Feeling like trying something calmer today

Click for larger, higher res image

After Maggie Barry suggested during the paid parental debate that Labour MPs without children aren’t that well qualified to talk on the issue of paid parental leave, Twitter had a hash tag of #maggiebarrystandingorders. Pete George has some of the better ones:

• Happy birthday @jacindaardern! Although it’s not MY birthday so I really shouldn’t comment…
• only Maggie Barry may cite #maggiebarrystandingorders in the house
• You can only talk about asset sales if you have three TradeMe stars or more.
• Maggie Barry seems quite happy to talk about euthanasia. Maybe it’s a cry for help
• Only MPs named Sarah can talk about CERA
• MPs wanting to talk about taser will have to have been tased.
• Maggie, I have 2 children so can talk about Paid Parental Leave twice as much.
• No more references to Willie Apiata by MPs who haven’t rescued comrades under enemy fire
• We can’t talk about #maggiebarrystandingorders because we’re not Maggie Barry
• MPs wanting to talk about taser will have to have been tased.
• You can’t make decisions about New Zealand unless you’ve never left the country.
• No-one in National or ACT can talk about public transport
• Under #maggiebarrystandingorders only Peter Dunne can speak on planking.
• @DavidClarkNZ must be on the minimum wage to put forward a minimum wage bill
• Louisa Wall must get married wage to put forward a marriage bill

All quite funny. I would point out though that I am a regular public transport user, unlike a certain former Green MP who didn’t even have a snapper card despite decades of going on about the importance of public transport in Wellington!

A very fun day today. Had so much on, haven’t even had time to download photos yet.

Started off in the morning with some snorkelling. The fish were everywhere, and with some bread, had them literally eating out of the hand. Quite a weird little sensation as your hand get nibbled by a dozen fish at once.

Then in the afternoon went out jet skiing. These were pretty powerful ones, as they get up to 80 km/hr. Your eyes start to get wind burn at that speed! But, boy are they fun.

Then early evening did a sunset cruise for two hours around the harbour. Ended up the front of the boat titanic style with two other couples and was one of those great occasions where you just all bond instantly, with the help of several rounds of drinks. Upshot is we now have a standing invitation to go and stay on the Gold Coast. Yay.

Then the six of us went out for dinner and (more drinks) and afterwards went to the casino for some blackjack and roulette.

Tomorrow we are taking buggys through the jungle and then trekking to a waterfall. After that, we’re meeting up with the two Aussie couples as it’s one of their 30th birthdays, so could be a very late night!

Vanuatu has been very enjoyable, if a little rainy. The locals are very friendly and genuinely helpful (ie not just trying to sell something), and the water is beautiful. Definitely will return at some stage.

1. Hon Phil Heatley will talk mining and housing in an extended interview with Rachel and John Harevelt (Fairfax) and Alex Tarrant (interest.co.nz)
2. Satyajit Das — author of “Extreme Money — the Masters of the Universe and the cult of risk” on why the great financial crisis is not yet over.
3. The Christchurch Court and Gerry Brownleee — reactions to the decision saying the Minister exceded his powers.

Broadcast on TV 3 Saturday at 9.30 am, repeated on Sunday at 8 am.

My NZ Herald column:

Yesterday the Opposition showed that you can make a difference, despite not being in Government. Parliament voted for four members’ bills to pass their first readings and to proceed to select committee.

One, by Government backbencher and Tamaki MP Simon O’Connor was to repeal to the Joint Family Homes Bill, and is uncontroversial.

The Opposition managed to get Parliament to vote for three of its bills, despite the opposition of National (and ACT) to two of them. This was a real reminder of MMP in action where single parties may form the Government, but will not win every vote in Parliament.

A brief snippet on each bill:

The first of the three opposition bills was by Labour’s Dunedin North MP, David Clark. It seeks to Mondayise ANZAC Day and Waitangi Day, if they fall on the weekend. It was supported by Labour, Greens, NZ First, Maori, Mana and United Future.

Personally I’m somewhat bemused by the fact National decided to oppose this bill. Yes one has to be careful of imposing additional costs on businesses, because doing so destroys jobs and reduces international competitiveness, unless there are productivity gains to compensate.

However two extra days of public holidays every seven years is relatively insignificant.

On paid parental leave:

This bill I think fails to take account of the ongoing crisis of debt ripping apart the European Union, and affecting the world economy. When fully implemented, after three years, it would cost taxpayers an extra $170 million a year. This extra spending would almost inevitable have to be borrowed from China or some other foreign lender. I don’t think Labour truly appreciates the nature of our fiscal challenges. Even if we manage to get back into surplus by 2014/15, we then need to grow that surplus to at least $2 billion a year, to cover the cost of contributions to the NZ Super Fund. That is probably around 2017 or 2018, if we are lucky and the Eurozone doesn’t disintegrate as Greece, Spain, and even Italy get declared bankrupt.

We should be grateful I suppose that Labour are only proposing an extra $170m a year for 26 weeks paid parental leave. Their policy is to eventually increase it to 52 weeks, which would cost half a billion dollars a year.

And the lobbyists bill:

It’s one of those thinsg no political party will want to be against. However getting an agreement on how it should work, is likely to be problematic. Will Labour want a law that requires it to disclose every and all meetings with union officials and what was discussed? Will the Greens want a law that requires very environmental group that talks to them on an issue to have to register with the Auditor-General? However, if you exclude unions and NGOs from the bill, it then becomes very unbalanced. So it is far from certain what form the bill will emerge from select committee on.

But overall a good day for the Opposition to get three bills through a first reading.

Five bills were drawn from the ballot today – four from Labour and one from Greens. The most high profile will be the bill from Louisa Wall to allow same sex marriage. This will be a conscience vote, so expect to see media to start to ask around MPs how they will vote for it on first reading. That is probably six or so weeks away.

The Police have announced:

Police investigating allegations that the Hon John Banks knowingly transmitted a false electoral return have decided there is insufficient evidence to consider a prosecution for an offence under section 134(1) of the Local Electoral Act 2001.

This follows complaints about returns filed relating to donations from Sky City Casino, Mr Kim Dotcom and a radio advertising donation to the 2010 Auckland Super City mayoralty campaign of Mr Banks.

The inquiry has established the return was compiled by a campaign volunteer who assured Mr Banks it was accurate before Mr Banks signed and transmitted the return.

In terms of Section 134 (2) of the Local Electoral Act relating to transmitting a false return there is a statutory limit of six months from the time of elections when complaints must be laid. Police first received the complaint for investigation on 27 April 2012, well after the expiry of six month period. Police are therefore unable to consider charges pursuant to Section 134 (2).

That will be a relief to obviously John Banks, but also the Government.

The Local Electoral Act is quite deeply flawed, and I hope the Government introduces a bill to amend it, to brings its donation transparency requirements in line with the main Electoral Act.

The Law Commission has done its final report reviewing the Official Information Act. Scores of recommendations. Some key ones are:

• A new ground for withholding information, if disclosure would prejudice a statutory inquiry, but only while the inquiry has not concluded
• A new provision in the OIA and LGOIMA should state that requests may be made in any form (in hard copy, electronically, or orally)
• A new provision in the OIA and LGOIMA should place a duty on agencies to take all reasonably practicable steps to proactively make official information publicly available

That last one is huge, and one I have advocated for some years. The OIA is a very good act, bu you often don’t know what you don’t know! Having certain types of information released proactively would be a huge boost for open government.

• The Offices of Parliament (the Ombudsmen, the Office of the Controller and Auditor-General and the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment) should be subject to the OIA
• Information relating to any audit, assurance work, inquiry or investigation undertaken by an Office of Parliament should be excluded from the definition of “official information” in section 2 of the OIA.
• The Parliamentary Counsel Office should be subject to the OIA by inclusion in Schedule 1.
• The Office of the Clerk of the House of Representatives and the Parliamentary Service should be subject to the OIA by inclusion in Schedule 1. 
• The definition of “official information” in section 2 of the OIA should state that, in relation to these agencies, “official information” includes only statistical information about the agency’s activities; information about the agency’s expenditure of public money;information about the agency’s assets, resources, support systems, and other administrative matters.
• The Speaker in his or her role as responsible Minister in relation to the Office of the Clerk and Parliamentary Service should be subject to the OIA by inclusion in Schedule 1
• Section 2 of the OIA should state that “official information”, in relation to information held by a parliamentary agency, does not include any information held by a parliamentary agency solely as an agent for, or on behalf of, the House of Representatives or a Member of Parliament; or any information held by a parliamentary agency about a Member of Parliament in relation to the Member’s performance of his or her role and functions as a Member; or any information held by a parliamentary agency that relates to the development of political policies by a recognised party or an independent Member of Parliament.

I think their position on parliamentary agencies strikes a good balance. Bring them into the OIA, but restrict the coverage to the administration side of things. That way you can’t have (for example) people requesting draft policy papers, e-mails between MPs and the like. But it will ensure ongoing financial transparency. Good steps have been made under Key and Smith, but these could be revoked by a future PM and Speaker. An OIA requirement can not be.

Stuff reports:

What are the odds of a UFO sighting during the London Olympics opening ceremony? Or of the final torch bearer tripping as they ascend to light the flame? Or would you prefer a more traditional wager on the battle for gold between Russia and Spain in synchronized swimming duos?

London betting houses will offer odds on almost anything, including all 26 sports at the games, from the 100-metre dash to fencing, from diving to football. The industry expects to handle a record 100 million pounds (NZ$197 million) in wagers during the July 27-August 12 competition – even some pretty outlandish parlays.

A shame our gaming laws are so restrictive.

William Hill offers perhaps the longest odds of the games: 1000-to-1 that a flying saucer will appear over Olympic Stadium during the opening ceremony. Tough luck, presumably, if aliens don’t make first contact until the next day.

Other longshots get slightly better odds, like 250-to-1 that every team in the 4×400-metre relay final drops the baton, or 33-to-1 that flamboyant London Mayor Boris Johnson accidentally lights his hair on fire with the Olympic torch.

I’d be tempted to place some money on Boris self-immolating 🙂

The Herald reports:

Solar water heaters are not a “silver bullet” for tackling climate change because they are of little help when they are needed most, a report has found.

The 75-page report from Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Jan Wright, released today, looked at the extent to which household solar water heaters could help to reduce the need to build more carbon-emitting fossil fuel power plants.

Dr Wright found solar water heaters reduced carbon emissions but were not a “silver bullet” because they did not flatten electricity peaks.

“While solar water heaters save electricity, they are least effective when savings are needed most – on the cold dark days in winter when people have their heaters and lights running and fossil fuel plants are cranked up to meet this peak demand,” she said.

“Flattening this peak demand is needed if we are to avoid building more fossil fuel power plants and meet the Government’s renewable electricity target.”

That is the problem. One has to have capacity to meet peak demand, otherwise you have blackouts, power cuts or restricted hours for heaters etc. And peak demand tends to be on cold, non sunny days.

I like solar power, and how communities like Great Barrier Island are almost entirely solar powered. On an individual household level it can reduce power bills. But at a national level, it is of limited use in reducing the level of non-renewable energy.

A music video by Jevan Goulter and Gerogina Beyer in support of gay marriage. Nothing unusual in that. Except that Jevan works for Hone Harawira who has said he is not supportive of same sex marriage. I wonder if Hone has seen the video?

Stuff reports:

A Christchurch couple used a GPS iPhone app to track burglars who had just fled from their home.

The software led the couple to two Gloucester St flats where the burglars were held up. They called police, but were told officers could not enter as they did not have a search warrant.

The thieves later made off and the stolen items have not yet been recovered.

Couldn’t the Police have had someone stay by the House, while a warrant was obtained?

Using Yeng’s iPhone the GPS showed Liu’s iPhone was moving from Matipo St towards Riccarton Rd.

Liu called the police and explained they were tracking the offenders.

Yeng got in his car and followed the vehicle to a Gloucester St property and waited.

When the police arrived at the couple’s Matipo St home Liu said she was told they could not inspect the Gloucester St property without a search warrant, which could take days to obtain.

It could, but it also could take an hour or so.

She felt search warrant legislation was “too strict” and offered protection to the “bad guys”.

Inspector Alan Weston said police currently needed a search warrant to enter a property.

However, a new Search and Surveillance Act, which was to come into effect shortly, would make searching a property “a lot more simple”, he said.

The act will enable an officer to enter a place or vehicle without warrant to search for and arrest a person if the constable has “reasonable grounds”.

Good to hear of the law change, but I still feel they could have acted pretty promptly under current law.

Stuff reports:

The Kahui twins met a violent death while in the sole care of their father Chris Kahui, who went on to lie repeatedly to protect himself from blame, a coroner has found.

Mr Kahui, who was found not guilty of the murder of sons Chris and Cru in a 2008 High Court trial, has rejected the findings outright and reaffirmed he denies any involvement in the untimely deaths of his babies.

A report released today by coroner Garry Evans finds that Mr Kahui was alone with the 3-month-olds for at least three minutes on the day they received their fatal injuries in 2006. …

The coroner’s finding states: “The court is satisfied . . . to the required standard of proof, that the traumatic brain injuries suffered by Chris and Cru Kahui were incurred by them during the afternoon/early evening of 12 June 2006, whilst they were in the sole custody, care and control of their father at 22 Courtenay Crescent, Mangere, Auckland.”

Despite family wanting to take the babies to hospital after the incident, Mr Kahui refused. …

Mr Evans finds that, during the resulting police and coronial investigations, Mr Kahui repeatedly lied and changed his evidence.

“The evidence given by Chris Kahui was unreliable, conflicting and, on many occasions, untrue. The court [meaning Mr Evans] formed a poor view of his credibility.

Not as good as a criminal conviction, but at least the truth has been established by the Coroner.

Stuff reports:

The High Court has ruled Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee ‘‘stepped outside the legal limits’’ of his earthquake powers in rearranging Canterbury housing boundaries.

In the first legal challenge to Brownlee’s special powers his Canterbury land zoning decisions have been set aside by the High Court.

In a decision released today, Justice Chisholm ordered a judicial review of the process Brownlee took. He also set aside the land zoning changes Brownlee made.

At a High Court hearing in Christchurch early this month Independent Fisheries, several Canterbury property developers and supermarket giant Progressive sought to overturn Brownlee’s post-quake redrawing of housing boundaries.

He stopped short of giving Brownlee directions for reviewing the development potential of appellants’ land saying the court’s jurisdiction was on the scope of Brownlee’s powers, not the outcome.

To me this indicates that while the Government was given wide powers to speed up the reconstruction of Christchurch, the powers are not as vast as people said they were. The fact the High Court was able to over-turn them is proof of that.

But meanwhile the Greens use this to claim:

Sage said the Green Party had called for the extensive ministerial powers contained in the Act to expire after nine months, once the emergency period was over.

One can debate the extent of the powers, but for the Greens to claim there is no need for any special powers at all is sheer madness. They would have Christchurch CBD sitting empty for two decades, no doubt. It must frustrate Labour that the Greens get away with saying such daft stuff, and no one holds them to account for it.

The Herald editorial:

Sweet-tasting and high-strength “alcopops” have become the drink of choice for many young women. They take much of the blame for binge-drinking, and governments, unsurprisingly, are seeking to limit their consumption. 

Targetting a particular form of alcohol is actually a dumb thing to do. Natural, not dumb. Far more harm is caused from straight spirits. Worrying about the 8% drinks, and ignoring the 13%, 20%, 40% and even 55% drinks is just kneejerk.

One advantage of RTDs, often overlooked, is that people know exactly how much alcohol is in them, and how much they are drinking. A six pack of 8% RTDs is a defined limit. A bottle of rum and a couple of bottles of coke is not.

Australia imposed a 70 per cent tax hike on them.

Most alcopop drinkers simply switched to other spirits. 

Glad the Herald realises this, and mentioned it.

The Key Government, however, has come up with an alternative that could be more effective.

It wants, as part of the Alcohol Reform Bill, to ban off-licence stores from selling alcopops with more than 6 per cent alcohol content. Some drinkers may react, once again, by opting for substitutes. But the attraction of alcopops is their sweetness and cheapness. It may just be that deprived of this, young women, especially, may reduce their drinking.

That’s three mays and a could. Hardly a basis for confidence. And let me tell you why they are wrong.

Most female RTD drinkers like the 5% RTDs. They are the ones that are sweet and cheap. This proposed regulation will not affect those female drinkers at all.

Those who like the 8% RTDs though said (in POS research done by Curia) they were 68% likely to substitute if restricted to 5% and those drinking 9% or stronger RTDs were 88% likely to substitute.

Now who drinks the 8% or stronger RTDs? Mainly men, and those aged over 40. So in an attempt to do something about young women drinking 5% RTDs, the Government is proposing a law which will in fact not even affect those young women drinking 5% RTDs, but instead will piss off “Waitakere Man” who likes his 8% RTDs. And Waitakere Man, will probably go back to mixing his own rum and cokes at 13% strength, rather than drink 5% RTDs, because to him they taste like lolly water.

Alcopops are being tackled because they have been identified as being especially harmful.

No. There is a perception they are especially harmful. I know of no research showing that RTDs are especially harmful. I’d say straight spirits and cheap wine (the two things most likely to be substituted) are more harmful.

RTDs in fact are generally the most expensive way to get drunk – often costing the most per standard drink.

The European Court upheld the right of Sweden and France to place restrictions on the sale of alcopops. The Government, with little to fear and much to gain, should stick to its guns.

The Government should ace on the basis of evidence, not kneejerking. The Law Commission itself did not recommend targeting RTDs, citing the substitution issue.

This move will not only not work, it will in my honest belief, increase harm from alcohol. I suggest anyone who thinks it will work to actually go and talk to RTD drinkers and ask them what they will do if they cannot purchase RTDs over 5% or 6%.

The changes to standing orders around members’ bills has really increased the number Parliament can consider in a day. First readings traditionally took 120 minutes, with 12 speeches of 10 minutes.

However now they take just 65 minutes with the first two speakers having 10 minutes each, the next eight speakers having 5 minutes each and then the member in charge has a five minute right of reply.

So this afternoon, we may see:

1. 4 pm – 4.25 pm – Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and Anzac Day) Amendment Bill, David Clark
2. 4.35 pm – 5.30 pm – Joint Family Homes Repeal Bill, Simon O’Connor
3. 5.30 pm – 6.00 pm and 7.30 pm to 8.05 pm – Illegal Contracts (Unlawful Limitation on Regulators’Powers) Amendment Bill, Lianne Dalziel
4. 8.05 pm – 9.10 pm – Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months Paid Leave) Amendment Bill), Sur Moroney
5. 9.10 pm – 10.00 pm – Lobbying Disclosure Bill, Holly Walker (partial)

Unusually the 1st and 4th bills may both pass, despite National voting against. However they could veto the Parental Leave bill at third reading if it proceeds that far.

The Herald has announced:

The weekday New Zealand Heraldwill move to compact format on Monday, September 10, APN New Zealand announced today.

The redesign of the nzherald.co.nz homepage will also go live on this day.

Will be interesting to see both designs.

The new-look newspaper will feature new sections and a stronger focus on investigative journalism.

Excellent, if investigative is in the Kitchin/Fisher mould.

The Monday-to-Friday newspaper will have at least three sections each day – a “main book” of news, world, opinion and sport, a stapled business liftout, and a daily lifestyle or special-interest magazine.

On Monday, this will be a new magazine (to be announced shortly); on Tuesday, Travel; on Wednesday, Viva and Driven; on Thursday, TimeOut and on Friday, SuperSport and The Business.

The business lift-out seems a good idea.

“While we’ll be compact in size, we will not be reducing our editorial space – in fact, our news section will be bigger,” said Currie.

“We’re expanding the specialist topics our reporters are covering – readers can expect to see a lot more news content that’s relevant to modern-day New Zealand, including science and technology, environment, and social and property issues.”

Currie said the Herald’s stable of columnists would expand, with new names to be announced in coming weeks.

This will also be of interest. Maybe they could just clone Brian Rudman 🙂

The Daily Telegraph reports:

“We can’t keep going like this for another 15 days,” said Prof Miguel Angel Bernal from Madrid’s Institute of Market Studies. “The European Central Bank has to bring out its heavy artillery.”

The Herald reports:

Dunedin North MP David Clark remains confident his bill to Monday-ise Waitangi and Anzac Days should they fall at a weekend will pass its first vote tomorrow.

Recent reports had written off the chances of the Holidays (Full Recognition of Waitangi Day and Anzac Day) Amendment Bill but Mr Clark said he had received pledges of support from United Future and the Maori Party – Government allies – along with all Opposition parties.

He told the Otago Daily Times yesterday he expected the bill to pass 61 votes to 60, meaning the legislation would go through to a select committee.

The bill corrected an anomaly that happened roughly twice every seven years. When this glitch happened New Zealanders missed out on the usual full complement of 11 public holidays, he said.

I expect it to pass, and actually think National should be backing it. The impact on employers is minimal (around 0.11% of the wages bill on average), and it provides greater certainty.

Since having his bill drawn from the ballot, Mr Clark had received feedback.

“For the folk who work Tuesday to Saturday, or Wednesday to Sunday, they miss out on the Monday holidays. This bill won’t solve that problem. But we will get a chance to hear from people on a wide range of issues.

Well if you do not normally work on a day which is a public holiday, of course you do not get paid for it. That is not a problem, but a feature. Public holidays are not a way to get to earn extra money. They are a way to give people a day off, without it affecting their pay.

Russell Lupines in bloom along the road to Lake Alexandrina. Lake Tekapo in the background, South Island New Zealand. Photography by Sarah Sisson.

Welcome to another Wednesday morning – July is rapidly evaporating – I must admit that I’m looking forward to a respite from all this fog and frost though, roll on August…..

This image was made by my lovely and talented wife, Sarah.  It has just been featured as a double page spread New Zealand Geographic’s latest publication – Southern Exposure – which is well worth purchasing if you are a fan of New Zealand imagery (not just landscape photos either).

[Download as a free iPad wallpaper] Password = freewallpaper

Have a great week.

Cheers – Todd

[view image on our website] [blog]

Paul Little writes in the HoS:

Most political polling this year has shown Labour support going up slightly in a predictable version of the bounce you will get when you throw a dead cat from a high building. The Greens have also gained support in many polls. Naturally, the Government is losing support – that is what governments do when they govern. The Labour vote should be hitting the ozone layer by now.

That any National voters at all can opt for the Greens in preference to Labour must be deeply concerning for David Shearer and his small band of followers.

On the contrary one Labour MP has been boasting that they will win the 2014, 2017 and 2020 elections.

Things are changing for Labour because since the last election, the Green Party has emerged as a credible alternative, with credible leadership, competent MPs and policies worth considering.

Unlike New Zealand First and Act, its leadership is untainted by associations with the old guard. (Experienced politicians would say they are also untainted by reality or experience.) The Green Party was clearly one that opposed the old ways of doing things, not just on the issues but in the way it did politics.

And voters are ready for an alternative party that can work outside the old right/left, he said/she said way of doing things.

The historic social conditions that brought Labour into being haven’t gone away; but their response to them has evolved into a watered-down free-market philosophy that is no different from the guiding principles of their historic foe. Which is why, despite every poll increase and every intelligent policy that Labour doesn’t have the firepower to sell to the electorate, we are witnessing the long, slow and inevitable death of the Labour Party.

What happened in Canada at the last election was interesting. The Liberal Party was the major centre-left party and almost had been the natural party of Government. They shrank to third place, losing official opposition status to the fairly hard left NDP.

Could it happen here?

Just noticed this in a speech by John Key:

As Prime Minister, the most difficult, hard-to-tackle issues of public policy inevitably end up passing across my desk.

In working through those issues, I rely heavily on the advice and judgement of public servants.

It’s crucial that ministers know all the sides of a particular issue, have all the relevant information and fully understand the implications of different courses of action.

Since becoming Prime Minister in late 2008, I’ve been impressed by the professionalism and competence of public servants in my own departments and across the public sector as a whole.

The approach of my Government has been to respect people’s professional skills and to back public servants who want to get on and make New Zealand a better place.

As just one small example, we have reintroduced the practice of having officials regularly attend Cabinet committee meetings.

That’s for two reasons.

We want to get advice from the people who have the greatest knowledge of particular issues.

And we actually think it’s good for officials to see where ministers agree and disagree, what they feel comfortable with and what drives their consideration of a particular issue.

If I recall Labour kicked officials out a few years ago, as they didn’t want to have “political” discussions with them in the room. I think it is a good thing the Government trusts officials enough that Ministers can disagree in front of them.