logo
Lost for words when having to describe a pillock

Lost for words when having to describe a pillock

Sir Ian Taylor discusses rushed legislation, forgotten women and the triumphant return of the word "pillock".
I recently finished reading a book called A Dictionary of Lost Words, a moving tale that left me thinking about the stories we lose when certain voices are left out of the conversation.
The story centres on Esme, a young girl who spends her childhood beneath the sorting table where the first Oxford English Dictionary is being compiled, quite literally beneath the men deciding which words matter.
From her hiding place, she begins collecting discarded words, many of them spoken by women, by workers, by people whose language didn't fit the mould. It's a reminder that history isn't just written by the victors, it is often edited by them as well.
So, when I read about the rushed passage of the government's Equal Pay Amendment Bill, I couldn't help but wonder what voices, what words, were they hoping would drop beneath the table.
Brooke van Velden, the minister behind the Bill, assures us it's all about empowering women. A noble aim, no question. But her reassurances feel a lot like those of Emmeline Pankhurst, the famous suffragette who also features in A Dictionary of Lost Words.
I had always thought that Pankhurst had fought the fight for women to vote in the UK. What I learned was her fight was only for "some" women, not all women. Women who were property-owning, well-spoken and preferably able to prepare a cucumber sandwich without upsetting the tablecloth. Her fight did not include the working-class women of the time.
One could argue that Brooke herself fits nicely into Pankhurst's vision of the ideal female citizen: well-paid, well-dressed and well clear of the factory floor, the night shift in aged care, our overstretched hospitals and schools, or our early childhood centres.
Her work career appears to have been confined to the closeted halls of public relations for firms like Philip Morris, the multinational tobacco company where she was a "corporate affairs consultant".
From there she has stepped into the world of politics where, as part of a minority partner in the coalition government, she enjoys the comfort of a salary of more than $300,000 a year, plus expenses. Not to mention the guaranteed, uncontested, annual pay rises, between now and the next election, of 10%.
In the context of The Dictionary of Lost Words, the word "irony" springs to mind.
I asked ChatGPT how Esme, the central character of the book, might define the word irony in the context of Minister van Velden's rationale for her actions. This was the response.
Esme's Definition of Irony in The Context of the Amendments to the Pay Equity Bill
Irony (n) A word that slips between intention and outcome, cloaked in contradiction. A silent smile, often bitter, where justice is spoken but not served.
It then went on to add:
"Esme might sit with the Oxford Dictionary draft in one hand and the newspaper article in the other, her fingers brushing over the word 'equity' as if to weigh its truth. She would see the irony not simply in the Bill's withdrawal but in who introduced it. A woman in power proposing emergency legislation that would silence the voices of those sitting beneath the table with Esme — women whose work has long gone uncounted: the carers, the cleaners, the teachers, the nurses. Those without names who carry trays, wipe brows, and raise other people's children. Irony is when those who have been voiceless the longest are asked, yet again, to wait their turn."
Van Velden, like Pankhurst, seems to be championing women's rights while quietly stepping around the very women most in need of them.
At another level, there's a wonderful irony (that word again) in A Dictionary of Lost Words.
"Pillock" — this too was a word that fell beneath the table, excluded from the original Oxford Dictionary by the men making the decisions on what words were to be included.
Apparently, it was a "woman's word" and, crucially, one used exclusively to describe men. You can probably guess why the learned gentlemen of the time didn't think it worthy of inclusion.
Back then, every word submitted for the dictionary had to be written on a small piece of paper called a slip, with an example sentence showing how the word was used in context.
I can already picture the slip for this one:
Word: Pillock (n)
Example in context: On hearing David Seymour make the claim that Brooke van Velden had saved her budget, the Minister of Finance, Nicola Willis, was heard to mutter, "what a pillock."
I can almost see Esme quietly sliding that one into the submission box with a wry smile. No explanation required.
But there is a lot of evidence that supports the case for pillock being used in the context of David Seymour.
— Treaty Principles Bill: millions of taxpayer money spent on a Bill everyone knew would fail when it came to Parliament.
— School lunch cuts: $3 meals outsourced offshore, delivered late and barely edible.
— Charter schools: more millions of taxpayer money spent on administration for just seven schools, one with half a dozen students — learning French.
— The tractor stunt: driving a Land Rover up Parliament's steps, ignoring the advice of security guards that it was an offence.
All this while frontline workers like nurses, early childhood teachers, cleaners and caregivers, the very people historically undervalued and underpaid, are left out of the room, out of the process and out of the promise of change. They deserve to be heard.
Amendments to a Bill meant to fix a history of undervaluing women's work is being pushed through in a way that continues to undervalue women's voices. Esme would be shaking her head.
The fight for equity isn't just about ticking boxes. It's about understanding context, listening deeply and recognising the value of every contribution, not just the ones made from a seat in Parliament or a leather chair in a boardroom.
We have a chance here in Aotearoa to show what real leadership looks like. But leadership doesn't mean charging ahead with blinkers on. It means slowing down long enough to make sure everyone's with you, all voices are heard, especially those that are under the table.
Otherwise, we may one day find ourselves leafing through a future Dictionary of Lost Bills wondering how we managed to lose the meaning of "equity" and how the word pillock made such a triumphant comeback.
I was left wondering what alternatives might be used in place of pillock. There are a number — idiot, fool, simpleton, dunce — but a new one will be added to the list on May 31.
Deputy Prime Minister.
— Sir Ian Taylor is founder and managing director of Dunedin company Animation Research.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Marilyn Waring: Why I convened the people's select committee on pay equity
Marilyn Waring: Why I convened the people's select committee on pay equity

The Spinoff

timea day ago

  • The Spinoff

Marilyn Waring: Why I convened the people's select committee on pay equity

When it became clear the government had chosen ideology over evidence in its rushed-through changes to the pay equity system, former National MP Marilyn Waring decided to do something about it. I had tuned in to parliament to listen to the Equal Pay Amendment Bill debate on pay equity, and I didn't have to listen for very long to know there was no evidence to back this change in law. I sought to confirm this by going online and finding the parliamentary link to the legislation website. You look for the departmental disclosure statement and click on this link. After the general policy statement and the explanatory note, you get to part two: background material and policy information. (Yes, if they wanted you to find this it would be easier to access.) But you need to know this, because this is where you find out if anything other than ideology informed the changes in legislation. It operates as a mini audit, asking key questions that should have been part of the evidence for the change. In this case, it is a very rewarding quest. The first of the audit questions asks, 'Are there any publicly available inquiry, review or evaluation reports that have informed, or are relevant to, the policy to be given effect by this bill?' The answer is 'Yes', and three pieces of research work are referenced. Two of these are totally opposed to the changes in the bill: a report (by rigorous researchers) for the Human Rights Commission on pay equity and care workers, and a report by Research NZ that monitors social workers and employers before and after their pay equity settlement. Nothing in this report supports the changes, especially the response from employers. The other report was commissioned by Health NZ and the terms of reference were written by Health NZ. The researchers report that 'not enough evidence was received to fully answer the terms of reference'; many documents were not provided, and the wider context of the pay equity system could not be included in the report. This is the sole supporting evidence furnished to support the legislation. No regulatory impact statement was provided by MBIE. There was no analysis of 'the potential for any group of persons to suffer a substantial unavoidable loss of income or wealth', (due to 'ministerial time constraints'), but apparently there was analysis of 'the size of potential costs and benefits'. This is an entertaining 'yes', as for a number of years pay equity found itself listed among the 'unquantifiable fiscal risks' along with natural disasters and Treaty settlements. So … how come we went from an unquantifiable fiscal risk to billions of dollars, and which wizards hiding where (I suspect Treasury) just made up the figures – because they don't add up! The next question in the disclosure statement is about New Zealand's international obligations and whether the bill is consistent with these. Oh dear: it's 2025 and the assessors in MBIE and MFAT looked at International Labour Organisation conventions and trade obligations, but didn't mention the Convention on all Forms of Discrimination against Women, so the answer is wrong. Then there's the mystery of what happened to the attorney general's advice to parliament on whether any provisions of the bill limit any of the rights and freedoms in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. The site claims that there was such advice from the Ministry of Justice, so I scurried off to their site to find the Section 7 report – nothing there. How surprising. Next there is the claim that there was no 'external consultation on the policy to be given effect by the bill, or on a draft of this bill'. I seriously doubt this, and we will just wait for some loose lips in the post-budget estimates debates to reveal this. The government did, however, test the policy details with the Public Service Commission (where the pay equity group was disbanded in June 2024), Health NZ, the Ministry of Education and the Treasury. So, the government talked to itself, and what's more, every time they say 'employers', they are talking about themselves. In the absence of evidence for the debate we endured the lazy, specious, headline-grabbing and truly ignorant remarks about the comparators used in pay equity settlement. A comparison between social workers and air traffic controllers was one often quoted. I taught in the four-year Bachelor of Social Work, and the further one to two years for a Master of Social Work, at Massey University. Wherever I look on the web (New Zealand, Australia, UK), the skills and knowledge required for air traffic controllers are concentration, using judgment and making decisions, ability to work well under pressure, excellent verbal communication skills, problem solving, and paying attention to detail. In Aotearoa the qualifications can be gained in less than a year, at much less cost than a four-year social work degree. Understanding what a social work qualification means, I would happily employ a social worker as an air traffic controller but never contemplate the reverse. The minister claimed to be 'progressing this bill under urgency because we have to move quickly to make the changes to the act to ensure that the system is workable and sustainable'. No evidence whatsoever was presented to show the system was unworkable and unsustainable. Fourteen claims had been very well settled. Ideology was the only arbiter for these rubbish claims. I'm a researcher and I like to see evidence for such significant changes that continue to exploit women – an exploitation that has been present for my lifetime. I wondered what device could be used to collect that evidence. I began to call retired women MPs to see if they would join me in a people's select committee. We were set up in five days. The people's select committee is calling for submissions now – the deadline for written submissions is July 31, and oral submissions will begin on August 11. We will uncover and report on the information that should have been before any responsible government before the passage of such legislation, and we will make this available to all in Aotearoa.

China-US talks in London; Warner Bros Discovery to split in two
China-US talks in London; Warner Bros Discovery to split in two

National Business Review

time3 days ago

  • National Business Review

China-US talks in London; Warner Bros Discovery to split in two

Ata mārie and welcome to your Tuesday recap of the top business and political stories making news around the world. First up, multiple media outlets are providing updates on a new round of talks between economic superpowers the United States and China in London to resolve the trade war. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer represented US President Donald Trump. The BBC said the delegation met with Chinese representatives, including Vice Premier He Lifeng at Lancaster House. Chinese exports of rare earth minerals crucial for technology components, as well as China's access to US computer chips, were expected to be high on the agenda. Last month, both countries scaled back their hefty reciprocal trade tariffs, but accused each other of breaching the deal. Last week, Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping spoke by phone and agreed to resolve tariff disputes. Trump acknowledged the trade relationship with China had got 'a little off track'. Chinese President Xi Jinping. Al Jazeera reported that California filed legal action against the Trump administration over the deployment of National Guard troops in Los Angeles because of protests over immigration raids. California Attorney General Rob Bonta accused Trump of trying to 'manufacture chaos and crisis' on the ground. 'Federalising the California National Guard is an abuse of the President's authority under the law – and not one we take lightly. We're asking a court to put a stop to the unlawful, unprecedented order.' Meanwhile, business leaders walked back on fears of an economic recession in the US, which had originally increased after Trump's tariff announcement, CNBC reported. In a new survey, fewer than 30% of chief executives predicted a mild or severe recession over the next six months, down from 46% in May, and 62% in April. In financial news, OpenAI hit US$10 billion in annual recurring revenue, less than three years after launching its ChatGPT chatbot, CNBC reported. OpenAI targeted US$125b revenue by 2029, according to sources. OpenAI said it supported 500 million weekly active users, while it had three million business users, up from two million in February. Elsewhere, Bloomberg has an exclusive story that the investment banking arm of Barclays could cut more than 200 jobs to boost profitability. Sources said staff within investment banking, global markets, and research could be affected by the cuts. Meanwhile, media giant Warner Bros Discovery has decided to split its business in two publicly traded companies, the Guardian reported. One company would be focused on streaming and studios, while the other would focus on the legacy television network businesses. 'The separation aims to provide each company with greater strategic flexibility and focus,' WBD said. The corporate split was expected by mid-2026, CNN reported. CNN is part of the Warner Bros Discovery stable. Finally, technology company Apple unveiled a new operating system interface called Liquid Glass at its annual Worldwide Developers Conference, Bloomberg reported. Executive Alan Dye said the product would operate across its products and described it as the broadest design update in the history of the company. Meanwhile, Apple also confirmed plans to open its artificial intelligence models to outside developers. That would allow app creators to weave the technology into their own software.

'We have massive problems with regulation' - Seymour defends Regulatory Standards Bill
'We have massive problems with regulation' - Seymour defends Regulatory Standards Bill

RNZ News

time04-06-2025

  • RNZ News

'We have massive problems with regulation' - Seymour defends Regulatory Standards Bill

Deputy Prime Minister and ACT Party leader David Seymour has hit back at criticism of his flagship Regulatory Standards Bill, defending the legislation against claims it breaches Treaty of Waitangi principles and contradicts its own standards when compared with the recently passed Pay Equity Bill. In an at-times heated exchange with Guyon Espiner, Seymour stood firm on the need for regulatory reform despite New Zealand's high international rankings in governance and legal standards. Espiner pointed out that New Zealand ranks 99 out of 100 for regulatory quality in the World Bank index, placing it just behind the global benchmark. Seymour dismissed the ranking, arguing it measured whether a country is "basically a third-world country" and failed to capture the real-world frustrations faced by businesses, particularly in agriculture and construction. "You can read all the indices you like, but once you start getting down to talking to the actual people … we have massive problems with regulation," Seymour said, citing delays in approval for lower-emission agricultural chemicals as one. ACT Party leader David Seyour in studio for an interview on season 3 of 30 with Guyon Espiner. Photo: RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly Espiner went on to challenge Seymour on whether the government's recent Pay Equity Bill - pushed through under urgency - violated the principles laid out in the Regulatory Standards Bill itself. These principles include ensuring laws are not retrospective and that proper consultation takes place. Seymour did not deny the lack of consultation or the retrospective nature of the law change - which left 33 current pay equity claimants in the lurch - but argued it was irrelevant. "It was breached because it didn't matter," Seymour said. "All we did was dismantle a Byzantine crazy system… deciding how much the government would pay different workers it was employing anyway." He described the previous equity process as "effectively an internal government activity of arguing with each other" and derided those who had submitted pay appeals under the former system. "They said, 'We work so hard.' I said, 'Really? You think work is arguing with each other?'." The debate turned toward Māori engagement when Espiner pointed out the Waitangi Tribunal's conclusion that the Regulatory Standards Bill, due to a lack of meaningful consultation with Māori, breached the Treaty principles of partnership and active protection. Seymour insisted Māori voices were heard through public consultation. "We had 144 Iwi-based groups who submitted … If that's not enough, then I don't know what is." However, Espiner highlighted that of the 23,000 total submissions, only 76 supported the bill - a support rate of just 0.33 percent. Seymour dismissed the figure as misleading. "That quantum reflects nothing more than the fact that it's got easier and easier for people to make really, frankly, fake submissions … They've got bots, they can make a submission." Despite dismissing the opposing voices as fake, Seymour maintained that what mattered was not the opposition but the quality of the legislative framework, which is non-binding in its nature, thus not enforceable - despite the bill's $20 million price-tag. Seymour argued the Regulatory Standards Bill was about transparency, not enforcement. He compared it to the Public Finance Act and the Reserve Bank Act - also non-binding in nature, but important for government accountability. "There's nothing to stop a minister of finance writing to the governor of the Reserve Bank before an election saying, 'Run the presses, prime the pumps,'" Seymour said. "But it does allow the voters to judge them for doing it… and I want to do the same thing for regulation." Watch the full conversation with David Seymour and Guyon Espiner on 30 With Guyon Espiner . Subscribe to the podcast feed now to get every episode of 30 on your phone when it lands: On Spotify On iHeartRadio On Apple podcasts Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store