Kiwiblog

TVNZ reports:

The MP voted second sexiest man in Parliament has slammed the fashion sense of some of his colleagues.

National’s Simon Bridges told TV ONE’s Breakfast that some politicians are not adhering to the dress code when in the debating chamber.

“I’m talking track pants, sweat shirts you name it I’ve seen them,” he said. …

“I’ve actually thought about this for a while and I’ve seen women on all sides of the house wearing things I don’t think they should get away with,” he said.

“I’m just saying, the rules are the rules, I say suits for men and business attire for women.”

He said he had kept quiet about it in the past, but is considering taking a more pro-active approach to his fashion criticism.

Simon is a brave man. Maybe he should be invited to the next meeting of the National Women’s Caucus to elaborate in more detaul on which MPs have been wearing things that they shouldn’t get away with.

The BoP Times reports:

A war of words has erupted between former and current local National Party MPs over a controversial potential new law.

Former MP Bob Clarkson has accused current Tauranga MP Simon Bridges of toeing the party line over the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill, while Mr Bridges has said Mr Clarkson “doesn’t much like dealing with complicated issues like this”.

Mr Clarkson also said he tried regaining National’s Tauranga candidacy this year partly to stop the controversial foreshore legislation reaching law.

Bob is only one year older than Jim Anderton, so must be inspired by him.

I’m pretty confident that Simon’s majority will remain in the five figure range. He is extremely popular in Tauranga.

The Marine and Coastal Areas Bill is generating a significant level of angst – especially in provincial cities and towns.

The fact that Hone and others are campaigning against it, because they thinks the test for customary title are far too tough, indicates to me that the balance is about right.

As the NZ Herald reported, the actual difference in positions between National, ACT and Labour are not in fact great – they agree on a lot more than they disagree.

One major point of difference is that ACT believe the courts should set the test for customary title. This is an entirely legitimate view. What isn’t mentioned is that it is quite possible the courts (and it would probable y eventually be a decision of the Supreme Court lead by Chief Justice Elias) would set an easier test for customary title.

What do you do when it is 11.45 pm at night, and you suddenly find out you have to give a speech on a Customs bill. The MP for Tauranga did well in the circumstances!

The Dom Post reports the winners of the weight loss challenge amongst Maori MPs:

• Tau Henare – from 104 kg to 96 kg – 8 kgs
• Mita Ririnui – from 100 kg to 92 kg – 8 kgs
• Kelvin Davis – from 113 kg to 106 kg – 7 kgs
• Shane Jones – from 109 kg to 103 kg – 6 kg
• Simon Bridges – from 88 kg to 86 kg – 2 kg
• Parekura Horomia – from 155 kg to did not report
• Hone Harawira – from 107 kg to did not report
• Paul Quinn – from 112 kg to did not report

To mark Press Freedom Day, there is a debate tonight (7 pm) at the Backbencher on the moot “That politicians pay the price of a free press”.

The cost is $25, which includes finger food. Proceeds go to the Asia-Pacific Solidarity and Safety Fund which basically provides welfare to the families of journalists killed doing their job.

The debaters are:

Affirmative

1. Annette King
2. Darren Hughes
3. Simon Bridges

Negative

1. Tom Scott
2. Jane Clifton
3. Barry Soper

They are all very amusing speakers, so should be a fun evening.

You can pay at the door, but if you do plan to go, it is useful to e-mail Brent Edwards so they can cater for the right numbers.

A reader suggests a resemblance. Both are former lawyers who are now in politics for centre-right parties.

NewstalkZB reports:

New Zealand first leader Winston Peters will not contest the Tauranga seat at the next election.

Mr Peters was the MP for Tauranga for 21 years before being ousted by National’s Bob Clarkson in 2005.

Simon Bridges won it again for National at the last election.

No surprise as Winston now lives in Auckland.

Of course the fact that Simon beat Winston by a massive 32% – 57% to 25%, may be a small factor in it also!

The SST reports:

Prime Minister John Key might be on the wrong side of 40, married, and with a job that is more stressful than sexy, but that has not stopped Kiwis voting him as the country’s hottest politician.

The 48-year-old pipped (with 43% of votes) his much younger, and some would say more cosmetically appealing colleague, Tauranga MP Simon Bridges (33%), in an online survey of 700 Kiwis.

Friends and family of Simon Bridges have been keeping a non-stop vigil on him, since he received the news that a 48 year old father of two was judged hotter than him.

After multiple interventions and counselling, we think he will be okay and over time will recover. But members of the public are asked to help safeguard his mental health and not mention the poll results to him.

Auckland Central MP Nikki Kaye took out the female title with 32% of the votes, followed by another National MP, Melissa Lee (24%), and young Labour MP Jacinda Ardern (19%).

Kaye said that although she thought it was “lovely” that she had been chosen as the nation’s hottest female politician, she was not sure whether it would help her love life. Kaye is single.

“Yesterday I turned 30 and I was feeling down in the dumps, I had the 30 blues, but this news has just made it all better – it has made my day.

“I just hope there weren’t too many of my relatives in the survey sample.”

Good God, I thought Nikki was the MP for Auckland Central, not the MP for Tasmania.

The SST report:

TOUGHER PENALTIES against those who harm animals look certain to be fast-tracked after Prime Minister John Key last night said his government would consider the controversial issue at Tuesday’s caucus meeting.

A spokesman for Key said: “The prime minister has been appalled by the recent animal cruelty cases.”

Key’s intervention means the government is likely to adopt National MP Simon Bridges’ private member’s bill, which proposes increasing the maximum jail term for animal cruelty from three years to five. If the government fails to act, Bridges’ bill could be debated in parliament only if it is drawn, lottery-style, from a ballot.

Key’s spokesman indicated the government would move quickly. “The government supports ensuring we have appropriate measures to deal with these issues. The Simon Bridges member’s bill will be considered for adoption as a government bill at an upcoming caucus.”

Another option would be for Simon to seek leave of the House for its introduction, without going through the ballot. It may well be possible no MP would object, considering the recent court cases.

Labour leader Phil Goff yesterday said the opposition would support Bridges’ bill to the committee stage, where it can be debated, and amended if necessary.

Good.

Greens co-leader Metiria Turei had signed the Paw Justice petition and is likely to support Bridges’ private member’s bill, and Act leader Rodney Hide supported tougher penalties because “the next step after cruelty to animals was cruelty to humans”.

Also good. That indicates there may be a reasonable chance of getting leave to introduce it straight away.

The Gisborne Herald reports:

Te Ahu Aaron Mankelow, 31, pleaded guilty to five charges of wilful cruelty to animals after he recorded himself on a cellphone tipping out five kittens from a box for his dog, and urging his dog to eat them.

It arose from an incident at a party at a house in Childers Road last September, prosecutor Vicki Thorpe told the court.

Mankelow was going into the property with his 18-month old pitbull dog Pepe.

Something in a truck parked alongside attracted the dog’s attention. When Mankelow looked inside, he saw five kittens, their eyes not yet open, in a cardboard box.

He took the box from the truck to a reserve alongside the property.

He tipped the kittens out of the box for his dog, which attacked them one by one, urged on by Mankelow, who recorded the whole attack on his cellphone.

All of the kittens were killed.

Someone called an SPCA officer who identified the remains of five kittens, with broken bones. At least one kitten had been disembowelled.

The officer estimated they were aged between six and 10 weeks.

Mankelow initially denied his actions, but then admitted it after being shown the video.

The law change promoted by Simon Bridges, increasing the maximum penalty for this sort of vile behaviour, can’t happen too soon.

Calling for a pre-sentence report, Judge Spear warned Mankelow that although community or home detention was a possibility, he could not rule out prison. This depended on the judge on the day.

Anything less than prison should not be a possibility. The maximum sentence is three years, and this case is so vile, that it should be at the higher end.

And the sick fucker is so proud of what he did, he recorded what he did on his cellphone.

This also reinforces my prejudices against pitbull owners. People who decide to buy a pitbull, rarely do so for good reasons.

His relatives hurled abuse and obscene gestures at reporters as they sought to question them. One member of the family told The Herald the incident had been over-publicised.

Nowhere near enough, I say. I hope the media show off who these relatives were hurlign abuse defending their kitten killing socio-path.

I’m holidaying in Mt Maunganui, but somehow ended up being a photographer at the announcement of $27 million of government funding for extensions at Tauranga Hospital.

Tony Ryall with Simon Bridges making the announcement in front of the DHB Chair. Tony enthused about being Minister of Health, declaring it is the best portfolio you can have in Government – a sentiment not shared by too many of his predecessors!

See that sign in the background of Simon, being interviewed by the local BOP Times reporter? Yes it does say “We love you Simon”. The (as it happens all female) staff of the pathology lab put the sign up when they realised the announcement was outdoors. Simon didn’t even see it until a reporter pointed it out to him. He of course them popped inside to thank the staff for their sign! I don’t think Simon has to worry about his majority!

And if you wonder how Tony Ryall manages to get such good press – it is because he only allows National MPs to interview him!

Actually it is not as bad as it looks. The camera man was reading out the questions from the reporter (whose voice will no doubt be dubbed in later), but they needed Simon to hold the mike and stand where the reporter normally would, so Tony looks in the right direction.

Apart from my amateur photography, just been enjoying the beach and shops up here. The weather is lovely!

The Dom Post editorial:

The never-ending litany of what human beings do to animals every year in this country makes the average person feel sick. But a group of people delights in the thought – and the act – of torturing animals, sometimes someone else’s pet.

If National’s Tauranga MP, Simon Bridges, is lucky, such persecutors will face greater jail time in future. When Parliament resumes, he will put into the members’ ballot a private member’s bill to increase the maximum penalty for wilful ill-treatment of animals from three, to five years’ imprisonment.

His rationale is simple. “A tougher penalty,” he says, “would … be in line with increasingly clear research that those who do serious harm to animals are much more likely to perpetrate family, as well as other violence. In addition, the research shows that psychopathic offenders, often as first offending, demonstrate a propensity for cruelty through abuse of animals”.

Mr Bridges is right. The FBI in the United States has recognised the connection since the 70s, when it analysed the lives of serial killers.

Such individuals have their wiring seriously mucked up. I can understand why people commit most crimes, but can’t understand how anyone can get pleasure from torturing animals.

It is to be hoped Mr Bridges has the luck of the Greens in having his bill chosen from the ballot. Or he might be able to persuade ministerial colleagues whose portfolios touch on the subject – such as Corrections Minister Judith Collins or Agriculture Minister David Carter – to sponsor his measure as a Government Bill. This initiative is overdue and such support would give it heft.

It will be good to see the penalties increased, regardless of how it happens.

The Herald reports:

A first-term National Party MP is seeking cross-party support for a law change for harsher penalties in cases of extreme cruelty to animals.

Tauranga MP Simon Bridges has drafted a private member’s bill to raise the maximum penalty for wilful ill-treatment under the Animal Welfare Act from three to five years in prison.

Mr Bridges said tougher penalties for animal abuse were backed by research showing cruelty to animals was an early warning sign of more psychopathic violence later in life.

Murderer Antonie Dixon was an example of this, said Mr Bridges.

“It is time to get tough on really serious animal cruelty. The public’s attitude has hardened on this and so should court sentences,” said the former Crown prosecutor.

“This is about sending a message that Parliament thinks this offending is abhorrent to our society. It’s more than not okay, it’s an outrage.”

I hope all parties will support this bill, if selected. Increasing the maximum penalties is the only way to send a message to Judges that they should increase the penalties they are handing out, which are too light in my opinion:

For example, Wayne Williams, 34, was sentenced to four months in jail for beating his partner’s dog with a metal pole before strangling it to death.

And Peter James Cooksley, 48, shot a cat with a crossbow bolt through the abdomen for entering his house – but was fined just $500. Mr Kerridge said many acts of animal cruelty were committed by people to torment their partners, including a case where a man was sent to prison for 2 months for throwing three kittens against a wall.

The longest sentence ever given out has been 12 months, reduced to 10 months on appeal.

I’m old enough to have attended the last victory (won Government) conference for National. It was in 1991 and was also in Christchurch. Both saw a new Government nine months or so into office, and both coping with a nasty recession.

However in 1991, the conference was not just attended by the party faithful, but there were around 8,000 protesters, close to 1,000 Police (they cancelled leave for every police officer in the entire South Island), and bomb squad sniffer dogs. While the 2009 National Conference did not attract even a sole protester despite National now being in Government. I can’t ever recall a conference by National in Government that didn’t attract protests before.

And in spring of 1901, National was at 22% in the polls – 20% behind Labour. As we head into spring 2009, National is at 56% – 25% ahead of Labour. A remarkable contrast.

So the conference was obviously a buoyant one, with delegates and MPs in good heart. It was at the Christchurch Convention Centre, and here is the view from the Crowne Plaza next door.

The PM’s speech was of course the highlight, and it was very good planning he used it to announce a timely and major initiative. In Government, people like a speech of substance, not just bashing the other side. In fact John did not mention the Opposition once during his speech.

Bill English gave a very sober and insightful speech on the realities of the economy and the challenges ahead. And I thought Simon Power’s speech on all the justice initiatives was first class. Also was good to see the Young Nats President Alex Mitchell use his speech not just to fellate the party, as Young Nats sometimes do, but demand action on voluntary membership of student associations and warn against any moves to increase the alcohol purchase age from 18 to 20.

What didn’t work so well was the Ministerial forums. Maybe I’m just getting old and cynical, but hearing five minute brag sessions from Ministers about what they are doing turns me off. I’d rather have less Ministers with more time to talk policy in detail, than giving each Minister five minutes and time for only a couple of questions. I did enjoy joking that anyone who wanted to ask Paula Bennett a question should be obliged to first state their IRD number

Even more than that, what I personally would have preferred is a Ministerial Q&A session – say for 90 minutes. I know this was meant to be the victory conference, so maybe they may do it next year. But I think giving delegates the chance to ask questions of any and all Ministers is a good look, and gives delegates more of a chance for interaction.

Then we had the Board and Presidential elections. I’ve known the five people elected to the Board for pretty much a decade or more. They are all good people, who will do a diligent job on the Board. There are not any of them that I would not want on the Board as they bring a good mixture of skills, experience and geography.

But having said that, I am disappointed Wira Gardiner did not get on. As I had a role in the vote count, I thought it was inappropriate to “take sides” before the vote, but I do not share any of the reservations that Whale Oil had towards Wira. I’ve known Wira since his first wife was a candidate and he has been involved for at least two decades, including service as a Vice-President of the Party.

His record of achievement speaks for itself, in that he is now formally Sir Wira. Both Labour and National Governments have used him as a trouble shooter to sort out dysfunctional agencies. Someone with that governance experience would have been well placed to contribute to the Party’s Board. Plus there were also some obvious advantages in terms of relationships with the Maori Party – but that is a secondary consideration to me. Merit is what I value.

So why did Wira not get elected? Well there was a variety of reasons. Hekia, his wife, being an MP was one of them – but not really the major factor in my opinion. The main reason is that Wira was touted as a potential President, despite not being a current Board member. And it seemed there was a reasonable chance of Wira becoming President if he did get elected. By no means certain, but a reasonable chance.

What this meant, is those who did not want Wira to be President, followed Whale Oil’s advice and ranked him lowly to keep him off the Board. I have no doubt he would have been elected if he ruled out standing for President. Now I was not a delegate myself, so didn’t have to think about who I would leave off the Board if Wira got on. As I said, they are all good people – but there were only five vacancies.

Peter’s election as President was not a surprise. One press gallery journalist had quite a laugh on Sunday morning when they saw on my laptop I already had written a story announcing Peter’s election as President, and was just waiting for the official announcement to click the publish button.

I believe the number one objective for the President is to raise the money the party needs to function, and win elections. Peter’s business background should do him well in that regard and again respectivelly disagreeing with Whale, I expect Peter will remain President through until the 2011 election at least. Of course it will be up to delegates at the 2010 conference to make that decision on re-election to the Board.

Also have to mention the well deserved awarding of the Sir George Chapman trophy for service to the party went to our own blogging Homepaddock – Ele Ludemann. I won’t even mention how she was alseep in her room when they awarded her the prize

This is a hazy photo of the screen, but had to share this photo of Tauranga MP Simon Bridges forming part of the conference dinner entertainment, Simon took it all in good humour as the entertainers put him into a number of poses.

The conference saw Judy Kirk retire as President also after just under seven years in the job. This makes her the third equal longest serving President. Sir Alex McKenzie did 11 years, Sir George Chapman nine years and Sir Wilfred Sim and Ned Holt both also did seven years. I was counting votes during the farewell to Judy, but understand it was warmly given and received.

The number of people attending must be a record for a non election year. Around 700 people attended and there were 574 voting delegates. I saw many people there who hadn’t been to a conference for quite a few years.

It will be interesting to see what the mood is like in twelve months time at the 2010 conference.

Today’s three MPs in the Herald:

Simon Bridges

New MP Simon Bridges wants New Zealanders to reconsider the right to silence for those accused of serious and sexual crimes and to trust juries with more information.

Mr Bridges, a former Crown prosecutor in Tauranga for eight years, used his maiden speech to challenge parts of the legal system, saying the accused’s right not to face questioning in cases such as rape put victims who had to face often gruelling cross-examinations in an uneven position.

“Martin Luther King jnr once said that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. In many trials I have seen injustices – indeed manifest indignities – performed on the weakest in our society as court rules work against them … in short, juries need to be trusted with more information and victims of sex crimes treated more evenly when compared to the accused.”

Mr Bridges told the Herald the question of whether an accused should face questioning was particularly relevant for sexual crimes or crimes against children where the victims themselves faced often gruelling cross-examination.

“I’m a reasonably experienced rape trial lawyer and I can think of specific women cross-examined for days, while the accuseds just sat on their hands and didn’t give evidence. There have been acquittals where I am sure factually that the accused was guilty.”

The right to silence has long been considered fundamental to the criminal law ethos of”innocent until proven guilty”.

Mr Bridges said he believed the law should be”rebalanced”and he intended to work on the issue as an MP.

He said juries should also be trusted with more information, such as previous convictions, in some cases as the current laws could obstruct a fair verdict.

Not sure I agree with Simon, but he makes a strong case about the unfairness of victims being cross-examined for days on end, and the accussed not having to give evidence at all. I’m more sympathethic though to his thoughts on juries having more information.

Kennedy Graham

Former diplomat and academic – most recently he lectured in international law at Canterbury and Victoria universities. Was involved in NZ establishing a nuclear-free zone, including fronting on it as a diplomat before the UN in Geneva and New York.

In his own words:
“We are drawing down on Earth’s natural resources, borrowing forward on the human heritage, irretrievably encroaching on our children’s right to inherit the Earth in a natural and sustainable state.”

It will be interesting to see what influence Kennedy has on the Greens foreign policy, as his views are presumably somewhat different from Keith Locke’s.

Carol Beaumont

Says her late father Ron takes credit for teaching her how to speak out and fostered debate, but also sowed the seeds of feminism in her when he dismissed her wish to follow in his footsteps and become a mechanic as “unsuitable for a girl”. She was chairwoman of the Melville High School Student Council, worked as a cleaner and was in the Cleaners’ Union.

In her own words:
“In the course of the campaign I saw the huge number of people who work for community good in sports groups, marae, in youth groups, in community safety groups, in churches and in community development initiatives. They are ambitious people. It is important to reflect on the meaning of the word ‘ambition’ because recently it has been used by many only in the context of the individual. It is more than that. I consider myself ambitious and have always wanted to use my skills in roles that challenge me but my real ambition is in wanting to make a difference for others.”

Beaumont was reasonably well regarded as CTU Secretary but her loss of Maungakiekie to National means she is reliant on keeping a high list place.

Two of the new National MPs had features on Campbell Live last week. Had quite a few requests for them, so Whale has You Tubed them.

Simon Bridges – three minutes, 42 seconds

Nikki Kaye – four minutes, 20 seconds

Both really nice interviews. I did comment to both of them that the next time they are on Campbell Live, it will probably be because they have stuffed up badly – Government backbenchers do not normally make Campbell Live unless it is bad news

Oh I do like that solid blue look. And in 2002 only a handful were blue.

Hunua is a new seat. The party vote is another 60:20 type solid seat. On the electorate vote Paul Hutchison narrowly beat Jordan Carter by 14,738 votes and Roger Douglas another 2,700 votes behind Jordan.

Waikato is 58% to 22% on the party vote. And Lindsay Tisch drove his majority from 7,000 to almost 12,000.

Coromandel went from 45% to 31% up to 51% to 26%. And Sandra Goudie scored a 13,400 majority for the seat she won in 2005.

The two Hamilton seats are no longer marginal weathervanes. Hamilton East went from a 9% party vote lead for National to a 19% lead. And David Bennett turned a 5,300 majority into one of over 8.000. Hamilton West saw an 11% lead in the party vote for National after being 2% behind in 2005. And Tim Macindoe turned his 1,100 loss in 2005 to a 1,500 victory in 2008.

Bay of Plenty is another 60:20 seat on the party vote. and Tony Ryall got a massive 16,500 majority up from 11,000 in 2005.

In 2005 in Tauranga, National had a 15% lead in the party vote. In 2008 the lead was 32%. Bob Clarkson beat Winston Peters by 730 votes in 2005. This time Simon Bridges beat him by 10,700. Simon will be happy to be the Member of Tauranga for some time.

Rotorua saw National lift the party vote from 43% to 51%, and Todd McClay scored a majority of almost 5,000 over a sitting Minister.

Taupo saw a party vote victory of 15% and Louise Upston beat Mark Burton by almost 6,000 votes. She ran a good campaign and for a big enough majority to make it safe for National. Burton got 2300 more votes than Labour so even harder for any future Labour candidate.  I also heard a rumour that Louise held the first meeting of her 2011 campaign committee at 8.15 am on Sunday morning

The East Coast had a 15% lead in the party vote (the graphic has it wrong) and on the electorate vote Anne Tolley turned a 2,500 majority into a 6,000 majority.

The growing seat of Napier saw National go from a 1% lead in the party vote to a 12% lead. And Chris Tremain drove his 3,300 victory over Russell Fairbrother in 2005 to a 8,400 margin. Remember this is a seat Labour held for all but three years from 1928 to 2005 and Tremain is building John Carter or Nick Smith type majorities as a brilliant local MP who owns his seat.

Over on the west coast, we have the huge Taranaki-King Country seat which is another of those lovely 60:20 seats.  And the 12,000 majority motors up to 14,500.

Finally we have New Plymouth. National was ahead on the party vote last time by 8% and this time it was 20%. And it was too much for Harry Duynhoven who lost the seat by 300 votes. In 2005 he held it by almost 5,000 votes and in 2002 his majority was a staggering 15,000. New candidate Jonathan Young will be watching the special votes though.

Labour will struggle to form a Government again, while so many seats have them getting just 1 in 5 party votes. Every seat in this region had at least an 11% gap in the party vote, with many having a 40% gap.

I’ve blogged over on curiablog the results fo several recent electorate polls, including tonight’s one in Tauranga. The topline results are:

• Tauranga – Bridges 26% ahead of Peters. Labour’s Pankhurst in 4th place at 5%. NZ First Party Vote down from 13% in 2005 to 6%.
• Palmerston North – National candidate Malcolm Plimmer ahead by 3%
• Ikaroa-Rawhiti – Parekura Horomia 5.4% ahead of Derek Fox
• Nelson – Nick Smith 36% ahead of Maryan Street
• West Coast-Tasman – Damien O’Connor 3.5% ahead of Chris Auchinvole
• Te Tai Tonga – Maori TV/TNS has Mahara Okeroa ahead of Rahui Katene by 10% – 49% to 39%. However Marae Digipoll has Okeroa bejind by 6% – 40% to 46%
• Hauraki-Waikato – Nanaia Mahuta ahead of Angeline Greensill by 0.6%

All three Maori seats held by Labour are highly competitive. In two seats Labour is ahead and in the seat with conflcitign results, an averaging of them out would see Labour ahead. This means that the Maori Party may not have much of an overhang at all – in fact they could even gain a List MP if they got 4% or so party vote.

Palmerston North is the only Labour held seat that a public poll has shown National ahead in, so far. Due to boundary changes Taupo and Rotorua are technically National’s on paper.

Based on boundary changes and public polls (and note this is not a personal prediction) the electorate seats would be:

1. National 35
2. Labour 28
3. Maori 4
4. ACT 1
5. United Future 1
6. Progressive 1

Labour will in one sense be very pleased to be ahead in all three Maori seats. However this does lessen their chances of winning via overhang.

And the Tauranga result is superb. With only 5% voting Labour on the electorate vote anyway, it means no amount of tactical voting in Tauranga can put Winston back in that way.

We’re in Tauranga and driving in have yet to see a single Winston billboard or hoarding.

Saw nine Simon Bridges ones driving in. A couple of Labour. Even saw Greens, and Kiwi Party. And saw one for Peter Brown.

But not a single hoarding yet for Winston. Why?

And over in Hamilton, saw NZ First hoardings for Doug Woolerton and unlike all the other years, no photo of Winston. Have they worked out he is now a negative brand?

Anyway we are heading into the CBD now, trying to find a photo of Winston or even better, the man himself. Or failing Winston, we’ll try visiting that nice Tommy Gear’s place. After all Winston officially lives with Tommy.

NZ Herald Assistant Editor John Roughan interviews the next MP for Tauranga – SImon Bridges. Well worth a read.

And the Dom Post reports on Bob Clarkson’s two second valedictory speech.

Rachel Glucina seems to be a big fan of the next MP for Tauranga, and his wife. She blogs:

Together Simon and Nat are set to inject a je ne sais quoi in to the impending election. They are the John and Jackie Kennedy of Kiwi politics, but smarter and not philandering.

Oh dear. Simon will get mercilessly teased over this. JFK II. He might want to avoid visiting Texas if Winston is there at the same time!

Natalie Bridges happily posed for my snapper Norrie with her colleagues from Simply You magazine, but she – and I found this interesting – was very careful to make sure she didn’t appear too fun-loving in the snaps. We can’t have that for the spouse of the next MP of Tauranga, she figured. And she’s right. Dignified and dainty is the way to go.

I expect Simon to win Tauranga with a very respectable majority. Some of that will be Natalie’s work!

And intelligent, too. They have to be one of the smartest couples on the political landscape. The pair met at Oxford University where she was studying English Literature; he was studying law at post-graduate level. They married at a small, ancient chapel on the grounds of Oxford and later set up home in Tauranga bringing with them a glamorous X-factor NZ politics hasn’t seen for some time.

Meeting and marrying at Oxford. Nice.

Bridges may have had a meteoric rise on our political platform, aided, let’s not forget, by Peters’ alleged memory loss, but his star is only just beginning to burn bright. Mark my words, the Bridges and their Camelot in Tauranga will be all the talk at election time.

I think it is fair to conclude, Rachel’s a fan!

Just been e-mailed a story from the Bay of Plenty Times. It is not online. They did a “snapshot survey” of 100 voters in Tauranga. Now 100 gives a 10% or so margin of error and it isn’t strictly scientific as it is of people who happened to be out on the streets. But as the results are so extreme, it is not without some news value. On the electorate vote, the responses were:

1. Simon Bridges (Nat) 53%
2. Undecided 18%
3. Anne Pankhurst (Lab) 16%
4. Winston Peters (NZF) 12%
5. Larry Baldock (Kiwi) 1%

And this was done before Owen Glenn revealed Winston Peters solicited the donation from him!

I did not think it was possible to score third behind Anne Pankhurst, who is quite reviled in Tauranga due to her local body career. But he has done it.

And can the Kiwi Party stalwarts now shut up about how Larry may take the seat as a dark horse candidate.

For those who missed the poll on One News, I have the results on curiablog.

Obviously the great news is that Simon Bridges is 20% ahead of Winston Peters. Peters is facing a crushing from someone born around the time Peters was first elected to Parliament.

What I also found also of interest is the party vote results with NZ First at only 6%. Last election they got over 13% so this is a loss of over half their support.

The Herald on Sunday editorial calls for the winds of change:

New Zealand First leader and Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters has exceeded even his own characteristically pugnacious standards in the past week as he has continued to deflect questions about the cash donations made either to him or to his party. Promising much but delivering nothing in terms of clearing the air, he has engaged in behaviour which has been at times hard to distinguish from the paranoid and irrational.

Except that Peters is just acting – the whole thing is just a charade to him.

It is difficult not to see Peters’ actions as those of a man committing slow political suicide. His party’s poll ratings (which is to say his; there has never been a significant distinction) are averaging barely 3.5 per cent, a long way from the threshold that would ensure its return to Parliament (he seems beyond unlikely to recapture the Tauranga seat).

National’s Tauranga candidate Simon Bridges is a very happy man. Peters may or may not fool 5% of the electorate into believing his protests he is victim of a media conspiracy, but he will not fool 40% of Tauranga voters.

But what is much more likely is that his behaviour is both shrewdly calculated and tactically astute. Fighting for his political life, Peters is interested in appealing only to the small number of voters – most of them lapsed NZ First loyalists who are making eyes at National – who can push his party over the threshold. If he alienates and exasperates the rest of the country, generous wealthy donors, his political opponents and even his coalition partners in the process, that is neither here nor there.

Spot on. He is not worried about the 90% who will never vote for him. He is just trying to lock in half or more of the 10% who might vote for him.

Until now, the Prime Minister has adopted a legalistic wait-and-see approach, saying she must let matters run their course. It is notable that her endorsements of Peters, never warm, are becoming steadily cooler. But it is intolerable that she should allow one of her ministers the freedom to manipulate the democratic process.

Clark will be laughed at if she tries to campaign on transparency or accountability.

Up to now, she has had to consider the implications for the coalition’s stability of alienating Peters, but this week, as the last of the Budget legislation is passed, represents the last procedural opportunity for NZ First to bring the Government down and force an early election. Come Friday, the PM could, and should, sack the minister and expose him to the chill electoral winds that are blowing his way. It would be a good thing for the country if those winds, once and for all, blew him from the political stage.

She made pretty clear on Agenda this morning, she would not be doing that.

Bill Ralston sees an end:

You can never write off Winston Peters. That well worn cliche is trotted out by commentators at every election. Except, this election, I believe at last we can write off Peters. I suspect even he is no longer confident of ever again being “happy as the MP for Tauranga” and at age 63, he is wistfully eyeing the prospect of retirement from politics in October.

I would just make the point that not winning Tauranga does not mean retirement for Peters if his party makes 5%.

National has just selected its candidate for Tauranga, Simon Bridges, the party’s electorate chairman and a Crown prosecutor. He is half Peters’ age.

Bridges’ youth neatly underlines the fact that Peters is a political dinosaur, a throw-back to the era of his mentor and role model, Rob Muldoon. Bridges was barely born when Muldoon was Prime Minister and Winston was first on the hustings.

That National is willing to put up someone more than just a lame stooge means it is serious about winning the electorate and it is confident Peters and New Zealand First are dog tucker.

National certainly is serious about winning the electorate. The outcome is of course up to the voters.

There is an air of desperation about the New Zealand First leader these days, as if he senses his old magic is no longer working. He and his party have repeatedly tried to pull the race card, particularly on immigration, but for once have found little response from the electorate.

However, it does not stop Peters having a knee-jerk reaction any time anyone mentions foreigners in a positive way.

Indeed.

Peters seems unable to comprehend the statistics that show migrants have a higher rate of employment, higher incomes, pay more tax and are less likely to go to prison or get a social services benefit than the average Kiwi.

His anti-Asian rhetoric, which was so politically advantageous in the 1990s, is increasingly falling on deaf ears. Over the past couple of decades, New Zealanders have come into much greater contact with their Asian neighbours and no longer fear them.

This is true, but remember unlike the big parties Peters is not worried by how much he offends 90% of NZ. He is targeting just 10% and needs half of them.