OLD AGE

Growing old 

A little poem, so true that it hurts.

Another year passed, we’re all a year older.

Last summer felt much hotter,

And now winter seems much colder.

There was a time not long ago,

When life was quite a blast.

And now I understand,

About living in the past.

We used to go to weddings,

Football games and lunches.

Now we go to funeral homes,

And after-funeral brunches.

We used to have hangovers,

From parties that were crazy.

Now we suffer body aches,

We’re sleepy and we’re lazy.

We used to go out dining,

And couldn’t get our fill.

Now we ask for a doggie bag,

And go home and take a pill.

We used to often travel,

To places near and far.

Now we get sore asses,

Just riding in the car.

We used to go to nightclubs,

And drink a lot of booze.

Now we stay home at night,

And watch the evening news.

That, my friends, is how life is,

And now my tale is told.

So enjoy every day, and live it up,

Before you turn to mold.

by Anonymous

 Here's a little something to keep you laughing . . .

Available as an e-book from: Smashwords.com

Happy reading

MR PUBLISHING DIES

New Zealand’s Mr Publishing – Ray Richards – farewelled

Eulogy delivered by Geoff Walker, former publishing director at Penguin New Zealand

I’m Geoff Walker and I’m a long-time friend, colleague and former employee of Ray Richards. I want first to extend my deepest condolences to Barbara, Nicki, Bron and their families.

Ray was my first publishing mentor. He gave me my first job in publishing 38 years ago and it’s been one of my life’s great pleasures and privileges to work with him as colleague and friend during all that time.

 

Ray Richards

I’m here to tell you about Ray’s extraordinary professional achievements, in a career in book publishing that lasted an almost unbelievable 77 years. It just has to be a record. Perhaps others overseas have continued working this late in their publishing lives – but surely nobody began at the age of 15. Publishing was in Ray’s blood and he found it impossible to relinquish.

That’s how young Ray was when he began working as an office boy at Reeds in Wellington before the war. After the war he returned to Reed as an editor.

And then began a remarkable publishing career which is unparalleled in the NZ book world. Someone recently described him as ‘the grand old man of New Zealand publishing’. I don’t think he would have minded that. This courteous, gentle man had a sharp analytical mind and, at a crucial moment in this country’s history, an ability to read the cultural winds and produce some great books.

It’s not stretching things too far to claim that Ray essentially created New Zealand publishing as we now know it. It’s a big claim, but I think it’s true. From the mid-1960s Reeds under Ray created a new kind of New Zealand book and set up New Zealand’s first commercial publishing culture.

We don’t see much of these books these days, but there are some of them over there. The novels of Barry Crump, the first big tourist color books, a big Maori publishing programme, the books by Peter McIntyre the painter, the T P McLean rugby tour books, natural history books, lots of New Zealand history, and so on.

This was all new. These were New Zealand books, by our writers, for us. It was the flowering of a specifically Kiwi publishing culture, which continues to this day, and it was led by Ray Richards. Ray has described this period as being ‘like a runaway train – unstoppable’. It’s easy to forget just how successful Reeds’ publishing was. They never printed less than 5000 copies – that’s double what a publisher would print today.

I was a long-haired leftie young editor, an enthusiastic new member of the team. And I was in awe of the man guiding this revolution – he was charming, canny, passionate about New Zealand culture, and possessing a very sharp commercial eye for what would work in the marketplace. He was a hands-on publisher, building strong personal relationships with many of his authors. And he was a brilliant editor himself.

But any life this long is also a rich tapestry in which there are ups and there are downs. Reeds ran into financial trouble in the 1970s. Ray ended up in bitter conflict with the owners. There were staff redundancies. As Ray himself has described it: ‘The team fell apart.’ Ray and Barbara’s beloved daughter Meredith died while overseas. Like the other Reed editors at the time I remember this vividly. It was the lowest of lows. And it was Barbara who said one night to Ray: ‘I don’t know about you, but I’m moving to Auckland. Do you want to come?’ It was time to leave and start a new life.

And so in 1976 they did. In Auckland they set up on their own as a book publisher and Ray became the first executive director of the Book Publishers Association, making a major contribution to New Zealand book publishing in a different way. In the same year he established in partnership with Barbara the Richards Literary Agency, which then became the second part of his publishing career. Barbara was an integral part of it and so were Nicki and Bron at various times.

For decades Richards Literary Agency was New Zealand’s biggest and strongest. Ray specialised in children’s books and he had a huge stable of children’s writers. He achieved considerable success in selling foreign rights, particularly to the United States, and he earned the gratitude and loyalty of many of our leading authors. To the end Ray was still working personally with fine writers such as Joy Cowley, Witi Ihimaera and Tessa Duder. He still represented Maurice Gee.

It isn’t possible to talk about Ray’s life and his achievements without mentioning Barbara. I want to pay special tribute to the remarkable woman who is Barbara Richards. Ray and Barbara were married for 64 years, and all through Ray’s life Barbara has been his partner in every respect. When he was a publisher she was his confidante and supporter – and yes, also cooking hundreds of dinners for authors and having the occasional penniless one sleep in the spare room. When Ray was a literary agent Barbara was literally his partner, his colleague in the business. She is also charming, loving and considerate – and a fine artist. That’s her portrait of Ray over there. So let’s be clear: Ray could not have achieved what he did without her presence beside him.

Ray Richards, we salute you, for a life that made a huge difference, not just to your family, friends and colleagues – but also to New Zealand’s culture.

E te rangatira – haere, haere, haere. From all your friends and colleagues in the book publishing world, farewell Ray. . . .

More on Beatties Book Blog

Peter’s Piece

I met Ray Richards several times about five or six years ago after someone suggested that I should engage him as my literary agent.

Ray was in his mid eighties and trying to reduce his workload. He wasn’t keen on taking on a new author and so we talked about flying instead. His flying was in the 1940s, mine started in the 1950s. As I left his house he asked to see my manuscripts, and I left the complete Asker Trilogy with him.

A couple of weeks later we had another long chat and he gave me lots of sound advice on changes to the manuscripts and how to get them published. He must have put in many hours on my behalf for no return other than the pleasure of helping a fellow flyer and lover of books.

His help is acknowledged in the front matter of Book One of The Asker Trilogy, a small appreciation for a great book man.

TAXES & BENEFITS

New Zealanders, Australia's 'Underclass'

By Robert Burton-Bradley  -  NewMatilda.com

The flag of Australia

Documents released under Freedom of Information reveal the Federal Government has been concerned since 2008 about New Zealanders isolated from support, education and pathways to citizenship, reports Robert Burton-Bradley

The flag of New Zealand

Documents released (pdf) under Freedom of Information reveal the Federal Government is worried about a growing "underclass" of New Zealanders living and working in Australia with limited rights and without access to basic government services.

The FOI release from the Departments of Community Services, Immigration and Foreign Affairs show that as far back as 2008 there was increasing concern for the estimated 566,000 New Zealand citizens now living in Australia, drawn here by a "40 per cent wage gap". At least 240,000 fall into the post 2001 non-protected visa category.

New Zealanders can live and work in Australia indefinitely as Special Category Visa holders, but following changes to the migration program those who arrived after 2001 fall into the "non-protected category" with no access to basic social services such as unemployment benefits, parenting payments, sickness allowance or HECS-funded study. They will not be covered by the National Disability Insurance Scheme when it begins.

In early 2009, with the GFC beginning to hurt, the situation was making itself clear to staff at the Department of Community Services. In March of that year a section manager working for the department's international policy section wrote: "We have recently seen an increase in correspondence around non protected SCV holders and their inability to access working age payments. I suspect this issue will only intensify with the downturn in the economy . . . . 

See the full story at:  newmatilda.com

Peter’s Piece

If Australians want the production and taxes of New Zealanders then they should be prepared to give them the protection that they have been taxed for. In this case the taxation really is nothing less than theft and extortion.

I have always found most Australians very reasonable people, but I would say to those who object to sharing their country with other taxpayers, they should exercise their own option and go somewhere else to live.

For more than 200 years Australia and New Zealand

have been like one nation. Has the time come to

make it one nation?

Read about the first years of Australia

in this hard-to-put-down book

Download a free sample of Nathaniel's Bloodline now from:

Smashwords.com

BRITAIN FIRST

Britain First fanatics distort
the truth to win support

From the Britain First website:
Man who put up sign banning non-Asians
from his property let off by judge

A man who put up a sign outside of his home threatening any non-Asians who called there, or who talked to the residents, with violence has been let off by a judge.

Jim Dowson, left, and three of his Britain First henchmen

Vaseem Gova, of Parkhurst Road, Sutton, was handed an absolute discharge after appearing at Croydon Magistrates charged with a public order offence – because of “exceptional circumstances” namely that he faced losing his tenancy if convicted.

According to the Sutton Guardian, the sign read: “An Asian family occupy this property. If you are not Asian or a member of my family you MUST seek permission from the estate management before attempting to talk to anyone from this household.

“Failure to adhere to this heartfelt advice will render your life a misery and threats of serious assault and carjacking will reign upon you so fast that you will wonder why this street is not called Parkhurst Prison.”

Wonder if a sympathetic judge would have let off someone who put up a “no Asians allowed or you’ll be seriously assaulted” sign outside of their home.

You know the answer, their feet wouldn’t touch the ground and not one judge would give a damn about their tenancy.

Funny how it seems that the law is more lenient and sympathetic towards certain groups of people than others.

Peter’s Piece

Before readers get their blood pressure up over this article they should consider what really happened in that court, and what Britain First is really about.

It is true that a person was charged in the Croydon Magistrates Court with a racist offence and he was found guilty and ordered to pay £325 costs. This outcome was not the same as that claimed by Britain First. However, the defendant was discharged without conviction so that his tenancy would not be lost. That’s not an unusual outcome and it is to be hoped that he, and others like him, will think twice before repeating the offence.

Now let’s look at Britain First.

Britain First was registered as a political pressure group in 2011 after its leader Jim Dowson split acrimoniously from the racist British National Party where he was the chief fund-raiser.
Dowson is a clever fanatic who makes money, and political capital, from the prejudices of people who are easily influenced. His hobby horses are racism, immigration, abortion and Christian morality. The ‘Hope Not Hate’ organization has described Dowson, 48, as ‘the cash cow of the far right.’

However, while Dowson is skilled at producing inflaming reports of the court appearances of others, he has also made his own appearances. Last month he appeared in court, with the leaders of several other extremist groups, wearing a boiler-suit with ‘Political Prisoner’ on the back.

He is in cahoots with such trouble-makers as the Progressive Unionist Party, the Ulster Volunteer Force, and the Ulster Defence Association.

His stated objective is ‘to save this country and our people from the EU, politically correct, multicultural insanity that is now engulfing us.’

Rape is another issue that Dowson and Britain First like to sound off about with one claim that of 130 rape charges in a particular part of Britain, 116 were British and 14 were foreign nationals. Surely a figure like that must confirm that foreign nationals are under-represented in the crime statistics.

But a complaint from a British National candidate, Shelley Rose, in 2010 that she was groped by Dowson, coincided with his departure from the party.

Dowson and Britain First are skilled at whipping up bandwagon hysteria, but more cautious minds will see the likenesses with the early days of Hitler’s Nazi Party.

NEW ZEALAND REPUBLIC

The case for a
New Zealand republic

The case for a New Zealand republic sets out the main arguments for why New Zealand should become a republic. They fall into three categories:

Parliament Buildings, Wellington

Independence — New Zealand should have a New Zealander as the head of state;

Nationhood — the constitution and head of state of New Zealand should reflect New Zealand's national identity, culture and heritage;

Democracy — New Zealand should have a democratic and accountable head of state.

Independence

New Zealand will not be fully independent until we have a New Zealander as head of state. New Zealand likes to think of itself as an independent country. However, it cannot objectively be argued New Zealand's current head of state represents this.

A republic means a New Zealander as head of state

"Is New Zealand to continue to have an appointed Governor-General... or should we move to an elected president? This will not happen because of any lack of affection or love for our Queen in London, but because the tide of history is moving in one direction." - former Prime Minster Jim Bolger.

Our current head of state is not a New Zealander and does not represent New Zealand. When the Queen travels overseas, she does so in order to represent Great Britain.

The Queen works to strengthen British economic and political ties, and does whatever the British Government asks of her. In fact, whenever "our" head of state visits New Zealand, the Queen has to ask for permission from the British Government to leave Britain.

If the Queen wanted to be a citizen of New Zealand, she would not meet the legal requirements to become a citizen. The Citizenship Act 1977 requires an applicant for New Zealand citizenship to have been resident in New Zealand for five years before citizenship is granted. The Queen has spent a total of no more than six months in New Zealand.

The Governor-General is not a proper head of state. While the Governor-General may increasingly act in ways that befit a head of state, the reality is that New Zealand is still not regarded as being fully independent of Great Britain. Appointing the Queen's representative in New Zealand is inadequate. A New Zealand head of state will make it clear that New Zealand is an independent country. It will signal New Zealand's independence and maturity to the world.

Deciding the rules for ourselves

In recent years, the British Parliament has attempted to amend the succession law. The problem is the Statute of Westminster 1931, the law which granted legislative independence to Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

The Statute requires "consultation" on changes to the succession before any changes to the succession law. While this provision is not binding, it is still an important constitutional convention. The most recent attempt in 2008 failed for this reason: the British Government did not want to have to consult with all the parliaments of the Commonwealth realms. New Zealand's Parliament could change the law of succession unilaterally, but that would go against the convention established by the Statute of Westminster. Change can only be enacted if the governments of all the 15 Commonwealth realms are consulted, probably by Britain. In a republic, the rules governing New Zealand's head of state will be made solely by the New Zealand Parliament. They will change as New Zealanders decide they need to, not because of events in Great Britain.

Nationhood

"The case for an independent republic of New Zealand is summed up in one word — nationhood. It is a statement to the world and ourselves that New Zealand is a mature nation, that we possess a constitutional framework that best suits New Zealanders." — Michael Laws, Mayor of Wanganui.

New Zealand is a unique, dynamic and diverse country. New Zealand's constitutional arrangements, national symbols and head of state should reflect this.

A republic affirms New Zealand's sense of nationhood

"We exhibit symptoms of retarded nationhood: a widespread insecurity about what others think, a search for applause and endorsement by visitors; and, conversely, a begrudging willingness to extend applause here at home." — Simon Upton former minister and National MP.

Becoming a republic and electing New Zealand's head of state will foster a deeper and more sophisticated sense of nationhood. It will clarify to New Zealanders, and to the world, what New Zealand stands for.

How New Zealanders understand their place in the world is crucial to New Zealand's success in an increasingly globalized world. New Zealand excels in sport, in its human rights record, in business and in the arts. New Zealand's constitution lags behind these achievements. Our current constitutional arrangement causes confusion overseas as to whether New Zealand is linked to Britain, or whether it is part of Australia. We send conflicting messages about who we are and what we stand for.

The debate and discussion around becoming a republic affirms the values that are important to New Zealanders. It will promote discussion about New Zealand's history and future. It will clarify the values we all see as important. Becoming a republic will be a celebration of New Zealand's unique culture and heritage. It will demonstrate New Zealand's confidence and independence and it will symbolize a shared sense of nationhood.

Democracy

A republic will make New Zealand more democratic.

A republic will ensure we have a head of state that is democratically elected and accountable to voters. As a result the head of state will be a more effective constitutional safeguard. This will decrease the risk of political instability.

Electing the head of state is a basic democratic right. Republicanism is based on the principle that government authority is reliant on the consent of citizens. The Monarchy is based on the principle that hereditary privilege alone should decide the head of state. It represents a belief that government authority is embodied in a single individual (the Monarch). In a republic the head of state would be elected — either directly by voters, or indirectly by parliament.

Replacing the Governor-General

At present, the Prime Minister chooses the Governor-General and advises the Monarch of their choice. They usually choose someone who will not challenge them, and someone who has something to do with their own party.

In the past, this has meant a number of openly political appointments. National Prime Minister Jack Marshall gave his friend Sir Denis Blundell the job in 1972.

In 1977, Robert Muldoon appointed former Prime Minister Sir Keith Holyoake to the job. This was primarily because the next best candidate, Sir Edmund Hillary, had signed a petition in 1975 supporting Labour Prime Minister Bill Rowling. Sir Michael Hardie Boys was a known constitutional conservative with National Party leanings.

In 1985, Labour Prime Minister David Lange appointed the Reverend Sir Paul Reeves. Sir Paul was known for his activism for the anti-apartheid and anti-nuclear movements. Dame Catherine Tizard was appointed to the office in 1990 by the outgoing Labour Government. She was the former wife of Labour Deputy Prime Minister Bob Tizard.

While individually there have been good appointments made, there have also been a number of openly political appointments. Many of those, particularly the appointment of Sir Keith Holyoake, were very controversial. Creating a transparent democratic process will ensure that the replacement of the Governor-General will not be as controversial.

A republic means an effective constitutional safeguard

A republic will create a head of state in New Zealand that could act in times of constitutional crises. The Monarch and the Governor-General do not have the political power to do this. The Governor-General is unable to resolve constitutional crises because the Prime Minister holds the power to dismiss and replace the Governor-General at any time. The Monarch will never get involved in New Zealand politics, because they are "non-political". Having a head of state able to act effectively in times of crises will be a better restraint on the power of the executive — the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

The Monarch is an absentee and ineffectual head of state. The position is unaccountable to New Zealanders. In a republic, the head of state will be chosen by New Zealanders. They will work on behalf of all New Zealanders regardless of their political beliefs.

More from the website: http://www.republic.org.nz/case

Peter’s Piece

The New Zealand Republic debate does not need to be centered on whether or not New Zealanders should support the Queen and her successors.

As a republic the country could still support the monarchy as head of the Commonwealth and there can be no disputing that the Queen has been an exceptionally good leader of the Commonwealth. But it is no longer appropriate for her, or her successors, to be the New Zealand Head of State also.

Some New Zealanders fail to appreciate that most members of the Commonwealth are republics, and several are even kingdoms, and that does not affect their Commonwealth membership. A suggestion that becoming a republic would oblige New Zealand to leave the Commonwealth is pure scaremongering.

The debate should be about full independence, democracy and effective government with a New Zealand based democratically elected, executive head of state.

I believe New Zealand’s time has come.

OSHKOSH AIR TRAFFIC

Handling the air traffic at Oshkosh

Have you ever wondered how AirVenture Oshkosh can handle up to 10,000 visiting aircraft arriving and departing?

Oshkosh has got it down to a fine art. The arrivals and departures are a mix of VFR (visual), IFR (instrument) and NORDO (no radio) aircraft funneling into Whitman Regional Airport and several smaller fields for the seven day event.

In addition, Whitman also handles scheduled air services too.

To see how it works click this link: Download the AirVenture NOTAM.

I’ll be there to see it all on August 1 and 2. Can’t wait. Sixty-three more sleeps.

TRUCK SAFETY

Trucking industry safety needs improvement

By Andrew Koubaridis @A_Koubaridis , Kieran Campbell @KieranCampbell , Gisborne Herald

8:08 AM Thursday May 30, 2013

Trucking industry groups accept more needs to be done to improve safety, after two fatal crashes in the eight days since a campaign was launched to reduce the number of people killed in truck accidents.

The two men killed in the accidents, at Kerikeri on Tuesday and on the East Coast last week, are the latest victims in an industry desperate to improve its safety record.

Both crashes were between two trucks.

First Union transport and logistics secretary Karl Andersen has called for an investigation into the cause of heavy vehicle accidents, saying many drivers are being put under pressure to drive for longer shifts.

Road Transport Forum chief executive Ken Shirley said the safety of the industry had drastically improved in the last 15 years but he admitted more needed to be done to crack down on the "three big causes" of crashes: speed, inattention and fatigue . . . .

Full story: NZHerald

Peter’s Piece

Mr Shirley’s statement appears calculated to pass the buck down the line to the people at the coal-face; the drivers on the road who dare not speak out in case they get their marching orders.

Driving a truck for many companies can be a case of my way, or the highway.

Mr Shirley’s statement should be compared with the interim results of Operation Austrans:

Since its launch on May 20:

• 1079 heavy vehicles stopped: 13 coaches and buses, 406 truck and trailer units, 47 articulated trucks, 234 B-Trains and 379 rigid trucks

• 866 roadside drug and alcohol tests, no offenders.

• 93 warnings to heavy vehicle operators

• 363 infringements, including speed (53), seat belts (11), maintenance/vehicle faults (90), dangerous goods offences (10), excess weight/loading issues (42).

These results show that maintenance and vehicle faults (90) was the most common infringement. That is the responsibility of the operator, but a common response from operators to drivers when asked to drive a vehicle that is sub-standard is, “If you’re a professional, you’ll be able to handle it.”

But a statement like that surely makes the operator very un-professional.

We hear a lot of rumor about drivers on drugs, but out of 866 roadside tests they found no offenders. That’s right. Not one in 866.

Dangerous goods and overloading offences are the responsibility of the operator. A driver with many companies will be told to carry the load he is given, or take a hike.

Operation Austrans also deserves some criticism. They have issued 363 infringement notices to drivers, but only 93 warnings to operators. Is that fair?