Fletchers shut down in the face of accountability - a long history

On October 25 this year FIRST Union members and Save Our Unique Landscape (SOUL) protested outside the Fletcher AGM at Auckland museum to highlight low pay and to oppose Fletcher's plans to build houses on the culturally significant Ihumatao site.

The Chairman shut down the meeting. What might not be widely known is that the Chairman only gained the power to shut down an AGM in 1988 following similar protests at Fletcher AGMs in the 1980s.
---
From Foreign Control Watchdog 60 December 1988 p4.

"FLETCHERS FRIGHTENED OF SMALL SHAREHOLDERS

The directors of Fletcher Challenge Limited obviously feel very sensitive about their connections with South Africa and Chile and about their treatment of Maori land in the Bay of Plenty and Indian land in Canada. In true democratic tradition two motions passed at the FCL annual meeting in Wellington in November were aimed at silencing the criticisms of the company's policies by small shareholders. (Remember CAFCA is now a capitalist organisation which owns 200 FCL shares).

To stand for a directorship of FCL now you will have to own 5000 shares. At today's prices that will cost you $24000. That move will rule out of contention 77% of the company's shareholders but more importantly for the company will, mean that ratbags such as Dick Cuthbert of Hart cannot stand for election. In addition, the chairman may adjourn a general meeting "without giving any reason therefore” if it becomes. "unruly or disruptive”.

We can only assume that the directors of Fletchers have been so impressed by the style of democracy that is practised in their favourite countries - Chile and South Africa that they have decided to implement similar strategies here. Incidentally, it was left to Bruce Wallace, ex-frontperson of Foreign Correspondent, to explain the reasons for the new rules in the”Christchurch Star” on November 2, 1988. Brucie said that the proposal giving the chairman power to adjourn the meeting as he saw fit was put forward because, in previous years "shareholders had not been able to enjoy the meetings as they should”. Of course the blacks of South Africa, the Chileans, Canadian Indians and Maori are having a ball."

Big Business wants First Past the Post to Privatise

Last Saturday the NZ Herald published a column by deputy editor Fran O'Sullivan which revealed that Cabinet was to begin discussions on a public referendum on Mixed Member Proportional(MMP) this week. O'Sullivan makes it clear she supports First Past the Post as an electoral system, if in a runoff against MMP.

O'Sullivan also stated a referendum on MMP is "clearly unfinished business for many Kiwis". Its interesting she used Roger Douglas' turn of phase here, as when she mentions Kiwis she means the section of the business community who genuinely believe the country should be run for their benefit foremost, and ask the rest of us to believe in the trickle down theory. O'Sullivan concludes:
"Fighting the next election on an electoral system - even First Past the Post - which gave more power to the major party to implement sensible policies would do more to even the gap with Australia than endless horsetrading."

Horsetrading, in this context means that annoying thing called democracy - ie the thing we did not have when the Labour Government of 1984-1990 and National Government of 1990-96 used cabinet majorities to push through far right neo-liberal 'reforms'. Funnily enough the gap with Australia became significantly wider in these twelve years. Not that the new right would ever be intellectually honest enough to admit it might have been a combination of their chosen polices and the method of their execution.

In a later interview with Larry Williams on NewsTalk ZB (hat tip Frog), O'Sullivan described what she meant by 'sensible policies', explaining what MMP had stopped for the last decade or so.
"…various single issue or smaller parties will be able to point to wins they have had through [their] influence on the major parties that happens to be in power. But there are also some big things that aren’t happening – there are things from a business perspective. No-one can talk about privatisation… "

So there you have it - the sponger side of business community wants a return to First Past the Post in order to restart the privatisation agenda. The business community do not believe they can convince over 50% of New Zealanders to adopt their chosen policies based on a system where votes are of equal value.

In 1993 the Anti-MMP campaign was headed by Telecom Chairman Peter Shirtcliffe who bankrolled the misnamed Campaign for Better Government (CBG) along with other big business backers. I really hope some of the 1993 advertising is replayed and replayed - as it will completely do in Shirtcliffe's crediability. In 1993 CBG warned MMP would put our future at risk alongside the chorus of crying babies - yes really - see here. Now it can be seen for the scaremongering nonsense it is, as well as a dummy run for the National party's Hollow Men campaign of 2005.

Fran O'Sullivan quickly responded to Frog's post. She clarified that she only became aware of the forthcoming cabinet discussions following a question raised by a participant at business breakfast meet in Auckland. In second comment O'Sullivan said:
"To clarify – Personally I favour either FPP or STV – I do not like a system where the party vote delivers half the MPs. Would prefer to tick a candidate."

Yet there is only one system that will deliver the 'unfinished business' of privatisation that Fran champions above - a rotten borough system* known as First Past the Post. This impression is also reinforced by Fran's endorsement of Shirtcliffe's timetable for a referendum - a single referendum held in 2010, and applied at the 2011 election. O'Sullivan says "Frankly, Key should adopt Shirtcliffe's timetable. If past polling is anything to go by, many Kiwis would vote MMP down if given the chance". Clearly Shirtcliffe can't wait, and sees an opportunity to remove MMP by doing it quickly - this was also the strategy of Roger Douglas to avoid the interference of democracy.

That said, on this occasion I am prepared to give Fran the benefit of the doubt. I note she sometimes uses her columns to channel the views of others, and sometimes this can give the strong impression these are the views she also supports. Yet if Fran was being a complete partisan hack it is likely she would have downplayed the reemergence of Peter Shirtcliffe and not raised the "fundamental issue of fairness" raised by the differing treatment of Act and NZFirst at the last election, where Act remained in parliament despite receiving around 10,000 less votes than NZ First.

I would suggest people look at the campaign to keep meaningful proportional representation in New Zealand as a long game. Having journalists write stories about 'the other side' can at times be useful, as well as adding to the debate in a useful way. If Fran found out more about who was funding the anti-MMP campaign - this would be worth a few hail Mary's would it not?

* I am defining rotten borough in this context to mean any system where a vote is not necessarily of near equal worth. John Key's preferred option of Supplementary member is just a rotten borough with a thin layer of icing designed to cover up the rottenness.

PS: Fran in case I have your attention I would appreciate it if the next time you wrote one of your fawning columns about the 'benefits' of free trade with the USA you would also mention the potential costs. This comes from a solid source, the US Trade Representative's publication 'Foreign Trade Barriers', but the majority of pro-free trade business journalists either don't know, or perhaps more likely don't want to know such a document exists - if the risk is Kiwis paying more for their medications surely the public deserve better than journalists who stick their fingers in their ears and chant 'see no evil'.

Don't let climate change quibbles weaken the movement

I wish people would stop attempting to undermine the arguments of campaigners working on climate issues by continually demanding they justify their own carbon use, especially in the context of their own campaigns.

Quite frankly, for those of us who are concerned about encouraging real and lasting policy change, such talk is as destructive as it is counterproductive. Encouraging the world to change its ways is going to need an effective political movement, and building such a movement should be the ultimate aim.

A focus on personal responsibility can be taken too far, and it may be said this is more common on the right of politics. A chemical process worker should not be finger pointed at for his job if the society around him does not provide a true alternative source of income.

Collective action will be the most powerful force in dealing with climate change, not individual responsibility.

A few of my greenie friends have refused to fly to meetings, events, conferences etc that would have formed part of most other political campaigns. I think is great people do care, but I sometimes wonder if people get too hung up on it, especially when we are yet to see real alternatives to flying in New Zealand, such as high speed rail. Yes we do need to strongly advocate for such alternatives, but the point is that they do not exist now.

Of course we need to 'think before we fly', especially when there are alternatives available, but I think there is a more important question to ask first - will burning a few tons of carbon build the movement? If so, it may be a case of burning a bit now, to burn a lot less later.

So no, I don't begrudge Al Gore for flying around the world to do his climate change talks. I may think his proposed solutions rely too heavily on carbon trading, but he has been able to communicate the scale of the problem to many people who otherwise would not have heard it. This does not prevent anyone from criticising the oil baron from flying around in his corporate jet - that should be called exactly what it is - needless climate damage.

I hope my friends working on climate change issues don't take this as a criticism - what I am really saying here is Kia Kaha - stand strong! As a hypothetical, say the opportunity came to fly to London to meet up with other climate change campaigners and build international solidarity on the issue. I would want you to go - because of my faith in your ability as effective campaigners.

Thank you Rosa Parks

One December evening in 1955 one black woman in Montgomery, Alabama refused to give up her seat to a white man on a segregated bus (Hat tip NRT). This simple action led to the Montgomery Bus Boycott and the start of the civil rights movement in the United States.

Rosa Parks died on Monday night (US time) aged 92.

Thanks to the work of Rosa and her legal team, Alabama's segregation laws were overturned by the Supreme Court. The bus boycott created a stage for a local preacher, Martin Luther King, who would later assemble the 'March on Washington' and demonstrate public support for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a legal guarantee of equal rights to Americans of all races.

Despite the inspiration she provided to others, Rosa suffered personal hardship in the immediate aftermath of her arrest. She was found guilty of violating the segregation laws and fined $14. She lost her job, and her husband quit his job after his boss ordered that no mention be made of "Rosa" or the legal case. Concerned for the safety of supporters as well as themselves, following a number of death threats, the Parks moved to Detroit in 1957, where Rosa worked as an aide in a Democratic congressman's office.

"Rosa was a true giant of the civil rights movement," said U.S. Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), in whose office Parks worked for more than 20 years. "There are very few people who can say their actions and conduct changed the face of the nation, and Rosa Parks is one of those individuals."

Thank you Rosa for demonstrating the power of non-violent direct action. Thank you for standing up against injustice and making the world a better place for us all.

More at No Right Turn.

Update: Bayprairie at OurWord has complied some interesting background to the bus boycott. While Rosa was 'the spark that lit the fire', Bayprairie points out that the movement to desegregate the buses in Montgomery began earlier, largely instigated by Jo Ann Robinson, a black college professor.

PS: You may have to log in to see the Washington Post report. (its free)

Categories: US, Politics, Activism, Civil Rights, Rosa Parks

Letterbox awards for Campaign '05

Driving home in the car today I planned to make a post about letterboxes, only to find Span already musing on the same subject.

Election time for most politicos usually involves strolling around the local streets delivering leaflets of information in the hope of better informing voters.

Today I strolled down memory lane, delivering Alliance tabloids to the very first street I lived, Haslet Place in Riccarton. I snuck a peek down the driveway to see the old house, the red-brick box I had not lived in since 1983 or thereabouts. As I folded each tabloid and placed it in each letterbox in Haslet Place, I came across a lovely childhood memory I had long forgotten.

The Lighthouse Letterbox. As a tot I remember enjoying walking past the letterbox shaped like a model lighthouse, with little windows and a tiny railing around the top. I liked the novelty of the letters going in vertically through a narrow slot and the decorative rocks attached to the base of the lighthouse. Sadly, like many real lighthouses, the passing of twenty years has left the lighthouse letterbox in a rather tatty state of repair. Once it looked so proud and novel.

But my vote for the best letterbox I saw this election campaign goes to some ingenious folks in Hokitika. What was perched out at the gate, where a letterbox should be?

An Old Microwave, with a the number of the house painted in white on the dark microwave door. Delivering a leaflet involved opening the door, which as I thought later was a great way to protect the mail from the elements - no more soggy envelopes!

Any other nominations for best letterbox of Election '05?

The Economic Tailban - a bunch of fundies

Span's latest takeoff of the ACT billboards is fantastic :)