Cave of forgotten dreams
Philip Matthews
Going underground
welcomes some good news. No other story in 2018 has gripped the world’s imagination like this: not World Cup football, not Donald Trump’s European tour, not a royal wedding, not even news of Justin Bieber’s sudden engagement to Alec Baldwin’s niece. (You missed that one? Really?)
We refer of course to the incredible story of the 12 boys and the coach of the Wild Boars football team who were rescued from a flooded cave complex in northern Thailand.
The unlucky 13 were stranded in tunnels by rainfall on June 23.
More than a week later, their location was discovered, about 4km from the mouth of the cave.
A long, fraught rescue operation began, which took the life of one of the 90 divers who worked on the rescue – Thai man Saman Kunan.
Tech billionaire Elon Musk designed a ‘‘kid-sized’’ submarine built with rocket parts by engineers from his companies who travelled to the remote area of Thailand to help save the boys. But it was rejected as ‘‘not practical’’.
So how were they rescued? A Thai Navy Seal diver explained that the boys were sedated and
sleeping or only partially conscious as they were passed from diver to diver.
It would have seemed like a very strange dream to them afterwards.
Permission to speak freely?
Nothing produces contradictions quite like free speech arguments.
Contradiction number one: complete unknowns can be propelled to fame simply by banning them.
So it was when Auckland Mayor Phil Goff decreed that Canadian far-Right activists Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux were unwelcome at Auckland Council venues.
Suddenly a pair with a YouTube following for their anti-Islamic, anti-refugee, anti-feminist positions got mainstream media attention and even prompted the formation of a free speech group that raised $50,000 overnight to fight Goff on their behalf, even though – contradiction number two – free speech spokesman Don Brash did not even know what the pair stood for.
In an internet age, true bans are impossible and most attempts are self-defeating, only serving to create political martyrs out of marginal thinkers whose views and interests are mostly irrelevant to the majority of New Zealanders.
Nursing a grievance
The nurses’ nationwide strike, their first in almost 30 years, seemed to have had strong levels of support from a public who sympathise with their predicament.
This is not just about wage increases – and the offers from the district health boards do seem fairly generous, it has to be said – but about years of understaffing and poor resourcing of the public health system.
‘‘Unsafe staffing is a massive issue for us,’’ Auckland nurse Erin Cammell told Stuff.
‘‘It’s not about money, [it’s] more about getting more people on the floor to help us.’’
The latest offer included $38 million to hire 500 new nurses.
Some also drew a direct contrast between the Government’s claim that its hands are tied, financially speaking, when it comes to paying nurses substantially more, and a surprising willingness to spend more than $2 billion on some new planes for the Defence Force. Broadcaster Guyon Espiner was reminded of the old peace activists’ bumper sticker that said that it will be a great day when teachers get what they want and the air force has to hold a cake stall to buy a new fighter.
Final question: is it a good look for the Government or a bad one that Jacinda Ardern does not get to front this issue?
Let’s Dubrovnik this!
So, while England takes on Belgium in a highly symbolic Brexit battle, the football World Cup will be decided very early on Monday by a game between France and Croatia. Who should New Zealanders back?
France gave us the lovely township of Akaroa, our early Catholic history and, er, the despicable Rainbow Warrior bombing, whereas Croatia has given us Lorde, historian James Belich, artist Milan Mrkusich, a wine industry and, er, Shane Jones. France is a global power that has won the cup before but Croatia is a plucky underdog in the final for the first time.
Croatia it is, then.