I’ve participated in the Bike Wise challenge for the last two years, trying to clock up more kilometers on my bike during February than anyone else the Green Party office. Not satisfied with failing to beat my nemesis/friend/colleague Robert Ashe two years in a row, I’ve decided to set my sights even higher in 2012 and take on that doyen of the cycling world, Hutt South MP Trevor Mallard in a head to head challenge.

I should have been suspicious when he so readily accepted – turns out he’s in training for the Graperide, a 101km race in March, so is relishing the opportunity to intensify his regime. I should also have checked his facebook page first, for such gems as “did Hutt to work via Makara” to give me an idea of what I am in for.

However, I am undeterred, and my approach will be to use my bike(s) as my primary form of transport for the month and see how many kms I can rack up going about my daily business – and in a frock as much as possible of course.

I warmed up today by taking my “pretty” bike, Prudence, for a leisurely cruise around Wellington Harbour to work from Petone. I truly believe that with the right cycling infrastructure, this could be one of the best cycle commutes in the world – it’s all flat, round a gorgeous harbour (where on a good day you can see dolphins, like I did yesterday) and with plenty of good coffee pit stops on the way (like the cart on Petone esplanade, the french cafe on the Hutt Road, the the bike shop/cafe on Thorndon Quay).

However it’s severely let down now by the lack of a dedicated cycleway from Petone to Ngauranga, and the poor quality of the existing cycle lane the rest of the way. On the way from Petone to Wellington it’s okay-ish – you ride on the shoulder of SH2 for about a kilometre before the cycleway starts (though you take an increased risk of punctures by actually using the cycleway as it’s often covered in broken glass. Many faster riders than me opt not to use it).

On the way home from Wellington to the Hutt Valley, you’re faced with the unhappy choice of riding on the shoulder of SH2 the whole way, which is in that direction very narrow and often invisible to motorists around the sharper corners, or riding back on the cycleway, which leaves you stranded to ride the last kilometre on the shoulder of the motorway GOING THE WRONG WAY. Not a happy conundrum. I usually opt to take my life in my hands and ride on the shoulder the whole way, but that hairy moment when you wobble uncontrollably as a huge track or bus takes a corner 10cms from you is not cool.

Urgently upgrading the Petone to Ngauranga cycle route as part of the Great Harbour Way project was identified in the Hutt Corridor Plan as a key priority (after lots of submissions urging for it, including mine), but action is still slow. I hope to keep pushing for improvements and to use my riding in February to raise awareness. I’m sure there are many more casual riders like me who would love to ride from the Hutt to Wellington but who are put off by safety (and maybe the fear of lyrca).

Despite these concerns, I had a beautiful ride to work today – which is good ’cause I’ll be doing it a lot in February. Who knows whether I will topple Trevor (the odds are not good), but I do at least have a secret weapon – as well as Bike Wise, I’m doing FebFast and giving up alcohol for the month of Feb. Who’s laughing now, Trevor?

The story was prompted by the release of two studies by the Families Commission on the risks to subsequent children in such families. The Commission makes a number of suggestions: improved information sharing between agencies, improved reporting processes, consideration of mandatory reporting, complementary interventions rather than single focus programmes, culturally appropriate services, and long-term more intensive follow-up.

The release of these studies comes while Social Development Minister Paula Bennett is in the middle of an intensive road trip consulting on her Green Paper for Vulnerable Children. She was in my town, Lower Hutt, last night, and in Whangarei earlier this week while I was there. From local reports, it sounds like the consultation process has been somewhat fraught, with locals in Whangarei frustrated that the Minister wasn’t open to hearing from people directly, insisting instead that they “put it in a submission“. Nevertheless I applaud the proactive way that the Government has approached the task of consulting on the Green Paper – they’ve really gone all out with meetings, websites, social media, and NGO engagement. Submissions close on 28 February and I do encourage you to make one.

The problem is I think they might be asking the wrong questions. The Green Paper makes similar recommendations to those of the Families Commission today, with a focus on mandatory reporting and prioritising social services for young children and families over older children and individuals.

There is no doubt that there is much that can be done to improve Child Youth and Families processes, better integrate services between Government agencies, improve information-sharing, and “wrap around support” (a current buzzword) for families at risk, to reduce the horrific rate of child abuse in New Zealand. To the extent that the Green Paper can achieve this, I applaud it.

However, I remain concerned both with the more controversial recommendations like mandatory reporting. As Metiria pointed out when the Green Paper was released in July last year, there is a very real risk that mandatory reporting of child abuse will be counter-productive, because it can frighten vulnerable families from access the support that is available to them. There is a huge stigma attached to having CYFS involved with your family which would only be intensified by mandatory reporting. In acute cases there are already very good best practice reporting guidelines for health professionals and social workers.

More fundamentally, I’m concerned that the Green Paper’s jurisdiction doesn’t extend to the underlying causes of abuse and neglect, namely poverty and inequality. The Northern Advocate called Paula Bennett’s consultation tour a “poverty roadshow“, but sadly, it is anything but. The submission template asks for opinions about prioritising services, monitoring families, sharing personal information, connecting families to services, and encouraging communities to take responsibility for child abuse, but nothing about poverty and how the  Government should address it. I’ve heard from those who were at the Lower Hutt meeting last night that the cost of living and inequality were are major theme of responses from the audience, but that the Minister’s focus was very much on reporting and information-sharing.

We know that financial stresses are a major contributor to child abuse and neglect. Beyond physical abuse itself, family financial hardship often exposes children to adult stresses that are detrimental to their wellbeing. This is a phenomenon I discussed with the team at 155 Whare in Whangarei on Monday, and one which is very real for children. When Metiria interviewed children at a Decile 1 school in Dunedin to produce our podcast of kids talking about poverty last year, they talked about loan sharks, credit cards, interest rates, and their parents “doing silly stuff” when financial stresses got too much. These are adult concepts and stresses that children simply shouldn’t be exposed to.

They also talked about going without shoes, parents going without meals to make sure their kids had enough to eat, living in cold damp homes that made them sick, and the unfairness of tax cuts that only worked out for the wealthy (yes really, with no prompting!).

Until we address child poverty and inequality, we can’t hope to make serious inroads on the child abuse issue.

My thoughts, and those of the Green MPs, are with the people of Canterbury this evening. Green Co-Leader Russel Norman issued this media release this afternoon:

The Green Party is extending support for the people of Christchurch and Canterbury in the wake of two major earthquakes today.

“2011 has been a tough year for Cantabrians. Our hearts go out to every person in Christchurch and Canterbury today,” said Green Party Co-leader Dr Russel Norman.

“Today’s earthquakes are an unwelcome intrusion on the Christmas period when families are coming together after such a challenging year.

“The people of Christchurch have shown great resilience in the face of adversity and the human spirit in the people of Canterbury is indomitable.

“We have seen this human spirit in the past and I have no doubt we will see it over the coming months.

“Our hearts go out to those injured in today’s quakes.

“The Green Party pledges to do all we can to ensure the people of Christchurch and Canterbury receive the help and support they need at this time.

“Our three Christchurch based MPs are ready to offer support to any person who needs or request it.”

If you are in Christchurch or the surrounding Districts and need some support, please feel free to contact any of the Greens’ three Christchurch-based MPs: – Kennedy Graham, Eugenie Sage, or Mojo Mathers.

A transcript is here for those who cannot access the video.

Whoever is the next Minister for the Environment, the Greens will be calling for more resources into the fund and a development of the work on toxic sites. Yesterday I sat in a community forum at Moanataiari with local people as their questions about their homes, gardens and children were just starting to be discussed. There are so many implications of the test results in our community. I wish I could say that this situation is limited and just an anomaly. However from sheep dips to timber treatment sites, from old mine tailings to new toxic dumps like the Waihi one, we have a big problem. We are committed supporting Moanataiari and every community facing these issues and finding effective solutions that protect human health and the environment.

Amnesty International begin its sixteen days of activism against gender-based violence, with events happening all over the country. This year there’s a focus on calling on the Solomon Islands to enact laws to protect women from violence, and working to defend Norma Cruz, a Guatemalan activist who documents cases of violence against women, from attacks on her life.

Just as importantly, we need to work to eliminate gender based violence here in Aotearoa. A third of New Zealand women will experience some sort of sexual violence in their lifetime. This, as they say, is not ok. Cuts to community group funding especially groups like Women’s Refuge and Te Rito have been a blow to the safety of women and children. The Government focus on court based support for victims of sexual violence instead of women’s organisations being resourced to play that role during court processes is not a step forward.

We must change. We need to place non violence and caring for people – at the heart of our economy. We need to commit to women’s human rights, from safety from male violence to welfare to pay equity. We need to move to a less adversarial and more compassionate justice system. We need to ensure adequate funding for organisations challenging gender-based violence. At a time where demand for Women’s Refuge safe-houses increased 12%, it is wrong for this vital service to lose $382,000 in baseline funding.

Just as important as these practical policy changes, is a cultural shift. As Jan Logie, one of our candidates who I hope will join me in Parliament after this election, has written:

We need to go back to challenging the socio, cultural and political systems, institutions, values and practices that continue to support gender based violence directly or indirectly. We need to undermine gender roles, victim blaming and sexism and promote non-violence.

Let’s get to work.

I was also delighted because the appointment represented the fulfilment of a lot of my work in Parliament this term. My Human Rights (Disability Commissioner) Amendment Bill to establish the position of Disability Commissioner was due to be debated in Parliament when the Government announced they would adopt my proposal and create the position.

In recognition of the importance of appointing someone to the post as soon as possible, Paul was appointed on a fixed term contract before the law was officially changed to create his position. The Government has now introduced legislation to establish the permanent position.

Or has it?

It won’t be debated until the next term of Parliament, because the House has now risen for the year, but the Human Rights Amendment Bill has been tabled in the House so we can examine and prepare for it in the next term.

At first glance, I’m surprised and a little perturbed to find that the Bill does much more than just establish the position of Disability Commissioner. The Government seems to have taken the need for legislation to establish the role of Disability Commissioner as an opportunity to review and the whole Human Rights Commission (HRC).

The Bill would make quite major changes to the structure of the HRC and the roles of the Commissioners. Instead of having dedicated Race Relations, Equal Opportunity, and Disability Commissioners, they will all be Human Rights Commissioners, with particular “portfolio” responsibility for different areas. While the Bill stipulates that there must be a Commissioner appointed to lead the work in the three priority areas of Race Relations, Equal Opportunities, and Disability Issues, it actually allows for one Commissioner to lead work in more than one of these “priority areas”. So there would be no guarantee that the Commissioner working on Disability Issues would actually be doing so full time.

It’s even possible that Commissioners wouldn’t be appointed because of their specialist knowledge in these areas, but appointed as Human Rights Commissioners first, and then assigned to one of these portfolios. If that were the case that would run completely counter to the strong push from the disability sector that the Disability Commissioner should have lived experience of disability and a proven track record as a disability advocate.

Obviously this rings some pretty loud alarm bells for me! Other parts of the legislation – like those more clearly spelling out the HRC’s role in promoting and monitoring New Zealand’s international human rights record – might be perfectly reasonable and necessary changes to enable the HRC to operate efficiently. I intend to talk to people within the Human Rights and Disability sectors to find out what they think over the coming weeks and months.

What concerns me is that these changes haven’t been sold by the Government as a major review of the HRC, even though that is what they are. The press releases from both the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Disability Issues following the tabling of the legislation merrily celebrated the creation of the new Commissioner with responsibility for Disability Issues, mentioning the wider changes almost as an aside. Both also emphasised that the Bill would enable a full time Disability Rights Commissioner, despite the fact that as drafted, it does not guarantee that the Commissioner wouldn’t have another portfolio as well.

This is at best careless and at worst misleading. If we are going to have a wholesale review of the HRC, then let’s have it out in the open! And if we’re going to establish the full time position of Disability Commissioner, then let’s do that, not do something like that that doesn’t quite meet the description.

I will be following the development of this legislation in the next term of Parliament very carefully, and suggest anyone with an interest in Human Rights, Race Relations, Equal Opportunities, and Disability Issues does the same!

The research looked at the differences in health benefits of using a bicycle sharing scheme run in Barcelona compared with travel by a car in an urban environment. The results were clear: public bicycle sharing schemes can improve public health.

In particular, the study found that physical activity lead to the avoidance of death producing a benefit to risk ratio of 77:1.

Using bicycles was also good for the environment. Annual carbon dioxide emissions in Barcelona were reduced by an estimated 9,062 tonnes.

The study adds to the growing body of evidence (from a public health perspective) for central government to subsidise bike sharing schemes in our major cities.

Kevin

However, this press release from the Ministry of Health is worrying.

The key message for World Suicide Prevention Day is that help is available to people who need it.

The release points us to thelowdown.co.nz, The Journal (with no URL) and the Depression Helpline.

That’s all you get.

They miss out and play down other wonderful services available to people with mental health problems, such as

• Depression.org.nz
• Mental Health foundation (and their mental health awareness week page!)
• Supporting Families with Mental Illness
• Youthline Call 0800 376633 or Free TXT 234
• Balance NZ
• Headspace.org.nz

They are also silent on how to access mental health services through your GP and DHB.

Mental health officials are urging people to seek help on Suicide Prevention Day. They say help is available for them and their loved ones but are they doing enough to help when all they promote is nothing except for a website?

There are also worrying signs that some of the progress previously hard won on mental health is being undone. I spoke in the House recently against the Government’s plan to roll the Mental Health Commission into the Health and Disability Commissioner’s office. There is clear evidence that DHBs are using money intended for mental health in other areas. Primary care referral to a Clinical Psychologist for free sessions is now only available for Maori, Pasifika and people with a Community Services Card. These services used to be for everyone, until the National Government cut them.

This Government needs to make a commitment to funding mental health services and promoting them adequately so that everyone can get the help they need and live happier lives.

David Clendon: What is the Government’s contingency plan if there is a catastrophic oil spill or leak resulting from exploratory drilling?

Hon HEKIA PARATA: Maritime New Zealand is responsible for ensuring that New Zealand is prepared for, and able to respond to, marine oil spills. The Marine Pollution Response Service consists of internationally respected experts, who manage and train a team of about 400 local, Government, and Maritime New Zealand responders.

I didn’t find that particularly reassuring at the time, and find it much less so now given what is happening off Tauranga. We know some smart and dedicated people, both professionals and volunteers,  are working desperately hard trying to avert a major disaster, but so far we have seen just how little capacity we have to manage an accident.

Nobody ever wants an oil spill anywhere in the marine environment, but in terms of acccess and ability to respond,  the location and timing of this spill could have been a great deal worse.  The vessel ran aground on a reef scarcely 20km from Tauranga, one of our largest, busiest and most modern ports.  It occurred in calm weather, and was known about almost immediately. Yet we have still struggled to bring together the necessary expertise and hardware to deal quickly  with the crisis.

How much worse would the situation be if we were to allow deepwater off shore drilling, which the Energy Minister and her government are so eager to do, and an accident occurred a long way offshore in foul weather.

The American response to the Gulf of Mexico disaster involved hundreds of vessels, and many thousands of  military, civilian and volunteer personnel.  It also required a second rig to drill the relief well that ultimately enabled the stemming of the oil flow into the waters of the Gulf.

New Zealand does not and will never have that sort of capacity.  The oil companies will resist having to take responsibility to provide it.

There will always be accidents at sea that threaten our coastlines, wildlife and the livelihoods of people who rely on the marine resource.  We need to continually assess and reassess the risks of such accidents and put in place appropriate safeguards and countermeasures.

To knowingly invite and even encourage deep water drilling, an activity that we know is highly likely to cause problems entirely beyond our ability to resolve them, would be reckless in the extreme.  I hope that the reality of having to deal with the Rena incident will cause the government to think again about our energy future in the interests of our environmental and economic wellbeing.

What I found was a rather more interesting (and also more demanding!) event, the brainchild of an enterprising group of AUT students who donated their time and skills to organising the morning as part of their communications degrees.

Posing as a ‘star’ for the morning, alongside Blair Strang, a real star,  I was invited to compete to see what distance I could clock up on an exercycle in blocks of three minutes.  I don’t find an MP’s lifestyle to be especially conducive to maintaining fitness, but  managed to produce at least some reasonable results, although Blair did manage to take the lead (by a modest margin ) in our final ‘contest‘.

The point of all the silliness and panting was to raise awareness of what Habitat does in the community, and of their plan to host a sponsored ‘Bike and Build’ cycle ride from  Auckland to Wellington next year, with proceeds to go toward completing a building project in Wellington.

So if you are keen to ride all or part of the way between our two largest North Island cities, for a good cause, keep an eye on the Habitat website for details.  You have plenty of time to get fit for it if you start soon!

In 2007 the PSA and the SFWU started court proceedings and they have finally won. The arguments used to deny these workers the minimum wage have all failed in court. After some negotiations and with the good will of the major employer (IDEA Services) the Government has worked with all parties to craft an affordable transition to a fairer situation. Back pay will be paid by Christmas to many of the workers who badly need this money.

It will cost $27.5 million to cover the back pay and $90 million to pay all workers a staged increase reaching the minimum wage by June 2013. The Government is contributing because IDEA services and other disability service providers couldn’t survive the legal requirement without help. The consensus now exists to do the right thing over time.

The Greens would like to see these workers paid the minimum wage and more straight away but we recognise that the formula developed is a workable solution and an opportunity that needed to be grasped. We strongly support the unions and IDEA Services for their constructive approach and the Government for helping mak this work. There were ugly suggestions about changing the definition of the minimum wage  so that the night shift hours did not have to be changed. However the worst has been avoided and the hourly rate goes from $3.77 per hour for some night shift workers to the minimum wage in incremental steps over the next two years.

I sat on the very short Select Committee and I was very pleased for once to see Urgency used for once for an urgent issue. Congratulations Phil Dickson, the worker who led the charge and congratulations to all involved.  For once the Parliament has used Urgency to be useful to the lowest paid, unlike the Video Surveillance Bill which is a total and utter disgrace!

The House grants outgoing MPs a chance to reflect on their time in Parliament with a valedictory speech. You can watch Sue and Keith reflect on their 12 years as Green MPs below.

Sue Kedgley

Keith Locke

Both Keith and Sue’s tireless dedication will be sadly missed. But, as Sue showed in her speech, the baton has been passed on and we’ve got heaps of awesome young faces coming through.

Being in Hamilton reminds me of how it felt to be a young man realising my difference for the first time. Although Hamilton is now actually a pretty cool place, I remember the fear, isolation and desperation of the mid-1970s. You may well have seen the video clip I shot for the “It Gets Better” project. But why can’t we make it better right now?

That’s the genesis for Murray’s report (or at least for my role in sponsoring it). As an adult gay man, my life is immeasurably better than the one I would have led in 1970s, as a result of the hard-won gains like Homosexual Law reform, legal protection from discrimination and civil unions. But the teenage gay boy growing up today is still surrounded by a family, friends, school, church and pretty well every other element of his environment that assumes he is heterosexual. What he is most aware of is his difference from his peers and from the expectations of others. And most likely his role models are that guy in Glee, Ellen de Generes and an occasional character on Shortland Street. Sure it’s better than it was for some, but it’s still much worse than it should be, leading to many negative health, educational and other social outcomes.

So Murray’s report sets out to write the agenda for making it better for those young people right now, rather than having to hang on in quiet desperation until their fabulous adult lives kick in. The specific issues raised include bullying, isolation, invisibility of queer people, a lack of knowledge amongst professionals who work with youth, inconsistency in how school support queer students, the struggle to embrace the diversity within the queer community, a lack of public awareness of queer issues, poor policies for transgender health provision, and growing complacency towards queer activism and rights. This is the agenda around which we want to unite the adult LGBT communities and the wider community in working to implement. These were the key actions:

Schools

• Develop policies that would ensure all schools create safe and empowering environments for queer students.
• Make sexuality and gender diversity education part of the core curriculum.
• Weave diversity awareness into all aspects of the curriculum.
• Make queer issues and diversity training a central part of teacher training and professional development.
• Ensure that teaching staff diversity, in terms of culture, gender and sexual identities, has administrative and institutional support.

Support Groups

• Promote the establishment of both community and school based support groups.
• Develop a national network where support groups can collaborate and support one another.
• Develop a national QSA network to promote the establishment of QSA groups throughout the country.
• Ensure collaboration between QSA and community based groups and networks.

Visibility

• Hold the media accountable for negative or narrow representations of queer people.
• Develop the capabilities of media spokespeople throughout our community.
• Develop a database of media spokespeople throughout the country.
• Engage with and educate journalist and reporters.
• Encourage celebratory events that raise the visibility of the queer community.
• Seek government support for a national visibility/public education campaign.
• Work alongside sporting and cultural institutions to encourage more out role models in different public domains.

Nurturing Internal Diversity

• Ensure queer events and spaces cater for all queer people, not just the hegemonic groups.
• Cross-Sectoral Professional Development:
• Make diversity training and queer issues a central part of the training and professional development of all professionals who work with youth – i.e.Counsellors, Nurses, Teachers, Social Workers.

Policy

• Establish a policy group or network dedicated to promoting policy initiatives that will empower queer youth and seek to have the queer youth perspective heard in any policy development.
• Work with schools and other institutions to see existing policy implemented or enforced.
• Develop policies that make it easier for transgender youth to navigate the health system and access the appropriate services.
• Specific research into the health needs of transgender youth and the implications of existing policies is needed.

Immediately prior to going to Hamilton for the Pride Festival I had a day in which two situations were raised with me, with requests for my help. Coincidentally both were of 17 year old young men who had come out to their parents and been thrown out of their homes. It was a sobering reminder of just how important Murray’s report may prove to be.

I concluded from my briefing with officials that the Food Bill has ended up inadvertently capturing things like home gardening, bartering and seed exchange, which should never have been covered in the bill in the first place, because of its broad coverage and definitions (eg its definition of sale includes bartering).

Officials argue that the Director General will be able to exempt entire categories of groups, such as those engaged in bartering or selling direct to consumers at Farmers Markets from coverage of the bill, and this is their intention.

The problem is that these exemptions will be at the Director General’s discretion, and so there is no certainty that they will happen.

So, I have proposed to officials that a much better approach is to amend the bill now so that it automatically exempts all home growers , people selling directly to consumers, people involved in bartering or food exchange etc.

Officials are considering my request.

Even more problematic is the way the Food Bill cracks down on those selling small amounts of produce to a retailer, such as twenty lettuces to the local vegetable shop.

I have therefore proposed that home growers who sell small amounts of produce locally also be exempt from the bill . This exemption should be extended to small certified organic growers, as they already have to follow organic standards and get audited, so they hardly need a further layer of regulation, bureaucracy and costs.

We will be pushing hard for these amendments and will likely vote against the Food Bill if it continues to progress through Parliament in its current form.

More posts on the Food Bill

The Food Bill, not as sweet as first appeared – Steffan Browning, 18 January 2012

Mojo And Steffan lead Green response to Food Bill – Mojo Mathers, 21 December 2011

The families of the Pike 29 have been there from day 1 of the Royal Commission, some there all day, every day, others dipping in and out as their other commitments and personal strength allow. I remember one event from Phase 1 that I found utterly heart-wrenching. Peter Whittall was giving a very long account of the types of machine being used in the mine. I was sitting out in the waiting room with a handful of family members, getting a break from the intensity of the courtroom itself, but still able to watch the evidence on closed circuit TV. At one point Mr. Whittall brought up a slide of the coal face to illustrate the pattern of scouring on the rock left by a continuous mining machine. It was an unremarkable image. Yet two of the women in the waiting area with me suddenly became very animated and rushed to the wall where the screen hangs. “That’s where they are” one of them said to the other.

For the families, who wait through agonising months, now almost a year, for the remains of their loved ones to be brought out of the mine so they can have some sense of closure, the Royal Commission gives them the opportunity to understand how this disaster occurred and, perhaps, to hold someone accountable.

In this phase of the inquiry we are going to hear a lot more about how the families have been communicated with, but already we have heard some damning revelations. Some readers may have seen on television  earlier this year some of the images taken in the so-called ‘fresh air base’ in the mine, showing an opened box that contained self-rescuers (which allow a person roughly 50 minutes of Oxygen when worn correctly). We don’t know exactly how that box was opened, but it very clearly establishes that at least one strong possibility is that one or more people survived the initial blast and were able to access the self-rescuers.

What has been revealed publicly for the first time this week is that this image did not just become available this year. In fact it was recorded on November 24th, just days after the first explosion and before the second explosion. The Mine Manager gave evidence that it was clear to him as soon as he saw the image at that time that it showed an opened self-rescue box.

You probably won’t remember, but the second explosion corresponded roughly with the time that all the authorities started assuring us that everybody died in the first explosion, but all the time they said this they KNEW that there was at least a strong possibility this was not the case, but elected not to tell the families or the public. In fact I know how this image eventually came to light publicly, and it was not through official action. If that hadn’t happened, would it ever have been released?

Two obvious explanations present themselves for covering up this evidence; one charitable, one not. The charitable explanation is that authorities believed it would be of some comfort to families to believe that their loved ones had died instantly. The uncharitable explanation is that authorities wished to divert attention from the obvious questions about whether or not it had actually been possible to mount a rescue.

There’s a political dimension to this too. You may remember that at the time of the disaster, Mr. Brownlee and Mr. Key were apparently very closely involved. It is inconceivable that they were not told about the opened self-rescuer box, which means that they were almost certainly party to covering this up, and deceiving the families and the public.

The questions for Mr. Key don’t stop there though. Mr White indicated that as far back as December he was instructed to refer to a ‘stabilisation’ operation at the mine and not to use the word ‘recovery’. Talking about recovery of the human remains was “politically unacceptable” he had been told. It would raise expectations and cost too much. He had budgeted that recovery could occur with a budget of $10 million. He had been given a budget of $5 million. When this evidence was given the talk both inside the Courtoom and then outside during the break was of the many occasions on which Mr. Key gave the families a sweeping assurance that no effort would be spared to recover the dead men. Apparently a disconnect between the public assurance and the behind closed doors instruction.

I was going to say that I think I am now the only person from the official party at the Pike River Memorial still following the Royal Commission. That wouldn’t be fair though. I can’t make it every day, and no doubt there are some people there when I’m not, and others are watching online. But the person who really doesn’t seem to be involved right now, who really needs to be is John Key. He needs to give some answers. And he needs to follow through on his promises.

I got to part of Phase 1 as well, and the routine is much the same. Half the public space is taken up by members of the Pike families, the other half by witnesses, people from helping agencies and affected parties, and a couple of strays like me. I hope nobody else needs legal representation in New Zealand at the moment, because there’s a small army of barristers, including at least 4 QCs. A couple of journalists sit in the Court room, but most are in a separate room watching proceedings on the closed circuit TV, and are strangely insulated from what is going on.

The Commissioners don’t have much to say, but their questions, hearteningly, usually indicate a strong focus on the most important issues. This week the most significant witnesses have been Daniel Rockhouse, one of the two survivors and a genuine hero; Doug White, who was the Mine Manager at the time of the disaster, and enormously experienced, especially in Australia; and Neville Rockhouse, the Safety and Training Manager for Pike River Coal, and father of both Daniel, and Ben, who died in the disaster.

Commissioner Bell, an Australian mining expert, has asked, for me, the two most telling questions of the week. At the end of almost two days of evidence from Doug White, he asked him whether, in his extensive experience of mining around the world and especially in Australia, he had ever encountered a situation where a mine operates for 7-8 years without receiving at least some kind of corrective instruction from the regulator. The answer was no. That happened at Pike.

Then today when Neville Rockhouse finished his evidence Commissioner Bell asked him how often the Department of Labour Inspectors had audited the safety procedures and policies he had developed. The answer was never.

I think these exchanges carried such a powerful impact because we have sat in the Court day after day hearing damning evidence of safety problems. Some of these we already knew about because I had tabled the evidence in parliament or from the miners’ accounts, but they included:

• The disastrous “second exit” up the ventilation shaft, that would have required a sheer vertical climb (actually overhanging for a period) up a 55m ladder, which Mines Rescue characterised as “extremely difficult to use in normal circumstances; impossible in a fire”. Oh, and the ladder could only support 8 people on it at one time, just supposing they actually could climb it (contrast with up to 60 who could be in the mine at a change of shift)
• The emergency phone line that went to answerphone
• Nobody to meet the two survivors when they struggled to the surface
• Broken ‘smoke lines’ that miners use to find their way out of the mine when there is limited visibility because of smoke
• Sensors disabled on safety equipment
• Very infrequent disaster training exercises
• Wholly inadequate gas drainage plans
• Drilling occurring immediately adjacent to cavities filled with pressurised flammable gas. If these cavities were actually breached they were ‘capped’. There was an incident where one of these caps didn’t hold and was forced out at speed, knocking out a man nearby
• Reports of multiple ignitions
• Telephone and air supply to a decommissioned “fresh air base” part way along the ‘drift’ which is the tunnel leading from the portal to the working area, was disconnected without the knowledge of the Mine Manager, the Safety Manager or the miners
• The area in the working area of the mine called a “fresh air base” was not actually sealable from the atmosphere in the mine, meaning that it was not, in fact, a fresh air base and, indeed there was not one in the mine. This is especially important because Peter Whittall in his evidence said that, because of the difficulty of using the so-called second exit, miners were instead encouraged to go to the fresh air base in the event of an incident.

In some ways the most telling illustration of the safety culture that prevailed was the tag board. Each miner or contractor has a personal ID tag. When they go underground this must be put on a hook on a board, and when they leave underground they collect the tag. It’s obviously of fundamental importance to know who is underground at any one time. Yet on November 19th two people had left the mine without removing their tags, and one person was undergound without his tag being on the board – an error rate of about 10%.

Clearly there was something fundamentally wrong in Pike River Coal. It was clear from the evidence that the Safety Manager had a relatively low status, and very limited influence or authority (his delegated authority to spend had a maximum level of $5,000 for example). He had only one staff member, who focused on training. The answer to virtually every question about safety problems has  been that a plan was being developed to deal with it, but I have heard almost nothing about safety improvements actually being implemented. Both Doug White and Neville Rockhouse have said, when confronted with the inadequacy of systems to deal with what actually occurred, that nobody ever expected the mine to blow up.

And that’s just it really: the company was under financial and production pressure, creating strong incentives for it to cut corners and to wave away the risks of unlikely disasters. In this they were aided and abetted by regulations that only require them to do what is “practicable” and an inspectorate within the Department of Labour with the even weaker requirement to take “reasonable steps” to ensure that employers do what is “practicable”, and where inspectors were over-stretched, under-resourced and insufficiently experienced.

It’s great that the Government has been forced to back down and create a dedicated High Hazard Unit, with significantly more personnel and resource for inspections. But if all they can do is police against the morass of weasel words that is the current OSH regulatory approach then yet another disaster will be inevitable. Government must move to make mine safety regulations mandatory and universal. Not after the election. Not when the Royal Commission reports. Now.

What happened at Hutt Valley High is a tragedy and our hearts go out to the people and the families involved. The victims of this bullying should also have on-going counselling made available to them by the Ministry of Education if they request it. Bullying is never OK.

We support the Ombudsmen’s call for clear guidelines about bullying for all Board of Trustees from the Ministry of Education. We also support mandatory anti-bullying policies, practices and campaigns in schools, promoting a culture of non-violence.

These anti-bullying programmes should include regular monitory and reporting, including surveying students, parents and teachers to ensure that the incidences of bullying are trending downwards.

Since these events in 2007, Hutt Valley High School has been proactive in introducing anti-bullying policies and practices but there is still more to do.

The problem with bullying is that it is not always as obvious as what happened at Hutt Valley High. As well as the more blatant physical bullying, there is a lot of emotional and, increasingly, tech bullying, happening as well. We need to change the ‘harden-up’ or ‘boys-will-be-boys’ culture that is still pervasive.

We need to build an environment for our children at school that is both education and fun. No one should live in fear. It’s never OK.

Our food labels are pathetic and extremely poor by international standards. They are full of information we don’t need, but don’t contain information we do need –such as where food comes from, and whether it is healthy or not.

And they are extremely confusing –as the survey found.

Manufacturers want to use food labels as marketing tools, to help sell their produce, rather than as information tools for consumers, to provide consumers with the information we need to make an informed purchasing choice.

The problem is, we can’t see or smell food when we buy it in a package. The only way we can try and figure out what we are buying is by reading the information on the label. That’s why good labels on food are so important.

An independent panel commissioned by Food Standards Australia New Zealand has recommended far-reaching changes to improve our food labels, but our government is intent on sabotaging their excellent recommendations.

They are opposing important improvements to food labels, such as traffic light labels and country of origin labels.

MAF is leading an inter-departmental team that is preparing our government’s official response to the FSANZ food labelling review, and is determined to keep their response secret –even though it is an issue that is of huge public interest. I have been trying to get a copy of their response for the last six months, under the Official Information Act and by written questions, but they are stone-walling me, and will not release the information.

They don’t want the public to know, until after the election, that they are opposing all efforts to improve our food labels. I think it’s a scandalous situation.

The weekend had a bit of everything: gorgeous scenery, local hospitality, wide-eyed children, even local political drama.

The ride follows the Forgotten World Highway and is framed by Mt Ruapehu at the start and Mt Taranaki in the end. You cross several great passes and ride through the deeply forested Tangarakau River gorge. You’re pedalling along one of New Zealand’s quietest state highways, so you often feel like you have the whole place to yourself. It’s certainly a very safe route for cycle touring.

And that’s where things got interesting. The local head of Federated Farmers wrote a strongly worded letter to the Ruapehu Press labeling the route too dangerous for “pushbikes” and was offended at the thought of cyclists pooping in farmers’ fields along the way. Many believe the letter led to the local mayor to cancel at short notice her appearance at the launch.

The letter was obviously unfair and reminded me of how we can sometimes be our own worst enemies. The Forgotten World Highway Cycle Trail offers Taumaranui the opportunity to diversify and strengthen its economy. It’s one of the safest routes in New Zealand for cycling and any toileting issues, should they arise, can be solved quite simply.

The weekend’s ride gave a handful of New Zealanders their first glimpse of what our Cycle Trail network will eventually look like, with outstanding backcountry road rides joining our network of Great Rides off road and urban cycling infrastructure in places like New Plymouth.

It’s exciting time to be a cyclist in New Zealand.