This is a bit of an experiment, using today’s TGIF photo from the GD. (Thanks David)

In theory, clicking the image will take you to a larger version.

Whistling Kite

As I did last year. I conducted a survey of MPs on the press gallery. This year I extended it to press secretaries also, and am very pleased with the 70 responses I got. Many thanks to those who responded.

The first initial data is below. This is the raw data. I will also blog next week results for each party (National, Labour, other) and a weighted average to take account of more National MPs than Labour MPs responding.

Respondents were asked to anonymously rate each media organisation and full-time gallery journalist from 0 to 10. The results for journos will be next week also.

I want to stress that this is not an impartial poll on the gallery. It is a poll of the subjects of the articles the gallery write about. Hence a low rating may indicate a media outlet or journalist has written very good stories that happen to damage that party or MP, and a high rating may indicate they are seen as a soft touch.

There are also some differences by medium, Print media will always tend to rate higher (in my opinion) than TV as they have a greater ability to cover more details in a story.

So basically I am saying don’t regard these ratings as some neutral indicator of who is good or bad. Those judgements can be left to individuals. Also do not assume these ratings are my personal opinions. They certainly are not.

Now the data:

The mean is pretty self-evident, and they are ranked in order of highest to lowest. I am not surprised NZPA and Newsroom rate at the top, as they both concentrate more on information, rather than analysis. They are not into selling copies of papers – but into supplying information.

It is interesting that Maori TV rates so highly.

The median is the mid point value. Normally close to the mean.

The mode is the most common score given for that outlet.

The minimum and maximum and range (difference between the two) show how diverse the opinion is petty much every outlet. There is no group-think. Most outlets had some MPs give very low scores and some very high scores.

The S.D. is the standard deviation and again gives some idea as to how varied the ratings were. Radio NZ had the highest standard deviation, or variation.

My final column for the year:

Brown to fight 2010 election

BROWN.RESIGN pays out $1 if UK PM Gordon Brown loses his job before the 2010 general election. With rumours that a date of March has been set for the election, it seems clear that Brown will be the Labour Leader and PM until the election.

The share price was 30c on 19 November and has fallen in the last few weeks to 10c.

But will Annette King fight 2011?

DEP.KING.2010 pays out $1 if Annette King is replaced as the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party by the end of 2010.

The price has been at 30c for several weeks but in the last few days has increased to 37c.

King has ruled out standing for Mayor of Wellington, but politicians can change their minds. I tend to think the stock is over-priced. King is popular in the caucus, and any change in Deputy Leader would be seen as destabilising Goff’s leadership. I’m definitely going to start short selling the stock if it goes any higher.

Len Brown’s stocks up

A UMR poll showed Len Brown ahead of John Banks in response to the question of who would be the better Mayor (which is not the same as asking who would you vote for). This has pushed his MAYOR.BROWN prices from the 30c average of recent months to a leading 45c. I think this is a bit optimistic at this stage. I purchased some Brown stocks early on for 15c as they were under valued at that price. At 45c I am very close to selling them.

And the other Mayors

Three new stocks on the chances of Dunedin Mayor Peter Chin, Christchurch Mayor Bob Parker and Wellington Mayor Kerry Prendergast being re-elected next year.

MAYOR.CHIN is at 79c but this has had only 16 shares traded. I would have thought the Dunedin Stadium protest would have his price somewhat lower.

MAYOR.PARKER is at 88c. Also light trading with only 33 shares traded. While there has been some controversy over certain property deals and decisions, there does not appear to be a credible challenger.

MAYOR.PREDERGAST is at 68c, after initially selling at 80c. Mayor Kerry has yet to confirm she will stand again, so the price seems about right. It is hard to see one current Councillor beating her, and a “celebrity” challenger seems unlikely. However the wild card factor is the team Bob Jones wants to put up to implement a vehicle free Courtenay Place to Lambton Quay. Will Kerry be part of that team or against that team?

Whanganui/Wanganui

The iPredict market beat the NZ Herald by a few hours in predicting Maurice Williamson would today announce that both Wanganui and Whanganui would be official names for the city. CITY.BOTH went up from 25c to 75c before dropping again to 50c. Then after the Herald story, it has increased again to 89c.

Most Traded Stocks

The December petrol price stocks are leading with over 38,000 shares traded. Next was the Manners Malls bus stock with almost 6,000 shares traded in the last week. In third place is the April 2010 OCR stock at 4,600 trades and the 2010 Goff departure stock on 3,700 trades.

The Dom-Post provides a slap-down:

Finance Minister Bill English should listen carefully to his Labour opposite David Cunliffe and then do the exact opposite.

Mr Cunliffe is a clever man who proved a capable minister of health, but he is either out of his depth in the finance role or has completely abandoned principle in pursuit of popularity. There is no other explanation for his absurd criticism of the Government for refusing to loosen the purse strings in the wake of a Treasury report suggesting the recession has ended and New Zealand is in better economic shape than forecast seven months ago.

“Basically what they are saying is our books are $2 billion better off but we the Government are going to keep all of it and you the public will get none of it,” Mr Cunliffe told National Radio on Wednesday.

That is populist nonsense. The improvement in the Government’s books does not translate to money in a bank account. It is money the Government no longer needs to borrow from international financiers. The choice Mr English faces is not whether to spend or save; it is whether to borrow more or borrow less.

We’re borrowing $250 million a week. There is a slight upturn and now we are borrowing only $240 million a week, and Labour says time for a big spend up. They just do not get it.

If he were to act upon Mr Cunliffe’s urgings, he would borrow and pass the debt on to future generations – generations that will already be burdened with servicing the billions of dollars of extra debt the Government has taken on this year and will continue to take on over the next few years to stave off the worst effects of the global economic crisis.

Fiscal restraint is needed not just for a few years. First we have to reduce the deficits and get back into surplus. That may take seven years or so of fiscal restraint. But even after that, we will want to get our debt levels back down to what they were pre-recession (in case we have another one at some stage, which is likely), so we will want several years of surpluses of around 1% of GDP. So fiscal restraint is needed for at least a decade.

If Mr Cunliffe really thinks the Government should be spending more now, he should have taken a greater interest in financial matters during Labour’s last nine years in office. If the government of which he was part had spent less on middle-class welfare, overpriced train sets, hip-hop study tours and shonky tertiary courses, its successor would have more to spend now on health, education and welfare. Seedcorn eaten today cannot be turned into cornflakes tomorrow. …

Money borrowed has to be repaid with interest. Mr English should ignore Mr Cunliffe’s rantings and enforce the strict spending limits detailed in the Budget.

And the limit is a limit, not a target.

Also the ODT:

Government surpluses are expected now to return two years earlier, by 2016, but government debt will still rise to an extraordinary $64.9 billion by 2013 and the burden on the public will continue to grow.

By comparison, it is $17.1 billion this year.

This means tighter conditions are a certainty – unless the Government decides future administrations can worry about the problem of paying the higher debt burden in years to come.

Considering the future cost of superannuation and healthcare, that would be very unwise.

As the Copenhagen summit looks like ending with no agreement, around the only substantial achievement (to date) was the launch of the Global Research Alliance on agriculture greenhouse gases.

This is hugely important both for NZ and internationally.

The importance for NZ is it could help find a way to reduce methane emissions from livestock, which would save the country billions in reducing our greenhouse gas emissions.

The importance for the world is to avoid what happened with biofuels – that food producing land is converted into other uses, leading to global food shortages.

So it is one of those rare initiatives that almost everyone from business lobby groups to the most hardened Greenie supports. And kudos to Tim Groser and others for getting 20 countries to all pledge funding to it – from Australia to Vietnam to the US. Much better than NZ funding all the research,

Back in NZ, it won support from the Wgtn Chamber of Commerce (no fan of an ETS):

“The reality is that rather than the current proliferation of poorly designed cap and trade systems, science and technology are the real keys to solving the greenhouse gas emissions challenge, and this initiative plays to New Zealand’s research strengths,” said Chamber CEO Charles Finny. …

“This is a good example of trans-national cooperation with a number of countries pooling their expertise to solve a global problem. New Zealand going it alone would be less likely to produce results and it runs against the grain of what this global issue is all about.

“It is increasingly likely that this will be one of the few concrete initiatives to come from Copenhagen and so John Key and Tim Groser deserve full congratulations for the leadership they have shown in delivering this outcome,” Mr Finny concluded.

So business likes it. And what about the Greens. Well this is Kennedy Graham:

Minister Tim Groser advised that, on Day 1, some US$150 m. had been pledged, and it was hoped that this would leverage private funding as well.  But he stressed that it was not just a question of finance – the essence was coordination, of research already underway and new research yet to be funded.  France, for example, already has some 500 researchers in agriculture and climate change who would form part of the Alliance.  India’s contribution would be immense as well.  Once the political momentum was underway, it was important to turn it over to the scientists.

Denmark gave the most impressive example of the potential of the Alliance. Since 1990 it had increased agricultural production by 16% yet agricultural emissions had dropped by 23%.   This had been achieved through optimisation of the nutrient chain and improving water management. …

We should take a positive view of this initiative.

And Jeanette Fitzsimons said:

The Green Party today welcomed the announcement that New Zealand will lead a Global Research Alliance for reducing climate change emissions from agriculture, adding that it is crucial to pursue science and ideas that enhance our clean green reputation.

“I am delighted that New Zealand is finally doing something serious about fighting climate change and reducing agricultural emissions,” said Green Party Climate Change and Agriculture spokesperson Jeanette Fitzsimons. …

So New Zealand has achieved around the only positive announcement from Copenhagen, with an initiative that pleases both ETS sceptical businesses and the Greens. So who does that leave?

Labour’s Charles Chauvel. In a bizarre press release (one which Clark would have called treasonous if she was still PM) he has attacked the Global Alliance claiming NZ should have gone it alone:

“The multinational nature of the Global Agriculture Fund will inevitably mean that New Zealand won’t own the results of any research paid for by it.

“So, as well as there being substantially less money for investment in the reduction of emissions from agriculture, New Zealand will be poorer because we lose the opportunity to sell or share emissions reduction technology in our singular area of expertise on our own terms.

“Despite the self-generated fanfare and bright lights, National’s approach represents a failure. It totally lacks ambition and is a huge missed opportunity for New Zealand,” Charles Chauvel said.

Yes Chauvel thinks NZ could have solved the problem all by itself. He also misrepresents intellectual property laws (being pat of a multilateral alliance does not mean individual institutions abandon intellectual property rights over their inventions). It is a shockingly stupid stance.

In Opposition, there are times when mindless opposition just for the sake of a press release is a bad idea. As the Greens show, there are times you can say this is a good initiative – even if we don;t like the other things you are doing.

I wonder what Phil Goff, a respected former foreign and trade minister, thinks of his MPs claim NZ should not have helped set up the global research alliance, and gone it alone? I can’t imagine he possibly agrees.

The Law Commission has reviewed the Civil List Act 1979, as it pertains to the Governor-General. Their major recommendation is that the Governor-General no longer be exempt from income tax.

The exemption is traditional, based on a belief that you can’t tax the Crown. However even the Queen pays tax in the UK now, so it seems overdue for the Governor-General to do the same. Now this will not mean a pay drop for the next GG, as the Remuneration Authority will take account of the tax status in setting the salary.

A summary of their major recommendations:

1. Pass a separate Governor-General Act defining the office, term and appointment, removing them from the Civil List Act.
2. Have a permanent legislative authority for the funding of the Governor-General and their office and travel.
3. Remove the exemption from income tax on the salary (but the allowance to cover expenses remains tax free).
4. Remove Section 7 of the Civil List Act which allows the Minister of Finance to exempt the Governor-General from paying any public or local tax, duty, rate, levy or fee.
5. Have an annuity determined by the Remuneration Authority for former GGs, and upon their death half that level paid to a surviving spouse or partner.
6. When the Chief Justice (or other Judge) acts as Administrator of the Government they stay on their current salary, rather than the current law where they get paid 50% of their judicial salary and 50% of the GGs salary.

All looks pretty good to me.  A small but useful modernisation of our constitutional structure.

An article in the Herald:

When the Nobel peace prize committee awarded President Barack Obama the ultimate accolade, its members can never have imagined that his acceptance speech would set out an eloquent defence of war.

His speech in Oslo could have been delivered by George W. Bush, when Obama spoke of “evil” in the world and of reserving “the right to act unilaterally”.

I bet you they still cheered wildly though.

He offered an outstretched hand to Iran and North Korea, instead of the fist of his predecessor, Bush. But now the talk is of “crippling sanctions” as the Iranian authorities continue to ratchet up their nuclear defiance.

Welcome to the real world.

He disappointed human rights advocates by not standing up to China and for hesitating too long before expressing support for the demonstrators in Iran.

Gay rights campaigners point out he has not yet fulfilled his campaign promise to welcome gay men and women into the military.

His pledge to close Guantanamo by the end of the year is proving complicated to implement.

Rhetoric vs reality

Obama’s approval rating in the polls now stands at 47 per cent.

It is the worst poll rating for any American President since Truman at this stage in the presidency.

Is this the case? Let’s check.

1. George W Bush 86%
2. John Kennedy 77%
3. George H W Bush 71%
4. Lyndon Johnson 70%
5. Dwight Eisenhower 69%
6. Richard Nixon 59%
7. Jimmy Carter 57%
8. Bill Clinton 54%
9. Gerald Ford 52%
10. Ronald Reagan 49%
11. Harry Truman 49%

So in fact at 47% it would be below every modern President.

Now again there is a long way to go before the election, and Reagan, Truman and Clinton all won second terms. But this presidency is certainly no JFK and Camelot.

But the 2010 mid-terms are looking to be fascinating. The Republicans now lead on the generic congressional poll by 43% to 41%. However they have large internal rifts and many of their more electable candidates may not win the primaries.

What a pity some people think they are above the law and have the right to vandalise signs they do not approve of. The Herald reports:

The image depicts the Virgin Mary and her betrothed, Joseph, in bed together.

A person was seen defacing the image just after 4pm yesterday, covering Mary’s face, Joseph’s face and the slogan that read: “Poor Joseph. God was a hard act to follow.”

Church leaders at St Matthew’s said the point of the image was to get people thinking about the Christmas story.

Yesterday St Matthew’s communications manager, Clay Nelson, said the defaced billboard would stand for a day, as a testament to the single-minded view that some people had.

“They are driven to give threats and abuse – and [yet] they say ‘we love Jesus and he loves us’. I’m sorry, but they don’t get the irony of their behaviour.

I am sure they don’t.

Mr Nelson said that the church had obtained video footage of the defacer of the billboard and if the person could be identified, it would press charges.

That would be a good thing.

The Herald reports:

Karnail Singh was turned away from a function at Manurewa Cosmopolitan Club last week to recognise his service to the community, because of a policy of no hats.

How idiotic was the manager? This guy is the guest of honour.

Manurewa Cosmopolitan Club manager Patricia Rangi yesterday admitted the definition of the word cosmopolitan “does mean all races” and that the club has a mix of races.

However, “we are also strong on rules and regulations, and one of them is no hats”. …

Pukekohe Cosmopolitan Club general manager Michael Moore said the word cosmopolitan was “to do with the community side of it”. His club had no problem allowing turbans.

“We do have a ruling of no hats but we’ve never seen a turban as such.”

Pukekohe had a wide range of cultures and the club reflected that variety.

“If you had a member who’s a nun, you’re not going to ask her to remove her habit,” Mr Moore said.

Exactly.

Claire Trevett at the NZ Herald has what looks to be a scoop:

Wanganui is to be given its “h” back in a compromise under which Government agencies will have to follow the new spelling but others will have a choice.

Land Information minister Maurice Williamson will visit Wanganui today to announce his decision on whether it will become Whanganui.

This follows a sometimes-acrimonious public debate on the issue and a Geographic Board recommendation to insert the “h”.

The Herald understands his solution will be similar to the compromises that created Aorangi/Mt Cook and Mt Egmont/Mt Taranaki, making Wanganui and Whanganui official names.

Sounds fairly sensible. I have previously blogged that a recommendation of the Geographic Board should only be declined by the Minister if there is some failure on their part to consult properly.

Incidentally I was e-mailed this yesterday by a mate. He mentioned at the Press Gallery party that he had just been reading a 1938 history book which pointed out the name Wanganui was a mis-spelling, so this issue is not some new retrospective rewriting of history. I asked him to e-mail me a scan, which he did.

Anyway we’ll find out around midday what the official decision is.

Many people know of the 80/20 rule. It is used in many situations. One of them is an adage about how you can fix 80% of the problem easily, and the last 20% with much more difficulty.

This got me thinking about reducing greenhouse gas emissions. There are 150 countries at Copenhagen, and in theory all of them have to agree. But in reality the countries that are the biggest emitters really matter – the ones who make up 80% of emissions. Without them, no agreement will work. While if they do agree, what the rest of the world wants or does not want is of little moment. That is not to say that you do not want as many parties as possible agreeing, but those who make up 80% are the key ones.

So who are they. Well based on CO2 emissions, you only need 20 countries to make up 80% of emissions. They are:

The top six make up 60%, and the top 20, 80%.

Well that was a good one. Everyone in really good humour, and a huge turnout.

I’ll be hit by a US Tomahawk missile if I reveal too much, but let me just say that the new US Ambassador is an absolutely top guy with a great sense of humour, and everyone who met him raved about how genial he was. Almost enough to make me vote Democrat if it means we get to keep him here for eight years

The partying carried on long after the official event closed. People may want to guess which Labour MPs were seen at The Establishment around 5 am!

Also which TV reporter had a very fun night? They know who they are!

I think all the alcohol got drunk, or at least all the beer. The sausages kept flowing all night which helped people keep going.  There was a distinct lack of non alcoholic drinks, but I guess supply was estimated to meet demand (or lack of).

Many thanks to the gallery for their hospitality. They don’t just pay for the party themselves (well their employers do) but most of them spend much of the night serving drinks and cooking on the BBQ.

The media had a field day reporting and condemning the travel subsidy for MPs. For weeks on end we had story after story. But there was one story the media forgot to cover. It was the one about their massive travel subsidy to attend CHOGM in Trinidad and Tobago.

You see seven journalists flew to this lovely resort location on the PMs RNZAF aircraft. APN had one person attend, Fairfax one person, TVNZ and TV3 had two each and Getty Images also had one person. And they only had to pay $100 each.

Now if these media companies had to pay themselves to send their journalists, it would costs at least $4,000 economy to get there (including stop over). So this is a 97.5% subsidy for their travel costs. Or a savings of around $27,000 for the owners of those media companies.

If it is reprehensible that MPs get a 10% to 90% travel subsidy, then where has been the media outrage at this 97.5% travel subsidy?

What if a blogger decided he would like to attend a CHOGM in Trinidad and Tobago and got a lift over there with the PM for $100? Would that suddenly become a media story? You bet it would.

Now I am not saying that the media should not be allowed to travel on board the RNZAF plane if there is capacity. I’m not even saying that there shouldn’t be some cost saving for them (mind you 97.5% seems extreme). I am saying that it would be nice if they were as transparent about their own travel subsidies, as they were over those of the MPs.

These are from Gerry Brownlee:

Oral Questions

There were 86 question times.

This compares with:

• 57 in 2008
• 87 in 2007
• 81 in 2006

I’m pleased to see this. With 30 sitting weeks, this means only four times was there no question time. The Govt has gone out of its way to retain question time, even when the House is in urgency.

3^rd Readings

• 70 Government Bills passed their 3^rd reading and into law

• 3 Private Bills passed their 3^rd reading and into law

• 1 Local Bill passed its 3^rd reading and into law

All of the private members bills passed were old ones carried over, not new ones.

No Right Turn has noted that the Government has passed a sessional order that will allow it to sit on Thursday mornings, thus minimising the need for urgency. This is a good thing, as I have always said there should be a difference between merely having extended sitting hours for the House, and urgency which allows you to pass a bill through multiple stages without the normal delays.

Karl du Fresne blogs a quote from John Hayes about the teacher unions trying to boycott the proposed national standards:

“I spent 30 years working for a range of Governments. Sometimes I agreed with the policies the Government wanted, sometimes I did not. My views were irrelevant. My job as a public servant was to implement the Governments policies irrespective of my personal views. That is how democracy works in New Zealand. If a state employee does not want to implement a particular policy, like National Standards, that’s fine, they should resign and find employment in an environment that suits them better. It is not however acceptable for them to remain on the Government’s payroll and work against the Government’s policies.”

Hear hear.

First we have Tony Ryall from last week’s General Debate on Labour’s seven stages of grieving.

And then by popular demand an embedded version of Gerry Brownlee yesterday.

Lots today:

1. Stephen Franks asks questions about the Raetihi Cosmopolitan Club
2. Democracy Mum blogs a speech from Geert Wilders
3. No Right Turn is campaigning for killers and rapists to be given the vote.
4. David Lewis blogs an excellent analogy about flying the English Flag next to the Union Jack is the same as a Maori flag next to NZ ensign.
5. Audrey Young blogs on the Labour leadership and quotes Jane Clifton “The tacit caucus promise to Helen Clark that Goff would be given a long run while various leadership candidates incubated is now toast”.
6. Adam Smith lambasts Al Gore for his porkie over Arctic ice, but Ian Wishart (of all people!) defends Al Gore, noting that the climate scientist Gore cited has indeed been pubished saying what Gore quoted.
7. Stephen Franks blogs on securities law reform.
8. Cactus Kate blogs about a teenager she caught taking ketamine. She finds out the teen got into it after “the drug education people came to school to talk about ketamine to tell us not to do it”.
9. Liberty Scott labels the Transmission Gully plan “Think Big” and a destroyer of wealth.
10. Chris Keall has names and links of the most watched You Tube videos in 2009.

Stuff reports that Tesco have had to withdraw this Xmas Card.

I presume they withdrew it, because Samta complained it was not true.

The full report is here. Some of the recommendations and my comments are:

• simplifying and standardising product disclosure sothat investors have clearer knowledge of what they are investing in (such as through short, prescribed, plain-English documents and an explicit warning on complex
products)

Not controversial.

• broadening the range of high-quality equity offerings for retail investors by encouraging partial listings of:

• central and local government-owned companies
• agricultural businesses
• local subsidiaries of financial services firms

I think that is a great plan. There are not many NZ listings, so investors like me are forced to invest more and mroe money in Australian stocks. Partial listings of some SOEs would be a great boost to the local capital markets, and keep more investment at home. The disciplines of being a listed company would help many SOEs improve their performance.

The early signs are that National may have a policy for the 2011 election of allowing some minority listings – that would be a good thing.

• improving the links between public listed and private markets by facilitating the development of more lightly regulated exchanges that are able to develop rules and be owned or operated by fully regulated exchanges

The rules of the main public exchange are not suitable for smaller companies, so this is good.

• developing a specialist agricultural capital market centre – ranging from the commercialisation of innovation through to public markets that cater to cooperatives’ particular requirements and the development of derivatives markets for our agricultural products

That’s a fascinating idea. It could even become a global leader in agricultural capital markets.

• fundamentally reviewing the Securities Act to allow for the above, in a way that plays to New Zealand’s reputation as an honest and transparent economy, and provides clarity about which investors are able to invest
in which markets and the nature of the regulatory regime around each market

I’m not sure the Act needs rewriting. Often the problem has been lack of enforcement. I recall the case taken by Stephen Franks and Roger Kerr personally against a company director, when the Securities Commission declined to act. They were successful also IIRC.

• eliminating tax and regulatory biases between different types of investment (for example, property versus financial assets) or different governance arrangements (such as direct investment versus PIEs).

At present, many investment decisions are based on the tax advantages for that type of investment. That is not optimal, as decisions should be on the likely return and associated risk with an investment.

The Herald reports:

An $8.20 roll of salami proved to be the downfall for the killer of Marie Jamieson and allowed police to crack one of Auckland’s most mysterious unsolved murders.

Ms Jamieson, 23, was last seen crossing a service station forecourt in Kingsland on February 10, 2001. Her naked body was found nine days later behind factory buildings in Ranui. …

But seven years passed and police were no closer to solving the case – until Joseph Reekers was convicted of theft in April last year.

The conviction for shoplifting salami from Pak’n Save in Henderson allowed them to issue a compulsion order to take DNA from Reekers.

And there is no doubt it was Reekers as he pleaded guilty.

Yesterday, in a surprise move, the 52-year-old pleaded guilty in the High Court at Auckland to murder. The Crown withdrew the rape charge.

Now Reekers was not unknown to the Police

Reekers was already a “person of interest” to the inquiry. …

Now there has been debate about the desirability of a law change allowing DNA to be taken from suspects for serious crimes.

It occurs to me this is a good example of why that would be desirable. If he had never stolen the salami seven years later, then he may have got away with it, and the killer would never have been caught.

But if the Police had been able to DNA test the suspects, he would have been identified earlier on, with no need to rely on the chance he may steal salami one day.

Now I do not favour no limits on Police being able to demand a DNA sample. Otherwise we end up in a Police state where everyone at birth has their DNA added to the Police database for future crime solving.

But where someone is suspected of involvement in a serious crime (such as rape and murder), I support the Police being able to get a DNA sample – so long as it is destroyed if they are not charged or found not guilty at trial.

Anyway well done to the Police for getting a good result.

I’m used to Family First complaining about all my favourite films, shows and TV shows. The intensity of their complaints about a show tends to be an excellent indicator of how much I will enjoy it.

But now they have complained about a church billboard!!

Family First NZ labelled the billboard to be put up by St Matthew-in-the-City Church as insensitive and objectionable to many people. The billboard ..was intended to challenge stereotypes about the way that Jesus was conceived and get people talking about the Christmas story, the church said. Archdeacon Glynn Cardy said it had already generated plenty of discussion in its conception phase.

But Family First national director Bob McCoskrie describes the church’s plan as irresponsible. “The church can have its debate on the virgin birth and its spiritual significance inside the church building, but to confront children and families with the concept as a street billboard is completely irresponsible and unnecessary,” he said.

The billboard is funny and harmless in my opinion.

Photo from Stuff.

Now if the billboard showed Joseph ravishing Mary, then I think there could be grounds for complaint, but I think it us rather cute.

And all things considered, you do have to wonder how it was for Joseph. I mean if God gets your wife pregnant, that is going to lead to performance anxiety.

Now that was a good party!

Oh this is great. Go to In the House and watch the video of this question from David Parker to Gerry Brownlee:

Has he received my invitation dated 14 December to accompany me, after Parliament rises, on the Gillespie Pass tramping circuit in the north-eastern parts of the Mount Aspiring National Park, so that he can inspect first-hand areas in the conservation estate included in his stock-take of mineral resources, and will he accept it?

Gerry’s response is superb, as is the other contributions to the debate. A nice light touch for the final session of the year.

If anyone is able to You Tube the video, that would be great as I could them embed it here. I see in the comments that next year In The House will allow embedding which is excellent.

The Government has released their proposals for S92A, and I have to say that the proposal is not too bad. Some aspects not great, but some aspects are pretty fair.

The press release has a Q&A, but I recommend those interested read the full Cabinet paper.

My initial thoughts are:

Good:

• Three notices needed within 9 months to go to Tribunal
• Users can stay anonymous and send response via ISP
• Users remain anonymous at Tribunal stage unless they lose
• Notices must be sent to ISPs within 20 days of alleged infringement, so a huge number can not be collated over months and then piled into an ISP
• Rights holders will have to pay a fee per notice, to cover their admin costs in issuing the notices
• Termination/Suspension is an option only for courts, not the tribunal (or ISPs)
• Termination is defined as suspension of that account for up to six months so law is clear
• A new definition of ISP to be drafted for S92A only, which will be narrower then current definition which includes employers, bloggers etc.
• ISP given statutory protection where they comply with the Act and any court orders
• Law not to come into effect until six months after amendments passed
• 92A to be available for P2P infringing only, and material under 92C excluded from gambit of 92A

Not so good:

• Time between 1st and 2nd notice can be as little as 10 working days and 10 again between 2nd and 3rd. That means you can get to strike three in a month.
• The fee rights holders pay to ISPs is set by Govt and will not include capital costs of modifying systems
• No sanctions on right holders for false notices
• Termination/Suspension is still an option

Overall I have to say a huge improvement over the original 92A, and even a slight improvement over the discussion proposal.

I do think some further changes are desirable, and if a bill appears based on the paper, will submit for changes at select committee level.

A critical issue will be the level of the notice fee – too low and it will not provide a incentive for rights holders to be restrained in their allegations, and also it may not properly compensate ISPs for their costs.

I think the major change needed is the time frames for notices. They need to be such that a notice has to be based on an infringement that has occurred after one is sure they have received the previous notice. At present it does not do that. You should only get to strike two, if you have clearly continued infringing after receiving the first notice, and likewise strike three should only occur, if you continued after receiving the second notice.

But overall as I said, this is not too bad. Simon Power and officials have done a pretty good job in a complex area. But again that is not to say some further enhancements are not desirable, and I am looking forward to further engagement in the process.