Kiwiblog

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 was going to blog on what a good appointment this is, but I can’t do better than what John Pagani has said:

Meanwhile as Phil Goff strengthens his leadership some more, Gerry Brownlee announced:

Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee says the establishment of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA) will provide leadership and coordination of the recovery effort following the February 22 earthquake. …

Mr Brownlee said CERA would have wide powers to relax, suspend or extend laws and regulations which would be used responsibly and for clearly defined purposes related to earthquake recovery.

“These are essentially reserve powers and there will be checks and balances on the use of these powers so the public can have confidence they are being used wisely and with restraint.”

He said the public could take confidence from a number of key elements of CERA’s structure:

• a four person independent review panel to be chaired by a retired High Court judge to assess all legislative and regulatory changes CERA seeks to make;
• a cross-party forum of local Members of Parliament to provide advice;
• a forum of Canterbury community leaders to ensure CERA reflects issues important to local people;
• a number of appeal rights, with appeals to be heard swiftly by the High Court; and
• CERA will be subject to the Official Information Act.

Mr Brownlee said many of powers in the proposed CERA legislation, which will be introduced to Parliament in the coming weeks, were based on those put in place when establishing the Queensland Reconstruction Authority following the state’s devastating floods in January.

I like the idea of a review panel headed by a retired judge to vet law changes. Also the two forums for community leaders and MPs from all parties is a good idea. While there will be politics at play, I believe all parties want the same outcome – Christchurch rebuilt to better than before.

David Williams reports in The Press:

The Government has moved into damage control after it emerged senior civil servant Martyn Dunne will not be Christchurch’s first earthquake recovery tsar.

Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee confirmed in a press release yesterday that Dunne would not be involved in the new government department.

The department will manage Canterbury’s recovery from the devastating February 22 earthquake.

Brownlee refused to be interviewed yesterday by The Press, including about suggestions Dunne had turned down the role because he would not work with Brownlee.

In his press release, Brownlee said Dunne had been contracted to the State Services Commission to help set up the new department and that media speculation about his role had been “premature”.

It may have been premature but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t correct. When Trans-Tasman published the name of whom they thought was taking the job, the Government said it wasn’t him within minutes.

With Dunne, his name was kept out there for several days. Hence I think one can conclude he was the preferred candidate and had been offered the job. And it is a shame he will not be doing it, as he really does have a good reputation.

However, Paul Holmes, the presenter of television current affairs show Q+A, said yesterday Dunne had “turned down the job, not wanting to work with Mr Brownlee, we understand”.

I’m not sure why Paul said that was the reason. It’s hard to judge how credible that is, without any details. Personally, I’m a bit sceptical because Gerry being the Minister in charge has been known throughout. If that was the problem, I’d expect Dunne to have said he was not interested at the first opportunity.

What might be the cause (and i am just speculating) was the proposed division of powers between the Minister and the CEO.

Regardless of the cause, it is a setback. Hopefully an appointment can still be made quickly.

Gerry Brownlee has made his first “gerryorder” as our Supreme Overlord. Contrary to rumours he has not jailed John Key and given himself the keys to the Treasury.

His gerryorder#1 extends Civil Defence powers until 29 November 2010. Specifically it maintains (despite the state of emergency being over) their ability to:

• evacuate, and to exclude persons or vehicles from, premises and places (including public places)
• enter on, and if necessary break into, premises and places
• make available prohibitions or restrictions on public access, with or without vehicles, to roads and public places
• make available powers to remove (and if necessary for that purpose to use force or break into) aircraft, vessels, vehicles
• make available powers to requisition property
• make available powers to direct or request persons to stop certain activities or to take certain actions
• make available powers to examine, mark, seize, sample, secure, disinfect, or destroy any property, animal, or any other thing

The Supreme Overlord denies that he will be ordering the compulsory disinfecting of Opposition MPs in Canterbury.

Jane Clifton writes:

It’s probably safe to say that yesterday was the first time in history – possibly anywhere in the world – that a male Speaker of Parliament has found it necessary to defend his masculinity before the House.

Speaker Lockwood Smith’s unexpected intervention came after Energy Minister Gerry Brownlee, unconsciously reverting to a habit formed when Margaret Wilson was speaker of the last Parliament, referred to him as “Madam Speaker”. Dr Smith boggled somewhat, but politely waited until Mr Brownlee had finished his answer – which Mr Brownlee clearly considered to be a particularly witty riposte to pesky questions from the Greens – before asserting his manhood.

Unfortunately, hardly anyone except Dr Smith had noticed the garbled “Madam”, so the general air of shock can be imagined when he suddenly announced to Mr Brownlee: “I need to assure him that I have never had a sex change.”

MPs turned agape to Dr Smith, while a staggered Mr Brownlee struggled with his composure, clearly trying to think how his clever answer about mining could have been interpreted as a slur on the Speaker’s gender.

“I expect not!” he said, floundering. “Or there would have been a statement to Parliament.”

“It’s just that I’m not Madam Speaker,” Dr Smith explained, to everyone’s relief.

Heh classic.

You can see it below on the video from In the House. I have to say I think In the House is a world class service. Being able to find and embed videos from the House within a few hours of proceedings in Parliament is excellent.

Gerry Brownlee has an op ed in the Herald on mining. Good to see the Government front footing this to put thiings in context:

Try going a day without any goods or services that don’t require or depend on a product that has been mined.

From your inner-spring mattress to your car (or even your bike), computer, cellphone and medical equipment; the activities that make up our day and enhance our lives are in most cases only possible because someone, somewhere, has mined something.

A good point.

Many New Zealanders will not know that mining already makes a sizeable contribution to our economy. Mining in 2008 was a $2 billion industry and contributed $1.1 billion to exports.

Including oil and gas, the mining industry employs around 6000 people – and those jobs are highly productive and highly paid, relative to other sectors of the economy.

Mining is an important part of regional economies such as the West Coast and the Coromandel.

The Government is currently borrowing around $240 million a week and we have more than 100,000 people unemployed. The tradables sector of the economy has been in recession for the past five years.

That is unsustainable and the Government accepts the challenge of improving our economy and living standards.

Labour have already pledged to lower our living standards by cancelling any mining permits on reclassified land if they get elected.

We are therefore proposing to open up to possible mining just 7058ha of land that is currently protected in Schedule Four of the Crown Minerals Act.

That is only 0.2 per cent of all the land that is protected in Schedule Four, and it is a tiny amount compared with our total land area.

If prospecting that land showed potential for mining, it’s likely no more than 500ha of the 7058ha would actually be mined. That’s less than the size of the average sheep or beef farm in New Zealand.

But the economic return on that land is many times greater than any sheep, beef or dairy farm.

What I would like to see is an economic analysis for each site proposed in the consultation. I don’t think one can generalise over all sites.

Some people argue that New Zealand would not see any benefit from increased mining and that all the profits go overseas.

Yet the largest mining company in the country, Solid Energy, is 100 per cent state-owned. All its profits go straight towards spending on government services. There are also many New Zealand-owned mining companies active on New Zealand land.

The average ownership structure of resources companies listed on the NZX is 57 per cent New Zealand and 43 per cent overseas ownership. Others that are fully overseas-owned pay both company tax and royalties in New Zealand.

Some argue that the royalties from mineral mining are small, meaning it’s not worth it for New Zealand. But royalties are just an added bonus from mining.

The real benefits from mining are the jobs created and economic activity generated inside the country. That activity generates company tax revenue for the Government as well as economic growth.

This is the data I want to see though, to make a sensible decision. Not just an estimate of mineral wealth, but a range of projections for what mining in a specific area will do for job creation, royalty revenue, tax revenue, increased local consumption, and impacts on the trade deficit, the current account deficit and the level of crown debt.

Now of course it will be ballpark figures as such an early stage, but even that would be good.

Many New Zealanders are rightly concerned about protecting our natural environment and some say mining is inconsistent with that goal. The Government shares this concern and we will make sure any mining on conservation land in New Zealand is done responsibly and carefully.

Mines in New Zealand are subject to strict environmental tests. The higher the conservation value of the land concerned, the stricter the test. That fact will rule out open-cast mines on Schedule Four land.

Modern mining is totally different from its image in the past. Companies are required to rehabilitate the land after they leave and mitigate the effects of their activities as much as possible.

It is worth stressing that point – removing Schedule 4 protection is not an automatic licence to mine. It merely allows an application to be made that goes through the normal RMA process.

The Government believes a small increase in responsible mining could contribute to our goal of improving the economy’s performance and providing high-value jobs.

We want to hear what Kiwis are thinking. I encourage people to have their say by making submissions on the discussion document that you can find at www.med.govt.nz/schedule4.

Don’t complain about a decision, if you don’t take advantage of the opportunity to have your say. If you support greater mining – say so. If you are opposed to any change to Schedule 4, also say so. If you are in favour for some areas, but not others again have your say.

The Herald reports:

Mallard cleverly tricked National MPs into not objecting to leave for a motion congratulating Tertiary Education Minister Steven Joyce for getting his degree some two decades ago.

It was very amusing. The Govt did drop the ball on this one, and Labour deserved their fun.

The actual motion moved was to congratulate Steven Joyce on getting his degree conferred 21 years after he started it.

The Dim-Post is in fine form with its version of the Government’s mining policy:

• Amendment to Crown Minerals Act prohibits Energy Minister Gerry Brownlee from yelling ‘I’d like to open up her schedule four’ whenever an attractive aide enters the Cabinet room.

• Streamlined process for mining consents to make it easier for everyday New Zealanders to operate their own open pit cast mines or surgically excavate their back yards.

• State Services Commission enquiry to find out who keeps adding ‘unobtanium’ to the list of rare minerals detected in Mt Aspiring.

• $4 million dollars for extensive exploration of Coromandal focusing on area where Gerry Brownlee lost his beloved teddy-bear ‘Mister Wookie’ while on a day walk as a child.

The Mister Wookie one especially just cracks me up.

The Herald reports:

United Future leader Peter Dunne has given up on his annual list of worst-behaved MPs, saying Speaker Lockwood Smith’s reign has ushered in a new era of dignity and propriety.

To be fair, I think the absence of Winston helps also. But the House has been a far less toxic place this year.

Mr Dunne did honour Labour’s Trevor Mallard with a lifetime achievement award in bad behaviour “for services to melodrama, fisticuffs, and generally aberrant behaviour”.

When Lockwood orders him to apologise, you can actually see the supressed rage in his eyes!!

The Herald does find a few insults though:

Labour’s Moana Mackey apologised for referring to Hekia Parata as “Lady Parata” and “her royal highness”. National’s Paul Quinn was pulled up for calling Labour’s backbench “monkeys”.

I’d rather be called Lady Parata than a monkey I have to say – well if I was a female Parata that is!

Some apologies:

SHANE JONES
For saying of Energy Minister Gerry Brownlee, “the notion of him and energy is a mathematical impossibility”.

PHIL HEATLEY
For claiming another “fiddled the books” in ACC and Housing; for wishing the Speaker would use a 90-day eviction order on Trevor Mallard.

Heh.

RODNEY HIDE
For North Shore Mayor Andrew Williams’ “madness”, for calling Trevor Mallard “the angry one”.

Isn’t truth a defence?

JOHN KEY
For claiming Green MP Metiria Turei thought Phil Goff was “racist”. She had said his speech was “the worst kind of politics”.

So worse than racism?

These are from Gerry Brownlee:

Oral Questions

There were 86 question times.

This compares with:

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

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

3^rd Readings

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Gerry Brownlee has announced an action plan for unlocking and maximising New Zealand’s petroleum potential, primarily offshore.

“New Zealand’s largely unexplored petroleum resource could be one of the country’s most significant economic opportunities. A successful and flourishing petroleum industry will be a significant and essential contributor to lifting New Zealand’s economic performance going forward and to improving the quality of life for all New Zealanders,” he said.

Currently the petroleum sector accounts for around $3 billion per annum of New Zealand’s export revenue. Should the estimated resources in our unexplored basins be developed, this could increase to $30 billion per annum in export revenue by 2025. Crown receipts alone could increase to more than $10 billion per annum over the next 40 years.

That would help take care of the deficit!

As I have said before, if we want to be able to fund the same level of healthcare, of universities, of schools as Australia, we need to be increasing our national wealth. All power to Gerry.

John Armstrong reports:

Opposition MPs were aghast and Government members agog in Parliament yesterday after Energy Minister Gerry Brownlee broke with convention and refused to respond to a question from Greens co-leader Metiria Turei.

Brownlee had simply had enough. He had already answered five questions from Turei on National’s intended “stocktake” of mineral resources on Conservation land. He had repeatedly told her the Government had no intention of plundering or pillaging national parks or other valued parts of the Department of Conservation estate.

But Turei’s questions – which might more accurately be described as political statements masquerading as questions – just kept on coming.

So what was the actual question Gerry refused to answer:

Metiria Turei: When the Minister said in his speech that “… New Zealanders need to know that this country is also well endowed with natural resources.”, is it not the case that Kiwis already know how blessed we are, already know that our magnificent conservation places are like gold to the New Zealand economy, and are aghast at his attempts to plunder those areas for fool’s gold and dirty coal?

As Armstrong said, it is a political statement more than a question. But so are many questions. Brownlee explained later:

Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: In answering questions this afternoon I have made it clear that the Government has no intention of mining high-value conservation land. From the member’s question, she does not seem to want to accept the answers given. It is no wonder that she gets no answers to her questions.

However I think it is a bad look not to answer, even the most stupid loaded questions. If the Greens want to waste all their supplementaries getting more and more hysterical over a stocktake of minerals, then let them and swat their questions back at them, rather than refuse to answer them.

There is a precedent it seems though:

However, Parker was trumped by United Future’s Peter Dunne, who had found another ruling which stated a minister was not even obliged to seek the call when asked a question.

In Dunne’s view, such a practice was unusual, and even undesirable. But there was a clear precedent for Brownlee’s refusal.

And words of wisdom from the Speaker:

Saying he was not about to turn these past rulings on their heads, the Speaker still had something to say about Turei and Brownlee.

The former would be “well advised” to reflect on the wording of her questions. She promptly ignored him and asked another highly loaded question which went down the same track as its predecessors

As for Brownlee, the public would make its judgment. “Ministers would be very unwise to refuse to answer them, because in the court of public opinion a minister would be condemned for refusing to do so,” Smith said.

In other words, Brownlee should not make a habit of it.

Indeed.

Frog Blog has this photo from Glenn Murdoch and has used it to twitter on about coal or mining or something.

I think a far better use for it, is a caption contest. As always go for funny, not nasty.

The Herald reports:

Auckland’s prospects of bidding to host the 2018 Commonwealth Games have come under threat from the Government’s cost-cutting.

Minister for Economic Development Gerry Brownlee has withdrawn $500,000 earmarked by the previous Government for a study into whether Auckland could stage the event in nine years.

Thank God. Hosting the Games is the best way to lose tens of millions of dollars.

In a letter to the New Zealand Olympic Committee, the Ministry of Economic Development’s industry and regional development deputy secretary, Mark Steel, said the money promised by Labour had been conditional on city councils agreeing to put in money.

“After due consideration, and now that it is clear most cities that were initially approached will not be participating, the minister has indicated he is not convinced that the case has been established for allocating government resources,” said Mr Steel in the letter.

That tells you something if you don’t even have the local bodies on board.

Audrey Young blogs three mea culpas:

• Gerry Brownlee’s stuff up over urgency for the Electoral Finance Act repeal
• David Parker’s mea culpa over inflicting us with the the Electoral Finance Act
• Audrey’s own mea culpa over her doubts about how Lockwood would go as Speaker

Gerry’s stuff up is also covered in this article.

On Sunday Energy Minister Gerry Brownlee called for petrol prices to come down, and on Monday they did come down.

What is your explanation of these events:

1. It was a coincidence
2. The energy companies wanted to please the new Minister
3. Gerry’s staff worked out that petrol prices were about to drop, and thought if they got in first calling for them to drop, they would get the credit.
4. Other ____________

I’m going for No 3

Gerry Brownlee has confirmed he is lifting the ban on traditional incandescent light bulbs.

I actually use eco-bulbs myself, but it is not the role of the state to tell people what sort of lightbulb to use, so long as they are safe. 2.5 million households all have different needs, and householders are quite competent at deciding for themselves what sort of lightbulbs to buy.

Personally I would advocate most people get ecobulbs – they save money and power. But I would also advocate most people vote National, and neither of my preferences should be made compulsory!

I blogged this morning my concern that bills under urgency were not being made available to MPs at the first available opportunity, and that the rules should be changed, if they were preventing this.

It does seem perverse that the House votes urgency on bills before they are tabled, but Graeme Edgeler at Public Address supplies this transcript from Hansard:

Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill
First Reading

Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister of Finance): I move, That the Appropriation (Parliamentary Expenditure Validation) Bill be now read a first time.

Dr Richard Worth: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. Would it not be appropriate for us to see this bill?

Madam SPEAKER: That is not a point of order. [Interruption] The bill is on the Table.

Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN: Speaking to the point of order, I say that a copy of this bill was made available to National Party members this morning before their caucus.

Gerry Brownlee: The bill was delivered to us halfway through our caucus this morning. One copy was given to me, and another copy was given to Dr Brash. There are only two copies on this side of the Table, and they were brought into the House just as Dr Cullen was about to speak. This debate should not progress until there are sufficient copies on the Table for every member to have an opportunity to read it.

Madam SPEAKER: I understand that copies of the bill are available for members on the Table.

Gerry Brownlee: I seek leave for the House to adjourn for 20 minutes while the bill is distributed.

Madam SPEAKER: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? Yes, there is. [Interruption] Members, please, we will preserve a little bit of respect and decorum.

Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN: Of course, when bills are moved for introduction and passing under urgency, they are tabled subsequent to the motion being approved.

So rather rich for Dr Cullen to be complaining, when he himself cited the procedure he is now complaining about.

The order paper reveals some useful things:

• Lindsay Tisch is to be Deputy Speaker
• Assistant Speakers will be Eric Roy and Rick Barker. A pity Ross Robertson is not carrying on, as he was good in that role.

The full list of Select Committee memberships has not yet been revealed, but they do propose the Committee to review the ETS, and it is:

• National – Craig Foss, Nicky Wagner, Paul Hitchison, Hekia Parata (4)
• Labour – David Parker, Moana Mackey, Charles Chauvel (3)
• ACT – Rodney Hide (1)
• Greens – Jeanette Fitzsimons (1)
• United Future – Peter Dunne (1)
• Maori Party – yet to be named (1)

It will be nice to hope there will be a some broad agreements on the best way forward, but I do note that National has a majority with any two of its three support partners.

The proposed terms of reference for the committee do not include an explicit review of the science, however as they look at issues such as mitigation vs adaptation, demerits of the science will no doubt be considered as the robustness of the scientific scenarios will influence decision making.

The House is underway now. Michael Cullen tripped Gerry Brownlee up on some procedural issue. While I am sure Labour liked tripping Gerry up, I have to say the absolutely patronising and condescending tone from Cullen was him at his worst, and would probably knock Labour down 5% in the polls if more people saw it. Cullen can be the funniest wittiest MP in the House, but he can also be the most offputting.

In response Gerry made the point that he did stuff up, but he can admit his mistakes, and the reason Labour is now on the Opposition benches is because they never could admit their mistakes. So true.

The House is adjourned until 2 pm when the address in reply will start.

NZPA report:

Mr Goff today repeated criticism of National leader John Key’s decision to nominate as Speaker Lockwood Smith, whom he believes is too partisan to be fair.

This is nonsense, especially coming from the party that appointed Jonathan Hunt and Margaret Wilson to the Speakership. Someone should challenge Goff to explain how Smith would be more partisan than Hunt or Wilson?

He also said National intended to appoint Lindsay Tisch as deputy speaker.

He must read my blog, as that fact went unreported until I highlighted it from the video of the press conference

Both Dr Smith and Mr Tisch missed out on Cabinet roles and Mr Goff said the appointments were to placate the long-serving MPs rather than choosing the right person for the job.

Now here Goff is on stronger ground than the nonsense about Lockwood being too partisan. It is a political reality that there not being room for them in Cabinet is a strong factor in why they are the nominees for Speaker and Deputy Speaker.

But this does not mean they will not prove to be sound choices. Doug Kidd was made Speaker in 1996, basically because they needed room in Cabinet for new Ministers. But Kidd went on to be an excellent Speaker.

And let us remember Labour made Ann Hartley Deputy Speaker, and she was a disaster.

He said the roles were being treated as “a dumping ground for those that can’t get into Cabinet” and thought MPs like Eric Roy and John Carter were better choices.

Eric and John would be very sound choices, and there are factors such as Cabinet inclusion at work. But those in glasshouses should not throw stones. Here is who Labour is putting up for Assistant Speaker:

Labour would have nominated Rick Barker for the role.

Asked why Mr Robertson was not considered, Mr Goff said while he was fond of the role he had other talents, had been appointed as spokesman in several areas and was a useful local MP.

Now could anyone claim Barker would be better than Robertson who is widely respected? Of course not. So Goff is guilty of exactly what he accuses National of.

So what are the duties of the Associate Minister for the Rugby World Cup? My guesses are:

1. Reserving the good seats
2. Official tour guide for English WAGs
3. Talent Scout for the Parliamentary Rugby Team
4. 10% commission on corporate box sales

The birthplace of Labour, West Coast-Tasman went to National on the party vote by 11%. In 2005 the had a 3% margin. Damien O’Connor had a 1,500 majority and lost to Chris Auchinvole by 1,000 votes. Auchinvole (who once famously told Parliament you pronounce his name like it was Dock in Cole or a rude version that is easy to work out) wan a strong campaign with 160 hoardings and a large campaign team. O’Connor is first in on the Labour List, so if Michael Cullen retires he will be back as a List MP.

National finally won the party vote in Nelson. Labour won it by 6% in 2005 but National has a 5% lead in 2008. And no one was surprised that Nick retained his seat, although his majority did shrink from 9,500 to 7,900.

Kaikoura was marginal in 2002 and today the party vote was won by 23%, up from 9% in 2005. Colin King doubled his 4,700 mJority to 10,100.

Clayton Cosgrove did well to hold on in Waimakariri with 500 votes against the competent and hard working Kate Wilkinson. National won the party vote by 15%, up from a 0.3% margin in 2005. Cosgrove’s 2005 majority on new boundaries was 5,000.

Christchurch East remains red with 45% party vote Labour to 36% for National. However that 9% gap is a lot less than 24% in 2005. Dalziel’s 11,000 majority halved to 5,500 – still very safe. However National now has a List MP in the seat and will have hopes for when Lianne retires.

Christchurch Central was a great battle. Labour won the party vote by 1.4% and held the seat by 900 votes only. Nicky Wagner ran a very strong campaign but seats ending in Central are very hard to win for National. In 2005 the party vote margin was 22% and the majority for Barnett was 7,800.

Ilam has National 53% to 27% on the party vote. Gerry Brownlee also drives his majority from 5,500 to 10,800. This may finally stop Gerry from referring to his seat as marginal

Wigram saw Labour win the party vote by just 2%. In 2005 it was 12%. And Jim Anderton scored a fairly safe 4,500 majority despite new boundaries.

Finally we have Port Hills. National won the party vote by 16%, yet Ruth Dyson held the seat by 3,100. In 2005 Labour won the party vote by 12% so there was a massive swing there, yet Dyson’s majority shrank from just 3,600 to 3,100.

If you have a massively growing public service, then you need many more HR staff to cope with them all, and boy has Labour delivered. Gerry Brownlee has the figures showing the number of HR staff has shot up under Labour from 266 to 638 last year. And the cost has gone from $16 million to $51 million.

This is even higher than the growth in comms and media staff which has doubled.

So which agencies have had the biggest increases in HR staff:

• Treasury from 7 to 14
• Health from 10 to 25
• Education from 9 to a staggering 31
• SSC from 2 to 8
• MSD from 44 to 76
• Justice from 15 to 37
• Labour from 15 to 30
• The brand new Department of Housing and Building alerady has 10 HR staff!!!
• Corrections from 19 to 47
• IRD from 34 to 68

They only set the Dept of Housing and Building up a couple of years ago, and already they have convinced their Minister they need 10 HR staff. Oh I am looking forward to the Cabinet Expenditure Control Committee if National wins.