Kiwiblog

Go to CNBC and watch this video of Representative Gary Ackerman savaging officials from the US SEC over the Madoff Ponzi scheme. Wonderful. No method to embed but is worth a watch.

1. Poneke not only rejects the linking of climate change to the Victorian bush fires, he points out that opposition to removing vegetation around new homes contributed the problem, as it made it easier for the fire to spread to houses.
2. Maia at Capitalism Bad blogs on how she thought she was going to be arrested, after I twittered that I expected Maia to be arrested this week. I meant of course Maia Jefferies, the Shortland Street character. An unitended consequence!
3. Jordan responds to my post of yesterday, saying I exagerrated what he said.
4. Bridget Saunders blogs some amusing e-mails between her and Cactus Kate.
5. Aaron Bhatnagar blogs his happiness with Auckland City keeping rates increaes to half the rate of inflation, and puts the boot into the North Shore Mayor for stupid comparisons.
6. Cactus Kate blogs on her time in Wellington this week, and how she never meets for “coffee” as it tastes like “burnt sperm”. One can only wonder the circumstances of being able to make such a comparison.
7. Nigel Kearney at Kiwi Pundit provides a great example of how trade benefits both parties, even if one party has an absolute advantage in production, becaue it is all about comparative advantage. If this confuses you go read his post.

A reader points out this article for a year ago:

Undeterred by the credentials of those sounding warning bells, BNZ chief economist Tony Alexander said it was never difficult to find doomsayers. “So there’s nothing really new,” he said.

“And if the Iraq war and September 11 didn’t generate a recession, then it’s going to take something very special to do that.”

Alexander also said most recent global growth forecasts were being revised up, not down.

However, any global fallout would affect financial markets rather than become a fundamental economic downturn, he said.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing!

How disgraceful to have the UK ban a Dutch MP, because he is seen as anti-Muslim, Would they ban someone who is anti-Christian?

Many western countries slowly but surely are imposing self censorship. We saw thi with the Dutch cartoons. There is no right not to be offended by criticism of your religion.

Mr Wilders is under 24-hour police protection because of his anti-Muslim stance.

He has been receiving death threats from Muslim groups outside Holland since the anti-Koran film appeared on the internet earlier this year.

The film features verses from the Koran alongside images of the terrorist attacks in the US on 11 September 2001, Madrid in March 2004 and London in July 2005.

The film equates Islam’s holy text with violence and ends with a call to Muslims to remove ‘hate-preaching’ verses from the Koran.

So Wilders says the Koran encourages violence, and to prove him wrong, he recieves death threats. And now to really prove him wrong the UK Government bans him from entering the UK, because they fear the violence that may erupt. Anyone see the irony?

I oppossd David Irving being banned from NZ. He may be a anti-semitic Holocaust denier, but the correct response is to let him attend and speak, and allow those who disagree with him, protest, mock and ridicule him. This is not hard with Irving.

Now Wilders is no Irving. Yes he is anti-Islam, but that is no excuse for the death threats he receives and the UK banning him.

I recall No Right Turn agreeing with me that Irving should not be banned from NZ. I wonder if he agrees the UK Govt should not ban Wilders, no matter how much some may be offended by him?

The Greens cement their position as extremists, by announcing they are going to vote against the repeal of the Electoral Finance Act.

Russel Norman say:

The Electoral Finance Act can be better but even now it does a lot more good than bad.

More good than bad. I wish I could live in that universe.

This just shows what antipathy they have for people spending their own money on having a voice, rather than looting the taxpayer for funding.

The final maiden speech was given yesterday by new Green MP Catherine Delahunty.  It is online here. Some extracts:

Mr Speaker, Te Tiriti o Waitangi is like a rope between us, the indigenous manawhenua and the Tangata Tiriti. We, Tangata Tiriti hold on to the rope because we need it most. At our end the rope is made of the bones and tears of migrants – many of whom left cold islands on the other side of the world hoping desperately for a better life. And that better life came to pass through systemic violence, theft and denial. Te Tiriti, a frayed and stretched arrangement is the tie that binds us to this place and to the hope that violence, theft and denial need not be the basis for our bonds in the future.

A nice cheerful start.

We enjoy ongoing colonial privilege, but we have an opportunity to take responsibility for this and work for a justice-based peace. This justice is desperately needed from Ruatoki to Gaza.

Hmmn I think she just compared the Urerewa Raids to the conflict in Gaza. Well who knows, what she really meant.

But first I thank my mother for her vital lesson that a background of privilege and racism need not distort the human heart

So is she saying her mother came from a racist background?

Despite that healthy suspicion towards institutions I embrace this new chapter with all the illusions of a maiden. Last time I was a maiden was 40 years ago. It’s refreshing to revisit that time of passionate conviction, when it was our unique duty to resist the system while wearing a lot of black clothing.

Umm, was she a cat burglar?

The person who pushed me into this was my partner Gordon Jackman who lives issues of justice every day. They say that behind every great man is an exhausted woman, or behind every great woman is a man trying to slow her down, but I say: beside this ordinary woman is an extraordinary and totally supportive man.

So it is just all the other men who are slowing down great women?

When I first marched on Parliament it was in a pushchair, protesting against nuclear weapons. At 10, I stood with my sisters on those steps of Moehau granite as we protested against troops being sent to Vietnam, and at 16 I led the first union of high school students to those same steps.

Wow she was a political activist as a two year old. Obviously her parents believed in letting her form her own views.

And, to my friends of the last decade – the educators for social change and social justice – these years have been ones of learning, so much richer than any unit standard or university essay. We have travelled a road that is made by walking and we have met with inspiring community activists and workers along the way. Thanks to the Treaty educators, the disability activists, the Women’s liberation and gay rights workers, the environmental campaigners, the unemployed rights activists, community development leaders and young unionists, the collective gardeners and all the other targets of SIS and Threat Assessment Unit time wasting.

I think she missed out the whales.

The hardest issue I have ever learned about remains riddled with denials and taboos. As a TAB — a temporarily able bodied person — I grew up with all the prejudices our society has developed to justify our discrimination against people living with impairments.

Very Orwellian – instead of disabled people., we define those who are not disabled as “temporarily abled bodied”.

In a healthy group the individual can thrive, it is not a war between nanny state and the free market, the real struggle is between earth-based collective well-being versus a polluted globalised greed.

All worship Gaia and you will be happy.

The international financial crisis is inextricably linked to climate change and if we can’t work the linkage out then Papatuanuku will spell it out for us.

Wow, climate change is to blame for the financial crisis also!

Well one can’t accuse Catherine of hiding who she is, and what she believes in. Never though we would find someone who makes Sue Bradford look like a reactionary sellout to the forces of capitalism!

Was a very funny moment last night, related to the speech. During the afore mentioned drinks, one National MP gave an impromptu impassioned speech on a particular topic. She was clapped at the end of the fiery speech, until the Nat next to her did the best burn I have seen in ages, and serenely commented that it was the best speech he had heard since Catherine Delahunty’s maiden speech. Within seconds everyone was in hysterics, as this new ultimate put down.

I’ve always thought the best nights out are often those where it is all unplanned. Last night was one of those.

Had drinks for a couple of birthdays last night, at 10 pm after the House rose. Now usually drinks at 3.2 is a low key affair, but people seemed to be in very good spirits, and what started as a couple of glasses of wine turned into a long night out, getting home around 3 am after several hours on Courtney Place.

I can’t imagine anyone would have imagined the dozen or so revellers were Members of Parliament (and a couple of others), especially the way they were dancing away. Funniest scenes are seeing the various male teens trying to hit on the married female MPs after they got pulled up for a dance.

I imagine a couple of people will be upset that shock horror MPs are like normal people and enjoy a night out. I would point out that this all happened after they finished work at 10 pm, having completed a 14 hour day.

The only sad part to the night was that the Green Parrot was closed – the tradition bread and butter end to a night. Many highlights – but none which I am allowed to blog about

The Dom Post editorial looks at two contrasting New Zealands:

One was the New Zealand of Paula McCutcheon, the young mother widowed last month when her husband, Mark, was stabbed while trying to help a woman who was being assaulted outside a Hawke’s Bay pub. Hers is the New Zealand most inhabit a land in which citizens go to work each morning, take pride in standing on their own feet, abide by the law and teach their children to respect others.

The other was the New Zealand of Victoria Stevens. It is a New Zealand in which adults healthy enough to rob and to steal, and to wrestle with the police, prefer to claim benefits than to go to work and in which mothers show their love for their sons by barking like dogs. To most New Zealanders theirs is a foreign country, but it is a foreign country that coexists alongside mainstream New Zealand.

Not so much a foreign country, but almost a foreign species.

And then focusing back on Stevens:

Although reliant on her fellow citizens to feed and clothe her, she acknowledges no reciprocal obligation to abide by the law or to treat others with respect. Is it any wonder her son now finds himself in the dock?

Unfortunately, she is not alone. As Prime Minister John Key has identified, there is a growing underclass in New Zealand, the members of which scorn notions of responsibility, respect and decency. Its ranks include those who made Nia Glassie’s short life a living hell and the dysfunctional Kahui clan, which closed ranks to shield its adult members from the police but totally failed to protect three-month-old twins Chris and Cru Kahui from whoever it was that inflicted the head injuries that killed them. It is a group too many of whose members are Maori.

And, despite the best efforts of academics and social workers, it is a group that no one has yet discovered how to reintegrate into society.

One thing is clear, however. Paying benefits year after year to people who flout the law, choose not to work and accept no reciprocal obligation for the aid they receive, has not worked.

It is time for Mr Key’s Government to take a rigorous look at the other New Zealand the one in which the evils of intergenerational welfare dependency are becoming more and more apparent.

Sadly, some people dispute there is any problem with generations of a family being on welfare. They see it as a right, not to be challenged.

John Banks has announced that the rates increase for Auckland City has been lowered from 4% to 2% thanks to some expenditure controls and cost cutting.

They are still spending $450 million on needed capital works.

At a time when both home owners and businesses are facing tough times, they will be grateful that the rates increase is looking to be so small – half the inflation rate, so a reduction in real terms.

Chris Barton looks at the Government’s fibre plans:

We do know fibre-optic cable is at the centre of Joyce’s rewiring plan and the mechanism to get there is the much-vaunted public-private partnership.

So far so good. But just who does Joyce plan to partner with? And will he be seduced by Telecom’s wiles?

There’s no doubt Telecom would love to bed Joyce. Such a tryst – Telecom building, operating and no doubt, wanting to own, the new wires – would secure the firm’s monopoly dynasty forever.

I think Mr Barton needs to take less Viagra before he writes his column

But it’s also clear such a dalliance would be a terrible mistake. Not to mention a betrayal of voter trust and a very poor return on taxpayers’ money.

And getting the maximum return on the Government’s investment is crucial.

If Joyce is still uncertain about what to do, he should re-read the very fine piece of analysis prepared for Internet New Zealand by Network Strategies. There, in glorious return on investment detail, is a simple answer to who the Government should partner with instead of Telecom – electricity lines companies.

Why? Because if New Zealand wants to rewire its aged telecommunications to a fibre-optic future, the electricity lines companies are the cheapest, most efficient way to do it.
Plenty of power poles and ducting are already going by our homes, already with resource consent, making it much easier to string or trench fibre to our doorsteps. How much cheaper? Without the lines companies, Network Strategies estimates a fibre network will cost $5 billion.

With the lines companies on board, the cost drops to $3 billion – making the Government’s $1.5 billion investment look like a very realistic sum to fulfil its election promise.

A $2 billion difference is far from insignificant. I am of course on the Board of Internet New Zealand, but we were as surprised as anyone I think that the research turned up such a massive price difference.

There are other reasons why this is very good idea. Most of the 27 lines companies in New Zealand are owned by consumer trusts – an ownership structure that tends to be sympathetic to longer payback periods and fits well with local initiatives that recognise the importance of broadband to a region’s economic and social wellbeing. And some, such as Vector and Counties Power, are already providing fibre to homes or businesses.

And even more importantly, lines companies do not tend to be in the business of providing services over their lines – they are an access provide rather than a service provider. This is actually crucial as you then avoid a vertically integrated monopoly, and then multiple service providers can comptere and offer different packages over the fibre.

But there are two problems. The first is what such a network would do to Telecom’s share price. There’s no doubt it would have an unsettling effect. But if the new wires are “open access”, it’s hard to see how Telecom can complain too much.

Open access means companies get equal access to the infrastructure on non-discriminatory terms and conditions, so all comers are offered the same wholesale products or services at the same price and equivalent conditions. In other words, consumers get choice and Telecom competes for business with everyone else, probably getting a whole lot more efficient in the process.

The impact on Telecom is a real issue – not just in terms of share price, but also their fibre to the cabinet plans. Would they continue? Would they sell Chorus if the line companies get the nod to build the fibre to the home network? Could there be a win-win – maybe some partnership with lines companies and Telecom/Chorus? So many issues, which is why a decision should not be rushed.

NZPA report:

Pakistani security forces have detained a 35-year-old New Zealander who was trying to enter an al Qaeda and Taleban militant stronghold on the Afghan border.

Pakistani intelligence officials who declined to be identified have said they suspected he might have links with Islamist militants.

The man, identified on his passport as Mark Taylor, was detained at a paramilitary checkpost on the outskirts of Tank town, about 280km southwest of Islamabad, which is the gateway to South Waziristan.

The top government administrator in Tank, Barkatullah Khan, told Reuters, the man had told the soldiers who detained him that he was going to South Waziristan to get married.

“He was travelling in a passenger van. He has a beard and was wearing a shalwar kamiz as a disguise,” Khan said, referring to a traditional baggy trousers and tunic outfit worn by men.

This may be totally innocent, but South Waziristan isn’t exactly a popular tourist destination.

Jordan Carter gets very excited over National raising the minimum wage:

Yesterday’s announcement of the government’s decision to increase the minimum wage by 50c marks the formal beginning of National’s 2011 election campaign.

Make no mistake about it. The neo-liberal shibboleths of the 1990s have been left behind. The New National Party has decided that its raison d’etre in the 21st Century is one thing and one thing only: to be in power. To achieve that objective, it has one tactic and one tactic only: to destroy the relevance of the Labour Party in New Zealand electoral politics.

Oh my God, National does something centrist and suddenly it is an evil campaign to hold power at all costs, regardless of principle.

I mean National putting up the minimum wage by the rate of inflation is like, umm, well a Labour Government announcing massive tax cuts!!

So does Jordan think Labour decided its raison d’etre in the 21st Century is one thing and one thing only: to be in power, when they announced tax cuts.

That means everything is fair game. Policy crosses to Labour’s left; moderate-seeming approaches to some sensitive issues (the category the minimum wage increase falls into); dirty tricks when it comes to campaign and finance law (see this fortnight’s repeal of the EFA);

That’s the repeal his own party is voting for. And you have to appreciate the hypocrisy of someone from Labour talking about dirty tricks in relation to electoral law. Even Phil Goff admits they fucked up, but no Jordan still insists it is all the evil Nats.

close relationships with other minor parties to build a solid Parliamentary position post-election.

Oh no. That evil National Party. They are building relationships with minor parties. This just can not be allowed to happen. Quick pass a law against it.

It is the mirror image of Labour’s 2002-2005 approach, with one important difference. Labour’s purpose in government was to build a fairer, freer and more equal society. We did that through more progressive taxes and tax credits; socially liberal legislation that expanded people’s rights; investing for long term economic security; genuine treaty settlements… the list goes on.

National’s purpose is to be not-Labour in government.

Sigh, and once agin we get back to the “Labour good”, “National bad” meme. Yes National hates fairness and freedom. They are just about power.

Yes John Key is doing some centrist things. But National is also implementing its manifesto promises, and I am pretty sure that when Jordan was a candidate, he did not endorse those policies.So how can he argue National now stands for nothing.

They’ll do whatever they think can deliver that.  It will be dressed up, eventually, in some swish narrative that appeals to some Kiwi values. But it won’t be values based. The only value it seeks to serve is power itself. That will be National’s eventual undoing: the task for Labour is to uncover that moral bankruptcy, expose it, and persuade the public of its reality.

The task then for the progressive Left is to stop tilting at shadows. Some of you wish that National would relapse into Ruth Richardson style politics. Get over it. The Nats are not mad and they are not stupid.

What it will not do is make progress, and that is what we need to show and to promise to deliver. In so doing, we have to call this what it is: a National government with power at the heart of its ambition for New Zealand.

There are some interesting debates happening on various stimulus packages around the world. Take this AAP article on Kevin Rudd’s:

ECONOMISTS have raised concerns the Federal Government’s cash handouts to millions of people will be blown on pokies and plasma televisions.

The Government wants to give payments of up to $950 to individuals as part of its $42 billion economic rescue package….

Reserve Bank board member Warwick McKibbin called for the payments to be scrapped.

“A cash payment … only has the potential to temporarily stimulate demand and has no long-run benefits to the economy,” Professor McKibbin told the inquiry last night.

He said it would be better to bring forward tax cuts or temporarily cut the GST.

So what will the money go on. remember this is a one off payment, not a permament change in income:

Sinclair Davidson, professor of economics at RMIT, slammed the handouts.

“Do we believe that Australians have not been borrowing and spending enough on alcohol, pokies and tobacco, and that there aren’t enough plasma televisions around?” he asked the inquiry.

Then we look at the polls in the US on the Obama package:

In a CNN/Opinion Research poll, 54% of respondents said they favor the stimulus plan that the Senate is expected to pass on Tuesday. And 64% said they felt the bill would help the economy recover. …

But 55% of respondents said that even the less expensive Senate plan would cost too much in spending and tax cuts, according to the survey. In addition, 30% think it’s just the right amount of money and 13% said the government needs to spend even more.

The amount of pork in the Obama package is huge, and it is interesting that already most Americans say the package is too large.

Then back home Rob Hosking at NBR argues not to go too large:

Today’s infrastructure announcements from the government should provide a welcome boost for the economy, even though the $500 million spend is hardly earth shattering.

But too much stimulus – and it is not difficult to have too much – and ministers risk an inflationary surge and large interest rate hikes just as they head into the next election. …

Hosking continues:

There is already a fair surge of stimulation working its way through the New Zealand economy.

On the monetary side, the Reserve Bank has more than halved interest rates over the past six months and will continue cutting for until April or maybe even June.

The official cash rate was 8.25% just over six months ago: it is now 3.5% and likely to go to 2%.

It is very important to remember interest rate changes have a lag effect of 12 to 18 months before they fully work their way through the economic system.

That is a key point. Many of the effects are delayed and you risk having all this stuff kick in as the recession is ending, resulting in inflation.

Question One and Goff is wasting it on attacking the Government for wanting accountability from the Otago District Health Board over the $17 million fraud. They must think this is the equivalent of the Hawkes Bay DHB issue, but I think they will find less public sympathy for a Board that has such lax systems the fraud continued for so many years.

Oh Q3 was fun – Labour were asking why Bill Englih did not release the Treasury incoming briefing earlier, and he replied:

The Labour Party complaining about compliance with the OIA is like Jack the Ripper complaining about community violence.

Heh.

Scoop put up on Monday its Sevens photos – here, here and here. Some favourites below:

Pure in white.

The Punishers!

They should have won a prize!

I thought I saw a ….

So where’s Tarzan?

The ODT quotes:

Combined Trade Unions president Helen Kelly said in an interview yesterday she would not entertain any discussion of an across-the-board wage freeze or pay cuts to help businesses through the recession.

“Any unilateral approach to wages would not be helpful,” she said.

Some businesses were struggling but others remained profitable, and the size of union wage demands would be based on the position of each business, she said.

Well I agree with the CTU. Wage demands should not be across the board, but based on the position of each business. But wasn’t it the EPMU that just a few years ago that was demanding 5% pay rises across the board?

“Shareholders are not saying that because times are tough they will accept a lower dividend.”

Helen Kelly is obviously not a shareholder. Not only are shareholders getting lower dividends, they have had massive drops in their capital value. Shareholders are probably hardest hit. Not geting a pay rise is not the same as losing half your investments.

All parties – workers, employers, shareholders and the Government – should carry an equal burden as they faced the recession, and that included coming up with workplace changes.

This is muddled thinking. Employers and shareholders are effectively the same people. And the Government is not some seperate entity – it is funded by workers and shareholders!

The Dom Post have replaced their former group blog for their gallery team, with a dedicated one for their political editor Tracy Watkins, called Tracy Watkins on Politics.

John Key has given details of $500 million of infrastructure projects that will be fast tracked:

• $69 million on five new schools
• $30 million on school refurbishments and maintenance at 64 schools
• $9 million for special schools facilities
• $34 million to upgrade ICT infrastucture so schools are broadband capable.
• $41 million on improvements in 11 schools
• $6 million to establish a trades academy on Southern Cross Campus in Mangere
• $28 million to help schools accelerate existing building projects that have stalled.
• $43 million on acclerating five large state highway projects (Kopu Bridge Replacement, Matahorua Gorge Realignment, Hawkes Bay Expressway Southern Extension, Muldoon’s Rimutaka Corner Easing and Christchurch Southern Motorway
• $100 million for smaller regional roading projects, with one third to be spent before 30 June.
• $105 million on upgrades and renovations to 10,000 state houses – 18 a day for 18 months
• $20 million on construction of 69 new state houses

Targeted infrastructure spending is a far better response than some of the massive pork laden stimulus packages we have seen overseas.

Brian Rudman gets it 100% wrong in today’s Herald column.

At least in the United States, the donors have to declare their contributions. The repeal of the Electoral Finance Act means that Alan Timothy Gibbs of Kaukapakapa will no longer have to declare $200,000 in donations to Act last year, nor will new Act list MP John Boscawen have to reveal he stumped up $100,000. Ditto the rich horse industry brothers Peter and Philip Vela, who gave last-minute donations of $100,000 to Labour and New Zealand First.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.  The Government announced last year that the donation transparency provisions of the EFA would be retained in the Electoral Act. This has been confirmed on multiple occasions since, and is well known and understood. That is part of the reason why the repeal maybe backed by every MP in Parliament.

NZ First is looking at standing in the Mt Albert by-election if it occurs:

I heard a few weeks ago that they saw this as a possible route back into Parliament for them. And it can’t be totally dismissed – third parties often do very well in by-elections.

Complicating this by-election is the situation I have previously blogged on. If Phil Twyford is the Labour candidate, then a vote for hm in Mt Albert may bring Judith Tizard back in on the list.  You could expect to see a huge amount of focus on this.

It sounds like Winston may not be the candidate:

Mr Groombridge would not comment when asked if Mr Peters would be the candidate. He said it would be up to the party’s electorate organisation to choose. He was “pretty certain” NZ First had a branch in Mt Albert.

I find it amusing the Party President can not be sure if they have an electorate organisation or not!

Mr Groombridge said he also believed that Mr Peters should share the leadership of NZ First.

He said a co-leader would bring in “new blood”, while still retaining Mr Peters who “really is the patriarch of the party, there’s no question about that”.

Patriarch isn’t a bad term for Winston. Wikipedia describes as:

Originally a patriarch was a man who exercised autocratic authority as a pater familias over an extended family.

I’m wondering though if “capo” may not be a better term

Mr Groombridge said that depending on whether Helen Clark got the job and when she left, NZ First’s candidate could be either a contender for the co-leadership or the newly appointed co-leader.

If Ron Mark is co-leader, Ron could do quite well – especially that voting for him won’t automatically bring Winston in with him – unlike in the general election.

The Herald reports:

Prime Minister John Key expects other high-earners paid from the public purse to follow MPs and the Governor-General by asking not to get a pay rise this year.

Parliament yesterday unanimously agreed to ask the Remuneration Authority not to lift MPs’ wages when they are reviewed in the middle of this year.

The Remuneration Authority is responsible for setting the salaries of MPs, judges, local body councillors and public sector bosses.

“I’m sure judges and the like will take a similar view and I’m sure the Remuneration Authority, in reaching their conclusion, will take into consideration that this is a time of restraint and it’s important that we, as well-paid New Zealanders, show leadership,” said Mr Key

Good God, this is about as subtle as firing a flare gun through the door of the court. The PM is basically telling Judges to suck it up and also ask for a nil pay rise.

John has to be careful here. Trying to pressure Judges into a nil pay rise, isn’t that far removed from trying to pressure them into a pay cut. And in real terms, a nil increase is a pay cut. The motives are good, but perhaps the Attorney-General could point out to the Prime Minister that rather useful piece of law known as The Constitution Act 1986:

24 Salaries of Judges not to be reduced

• The salary of a Judge of the High Court shall not be reduced during the continuance of the Judge’s commission.

Dean Knight also blogs on this issue, and suggests freezing Judges salaries could border on unconstitutional.

John did say he admired Muldoon when he was at school. Hopefully admiration does not become emulation!

John Armstrong praises Lockwood Smith for what he calls his “democratic bombshell”:

Take a bow, Lockwood Smith. At long last, the House has a Speaker who seems serious about removing the blight on New Zealand’s democracy – the increasing tendency of Cabinet ministers to thumb their noses at the constitutional convention that they are accountable to Parliament.

Smith dropped a bit of a bombshell on the first sitting day of the year when he expressed displeasure with Labour Minister Kate Wilkinson’s reply to an Opposition question about the minimum wage, and then instructed her to answer the question again.

Such a practice is almost unheard of. You could see the jaws of National Party colleagues collectively dropping in shock.

I am 100% with Lockwood on this. His ruling does not apply too all questions, but only to the pre-notified primary questions and only when they are asking something factual, rather than an opinion. In those circumstances, one should get a proper response. Now of course the Minister should be able to robustly swipe back at the Opposition also, but this should be on top of giving the actual answer, not instead of.

Such interventions will not win Smith plaudits from his colleagues. They sat in Opposition for nine frustrating years complaining about Labour ministers diving for cover when the political heat was on.

Now in Government, they would expect the boot to be on the other foot. That it isn’t may be unfair on National. But stopping the parliamentary rot meant someone had to start somewhere at some time. Smith has done the right thing by serving notice that he expects ministers to lift their game. The onus is now on him to continue in the manner in which he has begun.

I seem to recall the Herald’s Political Editor saying she thought Lockwood would bomb as Speaker. I look forward to her next blog

In a more minor change Lockwood has also changed the route the Speaker’s procession will take every sitting day at 2 pm. Rather than go straight from the Speaker’s Office to the back entrance to the House through a private corridor, it will now go through the main lobby, allowing the public to see it.

This met with support from all sides, but funniest comment was Dr Cullen who suggested Lockie make it clear that the press gallery can not ask questions of the Speaker during the official procession. I doubt even Duncan Garner would be quite that cheeky!

The Herald reports that the repeal of the Electoral Finance Act may be unanimous. Only the Greens have to decide on whether they will support it.

It would be most appropriate for it to be repealed by 122 votes to zero. A symbolic burial.

Will the Police manage to make decisions on outstanding cases before the law is repealed?

The introduction of the repeal bill is set to be tomorrow. And it should be gone some stage during next week.

It has been suggested that there should be some drinks organised to celebrate the repeal. That is a fine idea, and we may try and organise something in Wellington and Auckland around the time of the third and final reading of the repeal bill.