Kiwiblog

UPCOMING SATURDAY 19/11/11 1030 — SUNDAY EDITION 20/11/11 0800 — TV3
1. Colin James reviews the week on the campaign trail
2. Natasha Smith goes campaigning with those who might succeed Phil Goff — David Cunliffe, David Parker, Shane Jones and David Shearer.
3. Phil Goff with Duncan Garner.
4. Narelle Suisted inside the Green Campaign — how radical are they?
5. Sean Plunket with Winston Peters.
6. The Sunday Media Panel will (as usual) be Bill Ralston and Brian Edwards.

My Herald column looks at what happens if Winston decides again.

This means that Winston Peters will decide who gets to be Prime Minister of New Zealand for the third time out of six MMP elections. In 1996 he chose Jim Bolger over Helen Clark, in 2005 he chose Helen Clark over Don Brash and if he holds the balance of power in 2011, make no mistake he will choose Phil Goff over John Key, and there will be a Government that can only pass a law if it can get the Greens, Winston, Hone, and the Maori Party to all agree to it.

And imagine the blowout in spending and debt!

Again polls have shown a certain reluctance for National voters to tactically vote for ACT. I speak often to many National supporters in Epsom. To a person, they all want National to have a coalition partner to the right (economically) of National. The debate is whether ACT in its crippled state is worth saving, or whether you do the humane thing and put it to sleep with some electoral euthanasia, allowing a new party to arise phoenix like from the ashes.

The prospect of Winston Peters installing Phil Goff as Prime Minister should be sufficient to resolve that debate. If they do not vote for John Banks, then a change of Government becomes significantly more likely.

Epsom voters now have a clear choice.

MMP is perfect for demagogues such as Peters. He selects who will be on his party list, and they become MPs based on his personal popularity, despite the fact 99% of New Zealanders could not tell you who the top six candidates on his list are. Their loyalty is purely to him, not to the New Zealand public.

STV will still deliver broadly proportional results, but candidates will have to actually be someone whom voters rank high enough with their ballots, to elect to Parliament. This should result in a significant improvement of the quality of candidates, if there is no backdoor through a party list.

I will blog more fully next week on the merits of STV.

Winston Peters on the tea tape by whaleoil

Whale has this audio of a party leader on Monday condemning the secret taping.

In response to whether the media should publish the tapes, he called the behaviour in taping the conversation illegal, said it was “News of the World” stuff.

Who was this party leader? It was Winston Peters. The man who since he has discovered a favourable angle for himself in this, has spent the week expressing mock outrage. Do the media spend all day demanding Peters reconcile his position on Monday with his reading out transcripts of what Peters himself says is an illegal recording? Of course they do not.

Massive dos attack is why we were down from around 6 pm yesterday. Some people are not so much into this free speech concept.

Over at Stuff I’ve blogged on an actual policy issue, shock horror. I chose law & order as I think it is a great example of a policy that actually matters to NZers, and has huge impact on our lives. An extract:

I regard law and order policies as among the most important, after the economy. Crime affects New Zealanders so profoundly. If you are a victim of crime, your life may never be the same again. Even a nonviolent burglary can leave you feeling vulnerable and violated, while serious rapes and sexual assaults many people never recover from. And those who lose loved ones to criminal acts must relive the horror and sadness constantly.

However, law and order policies affect more than just the victims of crime. Few of us are perfect and never break the law, whether it be speeding, littering, illegal drugs or more serious offences. It is important to have sentences that are appropriate for the crime. We don’t send people to jail for driving at 106kmh, but we might if they were driving at 190kmh for the fifth time, and almost certainly if they kill someone at that speed. …

I think there is some merit in [Labour's] approach. Sending someone to jail should be the last resort, and reserved for either extremely serious crimes, or someone who doesn’t respond to lesser punishments. Once you send someone to jail, they are probably going to remain a criminal for the foreseeable future, so the point of prison becomes protecting the community. Hence I tend to agree that sending someone to prison for just two months is of little value. Either keep them out of jail, or send them away for a decent period.

I suggest people read the full column.

Lindsay Perigo blogs on ACT, with a unique perspective having worked for them briefly. He notes with the cannabis speech:

On the night after the speech, Don appeared on Campbell Live to defend it. The programme ran a poll on decriminalisation to coincide with his appearance. A record number of people—15000—responded; 72% supported him! Not for the first time, we saw that this is one of those libertarian issues where the voters are much more enlightened than most politicians. As the Press noted at the time, on this matter Banks rather than Brash is the dinosaur.

Here was Don’s chance to re-brand ACT unambiguously as the live-and-let-live party across the board, not just on economic issues. But he needed to hold his nerve. I had texted him a line from Rudyard Kipling just before his Campbell Live appearance: “If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs and blaming it on you … “

I agree with Lindsay that the speech was not a mistake per se. However where I have been critical is that key stakeholders were not in the loop, and talking points agreed in advance. If that had been done, then the speech could well have worked as intended – showing Don as a social liberal, not just an economic liberal.

The Press reports:

David Bain stands to receive nearly $2 million if the judge appointed to consider his compensation bid finds in his favour.

Justice Minister Simon Power yesterday announced the appointment of retired Canadian Supreme Court Judge Ian Binnie to assess Bain’s claim for compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment.

A very smart move. Normally it is a NZ QC but a foreign former Judge makes it very hard for people to attack the assessment, when it is made.

“The compensation framework requires claimants to prove their innocence, and at a minimum, under Cabinet guidelines, Mr Bain will need to establish his innocence on the balance of probabilities.

I eagerly await Judge Binnie’s assessment of who was the most likely killer on the balance of probabilities – David or Robin.

The Conservative Party said that they have not written all their election policy yet. Stuff reports on what it could be:

THE MIDDLE FINGER: Swearing and making rude gestures are criminal acts … and may result in significant penalties.

KISSING: Public displays of affection, such as holding hands and kissing, are socially unacceptable … arrests for public displays of affection.

UNDRESSED: In situations other than the beach or swimming pool, a woman’s clothing might be considered indecent if it is tight, transparent, above the knee or shows her stomach, shoulders or back.CHATTING UP WOMEN: It is illegal to harass women. This includes unwanted conversation, prolonged stares and glaring.

SEX: Sex outside marriage is banned. Homosexual acts and prostitution are illegal and subject to severe punishment.DRINK DRIVING: It is illegal to have any alcohol in your blood when driving.

DRUGS: a zero-tolerance policy towards drugs and penalties for drug trafficking include the death penalty or life in jail.

Dime should be very worried!

Stuff reports:

New Zealand caddie Steve Williams has cast more aspersions on former boss Tiger Woods, keeping their feud bubbling ahead of the Presidents Cup which tees off today.

In a television interview to air around the world today, Williams, who carried Woods’ bag for 13 years until he was sacked in July, questions his former employer’s ability to win the five major championships he needs to pass Jack Nicklaus’s all-time record of 18 majors.

In the interview, which was recorded before he made a racially insensitive remark about Woods during a caddies’ end-of-season function in Shanghai a few weeks ago, Williams says he abhorred the former world No. 1′s infidelity, which was exposed by the media at the end of 2009 and led to the end of Woods’s marriage.

”I just didn’t like having my name associated with it. That sort of activity is not something that I have anything to do with,” he said.

Oh for fuck’s sake, would Steve Williams shut the fuck up. I don’t like my country’s name associated with him.

Williams seems to think it is all about him. Bad enough when he claims he got the win, when he is just the caddie (and yes I know the role is more like coach and can be vital, but at the end of the day the player gets the credit). Then he starts calling Tiger names and now he just won’t shut up about Tiger.

He’s taking Tiger dropping him about as well as a 15 year old boy whose first girlfriend dumps him.

I thought Hone did the best in the minor leader’s debate last night. Not that I agreed with anything he said – but he was best at articulating the far left point of view, and may well win some support from Labour and the Greens on it.

Russel Norman played a safe game, which is what you do when you are polling more than the other five parties combined.

I thought Peter Dunne and Winston Peters both waffled (as my tweet which was read out showed). When all six leaders were asked to name their number one economic policy, neither of them could or did. Peters of course was good at railing against, well everything, and that will appeal to some. It is a pity the moderator failed to get him to answer the final question, and in fact no media has got an answer. Peters claims (whether you believe him is another matter) that he will not go into coalition or accept a Ministerial role with either major party. He says he is campaigning to be in opposition. But the question that was not asked and answered is what will he do if he makes 5% and holds the balance of power? There are four options – vote for a National-led Government, vote for a Labour-led Government, abstain (which allows largest bloc to govern) or vote against and cause a new election.

Tariana Turia was overshadowed by Hone, and some of her facts and figures were grossly inaccurate. The media really should fact check minor party leaders. Don Brash had a hostile audience but got some good lines away such as wanting to change electoral systems because the test is what is good for NZ, not what is good for ACT.

As I said, I wouldn’t be surprised if Mana’s support increased enough that they might get John Minto in.

Went to Otari-Wilton Bush for what was meant to be a one hour walk along the purple and red trails. I took a wrong turn though and ended up doing the yellow trail also. Two hours later I get back to the car!

Still some very nice scenery on a sunny afternoon. Had rained this morning though, so the tracks were steep and slippery.

I’ve just been asked to meet a group of civil society leaders from Afghanistan who are coming to NZ to observe the election.

I hate to think what impressions they will go away with, based on the media coverage of the election. They will think New Zealand is such a perfect country with no crime, no poverty, no unemployment, no trade issues, no defence issues, no economic challenges, no debt as the major focus of the media has been on whether the Prime Minister said that NZ First support is dying off – something that has been said hundreds of times before by political reporters and commentators.

How will I explain to them that this gets more coverage than any other issue of the campaign?

When they refer to the debt crisis in Europe, and ask what did the party leaders say about the fact that France is hovering on the brink of a credit downgrade also, and what impact could this have on NZ, I’ll have to say I’m sorry but that wasn’t deemed worth talking about.

Thanks to TV3 everyone knows more or less what was said in the chat. There was obviously a reference to it being hard work to manage Don Brash at times, and to NZ First support base dying off. Neither of these statements are remarkable. The language used was not as delicate as one would use in public, but that is the difference between a private conversation, and a private chat. when you are chatting to someone one on one with no (known) recording devices in front of you, you don’t carefully consider every vowel you utter. This is not hypocrisy or inconsistency – it is human behaviour.

I do heaps of media work now. How I talk on air is quite different to how I talk one on one to people. I never say anything I don’t believe, but I carefully weigh up my words on air. The same goes for every journalist in the land, except maybe Colin James whose columns and conversations are near identical

So yes John Key said the NZ First support base is dying off. Wow wee. Does this mean he hates pensioners and wants them all to drop dead so they can’t vote for Winston? Of course not. He simply told John Banks why he didn’t think NZ First were likely to make it back.

UPDATE: For my 2c worth, if I was the PM I would go on Close Up tonight and give Sainsbury permission to quote from the transcript and have PM answer questions on it. Then everyone sees what a beat up it is, and the election can focus on the important issues.

Judy Callingham blogs this photo as an example of the cultural differences at the Toronto G20

The Wairarapa Times-Age reports:

Wairarapa residents have the second best access to elective surgeries in the country.

Health Minister Tony Ryall said more than $11 million had been poured into health service improvements in the region over the past three years and in that time 264 extra elective surgeries have been completed,

One would think this is a good thing, right?

Mr Ryall said performance efficiencies in Wairarapa over the past three years included more specialist appointments and shorter waiting times in emergency departments and for cancer radiation treatment.

There had been a 25 per cent increase in publicly funded chemotherapy clinics, record levels of immunisation, and improved diabetes and cardiovascular services and help for smokers to quit, he said.

Also sounds good I would have thought?

However, Wairarapa Labour candidate Michael Bott said the increases in elective surgery turnover “may not be all they seem” and that other health services in the region had been sacrificed for increased surgical funding. …

“The fact is that funding cuts have reduced the capacity of many health services. Front-line staff are doing back office work as well and everything else is getting squeezed to put more money into sexy elective surgery numbers,” Mr Bott said.

So Bott thinks elective surgery operations are “sexy’. In the dismissive context he uses it, he implies superficially attractive but not really that important.

I wonder if Mr Bott has ever been in need of surgery, and had to wait years on a waiting list? I suspect he would be less dismissive of it then.

Stuff reports:

Prime Minister John Key has refused to answer reporter’s questions about the ‘tea tapes’ and stormed out of a press conference in Wellington.

National had dug its heels in over the publication of the recording, with Key saing he cannot remember if he suggested NZ First supporters are dying out.

I can understand the frustration that for four days media have been writing stories on the illegally recorded conversation, but if the Stuff report is correct, this will just keep it in the news even longer. Yes it would be nice if the media actually reported on policies and how France is about to get downgraded due to its history of deficits and debt – but one has to accept the media as they are, not how we would like them to be.

The suggested comments about NZ First are of course correct. Peters gets very little support from younger New Zealanders, and hence his potential voting base does shrink every election. I doubt there isn’t a political reporter in the country who hasn’t said something similar in a private conversation.

Worth noting that it was not a press conference, but a media stand-up after talking to Federated Farmers on trade, and announcing National’s trade policy. The defence will be that as there were no more questions about trade, the PM left, but the media will report it in the most sensational terms.

UPDATE: TV3 video is here. I’m not sure one can describe it as storming out, but predict nevertheless that is how every outlet will report it. That doesn’t mean I think it was a good idea, because the media reaction was predictable.

I wonder if all those on the left who have railed against TV3 and Mediaworks time after time as being “brought off” by the Government might have the good grace to say they were wrong, considering the role of TV3 in keeping this issue alive.

UPDATE2: Looking at the TV news last night TVNZ did a balanced report on the issue, while TV3 hyped it up as their lead item, and probably will do the same tonight. There comes a point where you wonder how many days in a row they will continue with their campaign.

On Twitter and Facebook I did an informal survey asking people how they will vote in Part B of the Referendum. I did not ask about Part A. The results were:

The difference between the Facebook responses and the Twitter responses are interesting. Twitter people went massively for STV while Facebook went massively for SM. Very few people went for FPP or PV. Almost all those who chose FPP said they were doing so tactically as they were MMP supporters, and see FPP as the system least likely to win in 2014 if there is a second referendum.

Some tentative conclusions I draw.

1. Those on Twitter and Facebook (well those who follow me anyway) are far more politically astute than the general population, as FPP is by far the most popular option with the public who only know FPP and MMP, but very few picked it in this survey.
2. If one assumes that those who punted for SM tend to be more right leaning, it suggests that people on Twitter are more left-leaning. This reinforces my general impression over a couple of years.
3. I think those who are of a different political persuasion to each other are generally more willing to engage on Twitter, than on Facebook. You tend to see someone’s Facebook page as “their property” so don’t challenge them as much, while Twitter is seen as basically neutral ground and one gets far more challenging of views.
4. Most MMP supporters will vote for STV and most MMP opponents will vote for SM, at least amongst the politically aware. This is based on my general knowledge of those who responded. I didn’t ask about Part A as I didn’t want it to turn into a debate on MMP. I may do a later informal survey on Part A.

I’m still amazed that to the best of my knowledge there are no TV debates scheduled on the referendum. Sure there has been the odd segment on Breakfast TV or Close Up where proponents have exchanged views. But I think the referendum deserves the same scrutiny as the election. There should be a 60 to 90 minute debate or debates. I’d do it like a leader’s debates. Have a couple of proponents for keep MMP and change MMP and a panel of journalists questioning them. Pretty much like Radio NZ did it, but you know on TV where you reach massively more viewers.

Former Green party member Jolyon White has said he co-ordinated the sticker campaign, but did not take part himself.

But how curious is it, that a man and a woman riding the motorcycle registered to him were seen vandalising billboards in Christchurch with the stickers?

The most likely explanation is that this Anglican Church employee is lying. And if he is lying about this, why would he be telling the truth about how he arranged the nationwide campaign.

The Greens have not said how many of their parliamentary staff knew about the campaign. We know at least one did. They have said they will not investigate until after the election. This leaves open the possibility that several of their staff knew, or were involved, in the campaign.

Stuff reports:

On a bus in Wellington yesterday, the Green Party announced it would scrap Transmission Gully, the Kapiti Expressway and the Basin Reserve flyover roading programmes and reprioritise the $2.4billion spending.

I don’t know why the Greens just don’t come out and ban cars, rather than mess around with half measures. Their strategy is for roads to become so dangerous and congested through lack of spending, that people will abandon their cars, which will of course save the planet.

Road Transport Forum spokesman Ken Shirley disputed the Greens’ figures and said that over the next three years National had proposed spending $10b on roads and $7b on rail, despite roads taking 75 per cent of freight while 15 per cent of freight was moved on rail. The Greens were politicising the national highway process because of their love of other transport modes, he said.

This is what I call a balanced approach. You needs both roads and rail.

Porirua Mayor Nick Leggett called the Greens’ policy “madness” and said Transmission Gully and the Kapiti Expressway were essential to help develop the economic capabilities of the region.

A sensible chap that Leggett.

Having seen some of the tension in Ohariu about who does and does not live in the electorate, it got me curious about which MPs are standing in a seat where they are unable to vote for themselves. Based on what I could find out, this is my list of MPs who will not be able to vote for themselves in this election:

In four electorates there are multiple MPs standing who do not live there – Mt Roskill, Ohariu, Tamaki Makaurau and Taranaki King-Country. I haven’t gone into the reasons for each case, but in some cases they have a very good reason. For example Shane Ardern has lived and farmed in Opunake for several decades and that was in the TKC boundaries when he first got elected. The boundaries has since shifted, so hence he is now just outside the electorate.

Some like John Key have never lived in their electorate, while others like Phil Goff lived there initially and then moved out.

The most geographically remote MP will be David Parker who is enrolled in Dunedin North but standing in Epsom!

Stuff reports:

The cameraman responsible for the teacup tape is a former police constable who was suspended from the force while connections with a militia leader were investigated.

Bradley Ambrose, formerly known as Brad White, was investigated by police in 2000 for his connection with Kelvyn Alp, an ex-soldier who was reportedly trying to recruit a private army to oppose the government. Ambrose returned to police work after the investigation but subsequently left the force. …

The police suspension occurred in 2000 after items that allegedly belonged to White were found during a raid of Alp’s Mangere home. Alp was reportedly trying to recruit a private army to oppose the government at the time.

Alp – who said he’d met White at a friend’s wedding – claimed to have 100 members of his New Zealand Armed Intervention Force (NZAIF), armed and prepared to carry out “illegal” missions. Alp said White was not connected to the NZAIF.

Very strange. There’s normally a compelling reason for someone to change their name.

National has announced:

Under National, there will also be a stronger, more proactive stance against those who abuse and defraud the welfare system. Jobseekers whose recreational drug use affects their ability to apply for or secure a job will also be sanctioned, and through the investment approach those with drug addictions will be supported to overcome their illness. In addition, benefit recipients on the run from the Police will have their benefit cancelled.

I think many will be surprised that this wasn’t already the case in terms of those running from the Police.

And a vast proportion of people on the sickness benefit are drug addicts. The welfare state should not be there to allow someone to remain a non work capable drug addict for years or decades. They should be treated and if they won’t take treatment, be sanctioned.

“This year alone, Work and Income’s data matching found around six to 12 per cent of people were receiving benefit payments they weren’t entitled to.

That’s a huge percentage. Of course not all of this may be due to fraud. Some may be accidental, but I would hope everyone would agree that figure should be around 1% or less.

And from the policy:

There are 25,000 people currently receiving a benefit who have committed benefit fraud in the past, or who have received substantial overpayments they were not entitled to, after abusing the welfare system.

I bet you Labour say it is a miniscule problem, not worth worrying about.