
Politicians need to appreciate fine New Zealand literature
But do our politicians know of other New Zealand fiction?
You may recall the politician who is his party's spokesman on the arts being unable to name any New Zealand novelists.
Act New Zealand's Todd Stephenson, a mere list MP of course, has been reported as "taking 20 minutes to think of a single New Zealand author and the only artistic experience he could think of was that he went to see the musical Hamilton in New York".
It is a painful duty to be obliged to poke the borax at a Southlander, but Mr Stephenson's ignorance is appalling.
Mr Stephenson was educated in Invercargill the hometown of Dan Davin, one of our best writers, but seems unaware of Davin's work.
He studied law at the University of Otago but Dunedin's status as a Unesco-designated City of Literature has not ignited a love of books in Act's spokesman.
Many law students leaven the drudgery of their subject by slipping in a paper from the English syllabus, but that option may have also passed him by.
While Mr Stephenson is merely the Act spokesman on the arts and can thus never have any real input into government policy, his literary lapse is of wider concern. Can it be that MPs are Philistines who read only order papers, the race results and recipe books?
Some would say that it is asking too much of a busy politician to spend time reading novels but some of our earlier politicians actually wrote some very passable fiction.
Sir Julius Vogel's Anno Domini 2000 is regarded as among the better utopian novels and Vincent Pyke churned out a couple of good books including Wild Bill Enderby, which is not a bad read.
Even two-term Otago MP William Baldwin (of steepest street fame) produced a novel of some merit called Tom Hungerford.
In later times, John A. Lee added greatly to our literature, some of his best-known works being actually produced during his time as an MP.
Some would say that the procession of biographical works by Robert Muldoon smacked of fiction but then how many political autobiographies tell the whole truth?
Mention must be made of another lover of good literature, Prime Minister Keith Holyoake, who once told an interviewer that one of his favourite books was On the Origin of the Species by Charles Dickens.
It would be unfair not to include ex-MP Michael Laws, who now graces the table at Otago Regional Council meetings and is no literary slouch. He wrote a novel, Dancing With Beelzebub, which is described by one reviewer as "a sleazy crime novel set in Whanganui", of which city Mr Laws was once the mayor. And what about Mr Laws' biography of a hooker — Gladiator: the Norm Hewitt Story?
Mr Stephenson's literary ignorance may well be matched by a similar lack of knowledge among MPs generally and this needs to be rectified.
You will be aware that the government has decreed that from now on students from years 0–8 are to be given an average of one hour a day of reading, writing and maths.
I've already suggested to the Minister of Education Erica Stanford that a new clause be added to that edict which requires, "every member of Parliament to attend four one-hour sessions each week to improve their knowledge of New Zealand literature and the arts and to learn to use a more acceptable form of the English language".
The minister is enthusiastic about the proposal — although she doubts if her colleagues will ever handle the language requirement — and she has suggested the programme be handled by a "Kiwi Kulture Kommittee", which she has offered to chair.
Ms Stanford reminded me that she has a first-class honours degree in political studies with a minor in Maori studies and has been involved in export sales roles for local manufacturers.
I was loathe to point out that such an impressive resume may well have left some gaps in her knowledge of New Zealand writers, artists and film-makers but it seemed churlish to quiz her on the subject and there is always the chance I'd be left with egg on my face if she canvassed my opinion on the works of, say, New Zealand author Eleanor Catton who is world famous but whom I've never read.
I'll send Mr Stephenson a couple of books to start him on the road of remedial reading. Lynley Dodd's Hairy Maclary From Donaldson's Dairy and Barry Crump's A Good Keen Man are both excellent examples of their genres and ideal for an unlettered politician trying to come to grips with our country's literary heritage.
— Jim Sullivan is a Patearoa writer.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Te reo Maori is ‘normal'; stop treating it like it is not
Not ''abnormal'' language. PHOTO: ODT FILES If you can say the word "car", you can say the word "karakia". If you can say the word "for" you can say the word "koro". Unless of course if you are the minister of education, in which case, the complexity of using the same vowel sound for the same letters in both English and Māori words is too great a language hurdle. This is the official reason for the elimination of common reo Māori being removed from the Ready to Read Phonics Plus series of books. This decision by the minister has caused widespread condemnation and was recently described as "white supremacy". Some people will struggle with this term being used to describe the actions of the minister and ministry. White supremacy invokes the common image of skin-headed Nazis, hateful violence and destruction. So, is the minister's decision an act of white supremacy? White supremacy is a term that is not just used to describe individuals. It is an ideology that arises from the settler-colonisation of Aotearoa and Te Waipounamu and from a desperate grip on monolingualism seen almost nowhere else in the world. It is a term used to describe how racism is built into the systems that govern us. When racism is built into our systems of governance in Aotearoa New Zealand, we see it when the language, culture and people of Māori and other non-Pākehā ethnicities are treated like an aberration or not "normal". The treatment of non-Pākehā culture and language as "not normal" is evident in many ways. We saw an example recently when the minister for justice described the haka in Parliament as lacking "civility". But it is most prominent in the different ways te reo Māori is being eliminated from public view. The argument government uses is English is "normal" and te reo Māori is not "normal". It is untrue, and when this false argument drives government policy, that policy can be rightly described as white supremacy. The Māori Language Act 1987 made te reo Māori an official language of New Zealand, the first time any language was legislated as an official language. Legislation confirming New Zealand sign language as such followed in 2006. The effect of these two Acts is to give all New Zealanders the right to use te reo Māori and New Zealand sign language in legal proceedings and it places obligations on public services to make provision for their use. The use of te reo Māori is therefore protected by law. This was a great start. The kohanga reo movement, kura kaupapa Māori and the oversubscription of adult te reo Māori classes across the country all pile on evidence of the fact New Zealanders are increasingly using and wanting to use te reo Māori in their everyday language. It would be quite reasonable to think then te reo Māori is normal. And it is. Most likely, whether you "speak" te reo or not, you also use Māori words like kiwi, kai, waka and mana. You may often say "ka pai" when your kids do something well, "ka kite", or the peculiarly New Zealand slang of "ka keets" when you drop your kids or your "moko" at their "kura". You might baulk at the use of the word "Pākehā", but you still say it and know what it means. You almost certainly say, or know what kia ora means, especially when someone overseas says it to you when they discover you are a New Zealander. You may sign your colleagues' leaving cards with aroha and know what it means when it is written in yours. You might even say taihoa when someone needs to slow down and "holy hika" is making a lovely comeback when something seems surprising or undesired. These are the words our children see, hear and say everyday in some form in the reading, listening and speaking of "English". For the Ministry of Education to now classify these words as "abnormal" in New Zealand English can only be an act of racism built into our system of governance, and therefore rightly described as white supremacy. I admit to being particularly offended at the elimination of the word "koro" from the Ready to Read books. That word means our grandfather, our beloved elder and when it is used by us and by our mokopuna it refers to the utter love and affection we hold for those older men in our lives. To eliminate this word in the readers is to eliminate the depth of that relationship from the language of our moko who are learning to read. If the ministry continues with its plans, the precious relationship that mokopuna Māori have with their koro will disappear in their books. The only elder men who will matter will be Pākehā grandfathers. That is white supremacy. ■ Metiria Stanton Turei is a senior law lecturer at the University of Otago and a former Green Party MP and co-leader.


Scoop
12 hours ago
- Scoop
Grog's Own Country Or Grog's Own Health System?
Richard Seddon is Aotearoa New Zealand's longest prime minister (back then called premier). He assumed the position in 1893 and continued for over 13 years without losing an election until his death in 1906. As the dominant political leader of his time he was known for many things, good and bad. One that stands out and is long remembered was his description of New Zealand as 'God's own country'. Adapting Seddon's descriptor, in 1959 Conrad Bollinger then working for the Public Service Association, and subsequently an English language lecturer at Victoria University, published his first book, Grog's own country (revised edition in 1967). The book was a readable searing attack on the alcohol laws and the liquor industry in New Zealand. Looking under questionable rocks I thought of Bollinger's book when listening to and reading Radio New Zealand's investigative journalist Guyon Espiner's latest piece (20 August) on the influence of the alcohol lobby on the Ministry of Health following the forced release of Ministry documents: Alcohol lobby influence exposed. As our only public radio station RNZ is a critical cog in the democratic process. It has its critics – some on the mark and others vitriolic. Espiner is one of its several journalists who, in terms of investigative rigour, really cuts the mustard. He knows how to look under questionable rocks. From beneath the bureaucratically protected rock he reveals the tactics of the alcohol industry towards the Health Ministry over policies that might threaten its profits. His investigation included a long struggle with the Health Ministry to obtain documents it tried to keep secret. This involved formal requests under the Official Information Act and a successful appeal to the Ombudsman. The failure of the Ministry to respect the importance of open disclosure and transparency reflects poorly on its statutory stewardship role in the health system. The industry actively lobbied health officials not to adopt measures endorsed by the World Health Organisation as among the most effective ways to reduce alcohol harm. Specifically these measures involved raising taxes on alcohol and curbing supply or cutting industry sponsorship of sport. Undermining measures to combat Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder The industry even went further. It endeavoured to shape a government strategy to combat Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD). Let's be explicit about what FASD is, where alcohol fits in, and the risks of harm are. Health New Zealand describes it this way on its website: Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) is a diagnostic term for a neurodevelopmental disorder caused by exposure to alcohol before birth. The main effects from this exposure are to the brain but alcohol can also affect other parts of the body. A diagnosis of FASD requires evidence of alcohol exposure before birth and severe impairment in at least three of ten specified domains of central nervous system structure or function. Not everyone who is exposed to alcohol before birth is able to be diagnosed with FASD, but they may still have impairments caused by alcohol. People who have FASD, or potential FASD, can experience complex physical, behavioural, learning and intellectual problems that persist throughout their lives. Impairment also varies between people depending on when and how much alcohol was consumed during the development of their brain and other parts of their bodies before they were born. Although FASD is preventable, many pregnancies are unplanned and damage from alcohol exposure may happen before a woman knows she is pregnant and stops drinking alcohol. Health NZ and the Ministry of Health advises to stop drinking alcohol if you could be pregnant, are pregnant or are trying to get pregnant. There is no known safe level of alcohol consumption during pregnancy. So what is the response of the alcohol industry? In Espiner's words: Officials handed the draft FASD plan to alcohol companies for feedback – while keeping it from the public. Spirits New Zealand dismissed estimates that up to 3000 babies are born with the disorder each year as 'not credible' and attacked a taxpayer-funded ad campaign from 2019, even though it won five awards. As Espiner reports, whereas the Health Coalition Aotearoa said the industry should have no role in shaping alcohol policy, the Ministry was relaxed about it. Relaxed is my word, not Espiner's, but it seems an appropriate summary description. A spot on diagnosis I can't emulate I was impressed with the quick but penetrating response to Guyon Espiner's investigation by Dr Trevor FitzJohn on LinkedIn (20 August): Very interesting to see the machinations of politics and big business in this case 'Big alcohol '. 3 major issues here for me. Firstly that NZ allows lobbying like this, secondly the alcohol interests raising near spurious arguments to defend their profits, and thirdly the Department felt ashamed enough of its actions that it tried to hide them. That in itself shows it's duplicity. Excepts Ministry of Health deputy director general Andrew Old 'accepted the alcohol industry was motivated by profit. 'I also would hope that, in doing that, they don't want to be doing harm,' m. Being naive? The Brewers Association also warned against using the Alcohol Levy to fund 'controversial' programmes it believes won't reduce harmful consumption. 'Examples raised in our meeting included research with little application actions in the outcomes, funding of legal support for opposition of licences and replacing sponsorship arrangements in sport organisations with funds from the levy.' Really? They don't remember the success of 'Smokefree'? We cannot see how any FASD (Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder) -prevention plan can be started without good data as a baseline. We would ask that the Public Health Agency give assurances that work on measurement frameworks occurs prior to other plan elements being launched.' Really? Again this so echoes the early days of smoking and 'lung cancer is not related to smoking'. As a responsible alcohol producer I am against irresponsible alcohol promotion that leads to alcohol abuse. The alcohol industry needs to regulate itself so harm can be reduced and the public can enjoy alcohol drinks. Well done Guyon Espiner. This says it all. I can't match or surpass this analysis. Dr FitzJohn's diagnosis is spot on. If Conrad Bollinger was alive today, he might be tempted to opine Grog's own health system!


Scoop
13 hours ago
- Scoop
Grog's Own Country Or Grog's Own Health System?
Richard Seddon is Aotearoa New Zealand's longest prime minister (back then called premier). He assumed the position in 1893 and continued for over 13 years without losing an election until his death in 1906. As the dominant political leader of his time he was known for many things, good and bad. One that stands out and is long remembered was his description of New Zealand as 'God's own country'. Adapting Seddon's descriptor, in 1959 Conrad Bollinger then working for the Public Service Association, and subsequently an English language lecturer at Victoria University, published his first book, Grog's own country (revised edition in 1967). The book was a readable searing attack on the alcohol laws and the liquor industry in New Zealand. Looking under questionable rocks I thought of Bollinger's book when listening to and reading Radio New Zealand's investigative journalist Guyon Espiner's latest piece (20 August) on the influence of the alcohol lobby on the Ministry of Health following the forced release of Ministry documents: Alcohol lobby influence exposed. As our only public radio station RNZ is a critical cog in the democratic process. It has its critics – some on the mark and others vitriolic. Espiner is one of its several journalists who, in terms of investigative rigour, really cuts the mustard. He knows how to look under questionable rocks. From beneath the bureaucratically protected rock he reveals the tactics of the alcohol industry towards the Health Ministry over policies that might threaten its profits. His investigation included a long struggle with the Health Ministry to obtain documents it tried to keep secret. This involved formal requests under the Official Information Act and a successful appeal to the Ombudsman. The failure of the Ministry to respect the importance of open disclosure and transparency reflects poorly on its statutory stewardship role in the health system. The industry actively lobbied health officials not to adopt measures endorsed by the World Health Organisation as among the most effective ways to reduce alcohol harm. Specifically these measures involved raising taxes on alcohol and curbing supply or cutting industry sponsorship of sport. Undermining measures to combat Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder The industry even went further. It endeavoured to shape a government strategy to combat Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD). Let's be explicit about what FASD is, where alcohol fits in, and the risks of harm are. Health New Zealand describes it this way on its website: Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) is a diagnostic term for a neurodevelopmental disorder caused by exposure to alcohol before birth. The main effects from this exposure are to the brain but alcohol can also affect other parts of the body. A diagnosis of FASD requires evidence of alcohol exposure before birth and severe impairment in at least three of ten specified domains of central nervous system structure or function. Not everyone who is exposed to alcohol before birth is able to be diagnosed with FASD, but they may still have impairments caused by alcohol. People who have FASD, or potential FASD, can experience complex physical, behavioural, learning and intellectual problems that persist throughout their lives. Impairment also varies between people depending on when and how much alcohol was consumed during the development of their brain and other parts of their bodies before they were born. Although FASD is preventable, many pregnancies are unplanned and damage from alcohol exposure may happen before a woman knows she is pregnant and stops drinking alcohol. Health NZ and the Ministry of Health advises to stop drinking alcohol if you could be pregnant, are pregnant or are trying to get pregnant. There is no known safe level of alcohol consumption during pregnancy. So what is the response of the alcohol industry? In Espiner's words: Officials handed the draft FASD plan to alcohol companies for feedback – while keeping it from the public. Spirits New Zealand dismissed estimates that up to 3000 babies are born with the disorder each year as 'not credible' and attacked a taxpayer-funded ad campaign from 2019, even though it won five awards. As Espiner reports, whereas the Health Coalition Aotearoa said the industry should have no role in shaping alcohol policy, the Ministry was relaxed about it. Relaxed is my word, not Espiner's, but it seems an appropriate summary description. A spot on diagnosis I can't emulate I was impressed with the quick but penetrating response to Guyon Espiner's investigation by Dr Trevor FitzJohn on LinkedIn (20 August): Very interesting to see the machinations of politics and big business in this case 'Big alcohol '. 3 major issues here for me. Firstly that NZ allows lobbying like this, secondly the alcohol interests raising near spurious arguments to defend their profits, and thirdly the Department felt ashamed enough of its actions that it tried to hide them. That in itself shows it's duplicity. Excepts Ministry of Health deputy director general Andrew Old 'accepted the alcohol industry was motivated by profit. 'I also would hope that, in doing that, they don't want to be doing harm,' m. Being naive? The Brewers Association also warned against using the Alcohol Levy to fund 'controversial' programmes it believes won't reduce harmful consumption. 'Examples raised in our meeting included research with little application actions in the outcomes, funding of legal support for opposition of licences and replacing sponsorship arrangements in sport organisations with funds from the levy.' Really? They don't remember the success of 'Smokefree'? We cannot see how any FASD (Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder) -prevention plan can be started without good data as a baseline. We would ask that the Public Health Agency give assurances that work on measurement frameworks occurs prior to other plan elements being launched.' Really? Again this so echoes the early days of smoking and 'lung cancer is not related to smoking'. As a responsible alcohol producer I am against irresponsible alcohol promotion that leads to alcohol abuse. The alcohol industry needs to regulate itself so harm can be reduced and the public can enjoy alcohol drinks. Well done Guyon Espiner. This says it all. I can't match or surpass this analysis. Dr FitzJohn's diagnosis is spot on. If Conrad Bollinger was alive today, he might be tempted to opine Grog's own health system!