Kiwiblog

First Husband Peter Davis wrote to the Herald on Tuesday accusing them of formenting happy mischief.

A senior journalist suggested to me “Formenting Happy Mischief” would be a better slogan for Kiwiblog than the Herald.  I’m inclined to agree.

I don’t have a tagline for the blog. I quite like the idea of using one supplied (indirectly) by Peter Davis!

Go over to Spare Room and check out the video of the most spoiled 15 year old “beauty queen” in America.  Her parents wait on her hand and foot, give her a new Christmas present *every day* and well you just have to watch it.

The suggestion of a common or harmonised carbon emissions trading scheme with both Australia and NZ is to my eyes a good one.

Australia is our largest trading partner, and having us implement such a scheme without Australia doing similar always risked increasing their relative advantage over us. If Clark and Rudd can give priority to have a harmonised scheme, this should be beneficial to both countries.

The NZ Herald reports:

The Electoral Commission is seeking advice on whether personal websites that carry political opinions should be treated the same as blogs under the Electoral Finance Act.

The law exempts from election rules “the publication by an individual, on a non-commercial basis on the internet of his or her personal political views (being the kind of publication commonly known as a blog).”

Electoral Commission chief executive Helena Catt said it was unclear how wide the exemption was and whether it included personal websites that did not necessarily take the blog format…

Dr Catt said the commission hoped to clarify the law soon and would meet in early April to discuss advice on a range of online areas, including whether political parties’ websites had to abide by the rules for election advertisements.

It does indeed seem ludicrous that the law discriminates based on the type of technology a website uses.  But sadly this is not some drafting error, but a deliberate decision supported by Labour, NZ First and the Greens.

The Departmental Report (Para 306) advises not to broaden the exemption:

The aim of this provision is to make it clear that the publication by an individual of their personal political views on the internet in the form of  “blog” or “weblog” (which is a form of online diary) does not amount o an election advertisement. The provision is broad enough to cover all such blogs, including generic online diaries on particular websites, such as (for example) www.blogspot.com; www.myspace.com; www.facebook.com.

So the officials’ advice was very much that this applies only for views published in the form of a blog.

And National MP Chris Finlayson put up an amendment which would have widened the exemption to:

the publication by an individual, on a non-commercial basis, on the Internet of his or her personal political views

And this was rejected by Labour, Greens and NZ First.

So the problem for the Electoral Commission, and Crown Law who presumably are advising them, is that they probably agree it is ridicolous that the law defining an election ad should vary depending on the type of technology used, but if they choose to interpret the law more liberally then they are flying in the face of what Parliament explicitly voted not to do.

In his IFR column yesterday hard core leftie Chris Trotter said:

New Zealand should probably hope for a National victory, too.

So does this mean Chris has seen the light and repented? Well, not quite. Chris goes on to explain:

A defeat for the Right in November would be all too likely to encourage conservatism’s most dim-witted and violent adherents to take Von Clausewitz at his word and “continue politics by other means”.

So Chris is just saying people should vote National, because if you don’t we’re all going to start rioting in the streets.

This is one of the reasons why People Power do harm beyond the odd smashed window. They allow Chris to paint a picture of thousands of violent rightists just waiting to go on the rampage if National should lose the election. It’s about as likely as Tame Iti voting ACT.

Earlier in the column, Chris covers the events of 2005 election reasonably fairly:

However, the Right’s conviction that they were robbed of victory in 2005 is not entirely fanciful. The money the Labour Party used to pay for Helen Clark’s infamous “pledge card” came from a public fund which at least two responsible state officials had warned it not to use. That arguably illegal decision freed-up the half-million dollars the party needed to bank-roll its South Auckland strategy. That Labour was able to edge past National in the final hours of election night was due, in no small measure, to campaign over-spending.

The Right’s rage was not abated when the final election returns showed a narrow majority of votes had been cast for the Centre-Right. The combined total of votes for the parties of the Centre-Left (Labour, Progressive, Green) was 1,082,281 (48.1%) while the Centre-Right (National, Act, NZ First, United Future) secured 1,115,257 (49.6%).

Chris hasn’t classified the Maori Party as Centre-Right or Centre-Left. Also I get slightly different percentages as there were a total of 2,275,629 valid votes.  Maybe Chris is going off total votes for parties which made it into Parliament which is 2,245,801.  Let’s see – that might be it as that gives the CR 49.7% and CL 48.2%.

Incidentially while I have heard many people rage about the illegal overspending of some $400K to $800K by Labour, I’ve not heard many claim that the CR got more votes than the CL. I certainly tend to regard the Maori Party as more CL than CR, which puts the CL marginally ahead of the CR.  Even if you add Destiny into the CR vote that gives you 1,129,467 for the CR and 1,130,544 for the CL – almost a tie – only 1,077 votes in it.

I’m very impressed with Trade Me that they had enough of a sense of humour to keep the auction for an Honorary Consulship to the destination of your choice open for almost an entire week.

Whale Oil blogs that this was not due to accidental oversight but that they had been enjoying it:

We’ve enjoyed watching your listing and the various questions members have asked, and the listing has gained quite a bit of attention which is great. However it’s also accrued a number of complaints, which is understandable when dealing with politics.

Due to the complaints, and due to the fact that the item itself isn’t actually something you can deliver, we’ve removed the listing.

Whale notes that if National wins, he might be able to get very rich selling these for real. Personally I think he was more excited by the fact one of the bidders was offering Rachel Hunter, Aja Rock, Nicky Watson and Gilda Kirkpatrick for a weekend romp.

EPMU National Secretary has stuck with his original decision not to stand for Labour in 2008.

I am one of those who will not be surprised if Andrew is Prime Minister one day.  And if we have to have a Labour PM, he might not be a bad choice.

I think it is a sensible decision not to stand in 2008 – the worst possible time to enter Parliament is when your party is likely to go into Opposition.  The best time to enter is the election before when you head back into Government.

It’s pretty good news for Phil Goff also. If Labour lose in November, it is hard to see how anyone else can be a credible replacement for Clark. If Little had entered the caucus, then Clark might be tempted to stay on as leader for say 12 – 18 months, so that Little could them be a potential successor.

The Standard, and some other left blogs, have been critical of Bunnings for only paying workers a starting rate of NZ$12/hr compared to NZ$19/hr in Australia. They talk about the Australian CEO’s salary but that is a red herring.  The questions I would ask is what is the EBITDA for the NZ and Australian operations, and also what are the gross revenue and staff numbers for each side of the Tasman.  And what is the cost of living in each country.
Without that info, I can’t really offer an informed view as to whether Bunnings pay rates are reasonable in NZ compared to Australia or not. Also of course one of the incentives for employers to pay staff more, is the fact they may lose their staff to other employers who need those skills.  In a low unemployment environment, this is a real issue.

Nevermind also blogged on this issue and e-mailed the NZ General Manager of Bunnings, who replied to him.  Well done to Nevermind for publishing the reply, which is:

Thank you for your correspondence, as I am sure you will appreciate there are two sides to every story.

We have been negotiating with the National Distribution Union since May 2007, during this time we have lifted the average wage for all team members by 6.4%.This includes wages for union members despite being unable to reach agreement with the NDU. In addition Bunnings has also provided additional benefits which the NDU chooses to ignore such as 6% contribution to Kiwisaver, an offer to all team members of $1000 worth of shares in the company at the cost of one dollar, bonuses for all team members measured against store targets, dividends on shareholdings, to name a few.(around 80% of Bunnings NZ workers are shareholders)

Although the NDU publicly includes all Bunnings workers by insinuation in its press releases and pamphlets in fact they represent a little over 300 of our 2400 team members of which less tan 200 have joined in the industrial action taken.

We have a strong commitment to employing great people who want to work for us because it is a great place to work and in the main we believe we are achieving that goal despite the activities of the NDU.

I realise it is your choice where you shop but appreciate the opportunity to put the other side of the issue to you.

Now again I still don’t have information on exactly what the NDU is asking for, and what Bunnings have offered, so I’m not going to declare one side good and one side bad. But I will say I absolutely love the idea of a company where 80% of the staff are shareholders and would love to see more companies do this.

Tim Donoghue recently swapped from the Independent Financial Review to the Dominion Post, and hence now contributes to their group blog – Inside the Beltway.

He did what I think is his first blog post yesterday, and it is a good one – all about the breakdown in relationships between Jim Anderton and the fishing industry. It’s a godo topic for a blog post.  While there have been individual fisheries stories, it is timely to have someone look at the overall state of the relationship. And I didn’t realise how badly Anderton has been getting hammered in court as he keeps trying to act against the Fisheries Act. Some quotes:

Last week, Parliament’s Primary Production Select Committee released a financial review paper which in part found relations between the fishing industry and the Fisheries Ministry were at a very low ebb.

Reacting to this observation Fisheries Minister Jim Anderton noted industry was going through a painful time at the moment and would do well to look in the mirror, rather than blame the ministry for its problems.

By week’s end however the boot was on the other foot and it was Anderton who needed to purchase himself a large, vertical mirror for self-examination purposes.

Anderton went on the offensive on Friday after the High Court at Wellington delivered a decision finding against him and his ministry over their handling of catching rights for orange roughly in fishing area one…

Rather than thinking about an appeal most engaged in the fishing industry hold the view Anderton and his ministry would be better off endeavouring to implement the 1996 Fisheries Act as it is actually written, rather than going off on their own little tangents.

If ever there was an example of just why relations between Anderton, his ministry and industry are at an almost all time low, it’s the Antons litigation.

Little wonder the captains of the commercial fishing industry are quietly and diplomatically asking themselves the question: who should be looking at himself in the mirror now then – eh Jim?

As I said, a very interesting blog post on an area not often followed closely.

Okay the blog poll (not scientific) on who is telling the truth in NZ First on their mystery donation closed at midday.  The results are:

1. Dail Jones – 50% (129 votes)
2. Neither – 46% (119 votes)
3. Winston Peters – 4% (11 votes)
4. Both – 0% (1 vote)

Was that the loyal Peter Brown who voted both?

The Dominion Post reports on an unhappy Tauranga family.

18 year old Jacob Bowring was dating 18 year old Krystal Clark (above).  All fine.

But then Krystal traded Jacob in for his 45 year old father James (above). She is now expecting his child.

Jacob, understandably, was not too happy about this. So as his Dad drove by with Krystal (and Krystal’s 14 year old  female friend), Jacob yelled out that he was a paedophile.

Father James was not too happy about this, and as Jacob is too old to be smacked, chose instead to try and run him over. He chased Jacob down the street until Jacob hid behind a lamp-post.

Jacob got his father, James, arrested.  Now James already has four disqualified- driving convictions, so the Judge sentenced him to five months’ home detention, drug and alcohol counselling and 12 months’ loss of licence.

Only one small problem – his home detention is to be served out on his house-bus!!

So he can drive his house bus over his son, without breaching his home detention

Highly amusing (except for the poor boss) Dom Post article about the campaign of terror from an employee against her boss.  It included:

• Dog faeces in the mail box
• Fish in the letterbox (much better to do shrimps in the curtain lining)
• Warning her she might get hit by a car
• sending magazines with the eyes and mouth of the actress on the cover cut or burnt out and with “evil” written on it
• cartoons suggesting her death
• words cut out of newspapers and magazines saying things such as “evil bitch”, “die bitch” and “now it’s war”
• e-mails suggesting that Nazi Germany would welcome her with open arms
• covering her car with sealant
• superglueing the car locks

That is just scaringly obsessional.   I wonder what happened to so unhinge her.

A leading economist did a presentation to the Business Roundtable Retreat on Friday. It was Chatham House Rules so I can report some of the detail – but not who said what. It was an analysis of the trends and issues in the economy, and then some possible solutions.

• The 90 day bill rate predicted to drop in 2009 to 6% but then to increase and stabilise at 7%
• A small increase in the unemployment rate reaching 4% in 2010
• The equilibrium level of inflation may have increased from 2% to 2 1/4 to 2 1/2 per cent.
• Migration to Australia would continue and this would be of the relatively “more productive” New Zealanders. This isn’t a judgement on education levels or intelligence as much as recognising they are people with “skills established in this economy” so generally more productive here than any replacements.
• Mining in Australia is only 7% of GDP and 2% of their workforce so incorrect to credit the minerals boom for their economic growth.
• The big challenge for NZ is to increase our productivity, and it is hard to do this with a declining talent pool. Hence we have a vicious circle – the more people who leave, the harder it is to increase productivity so incomes can increase to keep people here.
• Agricultural Protectionism is a real issue and hurting the agricultural sector
• Multilateral trade deals and plurilateral trade deals are better than bilateral deals
• NZ needs to shift focus in trade deals from purely agricultural access to also have investment rights in agricultural processes and storage facilities.

He also did a very nice summary of one of the problems with the current macroeconomic model. Basically, if I recorded it correctly, it is:

1. Increasing Inflation –> Increasing Cash Rate
2. Increasing Cash Rate –> Increasing Interest Rates
3. Increasing Interest Rates –> Increased NZ$
4. Increased NZ$ –> Decreasing Exports
5. Decreasing Exports –> Decreasing Economic Growth
6. Decreasing Economic Growth –> Decreasing Investment
7. Decreasing Investment –> Decreasing Productivity Growth
8. Decreasing Productivity Growth –> Decreasing Aggregate Supply
9. Decreasing Aggregate Supply –> Increasing Inflation

In one sense it is an argument why it is important to keep inflation under control from the beginning, but it does highlight a weakness in the current monetary policy cycle. Whether there is a better solution though is the real question.

It was suggested that the RBNZ targets should have the emphasis on targeting inflation over the medium term removed, as it has led to timidity with the RBNZ late to act, with the consequence being inflation and interest rates stay higher for longer than they otherwise would have been.

He also highlighted some ways to increase productivity:

1. Encourage people to stay in NZ
2. Increase the returns for effort
3. Reform and reduce tax levels
4. Get rid of redistribution policies which just redistribute money back to those who pay it, and adds a deadweight cost to the economy
5. Reduce the rate of growth in the public sector relative to the private sector
6. Make it easier for employers to release lower productivity staff

Now people can make arguments against each and every one of these on grounds of social justice or fairness etc. I mean for example I wouldn’t advocate being able to get rid of staff at whim. But the point the economist was making is that if you don’t do these things, you will find it harder to increase productivity growth. So it is all a trade off – if you do not do any of the above you’ll watch the gap with Aussie grow even faster.

There is also a list of what not to do:

1. Don’t discourage the able from staying
2. Don’t discourage more effort
3. Don’t discourage investment
   1. Don’t ignore property rights
   2. Don’t have costly planning requirements
   3. Don’t increase the regulatory burden
   4. Don’t impose climate change policies which have large risks for investors

It was clarified this wasn’t an argument for having no policies to mitigate climate change. It was for uncertainty and risks to be minimised.

And again people can argue for or against each of the above – it was just a reminder that there is a cost to productivity growth if you do discourage effort and investment etc.

To some degree it was a bit gloomy.  The vicious cycle with migration and the impact of monetary policy on productivity growth make it very clear that closing the gap with Australia will not at all be easy.  It won’t just happen by chance without a change in policies.  And there will be no one or two simple things to do – it will only happen as a result of taking action in a dozen different ways, each incrementally helping increase productivity growth.

It looks like Roger Douglas and Rodney Hide have made up. Good. ACT needs to be united to do well. A centre-right Government is more likely is ACT and United Future both do relatively well.  If both parties are restricted to one seat each, then National really needs at least 59 seats to govern without having to be reliant on the Maori Party.  Maybe more than 59 if there is more than one overhang seat.

But if ACT and United Future can each get say three MPs, then National/ACT/United Future can govern with National just getting say 55 or 56 MPs.

The strain is showing on Helen Clark with her attacking the NZ Herald as being an enemy of Labour for the last 91 years!

Facing opinion polls putting her Government about 20 points behind National, Prime Minister Helen Clark said the Herald had run a silly campaign against the Electoral Finance Act and was a Tory paper which had shown no charity to Labour in the party’s 91 years of existence.

She singled out former cartoonist Sir Gordon Minhinnick for flaying Labour Governments last century.

In a TV interview, she said money linked to election-year ads might have been a factor in the Herald campaign against electoral finance law changes.

Where do you start with some stupidity.  I imagine over 91 years the newspaper has had many editors and owners.  Perhaps there is a secret oath of office they take to “never show charity to the Labour Party” as each new owner and editor is sworn in. Readers – feel free to suggest in the comments what the words might be for this oath of office.  Maybe all the staff have to swear it also?

The hilarious thing is I recall in 1999 that the then National Government was also infuriated with the NZ Herald, and convinced it was unfair to the Government.

Next we have Clark attacking a former cartoonist who used to make fun of Labour Governments.  How dare he the cad.  I call for state registration of cartoonists to regulate what they say.

Then the stuff on the Herald and advertising shows her typical paranoia about people who disagree with her.  She simply can not fathom that any of the opponents to the Electoral Finance Act could do so for sincere reasons of good faith. So she claims the Herald might be worried about lost advertising. Now for this paranoid theory to hold true, the publisher needs to have instructed the editor and all political staff to oppose the EFA. But it also means the lost advertising needs to be significant. I actually suspect the EFA will lead to more money being spent on advertising this year, but even if there is a reduction APN’s share of any reduction is probably no more than $250,000 – six full page ads. Now their revenue for last year was $1.314b so you know I really don’t think the publisher instructs the editor and staff over a potential loss of 0.02% of revenue.

The Herald also reveals that once again Peter Davis enters the political fray.  This is the surest sign of Labour in trouble when Davis starts writing letters to the editor!

I’m used to getting abusive comments, and abusive e-mails.  Even had the odd abusive phone call at home. Yesterday I received my first abusive text message:

“You and McCroskie (and National?) share a very sick way of life when you defend the riding crop sicko and other child beaters. You are a very sad unit!” 

I love the rational intelligent ones.

The NZ$ hit a new high against the US$ dollar today. The above graph shows monthly averages except for Feb 08 which is yesterday’s peak.

NBR and NZPA report that we hit 81.5c and some traders are picking 90c.  Earlier forecasts were for a peak of 83c to 95c though.

Also of interest is  Westpac is picking the Reserve Bank to increase interest rates twice this year. Ouch. But an interesting call from the Canterbury Manufacturers Association for a variable rate compulsory superannuation saving scheme. So when inflation starts to increase, you increase the compulsory deduction rather than put interest rates up.

It’s a nice idea but will only affect personal consumption but business activity, so I am unsure whether it would be as effective as the cash rate.  But just like Don Brash’s suggested variable petrol tax – it would be good to model.

It may be getting close to being over for Clinton in primaries. While she will hold on until the Mini Tuesday on the 4th, she has multiple problems:

1. Five polls out yesterday showed Obama ahead nationally by an average of 7% – the lead ranged from 2% to 16%
2. Clinton’s lead in Texas has dropped to an average of just 0.7%.
3. The head to head averages show Obama beating McCain by 5,2% but McCain beating Clinton by 3.6%

On the Republican side, an end is in sight. McCain now has 1,013 delegates of the 1,191 he needs. So around 180 more needed. There are 265 up for grabs on the 4th so he should become the nominee on that day.

UPDATE: Jay Cost at Real Clear Politics analyses the numbers and works out how Clinton can still win – unlikely he says, but not impossible.

A link from Frog Blog led me indirectly to this page, which has the top 10 ways to Green up your sex life.  A summary:

1. Sex toys made from glass, metal, silicone, hard plastics, or elastomers – and avoid those containing phthalates.
2. Organic lube – avoiding petroleum products, artificial scents, flavors, and colors.
3. Glyde condoms for vegans – no milk enzyme as in latex.
4. Gifts – Organic massage oils, fair trade chocolate, or a bottle of biodynamic red wine
5. Showering together can save water
6. Bamboo bed sheets (yes seriously)
7. Eco-undies
8. Going vegetarian to improve the taste of your “love juices”.  Their words – not mine.
9. Natural aphrodisiacs – ginseng, kava kava root, damiana leaves, kelp, tribulus, ginko biloba, rhodiola rosea, and horny goat weed!
10. Green matchmaking sites such as Green Drinks.

Where would we be without the Greens to help us with such good advice

A good column by Ben Thomas and David Young in NBR:

The fact that National hasn’t announced plans to close schools, slash health funding and turf civil servants out of work is evidence in itself, to these conspiracy theorists, that National has a secret agenda. Forget everything that the Tories say; they have a hidden master plan plain to anyone who pays their $10-a-year Labour party membership.

Katherine Rich isn’t quitting to be with her kids; she’s spooked by the neo-liberal policies of National. John Key isn’t really a centrist; he’s in bed with murky financial backers.

And John Key plans to cut everyone’s wages!

They also make an astute column on the Owen Glenn affair:

Although Clark suffers the indignity of having to explain Glenn’s comments to the media, there are no accusations that she has enjoyed the cheery billionaire’s hospitality or swapped ideas over pasta.

The bigger damage is to those who argue that “Hollow Men” run the National Party. That narrative hinges on the idea that any business or rich person’s interference in politics must be malevolent or nefarious. 

Of course it is only those who donate to right wing parties who are malevolent and nefarious!

I thought I must have missed it, but a checking of the Greens website finds they have not said a single word on Labour President Mike Williams incorrectly denying a donation from Owen Glenn, the perception of favouritism to Glenn due to his massive donations, and the NZ First revelation of a mystery close to $100K donation.

So much for the party of principle.  If this involved National they would have screamed for the Serious Fraud Office to be sent in.

I blogged a while back on how US comedian Sarah Silverman presented a video to boyfriend Jimmy Kimmel about how she was “fucking Matt Damon”.

Kimmel has responded with a music video on how he is “fucking Ben Affleck” (best mate of Damon). It has a massive chorus and includes Harrison Ford, Robin Williams and Cameron Diaz (wait until you see her hand signals).

It is effing hilarious and managed to trump Silverman’s efforts. They must have had so much fun making it.

Hat Tip: Whoar

David Carter has confirmed he will not seek the nomination for the safe National seat of Selwyn. Anger over the the selection process used last year has not dissipated so he has made the call so that the Electorate can unite behind a new candidate.

I trust what happened in Selwyn will act as a learning exercise for National, on how not to handle a selection. Contested selections are healthy – even when an incumbent MP is involved.

It is a highly desirable seat and I expect at least five candidates will seek it.  Pre-selection will whittle that down to five and the selection is on April 8.  Kudos to David Carter for putting the party first.  He will of course have a winnable list place.  Hell – on current polls almost every candidate has a winnable list place

The Government should read this column and be afraid:

I agree with Bob McCoskrie and Larry Baldock. Eight words which churn my stomach as I write them. When left-leaning, social liberals like me are forced to align with the fundies speaking in tongues and organising petitions, you know our little country at the bottom of the world has gone mad…

The problem for me is that I love the law and the democratic process. As a lawyer, I understand the benefits of obeying the law and the potential consequences of disregarding it. I want to parent within the law and I want to be able to use smacking as one of many parenting tools…

I don’t believe smacking is for every parent or every child. I don’t believe that it’s an effective tool once children get beyond four or five. I wouldn’t insist that you smack your child, but I don’t believe Parliament fixes anything by taking away my right to smack mine.

Sue Bradford told us that we had to stop treating our children as property. They are people too, with their own minds and their own rights. Illuminating stuff. But the police officer who pulled me over and asked why my child was wandering willy-nilly around the backseat didn’t buy it. I am apparently totally responsible for her well-being and behaviour, but not to be trusted when it comes to making parenting decisions about how to develop her sense of right and wrong.

The whole column is worth a read. And Sacha Coburn will not be an exception – there will be many more like her – left leaning liberals who don’t like this law.

Most of my “reviews” are positive.  The last bad hotel review I think was in Rome in 2004.

But as a service to readers I should mention Saturday Night in the Quest on Cintra Lane. I was crashing with a friend who was staying there briefly until her new apartment was ready.

A minor gripe is that there was no table for working on – just a coffee table.  So many people travel with laptops nowadays a bit of table space is necessary,

But the bed was simply horrendous.  It wasn’t so much that it was a small single bed (reminded me of the university hostel ones we used to label as contraceptives), but it was so cheap and tacky.  No real base, the wheels were such it moved about all night, and it was just awful. You get better I reckon in a youth hostel.

The final injury was when we checked out late (due to confusion over who was checking out).  Now I have no problems with a penalty for checking out late, but they refused to compromise on charging us anything less than than an entire extra night’s fee, even though the room was still available before check in.

The receptionist was very nice and I don’t blame her as she can not alter policy.  But there was no manager even available whom I could talk to.

The late checkout isn’t the biggie though.  The beds are just nasty.