Comments on: Why the National Party killed the pay-equity inquiries http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/ hopping along the corridors of power Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:06:50 +1300 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: toys online http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-83863 toys online Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:35:39 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-83863 incredible what they do... its all i can say... Women demands :D incredible what they do… its all i can say…
Women demands :D

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: James http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71953 James Sat, 28 Feb 2009 02:31:50 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71953 So far this thread has been won by BP,Sapient et el....the opposition is running on emotional fumes and leftist dogma. The issue of cost is one that the opposition can't answer without arriving at the inevertible lefty solution.....State force being needed to "rebalance" things....the gun in other words....whos suprised? So far this thread has been won by BP,Sapient et el….the opposition is running on emotional fumes and leftist dogma.

The issue of cost is one that the opposition can’t answer without arriving at the inevertible lefty solution…..State force being needed to “rebalance” things….the gun in other words….whos suprised?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: James http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71951 James Sat, 28 Feb 2009 02:28:02 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71951 That chicks have the hots for Key and will drop any other concern if they can droll over him? ;-) I've seen women do this over him...its mad! That chicks have the hots for Key and will drop any other concern if they can droll over him? ;-)

I’ve seen women do this over him…its mad!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: Trevor29 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71700 Trevor29 Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:03:45 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71700 The National Party’s Women’s Affairs policy page is not still blank. Its most obvious feature is the presence of three pictures of John Key! What does that say? The National Party’s Women’s Affairs policy page is not still blank. Its most obvious feature is the presence of three pictures of John Key! What does that say?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: BluePeter http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71698 BluePeter Tue, 24 Feb 2009 18:56:51 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71698 >>So overall you provided no evidence for your claims and actually backed up those of your opponents! Thanks for backing our position, Katie! You iz trollz now.... >>So overall you provided no evidence for your claims and actually backed up those of your opponents!

Thanks for backing our position, Katie!

You iz trollz now….

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: Sapient http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71696 Sapient Tue, 24 Feb 2009 10:57:15 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71696 First Link; Gender Analysis: The page itself is useless, though it does link to the “Full Picture” doccument which, while not a study, does cite several. It claims “Occupational segregation means that women are more likely to be in clerical positions...”, “women's labour force participation has doubled over the last four decades, and by 1991 women made up 45 per cent of the labour force employed for 20 hours or more per week”, “in 43 per cent of two-parent families with children, women's income is more than 35 per cent of the total family income”. These are the only substantive statements in said document and none of which support your argument; in fact they actually support some points made by the right wing “trolls” further up the thread. None of the articles referenced in the document detail pay differences for the same jobs or support your arguments in any way either. Second Link; Action Plan: Well what can I say, it cites no stats or research and all it is is a, very poor, plan to enhance the place of women. This does not support your position. Third Link; Extract from Cabnet Office Circular: Again, this pushes the role of the ministry of womens affairs but it provides no stats or arguments that lend any support to your arguments. The same stands true for all links from the page and Annex A. Fourth Link; Ministerial Breifs: Okay, Now we are getting somewhere. I just read every one availible on that page. From the 2007 report; “ Women are overwhelmingly the victims of violence, are lower paid than men, and bear the greater share of responsibility for unpaid work.”, “Women have much lower lifetime earnings than men, and the pay gap between women and men is ‘stuck’ at around 12 percent Lifetime earnings are a critical factor impacting on women’s economic independence. The average weekly income from all sources for women in 2007 was $510, compared with $832 for men. This reflects the combined impact of women being less likely to be in paid work, working fewer hours, and earning less per hour. Women’s median hourly earnings were 12.1 percent lower than men’s in 20073 – men earned $19.10 compared to $16.78 for women. “. From 2008; “Women’s labour force participation was at its highest in the September 2008 quarter at 62.6 percent – an increase of 0.4 percentage points from the previous quarter. This compares with a labour force participation rate for men of 75.0 percent – a decrease of 0.4 percentage points from the previous quarter.6 • In the June 2008 quarter, women’s median hourly earnings were $17.50, compared to $20.00 for men. The gender pay gap has remained at around 12 percent since 2001.”. Here it readily highlights the difference in pay rates between men and women, but note, it says across the entire economy, it also notes that there is a significant difference in areas of employment and in hours worked. It makes no claim as to women and men working at the same place, in the same job, with the same skill, same longetivity, etc making different sums. This reference lends no support to you statements, if anything it again enhances those of the “trolls”. Fifth Link; Influences of Maternal Employment and Early Childhood Education on Young Children’s Cognitive and Behavioural Outcomes: Okay? So you provided a link that shows not only that women are of a significantly greater risk than males, supporting my argument, but also that it is better for children to have mothers whom work little to no hours? Sixth and Seventh link; crud: same as mentioned in previous links. So overall you provided no evidence for your claims and actually backed up those of your opponents! The reason asked yout and frog to provide references was precisly because it is so easy to find evidence supporting me, now show me some supporting you :P You truly are an anthropologist arnt you? First Link; Gender Analysis: The page itself is useless, though it does link to the “Full Picture” doccument which, while not a study, does cite several. It claims “Occupational segregation means that women are more likely to be in clerical positions…”, “women’s labour force participation has doubled over the last four decades, and by 1991 women made up 45 per cent of the labour force employed for 20 hours or more per week”, “in 43 per cent of two-parent families with children, women’s income is more than 35 per cent of the total family income”. These are the only substantive statements in said document and none of which support your argument; in fact they actually support some points made by the right wing “trolls” further up the thread.
None of the articles referenced in the document detail pay differences for the same jobs or support your arguments in any way either.

Second Link; Action Plan: Well what can I say, it cites no stats or research and all it is is a, very poor, plan to enhance the place of women. This does not support your position.

Third Link; Extract from Cabnet Office Circular: Again, this pushes the role of the ministry of womens affairs but it provides no stats or arguments that lend any support to your arguments. The same stands true for all links from the page and Annex A.

Fourth Link; Ministerial Breifs: Okay, Now we are getting somewhere. I just read every one availible on that page. From the 2007 report; “ Women are overwhelmingly the victims of violence, are lower paid than men, and bear the greater share of responsibility for unpaid work.”, “Women have much lower lifetime earnings than men, and the pay gap between women and men is ‘stuck’ at around 12 percent
Lifetime earnings are a critical factor impacting on women’s economic independence. The average weekly income from all sources for women in 2007 was $510, compared with $832 for men. This reflects the combined impact of women being less likely to be in paid work, working fewer hours, and earning less per hour. Women’s median hourly earnings were 12.1 percent lower than men’s in 20073 – men earned $19.10 compared to $16.78 for women. “. From 2008; “Women’s labour force participation was at its highest in the September 2008 quarter at 62.6 percent – an increase of 0.4 percentage points from the previous quarter. This compares with a labour force participation rate for men of 75.0 percent – a decrease of 0.4 percentage points from the previous quarter.6 • In the June 2008 quarter, women’s median hourly earnings were $17.50, compared to $20.00 for men. The gender pay gap has remained at around 12 percent since 2001.”.
Here it readily highlights the difference in pay rates between men and women, but note, it says across the entire economy, it also notes that there is a significant difference in areas of employment and in hours worked. It makes no claim as to women and men working at the same place, in the same job, with the same skill, same longetivity, etc making different sums.
This reference lends no support to you statements, if anything it again enhances those of the “trolls”.

Fifth Link; Influences of Maternal Employment and Early Childhood
Education on Young Children’s Cognitive and
Behavioural Outcomes: Okay? So you provided a link that shows not only that women are of a significantly greater risk than males, supporting my argument, but also that it is better for children to have mothers whom work little to no hours?

Sixth and Seventh link; crud: same as mentioned in previous links.

So overall you provided no evidence for your claims and actually backed up those of your opponents! The reason asked yout and frog to provide references was precisly because it is so easy to find evidence supporting me, now show me some supporting you :P
You truly are an anthropologist arnt you?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: BluePeter http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71678 BluePeter Tue, 24 Feb 2009 06:47:54 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71678 >>not having children at all Thought you greenies would be applauding that. So the world isn't overpopulated? >>The penalizing of those with the wombs really suits those who prefer males to hold the upper hand and power within society There is no law saying women must look after children. If women tended to have babies, then went back to work soon after, and the male looked after the child, then you'd see the pay rates reflect this. But women DO make a choice, and that choice has a COST. Who should pay that cost? You? Good-oh - send more of your income direct to the IRD. >>Have the modern nats ever done anything to advance the position of woman in society I used to hire them. They tend to make very good programmers, in my experience. What have you done? >>not having children at all

Thought you greenies would be applauding that. So the world isn’t overpopulated?

>>The penalizing of those with the wombs really suits those who prefer males to hold the upper hand and power within society

There is no law saying women must look after children. If women tended to have babies, then went back to work soon after, and the male looked after the child, then you’d see the pay rates reflect this. But women DO make a choice, and that choice has a COST.

Who should pay that cost? You? Good-oh – send more of your income direct to the IRD.

>>Have the modern nats ever done anything to advance the position of woman in society

I used to hire them. They tend to make very good programmers, in my experience.

What have you done?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: daddyO http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71676 daddyO Tue, 24 Feb 2009 06:27:06 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71676 What sapient describes is social freeloading from the employers. If it were not for wombs and the 'choices' of their woman owners there be no 'markets' at all................. In many developed countrys there is the problem of woman putting of childbirth or not having children at all ................ often for economic reasons. The penalizing of those with the wombs really suits those who prefer males to hold the upper hand and power within society. ............... ie the nats Have the modern nats ever done anything to advance the position of woman in society ?????????? It seems they oppose every measure which brings equality. What sapient describes is social freeloading from the employers.

If it were not for wombs and the ‘choices’ of their woman owners there be no ‘markets’ at all……………..

In many developed countrys there is the problem of woman putting of childbirth or not having children at all ……………. often for economic reasons.

The penalizing of those with the wombs really suits those who prefer males to hold the upper hand and power within society. …………… ie the nats

Have the modern nats ever done anything to advance the position of woman in society ??????????

It seems they oppose every measure which brings equality.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: BluePeter http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71675 BluePeter Tue, 24 Feb 2009 06:12:55 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71675 >>I can’t believe people still think that women don’t deserve pay-equity. Women and men should get exactly equal pay for equal work and equal risk to the employer. The point is that some groups do present higher risk, hence the reason for the inequity in many cases. Again, if women were really "cheaper", then businesses would employ mostly women. Their wage bill would be lower. But they don't. So why is this not happening? >>I can’t believe people still think that women don’t deserve pay-equity.

Women and men should get exactly equal pay for equal work and equal risk to the employer.

The point is that some groups do present higher risk, hence the reason for the inequity in many cases. Again, if women were really “cheaper”, then businesses would employ mostly women. Their wage bill would be lower.

But they don’t. So why is this not happening?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: Sapient http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71674 Sapient Tue, 24 Feb 2009 05:48:31 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71674 Fem, its not that we, or atleast I, are arguing that women deserve less pay. Rather that in our present social situation, due to the choices made by the majority of women and due to women having wombs, women do in reality pose a greater risk than a male whom is exactly the same save sex and as such would be less prefered at a given pay rate. Employers have a basic right to employ employees at a rate which represents the costs and benefits associated with employing said employee. Katie, Thanks, I shall get on to those :P . Fem,
its not that we, or atleast I, are arguing that women deserve less pay. Rather that in our present social situation, due to the choices made by the majority of women and due to women having wombs, women do in reality pose a greater risk than a male whom is exactly the same save sex and as such would be less prefered at a given pay rate. Employers have a basic right to employ employees at a rate which represents the costs and benefits associated with employing said employee.

Katie,
Thanks, I shall get on to those :P .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: Fem http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71671 Fem Tue, 24 Feb 2009 04:46:48 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71671 Wow, that was so incredibly depressing reading all those comments. I can't believe people still think that women don't deserve pay-equity. It's 2009! Wow, that was so incredibly depressing reading all those comments. I can’t believe people still think that women don’t deserve pay-equity. It’s 2009!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: frog http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71644 frog Mon, 23 Feb 2009 21:55:21 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71644 Thanks katie. keep sending the refs! And yes, there is some sort of limit to the number of links, but it seems to vary so I have no idea what to recommend. Thanks katie. keep sending the refs! And yes, there is some sort of limit to the number of links, but it seems to vary so I have no idea what to recommend.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: katie http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71643 katie Mon, 23 Feb 2009 21:50:56 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71643 For those who can't google the ref's for themselves: http://www.mwa.govt.nz/gender-analysis http://www.mwa.govt.nz/our-work/action-plan/index.html http://www.dpmc.govt.nz/cabinet/circulars/co02/2.html http://www.mwa.govt.nz/news-and-pubs/publications/az-publications/bim http://www.mwa.govt.nz/news-and-pubs/publications/az-publications/work-and-enterprise/influence-of-maternal-employement.pdf http://www.mwa.govt.nz/news-and-pubs/publications/az-publications/work-and-enterprise/oss-litrev.html http://www.mwa.govt.nz/news-and-pubs/publications/trading-choices That's prolly enuff research for you to chew on for now, there's more but I seem to recall a limit to how many links the blog allows in comments posts. Frog, no intention to spam your post, just evening up the playing field. This is what a feminist look like ... ;-) For those who can’t google the ref’s for themselves:

http://www.mwa.govt.nz/gender-analysis

http://www.mwa.govt.nz/our-work/action-plan/index.html

http://www.dpmc.govt.nz/cabinet/circulars/co02/2.html

http://www.mwa.govt.nz/news-and-pubs/publications/az-publications/bim

http://www.mwa.govt.nz/news-and-pubs/publications/az-publications/work -and-enterprise/influence-of-maternal-employement.pdf

http://www.mwa.govt.nz/news-and-pubs/publications/az-publications/work -and-enterprise/oss-litrev.html

http://www.mwa.govt.nz/news-and-pubs/publications/trading-choices

That’s prolly enuff research for you to chew on for now, there’s more but I seem to recall a limit to how many links the blog allows in comments posts.

Frog, no intention to spam your post, just evening up the playing field.

This is what a feminist look like … ;-)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: toad http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71631 toad Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:59:32 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71631 I see the National Party's <a href="http://national.org.nz/PolicyAreas.aspx?S=243" rel="nofollow">Women's Affairs policy page</a> is <b>still</b> blank. Maybe it is intentional, and not just a glitch. I see the National Party’s Women’s Affairs policy page is still blank. Maybe it is intentional, and not just a glitch.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: Sapient http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71610 Sapient Mon, 23 Feb 2009 04:34:45 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71610 BP, Bingo. RedDeath, I can see this wednesday is going to be very interesting! I look foward to debating this issue live, esspecially since Sue and Cathrine will be there to join in :P BP,
Bingo.

RedDeath,
I can see this wednesday is going to be very interesting! I look foward to debating this issue live, esspecially since Sue and Cathrine will be there to join in :P

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: BluePeter http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71606 BluePeter Mon, 23 Feb 2009 04:02:02 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71606 Out of context, Don. Forget loyalty. Forget longevity of service. If women (insert any social group here you like) present a higher risk to the employer, then that risk will be reflected in their pay. There IS a risk that a woman of child bearing age will have children and require leave. The position may have to be held open for a year. That means the employer must account for that position and get a contractor in to cover, who tend to cost more. If the job is reasonably important, the chances of getting a qualified person who will work for a limited term are low. Again, extra risk and extra cost. It's not rocket science. Out of context, Don.

Forget loyalty. Forget longevity of service.

If women (insert any social group here you like) present a higher risk to the employer, then that risk will be reflected in their pay.

There IS a risk that a woman of child bearing age will have children and require leave. The position may have to be held open for a year. That means the employer must account for that position and get a contractor in to cover, who tend to cost more. If the job is reasonably important, the chances of getting a qualified person who will work for a limited term are low. Again, extra risk and extra cost.

It’s not rocket science.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: Don http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71605 Don Mon, 23 Feb 2009 03:41:11 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71605 'I strongly suspect the data doesn’t incorporate aspects such as longevity of service, loyalty, output, etc.' Everybody repeat after me: "Loyalty will be rewarded" "Your input is important to us" "Employees are our most valuable asset" "We reward risk-takers" Now drink your cool-aid. I've got to go to the Philippines for .... er never you mind. ‘I strongly suspect the data doesn’t incorporate aspects such as longevity of service, loyalty, output, etc.’

Everybody repeat after me:
“Loyalty will be rewarded”
“Your input is important to us”
“Employees are our most valuable asset”
“We reward risk-takers”

Now drink your cool-aid. I’ve got to go to the Philippines for …. er never you mind.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: daddyO http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71592 daddyO Mon, 23 Feb 2009 01:57:02 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71592 Of corse there is no grand conspiracy .............. its the natianal party we are talking about and there aint nothing grand about that mob. Ryall stopped the investigations because they would provide proof of the exploitiation of female workers in compared to males ............... something the nats have never cared about before. The nats have always struggled with the female vote .................. and this is an example why. The new nats are just the same as the old nats. Same dog ................ same leg action Of corse there is no grand conspiracy ………….. its the natianal party we are talking about and there aint nothing grand about that mob.

Ryall stopped the investigations because they would provide proof of the exploitiation of female workers in compared to males …………… something the nats have never cared about before.

The nats have always struggled with the female vote ……………… and this is an example why.

The new nats are just the same as the old nats.

Same dog ……………. same leg action

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: BluePeter http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71578 BluePeter Sun, 22 Feb 2009 23:58:13 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71578 They are not oppressed. They earn less because they offer a different risk profile than men. Women, in certain age groups, cost more to hire. In any case, even if there was some grand conspiracy against females (groan), where are you going to get the money from to pay for long maternity leave? Your magic green money tree? Cost it out, then tell me *exactly* where the money will come from? They are not oppressed. They earn less because they offer a different risk profile than men. Women, in certain age groups, cost more to hire.

In any case, even if there was some grand conspiracy against females (groan), where are you going to get the money from to pay for long maternity leave? Your magic green money tree? Cost it out, then tell me *exactly* where the money will come from?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]> By: reddeath26 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71577 reddeath26 Sun, 22 Feb 2009 23:51:17 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2009/02/21/why-the-national-party-killed-the-pay-equity-inquiries/#comment-71577 @BluePeter- Thats right, females can continue to be oppressed because we do not have the correct economic conditions to treat them as first class citizens. A bad economy does not justify the subordination of a significent proportion of the workforce based purely on their sex. @BluePeter-
Thats right, females can continue to be oppressed because we do not have the correct economic conditions to treat them as first class citizens. A bad economy does not justify the subordination of a significent proportion of the workforce based purely on their sex.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

]]>