NBR reports:

The 80 year-old Ngapuhi iwi kuia, Titewhai Harawira, says now is the time for the country’s largest Maori tribe to settle its claim with the Crown to redress grievances under the Treaty of Waitangi.

In the latest sign that the 125,000-strong iwi may settle ahead of this year’s general election, Harawira issued a two-page statement under the letterhead of Tuhornuku, the independent authority mandated to settle the claims after years of friction that have not fully subsided between competing elements of the tribe.

Most members of Ngapuhi who voted, voted to settle and recognise the mandate of the negotiators. A small minority are opposed, but it is very significant that Titewhai is not one of them, and even she is in favour of the settlement occurring.

An extract from her release:

Ngāpuhi are ready to talk to the Crown about settling, says Ngāpuhi Kuia and leader Titewhai Harawira.

“I have travelled and talked to Ngāpuhi from Hokianga to Invercargill and all stops in between. And I’ve heard what our people want. They want to get on with settlement.

“We are by far the biggest Iwi and we should be having input and influence over everything that is happening in our country”. …

Overwhelmingly, our people want to settle. We want to put the grievances behind us so we can become strong again as a people, as we were before colonisation.

“It is time for Ngāpuhi to take its rightful place in the leadership of our nation. Settlement will do this – it will advance our people in every way, in education, health, economically and culturally.

Said Mrs Harawira: “A Treaty settlement for all Ngāpuhi will transform Northland’s Iwi into an economic powerhouse, in a way other tribes have done for their regions further south.

There’s a fair amount I don’t agree with Titewhai on. But when she says it is time to settle and use the money to improve the economy, health and education of the Ngapuhi people, she is right. They are the only remaining major Iwi to settle, and it will be great if it does occur in the next couple of years.

A couple of months ago Labour announced they would use any means possible to force the shareholders of Pike River to pay damages owed by the company.

Today they’re done similar and have said:

“A Labour government will clean the reef up. We will make the Rena’s owner pay through any means possible.”

That is not a policy. It is a threat or rhetoric posing as a serious statement.

Governments are not tyrants that can wave a wand and force a private company to pay money they are not legally obliged to pay. Regardless of your view on what the owners should do, the reality is Governments can’t force a company to pay money anymore than King Canute can keep back the tide.

The only thing a Government could attempt to do is pass a retrospective law forcing a company to pay money. The precedent of such an act would be hideous, but possible. Is this what Labour is saying it wiil do? If so, they need to come out and be explicit.

Just saying we will make the owner pay through any means possible is not a policy. It isn’t even a promise. It is meaningless rhetoric. If Labour can’t say what specific action they would take to make the owner pay, then their policy is as opaque as their leader’s secret trust fund.

Stats NZ reports:

In the December 2013 quarter, seasonally adjusted dairy export values rose 27 percent, Statistics New Zealand said today. Dairy volumes, after adjusting for seasonal effects, rose 23 percent while actual prices fell 1.1 percent.

Total export volumes rose 9.7 percent in the December 2013 quarter while total export prices fell 0.5 percent. Both movements were strongly influenced by dairy, which accounted for 39 percent of the value of goods exported in the December quarter – twice as much as meat and forestry combined.

“Export volumes are at their highest level since the series began in 1990, reflecting higher dairy volumes in the December quarter, after adjusting for seasonal effects,” prices manager Chris Pike said. 

A 25 year (or more) high.

The merchandise terms of trade rose 2.3 percent. This is the fourth consecutive rise in the terms of trade, which is at its highest level since the December 1973 quarter and 3.5 percent below the all-time peak in the June 1973 quarter.

Now which party in New Zealand has a policy to reduce the dairy herd by 19%? Guess what that will do to exports and economic growth?

As one can see, February saw significant movement in the polls, as shown in the above average of the public polls.

The monthly newsletter is out today. The executive summary is:

There were four political polls in February – a One News Colmar Brunton poll, a Fairfax Ipsos poll and two Roy Morgan poll

 The average of the public polls has National 17% ahead of Labour in January, up a large 6% from January. The current seat projection is centre-right 65 seats, centre-left 55 which would see National form a Government.

Tony Abbott’s approval ratings has plunged in Australia.

In the United States President Obama’s numbers continue to slowly recover from his terrible end to 2013.

In the UK David Cameron’s ratings also drop after a poor Government response to recent floods.

 In Canada the Conservatives are static with the Liberals remaining in the lead.

The normal two tables are provided comparing the country direction sentiment and head of government approval sentiment for the five countries. The mood in Australia has dropped significantly in the last month, while New Zealand improves.

We also carry details of polls in New Zealand on the NZ Flag, religion in schools, Winston Peters, the most important issues, Labour’s baby bonus, higher taxes plus the normal business and consumer confidence polls.

 This newsletter is normally only available by e-mail.  If you would like to receive future issues, please go to http://listserver.actrix.co.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/polling-newsletter to subscribe yourself.

Went to my final fringe show on Saturday night, which was Barefaced Stories in New Zealand, at Bats.

It’s a simple but effective concept. Two Perth entertainers compere a session of story telling, with five locals getting up and telling a true story.

The first story was my favourite – the girl who went to a Flavour Flav show and then got invited back stage, and then out to a drink at a bar and finally up to his hotel room.

Also amusing was the guy who was so hung up on his ex girlfriend, he was unsure whether to go back to a tent with two girls who invited him in.

Another story was more sad, about suicide.

To a degree the highlights were actually the two Perth entertainers. They read out extracts from the diaries they both wrote as 14 year old teenage girls. The passages were often hilarious.

The show lasted around 80 minutes. Was on for one night only. Would go to a similar show again.

The Herald reports:

A top female defence lawyer is on leave after allegedly groping a junior male colleague at a work Christmas party.

The senior barrister’s behaviour is said to have stunned colleagues at the function late last year.

Several sources said the woman grabbed the crotch area of at least one male colleague at the function.

She is then alleged to have made explicit sexual remarks to the group on a microphone.

The woman, who has defended several high profile clients, has been on leave for the past few weeks.

Sounds like she needs a good lawyer!

I would observe that if a male lawyer grabbed the crotch area of a female colleague (without consent) it might not be so much an employment issue, as criminal charges for indecent assault. But regardless, good to see the law firm taking it seriously.

Another good quote from Shane Jones:

A couple have been told to apply to 14 different iwi to keep the water running to their home.

Brent and Jennifer Tassell will need approval to renew resource consent on a bore hole that has been operating for 10 years, supplying water to eight Puhoi homes.

The bore draws water from 305m underground and is the only source of water for the properties in Slowater Lane, on the northern outskirts of greater Auckland.

“It’s a hole in the ground that’s been there for 10 years,” said Jennifer. “It’s completely over the top for our situation.”

Under the draft Auckland Unitary Plan, all applicants for resource consent for new or existing developments must apply to iwi for them to assess whether it would have an adverse effect on mana whenua.

Taking or using groundwater is on the list of activities that could have a cultural impact, so iwi may insist on a cultural impact assessment – at the applicant’s cost.

Applicants may also have to foot the bill for the “costs of engagement” in the process.

The Tassells will meet Labour MP Shane Jones, who has been vocal in his disagreement with iwi approval rules.

He warned the new Auckland Council lacked safeguards.

“Maori heritage, while it’s important, it must never be used as a basis for divisiveness – and I fear that’s a consequence in this case,” he said.

Iwi should not be allowed to intervene to “test whether there’s a taniwha down a 10-year-old bore”.

What a great quote. Any other MP saying it would probably get bashed, but Jones can get away with it.

Jones has transformed himself from one of the laziest Labour MPs to one of the most effective. It is great to see.

The Herald reports:

Three new marine reserves, covering 435,000 hectares of ocean, have been set up in the subantarctic today.

Conservation Minister Nick Smith said the reserves would be formally established in sea surrounding the Antipodes, Bounty and Campbell Islands from Perseverance Harbour, Campbell Island.

“The New Zealand Subantarctic Islands are one of the most pristine places on earth and these marine reserves are about keeping them that way,” he said.

“The marine reserve status that takes effect today means there can be no fishing, no mining, no petroleum exploration and no marine farming in these waters.”

The reserves will ensure the protection of an “incredible diversity of wildlife”, he said.

Excellent news.

These new marine reserves mean New Zealand now has “complete ecosystem protection” covering the land and the sea of its Subantarctic Islands, Dr Smith said, and brings New Zealand’s total number of marine reserves to 37.

“The area coming under protection is thirteen times larger than the total area of all the reserves on New Zealand’s three main islands. It will expand the proportion of our territorial sea that is protected to 9.5 per cent, close to the target of 10 per cent recommended by the United Nations.”

Just as we lock some land up as conservation land, it is sensible to protect some marine areas also as reserves.

The Herald reports:

Labour leader David Cunliffe used an “agent arrangement” to take donations to his leadership campaign last November and is refusing to say whether he has disclosed individual donors in the MPs’ register of financial interests or whether they were disclosed as being from a trust.

This sounds too ironic to be true. Surely the “agent” wasn’t one of those secretive trusts that Labour has spent almost a decade railing against and legislated against?

The returns for the Register of Pecuniary Interests were due last Friday, and Mr Cunliffe said his return met both the rules of the register, which requires disclosure of donations of more than $500, and those of the Labour Party, which said all donations would be confidential.

He refused to say how he had met both rules, or whether he had declared donations as being from a trust rather than the original donors.

But he confirmed his campaign was run through an “agent arrangement” rather than taking donations directly. He sought a legal opinion before filing his return and defended the use of trusts.

What this means is that the Leader of the Labour Party used a trust so that we will never know who paid for his leadership campaign – despite Parliament’s Standing Orders requiring all donations of over $500 to be disclosed.

The stench of hypocrisy is massive.

“In the event donations are made to a trust, the trustee will have information about donations which a candidate or campaign team won’t have. So [if] there is a trust involved, it will be the donations of the trust to the campaign that are declared, as per the rules. If there is a trust, trustees owe obligations of confidentiality.”

But who decided to set up a trust? The purpose of the trust was to defeat the transparency requirements of Parliament’s Standing Orders.

I’m also not convinced that Cunliffe can refuse to name his donors, eve if it went through a trust. If he is aware of the ultimate source of the donations, you can argue Standing Orders require him to disclose – or risk a privilege complaint.

Of his rivals for the job, Shane Jones said he had disclosed all donations of more than $500, and the donors, and Grant Robertson said he did not receive any individual donations of more than $500.

So Jones and Robertson have disclosed – it is only their leader hiding behind a trust to protect his personal donors.

In 2005, Labour changed electoral finance rules to stop National filtering large anonymous donations through trusts. Grants made through a trust must now be disclosed separately if larger than the disclosable limit of $15,000 to a party or $1500 for an individual candidate.

Mr Cunliffe said there was “nothing at all” to embarrass him in his return.

That’s because it seems the return will just reveal the trust, and not the actual donors.

Mr Cunliffe also said Labour was likely to raise the issue with the standing orders committee, a cross-party group of MPs which decides on the rules for the register.

“It’s quite clear that having primary-style elections is new and not something that has been explicitly foreseen before in the register rules. It does raise a number of legal technicalities over the match between internal party rules and the rules of the standing orders.

“It would be better for everybody if they were aligned.”

The party can align its rules with standing orders if it so wishes, and drop the confidentially clause around donations. I can only presume that what Cunliffe is proposing is that standing orders be amended to allow Labour leadership candidates in future not to reveal donations to their leadership campaigns.

If any Labour MP or candidate now tries to campaign on better electoral finance transparency laws, they’re going to be laughed at.

UPDATE: Idiot/Savant at No Right Turn comments:

So, as usual, he’s claiming that it was All Within The Rules. But that’s not enough – his behaviour needs to be ethical as well. And by failing to tell us who he owes political debts to for financing his leadership ambitions, David Cunliffe has clearly failed that test and is unfit to be in Parliament, let alone a party leader.

UPDATE2: In 2008 Cunliffe said in Parliament:

Gee, the irony of that man impugning this Government on money issues will not be lost on Kiwis. He is the millionaire that Merrill built, the son of the “Hollow Man”, taking on the Government about transparency. Why does he not tell that to the millionaire brokers of the Waitemata Trust or the millionaire sponsors of the Exclusive Brethren? We believe in one person, one vote; not one dollar, one vote. We do not believe that elections should be bankrolled by big business, which is why the Electoral Finance Act is in place.

So he attacks people using trusts to hide the source of their donations in Parliament, yet uses the same device himself to hide the source of personal donations to his leadership campaign.

The Herald reports:

An Auckland politician has admitted making threatening comments about getting a restaurant’s liquor licence pulled after being refused a free bottle of wine.

Howick local board member Steve Udy faces a formal complaint, after the incident last week at the Porterhouse Grill, a popular new family-owned restaurant in Pakuranga.

Resident Peter Barclay, who is related to one of the staff, has lodged a complaint with Auckland Council chief executive Stephen Town, demanding Udy be censured for using his position to solicit a gift.

“When this was politely refused by management he became abusive and claimed that because of his position as a Howick board member he had the power to close the restaurant down,” the complaint alleges.

That’s so far beyond acceptable behaviour that I think it is a resignation offence. You should not hold positions like that, if you think it allows you to bully local restaurants.

Stuff reports:

The Government needs to significantly up its investment if the New Zealand Open golf tournament is to boom to the levels Sir Michael Hill dreams of.

Hill, who owns the tournament’s home course, The Hills, said the event was on the verge of being something “truly extraordinary” and he expected its popularity, growth and contribution to New Zealand’s tourism market to snowball.

But for the event to take off it needs television coverage and Hill thinks the taxpayer should foot the bill.

One of the tournament’s main drawcards is Hill’s course and the breath-taking Arrowtown surrounds.

Without television coverage, their impact is obviously reduced.

The Government already puts in $900,000 to the event, which offers a $900,000 purse but costs closer to $1.8m to run.

Television coverage would cost about $600,000 and the highlights package and live streaming the event organisers are already springing for costs $200,000.

Hill said the $400,000 shortfall should be covered by the Government, but he also said organisers were grateful for the contribution they already received.

I can think of many better things for my taxes to be spent on than televising a golf tournament. The taxpayer is already funding half the costs of the tournament, and now they want us to pay for the broadcasting costs also!

Audrey Young reports:

Burglars will be sent to prison for a minimum of three years without parole on the third burglary conviction under new policy announced today by Act leader Jamie Whyte.

A lot of people may be surprised to know that a very similar policy is the law of the land in the United Kingdom, and was passed by a Labour Government.

Under the UK law an adult burglar convicted of their third burglary must be given a sentence of at least three years in prison unless the court considered there to be “exceptional circumstances”. I’m unsure if the UK law is also without parole, but that appears to be the only possible difference.

So this proposal isn’t some far right extremist policy. It is a law put in place by a left-wing Government in the UK – just one that was hard line on law and order.

It is unclear how many people would be affected in New Zealand by such a law, and what the cost would be. ACT deserve some criticism for not having any estimates at all about impact and cost, but the UK experience suggests it may not be that great.

In 2012 there were 2,693 convictions for burglary (as the primary offence). Around 40% of them or 1,055 received a custodial sentence. That suggests repeat burglars are already mainly getting prison sentences.

How long is the average sentence for burglary, if custodial? A report to 2006 found an average sentence of around 15 months. This is for all custodial sentences for burglary. I imagine it is longer for those on their third conviction.

So there would be some costs associated with this policy, with more burglars in prison and for longer. The potential benefits though are that while in prison, recidivist burglars are not robing people’s homes, and also that the law may discourage recidivist burglars from carrying on.

A report in the Daily Telegraph found that from 2000 to 2008, only 3,018 people had been convicted of a third burglary. The burglary rate halved in the decade to 2010.

So what would be the expected number of third strike burglars in NZ, based on respective populations. They have around 15 times our population so one might expect over an eight year period 200 recidivist burglars to get a third strike. That suggests the costs of such a policy could be relatively modest.

The Maori Party have said:

The Maori Party say a cultural impact assessment clause in Auckland’s Draft Unitary Plan is a good idea, and that people focusing on race and cost are missing the big picture.

Te Ururoa Flavell, Maori Party Co-leader says “the provision in the plan to seek a cultural impact assessment from mana whenua on certain sites tagged for development is a good thing. It’s good because Maori have knowledge, history and a unique cultural perspective that can and will add value to our resource management decisions.”

“We are, however, shocked and disappointed with some of the reactions to the proposal. It tells us that our Maori culture, our knowledge, and our history are still treated as second class here in Aotearoa.”

Shane Jones is opposed. Does this mean they are saying Shane Jones is treating Maori as second class citizens? Surely not.

I’m with Shane on this one. But am still waiting to hear if even a single other Labour MP agrees with Shane.

Leftie HoS columnist Paul Little writes:

It’s time to shut down – or rather shut up – the ragtag bunch of malcontents who are giving their lives meaning by hounding silly old Len Brown every time he appears in public. These shrieking, self-righteous harpies are one length of rope away from full-blown vigilantism.

Protesters are now vigilantes, who should be (presumably) forcibly removed or arrested for the crime of protesting. Such a tolerant person Mr Little is.

If the Mayor of Auckland was, for example, John Banks and he had protesters turn up to most of his events – would Mr Little be calling for them to be silenced?

More importantly they are disrupting the democratic process by trying to prevent an elected official from getting on with his job. 

I doubt Len Brown would be Mayor of Auckland if voters had known about his undisclosed free hotel stays and the like before the election.

But such a fascinating view that protesting an elected official is antidemocratic.

The Washington Post reports:

Heightened Russian military activity in Crimea on Friday prompted a stern warning from President Obama and a deepening sense of crisis among the leaders of the new Ukrainian government in Kiev.

U.S. officials said Russian troops had entered Crimea, and Obama told reporters Friday evening that he was “deeply concerned by reports of military movements” and that there “will be costs for any military intervention.”

Earlier in the day, the new Ukrainian government said that hundreds of soldiers in green camouflage, without insignia but carrying military-style automatic rifles, had taken over two airports in Crimea. Regularly scheduled flights continued, at least until nightfall, when the airspace above Crimea, a region of Ukraine with deep ties to Russia, was suddenly declared closed.

Internet videos of Russian military helicopters flying over Crimea’s muddy winter fields went viral Friday. Russian IL-76 planes suspected of carrying 2,000 troops landed at a military base in Gvardiysky, near the regional capital of Simferopol, according to Crimea’s ATR television.

It is looking more and more likely that Russia has invaded the Ukraine, and the end game is the effective annexation of the Crimea back into Russia, or at least Russian control.

My question is whether Putin would have done this, if there was a different US President? One could well argue yes, but I think if for example someone like Reagan was President, then Putin would not risk it. He is a bully, and bullies tend to respond to only one thing. I even think it may not have happened with Clinton (either one) as President.

One (Democratis supporting) commentator remarked on a podcast that when Obama talks about consequences, not even his daughters take him seriously!

Amy Adams pointed out:

David Cunliffe latest attempt to rewrite history on oil and gas exploration highlights an on-going, casual relationship with the truth, Environment Minister Amy Adams says.

“As a minister in the previous Labour Government, David Cunliffe knows there was no environment oversight and certainly no public involvement in the exploratory drilling process under his watch,” Ms Adams says.

“Once again he has been caught out being tricky with the truth. He is trying to create a distraction from Labour’s woeful environmental credentials.

“Under his government, 36 wells were drilled in the EEZ between 1999 and 2008 with no legislation in place to protect the environment.

“In fact, the Labour regime only required the Minister for Energy and Resources to sign a permit and required no formal environmental assessment at all. That’s it – no public comment, no submissions, no consideration of environmental effects.

Not enough people know this. Labour signed off on 36 oil wells, with no requirement at all for a formal environmental assessment. The law passed by National requires the EPA to do an independent assessment.

“The ridiculous thing about David Cunliffe’s argument is that the EEZ Act introduced by this Government actually replaces a non-existent environmental regulatory regime for drilling in the EEZ, where the public had no say.

“Under this Government, the public will for the first time get a chance to have a say. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) can call for submissions from the public prior to granting a consent for exploratory drilling, if the EPA feels it is required. And before any production drilling can take place, a full public process must be held.

As always Labour is do what we say, not do what we did.

National has announced:

The National Party has announced local legal professional Sarah Dowie will be its candidate for the Invercargill seat at the 2014 general election.

Ms Dowie was endorsed by a meeting of local party members in Invercargill tonight.

“National is taking nothing for granted in Invercargill this year, and the selection of a candidate of Sarah’s calibre reflects that,” says National’s Southern Region Chair, Ele Ludemann. 

Eric Roy won it in 2011 with a 6,263 majority so it is comfortable, but not absolutely safe. Eric got 55% of the candidate vote and National got 50% of the party vote.

Sarah Dowie is an Invercargill-based solicitor. As the daughter of two police officers, justice and law and order issues are part of her DNA.

After graduating from Otago University and being admitted to the Bar in 1998, Sarah established a successful career practicing commercial and environmental law.

39-years-old, Sarah lives in Invercargill with husband Mark Billcliff and their two pre-school children. Mark is a former first class cricketer and Southland representative, who now gives back by coaching local youth.

Sarah is an appointee to the Otago-Southland Lotteries Board. Instinctively community-minded, she also provides free legal services to community groups.

She is a former manager for the Department of Conservation in its tourism and concession wing and is now a trustee and Deputy Chair of the Dog Island Motu Piu Conservation Trust, which is working to eradicate pests on the island and restore it as a viable habitat for tuatara.

It’s good to see candidates of Sarah’s calibre get selected. She’s had a successful professional career and is very involved in the community.

Whale Oil blogs:

Two rare early editions of Mein Kampf, signed by Adolf Hitler could sell for more than US$20,000 (NZ$24k) at an online auction, officials say.

Whale comments:

Check the back of the couch and see if you have a spare $24k.

But seriously what sort of sicko wants to own a book by Adolf Hitler. Only a nazi sympathiser could possibly want such a thing.

I think you have to be either genuinely unaware of what happened to millions of people during WWII under the rule of Nazi Germany, or you have to have a very specific personality fault to think that stuff is cool.

I agree. It is one thing to want to read Mein Kampf. It gives an insight into the mentality of the Nazis. But to want a copy personally signed by Hitler – that is rather sick.

The Telegraph reports:

Labour deputy leader’s insistence that she has ‘nothing to apologise for’ undermined by former colleague Hewitt’s frank apology

Harriet Harman appeared increasingly isolated over her links to a paedophile group after Patricia Hewitt apologised for her own role in the controversy, saying she had been “naïve and wrong”.

The Labour deputy leader has repeatedly refused to say sorry after it emerged that the National Council for Civil Liberties, where both she and Miss Hewitt worked in the 1970s, had given support to the Paedophile Information Exchange.

Harman is the current Deputy Leader of the UK Labour Party. Hewitt is a former Health Secretary.

Former minister Miss Hewitt’s frank admission that she had “got it wrong” on PIE contrasts sharply with Miss Harman’s insistence that she has “nothing to apologise for”.

As fresh evidence of the NCCL’s support for PIE emerged, Miss Hewitt, who has been abroad for the past 12 days, responded for the first time to criticism of her own role by saying she accepted the blame.

Miss Hewitt, who was general secretary of the NCCL from 1974 to 1983, said: “I take responsibility for the mistakes we made. I got it wrong on PIE and I apologise for having done so.

“NCCL in the 1970s, along with many others, was naive and wrong to accept PIE’s claim to be a ‘campaigning and counselling organisation’ that ‘does not promote unlawful acts’.

“I should have urged the executive committee to take stronger measures to protect NCCL’s integrity from the activities of PIE members and sympathisers and I deeply regret not having done so.”

Hewitt admitting she was wrong is the way to do it.

Meanwhile it emerged that the former Labour MP Bryan Gould was invited to become an honorary vice-president of PIE and said that he had a “good deal of sympathy” for the group’s objectives, despite turning down their offer.

BBC Radio 4’s World At One programme discovered that Mr Gould, a shadow minister during Neil Kinnock’s leadership, was contacted by PIE in the 1970s. He was approached following a speech he made to the Campaign for Homosexual Equality.

In a 1977 letter published by PIE’s in-house magazine, he said: “Yours is an unpopular cause and whilst I have a good deal of sympathy for your objectives, I do not think it would be fair to my wife and family for me to take a public stand on it… I’m sorry to have to send you such a disappointing reply.”

So in the letter he wrote at the time, he said he has a good deal of sympathy for the objectives of the Paedophile Information Exchange. Astonishing. Their aim was to abolish the age of consent to legalise sex between adults and children.

Mr Gould told the BBC that he did not remember the correspondence but had never had the slightest sympathy for paedophiles or any involvement with PIE

If he has never had any sympathy why did he write a letter saying he had a good deal of sympathy for their objectives? Is he saying the letter is a fake?

TVNZ does seem to be turning into a recruitment pool for the Labour Party. Fran Mold became Chief Press Secretary. Kris Faafoi is now an MP. Shane Taurima sought nomination and helped run a branch for them while working there.

The latest is Tamati Coffey who is seeking Labour’s Rotorua nomination.

Labour Party general secretary Tim Barnett said two nominations had been received, with a possible third nomination coming late Friday.

Mr Barnett said the names of all nominees for the party’s Rotorua candidate would be released on Monday with the selection process to take up to a month.

If selected, Mr Coffey would replace former Labour Party cabinet minister and new mayor of Rotorua Steve Chadwick as Rotorua’s Labour candidate to contest November’s general election.

Rotorua MP Todd McClay said he didn’t focus on what the Labour Party were doing.

“I believe I have a good track record of working hard for local people and have delivered some important wins for Rotorua and the wider electorate over the last six years.”

Mr McClay said this would be his third election campaign and he looked forward to making his case to continue to be Rotorua’s MP and represent its views in Parliament.

I hear there may be another broadcaster soon to also declare they will stand for Labour.

NZ Herald quiz here.

And well done to the Herald for finally making it compatible with Chrome!

Stuff reports:

A coroner is calling for better regulations of headlights following the death of a drunk man who was run over lying on a rural Hamilton road at night.

Hastings man William Gregory Hoskins was killed on January 15, 2012, after he was struck by a car on Marychurch Road in the early hours of the morning.

It is not known how he came to be lying on the road, Coroner Gary Evans said in findings released today.

Hoskins had travelled to Hamilton with family to attend a cousin’s wedding, and had been drinking at the reception.

A test found he had alcohol in his blood at a level of 190 milligrams per 100 milliletres, over twice the legal blood alcohol limit for drivers.

He had also smoked the equivalent of a single cannabis cigarette in the hours before his death, which may have accentuated the effects of alcohol, a report said. …

CORONER RECOMMENDATIONS

– Consideration be given to the creation of more detailed regulations as to the requirements of vehicle headlights.

– Consideration be given to revision of the warrant of fitness testing scheme with a view to measurement of the lux output of headlights and the distance at which they are operating efficiently.

– Greater emphasis be placed on the dangers of driving on dipped headlights on roads.

– Renewed consideration be given to the question of whether the Land Transport (Road User) Rules 2004 should contain a requirement or guide to the circumstances in which drivers must or should drive with their headlights on full beam.

I’ve got a simpler recommendation.

Don’t get so drunk and stoned that you fall asleep or unconscious on an unlit (or lit) road.