The small rural Northland New Zealand town of Dargaville now sleeps easier since the quick arrest of two people who were involved in an early-morning robbery of tourists there.
http://policenews.nz/totara-st-dargaville/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
Well done to the Dargaville Police for these arrests, following the incident at 1am, on April 24.
Our hearts, at BTO, go out to the tourists who have come here for some rest and recreation, only to have this happen. We only hope you are feeling better, especially now arrests have been made.
These occurrences are too often, not only in New Zealand but around the world, leaving people feeling uneasy.
Police would still like to hear from anyone who may have seen anything suspicious, or any information they can give in relation to this robbery.
Contact Dargaville Police CIB on (09) 439-3400, Detective Sergeant Jonathan Tier.
Information may be left anonymously, also by contacting CRIMESTOPPERS free phone 0800 555 111.
Monday, 25 April 2016
Monday, 18 April 2016
No more 'she'll be right' attitudes with health and safety
The 'she'll be right' attitude has to go out the window with tighter regulations around health and safety in New Zealand.
New laws governing H and S took effect on April 4 and if you are owning or managing industrial or even private sites where people could get hurt, you are responsible for everyone's safety.
The tighter regulations are in light of the Pike River Mine tragedy where 29 miners died.
Presenters of the new regulations and laws say, although our H and S laws are robust, there is still a lot of room for improvement.
They say there are still too many people either, not coming home at all because they have died, or they are coming home mamed for life.
http://www.business.govt.nz/worksafe/hswa
David Grindle of Northland, New Zealand law firm, WRMK, presented the new regulations and how they affect business people at a recent business breakfast meeting, hosted by the Dargaville Business Forum.
The presentation included highlighting the fact that anyone is responsible for any site where people are working and where there may be hazards.
The three high risk industries are; forestry, construction and agriculture. Death rates have fallen but are still shockingly high in these industries.
In New Zealand, there are 4.1 deaths per 100,000 workers annually.
So consequently, safety responsibility now falls on a Person Conducting Business or Undertaking Business (PCBU), on any site.
For example, if a home owner engages the services of a plumber at the home, the plumber would become the PCBU and is responsible for the safety hazards at that address.
The legal and financial consequences of not adhering to these new laws are high.
Failing to comply can result in PCBUs being hit with fines of $600,000. An individual who may not be a PCBU but may be in a leading role, could be looking at $300,000.
The responsibilities include; identifying risks or hazards, conduct training with staff, make staff totally aware of risks and hazards and ensure a hazard plan is in place, keeping records of incidents is most important.
New laws governing H and S took effect on April 4 and if you are owning or managing industrial or even private sites where people could get hurt, you are responsible for everyone's safety.
The tighter regulations are in light of the Pike River Mine tragedy where 29 miners died.
Presenters of the new regulations and laws say, although our H and S laws are robust, there is still a lot of room for improvement.
They say there are still too many people either, not coming home at all because they have died, or they are coming home mamed for life.
http://www.business.govt.nz/worksafe/hswa
David Grindle of Northland, New Zealand law firm, WRMK, presented the new regulations and how they affect business people at a recent business breakfast meeting, hosted by the Dargaville Business Forum.
The presentation included highlighting the fact that anyone is responsible for any site where people are working and where there may be hazards.
The three high risk industries are; forestry, construction and agriculture. Death rates have fallen but are still shockingly high in these industries.
In New Zealand, there are 4.1 deaths per 100,000 workers annually.
So consequently, safety responsibility now falls on a Person Conducting Business or Undertaking Business (PCBU), on any site.
For example, if a home owner engages the services of a plumber at the home, the plumber would become the PCBU and is responsible for the safety hazards at that address.
The legal and financial consequences of not adhering to these new laws are high.
Failing to comply can result in PCBUs being hit with fines of $600,000. An individual who may not be a PCBU but may be in a leading role, could be looking at $300,000.
The responsibilities include; identifying risks or hazards, conduct training with staff, make staff totally aware of risks and hazards and ensure a hazard plan is in place, keeping records of incidents is most important.
Necessary skill: The frequent use of the chainsaw in the forestry industry, is necessary and takes a high level of skill. Photo - www.alamy
Fluoridate or not to fluoridate that is the question
Fluoridation of water is a hot topic right now and has even been considered by some as a health hazard in itself.
See this link to a story on scoop.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1604/S00236/dhb-data-show-no-benefit-from-water-fluoridation.htm
For myself, I don't know that I like the idea of another chemical being put into drinking water involuntarily. Especially when the jury is out, as to whether it has only good effects, in this case, on oral health?
It's a big question mark for me, as I'm guessing it is for many.
However, it appears it may be coming, ready or not in New Zealand water supplies.
The government announced last week that it may give DHBs the power to force fluoridation on councils.
In light of the facts found in the Scoop story, it would appear, more homework clearly needs to be done.
Let's look at what some other expert health opinions say:
See this study done below, in 2007 and published by world research publishers Taylor & Francis, which brings up another view with some pretty concerning statistics.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10643380600678112
To me, democracy is having people's views on board with these kinds of decisions.
On researching for this post, studies way back in the early 1970s found fluoridating did reduce dental cavities but things change, the way people live changes and many variables taken into consideration then, would be very different now.
What do you think about the fluoridation issue?
Do you think it's a good thing, bad thing, or what?
Let us know in the comments!
BTO
Water quality: What kind of water do we want to be washing our food in. Fluoridation is a big issue world-wide. Photo www.alamy.com
See this link to a story on scoop.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1604/S00236/dhb-data-show-no-benefit-from-water-fluoridation.htm
For myself, I don't know that I like the idea of another chemical being put into drinking water involuntarily. Especially when the jury is out, as to whether it has only good effects, in this case, on oral health?
It's a big question mark for me, as I'm guessing it is for many.
However, it appears it may be coming, ready or not in New Zealand water supplies.
The government announced last week that it may give DHBs the power to force fluoridation on councils.
In light of the facts found in the Scoop story, it would appear, more homework clearly needs to be done.
Let's look at what some other expert health opinions say:
See this study done below, in 2007 and published by world research publishers Taylor & Francis, which brings up another view with some pretty concerning statistics.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10643380600678112
To me, democracy is having people's views on board with these kinds of decisions.
On researching for this post, studies way back in the early 1970s found fluoridating did reduce dental cavities but things change, the way people live changes and many variables taken into consideration then, would be very different now.
What do you think about the fluoridation issue?
Do you think it's a good thing, bad thing, or what?
Let us know in the comments!
BTO
Friday, 15 April 2016
TPPA protest planned
Protest organiser: Democrats for Social Credit deputy leader Chris Leitch strongly opposes the ratification of the TPPA in New Zealand and is seeking support with a public protest rally. Photo supplied.
Democrats for Social Credit deputy leader Chris
Leitch is organising a protest rally against the possible ratification of the TPPA this week and is asking for moral support for his cause.
The rally will be held at a Whangarei TPPA promotion hui (gathering), run by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs & Trade, at the Distinction Hotel, Riverside Drive, on Wednesday morning.
Mr Leitch says the 8.30am protest is intended to
be a peaceful gathering to highlight to participants, "there are significant
negatives to New Zealand, proceeding with the TPPA".
All participants are expected to be handed material detailing those negatives in preparation for asking questions of ministry officials.
They will also be provided with an alternative proposal showing how the economy could be boosted by double that predicted for the TPPA, without any loss of sovereignty, he says.
Mr Leitch says he and his party believe the TPPA has many inherent costs and risks, such as; "the threat to climate action and our environment; the impact it will have on our public health and medicines and the cost to consumers for copyright extensions".
He says other costs and risks include, the threat to GMO labelling and country of origin labelling; the impact of harmonised risk assessment processes for GMOs and the potential for enormous costs under an ISDS claim.
In a media statement Environment and Trade ministers Dr Nick Smith and Todd McClay say the chapter of the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement offers real benefits for both New Zealand’s environment and trade.
"TPP is not just good for the New Zealand economy but good for the environment. It goes much further than any other New Zealand trade agreement on issues like protecting endangered species and preventing pollution and also provides a valuable avenue for New Zealand to advance its environmental and conservation interests by working with, and pooling resources with other TPP countries," Dr Smith says.
For the first time in a free trade agreement, there is a platform for environmental cooperation with some of the world’s most advanced economies alongside developing countries.
Side bar:
National and Labour members of the Foreign Affairs & Trade select committee were served with a memorandum of injustice at recent TPPA hearings.
The memorandum, distributed by the Democrats for Social Credit party, sets out the grounds for a class action against committee members in the event they recommend ratification of the TPPA and the Democrats for Social Credit view that its subsequent implementation causes significant detriment to New Zealand or its citizens.
Before distributing the memorandums and at the conclusion of his
submission against the TPPA, D for SC deputy leader Chris Leitch
said, "if, as a result of you proceeding with the TPPA and the grave
concerns being covered in this submission and many others, lose control
of our financial system, our health, environment and most important, control
over the quality and safety of our food supply, how will you or your
descendants defend legal cases brought against you in the future, in a yet to
be constituted forum, for the detriment inflicted upon
New Zealand and both its current and future citizens".
Editor's note:
This is a significant step for New Zealand, if it becomes a reality.
Do you have an opinion about the TPPA and its effects on New Zealand?
Is ratification of the TPPA a good or bad thing for New Zealand?
Comments from anywhere in the world are welcome. We would be interested to know what you think!
Monday, 11 April 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)