Latest news with #DavidParker
The Spinoff
13-08-2025
- Politics
- The Spinoff
How to design a wellbeing ‘meta-law' that could actually make a difference
Laws that change the basis on which all other decisions are made have had mixed degrees of success. But a wellbeing act that focused on a few concrete targets – and measured the spending required to meet them – would be a sharp-edged way to hold governments to account for their social and environmental failures. Some politicians play the game better than others, but the smartest ones change the rules of the game itself. Most laws create something: a new penalty for shoplifting, a different type of school, an enhanced entitlement to paid parental leave. Some laws, though, change the basis on which all other decisions are made. You could call them embedding laws or meta-laws. Some are uncontroversial. The 1993 Electoral Act, for instance, is the bedrock of the democratic system, determining how elections are run, MPs elected, and political parties registered. Other such laws, though, embed a specific view of the world. For a long time, left-wingers have complained that the 1980s neoliberals entrenched a market-fundamentalist mindset through three interlocking pieces of legislation. The 1986 State-Owned Enterprises Act put profit ahead of the public interest. The 1987 State Services Act, while it was on the statute book, made government departments operate more like private companies. And the 1989 Public Finance Act nudged governments to borrow and spend less. Rather than do a specific 'thing', these acts changed the terms on which all government agencies did their 'things'. The last Labour government had a penchant for passing meta-laws – albeit with mixed success. The Zero Carbon Act reorients policy towards climate action, and creates an independent commission and reporting processes that seek to embarrass governments into cutting emissions. David Parker's 2023 Taxation Principles Reporting Act, which forced governments to justify their policies' impact on equality, was designed to nudge all future tax laws in an egalitarian direction. Jacinda Ardern's 2018 Child Poverty Reduction Act contained no policies to reduce child poverty, but created official measures and targets against which future governments could be held to account. But while the Zero Carbon Act has had enduring influence, the others have not: Parker's law was repealed the moment National took power, and Ardern's is largely ignored. Embedding acts, in short, are no sure thing. Another recent attempt, this time from the right, is David Seymour's controversial Regulatory Standards Bill. Although a pure reporting mechanism, with no hard power of its own, it nonetheless creates processes that seek to elevate private property rights and nudge ministers away from legislating in the public interest. How far it will succeed is an open question. Welsh lessons The latest idea for a meta-law, however, holds far more promise. The Wellbeing Alliance Aotearoa, a recently formed NGO, is running a campaign called Tomorrow Together, the centrepiece of which is a proposed Future Generations Act. The act is modelled on the Welsh equivalent, which requires public bodies to follow 'sustainable development' principles and promote the country's long-term cultural, social, environmental and economic wellbeing. Public agencies have to set wellbeing objectives and take 'all reasonable steps' to achieve them. The act also established a future generations commissioner, who makes recommendations that public bodies must – once again – take all reasonable steps to follow. Finally, the act requires Welsh ministers to set national indicators that show whether wellbeing is really on the rise. They include carbon emissions, community safety, poverty rates, productivity growth, the number of Welsh speakers, and participation in democratic decision-making. There is much to like here, but also a few things to give one pause. Of the 50 indicators, fewer than half are headed in the right direction, suggesting they may not have much influence over state action. It is hard to maintain government, media or public focus on so many measures. And, being set by ministers, the indicators are neither determined nor owned by the public. Picking five to 10 How, then, might a wellbeing act gain more teeth? The answer to this question begins with understanding why, year after year, economic debate is dominated by the demand for governments to run a budget surplus. Surpluses have assumed this status not just because they are often desirable but also because they generate a simple and widely understood measure of 'success'. While our governments run budget surpluses, however, they are often racking up environmental and social deficits, polluting the countryside and allowing poverty to rise. The budget gets balanced on the backs of the poor, and at the expense of the planet. Governments sometimes pay a price for this, if media stories of social misery and environmental pollution become too powerful to ignore. But the quest for a surplus continues to dominate debate because, by contrast, other measures are vague and amorphous. What does a social or environmental 'deficit' look like? Even if we knew, which ones would matter most? How would we measure them? And how would we stop governments from inventing their own, easily satisfied targets? Social and environmental measures, in short, need to be made more concrete, for both policymakers and the general public. The first step is probably to pick just five to 10 measures to target. (This would avoid the fate of the last Labour government's 'wellbeing' approach, which got bogged down in 141 different measures.) Why so few? Because many people, among them the Nobel prizewinner Joseph Stiglitz – one of the godfathers of wellbeing economics – believe a small suite of measures is needed to focus attention. 'One can grasp five to 10,' Sitglitz told the Treasury in 2023. How should we select those measures? A government could of course pick them itself, but that would have neither true democratic legitimacy nor real staying power. Imagine, instead, that we had a genuine national conversation – an overused phrase, admittedly – about the social and environmental measures most important to us. Who knows what people might choose – safety in their community, swimmable rivers, connections to whenua and reo, higher living standards, something else? Discussions could be held up and down the country, allowing individuals to come together, articulate different versions of the good life, and aggregate their views into a national vision. A citizens' assembly – a representative sample of, say, 100 New Zealanders, 'New Zealand in one room' – could be convened to make the final call, in full view of the wider public and with complete access to experts and evidence. (Countless other process choices, of course, would have to be made.) The resulting suite of five to 10 measures, embedded in legislation, would have immense democratic legitimacy, embodying the considered will of the public. And it could be renewed every decade or so. Countering the power of the 'surplus' To sharpen matters still further, though, imagine if the national conversation generated targets for each wellbeing goal: the best cancer survival rates in the world, for instance, or a halving of child poverty within a decade. That would hone government accountability to a well-defined point. And we might go further still. If we could estimate, however roughly, the spending needed to reach each target, and we added them all up, we would effectively have a measure of the social and environmental deficit – the amount by which spending on those outcomes was 'under' the line even while the government's budget surplus was 'over' it. This might constitute, finally, a number to compete with the hallowed surplus, creating a sharp-edged way to hold governments to account for their social and environmental failures. Imagine the effect of Jack Tame saying to a future prime minister, 'Sure, you've run a $1bn surplus, but what about the social and environmental deficit, currently at $23bn and worsening?' Embedding our shared goals The ideas above are naturally speculative. But even if all this were practicable and came to pass, how much difference would it make? Meta-laws can be undone, and even those that survive may have less power than their framers imagined. But the lesson from laws like the Public Finance Act is that they can have enduring power if they encapsulate elite opinion, the public's 'common sense', or – ideally – both. And this would plausibly be the case here: wellbeing economics is now mainstream policy thinking, and most people care about far more than just GDP growth. The results of such a priority-setting process, and the measures and targets selected, would not necessarily be the ones I would choose, nor those that you, the individual reader, would prefer. But that's democracy. The point is not to advance our own narrow interests but to orient politics, in an enduring manner, towards the social and environmental goals endorsed by New Zealanders as a whole. That is the kind of accountability worth embedding.
New York Times
26-07-2025
- Sport
- New York Times
In Cooperstown, Dave Parker's son prepares for the speech his father always wanted to give
COOPERSTOWN, N.Y. – David Parker II was six years old when his father played his final game in the majors. He learned of his career bit by bit, over time, mostly after high school. 'I'm still humbled, to this day, about things that my dad did,' he said here on Saturday. 'I think it's more fun to just learn about it as it comes. I didn't go sit down and watch hours of my pops. I like to stop at Kroger or wherever I'm at and hear the stories about my dad. People think I get tired of it, and I say, 'No, I like learning new things.' Everybody has a new story.' Advertisement Now it is Parker's task to synthesize those stories into a speech at the Hall of Fame. His father, Dave, will be inducted on Sunday, nearly a month after his death. Parker fought Parkinson's disease for nearly 12 years and died on June 28 at age 74. 'The last year and a half, it kind of took a wrong turn,' Parker II said. 'He knew that he was being inducted, but I'm gonna be honest: between me, my mother, and my family, we just didn't think he was gonna be able to come through all the complications that he had to come (to Cooperstown). If he would have still been here, it would have been really hard for him to get here. But he knows he's here. Trust and believe that.' Hall of Fame president Josh Rawitch led a small group of staffers to Cincinnati in late April to meet with Parker and his wife, Kellye, at their home. They discussed plans for the summer and staged a private ceremony, of sorts, to give Parker some closure in his final months. 'We put on the Hall of Fame jersey and we gave him his Hall of Fame cap in Cincinnati, (and) he was very, very aware of what it meant,' Rawitch said. 'You could see just how powerful that moment was. We're all very grateful that he was able to experience all that before he passed.' Parker and another posthumous inductee, Dick Allen, who died in 2020, will be honored on Sunday with CC Sabathia, Ichiro Suzuki and Billy Wagner. Allen's widow, Willa, will give his speech, as Roy Halladay's widow, Brandy, did for him when he was posthumously honored in 2019. The Hall of Fame expects more than 50 members to attend Sunday's ceremony, including players from each of Parker's first five teams: Bert Blyleven (Pittsburgh Pirates), Dennis Eckersley (Oakland Athletics), Barry Larkin (Cincinnati Reds), Paul Molitor and Robin Yount (Milwaukee Brewers) and Dave Winfield (California Angels). Parker hit .290 with 2,712 hits and 339 home runs in a career that stretched from 1973 to 1991. He won two batting titles, two World Series and was the 1978 National League Most Valuable Player. Parker was also the All-Star Game MVP in 1979 and won the first Home Run Derby six years later. Parker would joke that he had written his Hall of Fame speech many years ago, and while that wasn't exactly true, he shared some themes he wanted to convey in the speech with David II. After the Classic Baseball Era committee elected Parker in December, he said he always considered himself a Hall of Famer, anyway. The long wait, Parker II said, was all part of the journey. Advertisement 'The timing of it, I feel it's right on time,' Parker II said. 'You can't rush anything. It could have happened a little bit sooner but we're thankful for what happened because you can't lie about his numbers. So as long as he's there, I think that will put a smile on his face and ease his pain going home.' Only two other Hall of Famers have died in the few months between election and induction: pitcher Eppa Rixey in February 1963 and another pitcher, Leon Day, in March 1995. Day, a star in the Negro Leagues, was 78 when he got the news in a Baltimore hospital, He died six days later. 'I'm so happy, I don't know what to do,' a tearful Day said, according to the Baltimore Sun. 'I never thought it would come.' Parker did. And now his namesake will represent him for a moment he always wanted. (Top photo of Dave Parker II: AP Photo/Seth Wenig)
Calgary Herald
24-06-2025
- Politics
- Calgary Herald
'It's not great': Alberta independence movement takes hit in Olds byelection
OTTAWA — David Parker, the founder of conservative activist group Take Back Alberta, said on Monday morning that, by the end of the day, Albertans would know the strength of the province's budding independence movement. Article content 'It's not great,' he tweeted shortly before midnight, as the last of the results trickled in from Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills. Article content Article content The rural Alberta riding, one of three up for grabs in Monday's provincial byelection, was closely watched for a potential separatist breakthrough. Article content Article content In the end, the two pro-independence candidates on the ballot took home a respectable 19 per cent of the vote, but fell short of both major parties. Article content Article content 'I see a lot of talking heads and pundits and pollsters that are all quite vigorously calling for us to pack it in. And I hate to be the bearer of bad news for them, but we're just getting started,' said Davies. Article content He said going into the byelection that he was aiming for about 20 per cent of the vote. Article content Article content Davies, who favours Alberta becoming an independent constitutional republic, concedes that the Alberta Republicans' name and red colours may have tethered it too closely to U.S. President Donald Trump. Article content Article content '(The branding) certainly did cause questions about what we were,' said Davies. Article content 'Did it leave an opening for others to spread misinformation? Absolutely it did.' Article content Davies pushed back against assertions throughout the campaign that he wants Alberta to enter the U.S. as the 51st state, a claim he flatly denies. Article content Davies, who lives in south Red Deer, said he'll be running in the next provincial election but hasn't decided which riding he'll contest.
National Post
24-06-2025
- Politics
- National Post
'It's not great': Alberta independence movement takes hit in Olds byelection
OTTAWA — David Parker, the founder of conservative activist group Take Back Alberta, said on Monday morning that, by the end of the day, Albertans would know the strength of the province's budding independence movement. Article content 'It's not great,' he tweeted shortly before midnight, as the the last of the results trickled in from Olds-Didsbury-Three Hills. Article content Article content The rural Alberta riding, one of three up for grabs in Monday's provincial byelection, was closely watched for a potential separatist breakthrough. Article content Article content In the end, the two pro-independence candidates on the ballot took home a respectable 19 per cent of the vote, but fell short of both major parties. Article content According to preliminary results, the UCP's Tara Sawyer won easily with 61 per cent of the vote with NDP candidate Bev Toews taking home 20 per cent, edging out Republican Party of Alberta leader Cam Davies by 365 votes. Davies told the National Post that the third-place finish won't break his spirits. Article content 'I see a lot of talking heads and pundits and pollsters that are all quite vigorously calling for us to pack it in. And I hate to be the bearer of bad news for them, but we're just getting started,' said Davies. Article content Davies, who favours Alberta becoming an independent constitutional republic, concedes that the Alberta Republicans' name and red colours may have tethered it too closely to U.S. President Donald Trump. Article content '(The branding) certainly did cause questions about what we were,' said Davies Article content 'Did it leave an opening for others to spread misinformation? Absolutely it did.' Article content Davies pushed back against assertions throughout the campaign that he wants Alberta to enter the U.S. as the 51st state, a claim he flatly denies. Article content Davies, who lives in south Red Deer, said he'll be running in the next provincial election but hasn't decided which riding he'll run in. Article content Wildrose Loyalty Coalition candidate Bill Tufts finished well behind the top three with just over one per cent of the vote. Article content Most of the riding overlaps with Olds-Didsbury, where pro-independence candidate Gordon Kesler won a surprise byelection victory in 1982, becoming the only separatist to ever sit in Alberta's legislature. Article content Jeff Rath, a lawyer with the pro-independence Alberta Prosperity Project, said that the easy UCP win was a testament to party leader and Premier Danielle Smith's continued popularity with the party's grassroots.
Calgary Herald
16-06-2025
- Politics
- Calgary Herald
Take Back Alberta facing collection notice as it appeals $112K in Elections Alberta fines
Article content Court scheduling is underway to hear an appeal from activist group Take Back Alberta (TBA) as it seeks to overturn $112,500 in fines for election advertising violations that have since been referred to Crown debt collection. Article content The fines were imposed last February on TBA and its founder David Parker by Elections Alberta for what it describes as 'numerous substantive breaches' of the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act, including TBA's absence of financial reporting, circumventing advertising spending limits, and accepting money from outside the province. Article content Article content Article content Those violations were linked to TBA's online and in-person events ahead of the May 2023 provincial election. Article content Article content On March 6, TBA filed documents in Court of King's Bench in Calgary seeking to appeal the fines, arguing that its events did not constitute political advertising — contrary to the findings of election commissioner Paula Hale — and that its Charter right to political expression had been infringed. Article content According to the appeal notice, TBA's lawyers are seeking 'a declaration that the decision, or part thereof, was incorrect, unreasonable, a palpable and overriding error, and/or constitutionally invalid,' as well as a declaration that the fines were 'excessively punitive, disproportionate, incorrect, (and) unreasonable.' Article content Article content In a statement, Elections Alberta noted legislation prevents it from commenting on specific investigations, but confirmed both the fines and its direction to TBA to refile certain financial reports remain in force. Article content It added those unpaid fines have been referred to Crown debt collection, and the group's failure to refile the reports has been referred to the Crown Prosecution Service. Article content Parker formed TBA in 2022 and later claimed credit for helping oust former premier Jason Kenney as United Conservative Party (UCP) leader in May of that year. He and the group have had varying degrees of influence on the party's policies in the years since.
