Kiwiblog

LG had a little expo down at Chaffers Wharf yesterday. I popped in for a bit, to see what they were promoting. I knew I’d be interested in the TVs, but to my surprise also found myself interested in one of their washing machines.

Yes that is a washing machine balanced on four wine glasses, and yes they demonstrated in action on a spin cycle, and it didn’t move at all. Whomever came up with the idea of demonstrating its lack of movement and vibrations with balancing it on wine glasses did well.

LG use a direct drive motor in their washing machines, and it really does make them both very quiet and also relatively still. I felt the machine as it was working, and you really just pick up minor vibrations from it – way different to most washers.

What I was really there to see though was this:

Ignore the reflection that makes this a bad photo, and try to concentrate on the colour. This is their 84 inch ultra high definition TV.

The picture quality is an incredible eight million pixels, four times the normal high resolution. And trust me you can tell the difference. The quality is superb. The resolution is 3840 x 2160.

It also does 3D television. We watched a few minutes of Life of Pi, and it really was just as good as watching it in the cinema.

The TVs are $25,000 so really for pubs and bars or commercial offices. They will be rolling out a 55 inch model later this year, and are pricing it up at the moment.

The 84 inch TV is 2.8 times the area of an 50 inch TV. Not one for a small apartment!

All the TVs there now come with an ethernet port and built in WIFI. Clearly the future is TVs running programmes off the Internet or local computers. My only worry is what many GB would a one hour TV show be at ultra high resolution – can anyone do the sums?

Shane Cowlishaw at Dom Post reports:

A man who helped dozens of people with their ACC claims says the corporation has driven him into bankruptcy and depression.

After more than 20 years of acting as an ACC advocate, Mike Dixon-McIver has spent the past six years locked in a battle with the corporation after it tried to prosecute him for fraud.

That case was thrown out and a judge awarded Mr Dixon-McIver, of Upper Hutt, full legal costs. But the corporation has refused to go to mediation to discuss damages.

This has infuriated Mr Dixon-McIver, who at noon today will host a barbecue protest outside the corporation’s head office in Wellington to publicise his plight.

He plans to camp outside the office until ACC agrees to meet him.

“Nobody has said ‘we’re sorry’, nobody, and that’s the first thing I ever wanted from them.”

Adding to his frustration, he and wife Jolene will be forced out of their home on Friday after an option to buy the property expires.

He sent ACC a starting figure for damages and losses of $4.69 million, including sums for loss of earnings and impact on his mental health.

You want $4.7 million from ACC levypayers because of a failed prosecution against you that didn’t even go to trial?

Good luck with that one.

Incidentally Mr Dixon-McIver seems to have had some compensation issues of his own, after the Employment Court ordered him to pay three months salary and $6,750 for distress, humiliation and injury to feelings to a former employee who was constructively dismissed after he threatened to assault her, following his son assaulting her.

The Daily Telegraph reports:

A cub scout leader confronted terrorists just seconds after they had beheaded a soldier asking them to hand over their weapons and warning them: “It is only you versus many people, you are going to lose.”

Well done Ingrid Loyau-Kennett.

Mrs Loyau-Kennett, 48, from Cornwall, was one of the first people on the scene after the two Islamic extremists butchered a soldier in Woolwich, south east London.

The Herald provides a guide to the Auckland Unitary Plan:

Height is at the top of many people’s minds with the Unitary Plan.

Whether it’s walls of apartments on the ridges overlooking Browns Bay or 18-storey high rises in Newmarket, the council is facing a chorus of complaints.

Buildings in central Auckland will have no height restriction, and 10 metro centres such as Takapuna, Henderson, Botany and Newmarket will have an 18-storey limit. In another 37 town centres, the limit will be eight, six and four storeys, and in local centres, such as Mt Eden, it will be three or four storeys.

To prevent a canyon effect, any buildings of four storeys or more will have to be set back from the street and require resource consent.

After nine weeks of saying the maximum height of “small scale apartment buildings” in the residential “mixed housing” zone was two storeys, it emerged last week that the height limit is three storeys.

That omission of the real height limit is what has destroyed a lot of trust.

The days of “shoebox” apartments are back with plans to reduce the minimum apartment size from 35sq m to 30sq m, plus a minimum balcony space of 8sq m.

I’m not sure there should be a minimum size at all. If someone wants to live in a 25 square metre apartment, then let them.

The proposed rewrite of Auckland’s tarnished heritage rules leaves power in the hands of unelected bureaucrats and shuts out the public.

This is the view of the Character Coalition – a group of heritage and community organisations – that called for Auckland to follow Brisbane, which prevents demolition of pre-1945 houses unless the owner can make a case. The public have a say in the process.

On a visit to Auckland in March, Queensland Government architect Malcolm Middleton said the Brisbane model had been considered radical when introduced 15 years ago, but was now largely accepted and worked for the amenity and value of character suburbs.

The rules in the draft Unitary Plan will see council or consultant planners using case law to decide if applications to demolish or remove a house would be publicly notified or not. The council says more applications will be publicly notified. When this method was used by the former North Shore City Council, two of 17 applications were notified in eight years.

The council has proposed widening the heritage net to pre-1944 houses outside the existing heritage character areas and requiring owners to obtain a resource consent for demolition. The council, however, says the public will have no say in this process and officers will make the call because many landowners bought in these areas knowing they were not heritage areas.

Mayor Len Brown and chief executive Doug McKay are refusing to release the documents of a political working party, that meets behind closed doors, used to draw up the heritage rules.

The documents should of course be released, before submissions close on 31 May.

I think extending the definition of heritage to all pre-1944 houses is daft. Old is not the same as heritage.

Michael Goudie, a 28-year-old councillor, was picked by Mayor Len Brown and Penny Hulse to fire up young people to counter the views of generally older “Nimbys” – Not in My Backyard.

But instead of a legitimate campaign to get teens and 20-somethings to jump on social media with their views, Brown and Hulse turned a blind eye when Goudie promoted an anonymous blog labelling the elderly as “selfish, arrogant and narrow-minded” who should “just hurry up and die”.

Charming.

Nick Smith has announced:

Conservation Minister Dr Nick Smith today announced his approval under the Crown Minerals Act for an access agreement for Bathurst Resources for its Escarpment Mining Project on the Denniston Plateau, near Westport.

“This approval is for an open-cast mine on 106 hectares of the 2026 hectares that comprise the Denniston Plateau. This area is not National Park, nor Conservation Park nor does it have any particular reserve status. It is general stewardship land, which is the lowest legal status of protection of land managed by the Department of Conservation. The area does have conservation values although there has been some disturbance from previous mining including roads, bulldozer tracks and an artificial reservoir. The area also has some infestation from weeds like gorse and broom,” Dr Smith said.

“The loss of conservation values is compensated by a $22 million package by Bathurst Resources. This will fund pest and predator control over 25,000 hectares of the Heaphy River catchment in the Kahurangi National Park, 4,500 hectares on and around the Denniston Plateau, as well as for historic projects on the Plateau itself. This is the largest ever compensation package negotiated by DOC for a mine or other commercial venture.

The Greens say they are not against all mining, just some mining. But what is the bet they condemn this decision despite $22 million for conservation.

It will be interesting to see what Labour says on this decision, and especially Damien O’Connor.

Stuff reports:

The Green Party has called the independent report on the 2007 Urewera raids damning and said a dramatic overhaul of police culture was still needed.

The review, released today, labelled police actions ”unlawful, unjustified and unreasonable”.

The party’s police spokesman, Dave Clendon, said it was not okay to “descend like masked ninjas” on a small community, adding that police thinking about the raids had not fundamentally changed.

He believed racial discrimination played a part on the abuse of rights and illegal detention of innocent people.

“Would the police have raided Remuera in Auckland, or Khandallah in Wellington in the same way?” he asked.

Ummm. Engage brain before operating mouth,

Can anyone think of a high profile raid a couple of years ago in Coatesville? One that involved armed police and helicopters? I’m pretty sure the targets were not Maori, but German and Finnish.

And according to the 2006 census, the ethnicity of Coatesville is 80% European, 4% Maori, 3% Asian and 12% other so the racism claim from the Greens is quite unfounded.

The Dom Post reports:

Wellington’s mayoral race has just moved up a notch, with veteran councillor and former New Zealand cricketer John Morrison declaring his candidacy.

John is very well known, and will be a serious contender. I can’t see him being asleep at the wheel and not even aware of the costs of his own office refurbishment.

“The city and the council need good leadership and some decisiveness and some action. We’re the centre of the region, so we should be leading the pack, not following.”

The Council is ineffective and embarrassing at present. Not all Councillors – but overall.

It was not likely he would run for a ward position again, meaning his stab at the mayoralty could be his final performance.

However, he was confident he had strong support around the council table and was keen to use the talent available.

“Everyone at that table has to come offering something for the city.”

The Council is not divided on left v right terms. One of the biggest critics of Celia’s mayoralty has been Ray Ahipene-Mercer who has a life-time of activism on the left including the Clean Water and other environmental campaigns.

Stuff reports:

Mr Faafoi said the latest Ten One police magazine showed more than 50 sworn officers had resigned around the country in the past month.

“It’s the sheer number and the experience of these officers that’s of concern,” he said.

A meaningless number. The Police have around 11,500 staff. How many staff normally resign in a month? What has been the rate for the last year. A month’s figures by themselves may be a blip.

Mr Faafoi said the problem stemmed from cost-cutting and he was not surprised that there was nothing extra in the recent Budget for police.

Actually the Police were given an extra $4 million in the Budget for operational spending, and since 2008 their funding has increased by $173 million which is considerable, even more so when you consider the structural deficit inherited from Labour.

“It was more about the National Party’s mates than hard-working Kiwis and that extends to the police as well,” he said.

I think Labour came up with this slogan before they saw the Budget and are too lazy to change it. Is Kris really saying $100 million for home insulations for low income families is helping National’s mates, not hard working Kiwis? I thought Labour used to claim they cared for low income families. Does he think the extra $1.6 billion for health is restricted to National’s mates? And the $900 million for education? And please Kris tell us how the $2.1 billion extra for Christchurch is for National’s mates. sounds like National has lots of mates, and Labour has none.

As a result communities were not feeling as connected to police as they did in the past and Mr Faafoi believed this could have resulted in the drop in reported crime.

Trying desperately to spin his way out of the fact that not only is reported crime down, but serious violent crime is significantly down – and the notion that serious violent crimes are not being reported is laughable.

Mr Faafoi said Labour had a track record of looking after police officers and would look to rebuild the public’s confidence in the organisation.

Really. Please tell us about this track record. Labour’s opposed almost every law change that the Police have supported such as three strikes.

Stuff reports John Key as laying out the choices for Canterbury:

1. Council borrows money for infrastructure projects
2. Council raises rates for infrastructure projects
3. Council changes its asset mix to fund infrastructure projects
4. They don’t proceed with or downsize some of the infrastructure projects

My preference is (3) but it is a decision for the locals. If residents don’t want a new stadium, then absolutely that is their call. Likewise if they want one, but are happy with higher rates, then also their call.

Clare Curran exposes at Red Alert the right wing agenda. It seems to be:

1. Tony Abbott spoke at the 70th anniversary of the Institute of Public Affairs
2. Tony Abbott is advised by Crosby Textor
3. The NZ National Party is also advised by Crosby Textor
4. Hence the NZ National Party plans to implement the policy agenda of the institute of Public Affairs

Clare goes on to list some of the policies that may find their way into National’s policy agenda here, which she disagrees with. They include:

• Allow the Northern Territory to become a state
• Introduce a special economic zone for northern Australia
• Rule out federal funding for 2018 Commonwealth Games
• Privatise the Australian Institute of Sport
• Cease funding the Australia Network
• Abolish the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA)
• Privatise the CSIRO and the Snowy-Hydro Scheme
• Abolish the Commonwealth Grants Commission
• Privatise Australia Post, Medibank and SBS
• Halve the size of the Coalition front bench from 32 to 16
• Break up the ABC and put out to tender each individual function
• Abolish the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission

I’m pretty sure we won’t see any of the above implemented in New Zealand. Well, we could try to implement them but Australia may not take too kindly to us passing laws on their behalf.

There is one policy Clare agrees with:

Force government agencies to put all of their spending online in a searchable database

That’s good to see, as I’ve been pushing this for some time. I would have thought Clare also supports:

Rule out government-supported or mandated internet censorship

As it happens I think many (not all) of the IPA’s policies are very laudable and sensible. Ones I especially like are:

• Means-test Medicare
• Abolish the Baby Bonus
• Abolish the First Home Owners’ Grant
• Repeal the alcopops tax
• Allow individuals and employers to negotiate directly terms of employment that suit them
• Introduce a single rate of income tax
• Return income taxing powers to the states
• Cut company tax to 25 per cent
• Cease subsidising the car industry
• Privatise Australia Post, Medibank and SBS
• Halve the size of the Coalition front bench from 32 to 16
• Reduce the size of the public service from current levels of more than 260,000 to at least the 2001 low of 212,784
• Force government agencies to put all of their spending online in a searchable database
• Repeal the mining tax
• Introduce fee competition to Australian universities
• Means test tertiary student loans
• Reintroduce voluntary student unionism at universities
• Introduce a voucher scheme for secondary schools
• Rule out government-supported or mandated internet censorship
• End public funding to political parties
• Introduce voluntary voting
• Legislate a cap on government spending and tax as a % of GDP
• Legislate a balanced budget amendment which limits the size of budget deficits and the period the government can be in deficit
• Allow people to opt out of superannuation in exchange for promising to forgo any government income support in retirement
• Remove all tariff and non-tariff barriers to international trade
• Deregulate the parallel importation of books

The Herald reports:

Newly released papers raise fresh questions over Prime Minister John Key’s claim that Solid Energy asked for $1 billion of taxpayers’ money to fund its transformation into a massive resources company.

Mr Key made the claim earlier this year when it was revealed the state-owned coal miner was on the verge of collapse under the weight of almost $400 million in debt.

Former chairman John Palmer, who approached the Government with the plan in 2010, denied asking for the money but later said he understood why Mr Key might have said the proposal involved “those sorts of costs”.

But Solid Energy documents released by Treasury yesterday detailing the proposal contain noreference to a request for the money.

Solid Energy’s business proposal said the Government’s willingness to forgo dividends from Solid Energy and Kupe were essential for the project to proceed, and it would require extra equity of up to $1 billion on top of that to fund the expansion.

However, it did not seek that from the Government in the proposals, saying: “All this can be achieved … without requiring a direct Government equity contribution (other than forgoing dividends from Solid Energy and Kupe for up to 5-10 years).”

This is being pedantic, and the PM’s interpretation of Solid Energy seeking $1 billion (in fact up to $3 billion) of equity is entirely consistent with being interpreted as a potential call on taxpayers. The difference between not taking dividends and a capital contribution is semantics. Both increase the Crown’s equity in the company.

Thank God, the Government said no.

Also interesting to note in the released papers that what forced out into the open the lack of substance to Solid’s forecasts was in fact the mixed ownership model preparation. It was only the preparation for potential partial float that got the detailed coal price forecasts out of Solid Energy. Without that policy, the extent of their optimism may have gone unnoticed for much longer.

Solid Energy is a superb example of why the Crown should not be the sole shareholder of a risky commercial business. The transparency and discipline you get from being listed on the NZX is significant.

NBR reports:.

The death today of Supreme Court Justice Robert Stanley Chambers (59) has been confirmed by Chief Justice Dame Sian Elias.

Senior judicial communications officer Neil Billington told NBR ONLINE Chief Justice Elias is expected to issue a statement soon.

Justice Chambers was appointed to the Supreme Court in December 2011, after seven years on the Court of Appeal and five years on the High Court.

Justice Chambers, the husband of leading divorce Queen’s counsel Deborah Chambers (nee Hollings), began practice as a barrister in 1981 and was appointed Queen’s counsel in 1992.

He graduated LLB (Hons) from Auckland University in 1975 and gained a doctorate from Oxford University in 1978.

This is I believe our first Supreme Court Justice to die in office, and 59 is very young. No details on the cause of death but commiserations to his family, friends and colleagues.

The Attorney-General has said:

“Justice Chambers had an outstanding career as a servant of the law, ultimately appointed to the nation’s highest court,” Mr Finlayson said. “I was devastated to learn of his untimely death.”

“I served with him for many years on the Rules Committee of the High Court, and he had recently been appointed to the Council for Continuing Legal Education as the Chief Justice’s representative. He made a great contribution, and had only begun what was expected to be a long tenure on the Supreme Court.”

“He was involved in so many other areas outside the judiciary, and lived life to the full. It is not often one comes across the likes of Justice Chambers in the profession.”

And the Justice Minister:

“I am extremely sad to learn of the sudden death of Justice Robert Chambers.

“He was renowned across the profession as one of New Zealand’s greatest legal brains. His sudden death at such a young age is a significant loss to the legal community.

“I instructed Justice Chambers on many occasions when he was a barrister. I served with him on the Auckland District Law Society Council for a number of years and when he became President, I was Vice-President. I will always remember Justice Chambers’ for his humanity, terrific wit and way with words.

If he had not died at such a young age, he may have carried on as a Supreme Court Justice for the next 11 years or so. A huge loss.

Stuff reports:

Trade Me has joined 31 consumer and lobby groups from New Zealand and overseas in writing to Trade Minister Tim Groser to voice concerns about the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement.

The company is a member of the New Zealand-born umbrella group the Fair Deal Coalition, which was set up last year during the Auckland round of the negotiations to lobby against possible provisions in the yet-to-be-completed trade agreement.

The coalition fears the trade agreement could unduly strengthen intellectual property rights, for example by extending copyright by 20 years and introducing new controls on parallel imports. …

In its letter, the coalition asked Groser to reflect on the “variety of sectors” that stood to be adversely affected by such provisions. “As a group we are diverse, but we share one thing in common: we seek appropriately balanced intellectual property laws,” it said.

Trade Me spokesman Paul Ford said the firm backed the coalition because it was concerned the agreement could “result in a crappy deal for both Kiwi consumers and a decent chunk of the Trade Me community”.

“We reckon parallel importing is pretty important to New Zealanders as it means Kiwi sellers can source goods direct from licensed suppliers around the globe, so buyers get more choice and, with any luck, better prices too,” he said.

The Fair Deal Coalition has attracted support from advocates in six of the 12 countries which are party to the trade negotiations, including the United States, Canada and Australia.

The group’s founders include Consumer NZ, InternetNZ, the Royal NZ Foundation for the Blind and the Telecommunications Users Association.

I’m one of those involved in the Fair Deal coalition, and it is great to see it gain supporters in the major countries involved in the TPP.

I’m all for free trade deals, but that doesn’t mean I want a deal at any price, and I think the proposed US chapter on intellectual property is not balanced or a fair deal. I think the current NZ intellectual property laws are relatively well balanced and we should not agree to anything that would force a change to them. If enough countries stand firm on these issues, I am hopeful the US will modify its position. And to be fair to the US, they have already moved a considerable way by agreeing to writing exceptions to copyright restrictions into the text – a first for a free trade deal with them. But the current proposed wording is still not suitable.

Consumer NZ spokesman Hadyn Green said his group believed the trade deal’s documents had provisions “which may remove parallel importing in New Zealand”. That would mean retailers could no longer import copyright goods, from software to branded clothes, without the permission of the manufacturer, which Consumer NZ feared would push up prices for many products.

Bans on parallel importing work against free trade, and should not be in FTA.

A Foreign Affairs and Trade Ministry spokeswoman said last week that the parallel importing of copyright works had been raised in negotiations but there was no consensus among the negotiating parties on whether an agreement “should include specific provisions on this issue”.

Which hopefully means it won’t include such a provision.

The IPCA report on the Urerewa Operation 8 can be found here. Key conclusions:

• The  Authority  has  found  that  Police  were  entitled,  on  the  information  they  had,  to  view   the  threat  posed  by  this  group  as  real  and  potentially  serious.    The  investigation  into  such   activities  by  Police  was  reasonable  and  necessary.  
• From  a  policing  perspective  the  termination  phase  of  Operation  Eight  was  concluded   safely.    No  shots  were  fired  by  Police  or  others,  despite  Police  locating  a  number  of   firearms  and  weapons.    All  target  individuals  were  located  without  incident  and  no   members  of  the  public  were  put  at  risk.  
• The  planning  and  preparation  for  the  execution  of  search  warrants  on  termination  of   Operation  Eight  was  largely  in  accordance  with  applicable  policy.    It  involved  huge   logistical  challenges  given  that  search  warrants  had  to  be  executed  simultaneously  across  the  country.    Those  individuals  who  were  considered  by  Police  to  pose  the  greatest  risk   were  quickly  and  safely  apprehended.      
• In  contrast,  the  planning  and  preparation  for  the  establishment  of  the  road  blocks  in   Ruatoki  and  Taneatua  was  deficient.    The  Authority  has  found  there  was  no  lawful  basis   for  those  road  blocks  being  established  or  maintained.  There  was  no  lawful  power  or   justification  for  Police  to  detain,  stop  and  search  the  vehicles,  take  details  from  or   photograph  the  drivers  or  passengers.      
• There  was  no  assessment  of  the  substantial  and  adverse  impact  of  such  road  blocks  on   the  local  community.    The  road  block  at  Ruatoki  was  intimidating  to  innocent  members  of   that  community,  particularly  in  view  of  the  use  of  armed  Police  officers  in  full  operational   uniform.      
• The  majority  of  complaints  received  by  the  Authority  in  relation  to  property  searches   were  not  from  target  individuals  but  rather  from  other  occupants  at  these  properties   complaining  about  the  way  they  were  treated  by  Police.  Some  felt  they  were  being   treated  as  suspects.    A  number  of  occupants  were  informed  by  Police  that  they  were   being  detained  while  a  search  of  the  property  occurred,  despite  there  being  no  lawful   basis  for  such  detention.  Police  had  no  legal  basis  for  conducting  personal  searches  of   these  occupants.  
• The  Authority  has  concluded  that  a  number  of  aspects  of  the  Police  termination  of   Operation  Eight  were  contrary  to  law  and  unreasonable.    In  a  complex  operation  of  the   type  that  was  undertaken  here,  there  are  always  a  number  of  important  lessons  to  be   learned  about  future  Police  policy  and  practices.    The  Police  internal  debrief  following  the   termination  of  Operation  Eight  has  already  identified  a  number  of  those  lessons  and   necessary  changes  to  Police  training,  policy  and  operational  instructions  have  been  made.     The  Authority  has  made  a  number  of  other  recommendations  in  light  of  its  own  findings.     This  includes  the  need  to  re-­‐engage,  and  build  bridges,  with  the  Ruatoki  community.  

This looks a sensible and well balanced report. In short the conclusions are:

1. The operation against those arrested was justified as they posed a real and serious threat
2. The actual arrest and treatment of those arrested was done properly and lawfully
3. The treatment of the wider community was over the top, insensitive and in some cases unlawful

The Ruatoki community do deserve an apology for their treatment by the Police. I think they have had one already, but will no doubt receive another. It is worth noting that of course we now have a different Police Commissioner and Minister of Police as from 2007.

But let’s not make martyrs out of those arrested. They were acting somewhere between very foolishly and with malignant intent, and the Police were right to bring their activities to an end. Their personal treatment was not generally criticized by the IPCA. They also bear some of the blame for provoking the Police action in Ruatoki. 17 firearms were found in three properties at Ruatoki, and 12 smashed Molotov cocktails at their training camp.

But as I have commented before, the Police response did seem over the top – and the IPCA has agreed. We expect better  from our Police than we do of Tame Iti and Valerie Morse. They have a job ahead rebuilding confidence with Ruatoki.

The Herald reports:

A dangerous high-security prisoner who killed a Corrections officer has been sentenced for assaulting two more but will spend no extra time in prison, a penalty the prison guards’ union calls disgraceful.

Latu Kepu was already serving a jail sentence for the manslaughter of prison guard Jason Palmer when he attacked two other guards in separate incidents last October.

Kepu was sentenced at the North Shore District Court yesterday after previously pleading guilty to two charges of assault.

Judge Philippa Sinclair sentenced him to seven months in prison, to be served concurrently. That means Kepu will not have time added on to his sentence and is still eligible for parole in 2015 on his manslaughter conviction.

Well that will teach him a lesson. Not a single extra day in prison for bashing two prison guards up.

It is disgraceful. This makes life even more dangerous for prison guards if prisoners see they can bash them up and not get any extra penalty.

UPDATE: The disgrace it seems is the Herald story, not the sentence. Whale Oil blogs an e-mail from the Ministry of Justice:

In fact, Latu Kepa was sentenced yesterday in the North Shore Court on a s9 Summary Offences Act assault and a s196 Crimes Act assault (both on prison guards) to 7 months imprisonment cumulatively on his present sentence of Manslaughter. I have checked the court file, the prison warrant and listened to the court recording at the relevant part and all of them refer to a cumulative sentence.

I’m sorry to say the Corrections Association also seems to have been misinformed : “At a minimum, the seven-month sentence should have been cumulative to the manslaughter sentence, Mr Hanlon said.”

Please let me know if you require any further assistance,

Warm regards,

Sonja.

Sonja de Friez.
Director of Community Engagement, District Courts.

That is a huge error by the Herald to get the main fact of the story wrong. My regrets that I assumed the story was correct in criticizing the sentence.

The Herald have removed their story from their website. I trust it will be replaced by an apology.

The Dom post editorial:

Labour MP Nanaia Mahuta has fired a broadside at Parliament’s rules after she found herself stuck in the debating chamber late at night with her 5-month-old baby.

She was aiming at the wrong target.

Instead of having Parliament’s standing orders in her sights, she should have trained them on her party colleagues.

Labour talks the talk on family-friendly workplaces, but it appears it is not so good at walking the walk when it comes to helping a breastfeeding colleague, even one as senior and respected as Ms Mahuta.

Exactly. They have 9 proxies they can use every day. They have only one MP with an infant. Plus as they are not in Government, they can even vote with reduced numbers without consequence.

If Ms Mahuta felt she should be among those whose presence was not required, then the correct place for her to have directed her complaint was chief whip Chris Hipkins, who organises the roster and should have been alert to the high likelihood of Parliament going into urgency after Thursday’s Budget, and her Labour colleagues.

All it would have taken for her to have the night off would have been for Mr Hipkins to give her priority or for just one of those Labour MPs who was excused to have offered to step in and take her place. Surely, Ms Mahuta would have returned the favour when her circumstances allowed?

To be fair to Hipkins, it has been reported she originally had leave for Friday, but asked to swap it. I’m not sure all the blame is with the Whips. To some degree what we are seeing is a continuation of Labour’s internal warring – it is no coincidence that Mahuta is part of the marginalised Cunliffe faction and she has no love for the party leadership and whips after her demotion.

After Ms Mahuta’s complaint, Speaker David Carter is examining whether even more can be done. In the meantime, Labour, the champion of family-friendly workplaces, can help Ms Mahuta no end by practising what it preaches.

A fair point.

The Press reports:

A Christchurch city councillor says the city could offload non-core assets, including its own offices, to help pay its share of big-ticket rebuild projects.

Cr Tim Carter said last night that less important assets were expendable if it helped ease the council’s debt burden in funding anchor projects such as the new convention centre and roofed sports stadium.

“We should question whether we should be owning half of the civic office building and the Henderson properties.

“The Henderson properties … add nothing to ratepayers. The council had no plan for how we were going to develop them when the council decided to purchase, and we still have no plan.”

The council’s projected debt from earthquake recovery of $2.1 billion was not sustainable, he said.

“The council’s finances are in a very precarious position and we should consider our options rather than passing on higher rates,” Carter said.

He was against selling strategic, money-earning assets such as Christchurch International Airport, Lyttelton Port, Orion, and Enable, which is installing ultra-fast broadband in Christchurch.

The Council has adopted an absolutist position in which it will not sell any assets, no matter what. It’s a recipe for debt and massive rate hikes. Many commercial businesses sell some assets in order to purchase or build other more valuable ones. Decisions should be on a case by case basis.

The headline in Stuff was:

Stockholm rioting continues after shooting

Sweden is not normally a country you associate with rioting. When I saw the headline, I thought that it was almost inevitable that the rioting would be by immigrants. I felt a bit guilty over jumping to such a conclusion but the story starts:

Some 200 youths hurled rocks at police and set cars ablaze in a largely immigrant suburb of Stockholm today, the second day of rioting triggered by the fatal police shooting of a man wielding a knife.

Dozens of windows were smashed, 10 cars and several containers were set on fire, and seven police officers were injured. Cars and containers were also set ablaze in another of the Swedish capital’s suburbs, Fittja, although police said it was not clear whether the two events were linked.

The unrest began Sunday night in response to the May 13 shooting, in which police killed a 69-year-old man who had locked himself in an apartment in Husby, west of Stockholm. Police refused to give the nationality of the victim.

It sounds like France.

I am an absolute fan of immigration, but it has to be done in a way where new citizens integrate into their new country, not form enclaves. Few countries in Europe have managed this. I’m pleased to say that New Zealand largely does.

Reinfeldt added that Husby – where around 80 percent of the roughly 11,000 residents are first- or second-generation immigrants – has been going in the right direction during his seven-year tenure, with employment increasing and crime falling.

An 80% concentration of immigrants is not healthy in my opinion. As I said above, integration (which is different to assimilation) is the key.

Danyl at Dim-Post looks at the share price of Fletchers over the last month after Nick Smith 10 days ago announced an inquiry into the cost of building materials. As the price has dropped Danyl says:

According to the Steven Joyce/Fran O’Sullivan theory of political sharemarket vandalism, Nick Smith has ‘destroyed’ about $260 million dollars worth of wealth in the last ten days. I look forward to their columns/press releases warning of capital flight, skies raining blood etc.

This is one of Danyl’s more silly comparisons. In his world I guess there are no shades of grey. An inquiry into high prices is the same as a unilateral announcement with no consultation that the Government is going to dismantle the competitive market and set prices.

Let’s look at what Nick Smith actually said:

Housing Minister, Nick Smith, speaking on “The Nation” said there was significant concern that items “the likes Batts, likes of Gib and concrete” were more expensive than what they were in Australia.

Batts and Gib are Fletcher’s brands and the company is a major concrete supplier.

But Mr Smith denied the Government was singling Fletcher’s out.

“We need in a very thorough way not on the basis of rumour or speculation, on the basis of really good analysis and information, to have a hard look at how the building materials’ market is working and to ensure that there are the competitive pressures that are there,” 

“In terms of tariffs and those things, you know New Zealand has a pretty liberal regime for bringing products in, but are there other barriers? 

For instance, we have a Body Standards New Zealand that sets the standard, and sometimes I’m concerned that the industry groups have too much influence over those standards, that are then effectively adopted by councils and do not allow product from overseas to be able to give Kiwis real choice about those products.”

Mr Smith said his inquiry was going to look what regulatory tools that the government had at its fingertips, that could try and get building materials costs more reasonable for the industry. 

So no mention or even hint of price controls. In fact the announcement seems focused on increasing competition in the market, and reducing regulatory costs. And also note that these products are just a few of many produced by Fletchers.

This is hardly in the same universe as what Greens and Labour did with Contact Energy and the 13 other generators. They have been attacking Contact for a couple of years, claiming (falsely) their prices are higher than the SOEs. Contact has only one product – electricity, and their announcement was that if elected they will unilaterallly determine the price Contact can sell electricity at in the future. This is the Government deciding the price for the sole product Contact produces. It is not about increasing competition, but removing it all together. It is in fact a de facto nationalisation as if the Government gets to set the price you charge for your sole product, they effectively own your company.

So as I say, the comparison is beyond silly.

Stuff reports:

A list of organisations that have expressed interest in running charter schools has been outed, revealing a high proportion of religious groups, including a Manawatu church arguing it has the right to teach creationism using taxpayer money because state schools teach evolution.

The Post Primary Teachers’ Association (PPTA) has defended its decision to print the list in this month’s edition of its members’ magazine, which names 21 organisations that registered interest – almost half of them religious groups – with president Angela Roberts arguing that the process had been shrouded in secrecy.

The secrecy is probably to prevent nonsense stories like this one.

That school referred to – has not even applied.

However, the PPTA yesterday named organisations including The Sabbath Rest Adventist Church. The church had been interested in the options presented by partnership schools but had decided not to make an application this year while charter schools legislation remained before Parliament, trustee Jill Friar said.

So this shock horror example is of a church that has decided NOT to apply. Of course many readers won’t get that far.

Asked if she thought taxpayer money should be allocated to schools teaching creationism, Mrs Friar responded it was tantamount to funding secular schools to teach evolution.

“Look at the state school system – they teach evolution as if it’s a fact and it’s not a fact. Even scientists say it’s a theory, so what’s the difference at the end of the day? Why should we teach evolution as if it were a fact when there is a theory that is an alternative?” Mrs Friar said.

“It’s education and caring for children that is important – to me that’s what the argument should be all about.”

PPTA president Angela Roberts said taxpayer cash should not go to schools teaching creationism.

I agree that no charter school should get funding if they wish to teach creationism. But again this church has not even applied to be a charter school, and I’m 99% confident that they would never get approved if they do wish to teach creationism as science.

Labour education spokesman Chris Hipkins said it was an example of why critics feared the charter school model.

“Those are their beliefs – but the state should not be paying for it. Those parents and kids can choose to believe and to receive a religious education. But not to the exclusion of other sciences, and I think in this case that is really inappropriate,” Mr Hipkins said.

It’s an example of nothing. Their big worry is that all the applicants will be so good, they won’t be able to demonise them.

The Makahika Outdoor Pursuits Centre (MOPC) in Levin, which offers alternative education for young male offenders, also registered interest. The organisation’s work is currently sub-contracted by the Ministry of Justice. Co-director Sally Duxfield said she and her husband paid up to $60,000 a year out of their own pockets to finance the programme.

MOPC was considering becoming a charter school because the funding style could allow them to extend to a full-year residential programme, Mrs Duxfield said.

The centre would use the New Zealand curriculum and employ registered teachers.

“The mainstream system doesn’t work for these boys. Some of these boys haven’t sat at a school desk since they were 10 or 12 because they’ve beaten people or stabbed people . . . they come here because they are unable to be educated safely [elsewhere].”

Wow, how awful if they applied, Some of the most at risk youth might get a better education. What terrible stuff.

A reader e-mails:

Just read your blog on housing affordability. Good stuff.  The other point that is worth making is that the left go on about average housing prices and how they are out of reach of 1st Home Buyers. It is such a chardonnay socialist concept. For gods sake – who as a first home buyer buys an average priced property? Only a few well heeled young professionals. Most, nearly all, first homebuyers buy at the bottom end of the market (including myself). It’s called doing the hard yards by starting at the bottom of the property ladder.  And to get on the ladder they may have to buy in suburbs which are not their first preference.

While that may come as a shock to some, just check out the numerous options on www.realestate.co.nz of properties under $400k in Auckland. On the first page alone I saw a 2 bedroom flat in One Tree Hill (nice suburb) for $338k. A $20k contribution to a couple from Kiwisaver ($10k of their own savings) would get them into this pretty easily depending on their combined incomes.  Nice starter with the opportunity to add some value. Have a look at the options on the various real estate web sites.

Sure – not ideal for a large family but people should be aiming to get into the property market before they endow themselves with multiple kids, get themselves established and then have children. Even with this flat you could have your first child before moving up to a bigger home, but by that time you might have been in the property market for 4 to 5 years (2 to 3 as young couple and another two with a baby) and have built some tidy capital.

It is a good point that we should not overly focus on the average price. For first time buyers the level of say the 25th percentile is probably a more useful figure.

I’ve only owned two apartments. The first one cost me around a third of the second one, as I worked my way up the property chain. I would never ever have been able to consider going straight into what I own today.

Midnight in Moscow, at Circa, is a lively story of love, loyalty and politics. It is set in the NZ Embassy in the USSR in 1947. At times it is a bit like a murder mystery, but instead of working out who was the killer, it is more who was the spy?

You also get intrigued by whether that gay man and the young girls’ blossoming friendship may in fact be something for her aunt to worry about. Will the wife find out her husband’s affair with the mistress of Boris Pasternak?

There is of course a political theme to the play, as expected from playwright Dean Parker. Young Madeleine (played by Chelsea Bognuda) have a naive appreciation of the wonders of the worker’s paradise. Her aunt, and head of mission, June (Carmel McGlone) lays out the reality of what the Soviet Union was really about – political prisoners and repression.

Other embassy staff have some surprising views, which reveal themselves during the play.

The star of the show for me was Gavin Rutherford as the witty, urban, flamboyant and promiscuous Kit. His character provides many of the laughs. he provides the signature quote from E M Forster “If I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country”. Stephan Papps also excels as Boris Pasternak.

Jon Pheloung and Jessica Robinson play husband and wife Hugh and Sophie. Hugh is helping the famous Boris Pasternak  translate Doctor Zhivago into English, and also having an affair with Boris’ mistress Olga (Miranda Manasiadis). Hugh’s character is based on NZ diplomat Patrick Costello, who was suspected of being a Soviet spy. The debate continues today as to whether he was. For my 2c I think he was.

There is a chilling moment when Pasternak gets a phone call from Moscow, and it turns outs to be Stalin himself. This is of course based on real life, and I’d encourage people to read the awful treatment of Pasternak and other authors under the USSR.

Photo by Stephen A’Court

Parker has crafted a very clever play that shows how awful the USSR was (and certainly was not an apologist for it as a Herald review suggested). There were also some lovely moments such as when the three female staff rehearsed for their role in The Mikado, bing out on by the British Council.

I enjoyed the play, but I did have a couple of criticisms.

The set was very well done, but I found the suits worn by the men (especially Kit) did not look anything like the 1940s. They looked like very modern suits. Maybe I’ve been spoilt by how well shows like Mad Men get the look and feel of an older era so well, but the suits did jar with me, as not fitting into the era.

Another minor point was the idea that a woman would be head of delegation in 1947. I know of course that a play is fiction, but again it made it harder to get into the play. The best plays are where you forget it is a play, and you are one the edge of your seat wondering how it will all end.

I also like a play that grabs your attention at the beginning, and found the opening monologue didn’t quite do that. Also the poetry scene with Hugh and Pasternak went on a bit too long for my simple tastes. The play lasted two hours 15 minutes (plus a 15 minute interval). I thought the first half dragged on a bit and could have been shorter or brisker. The second half though was much more enjoyable, and overall was a very good production.

John Smythe at Theatreview has also reviewed the play. It runs at Circa One until Saturday 8 June.

UPDATE: I am informed that in fact the head of delegation in 1947 was indeed a woman, so wasn’t NZ progressive!

Treasury has just released a mound of documents on Solid Energy. There’s over 100 documents so I’m not going to try and read them all.

I am looking at some around the proposed Natural Resources Ltd. if any readers are bored, feel free to read a few docs, and comment below any interesting aspects of them.