Kiwiblog

Stuff reports:

Several thousand people have gathered in Christchurch this afternoon to protest the demolition of the city’s Anglican cathedral.

The protest rally began in Cranmer Square and saw past and present civic leaders, MPs and other high profile Christchurch residents calling on the Anglican Church to immediately halt demolition work on the quake-damaged Cathedral.

The rally came on the day an opinion poll showed the fate of the Anglican cathedral has divided the region, with 54 per cent of those polled favouring demolition and 42 per cent calling for it to be saved.

Former MP Jim Anderton told the crowd that 100 engineers had confirmed the Cathedral could be saved and restoration should go ahead regardless of the cost. If the city could afford to spend money on a new rugby stadium it could afford to restore the city’s most iconic building.

Jim must have missed a key word. It is a “new” stadium. That is very different to trying to restore a building that is dangerous and unsafe. But hey, if Jim has some engineers who think it is fine, I’m all for sending Jim in with a hard hat.

But Jim doesn’t just want to risk other people’s lives restoring the cathedral, he also says that it must be restored regardless of the cost.

Well if each of the 5,000 people who marched contribute $20,000 each they can buy the Cathedral and do what they want with it.

I presume Saint Jim has set up a trust fund which he has made a large donation to, encouraging others to do the same, to pay for the Cathedral’s restoration. I mean, surely he isn’t saying he just wants other people to pay for it, and not him.

Ian Steward in the SST reports:

Inmates are breathing easy following the prison smoking ban with scientists finding a greater than 50 per cent rise in air quality and – to everyone’s surprise – no major incidents since the big stub out.

Smoking was banned in New Zealand prisons on June 1 last year with stark warnings from prisoners, prison advocates, and guards of riots and disorder.

However, there were no riots and Corrections staff report a number of unforeseen benefits.

Prison services assistant general manager Rachel Leota said prisons had reported a “calmer” environment with fewer “standover” incidents now that tobacco has been taken out of circulation.

Inmates had been heard on the prison telephone monitoring system telling family they appreciated living in a smoke-free environment and encouraging family to give up.

I recall the predictions of riots and violence. I really should look up who was making those predictions, so that when they opine in future on prison policy, we can take this into account.

A team of scientists from Auckland University studying the amount of “fine particulate” in the air of prisons has found the rate halved after smoking was banned.

Dr Simon Thornley and colleagues set up an air quality monitor in Auckland Prison, at Paremoremo, and measured fine particulate concentrations for 15 days before and 15 days after the ban.

Readings were already low as the detector had to be set up in a staff area for safety concerns.

Before the ban the mean concentration was 6.58 micrograms per cubic metre of air.

This dropped to 5.17mcg once a ban on sale of cigarettes was introduced and fell further to 2.44mcg once the total ban was implemented. Thornley said despite the dramatic increase in air quality, the thing that surprised people the most was how well-behaved prisoners were while the ban was introduced.

Excellent.

The HoS reports:

The country’s unemployment rate is the highest it has been since 1999, but some employers are struggling to find people willing to take on manual work.

Several employers desperately seeking reliable workers say it is as if people are unprepared for the workforce and don’t want to prove themselves.

The unemployment rate for the March quarter was 7.1 per cent, the highest it has been since June 1999, and the youth rate was 23.4 per cent.

Hayden Bootton, of HSB Builders in Northland, said finding unskilled workers was difficult, despite offering apprenticeships.

He was offering $16 an hour for temporary workers and the minimum wage for permanent work, pay rises every six months and the prospect of a full builder’s wage of about $20 an hour at the end of training. …

Northland’s unemployment rate is almost 9 per cent, one of the country’s highest.

Brenda, who does not want her surname used, said it was not only a Northland problem. Her Waikato business hires labourers. She said people had worked a couple of days before quitting, and others had walked out when faced with a drug test.

I recall after I left university deciding not to apply for a job because it paid only $11 an hour, and was for four months only while someone took a long overseas trip. Later that day I reconsidered and recovered the advert from the bin and applied for it. My rationale was better to be in work on not great wages for even four months, than not working at all.

Four years later I left the employer earning close to double what I started on. I was so glad I took that initial relatively low paid job with no job security.

I bombed this week. Just 6/10. Quiz is here.

Whale Oil blogs that a remit was put to the National Party’s Northern Regional Conference by the Young Nationals:

That the National Party legalise adoption for those who have entered into a civil union partnership.

The remit was passed by the conference and will now be considered for debate at the overall party conference in July.

I’m really pleased that the delegates at the Northern Conference voted in favour of the remit. The outcome reflects well on them and the party.

Jared Savage in the NZ Herald reports:

The public servant who handled the citizenship application of a millionaire Chinese businessman with multiple identities was told by his boss to “stop asking questions”, a transcript of court evidence shows.

Nothing to see here, just move on.

Mr Gambo wanted to make further inquiries with immigration authorities in Australia.

“I had a phone call that I was told not to ask any more questions because there was a lot of political pressure to send the file to Wellington.

“I was told to just process the file, send it to Wellington, don’t worry about asking any more questions.

“I have been working there for seven years and that was the first time I have had my boss phone me about an application.”

This is what is at the heart of the case. That a man with friends in the Labour Party, got special treatment.

Shane Jones has previously said he granted Mr Yan citizenship on humanitarian grounds because an Internal Affairs official told him Mr Yan risked execution if he returned to China.

Yesterday, an Internal Affairs spokesman said the files on the case had now been checked and there was no record of a departmental official discussing that issue with Mr Jones.

“We are not saying absolutely that didn’t happen, but we don’t have any [record of it].”

The execution in China angle was pushed by Yan, and his lawyer (who also happens to be Dover Samuels’ lawyer). As far as I am aware they have never provided a shred of proof. Anyone can assert something. What a competent Minister does is ask for proof, or at least consider the plausibility of the claims, such as will being a citizen rather than a permament resident in any impact whether or not he goes to China, and how consistent is it to claim to be Falun Gong, which bans gambling, and spent millions at Sky City casino.

The Herald reports:

The Government could scrap the need for a Warrant of Fitness on new cars under changes to the vehicle licensing regime.

New cars would first be checked two years after being sold, followed by inspections at four and six years. Thereafter, they would need a yearly Warrant of Fitness. The current six-monthly WoF on cars over six years old could be moved out to 12 months.

The changes are part of government proposals to lower the annual compliance costs of the WoF, vehicle registrations and the certificate of fitness and transport services licensing systems.

This seems pretty sensible for me. The timing of WOF checks should be based on the probability of there having been faults develop during that period which make the car less safe to drive. I don’t know what the data is, but this should be an evidence based decsion.

Opponents say changes would put people out of work, affecting Vehicle Inspection NZ, Vehicle Testing NZ stations and small garages.

“The neighbourhood corner garage relies on six-monthly WoFs for its bread and butter,” said one man. “Switching to a year on older cars and two years on new ones would force many of the smaller garages to close.”

Sigh. Arguments like this depress me. This is effectively arguing that the reason we require WOF checks, is to create jobs in garages. Well why stop there, let’s require monthly checks and that will be a huge boost for jobs in garages.

Sustainable jobs are those based on their being a legitimate demand for the associated services or goods.

We will have Bill English, David Parker, Brian Fallow, Colin James and Pattrick Smellie we will also have the following on the programme:

• Jo Doolan (Ernst and Young) and Chris Money (PwC) on getting growth in the economy.
• And the Sunday media panel (Ralston and Edwards) will talk to Andrew Holden, Editor of The Press on how his newspaper survived an earthquake and won a newspaper award.

The programme will be hosted by Simon Shepherd

Saturday 930 — repeated on Sunday 0800 — TV3

---

My Herald column is on National’s Super problem:

One of the reasons National got re-elected is they were seen as more fiscally credible than the alternatives. As European governments crumble under the burden of excessive government spending, deficits and debt, voters at home place great stock on fiscal sanity.

However the stance on superannuation is the chink in National’s armour. Labour will try and use this issue to portray National as going for the easy spending targets but unwilling to target the largest item of spending.

Labour’s pledge to increase the age of entitlement from 65 to 67 is a tactical policy to try and position National as fiscally irresponsible, and National is locked into a five year old policy pledge that leaves it incapable of responding. …

The lesson for both the current Prime Minister, and any future Prime Ministers, is to never ever make any pledge beyond the next term of Parliament. Doing so is both short-sighted and anti-democratic. Elections should be about choices. Policies should change as circumstances change. Our three year electoral cycle allows policies to gain mandates in a fairly timely manner.

The Prime Minister’s pledge to never allow any changes to superannuation during his tenure will continue to grow as a problem for National. They are fortunate that at the last election the fiscal credibility of their opponents was weak, and a debate stumble by Phil Goff fatally crippled them. In 2014 David Shearer may have succeeded in portraying Labour as fiscally credible, and then the superannuation pledge could become a critical issue. It would be ironic is a pledge which helped National win the 2008 election became the reason they lost the 2014 election.

This is probably the last post for today as I’m in meetings the rest of the day. Enjoy the weekend!

I’m start to get seriously annoyed at media who run story after story on how various families have to survive on $x, and hence need a payrise – without detailing their actual total income including government support. They do their readers a gross disservice by hiding relevant facts from them.

Today’s story is:

Solo mother Kelly Belcher is trying to raise her two young children on around $240 a week, a wage she says is not enough to provide her family with a decent quality of life.

Ms Belcher was speaking at the launch of the Living Wage Aotearoa NZ campaign in Auckland today, which aims to combat poverty and inequality by advocating for better wages for low-paid workers.

She works as a cleaner in Auckland and is also studying for a degree.

“I would earn more on the DPB (domestic purposes benefit) but I’m trying to do the right thing and be productive and work, but I get slapped down for it. That’s how it feels. There’s no quality of life. I look at my two little kids and there’s no activities, there’s no soccer, there’s no swimming, there’s no life,” she said.

Now good on Ms Belcher for working and studying. I am not disputing that life is tough for her. What I am saying is that media have a responsibility to provide complete information on income.

At a minimum there is a family tax credit of $157 a week. The weekly no of work hours appears to be 17.  If Belcher increases her number of work hours to 20, then she would gain an extra $279 through the in-work tax credit and minimum family tax credit. So an extra three hours a week of work would see an extra $14,500 a year.

By contrast an increase in pay from $13.50 an hour to $17 an hour would bring in only $60 (gross) a week or around $50 net.

We also do not know if there is any income from student allowance, or accommodation supplement, let alone child support from the father.

There should be a guideline in place for reporters who do stories which include claims about family income. It should tell the reporter to ask the following:

• How many hours of paid work, at what rate
• Do they receive welfare and/or WFF credits
• Do they get the accommodation supplement and/or live in a state house
• If a sole parent, is there any contribution from the other parent
• Do their expenses include anything irregular (such as debt repayment)

I’m not saying that after all that, there will not be a story that shows times are tough for that family. But that the public deserve the have enough information for them to be able to form an independent judgement. Merely repeating claims in a press release is not serving readers.

Here’s some of the more significant aspects of the 2012 Budget:

• Household savings rate is positive for the first time in a decade, and is forecast to increase to almost 4% by 2016
• Unemployment is forecast to drop below 5 per cent by 2015
• Forecast fiscal surplus in 2014/15 is $197 million
• Core Crown expenses to fall progressively from 33.5 per cent of GDP in 2011/12, to 30.2 per cent of GDP in 2015/16
• $385 million of new investment over four years in research, science, and innovation
• $250m from asset part-sales going towards Kiwirail
• Deferring the auto-enrolment exercise for KiwiSaver, until surplus is locked in
• Goals No 2 and 3 of 10 announced - reducing prisoner reoffending by 25% in five years and increasing the rate of participation in early childhood education to 98%, up from 94.7% currently
• $1.5 billion extra to Vote Health over four years – will include 4,000 more elective ops a year
• Tobacco excise tax to increase 10% (plus inflation) on 1 Jan 2013 and repeat for the next three years (so a real 40% increase in excise tax)
• $512 million towards new frontline education initiatives
• $104m for housing

I’m up in Auckland for the Eurocalypse Now debate tonight with high profile British MEP Daniel Hannan. It is likely to be a very lively debate about the future of Europe, the Euro and the EU. There are still a few places left, and it is free to attend. Starts 5.30 pm at the Auckland War Memorial Museum. You can register to attend at http://eurocalypsenow.eventbrite.co.nz/.

The Herald reports:

A millionaire businessman at the centre of a political scandal has been found not guilty of immigration fraud charges.

William Yan – also known as Yang Liu and Yong Ming Yan – pleaded not guilty to four charges relating to false declarations on immigration papers in 2001 and 2002 and one of using false written statements to get citizenship.

He was found not guilty on all five charges against him in the High Court in Auckland this morning. …

Justice Timothy Brewer said the case had nothing to do with political connections and commentary.

His decision was based on the evidence in court about whether false declarations had been made on documents.

He said he found that the Crown had not reached the level of proof of beyond reasonable doubt which the judge said was a very high standard.

The court case, as I said before, was on whether Liu lied on his immigration forms. The issue with Shane Jones is whether he granted Liu citizenship against official advice because Liu had donated to various parties and MPs. His explanation that Liu faced execution because he was Falun Gong is very dubious when you consider:

• The decision was about being a citizen vs a permanent resident, not about staying in the country
• Falun Gong are strictly banned from gambling, Liu spent over $10m at Sky City
• There is no written record of the advice Jones claims he was given by an official he seems unable to name

I’ll comment tomorrow on the request for the Auditor-General to investigate. The way the request has been worded is incredibly narrow. Any investigation should be full and robust. I’ll try and blog tomorrow what, at a minimum, an inquiry should look at.

The danger for the Auditor-General is that things could be a repeat of the Ingram Inquiry into Taito Philip Field. Helen Clark set very narrow terms of reference, related to Field’s ministerial role only. Ingram actually did a superb job with his inquiry, but due to his terms of reference found no breach by Field in terms of his ministerial role. As people know, the Police later charged Field and he was convicted of corruption and bribery. Ingram’s report was unfairly seen as a whitewash, because the terms of reference were so narrow.

The essence of the allegations against Jones is that he was influenced by MPs (principally Dover Samuels) to grant citizenship despite the lack of good character, and that part of the motivation for this was because Liu had donated to various MPs and parties. Now it is difficult to see how one can investigate this, unless you can access the donor records of the various political parties. And I am unsure that the Auditor-General has any power over political parties.

Hence I think a full inquiry with powers to compel witnesses and material would be the best way forward, if Shearer and the PM could agree on terms of reference. In the absence of such an inquiry an investigation by the Auditor-General is better than nothing happening – but the terms of reference need to be as wide as possible to ensure it is not a repeat if the Ingram Inquiry.

The full register is here. Nothing scandalous there, but the media have pointed out that Labour’s campaign on the evils of Sky City’s casino didn’t stop them accepting numerous RWC tickets from Sky City!

Some of the more interesting or unusual entries:

• Jacinda Ardern got free tickets to four RWC games including the semi-final and final – the most impressive collection for a (then) backbencher
• Gerry Brownlee was given a framed All Blacks RWC jersey
• Cam Calder owns a restoration project of a ruin in Gers, France
• David Carter and Peter Dunne scored “only” three RWC games, but they were the quarter-final, semi-final and the final
• Charles Chauvel had three overseas trips partially paid for by the UNDP, relating to the UN Commissioner on HIV
• Clayton Cosgrove is the Patron of the North Canterbury Special Olympics
• Craig Foss got four RWC tickets, including both semi-finals but missed out on the final
• Phil Goff had five RWC games, including a quarter, a semi and the final
• Paul Goldsmith declared income from the Creative NZ Author’s Fund for books he has published in NZ
• Chris Hipkins made the RWC Final courtesy of Sky TV
• John Key got the most impressive gift, being a replica of Frodo’s sword “Sting” from Lord of the Rings (a gift from Obama)
• Trevor Mallard got tickets (he is shadow sports spokesperson) to at least five different RWC games, from the NZRU, IRB, RWC 2011, Rugby World Cup Ltd and Sky City
• Ian McKelvie is the Chairman of Special Olympics New Zealand
• Winston Peters has shares in his own strategic development advisory company and also in a project management company
• Rajen Prasad is an active paid director in the Bank of Baroda (NZ), a subsidiary of the Indian Bank of that name. This might explain why he seems to have so little parliamentary activity!
• Tony Ryall is a shareholder in a textile sales company with his wife, called Maisie and Llew Limited (very cute – the names of their kids)
• Pita Sharples also got tickets to a RWC quarter, semi and the final – plus the opening ceremony
• David Shearer might get the prize for best RWC haul, with six freebie games including the opening, quarter, semi and final
• Metiria Turei has an interest in NZ Biograins Ltd and Comvita NZ Ltd
• Nicky Wagner has the coolest name for a trust – the Timelord Trust
• Louisa Wall was a RWC commentator for TV3
• National MP Jian Yang declared the gift of a Chinese painting from Labour MP Raymond Huo

As it is Budget Day, it is worth celebrating one thing – the quality and openness of the Budget information. This year there is even a smartphone app for the Budget.

The International Budget Partnership collaborates with civil society around the world to analyze and influence public budgets in order to reduce poverty and improve the quality of governance.

They have a league table of how open budgets are and the top ten are:

1. South Africa 92
2. New Zealand 90
3. UK 87
4. France 87
5. Norway 83
6. Sweden 83
7. US 82
8. Chile 72
9. Brazil 71
10. South Korea 71

The bottom five are Chad, Iraq, Equatorial Guinea, Fiji and Sao Tome E Principe all on zero.

This has to be seen to be believed. Only the Germans could do it. It is 1300 square metres in size and has 13 kms of track, 900 trains and 12,000 wagons!

But it also has a 30,000 litre “North Sea” with cruise ships, 250 computer controlled motor vehicles, a fire brigade that responds to fires, Police chasing speed offenders, and get this an airport where with 49 airplanes that land automatically at it and get serviced by ground crews.

They also have 200,000 people populating the model.

I am so going to visit Hamburg now!

When Michael Cullen wanted his own train set, this is what we should have got him instead of Kiwirail!

Peter Lyons writes in the Herald:

A key rule of economics is that incentives shape human behaviour for better or worse. I am starting to like the idea of performance pay for teachers.

I have taught for more than 20 years. I have authored text books in my subject and been a lecturer for beginning teachers in commerce.

I think a merit-based system of pay would suit me.

I think Mr Lyons would do very well with merit based pay also. While not the most scientific of methods, he gets excellent comments and ratings at Rate my Teachers:

Brilliant mate … the man can not be faulted … Probably the best teacher in NZ … legend … Peter Lyons is a legend. He defines economics.

With such glowing references from his students it is with trepidation I challenge his column, but I will. Peter said:

I teach economics, which is an option students can choose to take. If performance pay was introduced the first thing I would do is restrict those students who could take my subject. There will be no low achievers or slackers taking my subject if it costs me money.

Two issues with this assertion. As far as I know, individual teachers do not determine admission policies for their classes. The principal or board does.

The second issue is that having performance pay means you don’t want someone who has been a low achiever in your class. If the performance pay was based on what improvement you make to that student, then having ones that start from a low base could actually be an advantage over some know it all students who can’t improve on their alreeady high marks.

There is little point in teaching the less able kids if my pay packet depends on exam results. I’ll leave that to the idealistic first-year teachers who believe they can make a difference.

Who says performance pay will depend solely or even mainly on exam results. One could have a system where say the principal and board have 10% of the staffing budget flexible to be allocated to whichever teachers they think have performed best on the criteria that works for that school.

 I will focus exclusively on the exams. There is no point in teaching students about financial literacy and how to manage money if this is not going to improve their marks and my pay. Show me the money! I love incentives.

Here Peter has a stronger argument. A performance pay system could encourage teachers to teach for the exams only. But again performance pay doesn’t have to be about exams only.

Under merit pay I have a great opportunity to be one of the highest paid teachers in New Zealand. I will get my NCEA students to do endless resits of internal assessments until they get it right. I will make them rote learn the answers for the exam until they can repeat them in their sleep. Any student unable to perform this simple cognitive task will be withdrawn from sitting the exam to maintain my excellent pass rates. 

Again I am unsure that individual teachers can withdraw students from exams, or for that matter force resits for higher grades.

What I’d challenge Peter to come up with is what are the attributes that make a great teacher (as he seems to be) and how can they be recognised and even quantified, so that the great teachers are getting paid more than the not so great teachers.

For the first time in many years I won’t be in the Budget lockup today. I was in the Wellington lockup, but then I had to be in Auckland on Thursday afternoon for the debate on Europe starting at 5.30 pm. I tried to swap to one of the two Auckland lockups, but they are both full and selfishly no one from TVNZ or TV3 has died this week freeing up a place for me

I can’t get to Auckland in time if I do the Wellington lockup as the first flight is at 4 pm after the lockup ends. So I am flying to Auckland in the morning and will be reading furiously come 2 pm.

So any coverage of the Budget won’t be at 2 pm, as normal, but slightly later. I need to write a small article for Fairfax on the budget also which will be my first priority (paid work trumps blogging!), but once that is done hope to have something blogged before 3.30 pm. I’m on the RNZ Panel from 1545 to 1700 also and suspect the Budget may be one of the issues we discuss!

Labour have worked out that the reasons given by Shane Jones for granting Liu citizenship are so weak that no one seriously believes them.

So they have stood Jones down and referred it to the Auditor-General.  About time. Helen Clark should have done this in 2008.

A reader e-mails me these observations:

Sometimes you see something and it is so absurd that you think you must be missing something. You then look closer and realise the reality is really that true. I must thank Mayor Len Brown and his media team for providing exactly that sort of farce – it is still making me laugh.

I understand that Len has as many media staff as the PM, and also keeps an ex-prime ministerial chief press sec on retainer to provide more advice. With this sort of support you would think they could get the basics right.  It turns out the opposite may be true. 

On Friday afternoon Brown called a press conference to boast how prudent he has been with his budget, how tough he has been on projects, and how much money he has saved the ratepayers of Auckland. I am unsure why he’d wait until Friday afternoon to do this, but he deserves points for trying to get his positive messaging out, setting the agenda, and being available to the media.

That though is when it all becomes undone. For some reason (that I can’t begin to understand) everything that happened at the Brown presser plus all the material associated with it is placed under embargo until 5am Monday morning. I have watched politics for a very long time, but have never seen anything as curious as this.  So Len tells selected media what he wants to say on Monday on Friday, swears them to secrecy, in a bid to set the agenda take any opposition by surprise?  The only thing that was surprising was that Len and his media boffins thought this would work.

To make matters worse though they also released (also under embargo) a letter that they had sent out the day before to Auckland’s elderly. The letter was about a problem with rates rebates for old people homes, the fact that Government was ignoring it, and that Brown was going to fix it. This letter may have been embargoed as part of the press material until today, but was circulated widely on Thursday. Effectively, Len and his team tried to score points against David Carter… but figured they’d give him two days grace to work out how to respond.  Madness. 

Of course the Government and C&R had well and truly got its act together as early as Sunday morning. This meant instead of the good news stories for Len, the the focus of Monday’s reporting was on Brown’s extravagant budget, the unaffordable rail link (Carter and Key), the stupidity of spending on a V8 event (Carter on Q&A), Brown’s Greek-style spending habits, and a story about the massive storm water infrastructure deficit facing Auckland. The latter story found its way to TVNZ in the way of Council papers during Browns two-day meditation and self-imposed silence.  Gee, that embargo really paid off.

The result of this farce…come Monday any good news Brown had planned is lost and he looks massively under-pressure and defensive. In case anyone missed this case-study in inept media management, three hours after the embargo is lifted someone in Browns office gets around to sending around the media material to all media (not just the selected few who turned up to the Friiday press conference).  What’s the point?  By then the material had been copied and distributed to media that cared and certainly all of Len’s opponents. 

Auckland Council meet again on Wednesday.  I understand that the focus for the Right will be to see how many of Brown’s pet projects (that he so confidently announced) can be voted down. Might be worth the trip to Auckland just to watch.

No wonder Auckland is fast losing patience with Brown. He is ripe for the picking next year if Auckland’s right can get itself organised – or if Trotter can organise a replacement.

I’m not sure if the reader is correct about the number of media staff Len has (does anyone have the number?), but their observations on the attempt to have a secret embargoed press conference as spot on.

First an easy rebuttal of Jones claim that he was told Liu would be executed if he went to China. The ODT reported:

The department’s case officer, Johannes Gambo, told the court Yan boasted that he had politician friends who would ensure he was granted citizenship.

When told he would not receive citizenship, Yan said he was 99 per cent sure he would, according to Mr Gambo.

“He said he had a lot of support from members of Parliament … he was going to take them to China.”

Do you really think he would be planning to take his MP mates to China, if he was at risk of being executed and organ harvested?

Also an amazing concession by Shane Jones, as reported by Stuff:

Labour MP Shane Jones knew there were serious questions over the true identity of Chinese millionaire Yong Ming Yan when he gave him a New Zealand passport. …

Mr Jones admitted he knew there were questions about Yan’s identity. “I certainly know that there was a live issue as to whether or not this man is who he says he was … there was always a mystery … Those were allegations.”

So Jones has said that he was not sure that Liu or Yan was who he claimed he was, yet he still gave him citizenship!!

I can’t think of another non third world country where the Minister grants citizenship to someone on the urging of his mates, despite not even knowing if that is the person’s real identity.

The papers about this case are on the Investigate site and worth a read. Some salient points:

• Nowhere at all in the papers is there any mention at all of fearing of going back to China. It is all about how much he has invested in NZ. So the reasons Jones says he made his decision on are not even in the official papers. It is all this mystery official’s verbal briefing!
• The fraud charges in China are for NZ$2.7m
• The papers clearly state he is entitled to reside indefinitely in NZ in terms of the Immigration Act, so this was NOT an issue about whether or not he might be deported to China. That is a total red herring.
• According to the Chinese Government he stole another person’s identity in 1999 by falsely registering their birth, and used this to obtain two false passports. He stole the identity of Yang Liu.
• The papers refer to Liu claiming he has worked to develop trade and good relations between China and NZ, including involvement in formalising agricultural agreements. Does this sound like someone terrified of China, and who fled because he was facing persecution?
• The papers also refer specifically to humanitarian considerations and does not detail any applicable in this case.
• The letter from Dover Samuels fails to disclose Liu donated to him.
• Strangely the Samuels letter says Liu deeply respects NZ’s anti nuclear policy. God knows what that has to do with anything, unless it is code for being a Labour Party donor.
• The papers make it clear that Rick Barker was the Minister initially dealing with this issue.  He must have recused himself only after a very late stage. Recall that Labour fundraiser Shane Te Pou took Liu down to meet Barker.
• A follow up letter from Samuels borders on the hysterical and accuses the officials of subjecting Liu to “mental torture”, and that his treatment is not the mark of a civilised country. Samuels seems to think citizenship for migrants is a right, not a privilege.
• Pansy Wong’s letter of support refers to the Immigration Minister not revoking Liu’s residency, and citing this as grounds for citizenship. So Cunliffe’s decision not to follow the advice of his officials, is then used to advocate for Liu to get special treatment from Jones, against official advice again.
• Wong’s letter was just addressed to DIA, and did not in fact advocate what the decision should be, just that they should commence consideration and take account of his community contributions. I find that quite different to Samuels who directly advocated the outcome to the Minister in the strongest possible terms.
• Chris Carter’s letter, like Pansy Wong’s, cites Liu’s contributions but does not call for a particular decision and is a general reference, not an advocacy letter direct to the Minister. I find no fault with Carter or Wong, except that they would both have been wise to have declared Liu had donated to them campaigns.

I suggest people read the full file. There are parts redacted but hopefully after the court case they will become public also.

A great cartoon by Hubbard Emmerson.

The Herald reports:

A campaign has been launched for a “living wage” in New Zealand, inspired by policies in United States cities and London.

In New Zealand, Labour Department research shows that 103,800 workers under 25, and 161,000 aged 25 to 64, earned less than $15 an hour in the year to last June.

I have no issue with the campaign. But I caution that not all employees and not all employers are the same. I don’t think a 16 year old earning $14 an hour in an after school job is an issue. I think it is more of an issue if someone is earning that 10 years later. But also wages can only be paid if a company is earning enough income to employ people. An increase in costs can make a company unprofitable. This is why in the main individual employers negotiate agreements with individual employees – because that reflects the position of both of them.

Low wages for the Kaufisis mean the children don’t go to school when there is no money for lunch.

Leo Kaufisi, of New Lynn, earns $14 an hour as a dispatcher for Pacific Inks in Avondale. His wife Lopaini earns the legal minimum of $13.50 an hour as a cleaner.

Four adults and eight children live in the three-bedroom house which they rent for $350 a week – Mr and Mrs Kaufisi, their six children aged between four and 12 , Mrs Kaufisi’s unemployed mother, her mother’s partner, her 12-year-old sister and 10-year-old brother.

Six children sleep in one cramped bedroom.- The other children sleep with their parents.

Mr and Mrs Kaufisi are both working hard to care for their family. I have no problem with taxpayers helping them make ends meet. Sadly the article doesn’t detail what this support is.

I presume the two other adults receive the unemployment benefit. So my estimate of the weekly net income is:

• Mr Kaufisi $471
• Mrs Kaufisi $455
• Family Tax Credit $598
• UEB (couple) $342
• Accom Supplement $32

This is a total net income of $1,898. The equivalent gross before tax income (if it was a single earner) is $2,627 a week. That is a gross annual equivalent of $136,604. Now that is for a large family, but it gives a more complete picture than just talking about $13.50 an hour.

Even with family tax credits, Mr and Mrs Kaufisi say almost all their income goes on the rent and on payments to finance companies. These total about $500 a week for furniture and other items including two cars, which were both repossessed recently when Mr Kaufisi’s work permit expired.

Actually the rent is under 20% of the net income, according to my calculations. The problem is the finance company payments.

Having 12 people in a three bedroom house is massively over-crowded. It is not clear if they are in a state house, but it seems to me they would easily qualify.

Mrs Kaufisi said their combined wages now were not enough to live on and she supported the call for a “living wage”.

“With a living wage, maybe we can afford to rent our own place or buy healthy food for my kids,” she said.

I’m not sure higher wages will make a huge difference to their household. I think the biggest issue is only two out of 12 people are earning. Let’s assume that both the Kaufisi’s get paid $17.50 an hour, or $35,000 a year. What would this do to their income:

• Mr Kaufisi $584
• Mrs Kaufisi $584
• Family Tax Credit $524
• UEB (couple) $342
• Accom Supplement $0

This is a total of $2,034 a week. That is an extra $136 a week, but only a 7% increase in net income despite it being a 30% increase in wages for Mrs Kaufisi and 25% for Mr Kaufifi.

David Carter and Kate Wilkinson have announced:

The Government today announced it is to require reflagging of foreign-owned fishing vessels operating in New Zealand waters to address labour, safety and fisheries practice concerns.

Primary Industries Minister David Carter and Labour Minister Kate Wilkinson say foreign-flagged fishing vessels will no longer be able to legally operate in New Zealand waters after a four-year transition period.

“The Government’s decision sends a clear message that New Zealand is serious about the fair treatment of fishing crews, the safety of vessels and its international reputation for ethical and sustainable fishing practices,” say the Ministers.

After years of abuses onboard ships operating in our EEZ, it is great to see this Government take such a strong step to stamp it out. As I have blogged about on many previous occasions, the conditions on board some ships were tantamount to slavery and sexual abuse.

This will have some economic impact on New Zealand. But if the Government did not act, the economic impact may have been greater in the long term as I think we could have faced boycotts of NZ fisheries from stores and chains in the US. But this was not just an economic issue. We can’t control how workers are paid and treated around the world. But we can and should take responsibility for what happens in our EEZ on board ships fishing NZ quota. Slavery in NZ waters is repugnant to Kiwis.

Not all foreign-flagged vessels were acting in such a barbaric way. I understand the Ukranian ships used by Sealord had no significant problems. It was mainly the Korean ships with Indonesian sailors, used by other companies. But also worth noting that such vessels can still fish here with a foreign crew. However they must be NZ flagged. The significance of this is that NZ law then applies on board them.

Under the current regime, the FCVs were contractually bound to apply NZ minimum wage laws, but some vessels got around this by having a fake set of books.  And any complaints of rape or sexual abuse could not be investigated by NZ law enforcement.

Radio NZ reports:

Labour MP Andrew Little is critical of the way he was served papers on behalf of ACC Minister Judith Collins who is suing him and fellow MP Trevor Mallard.

Mr Little says a man emerged from the darkness on Monday night, shone a torch in his eyes and served him the papers as he got out of a taxi at his house.

Mr Little says the way the papers were served is typical of Judith Collins’ approach.

It is very hard to have sympathy for Andrew when he of course could have done what 99% of people do when a lawyer asks for an address for service – supply one. But if you’re going to go all macho and boast about how you will not co-operate, then don’t think you can take the moral high ground that you get served getting out of a taxi.

Incidentally the server rather than being a thug, had a nice sense of humour as it seems his words were “You’re served Mr Little, but no fries with that I’m afraid”.

He now has 25 days to file a statement of defence, but says he does not believe Ms Collins intends the matter to go to trial.

I’m pretty sure Andrew also said he never expects Judith to file in court.

Not often the Howard League for Penal Reform  and Rethinking Crime and Punishment praise the Government, but Stuff reports:

Prison reform groups have praised the Government’s $65 million funding boost for the rehabilitation of criminals, saying it signals a shift away from costly, punitive corrections policy which had not worked.

Corrections Minister Anne Tolley has announced an ambitious plan for Thursday’s Budget to cut reoffending by 25 per cent in the next five years.

She said this target would be achieved by extending drug and alcohol addiction services to all prisoners, expanding education and employment training in prisons and greater support for prisoners to find jobs when released.

If the goal was reached there would be 18,500 fewer victims of crime, and 600 fewer people in jail by 2017. The target of cutting reoffending was one of 10 goals for the next five years set out by Prime Minister John Key in March.

The $65m funding targeted includes:

• 33,100 additional offenders receiving new and expanded drug and alcohol treatment in prisons and in the community (a 500% increase)
• 7,855 additional prisoners and community offenders receiving new and expanded rehabilitation services (230% increase)
• 2,950 additional prisoners in education and employment training (30% increase)

So this is a massive increase in those areas.

However I disagree with the lobby groups which say it is a shift away from more punitive policies that have not worked. That is just ideological ranting.

To use an analogy, I hate it when some Green MPs talk about transport policy being a choice between roads/motorway and public transport. It is a false dichotomy. We need both better roads and better public transport. The debate should be about the exact funding mix – not an either/or choice.

The same goes for corrections. We need both very tough policies on sentencing and parole to keep the worst violent and sexual offenders locked up so they can’t keep victimizing innocent New Zealanders. But we also need to invest in rehabilitation and support for those criminal who can be rehabilitated (which is not all of them – in fact probably not even most of them).

So I’m all for a three strikes policy and tougher bail and parole laws. But I’m also all for investing more in drug and alcohol treatment in prisons so the reoffending rate drops. It is not a choice between one and the other.

Howard League for Penal Reform spokesman Jarrod Gilbert said it was a brave move based on robust evidence instead of fear and populism.

He had some reservations about whether the goal of a 25 per cent reduction could be reached but welcomed the Government’s shift in rhetoric away from “zero-tolerance”. …

Rethinking Crime and Punishment spokesman Kim Workman supported the changes but said they would be difficult to achieve given the “very high imprisonment rate” in New Zealand.

One of the most dramatic proposals in the pre-Budget announcement was the expansion of drug and alcohol treatment to 33,000 more people in prison and in the community.

It won’t be easy. Once someone is one a life of crime, it is difficult to shift them. But it is worth making the effort.