A Tale of Two Cows infographic by kylatomdesign.

 

Have seen many of these before, but not all of them. The venture capitalism one and the Iraqi one are may favourites.

Also liked this one in the comments:

In Romania: You have 2 horses… you sell them to Western Europe. As… Cows 🙂

People may be interested in this transcript from Q+A. The video at the link is even better:

SUSAN WOOD

On Friday we found out some of the details about the partial sale of Mighty River Power. The price range for the shares estimated to be between $2.35 and $2.80. That should bring around $2 billion into the government coffers.

Good morning, David Shearer.

DAVID SHEARER,

Good morning, Susan.

SUSAN         $2 billion on schools, on things that are public good. Money well spent?

DAVID          No, because you also miss out on the revenue over a longer period than that, and as soon as you do that, 50 per cent of your revenue goes, and over time, obviously, that’s nonsensical. But the other thing about selling these shares is that a small group are going to get ownership of those shares-

SUSAN         400,000 people is not a small group of New Zealanders.

DAVID          Well, if you actually add it up, it’s going to be well less than 10%. More than 90% of New Zealanders will not have the opportunity to buy shares, and they will lose, in a sense, what they already owned before, which is a national asset.

SUSAN         So without selling assets, and we know you don’t want to, how will you balance the books without borrowing?

DAVID          Well, what we had been saying before is a whole programme of economic development, capital gains tax, and in the short term-

SUSAN         So tell me how you’ll raise $2 billion. This government’s raising $2 billion doing it. How will you come up with $2 billion?

DAVID          Let’s start from the beginning, then. Do we need to have exactly that $2 billion or not? The way the government’s put its books in order, or not in order, is by putting forward an argument that we need to sell our state-owned assets. I don’t believe that that’s the way that we should be going forward. There are other alternatives.

SUSAN         Do you agree, though, that the government should be running a surplus? They should not be in deficit? Households have to tidy up their act. Do you agree that the government books should be in surplus?

DAVID          Well, of course we should be in surplus, and that’s what the Labour government did for nine years while it was in government, and that’s what it handed on to the National government – government books that were in surplus.

SUSAN         Yeah, but to be fair, there’s been a GFC.

DAVID          When you sell a state-owned asset like Mighty River Power you forego the income that that brings in.

SUSAN         I understand that.

DAVID          So what you’re effectively doing- It’s like selling your business, putting an extension on your house – you feel much better for that, but you lose the income from the sale.

SUSAN         OK, but they are getting the books back into surplus. They are getting their house in order. Give me a few ideas of how Labour would get the house in order without borrowing more money.

DAVID          Well, at the moment we don’t have a growth agenda in New Zealand. We are not growing our economy as we should.

SUSAN         But give me some specifics here of what you would do. We know what this government is doing. How would you raise a couple of billion to get the books back in balance?

DAVID          Well, what I’m saying is that what we need to do is to grow the economy in a way that it’s not growing at the moment, and we’ll be talking about Tiwai Point in a little while…one of the big problems about – no, no, let me finish – one of the biggest problems about that is that the exchange rate is so low that we’re seeing many of our businesses actually going out of business because they’re not being able to succeed. We’re not putting our money in the profitable sector; it’s going into the property market because we don’t have a capital gains tax that will help us direct money into those areas. And if you’re wanting to raise money, then at least put money into businesses- invest in businesses through the incentives of capital gains, and that brings, obviously, money into the government as well.

SUSAN         Let’s talk about the GCSB spy boss, Ian Fletcher. Is he the right man for the job?

DAVID          I don’t know Ian Fletcher, but I can say that the way he has been appointed-

SUSAN         No, no, there is nothing negative about him, is there? There is no suggestion that he is not the right man for the job. Let me phrase it that way.

DAVID          Well, let’s put it another way. Just last year, when the whole Dotcom issue was running, Ian Fletcher was the person who went to the prime minister and said, ‘Sign this, because I want to cover up the fact that we’ve been illegally spying on Dotcom.’ That was the ministerial certificate that Ian Fletcher took to the prime minister. Now, I don’t think that was a good move. I don’t have an opinion of him per se, but-

SUSAN         Well, you don’t like that.

DAVID          Of course I don’t. No, I’ve just said that. But what I don’t like is the way that he was interviewed and the process that went through. I don’t like the idea-

SUSAN         But hang on-

DAVID          Hang on, no, no, just let me finish- John Key has shoulder-tapped one person, put him into that position. We now have in our most secret agency in New Zealand a friend of John Key’s who reports directly to him. John Key is the only person who has democratic oversight over that agency.

SUSAN         And it’s his right. It is his right to select whoever he wants for that job.

DAVID          There is a real problem in New Zealand now with the confidence that we have in our intelligence agencies, and if I was coming into office, I would have a full independent inquiry into our intelligence agencies to restore that confidence, because if we don’t do that we will not be able to hold ourselves up as the transparent nation that we are.

SUSAN         Rebecca Kitteridge has been looking into it.

DAVID          That’s an internal report. I would want this to have a terms of reference that would be agreed by parliament. It would report back to parliament so that we all have confidence in it. It’s something the Australians did a few years ago when there was a crisis in their intelligence agencies, and they’ve had regular independent outside reviews going on. Now, we have the SIS at the moment. The SIS is about to look at its legislation, reform its legislation, and I think that we need to have that independent review before we get to that point.

SUSAN         Much made this week of the Prime Minister’s memory loss. You, of course, have had your own memory loss over that $50,000 US or more, how much was it?

DAVID          I’m not going to say. It’s my family business. I don’t talk about my savings online, but I do-

SUSAN         Tony Ryall said in the house it was a couple of hundred thousand dollars US. Is that correct, or is it more than that?

DAVID          I’m not going to say. It’s my family business.

SUSAN         Didn’t you lose your right for privacy around it when you forgot to declare it? When you broke the rules and did not declare it?

DAVID          No, I absolutely did not. I said that I made an error. I myself came forward and corrected that error. I took it on the chin and said ‘here it is’. And I expect that to be the standard by which all politicians operate if they do make a mistake.

SUSAN         That’s what John Key did this week. He said he’d made a mistake and he fessed up. Exactly the same scenario.

DAVID          I think what John Key was doing this week-

SUSAN         He came forward.

DAVID          No-

SUSAN         Yes, he did. He came forward and he said, ‘Actually, I’ve checked by records and I did call Ian Fletcher.’ He came forward.

DAVID          What he was doing this week was that he was deliberately trying to move opinion away from and deflect opinion away from his friendship and relationship with Fletcher.

SUSAN         Is your problem with this money- Is your problem with this more than $50,000 US in the bank, is your problem that there is so much money there that it would not resonate? You would not resonate? I mean, Michael Cullen very famously called John Key a ‘rich prick’. Are you, Mr Shearer, a rich prick?

DAVID          Look, I worked for my money working for the United Nations in Iraq. I put it in the bank. It’s my family’s savings. I didn’t put it on my pecuniary interest. I declared that and I came forward and I was honest about it.

SUSAN         And you were very well paid in that job, sometimes up to half a million Kiwi dollars a year.

DAVID          No, I think you need to do your research on that, quite frankly, Susan. But, look, working in Iraq, where we lost 25 people, there was a- people do get paid hazard money in those situations.

SUSAN         What’s the money sitting there for?

DAVID          Look, it’s my family- Look, people put money in the bank for any- Look, this is my private savings, my family’s savings. Do you ask John Key what he does with $50 million when he comes on to your show?

SUSAN         John Key actually does have scrutiny over his money all the time. There are reports about how much money he has; he’s on the NBR Rich List – all those sorts of things. So, yes, he does have the same sort of scrutiny.

DAVID          Well, I haven’t heard you asking the same sorts of questions-

SUSAN         I haven’t had him on the programme yet, but when I do, I will ask him. So, are reports that it’s around $1 million correct or incorrect?

DAVID          Look, I am not going to put a figure on it, and I resent the fact that you are asking me to reveal how much is in my bank account. Nobody needs to do that. I have done-

SUSAN         You do need to.

DAVID          I have done what I was obliged to do under parliamentary rules, which is to declare any account that had more than $50,000 in it. I did do that. I regret, obviously, not putting that on my pecuniary interests, and that’s where it stops.

SUSAN         So you’re not a rich prick?

DAVID          I’m- Obviously, as a New Zealander, I’m fortunate, but I’m not in the same league as our prime minster, no.

SUSAN         Tiwai Point – what would you do if you were in government?

DAVID          Oh, look, Tiwai Point needs to be negotiated. It obviously needs the government to have a look and see what it can do.

SUSAN         What would you offer, though? Would you be offering Rio Tinto some sort of extra funding to stay here?

DAVID          Oh, look, I think what we would need to do is take a look at what’s on the table, and I don’t know what’s on the table.

SUSAN         Nothing’s on the table. The government’s pulled it off the table, haven’t they?

DAVID          We don’t know how far apart they are. We’ve only just got indications about that. I think what we need to do, though, is look at the national interests about what this means to New Zealand, what it means to Southland, what it means to jobs. And at the moment the government is not in the business of creating jobs. There are jobs going and for Southlanders obviously they are very, very –

SUSAN         I think you could actually say that the government has played Rio Tinto pretty well on this. And the numbers – let’s talk about them. $250 million a year they pay for power. That’s about a quarter of what you pay for power, of what all of our viewers pay for power. They pay one quarter. They then return about $150 million. Effectively, we’re giving them a $750 million discount. Should they even be here? I mean, what are they really adding?

DAVID          Well, that was what they were set up for, obviously, and they were guaranteed that power for a long time. I mean, you have to play out what does it mean for jobs, what does it mean for the Southland economy, what does it mean for our current account deficit? But the bottom line is you would try to, obviously, secure a deal-

SUSAN         Really? Because those numbers I’m looking at there, there are other things you could do. The power could be in other uses.

DAVID          But you wouldn’t be going into a negotiation with a blank chequebook.

SUSAN         And the government hasn’t. They’ve walked away.

DAVID          Well, the government, what it did, was it was trying to-

SUSAN         The government put pressure on Rio Tinto.

DAVID          What the government was trying to do was actually get the sale of Mighty River Power across the line and reduce the uncertainty around the electricity price. That’s what it was trying to do, and that’s why it went into negotiations. Now, it went into negotiations with Rio Tinto aware that the government was wanting to do that. So it went in with one hand tied behind its back.

SUSAN         Well, they haven’t paid it one cent, which I think would be the public mood at the moment – no mood to give a lot of money to a foreign multi-national. One final question – there is some confusion around Labour, and I’ve been trying to press you during this interview about what you would do differently. So let me give you a specific example. You’re a 26-year-old woman. You’re living in Auckland. You’re earning $65,000 a year. You’re paying off your student loan. You’re renting. What would Labour do for this woman that National is not doing?

DAVID          Well, two things – first of all, we would have a healthy home guarantee to make sure that where she’s living, in the rental accommodation that she’s living in, is actually up to scratch; it’s both heated and it’s insulated. The second thing that we would do is we’re building 10,000 houses, affordable homes, a year, and that would enable her to have an opportunity to get on to the housing ladder. So there are two specific things that I believe that would help that case.

 SUSAN         Thank you for your time this morning.

DAVID          Thanks, Susan.

I like how Labour goes from condemning the Government for negotiating with Rio Tinto on Tiwai Point, to complaining they didn’t secure a deal.

A reader writes in:

The first time I became aware of the SST offender database was when we were gravely concerned about the attention and interest a 43 year old man had in an 11 year old family member. My suspicions and reasons to look for this information was based only on 2^nd-hand information and hunches that something didn’t feel right.  

 His name didn’t appear on the SST offender database back then as he had name suppression for 3 prior sexual offences against children and as such this information was prohibited from being made public. Our girl was his 4^th victim when he raped her before her 12^th birthday and I sincerely wish this offender’s name had not been suppressed and that it had been on that database when I looked first looked as we may have averted years of trauma and heartbreak.  

 Btw. His name is now on the database and he is serving a Preventive Detention Sentence … too late for us …too late for victims that preceded

Far too many children get assaulted or raped because their offender had name suppression for previous offences. Sometimes this is necessary to prevent the identification of the previous victims, but what should be suppressed is details about their relationship to the offender, not the identity of the offender.

The Sensible Sentencing Trust has a violent offenders and sex offenders database. It is a pity they have to provide this service. I think court convictions should be listed by the Government in a searchable database – subject to the clean slate legislation, and any name suppression orders.

Curia’s monthly newsletter is out. The executive summary is:

Curia’s Polling Newsletter – Issue 66, March 2013

 March saw just three political polls published in New Zealand – a DigiPoll and two Roy Morgan polls.

 The average of the public polls has National 11% ahead of Labour – 3% less than in  February. The seat projection is centre-right 58 seats, centre-left 60.

 Australia has Labor and Gillard’s ratings seriously tanking.  The Coalition has a two party preferred lead of 16% to 18%, and is projected to win three times as many seats as Labor in the September election. Gillard has only 26% positive approval and 65% negative.

In the United States Barack Obama’s approval rating is has dropped significantly by 7%.

In the UK the Conservatives are still 11% behind Labour and the UK Independence Party is now polling at the same level as the Liberal Democrats.

In Canada the Conservatives are on 31%, NDP 28% and Liberals 27%. Likely Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau is already leading the Preferred PM polls.

The normal two tables are provided comparing the country direction sentiment and head of government approval sentiment for the five countries. New Zealand continues to top both by considerable margins.

We also carry details of polls in New Zealand on asset sales, constitutional issues, a four year term, Christchurch schools, same sex marriage, The Hobbit, cats, List MPs, and nuclear powered ships 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 e- go to http://listserver.actrix.co.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/polling-newsletter to subscribe yourself.

News.com.au reports:

THE Australian labour movement will wage a pre-emptive strike against the federal opposition as the election nears, ACTU boss Ged Kearney says.

This means spend a shitload of money. They’ll need to as the latest poll projects 109 seats for the Coalition and just 36 for Labor.

In a candid address to a NSW Teacher’s Federation conference in Sydney on Saturday, Ms Kearney indicated the ACTU was bracing for a coalition win on September 14 and a royal commission into union corruption.

That could be devastating for them.

“The royal commission is coming – because of the HSU, because of the whole slush fund stuff, they will come at us with lawyers and barristers and queen’s counsels and they will try to send us broke,” she said.

They should welcome a Royal Commission to clean their mess up.

I’ve blogged at Curiablog the details of a poll by ResearchNZ on constitutional issues. Pleased to see 58% support for a four year term, but that is not the surprising result.

If NZ does adopt a written constitution, 58% said they support incorporating the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi into it, with only 35% opposed.

I’m a bit surprised by that level of support. Mind you if you asked along the lines of “Do you think the Supreme Court should be able to strike down laws that it finds are inconsistent with the Treaty of Waitangi“, you may get a somewhat different result.

Matthew Hooton has a very good piece in NBR on beltway politics.

The Herald reports:

A Labour MP is calling for Government action over the poor condition of State Highway 3, between Taranaki and Waikato.

Andrew Little says the Government is allowing a road to block for exporters trying to transport goods efficiently.

We should celebrate this day. A Labour MP has called for spending on a road. This is a good thing.

NZ Herald quiz here.

The Herald reports:

North Korea has warned diplomats in Pyongyang that it can’t guarantee the safety of embassies in the event of a conflict and suggested they may want to evacuate their staff, Russia’s top diplomat said Friday.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is demanding an explanation from the North Koreans asking whether the warning is an order to evacuate the North Korean capital or merely a proposal to consider doing so.

It is very difficult to analyse what North Korea is doing, because the leadership is so abnormal. The cold war between US and USSR never became a major conflict because both sides could analyse what the other side was thinking and would do.

The recent rhetoric from North Korea is much more aggressive and specific than in the past.  With most countries this is a cause for alarm, because you can’t back down from such aggressive language without losing face.

However as the regime controls almost all communications within North Korea, they can just lie to their people and claim the US has agreed to withdraw a warship or something and claim it as a huge victory. The poor people will probably never know better.

But there is a not insignificant risk that North Korea will want some sort of “victory”. They are unlikely to attack the US directly as that would be regime suicide. but could they attack some South Korean targets? Yes.

What if they lob a couple of missiles at some non populated areas in South Korea? Or sink a ship? Does South Korea retaliate? If they do not, then they may invite more unprovoked attacks. If they do, then war could eventuate.

My pick and hope is North Korea will declare some sort of fake victory and not actually attack. But this is far from certain.

The Dom Post editorial:

Confusion has seized Wellington City councillors, and the spectacle is not pretty. While many of them were asleep, it seems,150 council jobs have been axed. “How did that happen? Why were our hands not on the steering wheel?’ asks Mayor Celia Wade-Brown.

This is a damaging question for any politician to ask, at least out loud. If the mayor did not know how the jobs went west, she should have. If her hands were not on the steering wheel, they should have been. It is no excuse to plead ignorance. It is the mayor’s job to know such things.

It was a damning thing to say.

Unfortunately, this is not the first time that the council has blundered about in confusion and ignorance. It is only a few weeks ago that Ms Wade-Brown was astonished to learn that the renovations for her temporary office were going to cost $350,000. When this newspaper revealed the fact, Ms Wade-Brown said it was unacceptable and would be scaled back.

It is beyond belief that the Mayor was not previously aware of the cost of her own office renovations.

Phil Kitchin at Stuff reports:

The Human Rights Commission plans to prosecute the Sensible Sentencing Trust for breaching a serial paedophile’s privacy.

I’m speechless.

It stems from the trust printing the man’s name and details of his offending on its website. The commission says this breaches his privacy because the trust does not mention that he has name suppression.

However, neither the paedophile nor the commission have been able to supply a court record to prove he has name suppression.

Which is rather important. I don’t think taking the paedophile’s word for it is a good idea.

In January, the present commission director, Robert Kee, wrote to the trust saying it had not ensured it was publishing accurate information when it put the paedophile’s convictions on its website.

Publishing the information without referring to “the fact there is a suppression order” breached the man’s privacy, Mr Kee said.

But three paragraphs later, Mr Kee said he agreed with a judge’s minute that said there is “no record on the file of a final suppression order” being made.

He said the sentencing judge’s written decision was missing, but he believed the Human Rights Review Tribunal “could find on the balance of probabilities that there was a suppression order”.

Balance of probabilities? Not good enough. If you can’t find one, there isn’t one.

On one side of the case is the taxpayer-funded Human Rights Commission, which includes the Office of Human Rights Proceedings and prosecutes cases under the Privacy Act.

On the other side is the Sensible Sentencing Trust, staffed by volunteers and funded by donations.

In the middle is the convicted paedophile, a 58-year-old Wellington man whose offending is alleged to have spanned 14 years.

He was jailed for a year in 1995 on five counts of committing indecent acts on two girls aged 10 and 14.

At the same trial he was acquitted of a further two charges of rape and four charges of indecent assault on young girls.

Twenty years earlier he was charged and acquitted in three separate rape trials.

He also has a conviction for careless driving causing death.

The man lost his job as a chief executive when members of his organisation learned of his sex offending. Documents obtained by The Dominion Post from members of the organisation said he had access to children in his work and had lied about being employed when he was in prison.

I know which side I am on. If this proceeds, I’ll be happy to solicit donations from readers for the Sensible Sentencing Trust on this issue. You don’t have to agree with everything the SST says or does to be appalled by this prosecution.

The Economist has published their 2012 democracy index.

Our score out of a maximum 10 is 9.26. Norway is top on 9.93. North Korea bottom on 1.08.

25 countries are classified as full democracies, 54 as flawed democracies, 36 as hybrid regimes and 52 states as authoritarian.

In terms of the global population only 11.3% live in a full democracy compared to 37.1% who live in authoritarian regimes.

NZ scores are:

• Electoral process and pluralism 10.00
• Functioning of Government 9.29
• Political participation 8.89
• Political culture 8.13
• Civil liberties 10.00

The Herald reports:

The New Zealand government had a smaller operating deficit than expected in the first eight months of the financial year as it took in more income tax and tax from source deductions than it had forecast.

The operating balance before gains and losses (obegal) was a deficit of $3 billion in the eight months ended February 28, 16 per cent smaller than forecast in the December half-year economic and fiscal update.

Core Crown tax revenue was $37.6 billion in the first eight months of the year, which was $719 million, or 2 per cent higher than forecast. Source deductions were $266 million above forecast, which the Treasury said showed underlying strength in the economy.

That is an encouraging sign that we may get out of deficit by 2014/15. In 2008 the projected deficit was permanent and ever-growing. The outlook was a Europe type spiral into ever-increasing debt.

The Press details the three options for Christchurch Cathedral:

Option 1: Restoration
Cost $104m-$221m
Time 6.5 – 22 years
A complete restoration of the original cathedral.

Option 2: Traditional
$85m-$181m
Time 5-22 years
A re-interpretation of the original Gothic revival building in modern materials.

Option 3: Contemporary
Cost: $56m-$74m
Time: 4.5 – 9.5 years
A contemporary new building with a sculptural spire.

Worth following the link to look at the design sketches.

I called the consultation a bit of a sham, on radio last night. This is because it is obvious what the preferred option and inevitable decision will be.

Two of the three options will cost around $200 million and take up to 22 years to build. The third will cost less than half of the others, and can be completed within a decade, maybe even half a decade.

Not hard to work out the likely winner.

As it happens my preference is the contemporary one anyway.

Not that I get a vote. I am not a member of the local Anglician parish. This is not a public building – it is their building. God knows why prominent Catholic Jim Anderton is trying to impose his views on the Anglician Church as to their building. Jim – the Anglicians left you guys in 1534. You don’t get to decide.

UPDATE: It gets worse. The Labour MP for Wellington Central is saying the Anglician Church should go with the traditional restorations option as “the traditional restoration option may well be more expensive than the alternatives, the cultural, historic and heritage values of the building warrant those costs being met”.

What the fuck has it got to do with a Wellington Labour MP?

But tell you what, Labour. If you think the extra $145 million cost is worth it, then why don’t you pay for it? Start organising the sausage sizzles. Labour has around 6,000 members so if each member can fund-raise $24,000 they can cover the cost.

Finally, it is out. The announcement:

New Zealand retail investors in the Mighty River Power share offer will receive one loyalty bonus share for every 25 shares they hold for two years from the offer, up to a maximum of 200 bonus shares, Finance Minister Bill English says.

Mr English also announced that the indicative price range for the shares is $2.35 – $2.80 per share, with the final price expected to be announced on 8 May after the retail offer has closed and the institutional offer has been conducted by a book-build process.

“The loyalty bonus scheme that I am announcing today is another way to encourage widespread and substantial New Zealand ownership of shares in MRP,” Mr English says.

“It also recognises the loyalty of those New Zealanders who retain their shares and contribute towards the country’s savings culture.”

The loyalty bonus scheme is available only to New Zealand retail investors – not to institutions in New Zealand or overseas.

A 1 in 25 bonus is basically a 4% premium for holding on. Experienced investors will buy and sell regardless as potential gains are greater than 4% but for first time investors, the bonus will probably encourage them to hold onto their shares for at least the initial period.

People who pre-registered will be posted or emailed copies of the share offer document once the offer opens, expected to be Monday 15 April.

686 million shares are up on offer.

A useful summary of risks is here:

• The availability of the fuel (mainly water, geothermal fluid and gas) that Mighty River Power requires to generate electricity may reduce for a wide number of reasons;
• Mighty River Power’s power stations may not be able to generate electricity as expected if they cannot operate in the normal manner or at all;
• If the Tiwai Point aluminium smelter were to significantly reduce its electricity consumption or cease consumption altogether, the resultant drop in demand could lead to a sustained reduction in electricity prices in general;
• The wholesale price at which Mighty River Power sells the electricity it generates, or buys electricity to sell to customers, is subject to significant variability and may be unfavourable;
• The volume and price at which Mighty River Power is able to sell electricity to customers may be adversely affected by competitor behaviour, economic conditions, changes in customer demand or regulatory changes;
• Investment in geothermal development activity requires significant early stage capital and may encounter unexpected delays, increased costs, a requirement to impair assets or not be commercially viable;
• International geothermal development faces additional risks associated with operating in jurisdictions outside of New Zealand;
• Changes in the regulatory environment that adversely impact Mighty River Power;
• A single (or multiple) catastrophic event generating losses not covered by insurance;
• Insufficient access to future capital; and
• Treaty of Waitangi and other Māori claims relating to ownership and governance of land, water and geothermal resources that directly or indirectly impose additional restrictions, conditions or additional costs

I plan to buy shares, despite those risks. There are no rewards without risk. I’m pleased that I will be able to make an individual choice as a citizen about whether to invest my money into Mighty River Power, rather than have the decision solely up to the Government,

Stuff reports:

Being a parent takes up more time each day than a fulltime job, Statistics New Zealand figures show.

The average Kiwi parent spent more than eight hours a day caring for children, and some mothers were spending twice that, social statistics manager Steve Manning said.

Parents with children under 14 spent on average eight hours and 18 minutes a day caring for their children.

“The information from the Time Use Survey 2009-10 shows mothers on average spend four hours a day more than fathers caring for children,” Mr Manning said.

“Mothers of young children [under 5 years] spend on average 12 hours a day caring for them.”

This doesn’t surprise me. I think those who have not had kids can only imagine the intensity of being a parent.

Stuff reports:

Southland Chamber of Commerce chief executive Richard Hay urged people to consider what was really going on.

Pacific Aluminium, a business unit of Rio Tinto and the majority shareholder of New Zealand Aluminium Smelters, had been perceived as playing hard ball, he said.

“If anybody was getting the short end of the stick, it would appear to be the smelter.”

Rio Tinto was shown as begging from the Government and using the Mighty River Power partial asset sales policy as leverage to get what it wanted, he said.

“However, has any consideration been given by the public that it’s Meridian playing hard ball.

“After all, it has been making a yearly profit of $200 million off the Manapouri power generator, while NZAS is losing $50m and is in the shadow of closing,” Mr Hay said. …

“Rio Tinto wants Meridian to reduce the power price in tough times but be prepared to pay more for it again when the market improves.”

I understand that essentially Rio Tinto want the price they pay for electricity to be linked to the price they get for aluminum. This is very understandable from their point of view. Electricity makes up over 30% of their operating costs.

What they are effectively asking Meridian to be more a partner than a supplier. To share both the risks and rewards of the aluminum market.

While Meridian is 100% Government owned, I’d be very reluctant to have a Government owned business getting involved in a risky commercial enterprise such as aluminum – beyond their current role as a supplier. Why should taxpayers be forced to invest in the aluminum market?

But if Meridian was fully or partially privately owned, then Meridian shareholders could well want their Board of Directors to accept a deal where the price they charge is linked to the aluminum price.

So my hope is that Meridian and Rio Tinto can reach an agreement for now. Once Meridian is no longer an SOE, then it should have greater flexibility to consider variable price agreements.

Vernon Small at Stuff reports:

The New Zealand flag has been lowered for the final time at Kiwibase in Bamiyan marking the official close of the Provincial Reconstruction Team and this country’s 10-year involvement with it.

The United States and Malaysian flag, representing other nations in the PRT, were also lowered leaving the Afghan flag flying alone. …

At the flag-lowering ceremony Governor-General Jerry Mateparae said the final “crib 21” rotation could now start the 13,000km trip home.

“You leave a legacy of which you can be proud.”

Sir Jerry read out the names of the 10 Kiwi soldiers who died in Afghanistan: Lieutenant Tim O’Donnell, Private Kirifi Mila, Corporal Dougie Grant, Lance Corporal Leon Smith, Corporal Dougie Hughes, Lance Corporal Rory Malone, Lance Corporal Pralli Durrer, Corporal Luke Tamatea, Lance Corporal Jacinda Baker and Private Richard Harris.

He said they had come to resists tyranny, promote democratic values and bring peace to troubled lands. …

Nato’s deputy senior civilian Andrew Steinfeld, who arrived with other official in a fleet of Black Hawk helicopters just before the event, thanked the PRT for its effectiveness. It had helped make big improvements in health outcomes, especially for children and had lifted the number of girls going to school.

He said it was appropriate Afghanistan now take the lead, but it would not have to do so alone.

Bamiyan Governor Habiba Sarabi thanked Defence Minister Jonathan Coleman for the PRT’s “remarkable service” and said the withdrawal should not indicate the end of the friendship and support of New Zealand but expected “a more sustainable friendship and … continued humanitarian support”.

New Zealand will continue to support two “legacy” aid projects including agriculture and the establishment of three solar powered generators that will start coming on stream in May and provide power for 2500 users in business, government buildings and residents.

Afghanistan is never going to turn into a post-war Germany or Japan. But life is way way better for the ordinary Afghani since the fall of Taliban, especially for women.

Another interesting UMR poll. I like the scale they used which was:

• Are absolutely certain it is true
• Are fairly certain it is true
• Believe it’s true but are not too certain
• Believe it’s true but are not at all certain
• Believe it’s not true but are not at all certain
• Believe it’s not true but are not too certain
• Are fairly certain it is not true
• Are absolutely certain it is not true

The first four can be totalled to be agreement and the last four disagreement, but as interesting as the totals are the breakdowns.

On belief in God, the responses were:

• 28% absolutely certain it is true
• 13% fairly certain it is true
• 9% believe it’s true but are not too certain
• 11% believe it’s true but are not at all certain
• 6% believe it’s not true but are not at all certain
• 5% believe it’s not true but are not too certain
• 11% are fairly certain it is not true
• 16% are absolutely certain it is not true

I am amused at the 44% who answer absolutely certain there is or is not a God. I’d love to know how they can be “absolutely” certain!

The demographic breakdown is interesting:

72% of women believe in God, compared with 52% of men.

That’s a large difference, and not one I was aware of previously. Why would 20% more women believe in God? Is it men are more into proof than faith?

65% of Maori and 72% of Pacific people believe in God.

Less surprising.

Another question was if you believed Jesus Christ was a real person who lived 2,000 years ago. This was regardless of if you think he was the son of God, a prophet, a preacher etc.

• 29% absolutely certain it is true
• 25% fairly certain it is true
• 10% believe it’s true but are not too certain
• 14% believe it’s true but are not at all certain
• 4% believe it’s not true but are not at all certain
• 4% believe it’s not true but are not too certain
• 6% are fairly certain it is not true
• 8% are absolutely certain it is not true

I’m surprised 14% are fairly or absolutely certain that Jesus never existed.

Today’s pic is of a local bird, the kereru.  This threatened species is also the largest extant pigeon in the world (and NZ”s only pigeon species)

Click for larger, higher res image

Enjoy your Friday.