09-09-2023, 11:47 AM
I'd like to believe that most Kiwi's have more common sense & understanding than to vote for such things, but the ACT lot have high ratings.
https://www.thepress.co.nz/a/nz-news/350...us-man-yes
"Even a left-wing partisan would admit public services providing “equal opportunity according to robust statistical evidence instead of racial targeting” is enticing. Who would disagree with public services according to need as the data identifies it? The trouble for Seymour, and what a left-wing partisan might already know, is that need and race are often a function of each other.
That implies high rates of heart disease are, in fact, “race-based”. The consequence of Seymour’s needs-based standard, then, is that public health services directed at preventing and treating heart disease would arrive at the very destination Seymour wishes to avoid – “race”.
Serious politicians understand this is why the Māori Health Authority and iwi health providers exist.
The racist explanation for that heart disease finding is that ethnicity is the controlling factor because – to phrase it as bluntly and stupidly as a racist would – Māori eat like s.... But decades worth of accumulated research finds the issue is structural. [b]Across disease categories[/b][b] [/b]Māori adults and children are less likely to be referred to a specialist than non-Māori.
[b]In the actual lives of individuals that means Māori are more likely to die younger than Pākehā and from easily preventable disease.[/b]
That’s a moral and political outrage. Is a Pākehā baby born at the same time and in the same place as a Māori baby entitled to a statistically longer, healthier life simply because of their ethnicity and the privileges that confers in the level of diagnosis, referral and treatment?
Of course not, and the vast majority of New Zealanders would agree. But Seymour’s ACT is committed to abolishing one of the most significant reforms to help prevent that moral and political outrage in the form of the Māori Health Authority.
Cynical commentators might allege that ACT is pursuing abolition for electoral reasons only. They might secure the votes of the country’s proudest (and usually loudest) know-nothings.
The trouble is Seymour often cites Article III to support the notion that “co-governance”, often in the form of institutions such as the Māori Health Authority, confers greater rights or advantages upon Māori.
That view collapses under the weight of even the lightest interrogation. In health, it’s Māori who suffer disadvantage on a population level for the simple fact of being Māori. That disadvantage holds across other government categories too including crime. JustSpeak’s research finds that a Māori person apprehended for committing the same crime as a Pākehā person is [b]seven times more likely to be charged[/b][b] [/b]than the Pākehā person who was apprehended.
[b]Again, this is only explainable with reference to ethnicity and not criminal severity implying the issue is structural and thus only amenable to structural solutions.[/b]
Whether for reasons of political opportunism, cynicism or (charitably) genuine belief ACT’s policies reject this evidence for fairy tales of policy independent of ethnicity. That belief in the magical might make David Seymour the most dangerous man in New Zealand politics."
Morgan Godfrey.
https://www.thepress.co.nz/a/nz-news/350...us-man-yes
"Even a left-wing partisan would admit public services providing “equal opportunity according to robust statistical evidence instead of racial targeting” is enticing. Who would disagree with public services according to need as the data identifies it? The trouble for Seymour, and what a left-wing partisan might already know, is that need and race are often a function of each other.
That implies high rates of heart disease are, in fact, “race-based”. The consequence of Seymour’s needs-based standard, then, is that public health services directed at preventing and treating heart disease would arrive at the very destination Seymour wishes to avoid – “race”.
Serious politicians understand this is why the Māori Health Authority and iwi health providers exist.
The racist explanation for that heart disease finding is that ethnicity is the controlling factor because – to phrase it as bluntly and stupidly as a racist would – Māori eat like s.... But decades worth of accumulated research finds the issue is structural. [b]Across disease categories[/b][b] [/b]Māori adults and children are less likely to be referred to a specialist than non-Māori.
[b]In the actual lives of individuals that means Māori are more likely to die younger than Pākehā and from easily preventable disease.[/b]
That’s a moral and political outrage. Is a Pākehā baby born at the same time and in the same place as a Māori baby entitled to a statistically longer, healthier life simply because of their ethnicity and the privileges that confers in the level of diagnosis, referral and treatment?
Of course not, and the vast majority of New Zealanders would agree. But Seymour’s ACT is committed to abolishing one of the most significant reforms to help prevent that moral and political outrage in the form of the Māori Health Authority.
Cynical commentators might allege that ACT is pursuing abolition for electoral reasons only. They might secure the votes of the country’s proudest (and usually loudest) know-nothings.
The trouble is Seymour often cites Article III to support the notion that “co-governance”, often in the form of institutions such as the Māori Health Authority, confers greater rights or advantages upon Māori.
That view collapses under the weight of even the lightest interrogation. In health, it’s Māori who suffer disadvantage on a population level for the simple fact of being Māori. That disadvantage holds across other government categories too including crime. JustSpeak’s research finds that a Māori person apprehended for committing the same crime as a Pākehā person is [b]seven times more likely to be charged[/b][b] [/b]than the Pākehā person who was apprehended.
[b]Again, this is only explainable with reference to ethnicity and not criminal severity implying the issue is structural and thus only amenable to structural solutions.[/b]
Whether for reasons of political opportunism, cynicism or (charitably) genuine belief ACT’s policies reject this evidence for fairy tales of policy independent of ethnicity. That belief in the magical might make David Seymour the most dangerous man in New Zealand politics."
Morgan Godfrey.
in order to be old & wise, you must first be young & stupid. (I'm still working on that.)
![[Image: image.png.6baa92cb3462244e3a9994fb1d5baf26.png]](https://oldschool.co.nz/uploads/monthly_2023_09/image.png.6baa92cb3462244e3a9994fb1d5baf26.png)