Marika Hill at Stuff reports:

Auckland’s Catholic schools ruled in Metro magazine’s annual school league tables, but an education expert has warned parents the rankings are too “crude” to take seriously.

Each year Metro rates the best and worst schools in Auckland based on academic results, adjusted according to a school’s decile rating.

McAuley High School, a Catholic school for girls in the lower socio-economic area of Otahuhu, topped the rankings based on the past three years’ NCEA results.

So league tables do not necessairly discriminate against schools in lower socio-economic areas.

Catholic schools took eight of the top 10 positions in a table comparing year 11 NCEA results earlier this month.

Metro editor Simon Wilson suggested Catholic school principals should be giving a hand-up to principals of low-decile schools.

“If this country is really going to get serious about eliminating the long tail of failure in our schools, it’s possible the single most valuable thing we could do is shoulder-tap the key Catholic educators and gives them a free hand in low-decile schools that are not doing well.”

Not a bad idea. Or allow them to set up more schools.

Waikato University education professor Martin Thrupp said it was misleading to assume Catholic schools are better.

State-integrated religious schools have more flexible enrolment schemes compared to state schools.

While state schools must give priority to local students, a state-integrated school can give preference to Catholic students from a wider catchment area.

Thrupp said this effectively means Catholic school principals can be more selective when accepting students.

That’s a fair point, but it would be useful to know to what extent principals do accept from outside their area. I’m doubtful it would be enough to invalidate the fact Catholic schools took up eight out of the top 10 spots.

“Just because the school is top of the pops in the league tables doesn’t necessarily mean it will be right for your child. They might not fit the culture of the school,” he said.

“I wouldn’t pay it too much attention myself, there’s other more rounded forms of information like ERO reports.”

Absolutely one should not decide on a school just because it is top of a league table. And yes one should read ERO reports, talk to current students, former students, staff etc at a school. But comparative data on academic achievements can be a useful part of the mix.

Metro magazine looked at the last three years’ worth of NCEA results to create the tables.

The writers attempted to create a level-playing field by taking into account decile rating, which denote the socio-economic area the school is situated in.

Schools are compared against other schools in their deciles, and they determine what schools added the most value to the student intake.

It would be interesting to know their exact formula.

John Hartevelt at Stuff reports:

Labour is urging a “hard look” at the accommodation supplement, amid claims landlords are pocketing a $1.2b “subsidy” despite providing substandard housing.

Housing spokeswoman Annette King said the Salvation Army had warned in the 1990s that the supplement to support low-income people would turn in to a subsidy for landlords – and that had happened.

Where is the proof for this claim that it has turned into a subsidy for landlords? Is Annette King saying that landlords are charging more to someone who is eligible for the accommodation supplement?

“It is a major subsidy for landlords but it hasn’t produced better housing or more access to housing or an ability for people to buy housing,” Ms King said.

It is not a subsidy for landlords. It is a subsidy for low income tenants who are renting.

“If we just let it keep growing year after year as more and more people struggle to pay rent, then we are doing nothing in terms of changing the ability to house people and it’s time that we had a highly focused look at how do you turn that into something that is a whole lot better.”

The supplement is paid in addition to other welfare payments at varying rates, depending on circumstances. It is meant to help cover rent, board or home ownership costs.

In 2007, the Government paid $877m through the supplement, but it is expected to top $1.2b this year.

If Labour is proposing abolishing the accommodation supplement, then they should say so. You could divert the $1.2b a year into new state homes through Housing NZ, which are then provided at 25% of people’s incomes. I suspect this is what they want to do.

The problem with this though is those low income families who get into a Housing NZ home get massive state support, while those low income families who do not get into a Housing NZ home would get zero, nil, nothing.

Ms King said the supplement supported people in rental accommodation but a lot of the houses were “incredibly poor quality”.

“Some of it is absolutely appalling housing and landlords take whatever the accommodation supplement is and add it to their rent,” she said.

Again, proof? Labour are smearing tens of thousands of landlords with this allegation.

“I think we need to take a hard look at how we could turn some of that accommodation supplement into providing affordable, decent, warm housing and how we could turn some of it into people being able to own their own housing.”

She did not know exactly how that might work but said it should be discussed.

So Labour actually has no alternative. They just wanted to smear evil landlords.

Whitcoulls have announced their top 100 books, as voted on by 20,000 readers. The top 10 are:

1. The Millennium Trilogy
2. The Hunger Games Series
3. The Lord of the Rings
4. Pride and Prejudice
5. The Fifty Shade Trilogy
6. Harry Potter
7. Cross Stitch
8. Song of Ice and Fire Series (Game of Thrones)
9. The Pillars of the Earth
10. The Hobbit

I’ve read all but two of the top 10.

A mixture of old and new. 28 of the 100 are on the list for the first time. There was also a vote for favourite author and the top three are:

1. Jodi Picoult
2. JK Rowling
3. Lee Child

The HoS reports:

Taxpayers are forking out $2000-plus a week to a select group of benefit-dependent parents with more than 10 children.

Official figures show that twelve families on welfare have 10 or more kids, receiving a range of top-up payments on top of their average of nearly $1000 a week.

It would be interesting to see how many families there are with more than 10 children who are not on welfare. A generation ago there would have been quite a few. Jim Bolger had nine kids for example. I suspect far fewer today. Even the Catholics seem to manage to restrict themselves to four or five kids – Vatican roulette must have got better over the years 🙂

As for the 12 families on welfare with over 10 kids, what I’d be interested in is whether the kids came before or after they were on welfare. If one parent died, then their surviving partner would go onto welfare with the kids. That is how it should be (although I would recommend life insurance for parents with large families). But if a family has had 11 or more kids, and the parents have never been in the workforce – that is not a good thing.

“There’s two words we don’t use often enough in this country and that’s self-responsibility,” Bennett told the Herald on Sunday. “The size of someone’s family is their business, so long as they don’t expect someone else to pay for it.”

Absolutely. So long as the parents are capable of providing for their family, it is no one’s business how many kids they have. However if you are already unable to provide for your existing kids, and you choose to have more – then the taxpayer does take an interest.

The data, released by the Ministry of Social Development under the Official Information Act, shows there are 143 parents on Work and Income’s payroll who have eight or more children and receive basic payments of $7 million a year, plus supplements.

There are more than 3000 large families with five children or more on the benefit. One-third have been on the benefit for more than five years and 430 for more than 10 years.

This is what the recent welfare reforms are designed to reduce – long-term welfare dependency.

Bennett said there were some people, such as grandparents and foster carers, who had taken children into their care who were doing a valuable duty for the community – but others who were taking advantage of the system.

Yep, need to differentiate.

But beneficiary advocate and former Green MP Sue Bradford said everyone would be better off if beneficiaries received more money.

Umm, except taxpayers I presume. I would also dispute that keeping people on welfare is good for those families long-term.

The HoS reports:

PPTA official Bronwyn Cross interjected at the meeting, describing the idea of placing the new schools in impoverished areas of south Auckland and Porirua as racism.

Trying to improve educational outcomes in South Auckland and Porirua is now racism. Really?

But the PPTA opposed the idea of sponsorship. Bunker said: “If there are commercial people out there wanting to contribute to the school system, they’d be better to pay additional taxes actually.”

How dare commercial people want to help local school kids. Does the PPTA also advocate no businesses donate items for school auctions?

The Australs debating semi-finals are this morning and finals tonight at the Paramount Theatre. The two semi-finals this morning are Monash 1 v Vic 1 and Monash 2 v Sydney 2. The final teams are not yet known of course.

Topics only get assigned 30 minutes before the debates start, so I don’t know what the finals topic will be. The quarters were:

• That the death of print media is bad for journalism
• That law enforcement should turn a blind eye to drug use and sale in designated areas
• That families whose children perform well in school should receive bonus welfare payments

I’ll update with who the finalists are later today.

UPDATE: The final is Monash 1 v Monash 2

Meeting a couple of friends at Circa to see the Beat Girls. My mate texted me to see where I was, as I was a bit late. His exact words were “Where are you, cunt?”.

The only problem is he didn’t send it to me but by mistake to his ex-wife! 🙂

Danyl at Dim Post blogs:

The question is: is this a real ad, or a satire? Seems too extreme to be real – although dawn-raids era National was an overtly racist party. But were they this overt? If this was real wouldn’t it have entered into notoriety, along with the dancing cossacks ad? Wouldn’t we have heard about it before?

On the other hand, the nation was a lot more regional back then. It’s not impossible that this was an ad in a regional publication put out by a rural MP that nobody ever noticed until now.

Anyone who thinks this ever could have been a real National advertisement is somewhat detached from reality. I think it says more about them, and how desperately they’d want it to be true.

Jack Marshall was National Leader in 1972. He was known as Gentleman Jack for a reason – well known for his being non-confrontational and not liking aggressive politics. Marshall also was an opponent of the Springbok Tour, so this little smear campaign poster is very misplaced.

Fran O’Sullivan writes:

I found myself wondering this week whether Shearer – who notoriously hates wearing a suit and tie – really only gets supercharged when he is wearing a flak jacket. He fluffed his way through a punchy interview on NewstalkZB when host Sean Plunket tried to pin him down on Labour’s position on the Maori Council’s controversial water rights claim.

The Shearer argument went something like this: Yes, John Key is inflaming things by rarking up the Maori Council and saying his Government won’t be bound by any Waitangi Tribunal ruling on the push to stop the Mighty River Power share float until a deal is done in this area. But, no, Maori don’t have a valid water claim. Nobody owns water. We pay for water rights to use water, whether it be for irrigation or hydro-electricity or whatever.

In other words, Key is right but I don’t want to say so because my party expects me to go into opposition mode at every opportunity.

There are plenty of other examples.

Shearer’s opposition to foreign investment in New Zealand farmland was also rather contrived. When Labour’s private polling indicated widespread public unease over the Shanghai Pengxin acquisition of 16 dairy farms, he chose to lift the scab off this running sore rather than pour on salving balm. Though privately he is not that fazed. Same too with partial privatisation of state-owned power companies.

Shearer held up Norway as a shining exemplar of what’s possible when it comes to developing a small nation economy. Yet many Norwegian SOEs are partially listed; the country has also built its fortune on oil.

Shearer should not have backed himself into these ideological corners.

Norway seems to be the new Finland.

Shearer needs to get out of this poll-driven mode. He is fundamentally an intelligent man who is at heart an internationalist. There is no shame in agreeing with the Prime Minister on some basic fundamentals. Both men are trying to capture the centre, after all.

His caucus seem to be pushing him towards the left.

Tough this week. 7/10 in 46 seconds. Quiz here.

The Herald reports:

One mayor, one city – but 36 delegates from the Auckland Council will be at the Local Government NZ conference in Queenstown, costing ratepayers more than $93,000.

Six councillors, 22 local board members, three Maori Statutory Board members and five council staff fly to Queenstown tomorrow for the two-day conference.

They will stay in the “spellbinding luxury” of the Millennium and Copthorne Resort Lakefront hotels.

36 delegates? Really.

The cost per delegate is $2600, including registration, flights and accommodation. Taxis, meals and other expenses are to be added.

That’s a fair bit for a two day conference. I’m sure it would have been cheaper in Palmerston North.

Stuff reports:

The high risk sex offender dubbed ‘The Beast of Blenheim’, Stewart Murray Wilson, will stay under extended supervision for the maximum 10 years after his prison sentence ends and his parole term expires.

The order was imposed by Justice Graham Lang in a written decision issued in the High Court at Christchurch today, a week after he heard a day of legal argument.

He described Wilson as presenting “a rare and special case” and said: “He will remain at risk of offending against young females well beyond the expiry of his release conditions.

“An extended supervision order is therefore necessary, in my view, to achieve the statutory objective of protecting such persons from the risk of further offending in the future by Mr Wilson.”

Does anyone know exactly what extended supervision involves? How often can he be checked up on?

In 1995, a jury found Wilson guilty on seven charges of rape, one charge of attempted rape, two charges of ill-treatment of children, one charge of bestiality, one charge of attempting to stupefy and two of stupefying, three of assault on a woman, and six of indecent assault.

Many of the charges were laid as representative charges, indicating the offences had been committed more than once.

Wilson was jailed for 21 years in 1996 and has remained in custody even though he became eligible for parole some time ago because the Parole Board considers he presents a high risk of re-offending.

In hindsight 21 years was not enough.

The Dom Post reports:

Parts of coastal Wellington could be drowned if doomsday climate change predictions from a new study pan out over the next 100 years.

Two reports issued yesterday by Greater Wellington regional council show Wellington’s sea level is the fastest rising in New Zealand – made worse by seismic rumblings causing the city to sink 1.7mm a year since 2000.

Worst-case scenarios coupling massive sea level rise with intense storm floods show low-lying coastal parts of the Eastbourne bays, Petone, Pauatahanui, as well as the river mouths at Otaki, Hutt, Whakataki (near Castlepoint), and Waikanae and the lower Wairarapa valley, could be forever swamped if sea levels rose 1.5m by 2115.

The scenario of 1.5m in 100 years is rather detached from reality. It would be sea level rise 10 times faster than what is actually happening. A 1.7mm rise a year is 17cm over 100 years if the rate stayed the same. Now sure it may increase – but it is not going to be 10 times as fast.

A reminder that the latest IPCC forecast is that on average over 100 years sea levels will rise between 19 and 59 cm. A 1.5m increase is three times greater than the “maximum” forecast by the last IPCC report.

On the plus side, the doomsday map shows that my apartment block will become a beachfront property, which would be great. So I’m all in favour.

NZ Herald reports:

Apple’s claims that the Galaxy Tab by Korean rival Samsung “slavishly copies” the iPad have been rejected by a British High Court judgment.

There was some consolation for Apple, however, after the judge ruled that Samsung’s designs were “not as cool” as the iPad.

“They don’t have the same understated and extreme simplicity which is possessed by the Apple design,” Judge Colin Birss, QC, said. “They are not as cool.”

Nice to have it official. I’m almost all Apple now – iPod, iPhone, iPad. The fact they can share music and apps is a powerful feature.

Stuff reports:

The mayor of a German town has sparked controversy by introducing special “easy” parking spots for women.

Mayor Gallus Strobel, from the Black Forest town of Triberg, told Germany’s Spiegel magazine he introduced the spots because men were better at parking than women.

The women’s spaces, which are marked by female symbols, are reportedly better lit and wider, while the men-only spots have concrete pillars to negotiate and can only be reversed into.  

Strobel told the magazine that women were welcome to attempt parking in the men-only spots, but that “men are, as a rule, a little better at such challenges”. He denied accusations of sexism, pointing out that there were 10 women-only spots in the carpark compared to only two men-only spots.

This is an excellent idea. I think the Wellington City Council should copy this initiative.  Just as we have special parks for disabled drivers, I think special parks for women is an excellent initiative.

Stacey Kirk at Stuff reports:

Government cuts and poor planning have left more than 70,000 calls to IRD unanswered over its busiest tax return time, the Public Service Association (PSA) says.

IRD figures showed about 70,000 calls weren’t answered between June 25 and July 5 – the two weeks leading up to the deadline for filing tax returns.

During that period 164,000 calls were planned for, but more than 202,000 were received. Of those only about 131,000 were actually answered as the department struggled to cope with increased demand.

The PSA said there had also been a significant increase in the number complaints about the phone service.

National secretary Richard Wagstaff said it was frustrating for both the public and staff but was a “clear consequence” of budget cuts and bad decision-making.

I’m a bit surprised by those numbers as I was one of those callers towards the end of that period. I first registered on their new voice authentication system. You repeat three phrases three times and their system records your voice patterns. This means that for future phone calls, they have a higher confidence they have verified your identity, and can deal with more stuff over the phone.

After the authentication there was a delay until answering, but only one minute. The good thing is the IRD system now tells you how long the delay is which makes a huge difference.

Then once I got through to a staffer, she talked me through how to get a personal tax summary, and I managed to file my effective return online. It went very smoothly.

Stuff reports:

Saudi Arabia is to send female athletes to the Olympics for the first time, with a judoka and an 800m runner representing the kingdom in London, the International Olympic Committee said.

Wodjan Ali Seraj Abdulrahim Shahrkhani, who will compete in the 78-kg category in judo, and teenager Sarah Attar will be the first Saudi women ever to take part after talks between the IOC and the country.

“This is very positive news and we will be delighted to welcome these two athletes in London in a few weeks time,” said IOC President Jacques Rogge in a statement.

“The IOC has been striving to ensure a greater gender balance at the Olympic Games, and today’s news can be seen as an encouraging evolution.”

Thursday’s decision means that every country competing in the July 27-Aug. 12 Olympics will be represented by both male and female athletes.

At the Atlanta Games in 1996, 26 nations sent no female athletes, the figure falling to just three in Beijing in 2008.

Progress, but said we are 12 years into the 21st century and this is still an issue.

In recent months human rights groups urged the IOC to ban Saudi Arabia from the Games unless it agreed to send women.

Powerful Saudi clerics denounce women for taking part in sport, saying it goes against their nature.

Women in Saudi Arabia are regarded as minors and require the permission of their guardian – father, brother, or husband – to leave the country and in some cases even to work. They are not allowed to drive.

Attar, 17, said she was honoured by the prospect of competing for her country at London 2012.

“A big inspiration for participating in the Olympic Games is being one of the first women for Saudi Arabia to be going,” she said at her training base in San Diego, California.

“It’s such a huge honour and I hope that it can really make some big strides for women over there to get more involved in sport,” she told the official Olympic website (www.olympic.org).

Hopefully it will be a powerful symbol to Saudis, and a building block to a less repressive regime.

Stuff reports:

Drugged dogs being brought in for treatment – including in one case a chihuahua high on marijuana – are worrying Hamilton vets.

Veterinarian Julie Lavis said the tiny canine nearly died from hypothermia when it was brought in to the After Hours Veterinary Hospital in Hamilton scared and “in a bad way”.

Roaches [the butts of cannabis joints] had been regularly left on a coffee table and the chihuahua had developed a fetish for eating them – and loved the taste of cannabis.

This story had to be either in Hamilton or New Plymouth.

It does remind me of a party in Dunedin when I was a student, where the cannabis was so rife in the room that the cat got stoned and literally started climbing the walls. It was good at it too. It would make it sway to the ceiling, and then get puzzled about how to walk upside down on the ceiling and fall back down.

Transtasman reports:

Cosgrove’s party did not exactly leap to defend him either.

Deputy leader Grant Robertson said all Cosgrove did was help a constituent, and everyone immediately recalled the last Labour MP this defence was used for, Philip Field, went to prison.

What’s more, Robertson was in then-PM Helen Clark’s office when she used the defence. It is theoretically possible Robertson’s comments were made innocently, just as it is theoretically possible to build a perpetual motion machine.

Heh. I actually think the phrasing was incompetence, not malice, but I seem to be in a minority on this issue.

My NZ Herald column is on the Waitangti Tribunal. An extract:

The Government knows that its policy to sell minority stakes in the power companies isn’t the most popular of policies. It is tolerated by most of their supporters, rather than beloved. The one thing which could turn that tolerance to opposition would be the Government doing a deal with Iwi to give them cheaper or even free shares in the power companies. They are keen for Iwi to invest in them (as Ngai Tahu has indicated they are keen to), but paying the same share price as “Mum and Dad” investors.

So the Government would have to say that they will not accept the findings of the Waitangi Tribunal. Any Government which retreated from the principle that no one owns the water (and the air) would face political oblivion at the next election.

This would then put huge pressure on the Maori Party. Would their members and activists want them to remain Ministers in a Government that ignored a Waitangi Tribunal recommendation? Their fear is that if they do not do something, then Mana would use the issue to try and win seats off them in 2014.

On this issue, can I recommend this excellent Q&A by Joshua Hitchcock on the Maori Council water claim.