spinofflive
Photo: 123RF
Photo: 123RF

SocietyDecember 7, 2018

Why the new strangulation law matters

Photo: 123RF
Photo: 123RF

The Christmas season is upon us and that means Women’s Refuges face their busiest time of the year, writes barrister and anti-violence advocate Catriona MacLennan for RNZ. This year, a new law will give police more power to protect women who need help most.

While some families will be enjoying presents and parties this festive season, others will become part of our grim statistic of one domestic violence event every seven minutes. Aotearoa has the highest reported rate of intimate partner violence in the developed world and, in human terms, that means some families will lose mothers and children by the end of the festive season.

In one summer holiday period, six women were killed by their partners – leaving 19 children orphaned – and one child died as a result of domestic violence injuries. New laws took effect this week with the aim of reducing this abhorrent toll. They include three additional offences: strangulation; assault on a person in a family relationship; and coerced marriage or civil union.

The reason for a specific offence of strangulation is that it is a type of asphyxiation that is now understood to be one of the most lethal forms of domestic violence. Unconsciousness can occur within seconds, and death within minutes.

Strangulation accounts for 10 percent of violent deaths in the United States, with six female victims to every male victim. The lifetime risk of intimate partner violence strangulation is 1:100 for American men and 1:10 for American women.

Strangulation is a red flag for future serious abuse and the possible death of the victim. New Zealand’s Family Violence Death Review Committee recommended a specific offence of strangulation in 2014, modelled on laws in many American states, and it is positive that the offence is now on the books.

The fact that a man was charged with strangulation on the very day the new law came into force, illustrates both the need for the law and Aotearoa’s shocking domestic violence. The offence of coerced marriage or civil union has been years in the making and resources for education and enforcement will be needed to make it effective. Other parts of the reformed law will take effect in July next year.

They sit alongside an additional $76 million in Budget 2018 for domestic violence support services, and a new “joint venture” approach requiring public service chief executives to take collective responsibility for ending family and sexual violence. But there remains plenty more to do in 2019.

I hope that the review of the Family Court will result in meaningful change. At present, the court is failing to apply domestic violence laws properly, and is thereby denying women and children the protection they should receive. A Court of Appeal decision in July 2017 held that a Family Court Judge had misapplied the law and denied a woman a protection order. That should have led to a serious rethink of the way the law is understood and applied, but the Family Court continues to issue judgments in which domestic violence is minimised and denied.

Domestic violence will not be eliminated until men see it as their problem. Violence against women and children is at present placed in the convenient box labelled “Women’s issues.” This places the onus on victims to prevent violence.

That is wrong.

It is the perpetrators and those who stand silently by who need to act.

Catriona MacLennan is a barrister and anti-domestic violence advocate.


The Bulletin is The Spinoff’s acclaimed, free daily curated digest of all the most important stories from around New Zealand delivered directly to your inbox each morning.

Sign up now


Keep going!
Piles of imported plastic sit at an illegal recycling factory in Malaysia’s Kuala Langat district (Photo: RNZ / Nita Blake-Persen)
Piles of imported plastic sit at an illegal recycling factory in Malaysia’s Kuala Langat district (Photo: RNZ / Nita Blake-Persen)

SocietyDecember 6, 2018

Hard truths about recycling: it might make you feel better, but it’s mostly PR

Piles of imported plastic sit at an illegal recycling factory in Malaysia’s Kuala Langat district (Photo: RNZ / Nita Blake-Persen)
Piles of imported plastic sit at an illegal recycling factory in Malaysia’s Kuala Langat district (Photo: RNZ / Nita Blake-Persen)

Think you’re helping the planet by chucking that sushi container in the recycling bin or dutifully using your local cafe’s compostable takeaway coffee cups? Think again, writes Greg Roughan for RNZ.

So the Sustainable Business Network (SBN) puts out a 47-page report on New Zealand’s plastic packaging system, and there’s a line that leaps out: recycling won’t fix the plastic crisis.

Geez. No kidding.

This is old news. At least, to the sort of person who reads 47-page reports on plastic. And it should be old news to the rest of us too. I really don’t mean to bag the SBN’s report here. Not even reusable bag it, because it’s excellent. But what I do want to say is, maybe if people are surprised about the whole ‘recycling doesn’t actually help much’ thing, then maybe it’s time for some hard truths?

So let’s have at it. Here are three uncomfortable facts about plastic and recycling (plus some useful ideas to make you feel better).

Recycling is mostly PR

So get this. The average old mobile phone has quite a bit of gold in it. You need just 41 phones to get a gram of the stuff – compared to the tonne of ore you’d normally need to process. Yet if you paid people minimum wage to dismantle phones and extract the precious metals there would be no way you’d ever break even (unless the price of gold quadruples – then we’re in business, pal).

The point here is that if we can’t even recycle gold profitably, think about the business case for turning your putrid yoghurt containers into something useful. Frankly, the scale and automation required beggars belief, which is why a) it was all getting taken by China, who b) just burned it sometimes anyway, and then c) got so sick of dealing with your unrinsed milk bottles they have now banned the importing of most plastic recycling entirely.

That’s right. The global market for recycling has shut down. Because it was awful.

A Beijing recycling centre in 2008 (Photo: Guang Niu/Getty Images)

Biodegradable plastics are useless

You know that nice, opaque-looking plant-based plastic lid on your compostable eco-friendly coffee cup?

It’s not compostable. Not in any normal sense of the word.

They’re made from polylactic acid (PLA), which only breaks down above 60ºC. I know this because I once put a PLA lid in a worm farm for a year, then dug it out again. Despite the best efforts of 1000 tiger worms – and about a billion microbes – it emerged remarkably unmolested.

And look, there are companies like Innocent Packaging running full-circle composting collections for PLA, which sees it successfully broken down in hotter commercial facilities, but on the whole biodegradable plastics simply cannot be recycled. Instead, they belong in landfill, where they’ll keep your old toothbrush and your plastic bin liners company for a long, looooong time.

Recycling numbers aren’t recycling numbers

HDPE, PET, PVC, EPS… all those acronyms stamped on the bottom of your plastic containers, with a number from 1-7, all surrounded by that little triangular set of arrows that tells you it’s recyclable…

Yeah, sorry. That symbol is just the Resin Identification Code, which – especially now that China won’t take numbers 3-7 – by-and-large tells you what kind of plastic it is that you can’t recycle.

Ah, heck, let’s not be too cynical. There are actually outfits in New Zealand that will grind up type one plastic (PET) for local reuse. But as for the rest of it… don’t hold your breath.

So what should we do?

All right, that was depressing, so what about some positive ideas?

Well firstly, let’s take a breath and appreciate that our number-one earning industry, tourism, is almost entirely supported by the concept of New Zealand being unpolluted. As is much of the value-added part of the primary sector, for that matter.

That’s a pretty good case for investing in plastic pollution solutions, if you ask me – and if you really want to ring-fence that money, just go ahead and slap an eco-fee on every tourist who comes here. They should feel lucky to pay it. Then put the money towards a couple of decent ideas:

  1. A government-supported product stewardship system that rewards companies that meet or exceed sensible packaging rules. And yes, creates a headwind for those who don’t play ball. Because if New Zealand can beat the world to universal suffrage in the 19th century, surely we can prevent the sale of individually wrapped prunes in the 21st?
  2. A compostables pick-up for all city households, so we can reduce the volume of waste going to landfill by diverting it to commercial composting facilities (along with all those stupid compostable cups).
  3. An outright ban on single-use plastics. Because lollipop sticks made from cardboard were actually fine, and the fact that cigarette butts are made of plastic is frankly insane.

Greg Roughan is the former editor of Green Ideas magazine.