Simon Collins at NZ Herald reports:

Disgraced former employers’ boss Alasdair Thompson has switched sides and is speaking up for raising the minimum wage to $18.40 an hour.

Mr Thompson, 66, has revealed he privately lobbied Prime Minister John Key in 2009 in support of a union campaign to raise the minimum from $12.50, where it was then, to $15 – even though publicly he opposed it as chief executive of the Employers and Manufacturers Association.

If I was a member of EMA Northern I’d be incredibly angry that my membership fees were spent to fund a chief executive who went around privately trying to sabotage the position that was the policy of the organisation that employed him and paid his salary.

Stuff reports:

Poto Williams has been chosen to represent Labour in November’s Christchurch East by-election.

Williams was selected by a six-member panel, equally made up of national and local representatives, and was personally greeted by new Labour leader David Cunliffe in Christchurch this afternoon.

Labour Party members were given the chance to have their say in the ballot, held at the New Brighton Rugby Clubrooms.

Panel members included Labour president Moira Coatsworth.

Williams was chosen over James Caygill, Karen Hayes, Christina Laalaai-Tausa, Tina Lomax and Deon Swiggs.

I’m disappointed but not surprised James Caygill missed out. No one who knows Caygill doubts that if he became an MP, he would be a very good one and inevitably become a senior Minister. Caygill has now missed out twice on Labour selections.

While Labour have introduced a more democratic leadership election process, their candidate selection process gives local members very little say. The typical National Party selection panel consists of 60+ grass roots members and no one from head office. Labour has a six person panel with three head office appointments so the vote of each local member is worth around 1/100th the vote of a a head office person.

Williams bio is on Linked In. What is interesting is her career appears to have been in Auckland for at least the last ten years, and she only took up a job in Christchurch around six months ago.

Andrea Vance at Stuff reports:

Community services claimed by David Cunliffe on his parliamentary biography have proved difficult to pin down.

Today, The Dominion Post takes a look at the early life of Labour’s new leader.

Gaps were identified over the course of the investigation in the “community activities” section of the curriculum vitae the New Lynn MP has posted on Parliament’s official website.

A spokesman for Cunliffe confirmed his office had requested work at Auckland City Mission be removed from the webpage. He said it was a “mistake”.

It comes after inquiries to the homeless shelter could not confirm if he had ever carried out volunteer work there.

Wellington City Mission was also contacted, as the New Lynn MP also cited work with its budgeting service on his CV.

Manager Jill Hilston said she has worked there 18 years and could not recall him. Cunliffe’s spokesman said he gave budgetary advice in 1987 and 1989, some 10 years before he entered politics as the MP for Titirangi.

“He did it once a week, or once every second week.”

Cunliffe also claims to be a member of the Waitakere Royal Forest & Bird Protection Society. However, the spokesman admitted he is not a “current” member.

Committee member Chris Bindon was not aware he belonged to the branch.

“I can’t tell you the last time I saw him at a Forest & Bird event or meeting, I have to say. We have weekend field trips … but I have never seen him on one in my time. I’ve been on the committee since 1989.”

Oh dear. This could be very bad. if you had been leader for a decent period of time, then a revelation like this would cause some damage, but not necessarily impact your overall brand because it will be built up on other stuff you have done. But when you have been leader for just one week, and the public are yet to work out what they think of you – such revelations can be much more damaging.

It was also difficult to locate anyone who recalled him being a Public Service Association (PSA) official, during his time at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Cunliffe was a diplomat for eight years, starting his career in Wellington, before postings in Australia and the United States.

His curriculum vitae said he was a union delegate for three years, between 1987 and 1990, and co-convener for a year. The PSA’s electronic records do not go back that far, and the union could not produce anyone who remembered his activities.

Massey University marketing expert Claire Robinson sat alongside him in the European division, and also could not remember his PSA representation.

Maybe the unions are starting to regret their 70% vote for him!

“He remembers doing it and being involved in pay negotiations,” the spokesman insisted.

“He has a clear memory of it, but not clear enough to say who his co-convener was.”

This story will not go away on the basis of “Trust me, I did it”. The media will keep interviewing and asking people until either the claims are verified or they are acknowledged as “padded” (to use a gentle label).

The other problem for Cunliffe is once there is smoke in one area, other claims over the years will now be investigated. I can just imagine certain people pouring over old speeches for selection and election meetings.

Retired Australian Supreme Court Justice Michael Kirby chairs a commission set up by the UN Human Rights Council about North Korea.

Now as readers will know Justice Gareth Morgan recently toured North Korea, and his findings included:

• it was fantastic
• The country is beautiful
• The country is just fantastic, the farms are perfect. They have no pollution.
• huge pride in their personal space
• those they witnessed were not malnourished or lacking in necessities in clothing or shelter
• poor, yes, but wonderfully engaged, well-dressed, fully employed and well informed
• what North Korea has achieved economically despite its lack of access to international money has been magnificent.

So how does that contrast with what Justice Kirby has been hearing from actual North Koreans who escaped:

“The commission listened to political prison camp survivors who suffered through childhoods of starvation and unspeakable atrocities, as a product of the ‘guilt by association’ practice, punishing other generations for a family member’s perceived political views or affiliation,” he said.

Among the stark testimony was that from a man imprisoned from birth, who lived on rodents, lizards and grass, and witnessed the public execution of his mother and brother; from a woman who saw a fellow inmate forced to drown her own baby in a bucket; and from a man obliged to burn the corpses of starved inmates and scatter their ashes on fields.

Mr Kirby also spotlighted torture and sexual violence, detention for watching foreign soap operas or having religious beliefs, kidnapping citizens of South Korea and Japan, massive malnutrition, and the total control by the regime’s propaganda apparatus.

Just fantastic!

Oh dear, how can one resist a caption contest for this. As always captions should be funny, not nasty.

Sometimes the Government has to change a target because it is not going to meet it. In this case we have the Government changing a target because they have already met and exceeded it.

Isaac Davidson at NZ Herald reports:

The Government has reset its target for youth crime reduction because offending by young people has dropped significantly since the goal was set.

The justice sector’s initial Better Public Services target was to reduce youth crime by 5 per cent by 2017.

Justice Minister Judith Collins said today that target had been exceeded – between June 2011 and June 2013, youth crime dropped by 19 per cent.

“Huge effort has gone into targeting youth offending and keeping young people from going before the courts, and it’s paying off,” Ms Collins says.

The target would be changed to a 25 per cent reduction by 2017.

That’s a great problem to have.

Statistics New Zealand figures showed conviction rates in the Youth Court were at their lowest point since records began in 1992.

These figures did not reflect all offending by young people, because most young offenders were not charged and were given alternative penalties.

But Ministry of Justice figures supported the downwards trend in youth offending. Research showed that police apprehensions of people aged 10 to 16 were at a 10-year low.

If the reduction in youth offending can be sustained, then that will flow through in later years to the overall offending rate.

The NZ Herald editorials:

Initially it was going to fund charter schools – or “partnership schools” as it prefers – only in disadvantaged areas of South Auckland and Christchurch. But when applications were invited and evaluated, Education Minister Hekia Parata was sufficiently impressed to widen the pilot. This week, she and Act leader John Banks announced five applications had been accepted for schools in Northland and Albany as well as in South Auckland.

It is no surprise that three of the five are Maori initiatives, one in Whangarei proposed by the He Puna Marama Charitable Trust, one in Whangaruru by the Nga Parirau Matauranga Trust and one from the Rise Up Trust in Mangere. 

Charter schools in the United States have attracted most interest from minorities who feel mainstream education is failing them.

And in some states like New Orleans and DC, they have had a significant positive impact.

The schools will be obliged to teach the national curriculum which, thanks largely to Labour governments, is not very prescriptive about what is taught. They will want qualified teachers and the information they must supply for their state funding will surely be available. Labour’s and the unions’ real objection to charter schools is one of principle and power.

Equality in education, they believe, requires not only state funding but state management of schools, as well as state control of teacher training and, not least from the union’s point of view, national bargaining over teachers’ pay and terms of employment. Even in the US, teachers’ unions still fiercely oppose charter schools.

For much the same reasons – their grip on power is loosened.

As in the US, charter schools’ futures will depend on their educational ideas producing the desired results. These schools are just an extension of the idea that diversity is healthy, choice is fair and an element of competition never did a public service much harm. This can now be put to the test.

These schools will be under intense scrutiny for their use of public money. If they work, even for a small number of students, that money will have been well spent.

Yep. We should judge them on their results. They can get closed down (unlike a public school) if they fail to perform.

Mark Webster at NZ Herald writes:

I don’t. But I put iOS 7 on my old iPhone this morning. My iPhone 5 immediately looks radically different as soon as it’s awake, and since you interface so visually with your iDevice (I upgraded an iPad 4 as well) it feels like you have a new product. The whole look of the interface is changed, and some will find it jarring, but it’s surprising how soon you get used to it, and how quickly the old interface looks all clunky and wrong (like on my iPad 1).

The home screen can now have a moving background, and the all-new Apple apps often show clever little touches. For example, the clock icon now tells the correct time with a sweeping seconds hand.

Largely, the whole redesign is effective and elegant. The Compass app has been redrawn to be neatly clearer – and swipe it to the left to get a level. …

Generally speaking, apart from the excellent new Control Center (sic) that appears when you swipe upwards from the bottom of the screen, giving you instant access to settings you access often including a flashlight.

There’s quite a lot about Control Center on TUAW.

Folders now have greater capacity. Up to iOS 6, you could place 16 apps in a folder. OS 7 lets you have nine apps per page, and 14 pages per folder for 126 apps total.

A little blue dot next to an app name means an app has never been opened, as a handy reminder you have yet to try an app you have downloaded.

I downloaded iOS7 overnight and like what I have seen so far. The larger folders, the control panel, the ability to restrict certain apps to wireless use, the automatic app updates. How have others found it?

Amy Adams has announced:

Communications and Information Technology Minister Amy Adams is calling for expressions of interest from companies who are considering building a new international telecommunications cable between New Zealand, Australia and the United States. 

“To ensure we have sufficient international capacity in the medium to long term, the Government is making a $15 million contribution available, and would commit to an anchor tenancy on a new cable for research and education purposes,” Ms Adams says.

This is the same commitment the Government made towards Pacific Fibre, and it is very good to see the Government make the same commitment to other companies who are seeking to build a second cable for us.

The commitment that REANZ would be an anchor tenant is probably more important than the contribution, even thought both are useful.

Some people want the Government to be directly involved in constructing a second cable, but my string preference is for the private sector to do it and I know that Hawaiki at least have a proposal out there. Their proposals includes having the cable connect a dozen or so Pacific Islands, which would be a great boost for them.

InternetNZ has commented:

InternetNZ (Internet New Zealand Inc) is delighted the Government is contributing $15 million and calling for expressions of interest for companies to build an international telecommunications cable between New Zealand, Australia and the United States.

InternetNZ Chief Executive Jordan Carter said this was an excellent move by the Government to help New Zealand’s telecommunications industry.

“Like the Ultra Fast Broadband and Rural Broadband Initiatives, we think this is a fantastic step towards ensuring New Zealand maintains our robust connectivity to the world.

We have sufficient capacity at the moment, and for the near future. But getting greater competition with international connectivity will be good for prices, and having supply meet demand.

The Herald reports:

Hassan Rouhani, Iran’s new President, has pledged he would “never” develop nuclear weapons as part of a series of overtures to the West ahead of his first address to the United Nations next week.

Rouhani, who was elected this year on a promise to end Iran’s international isolation, said he had the “full authority” from the country’s ruling ayatollahs to cut a deal on the nuclear issue.

In his first interview with United States television, Rouhani told NBC News that he was involved in a “positive and constructive” exchange of letters with Barack Obama, who wrote to congratulate him on his election.

He also ordered the release of Nasrin Sotoudeh, a prominent Iranian human rights lawyer, and several other political prisoners as part of a pattern of conciliatory gestures.

The White House offered no immediate public reaction to Rouhani’s comments but Western diplomats and US officials urged caution before accepting a new direction from Tehran.

Caution is correct, but I think the election of Rouhani does reflect that many in Iran want Iran to become less of a pariah state.

Tracy Watkins reports:

NZ First MP Andrew Williams ended up the butt of his own joke during Parliament’s question time today after accusing Conservation Minister Nick Smith of being caught “with his pants down”.

A phrase Mr Williams of all people should never use!

The question nearly bought the House down after it revived allegations that Williams pulled down his trousers and urinated on a tree outside the North Shore council offices while he was serving as its mayor in 2010.

Smith was being questioned about claims he meddled in the submission process for a dam project in Hawke’s Bay.

After the laughter subsided Williams repeated his question, but rephrased it to ask Smith about being caught in ” a difficult situation”.

I think it was Mr Williams who ended up in the difficult situation.

Stuff reports:

Pope Francis said the Catholic Church should not allow its bans on gay marriage, abortion and contraception to dominate its teachings, but must be a more welcoming Church where priests are understanding pastors and not cold, dogmatic bureaucrats.

In a dramatically blunt interview with Civilta Cattolica, the Italian Jesuit monthly, Francis said the Church had locked itself up in “small things, in small-minded rules”. It must find a new balance between upholding rules and demonstrating mercy, “otherwise even the moral edifice of the Church is likely to fall like a house of cards…”
 
Francis, the first non-European pope in 1300 years and the first from Latin America, did not hold out the prospect of any changes soon to such moral teachings.

In the long interview with the magazine’s director, Jesuit Father Antonio Spadaro, he also said he envisioned a greater role for women in the 1.2 billion member Church but suggested it would not include a change in the current ban on a female priesthood.

In an remarkable change from his predecessor Benedict, who said homosexuality was an intrinsic disorder, Francis said that when homosexuals told him they were always condemned by the Church and felt “socially wounded”, he told them “the Church does not want to do this”.

The Pope is not about to change the fundamental beliefs of the Catholic Church, but tone can be almost as important as substance, and his tone is doing wonders I believe for the image of the Catholic Church.

The Cats that look like David Cunliffe tumblr page is back in action again, with two new entries. This one is superb.

Paula Bennett announced:

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett was delighted to get unanimous support from Parliament for the Vulnerable Children Bill at first reading.

“This legislation is part of the wider Children’s Action Plan, with more than 30 initiatives to prevent child abuse and improve the lives of our most vulnerable children,” says Mrs Bennett.

“I’ve deliberately kept politics out of this and I’m delighted Opposition parties have found a way to support this work in exactly the same vein.”

This cross-party support is hugely significant for communities and individuals across New Zealand who’ve passionately adopted the Children’s Action Plan.

“It’s absolutely fair that parties have supported this legislation to Select Committee but reserve the right to debate and discuss the detail further before committing to the next step, I welcome that debate.”

“We are making major changes affecting thousands of New Zealanders.”

It is relatively rare for a major Government bill to get unanimous support. Those sort of votes tend to be around minor uncontroversial legislation.

But it is a heartening sign that all parties and MPs supported this law at first reading, as the status quo is manifestly unacceptable. That doesn’t mean every measure in the proposed law is going to end up supported, but I think the initial unanimous vote is a great sign that Parliament is determined to make some changes.

Stuff reports:

France’s Senate has voted to ban beauty pageants for children under 16, in an effort to protect children – especially girls – from being sexualised too early.

Anyone who enters a child into such a contest would face up to two years in prison and 30,000 euros (NZ$48,000) in fines, according to the measure. The legislation must go to the lower house of parliament for further debate and another vote.

I think there is something seriously wrong with a parent who enters an eight or ten year old etc in a beauty pageant. However I’m not sure it is the role of the state to prevent parents from making sub-optimal choices – unless that choice is clearly abusive and damaging.

Michael Fox at Stuff reports:

Labour leader David Cunliffe has appointed Auckland lawyer Wendy Brandon as his chief of staff.

Brandon, who worked for Cunliffe when he was minister of health, is the general counsel at the Auckland Council and a member of the executive leadership team.

“Wendy Brandon will be an outstanding chief of staff. She is a vastly experienced lawyer and manager, with a CV that spans central and local government as well as the private sector,” Cunliffe said.

He said Brandon, who this year won the Chapman Tripp public lawyer of the year award, had the right skill set for the job and would bring “depth and heft” to his office.

“At a personal level, I’ve known Wendy for many years. I trust her absolutely, and value her honesty, integrity and excellent judgment,” he said.

She will start as chief of staff on October 1.

This looks to be a very high quality appointment for Cunliffe. I do not know Brandon but her CV speaks for itself. A major party leader needs a chief of staff with gravitas who can not only direct the office, but to a reasonable degree also direct the caucus. The job is a mixture of management, risk mitigation and political advice.

It will be interesting to see what other senior appointments Cunliffe makes, but he is obviously using his network of contacts from his time as a Minister to assemble a team with more experience that Labour has had previously.

Questions for Oral Answer.

Questions to the Minister.

1. MAGGIE BARRY to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy?
2. Hon RUTH DYSON to the Minister of Conservation: Has he ever seen or received a submission or draft submission from the Department of Conservation regarding the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council Plan Change 6, which paves the way for the Ruataniwha Dam proposal, which is critical of it?
3. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Conservation: Does he stand by his statement “No, I did not” when asked in this House whether he gave any indication to the Department of Conservation on the direction or content of its submission on the Tukituki Catchment Proposal?
4. CLAUDETTE HAUITI to the Minister of Energy and Resources:What reports has he received on competition in the electricity market in New Zealand?
5. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does he believe women should have equal pay to men for work of equal value?
6. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister of Education: Will she allow creationism to be taught in charter schools; if so, why?
7. ANDREW LITTLE to the Minister of Justice: What factors were taken into account in setting the interest rate on legal aid debt under regulation 14 of the Legal Services Regulations 2011 at 8 percent?
8. KATRINA SHANKS to the Minister of Commerce: How will the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013, which will be phased in from 1 April 2014, strengthen our financial markets?
9. DENIS O’ROURKE to the Minister of Housing: Does he agree with all of the views expressed by Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga about housing on TV3’s The Vote on 11 September 2013?
10. CAROL BEAUMONT to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: Is he concerned about the underrepresentation of women in industry training particularly in light of labour shortages in many trades and technical areas?
11. LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Health: What progress is the Government making with its funded family care policy?
12. SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Women’s Affairs: Does her Ministry provide gender implications statements on proposed legislative or policy measures being considered by Cabinet?

Today Labour are asking five questions. These are about Ruataniwha Dam proposal, Equal Pay for women,  Legal Aid, Women in Industry and gender implications in policy documents. The Greens are asking two questions. These are about the Ruataniwha Dam proposal and creationism potentially being taught in Partnership Schools. NZ First are asking about housing policy.

Patsy question of the day goes to Louise Upston for Question 11: What progress is the Government making with its funded family care policy?

Government Bills 3.00-600PM.

1. Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill – Second Reading

2. Family Court Proceedings Reform Bill – Third Reading

The Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill is being guided through the house by the Minister for Broadcasting, Craig Foss. This bill extends for three years the ban on the commercial parallel importation of films.

The Family Court Proceedings Reform Bill being guided through the house by the Minister of Justice has now  been divided into ten separate bills. See the Order Paper for more details. This bill would implement the Government’s decisions resulting from a review of the Family Court conducted by the Ministry of Justice.

The Herald reports:

The Government has promised that the first charter schools in New Zealand will have publicly released performance targets, a high proportion of registered teachers and will not be able to stray too far from the national curriculum by teaching creationism.

Five organisations in Northland and Auckland successfully applied to run New Zealand’s first state-funded, privately run schools. The organisations had a range of backgrounds including military-based training, bilingual schooling and faith-based teaching, and all but one were established entities that had run educational courses or a school.

Education Minister Hekia Parata said the “partnership schools” would be expected to meet the same NCEA and National Standards targets as public schools, and the targets in their contracts would be made public.

All sounds good. And the quality of the applicants and what they wish to do to help struggling under-privileged (mainly) Maori and Pasifika students should be commented. Even Hone Harawira has noted:

“On the other hand, I know the people involved in the two Tai Tokerau projects and they are genuinely good people, dedicated to doing the best for Maori kids. The Leadership Academy already does a wonderful job and the Whangaruru project, although new, kicks off with the best of intentions. And the kids they’re going to help are going to be young Maori, so I wish them all the best.”

But the PPTA wants to treat these schools as some sort of evil regime akin to apartheid South Africa. They said:

The association plans to fight for the abolition of the charter school legislation and the paper will explore a number of options including instructing members to refrain from all professional, sporting and cultural contact with the schools and their sponsors and advising them not to apply for positions in them.

That is a response so far beyond hysterical, it defies belief.

They seem terrified that these charter schools might actually produce some great results, improving the lot of those who voluntarily choose to attend them next year.

Ms Parata said yesterday that in one of the schools – a Mangere primary school targeting Maori and Pacific students – all of the teachers would be registered. In the others, registered teachers would teach core subjects and non-registered teachers would take subjects such as carving, hospitality, and engineering.

Exactly the sort of flexibility you might expect, using an occasional expert in an area who is not a qualified teacher

Government has put aside $19 million for the first charter schools, and Ms Parata said the allocation for each school would be equivalent to similar schools in the same region.

Critics such as the New Zealand Educational Institute said that the funding was wasteful given the small rolls in the five schools – 369 students in total at first, rising to 800 within four years.

One of the new schools, the South Auckland Middle School, promised a teacher-student ratio of 1:15 – a better ratio than state schools.

University of Auckland Associate Professor of Education Peter O’Connor said parents in South Auckland might question why a state-funded public school had larger class sizes than a state-funded charter school in the same area.

Well if the funding is the same, then it is because the charter school has made a decision to spend more of its budget on teachers. I would have thought you’d applaud such a decision, not condemn it.

This is incredible and should ring warning bells about the attitude of a Government with the Greens in it to taxation.

Sitting in Finance Cttee listening to Treasury officials describe tax as a ‘burden’. Right wing political ideology runs deep in Treasury!

— Russel Norman (@RusselNorman) September 17, 2013

Its horrific that Dr Norman thinks tax is not a burden, and even worse calling it so is right wing.

When the state takes a large proportion of your income, of course it is a fucking burden.  If they didn’t do it, you’d have less more money.

If tax wasn’t a burden, then hundreds of thousands of people would pay extra tax voluntarily. Does Dr Norman wake up every morning and send a donation in to the IRD?

Plus the stupidity of Norman’s comments are highlighted by the fact that he got owned on Twitter by Gareth Richards who pointed out that Dr Norman himself had in the past used the term himself. So in fact Dr Norman was just attacking poor civil servants for using the same term as he had used. He should apologise to the Treasury officials he maligned.

Norman tried to defend his new found view that tax is not a burden on the basis the Government spends tax revenues on some good things. Eric Crampton points out:

Taxes are a bad, public services are a good. Saying the first doesn’t mean denying the second.

Again I’m horrified that we may have a senior economic minister in a future government who does not think taxation is a burden on hard working New Zealanders who fund the tax system. It reflects a neo-marxist view I guess that all income is really the property of the state’s, and we should be grateful they allow us to keep some of it.

Also Eric schools Dr Norman on some basic economics:

More importantly, economists use the word ‘burden’ in a particular way. A few useful notes about Principles-level (maybe intermediate) economics for someone who thinks himself qualified to be finance minister:

‘Burden’ measures the total cost of a tax. The ‘excess burden’ is the amount by which the cost of a tax exceeds the amount collected. Treasury tends to reckon that excess burden is around 20%: it costs us about $1.20 to raise $1.00 in tax. The $1.00 raised is a transfer from the public to the government; the $0.20 is pure loss due to distortions in economic activity consequent to increases in our current mix of taxes.

Also:

Russel Norman suggests only “right wing” economists talk about tax burden. Here is a JSTOR search on “tax burden”. There are 61 pages of search results with 100 results per page. Item number 177 on a date-sorted list is famous Right Wing Economist John Maynard Keynes discussing the Colwyn Report on Natinoal Debt and Taxation. Item 398 is rabid right-winger Nicholas Kaldor’s call for wage subsidies to reduce unemployment (1936).

Burden is just the term used by economists to describe the cost of the tax and to help sort out the difference between statutory and economic incidence. Like “While X writes the cheque to IRD, the burden of the tax falls on Y and Z.” That’s it. It’s the standard term used in the main texts to describe this thing. Richard Musgrave (centre, maybe centre-left) uses it. James Buchanan (right) uses it. Pick a random public finance text, you’ll find “tax burden” or “excess burden” somewhere in it.

Then on Twitter Dr Norman goes further rejecting both the labels burden and distortionary for taxes!

My challenge to all those who agree with Dr Norman that tax is not a burden, to write out larges voluntary cheques today to the IRD. That means it is no extra burden on you, and reduces the burden on the rest of us.

UPDATE: Russel has actually referred to the tax burden in Parliament, as has Metiria Turei. This reinforces that Dr Norman should apologise to the Treasury officials for his attack on them for using the exact same language both Green co-leaders have used in the past.

In yesterday’s General Debate, Gerry Brownlee revealed the extent of the fixation Clayton Cosgrove has with him:

That leaves just one possibility as a dead cert to be dropped off the front bench, and that is my Canterbury colleague the Hon Clayton Cosgrove. This comes as a deeply disturbing thing for me because Clayton Cosgrove has spoken in the House 21 times since the beginning of 2012—not a bad sort of record for substantial speeches in the House. In every one of those speeches he has mentioned my name multiple times. It is almost a fixation that the poor man has. In the imprest supply debate he mentioned my name six times. In the Environment Canterbury bill it was five times. There are many threes, there are many fours, and there are many fives. I got mentioned six times in the Canterbury schools debate. But, somewhat inexplicably, he mentioned me five times in the debate on the State-owned energy companies and delay of sale of Mighty River Power—five times. Then when it came to the Mixed Ownership Model Bill in Committee I got nine mentions—nine mentions. These were 5-minute speeches and I took up most of them. In the Address in Reply debate this year he outdid himself. In the Address in Reply debate he outdid himself. In a 10-minute speech I got 11 mentions. That is one a minute. It is quite clear that the man thinks of nothing else but me. Clearly, he is a man who does not have his eye on his policy portfolio issues and who has a certain fixation with me, which is worrying because the deputy leader once had one of those as well. 

We await the caucus reshuffle on Monday with interest!

Barry Soper writes:

Martin Luther Cunliffe’s dream job’s becoming a nightmare for Labour Party apparatchiks.

Cunliffe’s become something of a gunslinger, firing staff who are thought to have supported either Rainbow Robertson or Shame Jones in the leadership race.

The new Labour Party head honcho certainly isn’t practising what he’s been preaching. In the race for the Party’s top job he made much play of what he said were the Government’s draconian labour laws.

Martin Luther preached about how he was going to take them apart if he becomes the Prime Minister next year, like extending to all workers Part 6a of the Employment Relations Act that at the moment applies only to vulnerable workers, like cleaners. Employers are forced to keep them on after winning a contract from a competitor.

Well you could argue that the 25 Labour apparatchiks employed under a Shearer contract should be able to continue under Cunliffe, if he does indeed practice what he preaches.

But rather than keeping them on he’s accusing some of them of supporting his leadership opponents and they’re fired. And for the rest he’s asking them where their loyalty was in the run up to the leadership vote.

Now that’s in breach of employment law where workers are entitled to privacy. So this lawmaker could now find himself on the wrong side of the law if one of the Labour workers takes a case against him.

I would hope the decision on which staff members are retained are taken on the basis of their competence and professionalism, not based on whom they may have voted for in a secret ballot.

Also one can have a preference in a leadership race, and work as a dedicated professional staffer to a new leader. I had a small role in trying (unsuccessfully) to prevent Don Brash’s coup against Bill English. However once the decision was made by caucus I started working loyally for Don within minutes and Don kept me on in his new office, despite my rather public support for Bill. He trusted my professionalism and loyalty, and I was always very grateful for that.