Questions to Ministers 2.00 – 3.00 PM

1. METIRIA TUREI to the Minister for Economic Development:Does he agree with the Department of Internal Affairs’ advice to his officials on the proposed international convention centre that “virtually any of these proposed concessions would almost certainly be followed by an increase in the number of people seeking help citing problems linked with casino machines or casino table games”; if not, why not?
2. JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the Government’s financial position – particularly progress in reaching its target of returning to fiscal surplus in 2014/15?
3. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?
4. CLAUDETTE HAUITI to the Minister for Economic Development: What progress has the Government made on establishing an international standard convention centre in Auckland?
5. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statements regarding Solid Energy and the Future Investment Fund “Well, again I think he’s saying that technically it was in the rules it might be possible. I haven’t actually seen – can’t recall either seeing [indistinct] and marked those things that are in the budget is an allocation process” and “If Bill’s saying it’s there, there might be a [indistinct] allocation”?
6. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister of State Services: What progress is being made toward the achievement of the Government’s Better Public Services targets?
7. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement “The Government decides what the Future Investment Fund is spent on”?
8. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements on the recent controversies around the GCSB; if so, why?
9. EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister of Conservation: Does he agree with former Otago Conservation Board chairwoman, Associate Professor Abby Smith, who said restructuring at the Department of Conservation has left it “dead in the water”; if not, why not?
10. MIKE SABIN to the Minister of Justice: What new initiative is the Government undertaking to fight crime and drug addiction?
11. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister of Internal Affairs: What actions is he taking to minimise the harm from gambling?
12. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister of Internal Affairs: What progress has been made toward the Government’s targets for delivering more services online?

Today Labour are asking four questions. Labour are asking about whether the Prime Minister stands by all his statements, Solid Energy, the Future Investment Fund and Gambling harm reduction. The Greens are asking two questions. These are about the Skycity Convention Centre and the Department of Conservation. New Zealand First is asking one question, about the GCSB.

Patsy question of the day goes to Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi for Question 6: What progress is being made toward the achievement of the Government’s Better Public Services targets?

Government Bills 3.00PM-6.00PM and 7.30PM-10.00PM.

1. Psychoactive Substances Bill – Committee Stage

2. Formerly the Legal Assistance Amendment Bill, is now six separate bills. They are here 1, 2, 3, 4 ,5 ,6. – Third Reading

3. Formerly the State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill is now three separate bills. They are here 1, 2, 3. – Third Reading

4.  Airports (Cost Recovery for Processing of International Travellers) Bill – Committee Stage

The Psychoactive Substances Bill is being guided through the house by the Associate Minister of Health, Todd McClay. The bill seeks to regulate otherwise unregulated psychoactive substances such as “party pills” and other “legal highs” in New Zealand. The bill aims to restrict the importation, manufacture, and supply of psychoactive substances unless authorised by a regulator, while allowing the sale of products that meet safety and manufacturing requirements. Currently, any psychoactive substance can be sold legally if it is not listed in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975. This bill aims to place the onus on the industry to demonstrate that a psychoactive substance is not harmful or poses only a low risk to human health before approval for sale is given. Approval could be given only to finished, packaged psychoactive products, allowing the regulator to assess all the ingredients and the risk that they might present in the particular combination.

What was the Legal Assistance Amendment Bill is being guided through the house by the Minister of Justice, Judith Collins. These six bills are the Legal Services Amendment Bill, Accident Compensation Amendment Bill, Care of Children Amendment Bill, Child Support Amendment Bill (No 2), Family Proceedings Amendment Bill and the Property (Relationships) Amendment Bill.

What was the State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill is being guided through the house by the Minister of State Services, Jonathan Coleman. This bills is now three separate bills. These are State Sector Amendment Bill, the  Public Finance Amendment Bill (No 2) and Crown Entities Amendment Bill.

The Airports (Cost Recovery for Processing of International Travellers) Bill is being guided through the house by the Minister for Primary Industries, Nathan Guy. This bill provides for cost recovery arising from processing of travellers in the aviation security, biosecurity, and customs areas.

The Herald reports:

The Post Primary Teachers Association have released research which they believe shows that it is inaccurate and simplistic to say that one in five New Zealand students is failing in education.

Independent researchers Liz Gordon, who was a former member of Parliament for Alliance, and Brian Easton who is an economist and columnist for the Listener, were given access to the Education Ministry’s 2009 OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) database.

They found 14.3 per cent of students failed to achieve proficiency level 2 on PISA reading.

Which would be one in seven, not one in five.

They also found 74 per cent of those who failed were male, and that socio-economic factors such as parental income and the number of books in the home were contributing issues.

Boys are doing far worse than girls at pretty much all levels of education. That’s a gender gap which should be a priority to close.

The spokeswoman for Ms Parata said ‘one in five’ was an estimate which reflected the fact that not every person is leaving school with the qualifications and skills they needed to succeed.

“It reflects the fact that 15 per cent of school leavers do not have an NCEA Level 1 qualification and the basic literacy and numeracy skills required to attain it, and that around 30 per cent of students leave school without an NCEA Level 2 qualification – the minimum level of competency required to train for a basic apprenticeship.

“The one out of five reference also drew on ERO research and reading recovery data which indicated that up to one in five young people are leaving school without the skills needed for modern jobs.

The report is here.

The Herald reports:

Labour has withdrawn its proposal for women-only selections after a request from Leader David Shearer.

Mr Shearer said it was distracting from other issues and he did not believe it was what people wanted from Labour.

He said he had asked the Council to withdraw that proposal and it had agreed.

I score this as Whale 1, Labour members and activists 0 🙂

What is astonishing is that neither Shearer nor Robertson, who sit on the NZ Council, did anything to stop this before it was adopted.

The fact they may or may not have been at a particular meeting is irrelevant. Papers get sent out well in advance of meetings. If they had good political management they would have killed this off prior to the NZ Council adopting it and recommending to the the annual conference.

Stuff reports:

Senior Labour MPs are pressuring the party to dump or modify gender quota and “women-only” selection proposals ahead of today’s regular caucus meeting.

“Free and frank” views are expected to be aired by supporters of the quota and a group of male MPs, including Shane Jones and Clayton Cosgrove, who have openly rubbished the moves.

Manurewa MP Louisa Wall has backed the rule changes and list MP Sue Moroney has also spoken in favour of their aims, although she has hinted at a compromise.

After a series of meetings that spilled over into the evening, Labour sources yesterday said the solution rested with the party’s ruling council, not its MPs.

David Shearer refused to go on television last night to talk about GCSB, unless the broadcasters promised they wouldn’t ask him any questions about the man ban. They refused of course, so he refused to appear. Not sure I can recall a previous occassion where an opposition leader boycotts television interviews!

He has managed to man ban himself!

A solution would likely centre around redefining the 50 per cent quota as an objective, rather than a requirement.

But will the NZ Council and activists agree?

The Dom Post editorial:

Wacky ideas and politics go hand in hand. One of the reasons people join political parties is because they’ve got ideas they want to advocate. Selling raffle tickets and leafletting neighbourhoods only has so much appeal.

Hence it is no surprise that there are people within the Labour Party who think a gender quota should be introduced to ensure that women make up half its MPs after the 2017 election.

What is surprising is that the proposal has been adopted by the party’s ruling council. And what is even more surprising is that leader David Shearer has not dismissed it out of hand.

Shearer is a member of the Council that approved it.

Women bring a different perspective and different life experiences to Parliament. In recent years Ann Hercus, Fran Wilde, Ruth Richardson, Jenny Shipley and Helen Clark have all left their marks on New Zealand and Judith Collins and Paula Bennett are doing the same thing now.

It is not easy being a woman in a traditionally male institution, but none required special treatment to get selected by their parties or to rise to influential positions once they had got to Parliament.

The Labour proposal is condescending to women and counter to the party’s interests.

The people who seem to be most angry about this are in fact women.

Mr Shearer and his saner colleagues know this.

So which colleagues are not “saner”?

The Labour leader has said he prefers targets to quotas. His failure to stamp out a nutty idea leads to only one conclusion. He lacks the power within his own party to do what he knows is in its best interests. That does not bode well for him or Labour.

But good for New Zealand!

So we’ve had politicians complain for the last year that the exchange rate is too high and that the NZ Government must either print money or spend billions intervening in the exchange rate to lower the dollar.

Stuff reports:

Mike Jones, a currency strategist at BNZ, said he expected the kiwi to trade between US76c and US80c in the next three to six months, based on the gyrations of the global economy.

But the general rule at the moment is based on a simple formula: the better the economic data out of the United States, the further the kiwi will fall.

Which is why calls for us to intervene are misguided. It’s like trying to stop a river with a couple of stones.

Grey Power has said:

What is our society coming to when an elderly gentleman, on a walker, is attacked leaving the RSA? This follows hot on the heels of other well-publicised and cowardly acts against elderly, and Grey Power is sick of it. It is about time that we demanded better.

Grey Power National President, Roy Reid is disgusted and says that anyone convicted of assaulting a superannuitant should automatically face a mandatory minimum prison sentence of 3 years.

So if Nigella hit Charles Saatchi first, she’d be in prison for three years?

Maybe if we bring back compulsory military training for youths we could have the ambulance at the top of the cliff. This country is under direct threat from within. We need a society with respect, for people and property, with discipline, pride and with skills and leadership qualities. We believe that military training can provide that and would prove much more cost effective than the inevitable prison sentences and many of the training schemes that are currently on offer. This would also provide a force of civilians who are trained in emergency situations that can be utilised if needed.

What could go wrong with training young thugs how to shoot and kill people!

Would never happen right!

UPDATE: I wonder if Grey Power have costed their policy. If you assume a cost of $50,000 per youth per year and say 50,000 youths doing it every year that is a $2,5 billion price tag. I’d be willing to consider CMT, if Grey Power agree to a 20% cut in the pension to pay for it!

C – A Musical is a musical about the Big C, or cancer. Paul Jenden is a long-time creative force at Circa, but this time the production was about himself – his battle against chronic lymphocytic leukameia.

It’s a sad topic for a musical, and at parts of the show, you do feel downright depressed. Mortality is not an easy topic. But despite that, the show is also uplifting and great fun.

It’s not a typical musical.  It is described as a play with song and poems.

Danny Mulheron plays Jenden himself, and is captivating and lively. He is so convincing, you would think he really was Jenden, the way he described the chemotherapy, receiving the news etc.

Photo by Stephen A’Court

Beyond any doubt the star is Jackie Clarke who plays the voice inside his head, and sings the songs. Clark is simply fantastic and was a knock out. Her acting, her voice, her costume were all flawless.

Jane Waddell plays Paul’s Mum, who died from cancer also. Some very poignant scenes, but also some funny ones. The one that sticks in my mind is when she is talking to an angel and keeps asking him how much more time she has. He keeps avoiding the question until he finally points out that if you are talking to angels, the answer is pretty obvious!

Sue Alexander does an excellent job on the piano and Louis Solini silently plays Carcinoma most effectively.

On the technical side, the lighting used was done incredibly well. Great use of lights to capture emotions and states.

Most of us know someone who has fought cancer – some successfully, and some not so. The lyrics of “say si si to C” are a statement we can all aspire to.

As I said the play is not a barrel of laughs. At times it is very funny and uplifting. At times very sombre and sad. You ride a bit of an emotional roller-coaster, but well worth seeing.

Threatreview also has a review.

The Govt has released an update on progress towards their 2017 goals for better public services.  As far as I can tell from the various releases, this is the state of play:

1. Reduce the number of people continuously receiving these working-age benefits, which will become the new JS, for more than 12 months by 30%, from 78,000 in April 2012 to 55,000 by 2017: Result: A drop of 3.6% to 75,366
2. In 2016, 98% of children starting school will have participated in quality early childhood education: Result: 95.7%, up 0.7%
3. Increase infant immunisation rates so that 95%of eight-month-olds are fully immunised by December 2014 and this is maintained through to 30 June 2017: Result is 89%. Also Reduce the incidence of rheumatic fever by two-thirds to 1.4 cases per 100,000 people by June 2017: Result is 3.9, down from 4.2.
4. By 2017, we aim to halt the 10-year rise in children experiencing physical abuse and reduce current numbers by 5 per cent. Result is a 3.5% drop
5. 85% of 18-year-olds will have achieved NCEA Level 2 or an equivalent qualification in 2017: Result is 77.2%, up from 74.3% in 2011
6. 55% of 25 to 34-year-olds will have a qualification at level 4 or above by 2017: Result is 52.6%, up from 51.8% in 2011
7. By June 2017, reduce the crime rate by 15%, reduce the violent crime rate by 20%, reduce the youth crime rate by 5%: Results: Total crime down 11%, youth crime down 18%.
8. Reduce the re-offending rate by 25% by 2017: Result is re-offending down 9%
9. Business costs from dealing with government will reduce by 25  per cent by 2017, through a year-on-year reduction in effort required to work with agencies: Result is not yet quantified
10. An average of 70 per cent of New Zealanders’ most common transactions with government will be completed in a digital environment by 2017: Results include 35% of passports renewed online, 18% of GST returns done online, 93% of tax returns done online, 68% of MSD benefits applied for online

Good to see all the indicators are moving in the right direction. Some are well on the way to meeting or exceeding the 2017 targets. Others are moving more slowly. The Government has announced $20 million more funding to help agencies meet the targets.

Most focus has been on Labour’s proposed man ban, but their proposed gender quota is equally worthy of focus. Few people disagree that we should have more women in Parliament, and a gender quota would of course achieve that. But quotas are inflexible and they mean that gender is regarded as more important than all other factors.

To illustrate why this is a pretty stupid idea, I’ve analysed what changes would have occurred to Labour’s caucus in the six MMP elections to date if they had a 50% female quota. Of course you can argue they may have done things differently, but we can only act on the info we have. Also for several of those elections Labour would have had no male list MPs at all, so it doesn’t matter how you argue it – they would have lost every male List MP if they were required to have a 50% quota.

1996 Lose

Joe Hawke
Jonathan Hunt
Mark Gosche
Dover Samuels

1996 Gain

Helen Duncan
Verna Smith
Suzanne Sinclair
Sue Moroney

1999 Loss

Joe Hawke
Jonathan Hunt
Michael Cullen

1999 Gain

Lynne Pillay
Lili Tuioti
Brenda Lowe-Johnson

2002 Loss

Ashraf Choudary
Dave Hereora
Graham Kelly
Jonathan Hunt
Michael Cullen

2002 Gain

Moana Mackey
Lesley Soper
Carol Beaumont
Gill Boddy-Greer
Louisa Wall

2005 Loss

Dave Hereora
Russell Fairbrother
David Parker
Shane Jones
Ashraf Choudary
Rick Barker
Mita Ririnui

2005 Gain

Lesley Soper
Louisa Wall
Denise MacKenzie
Leila Boyle
Jennifer McCutcheon
Linda Hudson
Marilyn Brown

2008 Loss

Stuart Nash
Rick Barker
Ashraf Choudary
Kelvin Davis
Charles Chauvel

2008 Gain

Judith Tizard
Louisa Wall
Lesley Soper
Erin Ebborn-Gillespie
Josephine Bartley

2011 Loss

Raymond Huo
Rajen Prasad
Shane Jones
Andrew Little
Charles Chauvel

2011 Gain

Carol Beaumont
Carmel Sepuloni
Deborah Mahuta-Coyle
Steve Chadwick
Kate Sutton

I think illustrates the inflexibility and dangers of quotas. In 1996, 1999 and 2002 Labour would not have been able to give any male MPs a winnable list place. That means they would have lost Michael Cullen. Ironically, one of the MPs who would have been elected in his place is Lesley Soper. Soper is the only pro-life woman in the Labour Party, and quite hated by most Labour women. The thought that replacing Michael Cullen with Lesley Soper is a triumph for women’s rights is absurd.

Labour would also have lost David Parker, Shane Jones, Kelvin Davis and Andrew Little if they had to apply a 50% quota for previous list rankings.

Yes quotas will achieve 50% female representation. But at what cost?

The Herald reports:

Radical Muslim preacher Abu Qatada was deported yesterday from Britain to Jordan to face terror charges, ending a more than decade-long battle to remove a man described as a key al-Qaeda operative in Europe.

The move comes after Britain and Jordan ratified a treaty on torture aimed at easing human rights concerns that had blocked previous attempts to deport the Palestinian-born Jordanian preacher.

British Home Secretary Theresa May announced Abu Qatada’s departure.

“This dangerous man has now been removed from our shores to face the courts in his own country,” May said. The Home Office posted a picture on Twitter of Abu Qatada, wearing a long robe and climbing the steps of a plane – proof that the lengthy extradition saga was over. He landed at Marka Airport in east Amman last night.

Abu Qatada was wanted in Jordan for retrial in several terror cases in which he was sentenced in absentia. Britain had tried since 2001 to deport Abu Qatada – whose real name is Omar Mahmoud Mohammed Othman – but courts have blocked extradition over concerns that evidence obtained under torture could be used against him.

Amazing that it has taken 12 years to remove him. Well overdue.

3 News reported:

A US study, which a New Zealand teachers’ union has used to back up its claims that charter schools are failing, says they are actually helping struggling students.

A study by Stanford University’s Centre for Research on Educational Outcomes was referenced by the NZEI in its argument against charter schools being introduced in New Zealand.

A statement from the union says the 2013 study, which looked at charter schools in 26 states, found that the taxpayer-funded privately run schools do not justify their existence.

“It backs what educationalists in New Zealand have been saying all along – that charter schools are not the answer to improving educational outcomes for children,” said national president Judith Nowotarski.

But 3 News spoke to Stanford University:

It found charter school students had greater learning gains in reading than their peers in traditional public schools while there were equivalent learning gains in mathematics.

“The results reveal that the charter school sector is getting better on average and that charter schools are benefiting low-income, disadvantaged, and special education students,” said Dr Margaret Raymond, director of the centre.

According to the research, students in poverty, black students and those learning English gain most in both reading and maths compared to their traditional public school peers.

This is what Labour and Greens are fighting tooth and nail against!

The House has referred to a select committee the The Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill.

The Copyright Act has a provision that bans the parallel importation of films into New Zealand for nine months. This provision expires on 31 October 2013.

The bill proposed extending the ban for a further three years, but reducing the period of the ban from nine months to five months.

I think this bill moves the law in the right direction (a shorter ban period) but I’m not convinced we should have a ban at all.

Craig Foss in moving the bill said:

The Copyright (Parallel Importing of Films) Amendment Bill imposes a temporary ban on the parallel importation of films for commercial purposes for a period of 5 months from the date of the film’s first release to the public. A ban on parallel importing is necessary to enable cinemas to exclusively screen films for a limited period, before copies of films on formats such as DVD and Blu-ray are brought to the New Zealand market. Although many films are released in New Zealand cinemas at the same time as international releases, many films are delayed for several weeks or months due to factors such as seasonality, screen availability, profitability assessments, and competition with other films. Without a ban in place, parallel-imported copies of films could potentially be sold in competition with screenings in cinemas. This could potentially affect the viability of cinemas.

Two things occur to me.

The first is I am far from convinced that allowing DVD sales immediately would threaten the viability of cinemas. People choose to go an see a film at the cinema for a number of reasons – the big screen, the larger capacity, the night out, the better sound etc.

The second is why should we protect cinemas as a medium. Do we protect supermarkets from dairies? Do we protect record stories from open air concerts? Let consumers choose how they want to watch a movie I say.

I think the future is, or should be, that upon release consumers can choose where and how they watch a new movie – so long as they are willing to pay for it.

It may be that a digital copy of a new movie costs $50 for the first month, then $30 for the first five months and say $20 thereafter.

Also the ban on parallel imports for a period encourages unauthorised copies. If you can’t legally buy a copy of a film, then you are more likely to acquire an unauthorised copy.

Labour also backs this bill so it will pass:

Jacinda Ardern: Just to go back to the beginning, in 2003, as I understand it, Labour introduced a 5-year temporary ban that prohibited the commercial import of a film for a period of 9 months from the film first being made available to the public. There is a very explicit reason for this and it is very much based around the motion picture industry—in particular, our small cinemas that many of us may have frequented over the years. I particularly want to highlight the ones in some of our smaller towns and provincial areas that really do rely on the ability to at least get a first foot in the door when it comes to a release. The staging of releases is pretty important to remember: something that is released in the United States, for instance, that is timed around a school holiday period, does not naturally coincide with that period within New Zealand. So having that little buffer period for that industry, as it claims, is the difference between 165 jobs existing or not. Let us be really clear on that. That is work that PricewaterhouseCoopers has done on behalf of the industry to demonstrate that a loss of that window would have that effect.

Let us be clear, though: the industry does have to move with the times. Things are changing, and rapidly. So that is why, as I understand, this bill will put an expiry date of 2016. It also reduces the window from a period of 9 months, which is what we currently have, down to 5 months. That is a compromise that we feel very comfortable with. This is a message, I guess, to the industry that this is unlikely to be a tenable, long-term way of maintaining its ability to stay in front of the game in a digital age. This is, as it were, extra time for the industry to try to develop where it goes next, in the same way that the music industry is doing—and has started doing a very good job of it, I must add. So too does this industry have to start looking at that, and much more rapidly, as well. This bill will allow it the time to do that. It will allow those jobs to be retained while the industry works on how it tries to ensure that it remains viable in the future.

I agree with Jacinda that this bill is not a tenable long-term way of comping with the digital age. My concern is will we just see it get extended time and time again every three years? This is the second temporary ban. MPs should make very clear that this will be the last one.

You can submit on this bill up until 25 July. What do readers think? Should cinemas be able to have an exclusive period where only they can show a film?

Isaac Davidson at NZ Herald reports:

Act Party leader John Banks will make a rare vote against his coalition partner National this week to maintain his passionate defence of animal rights.

The Psychoactive Substances Bill is expected to return to Parliament tomorrow and the Government could come close to losing a vote on a Green Party amendment which would ban animal testing for the purposes of approving legal highs for sale.

The bill states that animal testing should not happen if alternatives exist, but some MPs want the tests ruled out.

A proposed ban on animal experiments tabled by Green MP Mojo Mathers has the support of Mr Banks, who told Parliament on Wednesday: “Protecting animals is ingrained in my soul.”

Mr Banks said the bill was well-intentioned but he could not support it in its present form.

It was “totally unacceptable” that the bill failed to rule out “testing these recreational drugs on innocent animals”. …

If it passed, Ms Mathers’ amendment would block drug-makers from using information gained from animal testing to prove that their products were “low-risk”.

It was opposed by National and United Future.

Whether it succeeds could hinge on the fact that new Labour MP Meka Whaitiri will not be sworn in when the vote is held.

At present, the amendment is believed to be supported by 60 MPs and opposed by 60 MPs. New Zealand First has not publicly stated its position but is expected to support the amendment.

It was expected to pass if Ms Whaitiri was able to cast her vote. But the new Ikaroa-Rawhiti MP, who was elected in a byelection last week, will not be sworn in until the end of the month.

If the vote is tied, the amendment fails.

In the old days, the Speaker would have a casting vote which would be used to maintain the status quo. Now, there is no casting vote and a tie means the vote fails.

The NZ Herald editorial:

Just when the country imagined women were doing well in politics, particularly in the Labour Party, the party’s organisational wing says they are not. It is so worried that women do not yet fill half the party’s seats in Parliament it might allow electorates to ban males from selection as the Labour candidate. Predictably, the “man ban” has been ridiculed from all sides but if Labour wants to do it, why not?

I hope they do!

 They have set a goal of a 50-50 gender balance in their caucus and women make up only 41 per cent so far. To reach perfect equilibrium by the election after next, they may need to turn away good men. Local electorate committees may be able to seek permission of the party’s New Zealand council to say that only women need apply for their selection.

If this is repugnant to the meaning of equal opportunity in most people’s minds, it is not foreign to Labour thinking.

What is amazing is that the political leadership did not see this coming. Richard Harman blogs on this at Frontpage:

Make no mistake this “Man Ban” furore has raised potentially fatal questions about David Shearer’s leadership of the Labour Party.

Here at “The Nation” last week we got a front row view of just how dysfunctional the Shearer leadership machine is.

First up, it is mind boggling that it was left to Cameron Slater and his “Whaleoil” blog to reveal that the party was proposing to allow women-only  candidate selections as part of a bid to evenly balance its gender representation by 2017.

This proposal is part of the party’s Organisational Review which began work last year.

Its proposals have already surfaced at a national conference; at local LECs and at regional conferences.

They then went to the party’s Policy Council.

Either Mr Shearer is so out of touch with what is happening inside his own party or alternatively — as one Labour source suggested to me over the weekend – he simply wasn’t listening.

But nor, apparently, were the rest of the caucus.

The Herald continues:

Positive discrimination is central to the philosophy and character of the Labour Party. It does not believe in equal opportunity but in equal outcomes, which it believes require the playing field to be tilted in favour of those disadvantaged by race, gender or relative poverty. The “man ban”, even if the executive backs away from the idea in public, is a good defining issue for voters.

I think that is a key difference between National and Labour – the focus on equal outcomes rather than equal opportunities.

To anybody who shares Labour’s belief that women are inherently disadvantaged in competition with men, an idea as drastic as the “man ban” will show how determined a Labour government would be to address remaining gender imbalances in all walks of life.

Imagine what quotas will be introduced by a Labour/Green Government?

The Dom Post reports:

Wellington City Council is again looking to slow the resource consent process for the Basin Reserve flyover.

The council has appealed to Environment Minister Amy Adams to have the consent application for the $90 million flyover heard by the Environment Court, rather than by an independent board of inquiry.

The minister has the power to appoint a board, which is required make a consent decision within nine months of public notification.

The Environment Court process can vary in terms of time, but history suggests it takes longer.

The law that is applied and the outcomes should be the same. But a board of inquiry is dedicated to one hearing, so you don’t suffer a backlog.

Wellington City councillor Iona Pannett said she had little faith the board process would allow for a proper debate.

All boards of inquiry established since 2009 had granted approval, suggesting they were little more than a government rubber stamp, she said.

Boards of inquiry and environment courts are not binary decision making bodies. They do more than say yes or no. They attach dozens, sometimes hundreds, of conditions to a resource consent.

“People opposed to the flyover should be very concerned, therefore, if the project goes to a board of inquiry. The risk is real that the project will be given the green light.”

That is not what most people call a risk.

Note that the Council has accepted there is actually not practical or affordable alternative to the flyover. Despite that some Crs are still trying to kill it off.

City councillor and mayoral aspirant John Morrison said the flyover needed to be fast-tracked through a board of inquiry. He was disappointed that certain members of council wanted to use the Environment Court as a “smokescreen” for stopping the flyover.

“It’s this endless Green Party attitude of ‘stop everything, do nothing’ and that’s simply what this is. I’m sick to death of it, and I believe the city is too.”

Mr Morrison, who also sits on the Basin Reserve Trust, said the ground desperately needed the $12m stand that would be built by the Government to soften the visual impact of the flyover.

The cricket ground was in real danger of losing its test match status soon if its facilities were not drastically improved, he said.

The Environmental Protection Authority, NZTA and Greater Wellington Regional Council have made submissions to Ms Adams, all saying the flyover should be considered by a board of inquiry.

I hope the Govt will listen to them, not the WCC.

Jewish News reports:

The Left Party, a political party made up of socialists and feminists, in the County Sormland, Sweden, is pushing for making standing urination for men, illegal, for those who use public restrooms of the Provincial Government.

Why you wonder?

Party officials are pushing for the installation of sitting only toilets in men’s restrooms.

Local supporters of the proposal said they feel that sitting only urination is more hygienic and promotes male health. This will help eliminate the problem of puddles on the floor and spray stains in toilets. They also argue that urinating while sitting will help promote men’s health because it allows men to empty the bladder more effectively. Sitting urination according to advocates reduce prostate problems in men.

Men must not use urinals! They are bad for you!

I await this policy being adopted in New Zealand.

The Guardian reports:

Local reports said the incident, which took place on 30 June in the remote Brazilian town of Pio XII, escalated when the player, 30-year-old Josenir dos Santos, became involved in an argument with the referee, Octavio da Silva.

As the confrontation became physical and Dos Santos refused to leave the field, Da Silva allegedly produced a knife and stabbed the player, who died while being taken to hospital.

Reports said that outraged spectators responded by running on to the field and stoning Da Silva, before severing his head and sticking it on a stake in the middle of the field.

Okay, I think I might cross Brazil off the travel list. I thought sticking heads on stakes died off with the Roman Empire!

Police spokesman Valter Costa was quoted as saying: “We will identify and hold accountable all those involved in this incident. One crime will never justify another. Actions like this do not correspond with state law.”

Good to know state law doesn’t endorse decapitation.

Radio NZ reports:

Infrastructure investor Infratil says the Labour Party’s portrayal of how much New Zealand electricity prices have gone up in the past three years is misleading.

A graph on Labour leader David Shearer’s Facebook page – using Government data for 14 countries – shows New Zealand was one of only two where electricity prices rose between 2009 – 2012.

Bruce Harker, the head of Infratil’s manager’s energy team and TrustPower chairman, said the list of countries put forward by Labour omits Australia, where electricity prices have risen much more than in New Zealand.

Dr Harker said the comparisons being made are misleading and although if it’s converted to New Zealand dollars it appears the electricity price has fallen in other countries, the reason for that is that the New Zealand dollar has appreciated so much over that period of time.

He said consumers in Britain, Denmark or Norway would say their prices have gone up 15% – 20% in that period.

That’s outraegous – to use exchange rate changes to make it appear power prices have not shifted in other countries. Intellectually absolutely dishonest. Unless consumers in Denmark and Norway pay their power bills in NZ dollars, it is meaningless. The graph should show the actual increases in each country.

Labour finance spokesperson David Parker, a former minister of energy, concedes power prices have gone up more in other countries than in New Zealand.

So Parker admits Labour lied.

Peter Kurti at CIS writes:

Federal Labor MP Ed Husic is to be commended for his cool reaction to the swirl of anti-Islamic posts on Twitter and Facebook this week.

When he was sworn in on Monday as a Parliamentary Secretary, the member for Chifley became Australia’s first Muslim frontbencher.

Mr Husic, the son of Bosnian migrants, took the oath of office on a copy of the Qu’ran. ‘I couldn’t obviously take my oath on a bible,’ he said. ‘I am who I am.’

But that decision provoked unpleasant and anonymous attacks on social media which accused Mr Husic of treacherous and unconstitutional behaviour.

As well as being offensive, these rants were both absurd and inconsistent.

Far from being an unconstitutional act, Mr Husic’s decision to take the oath of office on the Qu’ran falls entirely within the provision of section 116 of the Australian Constitution.

Not only does the Constitution protect the free exercise of religion, section 116 prohibits religion being made a qualification for public office under the Commonwealth.

In other words, the Constitution protects the rights of Muslims to hold public office. When a Muslim is appointed to such an office, it is entirely appropriate that he or she take the oath on the Qu’ran if they wish to do so.

The Qu’ran has long been made available to Australian Muslims taking the oath in Australian courts of law.

A person taking an oath on a sacred book is not promising explicitly to uphold the contents of that book. The book simply serves as a symbol of invocation as the oath taker calls upon God to be the guarantor of his or her integrity.

NZ is rather more tolerant on these things. Ashraf Choudhary in 2002 was elected an MP and chose to swear his parliamentary path on the Qu’ran.  Off memory, there was no fuss or protest or backlash at all (except from Winston Peters, but he doesn’t count) – as there should be. We either allow no-one to swear an oath on a religious book, or we allow all religious books to be used. A country should not tell its citizens which religions are acceptable.

Kenneth Minogue died last week, aged 82. Not well known in NZ, but significant classical liberal who was President of the Mont Pelerin Society. Wikipedia notes:

Minogue wrote academic essays and books on a great range of problems in political theory. His 1963 book The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness, about the perversion of the liberal label by radical leftists became popular internationally. Minogue argued that genuine liberalism rests on the tradition of thinkers like Adam Smith, Benjamin Constant, Adam Ferguson, Alexis de Tocqueville,John Stuart Mill et al., who built the foundation for a conservative perspective. Minogue defended civility, decency, and moderation against globalists and leftists, and advocated an honest and transparent public sphere where individuals can freely pursue their own ideas of happiness.

National Review writes about him:

Kenneth Minogue, who was one of the most brilliant yet also most approachable philosophers of liberty, died suddenly on Friday when returning from a conference of the Mont Pelerin Society, whose retiring president he was, on the Galapagos Islands. This is not a formal obituary and so it will not list Ken’s academic achievements and honors. All one need say for the moment is that he was at the center of an extraordinary group of political philosophers, economists, and journalists — other members included Michael Oakeshott, Bill and Shirley Letwin, F.A. Hayek, Roger Scruton, Perry Worsthorne, Noel Malcolm, Colin Welch, Frank Johnson — who between them instilled intellectual rigor, political imagination, a deep appreciation of liberty, and a sharp (occasionally derisive) wit into the all-too-inert body of English conservatism.

Ken, a New Zealander by birth, an Australian by upbringing, and British by affection and long habit, established a solid academic reputation at the London School of Economics and gradually expanded it into an international one through his books and lecture tours. He was well-known throughout Europe and the English-speaking world for the freshness and originality of his thought and expression. He was a contributor to National Review under all of its three editors, and an occasional guest of Bill Buckley’s on Firing Line.

He did come back to NZ from time to time, and will be missed by those who knew him.

Stuff reports:

Plans to lift the minimum wage for Hamilton City Council staff have failed.

An ambitious proposal to introduce a “living wage” of $18.40 per hour over two years was today voted down 6-5 as councillors baulked at its costs.

The council voted in May to introduce a living wage over two years, from this year, on the strength of a February estimate it would cost $168,000 to lift pay rates for 80 permanent council staff now paid between the minimum and living wages. 

But management now say the resolution covered 144 staff, and their revised estimates showed the cost would be at least $643,000.

Mayor Julie Hardaker said once the council’s “toe was in the water” on a living wage policy it would be very difficult to review it, or roll the changes back.

The weird thing with the original decision is they were outsourcing their wages policy to a couple of people in the Hutt Valley. Whatever they said was a living wage, would be automatically implemented by the Council!