Honouring Service And Sacrifice: 75th Anniversary Of The Korean War
"The 25th of June is a day where people can take the opportunity to honour and reflect on the courage and sacrifice of New Zealanders who served in the Korean War," said Stacey Richardson, Director Office of the Secretary at Manatū Taonga Ministry for Culture and Heritage.
The commemoration is held on the anniversary of the beginning of the Korean War on 25 June 1950 when communist North Korean forces crossed the 38th Parallel into South Korea.
"New Zealand was one of the first nations to respond to the United Nations Security Council's call for military assistance following the invasion of South Korea in June 1950.
"Over 6,000 New Zealanders served during the Korean War. Around 4,700 New Zealand Army personnel served in Kayforce, with about 1300 others on Royal New Zealand Navy frigates.
"The ramifications of this war were felt across the world and in Aotearoa. Forty-five New Zealanders lost their lives, and many more were wounded or affected by the conflict".
"Our national commemorations provide a space for individual and collective reflection. They bring together veterans, service personnel, communities and members of the public to honour together and reflect on the enduring legacy of war.
"As we reflect, we can also look forward. We acknowledge the enduring bonds forged between Aotearoa and the Republic of Korea, which have shaped the strong partnership our nations enjoy today," said Richardson.
Veterans, their whānau, and members of the public are warmly invited to attend the national commemoration. Anyone who would like to attend should arrive at the Hall of Memories at Pukeahu National War Memorial Park at 10.45am for an 11.00am start.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
4 hours ago
- 1News
Change coming to rules for residential sheds, garages
Homeowners will soon be able to build small structures like garden sheds, sleepouts and garages closer to their property boundaries without requiring building consent following regulatory changes announced by the Government today. Cabinet agreed to remove the minimum distance required between single-storey buildings under 10sqm and a property boundary or other residential building, and reduce it to one metre for buildings between 10 and 30 square metres. Previously, these structures needed to be set back from boundaries by at least their own height unless a building consent was obtained. The changes, which would be made by amending Schedule 1 of the Building Act, were expected to take effect later this year. All building work must still comply with the Building Code and local district plans. ADVERTISEMENT Regulation Minister David Seymour said shrinking section sizes and the cost of living meant forcing people to put sheds in the middle of their lawn or pay for consent to store tools "doesn't make sense". "There is no justification for such generous setback distances on private property," he said. "Today's housing market means space is tight and building costs are high. These types of property developments are practical and affordable improvements. We want people to be able to utilise them without hassle." Building and Construction Minister Chris Penk said the Government did not believe Kiwis should be "bogged down in bureaucracy" when making use of their backyard. "That's a real win for anyone short on space, giving them more freedom to add a bike shed, protect their tools, cover a vehicle, or even create a small sleepout for guests – all without extra paperwork." Seymour said the regulation change had come about due to the Ministry of Regulation's red tape tipline, an online resource where the public could make submissions on regulations that affect them. Larger granny flats able to be built without consent ADVERTISEMENT A granny flat (file image). (Source: The Government also announced earlier this year it would ease rules around granny flats and increase the maximum size that could be built without consent to 70 square metres. An increase to 60 square metres was a National-NZ First coalition agreement, but Housing Minister Chris Bishop said "huge support" meant the Government would go even further. "It's currently far too hard to build the homes New Zealanders need, with even the simplest dwellings tangling up homeowners and builders in red tape." Under the proposal, granny flats could be built without consent if they had a simple design, met the Building Code, were built by authorised builders, and if the council was notified before and after construction. The amendment bill passed its first reading and was currently at the select committee stage, with the report due back next month.
The Spinoff
9 hours ago
- The Spinoff
NZOA has saved reality TV and soaps – what about all the shows left to die?
NZ on Air is confronting a very uncomfortable question: what to save, and what to leave behind. Funding announcements from NZ on Air are not typically newsworthy in and of themselves. The agency functions as a local version of the BBC, but instead of existing as a non-commercial umbrella brand, it funds a variety of media which runs across a wide range of largely commercial mediums and platforms. Funded work often consists of a mix of returning shows and new projects, which are either predictable (another season of Q+A, or a fresh David Lomas project) or largely unknown (another murder in rural New Zealand, cast tbc). The most recent round was strikingly different, making news in a way which reveals challenges to the agency's model, and shows just how bad the choices are for NZ on Air now. Three very familiar shows collectively received more than $5m in funding. They are Shortland Street, Celebrity Treasure Island and The Traitors NZ. All are broad in their appeal and comparatively popular. Yet none would have been considered good candidates for funding until very recently. That's because NZ on Air was set up to address a market failure. Due to our small population, some forms of 'programming reflecting New Zealand identity and culture' (according to its legislation) are not commercially viable. The legislation makes specific reference to 'drama and documentary', with everything else somewhat in the eye of the beholder. For decades that meant scripted shows (such as comedy and drama) were NZ on Air's core business, while most other formats (from current affairs to breakfast TV) were commercially funded, due to TV networks being able to sell enough ads to make them on their own terms. That didn't mean it lacked value, just that it didn't need the support. News is the canonical example of a commercially funded genre – TVNZ's 6pm bulletin remains among the highest-rated shows on television, despite costing a bomb to make. Reality TV wasn't even a genre when NZ on Air was founded, and the agency has tended to be fairly circumspect in its funding of it over the years, only getting involved when, as with Match Fit, or Popstars, it fulfilled another worthy goal. Shortland Street, our only true soap, was briefly funded as a kind of TV startup, but cranked along under its own steam for decades afterwards. This was helpful because reality TV and soaps are considered less intellectually nutritious by the kind of people who care about the culture we fund. The end of that era This has not been an uncontested idea. Critics, including those at The Spinoff, and the makers of reality TV have long felt that NZ on Air was too prescriptive in its definition of 'reflecting New Zealand identity and culture'. They believe that reality TV and soaps are popular, show a diverse range of New Zealanders and bring voices, vernacular and perspectives to our screens, just as scripted comedy and drama do. This past week, they won the argument. Shortland Street has returned for a second funded season, after last year accessing two different strands of public funding to stay on air. More striking was the return of The Traitors NZ and Celebrity Treasure Island, two shows which had previously been commercially funded. Celebrity Treasure Island is a revival of an '00s-era format, and has drawn praise for its use of Te Reo Māori and addressing 'complex issues like ageism, sexism and queer politics, all on primetime mainstream television', according to my colleague Tara Ward. The Traitors NZ is a hit local version of a smash international format, with a diverse cast and a strong strain of New Zealand-specific humour. In addition to the cultural arguments, there's also a broader systems-level case for their funding. The shows have consistently rated strongly, particularly with the kind of middle-aged audiences which have abandoned linear television over the past decade. The thinking goes that by keeping these tentpole shows on our screens, you also help keep our networks and production companies viable. The path not taken Despite the solid arguments in favour, there remains a case against, too. To contemplate it, you only need to cast your mind back to a little over a year ago. It was a bonfire of the journalists. We lost longform current affairs stalwart Sunday, the venerable consumer rights show Fair Go, the magazine-style 7pm staple The Project and, most wrenchingly, the whole Newshub operation, all in the space of a few harrowing months. The death of those shows was attributed to the awful financial equation facing TV networks. That despite all rating very strongly, at least by comparison to the rest of the schedule, none could justify the investment required to keep them running. It was a shocking, visceral event, one which made New Zealand a cautionary tale across the Tasman – the country you need to look hard at to figure out how to avoid its fate. Now, a year on, and NZ on Air has been persuaded by the arguments of TVNZ and Three, that these reality TV and soap formats are too important to be allowed to die. To be clear, none of Shortland Street, Celebrity Treasure Island or The Traitors NZ is fully funded. The budgets aren't public, but production industry sources suggest the agency's investment would cover no more than 50% of the associated costs, and perhaps considerably less. Still, the risk of moral hazard is clear. The networks and production companies have established that no show is beyond help, and as audiences decline, there is a manifest case for continually topping up the public funding component of budgets. The implication is that paradoxically, as they get less popular and ad revenue declines, they should receive more help. None of which is to say these decisions are wrong in isolation. But looking at the slate of what we publicly fund now, we seem a long way from home. Pulpy true crime documentaries, reality TV shows with large chunks devoted to selling McDonalds, regularly re-named shows built around the interests of a single comedian. Still, what else can we do? Linear TV audience decline is a global phenomenon, and no public or private broadcaster has successfully ported their audiences across to digital at the same scale as they once had, let alone been able to defend the same advertising revenues. NZ on Air faces bad choices everywhere as it seeks to fulfil its mission and defend its model. It may not have even been given the chance to save the news. But as we slip gently into a new era, where everything which can be argued can be funded, it's important to remember the shows we didn't save too. And ask whether the foundational mission of NZ on Air is better served by what we kept, or what we threw away.
NZ Herald
14 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Invest in public good for a sustainable future
Click here for an alternative view: Cutting red tape key to NZ's infrastructure success - Chris Bishop The Green Party is unapologetic about our commitment to the long-term benefit of our people and planet. We have a clear vision that is outlined by the action plans we have released in the past months, including our Green Emissions Reduction Plan, He Ara Anamata, as well as our Green Budget 2025 and Fiscal Strategy. We know that the status quo is not working, the truth is that it hasn't worked for a long time. In the 1980s and 1990s, many reforms saw public assets that had been built up over generations sold into private hands, like our rail network, some social housing, and some electricity generation. There was a mistaken belief that cutting public investment and jobs would make us better off as a country. Thirty-five years on, we can clearly say that approach has not worked for most of the country. Cutting down the responsibility of the state has increased inequality, which may suit the super-rich, but certainly doesn't benefit the rest of our society. Housing scarcity and unaffordability allow a gentry of landlords to exploit desperate renters without a foot to stand on. Handing the reins of our economy over to the private sector and moulding our laws around their preference makes it easy for corporates to exploit underpaid workers and our natural resources. Our people, and the planet we depend upon, pay the price. The 'privatise the benefits, socialise the cost' approach isn't fair, and it isn't working. It's time to be bold and brave. We can invest in the public infrastructure we need ourselves, rather than making ourselves dependent on the goodwill of private international financiers, who will be looking for returns. New Zealanders can be in control of our economy, our jobs and our future. We can take control of our destiny and build what we need while creating thousands of good jobs. Our people, and the planet we depend upon, pay the price. The 'privatise the benefits, socialise the cost' approach isn't fair, and it isn't working. Julie Anna Genter Over the past months, we have been across the country and have seen the harm private companies have done to communities by coming in, promising the world, and then upping sticks once the profits have dried up, leaving people without livelihoods and much hope. In the last year alone, we have seen this from the West Coast of the South Island, to Ohakune, to Tokoroa. It was the stories we heard from these communities that encouraged our Green Jobs Guarantee. This plan will create at least 40,000 jobs across Aotearoa to rebuild our infrastructure, restore nature and build the homes we so desperately need. These jobs will form the foundations of an economy that works for all of us and a society that leaves nobody behind. Before politicians took their hands off the wheel of the economy 40 years ago and sold off the assets we all used to own, we had a Ministry of Works. Our plan for a Ministry of Green Works builds on that proud tradition but is future-fit for the climate transition. With our future-focused workforce agency, Mahi Anamata, we will be able to plan for the skills we need. This will allow us to prioritise resources to the areas we need rather than allowing the private sector to dictate our job market on their terms. We have so many opportunities at our fingertips. Energy efficiency is a boon for productivity. The steps we need to take in transportation and urban development to reduce congestion will also reduce emissions, deaths and serious injuries, and petrol bills – by reducing the need to use private vehicles. We can take pressure off our hospitals and people's power bills with healthy homes, wind and solar, and walkable communities. A better world is possible. The only thing holding us back is this Government, which is firmly stuck in the past and beholden to the interests of a wealthy few. Julie Anne Genter is MP for Rongotai and Green Party spokesperson for Infrastructure, Transport, Urban Development and Building and Construction.
