spinofflive
Image by Archi Banal
Image by Archi Banal

OPINIONBusinessMay 21, 2022

Simon Henry’s anti-Asian sentiment is sadly all too common

Image by Archi Banal
Image by Archi Banal

Amid the outcry over the blatant sexism of Henry’s ‘bit of fluff’ and ‘cleavage’ comments, the anti-Asian undertones of what he said has garnered less attention, writes Ruth Oy Har Agnew.

What surprises me most about the Simon Henry/Nadia Lim debacle is the way it has been so thoroughly covered in the media and captured the interest and indignation of New Zealanders across the country. While I’m grateful for the collective outrage from My Food Bag and Masterchef fans and the support shown for Nadia Lim, I can’t help but wonder why we haven’t had this reaction to other anti-Asian incidents in recent years. Where was the care and kindness for Sammy Zhu, a photographer assaulted in Ōtautahi in 2020 by a stranger in a racist response to Covid arriving on our shores? How did NCEA assessors decide it was appropriate to use the manifesto of someone who murdered a Chinese man in an external assessment, and why was it left to a year 13 student to challenge the decision (shout out to the magnificent Candace Chung for her amazing endeavour)? What action has been taken to address the rise in anti-Asian incidents since the start of the pandemic?

Of course, the attention garnered by Henry’s belittling may be due to his choice of target. Nadia Lim has to be one of the most likeable faces in local TV, sauteeing her way into our hearts with her dramatic Masterchef win, sashaying across the stage in Dancing With The Stars, and sorting dinner for middle class New Zealanders five days a week with her company My Food Bag.

All of which makes the smug self righteousness of Simon Henry’s comments even more audacious. He felt so comfortable sharing his anti-Asian sentiments that even one of our most successful and beloved New Zealanders could publicly be reduced to a racist, misogynist trope. If Lim, with her lengthy list of televised achievements, charitable endeavours and business forays is seen as a “bit of Eurasian fluff”, what hope is there for those of us with less impressive CVs to be seen as anything more than an ethnic trope? Would there have been such a groundswell of support if Lim had not been of mixed ethnic heritage?

At this point, I should mention my own ethnicity. My mother is sixth generation New Zealand-born Chinese, and my father is fifth generation New Zealand European of Scottish origin. My mother’s ancestors were beckoned here by the glimmer of gold, promising a better life. Perhaps my great-great-great grandfather, Choie Sew Hoy, would have had second thoughts about which country to settle in if he had known that over a century after his arrival, his descendants would still not be considered New Zealanders. Check the next census or hospital or educational institution’s ethnic identity form, and you’ll find options for NZ European Pākehā, but no tick box that acknowledges my mother’s cultural identity as a New Zealander of Chinese descent. The exclusion of any formal recognition of non-Europeans as “proper” New Zealanders citizens is an example of the casual and institutionalised racism that endows white-privileged men like Henry with the sense of safety and expected acceptance of such offensive comments. I’m not aiming to excuse his lazy leaning into preexisting ideas of the hypersexualisation of Asian women; I’m asking us all to acknowledge our role in creating a cultural acceptance of anti-Asian prejudice.

Jacinda Ardern’s condemnation of Henry’s comments seem to overlook the overt anti-Asian aspect of his slurs. Said Ardern: “Not only does that do a complete disservice to Nadia, I imagine it would be insulting to all women.” Clearly, all women matter, but by ignoring the racism inherent in Henry’s remark we fail to address the acceptance of casual anti-Asian racism that still exists in our country. Chinese in particular have been subject to more legislative prejudice than any other ethnic group. The Chinese Immigrants Act of 1881 introduced a Poll Tax of £10, later raised to £100 (about $14000 today), and the naturalisation of Chinese was stopped in 1908 and did not resume until 1952.

Throughout the late 19th century and first half of the 20th century, numerous organisations including the Anti-Chinese League, the White New Zealand League, the Anti-Asiatic League and the Anti-Chinese Association worked for further exclusion of Asian immigration, spreading a hatred and fear of “the Yellow Peril” to such an extent that in 1905, goldminer Joe Kum Yung was shot in the street by a Pākehā man who wanted to draw attention to his fiercely anti-Asian beliefs.

This century started promisingly for New Zealand Asians, with Helen Clark issuing a long overdue apology in 2001 for the poll tax and other discriminatory laws. However, we were still giving air to the myth of an “Asian Invasion”. A Labour politician blamed rising house prices on the number of “Chinese sounding names” he had seen, mocking Asian accents and stereotypes was still seen as a perfectly valid advertising technique (“splay and walk away”, “Monsoon Poon”), and a 2021 New Zealand Human Rights Commission survey found that four in 10 New Zealanders of Asian descent had experienced discrimination since the Covid outbreak.

So in a country with such strong roots in anti-Asian attitudes, it is disingenuous to ignore the role race plays in Henry’s casual dismissal of Lim. While I haven’t ever been called a “Eurasian piece of fluff” before, I cannot count the number of times men have tried to trap me in a tired trope of a hypersexualised Asian.

To those who feel a veneer of humour makes racism cute, let me be clear: speaking in a mock Asian accent will not entice me to “love you long time”, no, I don’t want you to white my wong, and I do not have sideways slanting genitalia (these are all genuine comments that have been made to me). Simon Henry is not alone in feeling comfortable and safe making targeted racist, sexist comments. So let’s use the discourse that has opened up around his comments as a catalyst for stamping out this acceptance of anti-Asian sentiment simmering under the surface in Aotearoa.

Keep going!
Image: Tina Tiller
Image: Tina Tiller

BusinessMay 20, 2022

Short-term pain, long-term gain – but the budget can’t fix a deteriorating economy

Image: Tina Tiller
Image: Tina Tiller

The economy could well shrink in the near term, interest rates keep going up and supply chain shortages aren’t disappearing any time soon. But the budget’s focus on the long term is praise-worthy, experts say.

Inflation is at a 30-year high, living costs are on the rise, and supply chain woes and labour shortages are pushing business expenses up. At the same time, the long-term game of building good-quality roads, hospitals and train tracks, and addressing climate change, demand immediate investment. Today’s situation requires short-term relief and future-proofed thinking.

It’s in that context that finance minister Grant Robertson delivered his fourth “wellbeing” budget. Titled “A Secure Future”, the budget came in at $5.9bn – a smidge under the $6bn annual operating spend he had at his disposal – and among the announcements were:

  • A temporary $350 payment for about 2.1 million New Zealanders aged 18 and over who earned less than $70,001 last year and don’t already receive the winter energy payment;
  • A two-month extension of the government’s temporary fuel excise cuts and half-price public transport, through to August 2022. The latter has been made permanent for the 1 million community services cardholders;
  • The single largest boost to health spending ever, at $13.2bn, covering cost pressures and new services;
  • $2.9bn from the climate emergency response fund to focus on immediate decarbonisation efforts and energy security; and
  • An amendment to child support rules, which the government expects will lift 6,000 to 14,000 children out of poverty by treating sole-parent beneficiaries’ child support payments as income for benefit purposes.

The budget wouldn’t change the outlook for the economy, house prices or interest rates, said economist Tony Alexander. “It’s not going to address the shortages of staff, which people are facing; it’s not going to alter the ‘brain drain’.” On the other hand, he liked the government’s focus on the future. “That would be the big outtake – the long-term infrastructure, health, climate change focus. These are very positive things.”

As much as the government has increased the net debt ceiling to 30% of GDP, Treasury has forecast the ratio would peak at a shade under 20% in 2024 before gradually declining. Alexander, a former chief economist at BNZ, said the government wasn’t undertaking a “spending splurge, which will either blow out debt or necessitate tax increases. You couldn’t say that they’ve been profligate with the money.”

While the government could always address short-term issues – the economist pointed to the billions of dollars of fiscal stimulus the government spent to shore up jobs and livelihoods as the pandemic hit New Zealand’s shores – if it had tried to insulate people “aggressively” from rising living costs, it would have made the Reserve Bank’s job of controlling inflation more difficult, he said. “Extra fiscal loosening now would have necessitated more monetary policy tightening.”

Accompanying the budget were the Treasury’s forecasts, and Alexander said they told the story of a deteriorating economy. Treasury had previously forecast the economy would expand 2.2% by mid-2024; it’s now 0.7% – an estimate that was consistent with what private-sector economists were expecting. Treasury also expected inflation to ease to normal levels of 1-3% by the middle of the decade, wages should rise 6.3% by the end of 2023 and a budget surplus should arrive in 2024/25.

Economist Tony Alexander (Photo: Supplied)

Alexander said a “big game-changer” housing policy was lacking, although that was “realistic” to expect. It didn’t matter what policies the government crafted to incentivise more construction as there was a shortage of readily developable land, infrastructure, materials and staff. “The resources simply aren’t there. You’d be simply banging your head against a brick wall,” he said. The finance minister announced that price caps on eligibility for first home grants would be increased in many parts of the country, for both existing and new builds. A new programme was also announced to support the development of new affordable homes for low-to-moderate-income whānau.

Property Council head of advocacy Katherine Wilson said while the budget would benefit the average voter, little of significance related to the property sector. The property industry lobby group was “once again” disappointed to see the government hadn’t unlocked the build-to-rent sector for the private market. “It is almost inconceivable that the government has overlooked ‘quick wins’ in terms of legislative changes that could open up” the market, said Wilson. Earlier this week, the council calculated that just over 1,000 homes could have been completed or in the pipeline for the month of May had the government acted earlier in “unleashing” build-to-rents. As a result, some 2,706 New Zealanders have missed out.

Other reactions posed the question of how far and fast could the government execute its reform agenda. Deloitte chief executive Mike Horne said the budget provided insights on what levers the government was willing to pull to achieve a prosperous Aotearoa. But questions remained over the breadth and speed of its agenda. “The government will be under particular scrutiny about whether value for money is being delivered from their reform agenda and climate objectives,” he said. “Direction and intent is one thing but execution is ultimately what will drive the scorecard.”

An investment fund worth $100m over the next year providing small and medium-sized enterprises with access to finance was a nice-to-see. Horne explained the scheme effectively meant the government would take minority stakes in qualifying businesses and seats at their board tables. “The challenge will be ensuring that the investment can be delivered in a robust, responsible and timely manner and that process and regulation do not become overbearing barriers to access,” he cautioned.

While acknowledging the need for spending to account for wider inflationary consequences, the government had shown a desire to keep pushing on with healthcare and other reforms. Horne said: “How inflationary these are likely to be will depend on how quickly the investment gets rolled out, especially with much of the funding directed into areas of the economy that are already facing capacity constraints.”