PRESS RELEASE: Penny Bright NZ ‘Whistleblower/ Anti-Corruption Campaigner’: “Are NZ Judges effectively ‘out of control?'”
19 July 2011
PRESS RELEASE: Penny Bright NZ ‘Whistleblower/ Anti-Corruption Campaigner’:
“Are NZ Judges effectively ‘out of control?'”
New Zealand is ‘perceived’ to be the ‘least corrupt country in the world’ (along with Denmark and Singapore), according to Transparency International’s 2010 ‘Corruption Perception Index’.
http://www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2010
Therefore – shouldn’t New Zealand arguably be the most ‘transparent’ country in the world?
So – how come in New Zealand, our Judges don’t have:
An enforceable ‘Code of Conduct’?
A ‘Register of Pecuniary Interests’?
A mandatory requirement to record all court proceedings?
(How can ‘justice be done or be seen to be done’ – if there is no court record of what was done? How can a ‘court of record – not keep a record? )
On top of this – some New Zealand Judges – at the highest levels – apparently don’t think that the ‘Rule of Law’ applies to them.
How can it be lawful, for some New Zealand Judges to make ‘court orders’ based on ‘judicial discretion’ – not the ‘Rule of Law’?
How can it be lawful, for some New Zealand Judges to just ‘make it up’?
I, Penny Bright, publicly-acknowledged ‘anti-corruption campaigner’, have been trying for days to file in the Auckland High Court, an ‘Application for Order’ to get a Judge’s ‘suppression order’ lifted.
This was a ‘suppression order’ – which suppressed the JUDGMENT itself and the REASONS for that judgement.
Under New Zealand law – s 138 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985 – there is no lawful right for a New Zealand Judge to do this.
s 138 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985 states:
138 Power to clear court and forbid report of proceedings
…….
(5) The powers conferred by this section to make orders of any kind described in subsection (2) are in substitution for any such powers that a court may have had under any inherent jurisdiction or any rule of law; and no court shall have power to make any order of any such kind except in accordance with this section or any other enactment.
[Bold and emphasis added]
The ‘suppression order ‘ to which I am referring, is that of Judge Winkelmann, New Zealand’s Chief High Court Judge, made in December 2010, where she not only denied the 18 defendants in the ‘Operation 8’ (NZ’s first so-called ‘terrorist’ case) – their statutory right to trial by jury, but then ordered the Court staff to suppress the judgment.
After all the ‘MAN ON THE MOON’ headlines from 15 October 2001 which burst across world headlines – the continued proceedings have now become ‘top secret’? Not only were the public not allowed to know that the ‘Operation 8 ‘ defendants had been denied their right to trial by jury – but the public were not allowed to know that they had been denied their right to trial by jury?
How can this be right?
Vince Siemer,(in my considered opinion New Zealand’s leading ‘whistleblower’ exposing the lack of judicial transparency, accountability and judicial ‘conflicts of interest’), didn’t think this was right, and did something about it.
Vince Siemer defended the public’s right to know Judge Winkelmann’s decision and her reasons for it – by publishing her judgment on his website, along with his story ‘Judge or be Judged’ 10 December 2010 http://www.kiwisfirst.co.nz/index.asp?PageID=2145845331
(For a more detailed story by Vince Siemer about the ‘Operation 8’ case – “A Public protest away from tyranny”
A PUBLIC PROTEST AWAY FROM TYRANNY
THE OPERATION 8 SAGA
______________________________
(A documentary has been made, called ‘Operation 8’, now playing in NZ cinemas, which examines the ‘anti-terror’ raids of October 2007.
http://www.flicks.co.nz/movie/operation-8/ )
______________________________________________________________
Contempt proceeding against Vince Siemer were then initiated by the ‘second highest lawyer in the land’ – the Solicitor-General of New Zealand David Collins QC, who has effectively ‘backed up’ the arguably unlawful decision of Judge Winkelmann to suppress her judgement and the reasons for it.
Vince Siemer has been found guilty of ‘contempt of court’ and now faces imprisonment for so doing, as ruled in the following decision of the High Court, Solicitor-General of New Zealand v Vincent Ross Siemer CIV-2010-404-8559 MacKenzie and Simon JJ 4 July 2011.
Interestingly, THIS judgment has not been suppressed, yet it makes reference to Judge Winkelmann’s Judgment – which was.
Which arguably helps to show how patently ridiculous it was to suppress this original judgement in the first place?
I have not just published press releases about this matter on my blog (https://waterpressure.wordpress.com) , I have actively and vigorously disseminated this information to all New Zealand MPs; NZ media, all NZ Councils, all NZ Unions, a wide range of social justice and human rights activists.
Surely, if we are ‘all equal before the law’ – I too, should be facing contempt proceedings?
Or has New Zealand’s second highest lawyer in the land – the Solicitor-General David Collins QC – arguably maliciously and vindictively abused his power and authority, in order to continue his on-going persecution of Vince Siemer?
If I too, am not going to equally face ‘contempt of court’ proceedings for arguably doing worse than Vince Siemer – then it must be obvious that Vince Siemer is being ‘picked on’ and unjustifiably victimised.
In my considered opinion, Judge Winkelman’s arguably unlawful suppression order must be lifted forthwith.
Once Judge Winkelman’s arguably unlawful suppression order is lifted, then, in my considered opinion, all proceedings against Vince Siemer in this matter, must be dropped, including his upcoming sentencing for ‘contempt of court’.
In my considered opinion, what then needs to happen is an inquiry into the actions of the Solicitor-General against Vince Siemer; whether he has abused his power and authority; including possible ‘Contempt of the House’, through his involvement in the decision of the former Justice and Electoral Select Committee in arriving at a decision not to ‘conduct an inquiry into the committal for imprisonment of Mr Vincent Siemer for contempt of court’ on the basis that the matter was ‘subjudice’ – at a time it was not.
I take full personal responsibility for my actions, as a ‘whistleblower’ in this matter, and am prepared to face whatever consequences may be forthcoming.
However – I equally expect the Solicitor-General to do the same.
The first step in this process is to get the (unlawful) ‘suppression order’ of Judge Winkelmann removed.
The path for so doing was outlined in the above-mentioned decision of Judges MacKenzie and France, where they stated:
“[41] … It is open to persons including Mr Siemer to apply to the Court for a variation of the order, or for its removal, but until that is successfully done the order is binding.”
However – this ‘path’ has not been a clear one to follow, given that this is effectively trying to ‘undo’ a ‘court order’ which has not itself been based upon the clear, open, written, ‘Rule of Law’.
Arbitrary decisions by Judges, based upon ‘judicial discretion’ ie: ‘rules’ which only exist inside their heads, are arguably neither open, transparent nor accountable.
Isn’t that why we have the ‘Rule of Law’?
Wouldn’t you think that if there was anyone who should be expected to follow the ‘Rule of Law’ – it would be the Chief High Court Judge – not to mention the second- highest lawyer in the land – the Solicitor-General of New Zealand?
Today, Tuesday 19 July 2011, I will again attempt to file in the Auckland High Court, an ‘Application for Order’ to get Judge Winkelmann’s suppression order ‘removed’.
May ‘justice be done and be seen to be done’ and the ‘Rule of Law’ upheld.
Penny Bright
Media Spokesperson
Water Pressure Group
Judicially recognised ‘Public Watchdog’ on Metrowater, water and Auckland regional governance matters.
Anti-corruption campaigner’
Attendee: Australian Public Sector Anti-Corruption Conference (APSACC) 2009 (Brisbane, Australia)
Attendee: Transparency International 14th Anti-Corruption Conference 2010 (Bangkok, Thailand)
Auckland Mayoral candidate 2010
Botany by-election candidate 2011
Howick Ward (Auckland Council) by-election candidate 2011
Ph 00 64 09 846 9825
_______________________________________________________________
WHAT I WILL BE ATTEMPTING TO FILE TODAY IN THE AUCKLAND HIGH COURT:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV 2011-404-
BETWEEN PENELOPE MARY BRIGHT
Applicant
AND THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL
Respondent
ORIGINATING APPLICATION FOR ORDER
Filed by Penelope M. Bright
86 A School Road
Kingsland, Auckland
Phone/Facsimile:(09) 846 9825
To The Registrar of the High Court at Auckland, and
To Crown Law on behalf of the respondent.
This document notifies you that –
Under The Judicature Act 1908 Schedule 2 High Court Rule
19.5Court may permit proceeding to be commenced by originating application
(1) The court may, in the interests of justice, permit any proceeding not mentioned in rules 19.2 to 19.4 to be commenced by originating application.
(2) The court’s permission may be sought without notice.
(3) The proposed originating application must be filed with an application for permission under this rule.
1. The applicant, Penelope Mary Bright, will on __________________ 2011 apply to the court for orders:
1.1 Revoking, lifting, or ruling as legally invalid, the alleged suppression order of Winkelmann J, which purports to prevent the New Zealand public, and the world
at large, from knowing about Her Honour’s Judgment granted that same day in
18 criminal prosecutions (CRI2007-085-7842, CRI2007-085-7843, CRI2007-085-7840, CRI2008-004-9108, CRI2008-004-20747, CRI2007-004-23065, CRI2008-004-20022, CRI2007-004-23068, CRI2007-004-23069, CRI2008-004-20748, CRI2007-004-23066, CRI2008-004-20045, CRI2007-063-4445, CRI2007-063-4441, CRI2007-054-4999, CRI2007-063-4472, CRI2008-070-1415, CRI2008-404-342), known collectively as “the Operation 8 prosecutions”.
1.2 Revoking, lifting, or ruling as legally invalid, the Minute of Winkelmann J dated 21 December 2010; to the extent that “Minute” intends to – or results in – the New Zealand public or word at large from knowing relevant facts in the prosecution or reasons for suppressing all of Her Honour’s 9 December 2010 Judgment in the Operation 8 prosecution, including such basic and important information as the fact of their indictment on charges.1
This application relies on the decision of the High Court in Solicitor-General of New Zealand v Vincent Ross Siemer CIV-2010-404-8559 MacKenzie and Simon France JJ, 4 July 2011:
“[41] … It is open to persons including Mr Siemer to apply to the Court for a variation of the order, or for its removal, but until that is successfully done the order is binding.”
1.
ON THE GROUNDS:
2. It has not been established in the body of the judgment that the Judge had, in fact, made such a suppression order. The suppression wording was apparently added later by a member of the court staff.
3. There is no basis in law to suppress a court judgment resulting from a criminal prosecution. Such judicial powers are limited to the evidence adduced, the submissions made, publication of the name of any witness or witnesses, or any name or particulars likely to lead to the identification of the witness or witnesses under s 138 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985.
_____________________________________________
1 Refer to paragraph [1] of the Judgment of Winkelmann J dated 9 December 2010, “Operation 8 prosecutions”
4. s 138 of the Criminal Justice Act 1985 states:
138 Power to clear court and forbid report of proceedings
…….
(5) The powers conferred by this section to make orders of any kind described in subsection (2) are in substitution for any such powers that a court may have had under any inherent jurisdiction or any rule of law; and no court shall have power to make any order of any such kind except in accordance with this section or any other enactment.
[Bold and emphasis added]
5. It is a violation of natural justice to attempt to enforce a suppression order, with criminal penalties, against the public at large (i.e. not parties to the proceeding) for commenting on, or disseminating, a judgment, without the right to be heard, in a free and democratic society.
6. Similarly, it is an unreasonable restriction on the statutory right of freedom of expression guaranteed under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 for New Zealand citizens to face prosecution and be threatened with loss of their liberty simply for disseminating or commenting on any court judgment – particularly cases pertaining to the ongoing “Operation 8 prosecutions”, which have already been the subject of significant public interest.
7. The order is in direct conflict with the principles of open and transparent justice which have been the hallmark of an honourable and just court system in every egalitarian society, because it effectively makes the judgment secret and unavailable to public scrutiny.
2.
8. The subject suppression order violates a broader interest – that of significant public interest – and the conflict of Justice Winkelmann’s alleged suppression order against this broader public interest has been confirmed in correspondence between the Crown Prosecutor, Mr Burns, in the Operation 8 prosecutions and the High Court in which the alleged suppression order originates.
9. It is relevant to the grounds of this application that Justice Winkelmann gave no reasons for the alleged suppression order, if indeed it was Her Honour’s order, for concealing the public court judgment from the New Zealand public and the world at large. Justice cannot ‘be done or be seen to be done’, if the judgment of ‘what was done’, and ‘why it was done’ is deliberately hidden from the public.
10. A court “Minute” is an administrative direction of the court which is not publicly reported and can only affect actual parties to the litigation. In law, it cannot be used to contravene the legal right of the public’s right to know, let alone be used to imprison NZ citizens. Such Minutes are not disseminated to the public at large. This underscores the patent injustice of such a judicial tool.If anyone should have been obliged to follow ‘lawful due process’, in order to prevent a real risk to the administration of justice, then it should have been the Judge herself. The Judge herself has a duty/ lawful obligation/ to follow ‘lawful due process’ in order to prevent a real risk to the administration of justice
11. The risk to personal liberty against citizens of New Zealand is unacceptable, if the alleged suppression order is allowed to stand. The threat to personal liberty is evident by the recent prosecution of the legal news website publisher Vince Siemer, who is currently facing imprisonment as a sole and direct result of publishing this public court judgment. 2
12. As the applicant has disseminated details regarding this 9 December 2010 judgment to the public, as well as engaged in commentary regarding it, she faces potential prosecution by the State unless the court suppression order – if it is determined by this Honourable Court to be an actual order – is allowed to stand.
13. If Justice Winkelmann’s court ‘order’ has not been based upon the ‘rule of law’, then the public cannot be expected to respect it. If Judges don’t themselves follow the ‘rule of law,’ by basing their decisions upon the ‘rule of law’ – then they are not ‘setting an example’ to citizens which either safeguards the administration of justice, or enhances public confidence in the New Zealand judiciary.
____________________________________________________________________
2 Solicitor-General v Vince Siemer CIV2010 404 8559
3.
14. The Applicant holds that the real risk to the administration of justice stems from this court ‘order’ which has not been based on the ‘rule of law’ – but has been ‘made up’ by Justice Winkelmann, then enforced by the Solicitor-General David Collins QC, in such an discriminatory and arbitrary way as to constitute an abuse of power which cannot be justified in a free and democratic society.
This application is made in reliance upon the Criminal Justice Act 1985, the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, fundamental principles of natural justice; Company v Attorney-General of Trinidad and Tobago, Hogan v Hinch [2011] HCA 4, Couch v Attorney-General (No 2), Transport Accident Investigation Commission v Wellington District Court [2008] NZAR 595, the Laws of New Zealand “Criminal Procedure” citation 103, Lewis v Wilson and Horton [2000] 3 NZLR 546(CA), Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions 163 JP 789 [1999], Crim LR 998, 7 BHRC 375 [2000] HRLR 249; the legally balancing exercise engaged in Duff v Communicado [1996] 2 NZLR 89, Shaylor [2002] UKHL 11, [2003] 1 AC 247, The Johannesburg Principles on National Security, Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, Nov 1996, Application 22954/93: Ahmed v United Kingdom (1998) 29 EHRR 1, ECtHR, at para 7, Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd [1993] AC 534, Lester and Pannick- Human Rights Law and Practice (3rd edition 2009) Para 4.10.30, R v Togia HC Wellington, Clifford J, CRI-2007-485-37, Brooks v DPP [1994] 1 AC 568, 528G, T v Regional Intellectual Care Agency [2007] NZAR 643, [1996] 3 S.C.R 480; equity and good conscience and the inherent jurisdiction of the Court to maintain the rule of law and protect its processes.
___________________________________
Penelope Mary Bright
(aka Penny Bright)
Cc: Rodney Harrison QC, on behalf of the Operation 8 defendants
Mr Ross Burns, Meredith Connell, prosecutor in the Operation 8 trial
________________________________________________________
IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND
AUCKLAND REGISTRY CIV 2011-404-
BETWEEN PENELOPE MARY BRIGHT
Applicant
AND THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL
Respondent
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO FILE AN
ORIGINATING APPLICATION FOR ORDER
Filed by Penelope M. Bright
86 A School Road
Kingsland, Auckland
Phone/Facsimile:(09) 846 9825
To The Registrar of the High Court at Auckland, and
To Crown Law on behalf of the respondent.
Under The Judicature Act 1908 Schedule 2 High Court Rule
19.5Court may permit proceeding to be commenced by originating application
(1) The court may, in the interests of justice, permit any proceeding not mentioned in rules 19.2 to 19.4 to be commenced by originating application.
(2) The court’s permission may be sought without notice.
(3) The proposed originating application must be filed with an application for permission under this rule.
May it Please the Court,
It is not clear, how exactly to commence an ‘Originating Application’ for an ‘Order’ of this type.
However, having been assisted by the Registrar’s direction to the above-mentioned High Court Rule 19.6 of The Judicature Act 1908 Schedule 2, I, The Applicant, Penelope Mary Bright, hereby seek permission, without notice, on ___________________________ 2011 to file the attached
‘Originating Application for Order’.
___________________________________
Penelope Mary Bright
(aka Penny Bright)
BREAKING NEWS! BBC ‘Greek government survives confidence vote’
21 June 2011 Last updated at 22:01 GMT
Greek government survives confidence vote
Outside parliament, thousands of protesters chanted slogans against austerity measuresThe Greek government has won a critical vote of confidence in parliament as it struggles to win support for extra austerity measures and avoid a default.
Prime Minister George Papandreou’s new cabinet was approved by 155 votes to 143, with two abstentions.
MPs will now be asked to approve 28bn euros (£25bn) of cuts, tax rises, fiscal reforms and privatisation plans.
Eurozone ministers say the legislation must be passed to receive a 12bn-euro loan Greece needs to pay its debts.
Earlier, thousands of people gathered outside the parliament building in Athens to protest against both the austerity measures and politicians in general.
Mr Papandreou reshuffled his cabinet and replaced his finance minister last week after weeks of demonstrations against his handling of the crisis.
‘Moment of truth’
Just before Tuesday’s confidence motion, the prime minister told MPs that the last thing their country wanted now was an election.
“We all have to agree that we will put an end to deficits,” he said.
Continue reading the main story
What went wrong in Greece?
- Greece’s economic reforms, which led to it abandoning the drachma as its currency in favour of the euro in 2002, made it easier for the country to borrow money.
“We want to make a leaner, healthier state, because otherwise our country cannot take the burden.”
Mr Papandreou’s government must now persuade parliament to approve a five-year package of 28bn euros of tax increases and spending cuts by 28 June.
It must then push through laws implementing the reforms in time for an extraordinary meeting of eurozone finance ministers on 3 July.
The eurozone ministers on Sunday announced that they would withhold the payment of the latest tranche of the European Union and International Monetary Fund’s 110-bn euro bail-out package until the laws were in place.
Greece needs the loan to be able to keep up with payments to the creditors of its 340bn euros of debts, which amounts to 30,000 euros per person.
European Commission President Manuel Barroso warned that Greece faced a “moment of truth” and needed to show it was genuinely committed to the reforms needed to avoid a sovereign default.
Acting IMF chief John Lipsky echoed the comments, saying Greece’s fiscal system was broken but could be fixed with the right political will.
The eurozone finance ministers also agreed on Sunday to put together a second bailout package worth 120bn euros. The new aid package, to be outlined by early July, will include loans from other eurozone countries.
It will also feature a voluntary contribution from private investors, who will be invited to buy up new Greek bonds as old ones mature.
JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT: ‘Protests continue as Greek parliament prepares to hold vote on Prime Minister and austerity legislation’
Protests continue as Greek parliament prepares to hold vote on Prime Minister and austerity legislationJane Burgermeister | June 21, 2011 at 1:53 pm | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/puNtl-1jm
|
JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT: ‘ACCOUNTS OF EUROPEAN MEDICINES AGENCY REJECTED BY EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AFTER DRUG SCANDALS’
ACCOUNTS OF EUROPEAN MEDICINES AGENCY REJECTED BY EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AFTER DRUG SCANDALSJane Burgermeister | June 21, 2011 at 1:37 pm | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/puNtl-1je
|
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT REFUSED TO APPROVE EMA’S ACCOUNTS
IN MAY 637 MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT VOTED AGAINST AN APPROVAL OF THE ACCOUNTS OF THE EUROPEAN MEDICINES AGENCY. ONLY FOUR MEMBERS WOULD APPROVE
By Kaysa Nynne Kledermann
An overwhelming majority of the European Parliament decided in May 2011 not to approve the accounts of the European Medicines Agency (EMA). This according to a report appearing in Danish media on June 10, 2011.
The Agency, that approves and monitors drugs at the European level, is mainly funded by the pharmaceutical industry.
The European Parliament asks for EMA’s financial structure to be analyzed in a report.
The accounts will be treated in the European Parliament for a second time in November.
There are several reasons for this parliamentarian landmark decision.
Among other things it happens in the wake of the withdrawal from the market of the slender means “Mediator”.
It took EMA no less than ten years, from the first reports of serious adverse events in the use of the slender means “Mediator” occurred, and until the pills were finally drawn from the market. Read more of this post
JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT: ‘Second Greek bail-out could push eurozone bill to €1,450 per household; European tax payers will have to foot bill for 250 billion euros by 2014’
Second Greek bail-out could push eurozone bill to €1,450 per household; European tax payers will have to foot bill for 250 billion euros by 2014Jane Burgermeister | June 21, 2011 at 1:32 pm | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/puNtl-1jc
|
Far from protecting Europe, a second bail-out of Greece is likely to cost eurozone taxpayers three times the amount of the original by 2014, according to a report by Open Europe, writes The Telegraph.
By 2014, 64% of all Greek debt or 250 billion euros could be held by European tax payers, the ECB and IMF, up from 85 billion euros at the start of 2011, Open Europe told Bloomberg.
JANE BURGERMEISTER: ‘UK Treasury plans for Greece to go bust’
UK Treasury plans for Greece to go bustJane Burgermeister | June 21, 2011 at 1:28 pm | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/puNtl-1ja
|
Treasury ministers have admitted that the Government is drawing up contingency plans for a Greek bankruptcy after being warned by a former foreign secretary that the euro “cannot last”, says The Telegraph
Read more at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8588047/Treasury-plans-for-Greece-to-go-bust.html
JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT: ‘JP Morgan and RBS face $800 million lawsuits over subprime fraud; regulators probe ratings agencies’
JP Morgan and RBS face $800 million lawsuits over subprime fraud; regulators probe ratings agenciesJane Burgermeister | June 21, 2011 at 1:26 pm | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/puNtl-1j7
|
*SEC investigates role of ratings agencies Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s ahead of the financial crisis
* US regulator sues JPMorgan, RBS in subprime probe
(AFP)
NEW YORK — A US regulator on Monday sued Wall Street bank JPMorgan Chase and Britain’s Royal Bank of Scotland, seeking to recover more than $800 million in losses incurred during the subprime mortgage crisis.
In its lawsuit, the NCUA charged the securities firms of the two banks had violated federal and state laws and made misrepresentations in the sale of hundreds of securities.
The regulator vowed to sue other banks that had sold credit unions mortgage-backed securities which plummeted in value during the financial crisis, without specifying which banks would be targeted.
“We expect to file additional actions and seek a total amount of damages in the billions of dollars,” Metz said.
Read more at: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jzR3WD-CroazkHBk3Y25JhD0PZ9A?docId=CNG.f6e4cf8f7bcbf9e0be98991770b9f79b.cb1
JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT: ‘Eurozone increases pressure on Greek parliament in make or break week for eurozone’
Eurozone increases pressure on Greek parliament in make or break week for eurozone
Ahead of a key confidence vote on Greek Prime Minister Giorgos Papandreou in the parliament on Tuesday, eurozone officials have increased the pressure on Greece to agree to sweeping privatisations and additional fiscal austerity measures, arguing there is no option for Greek lawmakers except to agree to the eurozone measures or face bankruptcy.
Of course, there is an option. It is called a managed insolvency and should have been implemented a year ago given the evidence that Greece is insolvent. The German government buried a recommendation for a managed insolvency mechanism by its experts in autumn 2010.
Also, a US senate investigation, in the meantime, has concluded that the financial crisis and Lehman debacle were avoidable. Equally avoidable are any bank crashes in Europe as a result of a Greek default, especially given the fact the tax payers and ECB are already by the far the biggest creditors of Greek, Irish and Portuguese government and bank debt.
Econmists say Greece should default, nationalise its banks and reintroduce the Drachma and reform their public sector at their own pace. A disorderly default now is far better than more fiscal austerity and hasty privatisations, which will only sink Greece deeper into ruinous debt.
More from the BBC on the make or break week for the euro with the eurozone officials openly pressuring Greece to continue down a path of economic ruin for the profit of American, German and French banks.
BBC, 20 June 2011
Eurozone finance ministers have postponed their decision on a 12bn euro ($17bn; £10bn) loan to Greece until it introduces further austerity measures.
The ministers said they expected to pay the latest tranche of a 110bn euro EU and IMF aid package by mid-July.
But its release depends on the Greek government surviving a vote of confidence on Tuesday.
Parliament then must also pass 28bn euros worth of new spending cuts and economic reforms.
Greeks have already seen wages and pensions cut and there have been regular, mass demonstrations – even riots – in protest.
The latest public opposition to the cutbacks involves Greek workers at the state-owned electricity company, who are on the first day of a 48-hour strike.
At a press conference on Monday, Jean-Claude Juncker, Luxembourg’s prime minister who chairs the meetings of the 17 eurozone finance ministers, said he felt for the Greeks: “This is something that affects me greatly. You look at the reaction of the people on the streets. You see they are rebelling. I understand that and I’m touched by that.”
Letting Greece default in a disorderly, uncontrolled way would probably be a good deal worse for the global economy than Lehman’s collapse.”
JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT: ‘Greece crisis: Revolution in the offing? asks BBC’
Greece crisis: Revolution in the offing? asks BBC
Gavin Hewitt, BBC
For more than three weeks protesters have occupied the square opposite the Greek parliament. They have pitched their blue and grey tents and hung their slogans from the orange trees.
“We got the solution. Revolution,” declares one poster. “Rise up people of the world,” urges another.
Read more at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13830466
Greece crisis: Revolution in the offing?
For more than three weeks protesters have occupied the square opposite the Greek parliament. They have pitched their blue and grey tents and hung their slogans from the orange trees.
“We got the solution. Revolution,” declares one poster. “Rise up people of the world,” urges another.
Inspired by the Arab uprisings, they have dug in to oppose further spending cuts in exchange for a second bail-out by the EU and IMF.
The encampment, however, hardly crackles with revolutionary fervour. It has the feel of an anti-globalisation village, nestled in amongst Africans selling handbag copies and bright-rimmed sunglasses.
The Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou is depicted as riding the CIA/IMF plane. He is portrayed as a capitalist stooge.
“Start Quote
The mood is tinder dry. A city at a tipping point”
The activists bicker amongst themselves about real democracy.
“We have no leaders here,” said one proudly. They go into contortions about interviews in case by speaking out it is judged as assuming a leadership role.
No zeal
There are references to the revolutions of 1789 and 1848 and La Commune. But amongst the hammocks and tables there is no agreed agenda. If there is a unifying theme, it is hatred of the bankers and international capitalism.
They are indignant but they lack the will, the determination, the message, the zeal to shake Athens.
“Start Quote
No-one knows what this generation will do with their anger”
What they do do is to serve as a rallying point. In the cool of the evenings families bring their children here. They are a magnet for those who feel bitter and let down.
The latest poll suggests that 47% of Greeks oppose the latest package cuts as demanded by European paymasters and the IMF.
But more dangerous than the activists is the mood of ordinary people. They are despondent. As academic Yannis Varoufakis told me “above all they resent the loss of dignity”.
They dislike the bail-outs. It eats away at their pride.
Papandreou may win his confidence vote, but has a divided country to runThey no longer know who to believe. They were told last year that short-term pain would deliver results. It hasn’t. The German Chancellor Angela Merkel says Greece has “cut new borrowing by 5%. Remarkable savings but not enough”.
All many Greeks see is rising national debt and unemployment.
The mood is tinder dry. A city at a tipping point. Power workers are about to go on strike threatening power cuts amidst the stifling heat of summer.
Despondent
I went to Piraeus to visit a family. Roula, the mother, is threatened with losing her job. She says finding another, at her age, is all but impossible. The young are leaving. “This will be a country of old people,” she says.
Her daughter Barbara, 23, is thinking of emigrating much as young people are in Ireland and Spain.
This is the real crisis in the eurozone. A young generation lost, without work. The figures are staggering.
In Spain unemployment for 16 to 24 year olds is running at 43%. In Italy it is more than 25%. In Europe millions of highly educated young people are being denied the opportunity of working.
Unemployment is the real threat to the eurozoneThe eurozone has proved a terrible trap for so many countries. The low interest rates, the easy money led to property booms, speculation, and piles of debt. Reducing the debt is now exacting a terrible toll on a generation.
In Spain they called themselves the “indignants” but no-one knows what this generation will do with their anger.
George Papandreou, opening a debate on a vote of confidence, has called for “national accord”. He said cash reserves would soon be exhausted. The image of national division was not helping the country survive. He offered a referendum in September on a new constitution that would make it easier to pursue corrupt officials.
He will probably win the vote of confidence on Tuesday. The week after, parliament will vote on the austerity package.
That will be a tense moment, with the risk of further violence. Even if there is another bail-out of around 110bn euros, Greeks have lost faith in the plan. All they see is debt piling on debt.
This is where the danger lies. A creeping despair. Injured national pride. Ten years of austerity.
Even so the bet must be that the Greeks reluctantly, sullenly, will go along with new austerity but I have sensed a despair that last year just wasn’t there and no-one knows where that will lead.
JANE BURGERMEISTER REPORT: ‘100,000 people march in Spain demanding real democracy’
100,000 people march in Spain demanding real democracy
Spanish reformists stage rallies in 60 cities
By SINIKKA TARVAINEN
dpa
Published: Sunday, Jun. 19, 2011 – 1:00 am
MADRID — MADRID-Tens of thousands of Spaniards demonstrated Sunday around the country, blaming the country’s economic crisis on politicians and bankers, and demanding democratic reforms.
Rallies were held in about 60 cities. Police and officials put the number of demonstrators at nearly 40,000 in Madrid, 20,000 in Barcelona, 18,000 in Granada, and several thousand in Valencia, Seville and Bilbao. No violence was reported.
Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/06/19/3711963/spanish-reformists-stage-rallies.html#ixzz1PpRXX7fR
-
Archives
- July 2011 (5)
- June 2011 (108)
- May 2011 (107)
- April 2011 (110)
- March 2011 (53)
- February 2011 (25)
- January 2011 (7)
- December 2010 (4)
- November 2010 (3)
- October 2010 (13)
- September 2010 (12)
- August 2010 (24)
-
Categories
- 9/11 TRUTH
- Anti-GE
- Auckland Mayoral campaign
- Botany By-election 2011
- Centre for Public Integrity
- CLG REPORT:
- Fighting corruption in NZ
- Fighting corruption internationally
- Fighting water privatisation in NZ
- Howick by-election campaign
- Human rights
- i watch news (Centre for Public Integrity)
- Internationally significant information
- Jane Burgermeister Report
- Metrowater
- Stop the $uper City
- Transparency in Govt spending
- TRUTHOUT
- Uncategorized
- VINCE SIEMER REPORT
- WORLD WATER WARRIORS
- YOU TUBE: John Clarke and Bryan Dawe
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
The Watchdog 