, based on the determination to take part, in turn prompted by a realisation that politicians won’t listen to you unless you vote – and the reminders mentioned above.

Even popped into King’s office and got the registration forms for all of us on a walk to the supermarket nearby.

The staffer who handed over the forms said something like, “Stand beside them and make sure they fill them in.”

Knew what she meant.

All manner of things can prevent the filling in of forms and voting.  Like tiredness from work and study, an emotional upset of some sort, a visitor, a programme on TV, a rugby game, etc., etc.

In anticipation of such possibilities got the group to vote on the Monday before deadline.

Anyway as a recent (repeat) migrant, also voted for King because after an absence of 25 years, had to rely on the advice of a cousin who said she was a good MP and after reading a column by Sir Bob Jones who listed her qualities in suggesting she should take over as leader for Labour weeks before the elections.

Certain National would win looked around for another party to vote for and settled on the Maori Party after listening to Te Ururoa Flavell on TV say their priority was Maori interests – and that they had to partner up with whoever is in Government to be listened to.

His practical approach appealed, and something Samoans and possibly other Pacific Islanders might want to follow; in other words form our own political party so our concerns aren’t lost in the list of other priorities in the other parties.

Felt no connection to the other parties and achieved only a slight understanding of what they all stood for.

A female relative did not say who she voted for – only shrieked a dislike and distrust of David Cunliffe because of the shape his face.

Distrust him for a different reason: he comes across as someone whose ambition to be leader seems stronger than a desire to serve.

In any case comments by a nephew who was a party official reinforced a belief that took hold years ago while a Wellington resident the first time – 1970s – late 90s – which is that Labour officials tend to tell you what is best for you and won’t listen when you try to tell them otherwise.

It is an arrogance that in another area, aid to Samoa, has seen millions upon millions of dollars wasted by donor countries like New Zealand.

The only citizens who did not abandon Labour these elections were Maori and Pacific Islanders, analyst Fa’amatuainu Tino Pereira said on Samoa Capital Radio.

Indeed a Samoan man told the station he has always voted Labour since he arrived from Samoa 45 years ago.

Other sources say such loyalty may be on the slide.

One man told Samoa Capital Radio his children voted for Conservatives.

On the other hand a friend in an Auckland electorate emailed to say, “Labour has to realise that they are no longer the party of choice for PIs. They have stuffed PIs for too long and (it’s) time for PIs to get organised and have their own Party.”

“For the Party vote I opted for NZ First ‘coz I believe PIs will get a better deal from Winston and (gave my) electorate vote for the Labour candidate.”

He says National has a “white is right” attitude.

Don’t know about that.

But it’s something to look out for in the days ahead.

Now that we’ve voted and seen the results, sad though they may be, the whole political thing has become more interesting.

At 2:30pm today, embattled Labour leader David Cunliffe will face media and make a public announcement about his future.

But for me, it’s been a six month wait to put pen to paper and write about this General Election.

Granted it looks as if the dust will take a wee bit longer to settle, but believe this is the right time to share a personal view of the elections, provide a part explanation for such a disastrous Labour result, and what hope is there for us Pacific islanders moving forward.

But first up, a big congratulation to all successful Pacific Island candidates who are now elected Members of Parliament. This 51^st term of New Zealand’s parliament will see seven, possibly eight, Pacific islanders in the Legislative Assembly. An historic feat since Taito Phillip Field became our first Labour MP 21 years ago.

As in any war, there will be casualties, whether by enemy or friendly fire. And in this 2014 elections, Leaufa’amulia Asenati Lole-Taylor became a friendly fire casualty when the NZ First party decided to drop her down from eight, to 16 on their list. It was a drop 5-places too far to see the return of the unconventional lady from the Samoan village of Safa’atoa Lefaga.

There were also the also-rans like: Herman Retzlaff, (Lab), Anahila Suisuiki, (Lab), Jerome Mika (Lab), Mataroa Paroro (NZ First) and others who gave it their all.

While Misa Fia Turner, currently sitting on the borderline, could well make it into parliament if special votes go National’s way. But more on Misa Fia later in our column.

It’s now a week after the elections, Pacific islanders will be celebrating this historic milestone – and rightly so. At the same time, it gives us pause to reflect and assess the calibre and strength of our voice in parliament truly is, from a Labour perspective and ask ourserlves: What can the Labour Party achieve with five Pacific MPs in Parliament?

How important are we, as Pacific MPs, and our Pacific vote to the Labour Party?

Being in opposition for a further three years, is it going to be more of the same to 2017? Or is this a sign of better things to come?

To better understand, one has to reflect upon our history; about how Pacific Islanders got a voice in the Labour Party, it gives us reference points to see that the signs to a disasterous 2014 results was actually not a surprise.

For instance, back in 2012 I started seeing signs of a bad omen. The subtle and concerning signal for me was Labour not moving assertively to reaffirm its historical connection with Pacific communities, more significantly, with us Samoans.

Why this jolted me was it was so out of sync with what Labour did in 2002. In 2002, to commemorate the 40^th Anniversary of Samoa’s Independence, Helen Clark, then Prime Minister went to Samoa to deliver an apology on behalf of New Zealand. She formally and publically apologised for the inept actions of its Colonial administration that resulted in the Influenza epidemic that killed off more than 20 per cent of our population; and the shooting and killing of Mau leader Tupua Tamasese Lealofi III and eleven Mau supporters on 28 December 1929.

Yet, just a mere ten years later, in 2012, Labour decided not to do anything to commemorate Samoa’s Golden Jubilee Independence Celebration for which those Samoans in the Mau Movement gave their lives.

To me, it pointed towards a disconnect between Labour and us Samoans, and from the looks of things, a growing disconnect heading to the 2014 elections.

Further evidence of these concerns is the generation that grew up under New Zealand’s Colonial administration and their children are ageing, but their descendants have little to no knowledge of the historical connection with Labour. They do not know the story and Labour’s intimate and significant role in Samoa’s independence movement.

This younger generation also has a higher proportion in mixed marriages, thus bringing in other relationships that are not necessarily part of the mainstream Pacific psyche which means the historical connection becomes even more diluted.

Another event in 2013 that pointed to a growing disconnect was the Christchurch East by-election.

Poto Williams’ (of Cook Island descent) milestone achievement in winning the by election is of huge historical significance. Yet in celebrating her victory, both the Labour Leader and President failed to mention in their speeches that Ms Williams is the first eveer Pacific electoral MP for the South Island; and the first female Cook Islander to be an elected MP in New Zealand parliament. Also of note was the public ommission by both Leader and President to thank the Samoan Community and its leadership for uniting behind Poto’s campaign. Cunliffe it seemed had forgotten the Pacific contribution in his eagerness to become attractive to middle income voters.

By February 2014, I could see that Labour was totally focused on pursuing middle income voters, and willing to sacrifice Pacific and low income voters if that was the price. Historically, you win middle income NZ, you win the general election, so fair enough, but what concerned me more was that Labour was operating on a “we cannot do anything for our people because we are in the opposition” line.

This mantra toed by our Pacific spokesperson was something that I took not as a defeatist Labour attitude, but more alarmingly, one of surrender way before the election.

What then became a real concern was Labour’s leadership taking Pacific voters for granted. I could see that Pacific voters were given the choice to vote on “tribal” lines instead of voting on issues, as was the case in the 2005 election which Labour won.

To be fair, there were those in high places of the Labour Party that shared my concerns and took seriously my warning of a likely scenario where Pacific voters would vote Labour with their Electorate vote; but gave their party vote to another party. I called this “skimming” the party vote.

As it turned out, the 2014 results showed that other than Mangere, all Labour Electorate MPs did not have a high party vote return for Labour. In short, the very middle income voter the Labour leadership was desperately after, were not inspired to give their vote to Labour. It did not help that, once again, about a million voters decided not to cast their votes. That is also another gross indictment on leader David Cunliffe’s who at the 2013 Labour Conference made a bold promise that “Labour will campaign to inspire the missing 800,000 voters in 2011 to come out and vote for Labour”.

2013 was to be General Election 2014 preparation year for Labour but it was wasted trying to sort out its leadership problems.

Meantime, Pacific leaders who supported Cunliffe became concerned that he was at the heart of all the undermining of Phil Goff and David Shearer. This did not bode well…an ill omen. This was very much part of the Samoan psyche that arises from the proverb “O le ala i le pule o le tautua” (The pathway way to leadership is through service). Cunliffe did not serve them well, therefore he does not deserve to lead.

Not long after Cunliffe became leader he went onto make one public gaff and blunder after another which further reinforced the belief in Pacific leaders (and it appears it also affected “mainstream” New Zealanders), that Cunliffe is someone who’s jinxed.

During the campaign, Pacific voters, as expected, did not get the message from Labour. Also noticeable was a smaller than usual army of volunteers for which Labour is renowned for, helping out. Pacific voters love a conversation that develops a narrative that leads to pathways for action/understanding. Labour left this too late and literally opened the door for others to compete for our people’s attention. In short, Labour found themselves trying to convince their own people to keep the faith instead of attracting new voters.

In essence, the Labour campaign became just a high visibility smile and wave without much of a physical street by street, door by door impact needed to get voters out.

The election results also point to MPs not on the list, but have returned to Parliament by winning their electorates. This surely is not a good omen for Labour.

Furthermore no one is stepping forward to take responsibility for the historic loss. How long will this take to sort out?

And so that begs the question: where to from here? Where has our Labour Party gone?

Labour suffering its second worst defeat in history and with Su’a Viliamu coming back to Parliament with the best performance of any Labour MP/Candidate, likely to keep the Pacific Spokesperson role, does not bode well for our people.

For he to say that we (Labour) just cannot do anything until we are in power is outright surrender. It gives the Government and other opposition parties an open invitation to do whatever they want to our people?

The Greens have been successful in opposition, they have influenced some of the Government’s plans with their own over the past six years, so why can’t Labour?

It is why I do not buy this surrender line from Labour mainly because it has opened the door to other parties to make inroads into the Pacific vote.

Labour does not appear to understand that South Auckland is not the start and end of all things Pacific. Only 30 per cent of Pacific islanders live in South Auckland. In total 40 per cent of Pacific islanders live in the wider Auckland Region and 60 per cent are spread thoughout the country.

Pacific people outside of Auckland are starting to assert themselves as a separate identity with the right to voice their own concerns. Christchurch is a prime example of this and they do not, and will not take on Labour’s surrender position.

I admire the leadership our people in Christchurch are showing. With everything lost and with everything to win, they are now working together to give voice to our people in the Christchurch rebuild, contributing constructively to nation building. Surely our people deserve Labour’s support in their fight? Or should they wait around in their cold damp rental houses earning minimum wages if they have a job, until Labour wins?

One elderly Samoan in Otara said, “I must admit that when we had the Labour candidate at our church conference, he correctly told us about the ‘crap life’ we’re living. Yet he doesn’t need to tell us about it because we’re the experts because we’re living neck deep in the crap. He certainly doesn’t live in it. What we needed him to tell us was a solution and what his Party will do to help us out of this mess.”

This is why the surrender position from Labour has driven some of our community leaders to look at making arrangements with National.

As another community leader puts it, “If Labour is waiting until they win to help us, then what choice do we now have? We are defenceless so we have to do something. I feel like a prisoner trying to make the best deal with my jailer.”

Pacific leaders who are traditionally Labour have to be concerned with the never ending leadership battles in the party. Our people are sick of the blame, defeatist attitudes and genuine lack of leadership and understanding about what Labour constituents want.

This current position from Labour has seen not just Pacific voters placing an each way bet of ‘Electoral Vote Labour’, but ‘Party Vote for another Party’. I have been proven wrong to think that this voting pattern would only apply to Pacific voters. It seems like the majority of voters took an each way bet on Labour hence the significant migration of Party vote to NZ First, National and the Greens.

Peseta Sam Lotu-I’iga, most likely will stay on as Minister of Pacific Island Affairs. So we are likely to see him support proposed changes to the Employment Relations Act (ERA) aimed at further casualizing jobs and keeping wages low.

Peseta goes on about all the success of the ‘Rock Star’ economy that National created from the ashes of the Global Financial Collapse. But he completely ignores the fact that most Pacific people are employed in vulnerable jobs.

The kind of jobs that as soon as there is a whiff of a recession, are the first to go. The very jobs that will see little to no pay rises during the recovery period, even when it goes into the “rock star” phase. The more Peseta goes on about the rock star economy, he must remember that most of his people do not see any rock star pay rises nor new rock star jobs.

Pacific unemployment is still double that of the national unemployment figure. So definitely no rock star, just Pacific hardship on the rocks again for another three years.

Child Poverty is a major problem among our people, and the Government appears to be setting up another task force/advisory group to come up with ways to combat Child Poverty. Another classic John Key talk fest on the way I say.

On Sunday, 21st September, Tangata Pasifika’s Marama Papau did an excellent job interviewing all the newly elected Pacific MPs.

If you watch the episode, you make up your own mind as to what the future holds for us Pacific islanders.

For me, I’ll bet my money on Labour Pacific MPs, Jenny Salesa, Carmel Sepuloni and Poto Williams. These women do not look defeated, they definitely do not look like waving a white flag. These women look like they are ready to step into the ring and fight.

If Labour chooses Su’a William Sio to be their Pacific Spokesperson again, our people will not only be serving three years of hard labour under National, but also three years in maximum security under Labour.

It is very plausible that a possible scenario after 2017 we will have a fourth National government.

Already I can see that happening with National making in-roads into the Pacific vote. Labour must come up with a fresh approach. If it’s more of the same then this arrogance will set off a seismic shift in the Pacific vote.

The Greens and New Zealand First are now definitely on Pacific voters’ radar. Continue with the “we cannot do anything because we are in opposition” line opens the door for these parties to give our people hope.

Hope propels people to take action. Hope is a powerful positive self-motivating driver that will get people out to fight for their families and communities.

Until this happens we are seeing National looking to winning a 4th term and Labour’s electorate strongholds are definitely in their sights.

Now back to Misa Fia Turner. If she doesn’t get in through special votes, I’ll wager that a sitting National MP will retire after the first 12-months to allow Misa Fia into parliament.

That move will allow National to establish a beach-head at Mangere two years out from the 2017 elections. For me personally, I never would have thought Labour would lose its historic connection with Samoa, let alone open itself for a beach-head from National, of all parties, to set-up in one of its strongest electorate forts.

For now Pacific islanders have been sentenced to another three years of hard labour. What we need to decide is whether we make peace with our “jailers” or do we rise from despair and inspire one another with hope.

If we do not stand-up then more hardship and pain will come our way. We have always kept silent and respectful in Aotearoa. And just look around at where our respect and hard work has gotten us?

We must take a look at ourselves and find the courage and hope to keep going.
We will never surrender!
We will never give up!
We shall fight in the hope that we and our children are the ones that shall rise up from poverty.
We shall fight for work to be paid fairly.
We shall fight for life where working hard is a life well lived.
We shall fight for a life that is lived in dignity.
We shall fight for a life that is not reliant on welfare.

 

 

“Human rights for citizens to dissent is a critical issue all over the world but it is particularly important in the Pacific and in Aotearoa that we maintain a strong stance on that.” Catherine Delahunty.

Returning Green Party MP Catherine Delahunty joined thousands across Australasia this week protesting against French and local journalists imprisoned by Indonesian authorities in West Papua.

Ms Delahunty told Pacific Guardians she’s protesting because “we believe in human rights and we believe that a genocide is taking place [in West Papua].”

But it’s also out of frustration as it was only in July this year, that all members of parliament, including the government, supported the Green Party’s motion to call on Indonesian President, Joko Widodo, to commit to genuine press freedom in West Papua.

Yet shortly after gaining the unanimous support of parliament, two French journalists, Thomas Dandois and Valentine Burrat, were arrested in West Papua by Indonesian police for allegedly illegally working when on tourist visas.

“The were arrested supposedly for ‘treason’ but we all know they were only trying to make a documentary about the real situation in West Papua. They were interrogated, are still in prison and being threatened with these ridiculous charges.”

Ms Delahunty has continued her call on the New Zealand government to step-in and use its diplomatic resources to advocate for the two French journalists.

But the lack of government response is frustrating.

“This is very frustrating because we have passed this motion for media freedom but the government will not give it teeth,” said Ms Delahunty.

“Without any journalists on the ground, the future for West Papuans and their human rights will continue to be very bleak.

“It is important for New Zealand and Australia to continue to advocate for not only for media freedom in West Papua but also hold Indonesia to account for numerous well documented human rights abuses in West Papua.”

The main push is for New Zealand to become a facilitator in helping West Papua gain its independence. The push therefore is to put pressure on the New Zealand government to put pressure on Indonesia.

She admitted that gaining greater New Zealand support for West Papua is tough going as awareness of West Papua and its situation gets very little coverage in New Zealand.

“It’s regrettable that we are still at the stage of trying to get New Zealanders to understand where this country is and what its history is. And why we, as neighbours, have a duty of respect to stand up for human rights,” said Ms Delahunty.

“Human rights for citizens to dissent is a critical issue all over the world but it is particularly important in the Pacific and in Aotearoa that we maintain a strong stance on that.”

The lack of awareness thus far caused her to vent in frustration at New Zealand’s mainstream media, with the exception of Radio New Zealand and Pacific Guardians.

“I’m disappointed that apart from a few of you, the majority of journalists in New Zealand act that this is a non story. And I find it disturbing that they spend a lot of time on celebrity politics and leadership spats rather than the fact that actually more people have died in recent weeks, being killed by the military [in West Papua].

“If it was Fiji there would be more coverage. So this kind of silence has to be broken and we’ve got a long way to go to break that silence around West Papua – just in terms of reporting here in New Zealand!”

With the low level of media coverage, Ms Delahunty’s fight will also be tougher this term in parliament with the loss of Hone Harawira and Maryanne Street who were her main supporters in the House.

However, the way forward remains clear, it is about building cross party consensus on West Papua. She is optimistic that some new MPs including new Pacific MPs could join her cause.

“I would say to them that this is an opportunity for solidarity. An opportunity not only to support West Papua but also the emerging groups of young people not only in Auckland but also in Wellington.

“In Auckland they have a group called Oceania Interrupted led by Leilani Salesa and others – so we are seeing the emergence of these youth support and it’s a great opportunity for these MPs to participate and support the work that I’m trying to lead in parliament. And I really hope they will help us put pressure on the government put pressure on Indonesia because that is the main avenue to support West Papua.”

But if that comes to nought, at least she gained some wins on Wednesday this week as the Pacific Student Council from Victoria University joined her protest.

“It was really impressive when I was standing outside of parliament thinking it was just going to be me. And then all these young Pacific people with their banners turned up,” she told Pacific Guardians.

“I was delighted they came down in strength with one of their lecturers Teresia Teaiwa. To me one of the exciting things happening in Aotearoa is the involvement of Pacific young people because for many years, its been a few non-government groups, the extraordinary leadership of Maire Leadbeater in Auckland, that when Pacific youth embrace that it will help grow the movement and put pressure on the government to act.”

The long game is about building a consciousness.

“If we can build up a Pacific consciousness about the West Papuan people, I believe it is really important for our region. There is a need to really support the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) and Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) to show a lot more courage.

“What we’re up against is the Indonesians having the money to shut down some Melanesian countries who are supportive of West Papua, which is a very, very sad thing for West Papua. But it means we need to build that solidarity in every setting that we can.

“This issue cannot stay under the radar. We are making traction internationally but on the ground, the suffering continues.”

In a report from Radio New Zealand earlier today, Vanuatu’s West Papua Unification Committee has confirmed its conference in Port Vila on the 4th of December following the National Day and flag raising ceremony on 1 December.

The conference is to provide an avenue for the different groupings in West Papua to come to an agreement on a unified bid for membership in the MSG.

A formal membership application by the West Papua National Coalition for Liberation was knocked back by the MSG earlier this year, whose leaders called for a more representative bid.

 

 

Tomorrow, Pacific Guardians will post its ‘post mortem’ of the 2014 general election.

I have received a number of queries from many Pacific Guardians readers as ‘why the silence’ on Labour’s second worst defeat in history.

Simply put, we have some ‘inside knowledge’ insights that needed to be balanced and referenced with accuracy. Especially as a number of events and personnel changes were part of some of the causal events that contributed to the Labour result.

Many of you will know we predicted this result from 2012 if certain things were or were not done.

The current Labour leadership shambles and resulting cannibalism under Cunliffe as leader was predicted by Rev Featuna’i Liua’ana’s column: ‘Keep Our Friends Close and Our Enemies Closer’ published on 23 November 2012.

We pointed to the seed of distrust planted amongst Pacific leaders as Poto Williams won the Christchurch East by-election in our feature ‘History and Brain Fade lessons for Labour in Christchurch win’ on 6 December 2013.

We even predicted on 27 May 2014 in ‘Political polls and the Pacific blindspot’ that NZ First would bring 11 MPs to parliament if Labour doesn’t pick up its game.

A week later in ‘Peseta and Le’au harvests votes as Labour winks in the Shadows‘. We wrote about increasing distrust in the Pacific about Cunliffe and Labour, and that party votes will migrate to NZ First and National.

Tomorrow, our analysis will point to where and what things went wrong from our Pacific perspective; where they could have gone so different if certain steps were taken.

But we also want to paint the road to 2017. A road that leads to hope.

This is important because the reality for the majority of Pacific islanders/low income New Zealanders is that our issues are now at the complete mercy of the National government. And the majority of us are not part of National’s constituency – people earning $60,000-plus. We expect to see changes to laws and policies reflecting benefits to National’s constituents.

So for the next 3 years, we are on the outer without much hope of a voice in the House. Yes even with an increased number of Pacific MPs, the core message we have been getting from Labour MPs for the past 6 years is this: “We can’t do much while in opposition”. And that’s exactly what our people have been getting – zilch.

That’s not quite true because we know for a fact that the Green Party managed to work with the Government to get 235,00 houses insulated; ensured there is better management of toxic sites in New Zealand; forced an investigation into the SkyCity deal; and playing a key role in getting authorities to investigate ACC privacy breaches. Through their Pacific spokesperson Jan Logie’s ‘Everyone needs the right help’ campaign, it resulted in more funding for the sector and started a select committee inquiry into sexual violence. The Greens have led the opposition in parliament to the GCSB and the Asset Sales. And after years of Green Party pressure, the huge government banking contract will finally be opened up to get better value for money for the New Zealand public. Finally, its only Green MP Catherine Delahunty (now without Maryanne Street and Hone Harawira) who is continuing the fight for human rights and press freedom for West Papua. Now those are things a proactive party and courageous MPs can do in opposition.

It means that for the next 3 years, Pacific leaders and communities need to find out who will actually stand up for us – for real and not just as show ponies or tourists popping up in time for photo opportunities.

No doubt as we head to 2017, many of our Pacific people today may well will feel powerless, insignificant, marginalised and let down. Others will join the few doing deals with our jailers. While for those looking for hope, our article tomorrow will show you that. And over the next three years, Pacific Guardians will continue to water that hope and give our people a united voice for a better New Zealand for Pacific, and for everyone else who wants to join us.

We don’t want much. All we want are equity and justice.

LIST OF RELEVANT BACKGROUND ARTICLES

23/11/2013 – “Keep Our Friends Close and Our Enemies Closer” - Why Labour would lose if Cunliffe becomes leader. Why John Key fears Shearer.
6/12/2013 – “History and Brain Fade Lessons for Labour in Christchurch Win”. Outlined the campaign platform that won Poto Williams the by-election. The platform that was not continued to campaign proper. The lack of Pacific acknowledgement watered the seed of Cunliffe the leader as defined by Rev Featuna’i’s column above.
12/5/2014 – “National, Labour Reveal Strategies in War for ‘Pacific Vote’”.
27/05/2014 – “Political Polls and the Pacific Blindspot”. Predicted NZ First would get 11 MPs from voter migration if Labour doesn’t pick up its game.
5/6/2014 – “Peseta and Le’au Harvests Votes as Labour Winks in the Shadows”. Tells of increased distrust amongst Pacific leadership of Cunliffe and Labour. And predicts voter migration to NZFirst and National more likely.

 

 

 

Yesterday, a 26 year old poet from the Marshall Islands gave voice to Pacific concerns on climate change at the highest global level.

Selected from over 544 civil society candidates in an open, global nomination process conducted by the UN, Kathy Jetnil-Kijinerspoke during the opening segment of the 2014 United Nations Climate Summit.

And in just over three minutes, Kathy captivated world leaders as she testified to the stark reality of climate change and its impacts not only in the Pacific, but to other vulnerable nations around the world.

“Those of us from Oceania are already experiencing it first hand,” she told world leaders. “We’ve seen waves crashing into our homes…We look at our children and wonder how they will know themselves or their culture should we lose our islands.”

She added, “We need a radical change of course. It means ending carbon pollution within my lifetime. It means supporting those of us most affected to prepare for unavoidable climate impacts. And it means taking responsibility for irreversible loss and damage caused by greenhouse gas emissions.

“I ask world leaders to take us all along on your ride. We won’t slow you down. We’ll help you win the most important race of all. The race to save humanity.”

To be selected from amongst 544 nominees globally is an honour. But it is not a surprise that a poet was given the task to voice the concerns of civil society.

Former US President John F. Kennedy proclaimed: “When power leads man towards arrogance, poetry reminds him of his limitations,” he said. “When power narrows the areas of man’s concern, poetry reminds him of the richness and diversity of his existence. When power corrupts, poetry cleanses.”

Kathy on her blog Iep Jeltok, writes her poetry focuses: “on raising awareness surrounding the issues and threats faced by my people. Nuclear testing conducted in our islands, militarism, the rising sea level as a result of climate change, forced migration, adaptation and racism in America.”

Her poem for the UN Summit “Dear Matafele Peinem”, is a new poem written to her daughter.

It starts: “Dear Matafele Peinem, you are a 7-month old sunrise of gummy smiles. You’re bald as an egg, and bald as the Buddha. You have thighs that are thunder, shrieks that are lightning. You are so excited for bananas, hugs and our morning walks along the lagoon.

“I want to tell you about that lagoon. That lucid, sleepy lagoon lounging against the sunrise. Men say, that one day, that lagoon will devour you.”

The poem outlines how the lagoon was empowered through climate change to rise up and proceed to devour the small islands of the Pacific.

But there is hope through collective actions according to the poem: “hands reaching out, fists raising up, banners unfurling, megaphones booming.

“And we are canoes blocking coal ships. We are the radiance of solar villages. We are the rich clean soil of the farmer’s past. We are petitions blooming from teenage fingertips.

“We are families biking, recycling, reusing, engineers dreaming, designing, building, artists painting, dancing, writing.

“We are spreading the word. And there are thousands out on the street, marching with signs, hand in hand chanting for change NOW.”

The poem ends with little Matafele Peinem sound asleep on her mother’s whispered promise: “Baby we wont let you down”.

At its conclusion, the UN summit rose to give Kathy and her family a standing ovation. A fair number wiping tears from their eyes.

Kathy Jetnil-Kijiner was born in the Marshall Islands, a nation of 22 low-lying atolls in the northern Pacific. She studied in Hawaii and California before returning to teach at the College of the Marshall Islands in Majuro.

She is a spoken word artist and co-founder of the environmental NGO in the Marshall Islands called Jo-JiKuM. An organization focusing on empowering youth by educating them on the importance of environmentalism and mobilizing them to work toward solutions to climate change issues.

She told the UK Guardian that she started Jo-JiKum with her cousins.

“Together with my cousins, I’ve started this non-profit organisation for youth and the environment. We’re getting young people involved in the climate change movement and getting people aware of it,” she said.

“We’re the ones who are getting affected, but sometimes it’s very frustrating, because it feels like no one is listening.”

She was one of only 38 civil society representatives chosen to present at the UN Summit.

 

 

 

“The environment and workers’ rights are seriously threatened by these two pieces of legislation, which is why National couldn’t get them passed in the last parliamentary term,” Mrs Turei.

The Green Party’s campaign machine hasn’t missed a beat as it ramps up efforts to defend both the environment and workers from National plans to bring in changes to two laws.

The campaign this time seem to aim at securing the lead Opposition party to the 2017 elections status. With Labour soul searching in one of its worst elections and bracing for the upcoming leadership battle, the united Greens march onwards. This time heading the fight against National’s move to make changes to the Resource Management Act (RMA) and the Employment Relations Act (ERA) laws.

Green co-Leader Metiria Turei, said National has signalled it will attempt to get planned changes to the RMA and ERA passed as quickly as possible, “in order to please its big business backers,” she said in a statement today.

“The environment and workers’ rights are seriously threatened by these two pieces of legislation, which is why National couldn’t get them passed in the last parliamentary term,” Mrs Turei said.

To be fair, the only reason why changes to Part 6A of the ERA didn’t go through last parliamentary term was John Banks. His vote would have been enough to pass it, but he had to resign when found guilty of filing a false electoral return.

Mrs Turei emphasised the importance that these two laws must not pass if New Zealand is to stay a fair and clean place to live.

“National’s proposed changes to the RMA will remove vital legal protections for the environment, and fundamentally change the Act’s sustainable management purpose to put the interest of business ahead of the environment,” she said.

“The Employment Relations Amendment Bill is designed to weaken workers’ rights, making it much harder to negotiate for better conditions, even removing workers’ automatic right to a break.

“These two Bills show National’s true colours as the party that puts the interests of the few ahead of everything else.

“John Key should honour the respect and love that New Zealanders have for their environment, and honour our workers by abandoning these regressive law changes immediately,” Mrs Turei said.

She pointed examples of how shows of public action were effective in the past, such as forcing changes to proposed mining legislation.

“Alongside political leadership from the Green Party there will need to be more, much stronger public opposition to prevent National passing these and other damaging laws in the future,” she stated.

 

 

 

Hundreds marched to parliament mid-day today protesting against epidemic levels of domestic and sexual violence committed against women and children.

They rallied behind a 2-meter tall statue of suffrage champion Kate Sheppard, the woman who led the movement that won women the right to vote on 19 September 1893.

The statue, made from layers of Perspex glass, which have messages against domestic violence inscribed on it, is intended as a gift to symbolize the on-going advancement of women’s rights in New Zealand that includes the epidemic levels of domestic and sexual violence against them.

Speaker David Carter had agreed for the statue to be erected and displayed at parliament for three months but then changed his mind just two days before today’s march.

Women’s Refuge spokeswoman Kiri Hannifin says they went last Wednesday to view the area where the statue would be housed.

But by Friday they received a letter from Speaker David Carter which said: “After careful consideration I have declined the request for the statue to be placed on display or housed at Parliament.

“This is a busy time at Parliament and space constraints, future requirements and use of the space in public and function areas cannot be overlooked.”

Ms Hannifin told the TVNZ Breakfast Show earlier today, the letter came after they requested the sculpture be moved to a location in Parliament where there would be more foot traffic, and said she believed that is why the Speaker changed his mind.

However, she felt the Government u-turn and saying “no” is a real indictment to their attitude towards domestic violence.

Rattling off a few statistics, Ms Hannifin revealed her organization, Women’s Refuge, gets a crisis call once every seven or eight minutes.

“The situation is getting worse. Last year the Police told us they attended 95,000 family violence investigations which is up 8,000 from 2012,” she said.

It is why the government’s rejection of Kate Sheppard’s statue is disappointing and “embarrassing for the people that marched today because she’s no longer being taken inside.”

Women’s Refuge is still deciding where to display the sculpture. Te Papa museum is one option.

Greens Co-Leader Metiria Turei called for a change in government saying the solution lay in “This National Government being voted out”.

Later she added that after the election, she will work with parties to get the statue into Parliament.

“If Women’s Refuge want Kate in this building [Parliament] then that’s where she will be.”

Labour’s Women’s Affairs spokesperson Ms Carol Beaumont said National’s u-turn on Kate Sheppard’s statue is because they are embarrassed.

“The National Party is so embarrassed about its failure to address the high level of violence against our women and children, it refused to accept a statue of Kate Sheppard from the Women’s Refuge.”

Ms Beaumont said if Labour wins the election this weekend, it will take decisive action and not run and hide.

“Labour takes this issue of domestic and sexual violence seriously. We won’t run and hide from it,” said Ms Beaumont.

“Labour will adopt an Action Plan to Eliminate Violence Against Women and Children.

“We also will provide $60 million over four years for family and sexual violence to support front-line services, primary prevention and education.

“Labour will reform the justice system to provide real justice to survivors while upholding the right to be presumed innocent. And we will review prosecution guidelines and the operation of protection orders.

“A Labour Government will ensure there is a unified effort across government agencies and NGOs towards addressing violence against our women and children. That’s why our action plan will be led from within the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.”

STATISTICS

-More than half of all reported violent crime in New Zealand is family violence

-Police estimate only 18% of domestic violence incidents are reported

-On average 14 women, six men and 10 children are killed by a member of their family every year

-Up to one in five women will experience sexual assault as an adult

-One in three girls will be subject to an unwanted sexual experience by the age of 16 years

-In the United Nations Report on the Status of Women published in 2011, New Zealand was ranked worst of all OECD countries in rates of sexual violence