Latest news with #DavidHarvey
National Business Review
24-05-2025
- Politics
- National Business Review
Defending democracy: First define your target
The state of democracy in the West remains a hot topic. Undoubtedly, the election of President Donald Trump in the United States and rising support for conservative nationalist parties in Europe have upset many. But the malaise goes much deeper. The other end of the political spectrum also rallies around causes that undermine the liberal democratic tradition. Accusations of authoritarian tendencies resemble a mirror game, with both sides being guilty of each other's actions. Publishers have responded with volumes on everything from the loss of trust and tolerance to polarisation and outright rejection. Even the judicial system is under attack. The Chief Justice, Dame Helen Winkelmann, raised the alarm against critics. Some supported her, implying these were personal attacks. Retired District Court Judge David Harvey. Retired Judge David Harvey has brought legal commentary and dispute to the wider public through his columns and blogs. He defends the rights of critics who oppose the judiciary's introduction of elements such as tikanga into the law. 'Criticism of a decision is quite a distance from personal criticism of a judge. It is perfectly legitimate for a judicial decision to be critiqued,' Harvey wrote. Personal attacks To clarify, he names those critics, who were not identified in one article on personal attacks. They will be familiar to NBR subscribers. Roger Partridge, chairman and co-founder of the New Zealand Initiative; Auckland lawyer Gary Judd KC; and Auckland barrister Warren Pyke. These debates are likely to be more common. Harvey has touched a nerve with his views that rulings from the bench, compared with earlier decades, are less in touch with public opinion. The term 'judicial activism' is used to describe how the courts, once upholders of liberal establishment values, have evolved into enforcers of concepts such as 'social justice' and 'human rights'. In other words, majoritarian democracies were being overruled by unelected graduates of law schools that taught radical ideas on the environment, identity politics, and human rights. When former Otago University law professor James Allan, a Canadian, first aired these concerns in Democracy in Decline (2014), he was considered a fringe conservative. Now, they are a core belief in efforts to redefine democratic principles as those made in Parliament, not in the courts. Sir Geoffrey Palmer and Sir Kenneth Keith. Two leading jurists, Sir Geoffrey Palmer and Sir Kenneth Keith, both had books published this year espousing what Allan, now at the University of Queensland, would consider a constitutional coup to overthrow parliamentary sovereignty. The pushback on the 'judicialisation of politics' has been expressed at the local level by an Otago graduate, Natasha Hamilton-Hart, who is director of the NZ Asia Institute at the University of Auckland. She says it's been a 30-year mission to bring back parliamentary control and accountability to tribunals, courts and quasi-judicial panels of experts. Clear voice One clear voice on these issues is Lord Jonathan Sumption, a former Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom and a non-permanent judge of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, from which he resigned last year. In his pre-legal career, Sumption was a medieval historian (his multi-volume history of the 100 Years' War is still in progress after starting in 1990). In the 1970s, before joining the Supreme Court, he was a founder with Margaret Thatcher of the Centre for Policy Studies, the think tank that propounded the neoliberalism that once dominated Western politics. His latest book, The Challenges of Democracy: And the Rule of Law, is a collection of lectures. Its remarkable feature, and one that explodes the myth of New Zealand's exceptionality, is that it could easily be just about this country. The insights remove much of the 'noise' about political discourse, and instead focus on how a democracy functions, and ways to protect it. The threats are real enough. The Economist Intelligence Unit's Democracy Index is at its lowest in decades. One reason is the appeal of authoritarianism, which is reflected in what Sumption calls the moral absolutism of the 'new Roundheads' in the universities, public service and the media. Several reasons He then addresses the causes of disillusionment with democracy. One is the role of representation, which is less about the quality of politicians than that they become part of a professional class. They then become less truly representative of their electors. 'Success in government requires high levels of intelligence, judgment and application. These qualities are uncommon, which means that democracies are in reality removable aristocracies of knowledge.' This elitism is never popular and is a scourge of democratic politics. A second problem is the unrealistically high expectations of voters. Increasingly, they expect the state to solve every problem. While it can do many more things than in the past, it can't do everything. 'Governments can create the conditions for prosperity and remove artificial barriers to prosperity, but they cannot create prosperity.' Worse, politicians are expected to promise the undeliverable and are then damned for failing to deliver it. Lord Jonathan Sumption. 'The result is to undermine the trust in institutions that is indispensable in any state not founded on mere force,' Sumption continues. In the UK, this applies to the National Health Service, the housing shortage and controlling crime. Ditto for New Zealand. Major problems A third reason for the declining appeal of democracies is their inability to tackle major problems, precisely because they are democracies. Here, Sumption cites perennially high house prices due to voters favouring planning restrictions and environmental regulation. Democracies also face the inability to finance welfare payments such as pensions when populations are ageing and the proportion of taxpayers to pay for them is decreasing. 'Any solution to the problem will be electorally unpopular, especially among older voters who are assiduous voters …' Climate change is yet another insolvable problem. 'Dealing with climate change will almost certainly involve reducing consumption, which will be hard to sell in a democracy.' Sumption then adds: 'The electoral kickback has already begun.' None of this is news to New Zealanders; nor are other issues such as student loan repayments, immigration restrictions, racial tensions, transgender rights, or foreign affairs. 'Democracy has a natural tendency to create interest groups for whom the preservation of their current advantages or the acquisition of new ones are the dominant factors in their political choices.' Main threats The main threats to democracy are economic insecurity, fear and intolerance. Sumption rejects inequality as inhibiting economic progress. In his think-tank years, Sumption co-authored Equality (1979) with Thatcher's economic minister, Sir Keith Joseph, and hasn't changed his mind that 'tax the rich' policies reduce capitalism's growth dynamics and therefore limit income-generation. While extremes can be socially disruptive, they are more likely when economic growth falters. Fear arises when people think an authoritarian regime offers more security. Sumption, as an appeal court judge in Hong Kong, witnessed how easily democratic norms can be undermined without criminal or illegal conduct. He cites Venezuela and Hungary as other examples where determined groups have harassed potential opponents, seized control of the media, exploited constitutional gaps, and run roughshod over political convention. Sumption also suggests complacency and risk-aversion are underlying contributors to fear. Demands that the state protects against all risks inherent in life are more likely to encourage despotic power. 'If we hold governments responsible for everything that goes wrong, they will take away our autonomy so that nothing can go wrong.' Sumption provides insights on the handling of the Covid-19 pandemic, elements of which are still being felt today. Alexis de Tocqueville warned against too much state power. He cites the warning of French political scientist Alexis de Tocqueville from two centuries ago of allowing security as the price of coercive state: 'Such a power … stupefies a people until each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.' Deliberate campaigns Finally, Sumption discusses intolerance, or polarisation. He calls out deliberate campaigns of suppression against politically unfashionable or 'incorrect' opinions, attempts to impose a new vocabulary that favours the campaigners, and generally the 'narrowing of our intellectual world'. This dive into the cultural wars reminds us why the lawyer Philip Crump chose religious martyr Thomas Cranmer as a pseudonym before his identity was outed after a series of columns that eviscerated the Labour Government's Three Waters. Direct action, to Sumption, is an invitation to authoritarian government, because it implicitly rejects the diversity of opinion. 'Those who engage in direct action instinctively feel … the end justifies the means, but they rarely confront the implications of their acts.' The essence of democracy is not consensus, but a common respect for a way to resolve differences. 'The task of a political community is to accommodate them so that we can live together in peace without systematic coercion.' This kind of language, which permeates all the lectures, is a refreshing alternative to the many suggestions of replacing the existing system. Although Aristotle warned that political classes endangered democracy, and many like a system that gets things done, Sumption comes down on the side of leaving decisions to those engaged in compromise and mediation. Even so, his conclusion is pessimistic. He expects the democracy that has existed over the past 200 years will eventually succumb to the human instincts for security, the decline of political tolerance and the rise of moral absolutism. The Challenges of Democracy: And the Rule of Law, by Jonathan Sumption (Profile Books) Nevil Gibson is a former editor-at-large for NBR. He has contributed film and book reviews to various publications. This is supplied content and not commissioned or paid for by NBR.
Time Out
24-04-2025
- Business
- Time Out
Cape winery scoops global award
Cape wine lovers, raise a glass! Hasher Family Wines in the scenic Hemel-en-Aarde Valley has been crowned Winery of the Year at the 2025 London Wine Competition. The boutique estate from the Upper Hemel-en-Aarde Valley near Hermanus wowed an international panel of sommeliers, wine buyers and judges with its Ernest Pinot Noir winning plaudits and the top trophy at the eighth outing for this international wine award. Unlike many other wine shows that focus purely on what's in the glass, the judging at the London Wine Competition also factors in quality, value and packaging. A little bit like we all do when deciding which bottle off the shelf is going to deliver bang for our buck. Hasher's Ernest Pinot Noir impressed the judges with its peppery spice, chewy tannins, and sleek modern design. "Very 'now' modern expressive packaging," noted UK importer David Harvey, while fellow judge Francesco Fronzo praised its complexity and elegant label design. The win is a proud moment for co-owners Frederik and Céline Haspeslagh. The Ernest Pinot Noir – named after their eldest son – reflects the winery's ethos of blending traditional techniques with contemporary flair. "This recognition from the London Wine Competition is a meaningful moment for us," says Celine, co-owner of Hasher Family Wines. "It inspires us to keep sharing our passion with wine lovers across the world. We look forward to welcoming you to the farm and raising a glass of Ernest together." Can't make it to the Hemel-en-Aarde Valley just yet? The estate's Wine Club offers early access to the wines on release, plus free delivery, complimentary estate tastings and invitations to special events on the farm.
Axios
11-02-2025
- Health
- Axios
Trump health info blackout shocks providers
Thousands of webpages containing federal health guidelines and data went dark last week, only for some to reappear over the weekend without clarity on what had been changed or removed — and with disclaimers noting that the pages could be further modified. Why it matters: The removed sites, primarily maintained by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, covered issues like contraception, transgender health and climate change that President Trump and Republicans have repeatedly targeted. The blackout shook health researchers and providers and raised the specter of the Trump administration limiting what public health information Americans can see. The information affected included CDC guidelines for treating sexually transmitted infections, used to know what tests to run and lay out treatment plans, said David Harvey, executive director of the National Coalition of STD Directors. Without access, "people will get sick. And, especially in cases like congenital syphilis where you cannot lose a day to treat, babies will die," he said in a statement. The information has since reappeared. Another affected website is used by clinicians to select birth control after a recent pregnancy. It helps rule out risky options if a patient has a heart condition or even is breastfeeding, physician and public health researcher Jeremy Faust wrote on Substack. State of play: A New York Times analysis found that more than 8,000 webpages across federal websites, including 3,000 from CDC, had been removed since Friday afternoon. Data sets also disappeared: More than 2,200 data sets came offline between President Trump's inauguration and Friday afternoon, according to tallies compiled from a repository of publicly available federal data, and the Internet Archive. Some had been restored as of Sunday. The CDC's website for the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which hosts vaccine recommendations for kids and adults, went down on Friday evening but was back online by Saturday. But references to COVID-19 vaccine and pneumococcal vaccine recommendations approved during ACIP's October meeting that appeared on a version of the recommendations page captured before Trump's inauguration appear to have been removed. CDC webpages now have a banner noting that the website is being modified to comply with new executive orders. The CDC said in a statement that all changes to the Health and Human Services websites are in accordance with President Trump's executive orders that called for an end to federal diversity, equity and inclusion programs and that declared the government will only recognize two sexes, male and female. "The Office of Personnel Management has provided initial guidance on both Executive Orders and HHS and divisions are acting accordingly to execute," CDC said. Scientists, journalists and others who rely on HHS data sets rushed to save data last week, anticipating some of it would disappear. The pace accelerated when word began circulating that the administration would take down government websites not in compliance at the close of business on Friday. The Arizona Public Health Association urged its members to download key information from federal websites. "If you use these resources, don't assume they'll still be there next week or that some archive website will have captured and preserved them — download and save them now before it's too late," the association wrote in a memo released Wednesday. Members of a top advisory board to the CDC also sent a letter to the agency's acting director asking for an explanation of the removal of public health data, Stat reported. Nine out of 12 public health researchers and scientists on the board signed the letter, and they expect to be fired for doing so, they told Stat. The data blackout came after Trump ordered the U.S. withdrawal from the World Health Organization, signed executive orders targeting transgender health care, and halted many external communications from HHS. A freeze on grants and other federal funding also paralyzed state Medicaid agencies and some health providers until a federal judge halted it. 💭 Our thought bubble: The full extent of changes to federal health information and data may not be know for some time. If the Trump administration removes gender, race or other demographic categories from data sets, it could fundamentally change the data. April Rubin contributed
