1. The experience so far in terms of the efforts of the new Charter School Agency are streets ahead of the 2013 beginning.
   
2. I have established a new Company (Education 710+ Ltd) that is applying for Charitable status. The Charter School model is not designed for profit but the company model is a good oversight structure. I have been able to attract a brilliant group of directors who cover experience and qualifications in education, governance of high value business, law, media, international students, students with needs – and all are very passionate about the project.
   
3. We are putting in three very high quality applications in:
   
   – Epsom (Epsom 710): As an academic Year 7 – 10 provision for 240 students (with options for growth). The site that we are negotiating on is exciting in itself and getting it back into full use will benefit the area greatly. 15 students per class and other innovations that will make it work for all students/families who would thrive with a different form of provision.
   
   – Warkworth (Warkworth 710): As an academic Year 7 – 10 provision for 240 students (with options for growth). Already highly supported by the community in an area – north of the Puhoi tunnel – that is growing fast and in need of exciting choice for families. 15 students per class and other innovations that will make it work for all students/families who would thrive with a different form of provision.
   
   – Central City Auckland (City 1113): A University Entrance – transition to tertiary – focused school for 180 students in 2025 and 360 in 2026.
   
   If approved all three provisions will be free. Under the Charter School model all students must be accepted and if/when full a formal ballot done. We would employ high quality teachers and pay them more than the collective contract (with other benefits such as life and health benefits – as well as the sheer joy of working it an environment where students come to genuinely learn and the model makes teaching deeply satisfying). No teacher only days and no strikes.
   
   The team involved in Education 710+ Ltd will also be very well positioned to be a “sponsor” of State schools looking to transition to become Charters and I am happy to take enquiries on what that may mean.
   
   If approved, all three schools would be set to start in Term 1 2025. Given the time frame we are currently taking expressions of interest from families for their children, potential teaching and leadership staff, people who may like to assist (in any form – including philanthropy and to see us fast out of the blocks). All contacts to alwyn.poole@gmail.com
   
4. I also have the privilege of working with some other excellent applicants. There are children and families in a range of areas that, if the schools are approved, can expect an exciting and very high quaity new option.
   
   Alwyn Poole
   alwyn.poole@gmail.com
   Innovative Education Consultants Ltd
   Education 710+ Ltd
   alwynpoole.substack.com
   www.linkedin.com/in/alwyn-poole-16b02151/

Newsroom reports:

When Wayne Brown started his term as Auckland mayor, he was lambasted for his poor communication, lack of engagement with the media and inability to get consensus around the council table.

While in the capital, Tory Whanau’s ascension to the mayoralty was heralded as a huge step forward; she was the first wāhine Māori mayor and talked of a progressive future.

It’s nearly two years into their three-year terms and the narrative has somewhat changed. Brown has secured the lowest rates increase of any metropolitan council across the country, while Whanau’s left-leaning colleagues have accused her of selling out her progressive stance.

The perception of both Mayors has changed over time.

This is from the monthly Curia-TU poll. As can see Brown started off poorly, but over the last year has received to positive territory. Whanau started off well, but had a huge dip in 2023, and remained negatives in early 2024. There will be another updated in September of these numbers.

1 News reports:

Last month the Government announced a near $4 billion boost to combat potholes on state highways and local roads over the next three years.

Today, the new pothole repair targets were announced as agreed between the NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) and roading contractors. 

The targets are for 95% of potholes on high volume, national, and arterial state highways and 85% of potholes on regional, primary collector, and secondary collector state highways be repaired within 24 hours of identification.

Nice to have a Government that wants to actually fix the roads, not just slow them down.

The Herald reports:

Deputy Prime Minister and NZ First Leader Winston Peters had a litigious start to the year, attracting legal threats from the band Chumbawumba and former Australian Foreign Minister Bob Carr.

But months later, neither Peters himself, nor his party, have received any indication that Chumbawumba or Carr plan to take legal action against him, suggesting their earlier antics this year were just empty tubthumping.

Good to see the Herald follow up on this. There were scores of stories on the tub thumping threats with Chris Hipkins hysterically suggesting Peters should be sacked as Foreign Minister. Maybe media should report less on someone saying they will sue, and more on if they actually sue.

Chloe Swarbrick writes:

Not only are our climate and environment the obvious foundation for any kind of economy, but the scientific fundamentals for life on earth as we know it are hard science, like gravity.

Economics, on the other hand, is social science. It’s laden with a number of theories that have been shown false in practice many times over. Yet, somehow, it’s economic theory, not the real-world limits of our climate and environment, that is treated as gospel beyond reproach in politics. 

Trying to claim environmentalism is a hard science asking to gravity is worth points for effort, but is ludicrous.

Chloe was only born in June 1994, so maybe she has never heard of the 1980 Simon–Ehrlich wager between an economist and environmentalist. The environmentalist said there were hard limits on certain resources so their price would increase over time. They were copper, tin, chromium, nickel and tungsten. Ten years later all five commodities had decreased, not increased in cost.

Peak oil opponents said production would peak at 12.5 billion barrels a year. It is now 29.5 billion. barrels a year. They said it would peak in the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s etc etc.

Malthusianism said population growth would exceed the capacity of the planet to feed itself. Totally wrong.

Both economics and environmentalism have uncertainty. We should not see it as a choice between them, but how to have them work together such as with the Emissions Trading Scheme.

The Herald reports:

A Timaru teenager who admitted “depraved” and repeated sexual assaults on a young girl – the most “unusual” the sentencing judge has encountered in more than 20 years on the bench – has avoided prison.

Blake Ivan Miller, 19, pleaded guilty to “extremely serious” charges and was facing seven years behind bars.

But 75% of the sentence was cut due to his personal circumstances meaning he will serve just 10 months’ home detention.

Appalling. These crimes have a maximum sentence of 20 years and he got home detention for less than a year.

“I just want justice for our daughter and having him do 10 months’ home detention is not justice – just a nice long holiday for him.”

And a lifetime sentence for the victim.

Now the “good” news is that in future a sentencing discount of more than 40% won’t be available.

But the bad news is that the proposed new three strikes law wouldn’t have his offending even count as a strike, because he got a sentence of under two years.

Don Brash and Helen Clark write:

A few days ago, New Zealand’s Ministers of Foreign Affairs and Defence, after just a few hours’ conversation with their Australian counterparts and absolutely no advance warning to the New Zealand public, appeared to abandon our independent foreign policy in favour of unqualified support for America’s “China containment policy”.

They appeared to indicate that New Zealand is keen to participate in the Aukus pact between Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States – a pact quite explicitly designed to keep China in its “proper” subordinate place in the scheme of things – albeit not in the nuclear aspects of that pact.

Our foreign policy has been changing towards China, and this is due to three things.

1. China changing course from the 1990s and 2000s policy of greater economic and political liberalisation to less freedom, more threats against Taiwan, more repression at home, breaking promises over Hong Kong and imposing economic sanctions against countries that criticise it (like Australia over Covid-19), cyberattacks, lying over Covid-19,
2. Russia invading Ukraine
3. China effectively backing Russia, and working with them to undermine a rules based world order

The recalibration of our foreign policy began significantly under Ardern, such as:

• Abandoning opposition to unilateral sanctions with Russia-specific legislation
• Provided military training to Ukraine troops
• Attended June 22 NATO summit
• In April 2022 Nannie Mahuta attended NATO Foreign Ministers summit
• Joined the AP4 grouping which is now partnering with NATO (Australia, Japan, NZ, South Korea)
• Defence Minister Andrew Little said NZ could soon join non-nuclear components of the AUKUS pact between Australia, the United Kingdom and United States.

I commented in 2022:

Ardern is probably the most pro-NATO Labour PM since Peter Fraser. Not because her views have changed, but because the world has changed. Again we should all fully support her Government’s work in this area.

Robert Ayson noted:

Ardern presided over a distinct hardening of Wellington’s position on Beijing …

As Ardern herself indicated last year in one of her most important foreign policy speeches, New Zealand was finding it “harder to reconcile” its interests and values with China’s behaviour.

So yes our relationship with China is changing, but this is not a radical change by the current Government, it is a progressive change that started under Labour. Nothing Collins or Peters have said is a radical or even large change from what occurred under Ardern and Hipkins.

Simon Wilson writes:

Kāinga Ora, the housing ministry, has made 15 bicycles available to tenants at a housing project in Rotorua and everyone is losing their defecatory matter. …

But when initiatives like this get into the public domain, the climate framing is often completely absent. Why?

Because it will have zero impact on the climate or the level of emissions in NZ. Transport emissions are capped under the ETS.

An average of 150,000 people are dying in heat waves and Europe is on track for its worst yet. Another study from ESSD gives the world an even chance of breaching the 1.5C warming threshold as soon as 2029.

I support economically sane measures to reduce emissions as a hotter world is bad for biodiversity, will lead to higher ocean levels, cause displacement etc. But the facts are that far far more people die from cold weather than hot weather.

Our World in Data reports:

In the Global Burden of Disease study, cold-related deaths were around four times higher than heat-related ones.

The study that estimates that 7.7% of deaths were attributed to temperature found that 7.3% were from cold temperatures; 0.4% were from heat.

In the “5 million death” study, 9.4% of deaths were related to sub-optimal temperatures. 8.5% were cold-related, and 0.9% were heat-related. This skew was true across all regions.

You can see these results in the chart below.

Globally, cold deaths are 9 times higher than heat-related ones. In no region is this ratio less than 3, and in many, it’s over 10 times higher. Cold is more deadly than heat, even in the hottest parts of the world.

So while global warming will have many negative impacts that we should mitigate and adapt for, it will also have some benefits and is highly likely to lead to fewer temperature related deaths.

The proportion of cold related deaths to heat related deaths by region is:

So there are many good reasons to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But temperature related deaths is not one of them (until you reach the tipping point when heat deaths exceed cold deaths).

Stuff reports:

The British co-founder of Extinction Rebellion has been given a record five-year prison sentence in the UK after a judge said he had “crossed the line from concerned campaigner to fanatic”.

Roger Hallam was found guilty of conspiring to block traffic as part of a Just Stop Oil campaign on the M25 over four days of disruption in November 2022. …

Judge Christopher Hehir told the five eco-plotters: “I acknowledge that at least some of the concerns are shared by many, but the plain fact is that each of you has some time ago crossed the line from concerned campaigner to fanatic.

“You have appointed yourselves as sole arbiters of what should be done about climate change.” …

“People missed flights, people missed funerals, students were delayed for their mock exam,” said the judge. “A child with special needs on his way to school missed part of the school day and [missed] his medication which placed the taxi driver at risk as he can become volatile without his medication.

“An individual suffering from aggressive cancer missed an appointment as a cancer patient and had to wait another two months for another appointment.”

The right to protest is not the right to take the law into your own hands and stop people going about their lives. As the judge noted, their actions caused real harm to people.

This is very very clever. For those who don’t know, Temu has incredibly cheap items (often 80% cheaper than NZ prices – I am a regular shopper) but often what you order turns out to be much smaller than what you assume.

The final report on the abuse and neglect of children, young people and adults in the care of the State and faith-based institutions in Aotearoa New Zealand between 1950 and 1999 is here.

I’ve not yet read the whole thing, but I will. The history they reveal is a blight on New Zealand. Just a few extracts:

• 200,000 NZers in care were abused
• Around 1 in 3 in care were abused
• Some children were “trafficked” to members of the public for sex
• Patients at Lake Alice were tortured
• 14% of all diocesan clergy were accused of abuse
• Patients at Lake Alice were given electric shocks without anaesthetic
• Lake Alice patients were also given painful and immobilising paraldehyde injections as punishment and emotional control.
• Staff at the facilities encouraged fighting and abuse between the children
• Children at facilities faced severe corporal punishment, sometimes inflicted with weapons and to the genitals

This is not history from 100 years ago. This is the second half of the 20th century.

So many New Zealanders who suffered at the hands of the state and faith-based institutions. It must not happen again.

Stuff reports:

Associate Health Minister Casey Costello has cut the excise tax on Heated Tobacco Products (HTPs), as she aims to make them more attractive as an alternative to smoking.

Costello, who is also Customs Minister, has cut the excise rate on HTPs by 50% effective from 1 July – a move silently dropped on the Customs website.

Costello refused to be interviewed by RNZ but a spokesman said she had made the move to reduce the cost of the products to encourage smokers to switch to safer alternatives.

But Janet Hoek, a Professor of Public Health at the University of Otago, told RNZ that the move seemed weighted in favour of the tobacco industry.

This is just common sense – you tax less harmful products less than more harmful ones to encourage substitution. This is why vaping is not taxed at the rate of tobacco – because vaping has led to a huge decrease in the smoking rate.

You need to recall there are two type of public health activists – those who will follow the science to reduce harm (ASH) and those who judge policies purely on whether or not they are good or bad for the industry they despise.

The CDC states:

The emissions created from heated tobacco products generally contain lower levels of harmful ingredients than the smoke from regular cigarettes. However, that does not mean heated tobacco products are safe.

Also a good article at The Conservation.

So you should not take up heated tobacco products if you do not smoke or only vape. But if you smoke then heated tobacco seems less harmful than burnt tobacco. There is less evidence on their level of harm than vaping, but the harm hierarchy broadly appears to be:

Smoking > Heated tobacco > Vaping > No nicotine products at all

And so what the Government is doing with tax is:

$1773/kg > $887/kg > no tax = no tax

So they are not signalling HTPs are less harmful than vaping, just less harmful than smoking.

In 2012 my great friend – and triathlon coach of my son at the time – Jack Ralston – and I sat on his bed and watched the opening of the London Olympics. It was the 28^th of July in London and we marveled at the performances of Britain’s best musicians (and Rowan Atkinson) and the wonderful spectacle. Jack reminisced about his marvelous experiences coaching at Olympic Games, Commonwealth Games, and World Championships.

What was very poignant for me was that my good friend was terminally ill – he passed away on the 26^th of August. His funeral included incredible tributes from Jack’s daughters, his brother Bill, Rod Dixon, Hamish Carter and Geoff Shaw as they told of what Jack meant to them and those near them. There were hundreds of Jack’s athletes present..

The Post Office, Nike International, NZRU, Gym Sports NZ, NZ Netball and many others benefitted from Jack’s business acumen and accumulated experience. On many occasions Jack would regale people with aspects of this business experience and stories of working with Phil Night, Bill Bowerman, Pete Sampras, Mary Pearce, Tiger Woods, Lance Armstrong, Michael Jordan, the Brazilian football team, Nelson Mandela, Francois Pienaar, Henry Rono, etc.

Coaching was one of Jack’s great loves and with over 200 national titles in athletics, triathlon and multi-sport to his athletes his abilities in this area are clear. The 200 titles is, in fact, a significant understatement – it was often the case that Jack’s athletes were in 2nd and 3rd places in those races too with many more spiked throughout it. Jack was steeped in the work ethic and methods of the great Arthur Lydiard. When interviewed in the late 1990s Lydiard was asked if the time of the European athlete had gone – replaced by the genetic ability of the Africans. Lydiard’s reply was terse – New Zealander’s (and others) had “gone soft” and he backed it up by stating that the NZ male 800m (1962), 1500m (since bettered), 1 mile (1982), 3000m (1982), 5000m (since bettered), 10,000m (1977) and marathon (1983) records had stood for so long.

If you were a Ralston athlete and followed his schedules you had very little chance to be soft. National and international champions such as Paul Amey, Terenzo Bozzone, Cameron Brown, Hamish Carter, Peter Clode, Andrew Curtanye, William Curtayne, Clark Ellice,  Jamie Hunt, Steve Lett, Liz May, Graham O’Grady, Michael Poole, Nathan Richmond, Jenny Rose, Geoff Shaw, Ben Visser, Rex Wilson, etc, etc, etc…will all testify to that and the value Jack was to them in their careers. Jack always played down his own athleticism but a 3000m PB of 8:17 is something many young athletes would envy today. Jack considered becoming good at running and/or triathlon was straight forward – train very hard and race harder.

I did meet for a day with the great Arthur Lydiard to document many of his views on how athletes can become successful. Arthur was adamant that on every street in our country there were HUGE abilities to be developed. Whenever I work with young people on academics, sports or the arts I always try and hold to that perspective. I avoid the word “talent” and strong prefer “developed ability”. Our running greats; Snell, Halberg, Magee, Dixon, Walker, Quax, Moller, Roe, Audain, Willis, etc, worked incredibly hard – as have current world indoor 1500m champ Geordie Beamish, James Preston (who recently broke the 62 year old 800m record of Sir Peter Snell), and 1500m runner Sam Tanner. Those three are well worth watching at the Paris Games and I give Beamish more than a bolters chance in the 3000m Steeplechase.

As I look forward to watching the Olympics I will remember Jack and his stories. I will also hope that many hard working kiwis do very well (many on a dime) and keep in mind that you are a champion to get there and that all winners have put many years and immeasurable effort into developing their abilities.

If anyone needs a reminder of just how incredible our greatest runner was – this is a superb reminder.

Eric Crampton writes:

Policy problems should be dealt with by the level and part of government best placed to deal with them.

Good public policy should recognise subsidiarity. Local problems should be dealt with locally. But not all problems are local. A council issuing its own currency to address perceived failures in national-level monetary policy would not be a great idea.

Council-level policies aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions are about as sensible as councils trying to take on monetary policy or building up their own armed forces. It isn’t that monetary policy and national defence aren’t critically important. It’s rather that those concerns are best handled by central government.

Yes importance doesn’t mean it is appropriate for local government.

Last week, Act Party MP Mark Cameron lodged a member’s bill prohibiting regional councils from considering greenhouse gas emissions from consented activities when deciding on resource consents.

Unfortunately, and hopefully unintentionally, Act’s press release claimed the Bill would “prohibit regional councils from considering climate change as a factor in their plans”.

Blocking councils from planning for increased flooding and for rising sea levels would be pretty stupid. That kind of land use planning is core council business.

Climate change adaptation is very much a role for local government.

Different parts of the country have very different opportunities for mitigating emissions and for sequestering carbon. When New Zealand reaches net zero, parts of the country will remain net emitters and other parts of the country will have net removals. It is impossible to tell, in 2024, which greenhouse gas emissions in 2060 will remain difficult to reduce. It is also impossible to tell which path technology may take for removing emissions from the atmosphere: trees may be surpassed by other options.

Hitting the net zero target at a national level will be hard enough to do cost-effectively. Trying to do it within each region misses out on opportunities where abatement is cheaper in some places than in others. The only sensible way of bridging those differences would be allowing emissions trading between regions – and that’s what the existing Emissions Trading Scheme already does.

Yep use the ETS to reduce emissions nationally.

The Herald reports:

New Zealand First deputy leader Shane Jones is calling out Te Pāti Māori for its “racist” rhetoric and says their continual use of “racism”, “genocide” and “Pākehā supremacy” is driving a divide between New Zealanders.

Jones told Radio Waatea host Dale Husband that a new ideology emerged in Te Pāti Māori in the three years when New Zealand First was out of Parliament, and its relentless blood shaming of Māori or others who don’t believe in their philosophies was inciting racial disharmony.

Calling the Government genocidal is inherently a call to violence.

Jones said it is that type of inflammatory commentary from Te Pāti Māori that is driving a bigger wedge between Māori and non-Māori.

“It’s a type of blood shaming and that term mau mau to toto Māori, it means blood traitor and the fact that’s now part of the Māori political lexicon is a deep indictment on the Maori Party. It’s almost as if they’re trying to run some sort of blood classification scheme out of Harry Potter.

He is basically referring to the Death Eaters, who were supporters of Lord Voldemort! I guess he is fighting rhetoric with rhetoric – but at least his is fictional. Those who have been actual victims of genocide probably don;’t appreciate TPM using it to refer to mere policy disagreements over whether the Maori Health Authority should be a standalone agency or within another agency.

The Post editorial:

In February this year, Wellington Mayor Tory Whanau told her fellow councillors it would further “kill” Courtenay Place if they didn’t back a $32 million deal with a multinational company.

The deal was to buy the land under the Reading Cinemas complex so the international owners could use the money to finally fix the quake-prone building and get it back open.

It was an idea met with fierce opposition by some – councillor Iona Pannett called it corporate welfare and councillor Ray Chung said it was the worst commercial deal he had ever seen.

It was a transfer of wealth from ratepayers to a multinational company.

It was also shrouded in secrecy, only adding to councillors’ unease and angst. Councillor Ben McNulty took to social media to try to explain to ratepayers why he felt so conflicted, but ultimately voted for the deal, which he described as a “carrot”, given the council had no sticks to force Reading to fix the building.

“So on the choice of using a generous carrot with guaranteed outputs versus leaving the site to rot until 2035 (which Reading’s financial position means they will do), I’ve taken a massive punt on backing the former.”

Those who voted for it had all the justifications in the world, but they chose to overlook the obvious – that without the Council dangling corporate welfare to the owners, they would not just let an asset sit there. They notion it would rot until 2035 was fantasy.

Three months on and a possibility nobody seemed to consider during the past year of controversy has emerged – the derelict Reading Cinemas complex is for sale.

Entirely predictable and probably would have happened earlier if the Council didn’t keep trying to throw money at the owners.

It’s clear Reading has been unable to develop the site for years, and the fact it’s now selling it – within months of the council deal ending – confirms just how attractive and last-resort the deal was to the multinational.

Putting the site up for sale is the right thing to do, paving the way for development and revitalisation of a key part of Wellington’s city centre.

Funnily enough, it achieves exactly what Whanau was trying to do with her doomed deal, but without ratepayers having to pay a cent.

Rather than further killing Courtenay Place, the deal falling through appears to have delivered it a lifeline.

Absolutely, and those Councillors who voted for the deal should be ashamed they were so gullible with our money.

SUBMISSION OF DAVID FARRAR ON THE
SENTENCING (REINSTATING THREE STRIKES) AMENDMENT BILL TO THE JUSTICE SELECT COMMITTEE

About the Submitter

1. This submission is made by David Farrar in a personal capacity. I would like to appear before the Committee to speak to my submission. 

The overall Bill

2. I submit that the bill should not proceed, unless significantly strengthened, as it has been so watered down to be ineffective, may actually lead to shorter sentences and will provide false reassurance to the public regarding serious violent and sexual offenders.

The former three strikes law

3. I regarded the former three strikes law as generally being a good and effective law. Data released by the Ministry of Justice comparing the five years before and after the Three Strikes law showed that the number of second strike offences before the law was 103 and after the law was 68 – a 34% reduction
4. I thought it was very unhelpful that the Ministry has refused to release data to do a more up to date comparison of 10 years before and 10 years after the three strikes law. I would recommend the bill be amended to require the Ministry to publish such comparative data at least annually.

Not carrying current strikes over

5. I was stunned when I learnt that this bill would not carry over all the strikes from offenders under the previous three strikes law. The decision not to do so will greatly reduce any effectiveness as a deterrent, and make New Zealanders far less safe by effectively resetting all serious recividst offenders to zero strikes.
6. The Government seems to have been captured by officials who seemingly labeled any continuation of the former strikes as retrospective legislation. This is a weak and incorrect assertion that is obvious to anyone who has read S12 of the Legislation Design and Advisory Committee guidelines.
7. Legislation is retrospective if it applies to an event or action that has already taken place. Carrying the strikes over would have no impact on an individual for their past actions, unless they commit a crime in future. The punishment will apply to their decision to commit a crime, in the knowledge of what the law now provides.
8. The guidelines state if a penalty is increased between commission and conviction, the lesser penalty should apply. Carrying the strikes over would be consistent with this, as they would only apply to crimes committed after this bill is passed into law.
9. I would note that every person who has a first, second, third or fourth strike under the old law was told by the relevant judge that they had gained a strike, and what the consequences of further offending would be.
10. The argument that differences between the old and the new law made it too difficult to carry over strikes is also fallacious. 

The new threshold for strike offences

11. The former law meant that anyone who commits a crime designated as serious violent or sexual offending (generally crimes with a maximum sentence of seven years or more) would automatically get a strike. This new law proposes that only if a judge sentences the person to two years or more in prison, will a strike be obtained.
12. This is a terrible idea. It removes the idea of certainty of consequence (a strike) and will reduce the number of serious violent and sexual offenders who get strikes by over a third. Considering the only impact of a first strike is a judicial warning about future offending, why would you want to massively reduce the number of serious offenders who get warnings? Many heinous crimes get a sentence of under two years, and the whole idea is to discourage further offending, and punish it if they continue.
13. There is a case for a two-year threshold for third strikes, which I will deal with later. But having a threshold for first and second strikes weakens the law so much, it turns it into a Claytons law.
14. As noted by Labour MP Dr Webb, this law could well lead to criminals getting shorter sentences for their first strikes. It is no secret that most judges don’t like a law that reduces their discretion, and hence will be incentivized to impose sentences of under two years to avoid triggering a regime they disapprove of. 

Judicial discretion

15. The original law had a provision for some judicial discretion for second and third strikes if the outcome would be manifestly unjust. The use of this provision morphed from previously being extremely rare to so common that a majority of third strikers were exempted from the normal third strike consequence
16. Even worse, the Supreme Court in an unprecedented decision effectively overrode the three strikes law and declared in the Fitzgerald case that a maximum sentence no longer need be given for a third strike (the parole provision is what was subject to manifestly unjust) if doing so would “shock the national conscience”
17. I happily concede the Fitzgerald case was one with an unjust initial outcome as his offending was relatively minor. However that can be dealt with in other ways, as I will explain later.
18. The problem this Supreme Court precedent set is that judges then lowered dramatically what they considered would shock the national conscience. In the case of Zacquirin Tikena-Stuchbery, the High Court ruled that a 14 year sentence for his prolonged violent and brutal beating of a woman (his third strike) would shock the national conscience and instead gave him a five year sentence with parole eligibility in 2.5 years.
19. This decision so outraged me that I decide to test whether the sentence set in statute would really have shocked the national conscience. So in an omnibus poll I described the offending to respondents and asked to choose between three sentence options, being:
    a) 14 years with no parole (the full third strike)
    b) 14 years with parole eligibility in five years (a third strike reduced by being deemed manifestly unjust)
    c) 5 years with parole eligibility in 2,5 years (the sentence ignori9ng three strikes law)
20. A plurality of 43% chose (a) and a further 38% chose (b) so 81% of NZers (including 76% of Labour voters, 81% of Green voters and 75% of TPM voters) were comfortable with a sentence that the Judge had deemed would shock the national conscience. This illustrated how totally out of touch with ordinary NZers many judges are. For those interested only 10% of respondents chose (c)
21. I recommend that if this law is strengthened and proceeds, that language be inserted to make clear that use of manifestly unjust provisions should be exceptional and rare, and that no other Act invalidates the provisions of this Act.
22. While outside the remit of this committee, I would also advocate that the Minister of Justice in his third reading speech (if it proceeds) explicitly state that any Judge who feels that imposing a sentence under this law would shock the national conscience, resign their warrant as the appropriate form of protest, rather than ignore the clear intent of Parliament.

A threshold for third strikes

23. While I oppose having a sentence threshold for first and second strikes, I do believe that there is a principled case to have one for third strikes – the strike where you actually get a longer term of imprisonment.
24. A two year threshold for third strikes (as in the Judge finds under norming sentencing guidelines the offence would not have resulted in a jail term of over two years) will prevent cases such as Fitzgerald.
25. It would also eliminate the need for manifestly unjust provisions for the third strike.  

Other changes from the old law

26. The change in the second strike penalty for murder from life without parole to life with a 15 year non-parole period seems sensible.
27. A 20% reduction in third strike offences for guilty pleas also seems sensible to avoid needless trials
28. A minimum 10 year term for third strike manslaughter and life with non-parole for 20 years for third strike murder also seem sensible and better than the old law.

Thank you for considering this submission. I would like to make an oral submission in support, and look forward to appearing.
David Farrar

Newsroom reports:

In a Cabinet paper about the critical minerals list and broader strategy, publicly released last week, Jones said the development of a critical minerals list was an important part of work to “secure access to essential minerals needed for our economic functions”.

“The clean energy transition is driving a global demand for minerals production, and countries are developing their resources on the back of this demand. Projections by the International Energy Agency suggest the demand for each of the five most important critical minerals (lithium, cobalt, nickel, copper, and neodymium) will likely increase between 1.5 and 7 times by 2030,” Jones’ Cabinet paper said.

This is more vital than people realise. If we want clean energy, we need more mining of minerals that are used in solar panels, electric cars, batteries etc.

The work has been a long time coming: in 2019, the Labour-led government committed to a list of critical minerals as part of a 10-year strategy, although a spokesperson in 2021 said the work was still “in its conceptual stages”.

LOL – another Labour delivery triumph. Conceptual stages is code for we forgot about it.

Across the Atlantic, the European Union’s new Critical Raw Materials Act has set a range of targets, with the ultimate goal of ensuring the bloc is not dependent on any single non-EU country for more than 65 percent of its strategic raw materials.

This is sensible, and should be applied in any area of critically important imports. If you are totally reliant on just one country, then you reduce your ability to independently disagree with them on issues.

George POMEE is a Third Striker.  He is a recidivist aggravated robber.

Aged in his late 20s, he already has over 10 criminal convictions as an adult.  He is a gang associate.

For his third strike, he was convicted on 2 counts of aggravated robbery and kidnapping. He is a menace to law abiding society.

Under the Government’s proposed re-introduction of Three Strikes 2.0, he will be on a clean slate.  His prior strike offences count for nothing, and he is a zero striker.

Just as bad, under the Government’s proposed Three Strikes 2.0, Mr Thomson would not qualify as a Third Striker if he did it all again!

Submissions on the law close at midnight tonight!

You can sign up for campaign updates to toughen the law and support the campaign at https://www.stop3strikessellout.nz.

You can make a submission at https://www.stop3strikessellout.nz/submission

This QR code will also take you to the site.