Andrew Dickens Afternoons

Dame Anne Salmond, the historian and New Zealander of the Year in 2013, has come out with an opinion piece today in response to Friday's atrocity. It has been published by both the NZ Herald and Fairfax so she obviously wants it widely debated.
In it, she says that white supremacy is part of us and she says in its soft version it can look bland and reasonable. A person saying that te reo Māori is a dead language, for instance. Of course, when you say that to Māori family who are fluent across generations then you’ve lost the high ground.
It’s important to say this because the horrors of extremism are built on top of a base of smaller slights. And if there is is an undercurrent the extremists feel as though there are supporters out there waiting to be mobilised by their insane actions.
A small example of this happened over the weekend when a well known, intelligent, conservative female blogger posted in social media. She said that no matter what you think of her, Jacinda Ardern is doing a great job. So far so good. But then she couldn’t help herself. She wrote pity about the headscarf.
A small cultural slur which is not based on the scarf but more an inability to cope with a hijab or burka. Complaining about the scarf is like complaining about anyone wearing formal wear. I was very tempted to ask if she would say the same to the Queen who is also very fond of a headscarf on its day.
But I say all this because that casual racism and culturism that has been a low buzz in our society has been absent for the past few days. Replaced by love and tolerance and frankly, it has been so refreshing. I wonder if we can keep it up as time goes on?
Now I have received a lot of comments on my Facebook page regarding my pledge to refuse to say the perpetrator’s name and my wish that his forthcoming court case be held in closed court, with a judge and a jury and no coverage of his methods or motivations.
I was further horrified when yesterday he fired his lawyer and said he would represent himself. We already know that his current intention is to plead not guilty.
So I’m going to reiterate that pledge. So far I have never said his name and I’m intending not to, though given my job I may be forced to.
But I don’t want this man’s name joining Anders Breivik as a superstar of the extremist movements they represent. I want him and his name and his evil to disappear.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

So it comes to my time to give thoughts on the terrible events that started on Friday. There are two ways to do this. One is to talk about my feelings, but that seems redundant because we know how we all feel. Just because I have a microphone, I don’t have a monopoly on feeling. And those feelings could be a number of things including anger.
On this day. Two and a half days on, it is the time to keep a lid on our most emotional impulses and begin a slower process towards coming to terms with this stuff
The other thing to do is look at what’s next. Gun laws, Monitoring of loose units. To me, it still seems too soon but it is at least a concrete angle to concentrate our minds.
I’m still thinking about the victims
I was listening to the Jacinda Ardern’s interview this morning and I noticed that there was not one mention of the victims. There was talk about the impossibility of monitoring lone wolves, the strengthening of gun laws, even strengthening of security on regional flights. But nothing about the Muslim community of Christchurch. I’m not blaming anyone it’s just how people are. In a hurry to move on from something terrible but I’m not totally ready to move on yet
I wanted to hear how the grave digging was going. Whether the state can give them help because time is of the essence. I was wondering about the victim’s families and how the government can help them. So many breadwinners gone from so many families. I’m wondering about long term support and so this date the 15th of March 2019 -15. 3. 19, is remembered as a time of ongoing kindness by the Muslim community rather than a date of martyrdom and revenge.
It felt to me as though the event is still centred around the perpetrator. The more he is minimised, the less he can motivate similarly unbalanced minds.
So I regret that he has ever been named. I understand the convention of law but this is not a conventional crime. I regret that any image of him is published, even the pixelated one. Because a paper in Australia published a photo of him in the dock flashing a sign well known to his admirers. I suppose they thought we’d be horrified but didn’t think that some people will be ecstatic.
This man needs to disappear quietly and legally.
Finally, the last time I was in front of a microphone was at 3:55pm on Friday, when a piece of paper was passed to me with the first confirmation of a fatality from Friday’s attack on a Mosque which I then read on air.
That’s how proper media works. We had many reports from bystanders of fatalities but you wait for confirmation from multiple sources and official sources.
Facebook is not proper media. Facebook Live even more so. Facebook could not have vetted something going out live. Facebook Live gives the power of anyone to broadcast anything. I’m surprised more atrocities haven’t already been unleashed. Don’t worry Mr Zuckerberg. Nobody will mind in the least. Get rid of Facebook Live right now

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Despite being found guilty of sexually abusing two 13-year-old boys, Cardinal George Pell was today sentenced to just six years in prison.
The light sentence has sparked division, with talkback callers firing up over the prominent Catholic's sentence. 
In his hour-long sentencing, Judge Peter Kidd revealed the three key factors he considered the 77-year-old's sentence. 
When outlining Pell's case for retribution, the judge noted while there was "no evidence of his remorse", the cardinal had "experienced an exceptional career within the Catholic Church".
Judge Kidd said Pell's age and health status had particularly affected the his decision.
"Your age is a significant factor in my sentencing exercise," he said. "As I have indicated before, you are now in your late 70s. It is relevant in a number of ways.
"Of some real importance in my sentencing exercise is the fact that each year you spend in custody will represent a substantial portion of your remaining life expectancy.
"While it is a matter of speculation as to how long you will live, the fact is that you are of advanced years and are entering the last phase of your life.
He noted Pell already had "some significant enough health issues", including hypertension and congestive heart failure.
"Facing jail at your age in these circumstances must be an awful state of affairs for you," the judge said.
The court imposed a non-parole period of three years and eight months.
"I will impose a shorter non-parole period than I otherwise would have been inclined to impose, in recognition in particular of your age, so as to increase the prospect of your living out the last part of your life in the community," Judge Kidd said.
Another contributing factor was Pell's risk of reoffending, which the Judge deemed negligible. He said Pell's age, his "otherwise good character" and the fact he has not been convicted of such an offence in the 22 years after his crime factored into his decision.
However, he acknowledged for a second time that Pell had "shown no remorse or insight into your offending" and that there remained no explanation for it.
During his final remarks, Judge Kidd noted Pell had no prior convictions and had not committed other sexual offences since this offending.
He added that character references submitted to the court — including one written by former prime minister John Howard — described Pell as a "compassionate" and "generous" person.
Acknowledging that victims of sexual abuse often did not come forward for many years, the judge said the delay had allowed Pell to lead an "otherwise blameless life".
In the view of talkback caller Marie, the sentence is more than Cardinal Pell deserved. She told Andrew Dickens that there is no concrete evidence to back up the claims of the two boys who were abused, only one of whom is now alive. 
"I just think it's their word against his, which isn't good enough." 
She insists that people lie all the time, and does not believe Cardinal Pell has been proved guilty. 
The call sparked anger from other listeners. Claire, who is Catholic but works with sexual assault victims, and says that the children would have gone through hell. 
She says that only 20 per cent of sexual violence cases that go through court end in a guilty verdict, and a high amount of evidence is needed to prove people guilty. 
"To have someone to say we need more evidence, for it to have made it to court, they must have had heaps of evidence, because if they didn't have evidence, it just doesn't make it to court." 
Claire says that the number of false sexual assault complaints are tiny and are weeded out very quickly by police, and they never make it to court. 
"Genuine complaints don't make it to court in New Zealand!"

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, I hate to hark back to the Michael Jackson documentary one more time but there is one final observation I need to make.
Yesterday, I wrote of my feelings after Part one of the doco and why I can no longer listen to Jackson’s music. I posted it online and I was disturbed by a number of comments.
Many people questioned how I could declare Jackson guilty of sexual abuse based on a one-sided documentary that didn’t seek the views of Jackson’s side. The problem I have with that is that I never said that.
My piece was very carefully worded. Nowhere in the piece did I say I believe that Jackson was guilty. But a grown-up will know that does not mean he’s innocent either. It’s just not proven beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law.
I spent half of the piece throwing Wade Robson's credibility into doubt just as a journalist on Chris Lynch's programme did. I stressed that everyone in this story, from the kids to their parents to Michael Jackson are seriously screwed up people.
But what I know to be a fact, that was illustrated graphically in the programme, is that Jackson groomed children and their parents and took a succession of boys aged seven through 12 to his bed. That is the truth, even Jackson admits that.
If you think that’s okay, and that abuse only occurs if sexual activity then takes place and can be proven, then that’s a worry. After all, what seven-year-old enthralled with a 30-year-old billionaire and the biggest star in the world, takes a camera and a tape recorder to bed with him.
Jackson’s proven behaviour is textbook paedophile. I called it a masterclass. Even more so if he did it because he got away with it. And that’s what the documentary was about. Not whether he was guilty or innocent but what abuse and grooming look like
I have found the vociferousness of the defence of Jackson to be concerning. It’s a demonstration on how so many abusers, bullies, perverts and murderers spend so long hidden in plain view
It's how the George Pells' and all the other priests get away with it for so long. Using their power to keep victims silent and their influence to keep accusers at bay.
It’s how the Michael Jacksons of this world get away with it. With their money and charm. Jackson had more to gain from keeping stuff quiet than his accusers had of blowing it open. Remember how he told every boy that if the secret was out the whole thing was over. He had billions of income to protect. Meanwhile, he amassed an army of supporters in the industry and around him that benefited from the circus staying on the road. He bought James Safechuck's family a house.
It’s the way people like the Kahuis operate. Using fear and silence to ensure that the truth never comes out.
I was thinking last night about that Rugby Coach who was recently convicted of 90 counts of sexual violation against multiple victims and I wondered how he got away with it for so long. Fear and silence and shame. The cards are always loaded against the victims.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

So round one of the Michael Jackson evisceration is over and the nation is collectively having a shower.
A nasty, brutal and graphic two hours and now another two hours to go. Imagine watching the whole thing in one go. No wonder people who saw the full doco at Sundance needed support afterwards.
And now there’s been the debate. But it’s a complicated debate just like all real life. It’s not a case of arguing if Jackson did it or not, or if the men who were the boys are lying or not.
One of the difficulties is that all parties were extremely damaged individuals.
Michael Jackson’s abuse at the hands of his father is well documented as was his stolen childhood as his family exploited his incredible talent.
The men at the heart of the documentary are also very compromised. It has to be remembered that Wade Robson, in particular, held his tongue for a very long time. I’ve read his testimony from a 2005 court case where he refutes ever being abused. That said the defence lawyer expertly framed the questions around whether the childhood Wade ever thought he was abused. Which is clever because that was the truth. The realisation of how advantage was taken came later.
Robson’s path to the documentary started in 2012 when Jackson’s estate did not give him a job choreographing the Michael Jackson Cirque Du Soleil show. A job Robson thought he was owed, dare I say it, for services rendered. What followed was a nervous breakdown. A book about his relationship with Jackson that never found a publisher. A billion-dollar damages case against Jackson’s estate saying that he would never work again because of the abuse that was scuppered because he was in fact working.
The documentary was his final chance to be paid off. It’s a nasty way of life being a grifter.
So what I took from last night was a masterclass from Jackson in how to groom people and their parents to bend to his will. It was a lesson in how many people aided and abetted Jackson because they were in thrall to his talent, fame and money.
It was a lesson in how when the advantage is taken of people, those victims don’t really see what’s happened to them until afterwards. It’s a lesson in how much abuse does not involve forcible coercion.
As to what happens next. For me, it’s the end.
I was a fan of Jackson’s music. I have four of his albums. Off the Wall is the best. I went to his one New Zealand concert. It was weird, unsettling and wonderful all at the same time. But I never warmed to man. And as we approach the 10th anniversary of his death this June his fame was wavering until this documentary brought him back into my attention.
I played Rock With You this weekend to see how it made me feel. Once it brought joy but now only distaste. Even the title now sounds dirty.
It makes me understand the music radio position. They haven’t banned Michael Jackson’s music. They’re just not playing it because enough people turn it off. Radio does not want you to find any reason to turn it off and there are plenty of other geniuses to listen to.
Michael Jackson is over. He could never really Heal the World and make it a better place. His music now reminds me the world is a nasty, craven, grasping, selfish and narcissistic place full of danger.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Another week, another litany of examples that we are a terrible country when it comes to forward thinking and planning.
So I woke up this morning to Mike Hosking sighing and being concerned. The news that 40,000 people in rural and isolated New Zealand will never be able to stream the Rugby World Cup even if they wanted to. Their broadband is just not good enough.
No kidding.
Now I’m more confident than Mike about the whole thing. And I’m impressed at the way Crown Infrastructure Partners have been rolling out the ultra-fast broadband around the country because it’s a massive and expensive job.
To give you an example just to do Milldale a new suburb for 9000 residents is going to cost $45 million.
But the internet and broadband are not the newest technology on the planet. Decisions have been made to base everything on the internet such as the abortive census from last year. So the point is once we decided this is the way then throw everything at it.
And here’s a great point. Last century our grandparents took sealed roads and electricity and telephones to almost every house in NZ. It'll be the same with fibre. We just need to pull our finger out and maybe get some of Shane Jones pot of cash off him.
But I also woke up this morning to news that someone has decided that Auckland needs a light rail tunnel under their harbour and no new car lanes. I’m not going to talk about the pros and cons of this idea here. What I am going to note is that the last bridge was built 60 years ago. Two years later it was doubled in size. Surely after that experience planners back in the day should have realised we were going to need either a replacement or new capacity within the following 50 years. This sort of decision is one that should have been made a quarter of a CENTURY AGO.
Then there’s Queenstown and their desire for a tourist levy. There are only 24,000 ratepayers in Queenstown but the town has one of the highest visitor-to-resident ratios in the world.
As the mayor says "No other city or district in New Zealand experiences the ratio of 34 international visitors per resident. By comparison, the Auckland ratio is one to one and Christchurch is three to one,". So to fund all the infrastructure the tourists need is proving too much for the ratepayers.
I get that but why didn’t anyone get that as more and more hotels and businesses were given approval. It appears Queenstown had a terrible 20-year plan 20 years ago.
I know I’ve said this before and others have said it too but I’m just so tired of the reactive way we run this place instead of proactive.
Could we please stop putting band-aids on our problems.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Talkback callers have shared their thoughts on working from home, after one company says they will soon make all employees work at home. 
BNY Melon in the UK has said they will stop people working from home. They say that if everyone worked in an office, it will lead to "better collaboration and quicker decision making".
The company currently has a flexible working policy for their 3,000 workers, but believe that some of those employees working from home are misusing their trust. 
The move has been met with backlash from employees, with some saying they will have to quit and find a more flexible job, and another saying that it will not benefit people with children or family members to look after.
Callers to Andrew Dickens were mostly in favour of working from home.
Caller Mike says that he has worked at home for several years and he prefers the environment to being stuck in an office, and his productivity has not suffered.
Tania points out that just because people are working in an office it does not mean they are being more productive. 
"I think eliminating the ability to work from home is like putting a bandaid in a wrong place. The issue is you have employed people that do not have enough respect for the company." 
However, caller Scott, who used to live in London and work for BNY Melon, he says that people often did not show up for the hours they were meant to. 
"If they are not managing people properly, it breaks down."

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Well, I have really, really, really tried but I have failed. The same way I failed last year’s Dry July. I had the best intentions but it’s just too tempting. Or maybe I’m too addicted. Or maybe it’s too infuriating.
I honestly thought I might get through this week without discussing the recent findings of the Tax Working Group. I imagined and visualised never uttering the words “Capital Gains Tax”. But I have now fallen.
I was tempted to talk about it after Jacinda Ardern got stuck into the people who write columns in the Herald. People like me. The inference being that we were all ganging up against the CGT. That the proposals were slowly being picked apart like pulling at a loose thread on a jumper. The tax was dying a death of a thousand cuts. And that was unfair. And of course, this whole thing is about fairness.
I took exception to that because what she was really complaining about is that nobody was coming out in favour of the tax. Apart from a few people writing emotional pleas about fairness and how it just feels right.
Ask yourself. Who have you seen crusading for the biggest shakeup of our economy in a generation? Where are the crowds marching in the street? How many water cooler conversations have you had about the taxes? The only ones I’ve had is about how we could avoid paying any. Perhaps on factory floors and minimum wage sweatshops, there are mobs of supporters, but I haven’t seen any evidence of that.
What the Prime Minister is really upset about is the Working Group’s ideas do not have a champion.
Which brings me to why I’ve broken my silence.
This week the government extended Sir Michael Cullen’s contract as Chairman of the Tax Working Group so he can defend the ideas his group presented to the Government. That’s a sweet gig. A grand a day to phone talkback stations or write letters to the editor to dispel any scaremongering that may or may not be going on.
I’m afraid this is just not right. Sir Michael was paid to collate expert advice, which he’s done. Job over. His ideas need to defend themselves. If he wants to defend them now the job’s finished he can do it on his own coin.
Then we come to David Seymour’s criticism today that this demonstrates the inability of Finance Minister Grant Robertson to articulate and defend his Government’s tax plan.
That’s not strictly true because the Tax Working Group’s plan is not yet the government’s plan. They’ll tell us what their plan is next month. And that’s their political failure. To be honest they’ve lost this already. By failing to come out immediately and say what they like and don’t like about the groups that plan the government is just sitting there like a big lump, saying nothing and getting kicked. If I was a supporter of the Capital Gains Tax, I would very angry at the government right now.
What all this is really saying is that the supporters of the Capital Gains Tax are so few and far between that this government is now paying people to support it and that just sounds a teensy bit corrupt.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Australia's largest airline Qantas says the notice it gives customers as part of its Frequent Flyer programme is adequate and it won't introduce new measures for warnings before air points expire.
This despite a number of complaints from customers who claim their points disappeared without warning.
Yesterday it was reported a New Plymouth man who had been saving his Qantas air points for 16 years was horrified to discover all 400,000 of them had expired - despite being advised on multiple occasions that they would not.
The points he had accumulated, according to Qantas' website, were enough to buy about nine one-way tickets between Melbourne and Los Angeles (excluding taxes).
He was frustrated that when he contacted Qantas he was presented the option of being able to "buy back" the points through the further accumulation of points.
The Herald's inbox was flooded with complaints and stories of people in similar situations, who claim their air points had expired without warning.
Two Qantas Frequent Flyer customers contacted the Herald and said they had each had 100,000 points saved which they said had been wiped without notice.
Another reader said she was in a similar situation having had over 90,000 points wiped "without warning or any kind of notice", and given the option to buy back the points.
A handful of others complained about similar experiences on the Air New Zealand's air points programme.
Qantas air points only expire if members do not use or earn at least one point within an 18 month period.
A Qantas spokeswoman countered claims that the customers had not been notified.
"We do give everybody notice of points expiring so I think the people that are saying they didn't get any notice have again obviously not been engaged in the programme."
She added that warnings to frequent flyers - by way of email, on the Qantas app and a banner on members' online accounts page - were sufficient.
Qantas' air points programme was generous and its points did not expire after four years like other airlines' programmes, which is why Wallace was able to save his points for over 16 years, she said.
"There are obviously multiple different ways that you can contact somebody and these are the three ways we have selected to do so at the moment, and that's why we encourage people to keep their details updated," the spokeswoman said.
"We're always looking at ways we can improve the programme and so it may be something that does come up in the future but at the moment this is what we're doing."
More than 12 million people are signed up to Qantas' Frequent Flyer programme.
Offering buyback schemes to reinstate points was about getting customers to participate in the programme, she said.
She said the airline gave customers a 60-day warning before their points are due to expire.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

You have to wonder at the moment whether all Australian league players do is play with balls and then go home and make sex tapes which they send to their mates.
This is after the Penrith Panthers five-eighth Tyrone May became the first player charged by police for his role in a sordid sex tape scandal. That said, he is just the latest in a line of leaguies whose sex tapes have been splashed all over the net.
May turned himself into Penrith police station on Tuesday morning after featuring in numerous lurid videos leaked on social media last Friday.
He was arrested and charged with two counts of allegedly filming and two counts of disseminating sexual acts with two women without their knowledge and consent.
Just yuck. I mean, the sex was consensual but the sharing of the videos with teammates is just strange. Who wants to see your workmates doing the wild thing? Can you imagine Larry getting up to that sort of thing?
But it was made even more yuck when his boss, the rugby league legend Phil Gould, then stated that the sort of behaviour that May has been caught at is, and I quote, “extremely widespread in League”.
Gould said, "Talking to people who deal with this every day, court judges and police, this is in all walks of life. The real worrying thing is this is conditioned into kids in the schools. This age of mobile phones and cameras, it is commonplace."
So it’s a bit of a relief to hear some sense coming out of another league legend Brad Fittler. The New South Wales Origin coach famously banned cellphones from the sheds at his camps in his first year.
It freaked out the players, particularly Matt Prior who found his two days without a phone “startling and stressful” but eventually liberating.
Now Fittler has gone further.
Based on his experiences with his players and his kids and some research he wants the government to help parents. He reckons if governments step in on other addictive practices because they’re injurious to mental health, then they should be stepping in on phones which he thinks is one of the big drivers of bad mental health.
He’s not wrong. The smartphone with its cameras and internet access is the conduit to social media which is being blamed for all sorts of social ills. And he wants us to learn to moderate our use at a younger age. He called on the government to "take the ball up" in censoring their use.
Let’s not go all nanny state and ban them from kids hands but parents need to be aware. After seeing a friends 13 year old child suspended for three days for downloading porn on his phone at school we decided that our boys could have dumbphones but not smartphones until they’re 16. And to make them loathe us more we refused to buy smartphones for them. They had to use their own money.
I’d be more than happy to see a campaign of social awareness around the use of smartphones by the under 16s. And hopefully, it might spark the league players to grow up as well.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.