Kiwiblog

After having failed to get the residents of Oamaru, Christchurch, Wellington and Napier to pay for Auckland’s CBD rail loop, Len Brown has proposed half a dozen new taxes as possible ways to pay for the loop.

The proposed taxes include:

• Regional income tax – new income tax paid only by Aucklanders.
• Regional payroll tax – new income tax paid by Auckland employers.
• Regional GST – raising GST in Auckland.
• Regional fuel tax – raising petrol and diesel taxes across Auckland.
• Visitor taxes – nightly charge for hotel and motel rooms.

Photo from Stuff.

Captions should be funny, not nasty.

Deborah Coddington writes in the HoS:

Why the fuss over charter schools? Given the hysterical ranting from teacher unions, you’d think we were returning to caning on the backside.

It won’t be compulsory for students to attend what are, essentially, alternative choices for parents to state or private schools. A bit like kura kaupapa.

But unions don’t like parental choice. They like telling parents what to do. Robin Duff, head of the PPTA, published an opinion piece comparing these evil charter schools with epic failures such as the Pike River mining disaster, the Global Financial Crisis and the grounding of the container ship Rena.

Charter schools also cause famine in Africa I understand.

The commonality is that none are accountable. But charter schools are accountable to parents, something that many state schools are not.

If parents can choose to stay or leave a school, that is the best form of accountability.

While the PPTA and NZEI remain firmly wedded to collective agreements, it will be difficult to introduce incentives to keep brilliant teachers in the classrooms when they must move into management for higher salaries. In union land, excellent teachers shouldn’t get more pay than incompetent colleagues on the same level because that’s not fair.

I say let each principal decide for themselves how much to pay the teachers at their school, within a total budget.

Got 9/10 in Herald quiz in 44 seconds. Muffed the Andrew Williams one.

Paul Holmes writes in the HoS:

Waitangi Day produced its usual hatred, rudeness, and violence against a clearly elected Prime Minister from a group of hateful, hate-fuelled weirdos who seem to exist in a perfect world of benefit provision. This enables them to blissfully continue to believe that New Zealand is the centre of the world, no one has to have a job and the Treaty is all that matters.

I’m over Waitangi Day. It is repugnant. It’s a ghastly affair. As I lie in bed on Waitangi morning, I know that later that evening, the news will show us irrational Maori ghastliness with spitting, smugness, self-righteousness and the usual neurotic Maori politics, in which some bizarre new wrong we’ve never thought about will be lying on the table. …

Well, it’s a bullshit day, Waitangi. It’s a day of lies. It is loony Maori fringe self-denial day. It’s a day when everything is addressed, except the real stuff.

Never mind the child stats, never mind the national truancy stats, never mind the hopeless failure of Maori to educate their children and stop them bashing their babies. No, it’s all the Pakeha’s fault. It’s all about hating whitey. Believe me, that’s what it looked like the other day.

John Key speaks bravely about going there again. He should not go there again. It’s over. Forget it. It is too awful and nasty and common. It is no more New Zealand day than Halloween.

Our national day is now Anzac Day. Anzac Day is a day of honour, and struggle, bravery and sacrifice. A day on which we celebrate the periods when our country embraced great efforts for international freedom and on which we weep for those who served and for those who died.

Waitangi Day is an important day in terms of the treaty between the Crown (Government) and Maori. But it is not, and should not be, our national day.

John Roughan also writes on Waitangi Day. I’ve observed that Roughan tends to be fairly liberal on Maori and treaty issues generally, so that makes his column quite significant:

Protesters forget that Maori have to act in good faith too.

If you or I imagined we were plugged into the deepest yearnings of the people, raised our flag, stood for election and collected a miserable few votes, we’d probably fold our tent, slip away and revise our view of the world.

But we’re not that special breed of human life known as the protester. Votes don’t count for much in the protesters’ idea of democracy. The Mana Party came to Waitangi last weekend as though the election had never happened, or perhaps to say it didn’t matter.

Good faith is indeed required both ways.

John Roughan writes at NZ Herald:

Then Hone Harawira and Greens co-leader Metiria Turei were called to the platform. Turei, declaring her background to be anarchism, said her concept of life was that we all lived in a cage with wild monsters trying to tear down the walls that protected us.

These monsters were corporate capitalism, she said, and she saw her job as trying to push out the walls of the cage and increase our living space. Weird.

Yes wild monsters are trying to eat our young and destroy us. They’re called businesses and are evil.

Adam Bennett at NZ Herald reports:

Technology allowing police and other authorities to identify the location of callers may become mandatory for all cellphones in New Zealand in a move to improve the 111 emergency calling system.

But although the proposal could save lives, Telecom and the Privacy Commissioner have rung alarm bells.

The mandatory global positioning system (GPS) idea was raised in a discussion paper reviewing the 111 system issued yesterday by Communications Minister Amy Adams.

Umm, no.

I’ve chosen to have GPS on my cellphone. Personally I like the idea of the authorities being able to trace me in case of emergency. Hell, I’m even on Foursquare, so I boroadcast my location to several hundred people.

But that is my choice. Equally I should have the choice of being able to use a cellphone that does not indicate my location.

Once the Government has the ability to detect your location via your cellphone for one purpose (a noble one), there is a slippery slope that they will want to use it for other purposes.

In my Herald column I look at the first week of question time. I praise Winston first:

Winston is back in Parliament, and had a good first week in the House. His chosen issue of wasteful spending under the whanau ora programme is a good one for him (and one I approve of). Labour and Greens are reluctant to go there, as they worry that they may be seen as being against the aims of whanau ora, which is seeking to improve the lives of whanau.

But also note:

There has been a fascinating series of exchanges between the Speaker and Peters. Peters complains that the PM has not answered his question, and the Speaker points out it is totally unreasonable to expect the PM to be able to answer a supplementary question on details of a small grant, when the primary question did not refer to the grant in question. Despite being told this on Tuesday and Wednesday, Peters persisted with this approach, and again on Thursday got the same reply from the PM. If he is smart, he will take the advice of Mr Speaker, and start providing details of the alleged wasteful spending in the primary question. But maybe secrecy is so ingrained with him, he can’t bear to reveal his target in advance.

I also look at the Greens and Labour.

Shabham Dastgheib at Stuff reports:

The mandatory bicycle helmet law has cut the number of cyclists in half and contributed to 53 premature deaths per year, new research says.

The research, published in the New Zealand Medical Journal today, found a 51 per cent drop in the average hours cycled per person from the 1989-90 period when compared to 2006-09.

Colin Clarke, the honorary secretary of the Yorkshire Region’s Cyclists Touring Club in England who produced the research, has worked as a safety instructor and cycled in more than 20 countries including about 8000 kms in New Zealand.

Clarke estimates the 1994 law has translated to about 53 premature deaths per year (through adverse health effects from not cycling) and promotes discrimination in accident compensation.

He said safety should be improved through policies supporting health, the environment, and without the legal requirement to wear a helmet.

I actually think people have the right to risk themselves. Hence they can bungy jump, climb mountains, swim, work as salvors etc. That right should extend to wearing no helmet while cycling, and no seatbelt while driving.

With cycling, people should be able to judge for themselves whether the extra enjoyment they get from cycling without a helmet outweighs the probability of more severe damage if they crash. If you cycle 10 hours a week, and you have say only a 5% chance of a serious crash over your cycling life, then it is may be a reasonable decision to not wear a helmet.

Now some may argue that the decision is not one of people’s rights to take risks, but an economic one. That as we have a socialised health system, we should force people to minimise their chances of disease and injury, as otherwise we end up having to pay for their bad choices.

I have some sympathy for that argument, but it can be slippery end of the slope. You could use economics to justify making condoms compulsory for sex to reduce the prevalence of STDs.

But this story above, is a nice reminder that even if you do accept the economic argument to reduce risk by say banning cycling without a helmet, you run the risk of unintended consequences. In this case, the unintended consequence is alleged to be fewer people are cycling, and hence unhealthier, which has actually led to more premature deaths and a greater cost to the economy.

This is another reason why we should be extremely reluctant to interfere with people’s personal choices. You may have the best of motivations, but you don’t know what the impact will be.

The December 2011 Household Labour Force Survey found the following:

• Seasonally adjusted employment up 4,000 for the quarter and 35,000 for the year
• Seasonally adjusted unemployment down 7,000 for the quarter and 6,000 for the year
• Seasonally adjusted labour force down 3,000 for the quarter but up 28,000 for the year
• Seasonally adjusted unemployment rate down to 6.3%. Was 6.7% a year ago.
• Under 20s unemployment rate up from 23.4% to 24.2%
• Of 34 OECD countries, NZ unemployment rate is 12th lowest

The Electoral Commission has also announced:

TVNZ OneNews coverage before 7pm on 26 November 2011.  It is the Electoral Commission’s view that the broadcast breached section 197(1)(g)(i) of the Electoral Act 1993 because it included statements that were likely to influence any elector as to the party for whom the elector should or should not vote.

I didn’t see the news that night (mainly because I was actually at TVNZ getting ready for the election broadcast) so can’t recall what they broadcast, which has triggered this referral.

It will be interesting to see the details of the material complained about, once it is made public.

New Northland MP Mike Sabin has just given his maiden speech. Some extracts:

One of this nation’s finest leaders once said of leadership “having a vision is not enough.  Change comes through turning a vision into a reality.  It is easy to espouse worthy goals, value and policies, the hard part is the implementation.

Tragically, 10 years ago the architect of those words, Sir Peter Blake lost his life in the pursuit of turning his vision into a reality. 

The essence of the Blake ethos centred around the notion that it is your actions that define you, not your words, something that can be easily forgotten by the well intentioned in their pursuit of public service.

Simon Power said something similar in his valedictory. That the honour comes from doing things as an MP, not just being an MP.

At this stage Mr Speaker I would also like to pay tribute to my predecessor Hon John Carter for the massive contribution he has made to the Party, to Northland and NZ. 

Of course “massive contribution” could also now describe his tab at Trader Jacks, but I’m sure the Cooks will be well served with him as High Commissioner, not only for his passion to make a difference, but for the range of new jokes he will be unleashing on an unsuspecting population.

Heh, so true. John had an endless supply of jokes. Some were even printable.

I am the eldest son of Lew and Merlene Sabin, with one brother and sister.  I’m the proud father of three amazing children; Brook, Darryl and Brenna. I am of mixed genealogy, like most; and am proudly of Tainui Whakapapa on my mother’s side.  It gives me a uniqueness in this world which I celebrate, but more so I celebrate that NZ is my home and that I am a New Zealander.

My early years were spent in Auckland before my family moved to Whangarei.  A product of WBHS, I followed my father’s footsteps in the Navy as a Seaman Officer, but before too long I found myself back in Northland dairy farming.  As a young father I was keen to join the Police, essentially to contribute to making the community a better place to bring up my children.

Navy farming and the Police. I like MPs who have had some real life experience.

My career in the police shadowed the introduction of Pure Methamphetamine (or P) into NZ, an area I developed and expertise in, but while working on squads running undercover and electronic surveillance operations I literally saw NZ explode from virtually no P problem to the worst in the world within 5 years.   

Our well-developed drug culture saw us primed for the only hard drug in the world that can be made on your kitchen bench from readily available retail chemicals.

Those 5 years have changed NZ forever and led me to the conclusion that the fight needed to go back to the top of the cliff.  Quite simply Mr Speaker I knew we wouldn’t win the war trying to heal the wounded.

This desire to find a better way gave rise to MethCon Group, a drug education and policy company I founded and operated from 2006.  The mission was simple; empower employers, students and community with education while looking for policy solutions to help provide government with better tools. …

Mr Speaker, while there are some who would say I am a one-trick-pony, here to further the anti-drug cause, far from it, my journey into politics has come about as an evolution of many professional experiences leading me to the conclusion that if one wants to support their community and nation to reach its real potential there is a need to be around the tables where the decisions that most affect our communities are being made.

The reality is Mr Speaker, my efforts with the P issue demonstrate more my on-going willingness to try to make a difference than my focus on that particular issue alone.  Much like my son, I just wanted to try and find solutions, while many others were finding ways to tolerate the problem.

And then more generally:

Personal responsibility, the very source from which self-respect springs is intrinsically related to the individual’s willingness to accept responsibility over one’s own life.  To do so is to give value, purpose and freedom to the soul.  To refuse it leaves a hole from which the spirit of the individual will slowly but surely drain.

Yet years of socialist ideology, welfarism which has evolved to provide perverse incentives to opt out and the insidious encroachment of government on the minds and lives of citizens has seen the notion of personal responsibility pilloried like it were the ramblings of capitalist zealots.

This country is Gods own yet we condemn many innocent children to abuse, neglect and homicide.  For a generation we have vainly sought solutions, largely ignoring the fact that we have created a culture which too easily traps parents in welfare, who often through no fault of their own, lack even the most basic of life skills and for whom personal responsibility is an unnecessary and irrelevant commodity surpassed by a sea of social agencies that seek to provide what they will now never have to.

Mr Speaker too often we have become consumed with addressing the symptoms of these very problems  while failing to challenge the cause of them, something that often requires courage and honesty in uncomfortable amounts, but nonetheless something in my view New Zealanders expect of its leaders.  To that end, I’d like to commend the work being done by the Minister of Social Development in this particular area.

Hear hear.

The full speech is after the break.

(more…)

Hayden Donnell at NZ Herald reports:

Ports of Auckland workers are set to strike for a full week in a new escalation of their long running employment dispute.

The just-announced strike action is set to start at 7am on February 24.

It is in addition to a partial strike set to take place from February 15 to 22.

So basically, they will be on strike for two weeks continuously.

How long until all the customers have gone to Tauranga?

Stuff reports:

New Zealand First leader Winston Peters says John Key should also be referred to police over his hosting of a radio show, not just RadioLive. …

I’m staggered that Stuff have not reported on the hypocrisy of that statement by Peters.

You see in 2008, the Electoral Commission referred NewstalkZB to the Police, for a prohibited election programme. And what was that election programme? It was an talkback programme hosted by Winston Peters (and another one by Shane Jones).

So Winston in 2008, did exactly what the PM did in 2011.

Unless Winston is being a total hypocrite (which of course he is), one can only conclude that he thinks he should have been referred to the Police in 2008, not just NewstalkZB.

Unlike Key, who did not talk about politics, Peters said during his talkback hosting:

We don’t mind who you vote for in your first vote, but buy yourself some insurance and give New Zealand First your party vote, your second vote

The Electoral Commission concluded in 2008:

the talkback programmes hosted by Winston Peters MP and Shane Jones MP, and broadcast on NewsTalk ZB, were broadcast in circumstances amounting to the commission of offences for the purposes of section 80 of the Broadcasting Act 1989

So let’s not hold our breath waiting for Winston to demand that he also be referred to the Police. Hopefully though the media will at least mention the gross hypocrisy.

Former ACT MP Heather Roy used to include in her weekly newsletter a list of upcoming bills likely to be voted on.

Each bill would have a large tick or a cross next to it, to indicate how ACT planned to vote on it, along with a sentence or two explaining why.

It strikes me that this would be a good feature on Red Alert. The Whips could do it after caucus every Tuesday, and it would let people know which bills are non-controversial and which ones are contentious. It would also let Labour indicate briefly why they are voting for or against, and maybe even highlight the aspects they want changed (if appropriate).

Ideally all parties in Parliament should do this – to be open and transparent on which bills they plan to support or oppose, and why. Maybe Frog Blog could do it also?

Stuff reports:

Energy specialist and renewable energy advocate Barrie Leay will be sorely missed says Windflow Technology chief executive Geoff Henderson. …

Henderson said Leay brought a wealth of New Zealand energy experience and international contacts to the company through his prior roles as executive director of the Electricity Supply Association of New Zealand and chairman of the APEC Energy Business Network in the Asia Pacific.

Barrie Leay was also the National Party’s General Secretary for much of the 1970s and 1980s. His nickname was Buddha, I recall.

Barrie’s tenure was in the golden years of Sir George Chapman, and also Sue Wood. He was a powerful figure. His successors have tended to be fairly apolitical, but Barrie was very political, and hence somewhat controversial.

I joined the party around the time he retired, However I had a wee bit to do with him through the National Political Centre, which was a  internal policy thinktank. He was indeed an expert on energy policy and issues.

Barrie devoted a large part of his life to the National Party. May he rest in peace.

The quarterly disclosures are out for MPs and Ministers.

Top Ministers in terms of internal costs were:

1. PM $121,884
2. Judith Collins $74,138
3. Pita Sharples $72,473
4. Steven Joyce $62,223
5. Tariana Turia $57,260

Worth remembering that expenses are to some degree a reflection of activity and location. Also affected by whether their ministerial home is owned or rented.

Total ministerial expenses for Q4 2011 were $1.16m plus $0.32m overseas travel for $1.48m. The year before in Q4 2010 it was $1.13m plus $0.86m overseas travel for $1.99m total. Obviously with the election, less travel.

Top MPs were:

1. Hone Harawira $54,961
2. Phil Goff $32,566
3. Rahui Katene $29,436
4. Kevin Hague $28,763
5. David Cunliffe $28,040

The total MPs expenses for the quarter were $3.15m. For Q4 2010, it was $1.80m. I guess the election saw a lot of taxpayer funded travel.

First some family history:

My waka is Tainui of which Hoturoa was the captain

My iwi is Ngati Maniapoto

My hapu,  Ngati Hikairoa

 On my European side I am descended from Orm, the Viking. 

Orm lived around 750 AD. He was reputed to have killed a large bear with one blow of his fist. I think Sonny Bill Williams should have fought Orm instead.

Because amenities were affordable we regularly visited the local swimming pool and developed civic pride, 20 cents entry fee.

 Compare that to my local council swimming pool Baywave in Tauranga where entry and  hydroslides costs 8 dollars for local children.

 It’s no wonder children struggle to swim and one of my goals is to have gold coin entry to all swimming pools for all NZ school children.

Brendan was born in 1961 so presumably the 20c was around 1968 – once decimal currency came in. The CPI was 70 in 1968 and today is 1158, so in today’s dollars that 20c would be $3.30. So $8 is over double what it used to be, in real terms.

“Evil thrives when good men and women stand by and do nothing”

 So I ask now – how can NZ have the highest child brutality and murder rate   in the OECD , how can this possibly be NZ when we start the year with a baby being murdered in a small town, a 16 year old boy assaulting and raping a 5 year old girl and a young father being stabbed to death while sitting in his car waiting for a medical prescription.

The foul stench of these crimes lingers over our entire nation, but in particular those of us in the house today – as it has happened on OUR watch.

And further …

The protection and safety of all NZ children must be paramount.

We are all aware of the need – and decisive action must be taken.

If we have to step on a few toes and offend the politically correct – then so be it.

I’d be interested to hear what he has in mind.

This NZ First economic plan will operate in the absence of secrecy.

Cough, cough Spencer Trust.

To be fair, that was Winston’s baby. No one else in NZ First even knew of it – not even the Party President!

Our people are some of the most creative, innovative and forward thinking to be found anywhere.

But currently we are marking time and quite frankly we need to embrace, support and speed up the rollout of ultra fast broadband.

The mobile digital revolution is accelerating at an exponential rate.

Countries with established broadband are rapidly going mobile and that is going to have massive implications for business, education and the health sector.

The digital revolution is still in its infancy, I agree.

The full speech is after the break.

(more…)

Anne Gibson at NZ Herald reports:

Auckland could need an extra 20,000ha to accommodate new houses in the next three decades if its current style of new housing is to continue.

That’s an area around 14 kms wide by 14 kms long.

Martin Udale, ex-chief executive of McConnell Property, was commissioned by Ree Andersen, Auckland Council’s regional strategy manager, to write an independent review of a report by Studio D4′s Patrick Fontein and architects Jasmax on the controversial plan to ring-fence 75 per cent of all new housing within existing city limits in the next 30 years. …

Udale, of Essentia Consulting Group, also questioned the wisdom behind the plan and raised the prospect of just 15 new houses built on each hectare of land, many small-lot suburban housing and townhouses, and showed how the city would need an extra 20,000ha.

But if 25 houses were built on a hectare and terrace-style residences were a big part of the mix, 12,000ha of land was needed. If 100 dwellings were built on each hectare, just 3000ha of extra land would be needed, he calculated.

100 dwellings per hectare? Shudder.

I just don’t think you can fit an extra 300,000 people within the existing Auckland metro area.

Yet the Auckland plan proposed that two-thirds of all new housing development would be low-rise in the form of attached dwellings and low-rise apartments of four storeys or less.

So Udale posed the question of where all the extra land would come from and calculated that an area about half to two-thirds the current area of the Auckland isthmus could be needed.

So it seems the only way Len’s plan will work is if people all go into high-rise apartments.

The Press reports:

Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee says calling Christchurch Mayor Bob Parker a clown was “over the top” but reflects his frustration with the city council’s problems. …

In yesterday’s Christchurch Mail, Brownlee called Parker a “clown” over comments about possible rates rises in the city.

Parker told The Mail last week the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (Cera) Act allowed the Government to force the council to hike rates or sell off assets to fund the city’s recovery.

“Cera has the ability to say, `This is how you have to meet your costs, and can make us take measures such as raising rates or selling assets’,” the mayor said.

Treasury officials had made overtures to the council about a potential rates rise, Parker told The Mail.

Brownlee dismissed the remarks, saying the legislation did not allow the Government to make the council set a rate. “That’s an outrageous abdication of his responsibilities. The Cera Act specifically forbids that,” he told The Mail. 

Brownlee told The Press last night the clown remark was “probably over the top”, but was based on his frustration with Parker’s comments and the council’s problems. “We were going through a quite intense period of getting the council to recognise their responsibilities … I am sick and tired of the council running and telling people what we’re going to do.”

Ironically this will probably make Gerry more popular in Christchurch.

It seems clear the Mayor was incorrect in his comments. Having said that, the remark just adds fuel to an already difficult situation. Hopefully it won’t become a major issue.

I can’t cover all of them, but am trying to cover a few of the maiden speeches in Parliament. New NZ First MP Denis O’Rourke spoke primarily on Christchurch in his speech. He is (off memory) a former City Councillor.

He said:

Magnitude 6.3 for the February 2011 quake does not adequately describe it.

 In my home on the Port Hills, directly above the fault, I felt the indescribable force of vertical ground acceleration 2.2 times the force of gravity, the largest ever recorded anywhere in a populated area.

But it was the great rolling waves following the initial shock which threatened to turn my home onto its side. Luckily it came back to the vertical again.

 And on top of all that was the severity of the shaking for nearly a minute.

 I helped neighbours out of shattered homes, and I looked across at the cloud of white dust rising over the central city, a thousand feet high and four kilometres wide.

 Then came the exodus from the central city.

People abandoned their cars on unpassable roads covered in liquifaction, and were exhausted even before reaching the hill, often with cuts and bruises and tears streaming down terrified faces, searching for children at the local school, or rushing home to loved ones.

Those terrible experiences are now all in the past.

But the effects are not.

A vivid recalling of the earthquake. Those of us not there, can only imagine what it was like.

And we all want to know what will happen to the red zoned land.

As the thousands of houses are demolished, we must not be left with vast areas of dusty demolition deserts  to add to the problems we already face.

 I call upon the government to urgently establish and fund a plan to turn these areas into properly maintained grassed parklands which will enhance the environment of the city, while final decisions are made on how to deal with this land in the longer term.

What happens to the red zone is one of the big issues.

I call upon the government to quickly establish

a major urban renewal fund for central Christchurch,

-       provided over a period of years,

-       designed to assist the rebuild of both public and private structures,

-       for access by way of grants and concessionary loans,

-       by building owners and businesses,

-       and by the City Council for public space and transport enhancements.

Interestingly, I’m hearing a view from more and more in Christchurch that rebuilding the CBD might just not be practical, and possibly Christchurch would made better progress by becoming a decentralised city.

I call upon the government to re-establish a government backed insurer in New Zealand with a mission to provide cover for everybody who needs it. 

I suspect at this stage, Bill English is in physical pain at the fiscal implications. But it may well eventuate that the Government does have to take a role in insurance in Christchurch. I hope not though.

It is time for a new unitary authority for Christchurch to be established for election in 2013. 

I think unitary authorities have considerable merit.

The full speech is over the break for those interested.

(more…)

Stuff reports:

A RadioLive show hosted by the Prime Minister John Key prior to the election has been referred to the police for breaching the Broadcasting Act.

The Electoral Commission confirmed this morning that it had referred the broadcaster to police. …

NewstalkZB said it had obtained a copy of the report, which found the show violated the act. RadioLive could be fined up to $100,000 for the breach.

The BSA had earlier found the show was not an election programme and would not have breached standards even if it were.

It looks like Radio Live, rather than the PM, may be in the gun in a legal sense. But if the show is found in court to be a breach of the law, it will be politically embarrassing to the PM, no doubt.

I think it is safe to conclude there will not be a repeat show – or at least not during the regulated period anyway.

It will be interesting to see what the Police do. A show with Shane Jones in it was referred to them for investigation in 2008. I can’t recall what the outcome was in that case.

Danyl at Dim post blogs in response:

But the point here is that having a couple of children shouldn’t be a ‘bad personal choice’ for everyone not earning a high income. 

It’s not a couple of children. I don’t disagree that a couple of children shouldn’t be a bad personal choice. This was four children though. One from a previous relationship, and three from this one. I stand by my view that if your household income is $42,000 a year, then it is not a good time to have a fourth child.

This used to be a country in which a family could be comfortably supported on a single, average income.

$42,000 a year is below the average personal income (for a FT employee) and well below the average household income for a couple. And four children is twice as much as two children.

That’s because our median wages remain stagnant while our living costs continue to rise.

Untrue. Our median after tax wage has increased in real terms.

Choosing your family size to meet your budget is nothing new. It is what the vast majority of couples do. Many well off couples decide to say limit their family to two or three kids, as a third or fourth kid would be too expensive.

I have a lot of sympathy for families with children, who fall on hard times, say with one or both parents losing their job. That is why we have a multi-billion dollar welfare state with welfare benefits and Working for Families.

But if a family is already finding it tough to make ends meet, and chooses to have further children, then I have less sympathy.

Trevor Mallard blogged:

The National party are up to their old tricks – appointing people very close to them to positions in a way that is not appropriate.

Trevor’s view of appropriate is sacking Madeleine Setchell because her boyfriend took a job with John Key, and defaming Erin Leigh because she was a whistle blower.

First Sir Wira Gardiner. Very talented. Appointed by the previous government to do some tricky tasks.

I’m glad Trevor mentions that. A quick search reveals Labour appointed Wira to the following:

•  independent Board of Inquiry to consider the proposed National Policy Statement for Renewable Electricity Generation, by Trevor Mallard
• interim chair of of Te Mangai Paho, by Parekura Horomia
• the Treaty of Waitangi Fisheries Commission, by Parekura Horomia
• facilitate hui on seabed and foreshore, by Michael Cullen
• Crown facilitator for Central North Island Forests Land Collective Settlement, by Michael Cullen

But he is married to a Cabinet Minister. He should not be appointed by any Minister in the current government to paid employment. John Key and Bill English have appointed him to sell their asset sales process to Maori.

As usual, Trevor is lying. Wira was selected and appointed by Treasury, not by Cabinet or Ministers.

If you claim that is a conflict, then you are also saying Peter Davis should not have been employed in the health sector.

Labour got Madeleine Setchell sacked because of whom her partner was. Thankfully National does not do the same.