Iran - such a nice regime

As the socialist peace movement starts its campaign opposing military action against Iran’s nuclear programme, the Sunday Telegraph reports the campaign of Maryam Rajavi about the brutality Iran inflicts upon teenagers accused of committing crimes. Maryam Rajavi is leader of the National Council for Resistance for Iran (NCRI), a group with a military wing described by the US, EU and UK as a terrorist group. She is criticised for being a personality cult. Her organisation is headquartered in France and calls for overthrow of the regime and installation of a government led by her, until holding free elections. Although her followers are a bit extreme, as two set fire to themselves after she was detained by French police suspected of terrorism. So one should be wary of this group, but regardless, some of the cases she cites are horrendous.

She has a book listing the 21,676 died resisting the Iranian regime, and another 120,000 executed since the 1979 revolution. She talks of a 15yo boy flogged to death for eating during Ramadan, and a 13yo girl buried to her neck and stoned for a similar offence. None of this should be a surprise. It executed two men last year for homosexual conduct. Human Rights Watch reports “Iranian law punishes all penetrative sexual acts between adult men with the death penalty. Non-penetrative sexual acts between men are punished with lashes until the fourth offense, when they are punished with death. Sexual acts between women, which are defined differently, are punished with lashes until the fourth offense, when they are also punished with death. “ How about charging with batons a peaceful march in celebration of International Womens’ Day on 9 March? The US State Department notes “The testimony of a woman is worth half that of a man in court. The blood money paid to the family of a female crime victim is half the sum paid for a man. A married woman must obtain the written consent of her husband before traveling outside the country”.

.

Slanderous pigs like John Pilger, claiming Israel wants to wage war against Iran - which is akin to claiming that the Chinese in the 1930s were intending to attack Japan - defending North Korea seeing off the US aggressor, ignoring how aggressive the North Korean regime is against its defenceless people, starved, executed, tortured and imprisoned like animals - but hey they are anti-American and nobody would want to live in the US would they? The Iranian regime is brutal, anti-democratic and contrary to the values of civilised society - it wishes the eradication of a fellow UN member state, refuses adequate inspections by the IAEA on its "peaceful" nuclear facilities. Military action is a last resort, against an Iran which threatens to attack Israel or supply nuclear materials to its terrorist organisations. Of course, this doesn't matter to the so called "peace movement" - because only if Tel Aviv is flattened by an Iranian nuclear weapon will many of its supporters waken up and might apologise - but Pilger will probably say the men, women and children who lived their lives in peace in Tel Aviv brought it upon themselves, by not helping to eradicate Israel as the "peaceful" Mullahs in Tehran call for.

.

Iran will change, a majority of those in Tehran want change, the 10% turnout for the last Mayoral elections is an indication of that. They just need encouragement and support, and the tactics needed are carrots and sticks - full transparency for the nuclear programme, an end to sponsorship of terrorism, an end to calls to eradicate Israel and a promise of no attack, end to sanctions and US diplomatic recognition. In other words, be a civilised peace-loving state.

Nanny State UK

Petty nanny statism is rife in the UK, everywhere officials are trying to regulate behaviour. Recent cases include the fine because a cop overheard one person swearing to a friend, which is illegal, or the man prosecuted for putting junk mail he received as he walked out of his home into a bin. Now there is Ofcom, the communications regulator complaining that Channel 4 – a privately owned commercial TV channel, broadcasts “too many commercials”. Now if Channel 4 broadcast too many for the viewers, viewers would change channels. Nobody is forced to pay for Channel 4, or to watch it – but Nanny Ofcom has to ensure that the British public are protected from… Channel 4 being too successful. Channel 4 depends on commercials to pay for its programmes, but that isn’t good enough for Ofcom. The Great British Battering Machine is in place – be mediocre, don’t be too successful, nobody likes it (unless it is football).

Don Foster, a Liberal Democrat demagogue said people expressed concern about More 4, a commercial digital TV channel owned by Channel 4. Well frankly those people should get a life – take their nosy little beaks out of what isn’t their business. Free to air commercial TV is something you get for nothing, a range of entertainment, news, information that through capitalism brings happiness to millions – if it didn’t it would fail. People are forced to pay £126 a year to pay for the BBC, what commercial TV does should be nothing to do with the state. Particularly now where there are 36 digital free to air channels broadcast.

Popular government of Clarkistan cannot be corrupt

.

People's Government Free of Corruption

.

(Helengrad, 17 March 2006) The Clarkistan Acting Deputy Commissar of Police (People's Civilian Securitat) today said that the complaints made against the Worker's Party of Aotearoa (Labour) made by the Electoral Commission were groundless in their accusations of breaches of section 214B of the Electoral Act 1993.

.

"The electoral pledge cards circulated by the Popular Democratic Government of Clarkistan, which happened to include the name of the Worker's Party of Aotearoa and its distinguished Great Leader Comrade Hel En Clark, could not be an "election activity", as they merely described what the Popular Democratic Government would do, if - the people in their democratically expressed general will - elected it by their free choice. " said the Commissar.

.

The Acting Deputy Commissar clarified that far from encouraging people to vote for the Worker's Party - the pledge cards represented mere promises of what would happen if the people gave a ringing endorsement, they were not "advertising" the Worker's Party or any other such absurdities. "Such criticisms were at best the utterings of a deluded fool, at worst treasonous counter-revolutionary statements indicating loyalties to the child murdering Bush and Blair imperialist aggressors" he continued "A pledge card is an affirmation of the people's love for the party and its leader, represented through the people's government, by popular acclaim, listing the forthcoming Three Year Plan as is the tradition every three years at this time. No working person cares to return to the heartlessness of an era when the government was not of the people, and the people would not endorse the release of the unplanned three years of oppression that the National Party pro-American fascist puppet clique wished to impose on the working classes. The pledge card comes from the heart of the people's love for the warm maternal bosom of the Great Leader and the loving instructions she gives us from Helengrad."

.

Spontaneous demonstrations of support were observed by Clarkistanis in Helengrad, Auckland, Clarkchurch and DuneCullen, as trade unions, students and workers carried placards saying "We love Comrade Clark", "Down with the US funded National Party Imperialists", "Deport the counter-revolutionary Chief Electoral Officer" and "Clarkistan will always be for the people". TV and radio reports all had broadcasts demonstrating the confidence the people had in the righteousness of the People's Civilian Securitat's correct line.

.

"Continued debate about this is as futile as barking at the moon" said the Acting Deputy Chief Commissariat of the People's Civilian Securitat.

.

Of course, the Great Leader and her comrades such as the Dear Manager of the People's Treasury Great Dr Cullen were elected with an overwhelming mandate by the working classes, therefore any argument as to the democratic will of the people being thwarted was "sheer nonsense" declared the head of the People's Civilian Securitat.

.

He also explained how the continued support of the Worker's Party by the Party of United Future (headed by his Holiness the Beloved Representative of Ohariu-Belmont Minister of People's Revenue Comrade Dunne) and the Party of Clarkistan First (headed by the distinguished extraordinary and plenipotentiary Minister of Foreign Affairs and Chief Custodian of the People's Baubles the Honourable Comrade Winston Peters) demostrated the broad democratic mandate for government. "If it were not for Comrades Dunne and Peters, we could not claim our mandate to govern - their continued support is proof of the veracity of our case that the people choose to pay for the election of the government they choose. Comrade Jim 'Ol Son' Anderton also gives his single Progressive voice to the People's Government- understanding that the people, the party and the government are one - and the people's government, cannot BY DEFINITION steal from the people, for it is made of the people, by the people, for the people".

.

Only reckless revisionist ultra-leftists like the Green Party, counter-revolutionary capitalist roaders like the National Party and the heartless US imperialist war-mongering ACT Party could claim anything different. Their kind were dealt a harsh blow at the elections, raising questions as to whether the people could even tolerate their continued presence at elections. It is only through the generous benevolence of the Great Leader than action is not to be taken against the other parties for their breaches of the law "The state is sovereign" reminded Comrade Clark "and my generosity knows no bounds, so I grant them clemency in the face of their certain guilt. Nobody can accuse me of being anti-democratic"

.

"However" Comrade Clark in her profligate magnanimity "despite the calls from so many working people, including trade unions, student representatives and correct thinking local authorities, I will not abolition general elections as of yet. They provide me and my Popular Government recurring ringing endorsements of our correct path, humiliate the counter-revolutionary forces of the left and right, and provide an opportunity for me, with help from the people's own contributions through collective revenue enhancement (tax) to declare my Three Year Plan to thwart the forces of revisionist, fascist, ultra-leftist and treasonous foreign imperialist ideas and continue leading Clarkistan into the century with the confidence of all right thinking Clarkistanis".

.

In a separate report, the Chief Electoral Officer is on a sabbatical to Pyongyang and Havana to learn about how elections are meant to be held. An investigation is underway into charges of treason among the staff of the Electoral Commission who have acted in a manner contrary to the popular will. When asked what law the staff were meant to have broken, the President of the Worker's Party said "it's not clear, but we will clarify it shortly so that we can be sure of the illegality of those who are working against the people". (CCNA - Clarkistan Central News Agency)

Auckland road pricing report released

Well the government’s study into road pricing in the Auckland region is out, and it raises a number of questions. It is motivated, rightly, by the desire to reduce congestion, but some want it to raise money to pay for trains (wrong) or roads (right as long as you aren't wasting the existing money collected). It is fairly well accepted by liberal free marketers and by environmentalist lefties that road pricing makes sense – after all, it is just people paying for the use of a scarce resource – road space.
.
The way you currently pay for roads doesn’t bear any resemblance to demand, just the cost of maintenance. It is right that, like phones, hotels and airlines that if you want to use a road when demand it highest you should pay for it – and as a result, you are guaranteed a certain level of service (uncongested road). The quid pro quo is that when the road is quietest you should pay very little – to encourage people to spread journey times.
.
Think about it like airlines. Most business people fly at the beginning and end of the work day, simply because their time is valuable and their plans can change quickly, so they pay expensive fully refundable fares. There are a lot of them flying at the same time, so fares are expensive, rarely will you get cheap fares on those flights. On holiday most people make plans well in advance, and are price sensitive. They will fly in the middle of the day or later in the evening because they are prepared to adjust their trip around flights they can afford – they pay less, but the planes get fairly well filled. The peak time business travellers make airlines a lot of money, but off peak leisure travellers don’t – but they pay enough to make it worthwhile to keep the planes flying and offering a frequent service. With road pricing the same would happen.
.
Now I could argue the case for road pricing till I am blue in the face, so what about this report?
.
The Greens' reaction is the usual “need more public transport”. This is the same as the ARC which is obsessed with trains. Of course with road pricing, you don’t need to subsidise public transport – the roads are priced according to space taken up by vehicles. As buses take up less space per person than cars, then buses pay less on average. Trains pay nothing (as they should be paying the cost for using the track). Uncongested roads mean buses can travel freely, but cars travelling on those roads are paying for a good level of service – in short, you’ve levelled the playing field, letting private bus and rail operators provide service where and when there is demand. The Greens don’t want money raised from road users spent on roads – which is economic nonsense. As long as motorists are paying for the efficient use of the roading network (which at peak times would be expensive) then it is not their business at all. The Greens advocate the silly and Orwellian parking levy option, that would have every single parking space in central Auckland, on private or public land, taxed for a small period of the day. It wouldn’t work very well, except to encourage more businesses to shift out of the city to places where public transport is even less suitable for commuting to. It is wrong to think good public transport is a pre-requisite to road pricing - road pricing exists now, it's just very blunt (petrol tax) and 20% of the pricing is spent on activities other than transport. It is also wrong to think Aucklanders became "car dependent" because of poor public transport, more like Aucklander's got poor public transport because they chose to use their cars. Auckland's tram and rail systems wound down in the 1950s and 1960s because cars were more convenient and quicker - they still are in many cases. The socialist philosophy that people are forced to use cars is nonsense, as long as you have open entry for commercial public transport services (which has only existed since the early 90s).
.
National has fortunately been balanced in its response, wanting to look at the report carefully. Hopefully it wont reject it outright, but consider how road pricing can be used to replace rates for funding local roads – though if that happens then governance of local roads would have to change radically to avoid local authorities gouging consumers like their gouge ratepayers.

Brian "Red"Rudman doesn't think it will happen, although he is wrong about the system for charging being expensive - it would be far cheaper per transaction that the system for the ALPURT B2 toll road being built to bypass Orewa. He is right about ARC's profligacy in seeking a $400 million more expensive version of the Avondale extension to SH20 though.
.
The option not being considered in the report is network charging. There already is a form of this with road user charges, which could be extended to all vehicles using new technology – you could have a prepaid smartcard that deducts funds for distance travelled over the network, with premiums for travelling on the busiest roads at peak times, and discounts for off peak travel. However, this requires a sophisticated on board system, and should replace petrol tax altogether.

I don't believe anything will happen on this, for now. Congestion charging is very risky politically, and Labour wont want to do it, although it may encourage more toll roads or new motorway lanes being toll lanes, as exists in some states in the USA. It will be a brave government that introduces it and motorists will want something in return; far less congestion and money dedicated to roads or worthwhile alternatives. Until the SH20 western ring road is built, and of the seven segments that need completing only four have guaranteed funding (and three are actually under construction right now, and to be fair one section Auckland local authorities can't even agree on) so that it probably ten years away.

.
There will probably be a populist lobby opposing road pricing, and given the options in the report I wont be surprised. There are better solutions that having a local authority controlled central cordon to raise extra money to pay for pet schemes – road pricing should be about motorists paying to use roads with the money being spent on roads. However, this is when debate should occur - Auckland's congestion wont be fixed by building new roads paid for by people who aren't using them or by building railway networks also paid for by people not using them. The roads are run by Soviet style central planning - that is what needs to change, pricing is one step along the way.

Nationalist radio quota bluff

Lindsay Mitchell and PC have both blogged on this and I agree with them. The government shouldn't be threatening the radio industry with quotas if it doesn't play enough local music. Like Oswald Bastable said in his comment, "it makes as much sense as saying we must have a percentage of NZ books in our homes". The local music industry has long wanted to force itself on listeners and radio stations - ignoring that there are few other countries where it is easier to set up a radio station and do it yourself.

.

One fact that the government tends to quietly not mention is the official advice it got back in 2001 that it could not legally impose local content quotas on radio or television, without significantly renegotiating two trade treaties it has signed.
.
Firstly, CER. You see for several years, the NZ film and television production industry argued in court in Australia that the Australian local content quota for commercial television (55%) should treat NZ programmes on a non-discriminatory basis. It won, and so New Zealand programmes have national treatment in the Australian market. Of course this is quid pro quo, and any New Zealand content quota for radio would have to treat Australian music as if it were New Zealand. There is no getting around this, unless CER is renegotiated, and I doubt the Howard government would want to give up one form of trade access, unless New Zealand could offer another – and there is precious little left to offer. It would also be incredibly bad form for New Zealand to withdraw access after arguing for it in Australia only recently. The CER Trade in Service Protocol is here.
.
So a New Zealand quota would, at least, have to be an Australasian one.
.
Secondly, New Zealand’s WTO General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) commitments include a multilateral commitment for open entry into the audiovisual services market. This includes for TV programmes and music. In short, it grants national treatment for overseas produced content. Now the Clark administration has been trying to negotiate a “cultural carveout” to trade away this commitment, along with Australia and Canada (two other culture nationalists), but it means New Zealand would have to liberalise something else in return.

.

Generally, you can’t pull back a liberalisation commitment at the WTO without offering one of equal or better value in return. So, not only would a local content quota have to be Australasian, but it would have to be open to ALL OTHER WTO member states on a non-discriminatory basis. So that includes the EU, USA and well, everyone but Cuba, North Korea, Russia, Syria and half of Africa and the Arab world.
.
The threat to impose a compulsory quota was effectively a threat for private radio stations to get a foreign government to argue in a WTO panel dispute on its behalf. That isn't easy, but not impossible. It is also very bad form to pass laws that are against your treaty obligations.

.

and why do these obligations exist? You can thank the National government of 1990-1999 for signing up New Zealand to the WTO commitments at the Uruguay Round, and separately the CER Services Protocol because of the Lange/Palmer Labour government, of which Helen Clark was a part. Wonderful stuff!