Latest news with #Herrick
Scoop
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Scoop
Greenpeace Vandals Must Lose Charitable Status
Federated Farmers is renewing its call for Greenpeace to be stripped of its charitable status immediately, following the extreme activist group's latest illegal publicity stunt. "Greenpeace need to be held accountable for their repeated illegal activity and the spread of harmful misinformation," Southland Federated Farmers president Jason Herrick says. "How can they be recognised as a charity when they're breaking all kinds of laws trespassing on private property, vandalising public property, and intimidating the community? "Last night's vandalism of the world-famous trout statue in Gore reinforces why these activists need to lose their status as a charity. I think it's a total abuse of charitable status." Herrick says Greenpeace's vandalism of the statue and welcome sign is a shameless attempt to divide the small rural community and spread anti-farming propaganda. "These activists are total cowards who are slinking around in the shadows vandalising property under the cover of darkness," Herrick says. "There's a reason they've done this at night. They knew it was dodgy behaviour - and that they'd never get away with it in Gore during daylight hours. "We're a tight-knit community down here in Southland. Farming plays a huge role in not only our local economy, but in our social fabric too. "There's no way we're going to put up with this nonsense. Greenpeace should hang their heads in shame." In April, Federated Farmers called for the Government to immediately strip Greenpeace of its charitable status after the group's illegal occupation of Port Taranaki. Charitable status in New Zealand is intended to support organisations that advance public benefit through education, relief of poverty, and other recognised charitable purposes. Under the Charities Act, organisations must operate for the public good and not primarily serve political or advocacy purposes. Herrick says he sees Greenpeace's ongoing illegal activity as clear evidence that it no longer meets these criteria for charitable status. "There are plenty of amazing, honest charities doing fantastic work out there - but Greenpeace is not one of them. "It's become little more than an extreme activist group that's disrupting legitimate businesses and spreading harmful misinformation - repeatedly and deliberately." Federated Farmers lodged a formal complaint with Charities Services in April, requesting a formal inquiry into Greenpeace's conduct and eligibility for charitable status. A copy was also sent to Community and Voluntary Sector Minister Hon Louise Upston and Minister of Internal Affairs Hon Brooke van Velden. The complaint focuses on Greenpeace's repeated involvement in premeditated unlawful protest activity. That includes the 2024 protest at Fonterra's Te Rapa dairy factory where seven individuals were arrested, and last year's occupation of Straterra's Wellington office, where five were arrested during a staged lockdown. "We urge Charities Services to act decisively on our existing complaint and strip Greenpeace of its charitable status quickly," Herrick says. "I can't see any way they meet the requirements for registration under the Charities Act 2005. "Hardworking Kiwi taxpayers should not be forced to subsidise their illegal attacks and extremist political agendas through tax breaks for their donors. "Law-breaking groups cannot hide behind charitable privileges while threatening livelihoods with misinformation about farming." Herrick says it's not just Greenpeace that needs to be held accountable for how it's operating as a charity. "I think Charities Services and the Government need to be held accountable too and answer some tough, but fair, questions about how this rort of the rules is being allowed to continue. "There is absolutely no way Greenpeace should be allowed to constantly break the law and still be recognised as a charity."
The Journal
15-07-2025
- Politics
- The Journal
Ireland's planned overhaul of asylum system may end up mired in 'legal uncertainty and dysfunction'
IRELAND IS STRUGGLING to be ready for the EU's planned overhaul of the asylum system, according to a leading Irish human rights body. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission has said it fears that the scale of changes – which are supposed to be implemented by next June – are simply not feasible for the government and will result in an asylum system 'prone to legal challenge, administrative dysfunction and human rights violations'. The government is proceeding with the fresh legislation to bring Ireland in line with EU requirements under the Asylum and Migration Pact. The EU pact seeks to create uniform rules around the identification and speeding up of decisions on asylum claims of people who arrive from outside the EU, and to develop a common database about new arrivals to Europe. A 'solidarity mechanism' is critical to the plan – this aims to ensure all countries share responsibility for asylum applications, rather than those that are at the edge of Europe, such as Italy and Greece. But in its initial analysis of legislation which proposes to introduce a new international protection system in Ireland , the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission said it has 'grave concerns' over the fairness and effectiveness of the new proposed asylum system. The commission raised concerns over the ability of the state to meet the challenge and as to whether it was going to trample over the rights of people seeking refuge. Advertisement Commission publishes observations on the General Scheme of the International Protection Bill 2025 In its observations on the General Scheme of the International Protection Bill 2025 (attached), the Commission expressed deep concern that implementation of the EU Migration and Asylum Pact ('the Pact') could introduce a system prone to legal challenge, administrative dysfunction, and human rights violations. Liam Herrick, Chief Commissioner said there were particular concerns over the proposals regarding detention of asylum seekers, access to legal representation and counselling, and the treatment of children vulnerable persons give rise to particular concerns. The proposed legislation for Ireland would broaden the circumstances under which an individual can be detained. It would include the power to arrest and detain applicants without a warrant if they refuse to travel to screening centres, with no absolute time limit on this detention. Children could also be arrested and detained without a warrant under the proposals. This was also of concern to the commission as Ireland is the only country governed by the EU Pact that has not yet ratified the Optional Protocol on the Convention Against Torture, meaning that the State will fail to afford applicants the protections deriving from the protocol. 'This is a once-in-a-generation overhaul of our asylum system. We must get it right,' Herrick said. 'In our analysis of the current draft proposals, the commission believes the State is in danger of introducing a system that fails to respect and vindicate the fundamental rights of international protection applicants.' While Herrick said the commission recognises the complexity and challenges facing the State in implementing the Migration Pact, it also believes that many aspects of new proposals are 'impractical and may lead to the new system becoming mired in litigation and uncertainty'. Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal
Irish Examiner
15-07-2025
- Politics
- Irish Examiner
Human rights watchdog warns that International Protection Bill could 'criminalise' asylum seekers
The State's human rights watchdog has stated that the Government's draft asylum bill 'greatly expands' detention powers and is concerned that it could include electronic tagging and tracking of applicants. It said the broad suite of powers under the International Protection Bill 2025 'will lead to the effective criminalisation' of asylum seekers in some cases. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC) warned the Government that many of its measures could end up being challenged in the courts, including access to legal advice and the treatment of applicants as adults when they might, in fact, be children. On Tuesday, IHREC is publishing its analysis of the general scheme of the bill, which will implement the EU Migration and Asylum Pact. Ireland signed up to the pact on July 31, 2024, and published the draft bill on April 29. IHREC chief commissioner Liam Herrick said: This is a once-in-a-generation overhaul of our asylum system — we must get it right. "In our analysis of the current draft proposals, the commission believes the State is in danger of introducing a system that fails to respect and vindicate the fundamental rights of international protection applicants. "The proposals regarding detention of asylum seekers, access to legal representation and counselling, and the treatment of children and vulnerable persons give rise to particular concerns.' 'Mired in litigaton' Mr Herrick said the commission recognises the 'complexity and challenges' facing the State in implementing the pact, but said many provisions could become 'mired in litigation'. The IHREC analysis said the pact aims to 'significantly shorten' the application procedure, with a first-instance decision on admissible applications in six months, with appeal decisions within a further three months. The commission said the general scheme totals 244 pages, and the task in implementing the full EU laws is 'considerable'. 'Inadequate consultation' IHREC said it was not happy with the level and quality of consultation to date. The watchdog said the EU legislative acts had already been in place for a year, and it feared issues that might well have been resolved during consultation and Oireachtas examination 'may now end up being resolved in the courts'. The analysis detailed concerns it had over the issue of legal access and the use in the draft bill of legal 'counselling' as opposed to legal advice and representation. It said it expected the 'limitations' on legal access and representation will be subject of court challenges. On the issue of assessing if applicants are children, IHREC said that, based on its experience, it was 'concerned that children will not be afforded the presumption of minority' and, with no credible age assessment process in place, 'will end up being treated as adults'. It said this will also result in litigation, and the issue should be addressed as a 'matter of urgency'. IHREC said the bill 'greatly expands' use of detention and includes power of arrest without warrant as well as the detention of applicants who refuse to travel to a centre for screening. It said it was concerned the final bill could include powers including requirements on applicants to sign in and out and obey curfews in accommodation centres, and they could be electronically tagged or tracked on phone apps.
Irish Examiner
09-07-2025
- Health
- Irish Examiner
Human rights body to inspect planned mental health facility in Cork for UN convention breaches
The Human Rights and Equality Commission is to examine a proposed residential mental health facility in Cork amid claims that it will amount to a "far-reaching, permanent breach" of a UN convention. Serious concerns have been raised around plans to locate a 50-bed long-stay residential mental health unit for people with severe and long-term mental illness on an isolated site, which has no footpath access or services nearby. Social Democrats TD Liam Quaide said plans for the €64m unit at St Stephen's Hospital at Sarsfield's Court, Glanmire, represent a "complete reversal" of a move towards keeping people in their own communities. "This makes no sense. The only sense it makes is financial sense for the HSE to centralise a lot of its staffing costs into one area in a site that they own themselves. But it's very much against the interests of the residents who will be there into the future," Mr Quaide told an Oireachtas committee. "There's no footpath even connecting St Stephen's Hospital to the nearest service station, which is 1.7 kilometres away. The nearest retail centre is three kilometres away in Riverstown, there's no footpath for the first kilometre of that. "There's no community amenities within walking distance of St Stephen's. There's no plans to develop any and the cohort of service users who would become residents there, many would have mobility issues, most or all would not drive," Mr Quaid, who worked as a senior clinical psychologist, said. In 2023, Cork County Council wrote to the HSE after councillors unanimously backed a call to oppose the plans to build the unit at St Stephen's Hospital. Mr Quaide said he had repeatedly raised the issue both as a councillor and now as a TD, but it "feels like an unstoppable process" as he claimed "the agency is intent on pushing ahead with this". "I feel very strongly about it because I worked in the mental health services in Cork as a psychologist, and I've seen the benefits of the same services in Cork adhering to our national mental health policies over the years, by facilitating the re-integration of long-stay patients of institutional facilities back into their communities." The Cork East TD put it to Irish Human Rights and Equality chief commissioner Liam Herrick, who was appearing before the disabilities committee, that the development would result in "a blatant breach" of the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities. Mr Quaide: It will be a far-reaching, permanent breach, because the proposal is for a centralised residential mental health service that will detach people from their community of origin, and in fact, from any setting that vaguely represents community living. While acknowledging he did not have full details of the case, Mr Herrick said the information outlined by the TD appeared to "engage" with the protections provided for in the UN Convention as well as "other rights and equality standards". Mr Herrick said: "We have a wide range of statutory functions and powers. I'd be happy to engage with you further, maybe learn more about the instance, and then we can explore if any of our powers or functions may be relevant in the area. "But on the face of it, I can say that the situation you outline does engage with those issues [contained in the UN Charter], and we'd be happy to consider further." Mr Quaide said there is no issue with the site as a location for a new elective hospital and acute inpatient mental health admissions, as is also planned, because those admissions are generally short term. Read More Mental health services short more than 800 beds, report reveals
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump Bill Advances as Team Owner and College Tax Breaks in Peril
The omnibus 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' passed by the House of Representatives Thursday morning takes aim at team owners' coveted ability to write off most of the purchase price of a sports team, with a clause that would remove billions of dollars from being deducted on taxes. 'The bill itself, vis-a-vis sports teams ownership, isn't really a great thing,' Irwin Kishner, a partner at the law firm of Herrick, Feinstein, said on a phone call. 'You could argue the valuations of sports teams would be less than they were prior to that tax treatment.' More from Baseball America the Latest to Be Target of 'Bork Bill' Congress May Have to Settle NCAA Athlete Eligibility Issue Coffey Talk: Donn Davis on PFL's Rise and Sports 'Ego Money' The bill, now numbered H.R. 1, covers a multitude of spending priorities including border security, defense and taxation, among others. The legislation also takes a hatchet to amortization, which is the depreciation of non-tangible assets often termed goodwill. Typically, 90% or more of a team's purchase price is goodwill, which excludes physical assets a team might possess, such as its stadium and weight room equipment. 'Team owners were allowed to deduct 100% of the purchase price over 15 years, and now they're only allowed to deduct 50% over 15 years, if it comes to law,' Robert Raiola, director of the sports and entertainment group at PKF O'Connor Davies accounting firm, said on a phone call. Amortization is an accounting principle meant to assess a decline in value over time, like its cousin depreciation, which is meant to account for physical assets wearing out, such as machinery. In sports, values don't typically decline. The 1973 New York Yankees sale to George Steinbrenner is believed to be the last time a franchise from the big four U.S. leagues traded hands at a loss. The amortization of team values is an under-the-radar tax benefit that is a key part of the calculus used in the decision to buy a U.S. sports franchise—and it plays a role in the skyrocketing prices paid for franchises in recent years. For example, under existing law, a team owner paying $1.6 billion for a franchise where $1.5 billion is intangible goodwill could deduct that $1.5 billion over 15 years. That $100 million annual deduction of taxable income probably saves the average team owner $40 million in actual taxes, assuming a 40% blended federal and state tax rate. Those deductions do raise the taxable income if and when the team is sold—all $1.5 billion would be a gain to be taxed—but not paying taxes today is preferable to paying them in the distant future. The proposed law, which now moves to the Senate, means team owners would still get a $20 million annual tax savings under the example above. As drafted, it would cover all professional sports teams, and specifies football, hockey, soccer, baseball and basketball as examples. The amortization reduction applies only to new purchases after the bill becomes law, so any revenue bump to the federal government would be muted by the fact current team owners will be exempt under the proposal. 'The general public doesn't really feel sorry for these people either way, but for the owners themselves, it has a huge impact,' Kevin Thorne, managing partner of tax-focused Thorne Law Group, said on a phone call. 'I think it's going to be changed by the time it goes fully through [the Senate and reconciliation process]. A lot of people are going to be getting phone calls on The Hill.' Two years ago Congress eliminated the ability of team owners to immediately depreciate the value of tangible assets of their franchises. Tax benefits 'are a big part of the calculus' of buying a team, Kishner said. 'But it's still a regulated asset in that supply is less than demand and people have historically done very well owning these franchises.' H.R. 1 also seeks to tax college athletic department licensing revenue. Typically, all nonprofits must pay income tax on revenue from activities not central to their tax-exempt status to avoid giving charities a competitive advantage over for-profit businesses. Yet under current law, income from the sale or licensing by a college of its name and logo is exempt from unrelated business income taxation. This money can be significant: Ohio State University's athletic department for example, made $34.1 million in licensing and advertising revenue in the latest reported year, according to the Sportico College Sports Finances Database. Athletic department logos of seemingly every college in the U.S. are widely licensed for apparel and other goods. That money would now be subject to the 21% corporate tax rate—at the same time the NCAA is proposing expanded scholarship limits and direct payments to athletes. Another clause in the budget as passed would allow health savings account money to be used to pay for gym membership, capped at $500 a year per person and $1,000 per family. Publicly traded gym operators Planet Fitness (PLNT) and Life Time Group Holdings (LTH) were up modestly in trading today, outpacing the broader market. H.R. 1 passed the full House by a vote of 215-214 with one abstention, and it will likely see changes in the Senate, despite the Republicans' six-seat advantage. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has set a July 4 target date to pass the legislation. The bill, weighing in at more than 1,100 pages, will now be referred to the Senate finance and budget committees, which may propose amendments that will need to be reconciled with the House version. Both bodies will need to approve by majority vote a final version before it can be sent to President Trump to be signed into law. With assistance from Michael McCann Best of Most Expensive Sports Memorabilia and Collectibles in History The 100 Most Valuable Sports Teams in the World NFL Private Equity Ownership Rules: PE Can Now Own Stakes in Teams
