Thursday, 11 June 2009

Mt Albert By-election Survey: Anthony ven den Heuval (Human Rights Party)

The sixth response to our candidate survey for the Mt Albert by-election has been completed by Anthony Ravlich, educator from the Human Rights Party, on behalf of that party's candidate for the by-election.

Candidate: Anthony ven den Heuvel
Party: Human Rights Party

Q: What particular issues do you believe women in Mt Albert face?
A: I would imagine the same in the rest of the country, namely, they are going to be made to bear much of the guilt for child abuse and many thousands of children going to school hungry.

Q: How do you think women's representation could be preserved and/or enhanced if the proposed Auckland Super City proceeds?
A: By picking women with considerable life experience and a social conscience not those who are are carried from 'cradle to grave' on merely the social status conferred on them by birth - the latter rarely have any understanding of real hardship - their degrees at university pale considerably to those who have reached a high level in the university of life. In other words talent, merit, experience and the good of all people i.e. universal interests, which are the positive forces of life which will take society forward to greater justice - those with particular or political interests, and only concerned with social status are the negative forces of the universe and largely only concerned with putting others down. Read my book, Freedom from our social prisons, released about eight months ago by a major publisher, Lexington Books, supported by a number of the world's top intellectuals such as Noam Chomsky but, of course, in a New Zealand where universal trtuh now means nothing only group self-interested truths matter it is being suppressed by the liberal media and politicians and NGOs but the plan is so simple that within a relatively short amount of time people will have to face the truth.

Multi-choice questions (candidate's answer is in bold):
Should the Ministry of Women's Affairs be:
Abolished OR Decreased OR Continued at the current level OR Increased (no option chosen)
Candidate comment: Affirmative action should now only apply to the most disadvantaged women.

In considering allegations of rape the law should:
Require the defendant to prove sex was consensual OR require the victim to disprove sex was consensual (status quo)(no option chosen)
Candidate comment:I have much limitations when it comes to largely women's concerns however I am able to make some contribution but I am no authority on this subject. Also women, as with men, have to be sincere in seeking the truth if such problems are to be resolved and do not consider that this point has been reached.

Should access to abortion be:
Abolished OR Restricted OR Continued as currently provided OR Increased to on demand (no option chosen)
Candidate comment: See my answer to 5 [the previous question]

Should paid parental leave be:
Abolished OR Decreased OR Continued at the current level OR Increased (no option chosen)
Candidate comment: See my answer to 5.

In the forthcoming Child Discipline referendum New Zealanders should:
Vote Yes OR Vote No or Abstain (no option chosen)
Candidate comment: As with the Green Party concern with food safety and ignoring child hunger so smacking criminalizes highly stressed but good women rather than addressing child abuse by extending the working package for families to include beneficiaries - but this is part of the absurdity that New Zealand has reached - again refer to 5.

Pay Equity measures by Government are:
Necessary OR Unnecessary (no option chosen)
Candidate comment: Of far less importance to the human rights violations suffered by women on the DPB.

Social change advertising campaigns, such as It's Not Ok, should be:
Abolished OR Decreased OR Continued at the current level OR Increased (no option chosen)
Candidate comment: Again I reer to 5 above - New Zealand is based now largely on half-truths unless the full truth is permitted - for instance, a women's feminist group would simply refuse to listen to my truth in today's society no matter what support I have in the international human rights community - they must a reach a point where they care enough to face the truth for all and rise above self-interest.


One more to go up today, from John Boscawen of Act, which will mean we have responses from all the major parties, except National.


notafeminist said...

Uhm, I gotta admit: I didn't quite ... 'get' this.

Anonymous said...

Don't you think the consent/rape question is badly phrased? The law doesn't require the victim to prove lack of consent (and nor should it). Wouldn't it be less misleading to ask 'or should the state be required to prove lack of consent'? (Which, is not to say that I don't appreciate the argument that the legal process often causes re-victimisation, just that I really hate misleading questions..)