The HoS reports:

Meanwhile, Greens co-leader Russel Norman said at the party’s national conference yesterday that the party would not scrap all mining if elected because it was an “inescapable” part of the New Zealand economy. Norman said Greens wanted each new mining operation to be considered on a case-by-case basis under a strengthened Resource Management Act.

On the surface, this is a welcome move. It is good they don’t want to turn Taranaki and the West Coast into barren jobless locales. However I do wonder if this is a change of rhetoric, not substance.

Let’s take the last ten years as an example. Can any Green MP point to a significant mining permit granted in the last ten years that the Greens would have allowed?

On Q+A this Sunday, has our binge drinking culture had its day? Or is National tinkering again? The government’s long-awaited alcohol reforms will be back in the house shortly, with proposed changes to licensing, parental control and the purchase age. Justice Minister Judith Collins says they will utterly change our drinking culture; critics are calling them “worse than weak”. So will the new law minimise harm? Stomp on responsible drinkers? Or make no difference at all. Judith Collins sits down with Shane Taurima.

And six months into the Shearer era, the Labour leader reflects on what he’s learnt and where he’s going with Greg Boyed. Is he shaping up? Or have the nay-sayers got it right? And what about the Greens – are the parties working together towards the next election or cutting each other’s throats?

Finally, the class size battle. Are teachers playing politics or has the government serious miscalculated? The showdown in the classroom – NEZI President Ian Leckie live.

Joining Dr Raymond Miller on the panel is former National Party president Michelle Boag and Labour’s former president, Mike Williams.

Broadcast 9 am Sunday TV 1, repeated on TVNZ 7 9.05 pm

Simon Shepherd is filling in for Rachel who is overseas.
1. Colin James will review the political week
2. Simon is live with Green Leader Russel Norman as the Greens hold their annual conference this weekend.
3. Shelley Nahr reports on how the Statistics Department has sexed itself up.
4. Bill Ryan from the Victoria University of Wellington’s School of Government on what Stats has done.
5. On the 50th anniversary of Samoan Independence we have excerpts from Marina McCartney’s short film, “Milk and Honey”. Marina joins us to talk about the 1970s dawn raids on Samoan overstayers in Auckland which inspired the film.
6. Our media panel — Brian Edwards and Bill Ralston on the Press Council, media regulation and foreign correspondents.

Broadcast Saturday 9.30 am, repeated on Sunday at 8.30 pm

Got 10/10 in 53 seconds in the Herald Politics quiz.

I think it would be useful to compare the debate on class size, to the debate on the minimum wage, specifically does class size impact on the quality of learning, and does the minimum wage impact on the level of employment?

The answer for both is yes. If you are from the left and say class sizes impacts quality of teaching but the minimum wage does not impact employment then you are a hypocrite.

Likewise if you are from the right and you say say the minimum wage does impact employment but class size does not impact quality of learning, then you are also being a hypocrite.

Let us take an extreme example for both, to prove out points. Would a child learn better in a class of one, with one on one teaching – or in a class of 1,000 people? Obviously in a class of one (all other things being equal).

Likewise imagine if the minimum wage was $10 an hour and $100 an hour. Could anyone dispute that at $100 an hour, we would have mass unemployment?

So there is no doubt both the minimum wage and class size can have an impact on the number of people employed and the quality of learning. However that doesn’t mean that every change you make has a significant impact, and that degree of that impact may be less than other benefits. Let us start with the argument over the minimum wage.

If the minimum wage goes from $5 to $6 an hour, there may be no impact on employment (as few people may have been employed at that level). Let’s say though it goes from $14 to $15 an hour, which probably will have an impact on employment. Why do the left say this should still happen? They support it, because they argue that if it gets a pay-rise of $40 a week for 150,000 families who have someone on the minimum wage, then that is a satisfactory trade-off for say 4,000 people losing their jobs. It is an issue of what do you see as more important – the level of wages or the number of people in employment.

Now likewise for class sizes. Of course a class of 1 would be far greater than a class of 1,000. But does a class size of say 27 compared to a class size of 25 make a significant difference? The international research is very clear that it has not. Now this is not an argument to have class size of 40 or 50 or 100 because obviously at some stage it will have more of an impact. Hence a private school with a class size of 15 can be better than say a public school with a class size of 30. But that does not mean that a difference between 25 and 27 will make any significant difference.

If it will not make much of a difference, you might say why not then stay with the status quo? Well the reason the minimum wages goes up despite some impact on employment is because it increase wages for those who receive it.

Likewise with class sizes, the benefit of a modest increase, is the funding it frees up for investing in teacher quality – something which has a far greater impact on the quality of learning.

The focus therefore should always be on the trade off. If in the minimum wage debate you focus just on higher wages or just on employment levels, you are missing the picture. Likewise if in the education debate you focus just on class sizes you are also missing the picture.

Tracy Watkins at Stuff reports:

When John Key stepped into Helen Clark’s shoes on the international stage, foreign policy was, by his own admission, his weak suit.

Four-and-a-half years later, he has made a trip to China a near annual event, crossed the White House threshold twice, though only once to see President Barack Obama, accumulated a collection of silly shirts – and brought a very different style to the role of prime minister.

Academic Stephen Hoadley admits Mr Key has surprised on the upside.

“He’s done better than many expected. His quiet manner but well-informed discourse, I think, has impressed leaders.

“They don’t feel threatened by him but they do recognise he has good control of his portfolio, and the foreign affairs portfolio, can discuss it succinctly and accurately, and consequently he makes a pleasant conversationalist.”

It is very clear that Key has forged good relationships with Obama, Cameron, Gillard and Harper – the four main Anglosphere leaders.

It is certainly true that Mr Key’s engaging manner has won him admirers. In 2010, after he attended the Nuclear Security Summit in the United States at the invitation of Mr Obama, US Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell enthused about the warmth of Mr Key’s manner.

Dr Campbell described how Mr Key and Mr Obama “really hit it off”. “… [Mr Key] made quite the splash, actually. He has a very engaging manner. That’s quite attractive to Americans. He’s very straightforward.”

Another long-term foreign affairs observer in this country suggests that one of the attractions with Mr Key is his background in the financial and banking industry. Other foreign leaders are interested in his insight and “take” on current events and “I wouldn’t be surprised if that played a part in [German Chancellor] Angela Merkel seeing him on this trip.”

Talking of Europe I see Ireland has voted for the fiscal treaty. Will be interesting to see what the Greek elections do.

Nowadays, he wears the role like a favourite suit. “I’ve become much more comfortable. I know most of the leaders, I think I accurately understand the issues, understand what it is we are advocating for, and I think it is a critical part of what any prime minister does.

“It’s about building … not only just profile on the international stage and standing up for the things New Zealand believes in, it’s also about economic expansion and the opportunity for us to grow our export markets.”

But in those early days he was not too proud to lean on his one-time rival, Miss Clark, and often texted her for advice.

As Trevor does also 🙂

Mr Key has cultivated other relationships by text; he and Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard are visibly close. They text each other not just about trans-Tasman matters – they were also in contact by text when Ms Gillard recently stared down a leadership challenge by her predecessor, Kevin Rudd.

“I’ve got a really good relationship with Julia Gillard … even though we’re opposite in terms of political leanings,” Mr Key says. “She’s been really good to New Zealand … committed to the relationship and quite helpful. I mean, I talk to her quite a bit.”

Howard and Clark also had a very good trusting relationship. It is good to be able to work across political boundaries.

Lane Nichols at the Dom Post reports:

Frustrated Wellington rail commuters will benefit from a massive Government investment in public transport designed to reduce congestion and delays.

The announcement of nearly $900million for national public transport projects will buoy proponents of Wellington’s costly proposed light-rail system.

Wellington Mayor Celia Wade-Brown immediately called for urgent work to establish a central city light-rail or tram system.

The Government has in fact spent a huge amount on public transport, and rail. I’d be quite keen to see costings of a tram system in Wellington, but we should make decisions based on the benefits and costs.

I’m a very regular user of Wellington buses in the CBD and Thorndon areas, and generally they work very well. Would trams be more efficient?

I suspect the cops laughed also.

An excellent letter, reminding people of the facts.

The moment the story broke about the triplets dying in the fire in Qatar, emotions welled up as we all considered the devastating impact it would have on their parents and family.

But the story didn’t fully hit emotionally until this photo in the Herald this morning. I can’t look at it without cracking up, and I didn’t even know them. I think it must be impossible to understand the full force of such a tragedy on the family concerned. We can only be grateful, such events are so rare.

Stuff reports:

The Green Party is spending $50,000 paying people to collect signatures for a citizens-initiated referendum on asset sales.

The equivalent of 10 fulltime staff have been hired for the next six to eight weeks in Auckland, Hamilton, Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin.

The Greens also have a volunteer army of about 2000 Auckland-based “issues assistants” helping with the campaign and have budgeted a further $28,000 for related sundries.

The bid for a citizens-initiated referendum was launched last month and is sponsored by a coalition of Grey Power, the Council of Trade Unions, Greenpeace, the Union of Student Associations, Labour and the Greens.

The sheer hypocrisy. The Greens spend years railing against money in politics, yet to use their language they are trying to purchase a referendum.

Greens co-leader Russel Norman said the funding was coming out of the party’s $1.3million annual leader’s fund.

`It’s very important to us to stop the asset sales and it’s very important to us that New Zealanders are given a voice because they currently don’t have one,” he said.

What bullshit. A referendum will not stop the partial asset sales. It is just an expensive publicity stunt. And Dr Norman is mad if he thinks people don’t have a voice on the issue. There was a 10 month debate on the partial asset sales last year, known as the election campaign.

And today, a bird that needs no introduction

Click for larger, higher res image

It’s a beautiful morning in Auckland today, so I shall nurse my grudge about being in the office with a steady inflow of espressos… 🙂

The Campaign for Marriage Equality has compiled MPs views on voting for a same sex marriage bill at its first reading. Overall they say there are 47 votes in favour, 18 against, 52 unknowns and 4 undecideds.

I’ve broken this down by party (and included undecideds in unknowns). The party states are:

• National – 7 for, 9 against, 43 unknown
• Labour – 24 for, 4 against, 6 unknown
• Greens – 14 for
• NZ First – 1 for, 3 against, 4 unknown
• Maori – 1 for, 2 unknown
• Mana – 1 against
• ACT – 1 unknown
• UFNZ  – 1 against

The four Labour MPs against are Rajen Prasad, Ross Robertson, Phil Goff and Damien O’Connor. The seven Nats in favour are Nikki Kaye, Jami-Lee Ross, John Key, Colin King, Tau Henare, Amy Adams and Chester Borrows.

Stuff report:

A High Court judge has ruled that the way Chinese millionaire Yong Ming Yan was granted citizenship was “highly suspicious”. 

The full decision is online here.

I step back now and look at the evidence as a whole. Overall, it proves a situation that is highly suspicious. An adult male obtains two passports in different names and with different dates of birth. He uses them both to access Australia and the United States of America. He uses one of them to access New Zealand. He does not disclose his dual identities. New Zealand immigration documents are filled in and in some cases signed on his behalf. Four of the five are false in that they assert that there is no other identity. Regardless of the validity of the passports, this proven situation is highly suspicious. But to move from highly suspicious to proof beyond reasonable doubt of dishonest intention, more is required.

Proof beyond reasonable doubt is a very high standard.

UPDATE: Have had pointed out the highly suspicious comments made by the Judge refer to the application for citizenship, rather than the decision itself – so the Stuff story is somewhat misleading in that regard.

I have always had a weakness for the Irish. I think it is their accents. At my university hostel there was a girl called Karen Quinn, who was Irish, and half the hostel had a crush on her – pretty much all due to her lilting accent.

So when I got offered review tickets to see the Irish dance sensation Riverdance, I didn’t need any persuasion to go. They are performing at the St James until 3 June, and then in Chch 5 to 10 June. The performance consists of 19 scenes in two acts, making it a compact two hour show (including interval).

There is a reason that Riverdance is a global sensation – they put on a world class performance. The dancing, which is the heart of the show, is sublime – but the music, the costumes and the singing are also very well done. They do around a dozen costume changes.

The 19 scenes each tell a story, and the costumes and special effects all combine together in harmony. I won’t detail all the scenes but will talk about what was by far my favourite scene. It was what I think of as the “dance off”, and they call “trading taps”. You have two “gangs” of dancers who at first dance alone, but then noticing each other confront each other as in their distinct styles dance into each other’s territory. This is fun enough, but the real hilarity starts when the two groups start to do parodies of the other’s dancing styles. Most of the audience were cracking up with laughter at this scene. It really is too funny for words.

Also worth noting is the scene with the lead male dancer in tight leather pants. God knows how one can dance wearing them, but he did. And the female members of the audience appreciated the spectacle greatly. The men, less so.

While a great performance overall, there was one aspect that didn’t quite resonate with me. There was quite a bit of time where it was just music, without dancing. People came to see the dancing, and you lose interest a bit when there are segments with music only. The exception was when they had the lead female singer on. Her voice was piercingly beautiful, and she could do a solo show.

Overall it was a great night’s entertainment. It is their final tour of New Zealand so it was great to see them for the first and sadly probably the last time.

Blockade the Budget Editorial

A reader has sent in this Craccum editorial, where they have marked up the huge number of basic grammar errors.

I think this proves the need for a greater focus on quality of education, not on sheer numbers attending!

Have a look at Winston in the Budget debate, at his finest. From around 7:50 to 11:30 he works through MPs and comments:

• Calls Paula Bennett a Kate Moss look-a-like
• Refers to Melissa Lee as Pyongyang (capital of North Korea)
• Asks if there is a corner dairy available for Bakshi Singh
• Then asks if there is a Chinese Restaurant left on Dominion Road for Dr Jian Yang
• Calls Katrina Shanks Miss South Carolina
• Calls Tau Henare an Uncle Tom

To think this man was Labour’s Minister of Foreign Affairs. And he is their path back to power.

Imagine if National MP had got up and spoke about Labour MPs in such a way. They would have denounced National as a racist and sexist party.

Worth checking out Where are my taxes. It details and shows graphically how much money per capita is spent on various activities. Some big items:

• Superannuation $2,328
• Primary schools $639
• Family Tax Credits $480
• Secondary schools $469
• Tertiary Education $459
• Domestic Purpose Benefit $413
• Land and Transport $401
• Student Loans $373
• Early Childhood Education $313
• Invalid’s Benefit $300
• Accommodation Assistance $282
• Unemployment Beneift $200
• Sickness Benefit $177
• Student Allowances $137

Whale Oil blogs:

The tipline has been humming this morning with news about Shane Jones.

Several sources have confirmed that he is not happy with David Shearer for throwing him under the bus…the word is he even dropped the C-bomb in terse discussions with Shearer. He is set to announce his exit rather than wait around for up to year while the Auditor-General peers into his affairs as a minister.

Important to stress this is not verified, but I don’t think it is a surprise that Jones would be unhappy with what Shearer has done, considering that when the issue first arose Helen Clark refused to take any action at all. He would be thinking, why is there an inquiry three and a half years later?

UPDATE: I understand that one detail is not quite correct. It seems that Jones did not use the C word in the meeting with his Leader, but he used it afterwards in talking to other MPs about his leader!

The Herald reports:

The first “three strikes” notices issued to alleged internet pirates have not resulted in action before the Copyright Tribunal, where the accused could have been slapped with a fine of up to $15,000.

Both TelstraClear and Vodafone confirmed last month they had sent a “enforcement” notice to a customer at the request of the Recording Industry Association of New Zealand (RIANZ), which represents music and recording artists.

Under a law passed last year, internet providers are required to issue warning and enforcement notices to customers suspected of illegally downloading copyright content – such as movies or music – if a copyright holder requests it.

After a third notice, rights holders can bring a case before the Copyright Tribunal, which can fine an offender up to $15,000.

But according to intellectual property lawyer Rick Shera, a third notice (the “enforcement” notice) expires after 35 days and rights holders can only file action against an accused within that time.

I understand that in one of the case the “downloader” has contacted RIANZ and presumably reached some sort of agreement not to proceed. This is sensible, but it will be interesting to see what happens if a case ever does reach the tribunal to see what level of proof is needed, and what defence if any is put forward.

The VUW Debating Society has a debate tonight on paid parental leave. It is in Rutherford House Lecture Theatre 2 starting at 6.30 pm.

The debaters are:

• Sue Moroney, Labour Spokesperson for Women’s Affairs
• Paul Callister, Victoria University of Wellington Economist
• Barbara Lambourn, Advocacy Manager, UNICEF
• Max Harris – Champion Debater
• Richard D’Ath – Champion Debater
• Olivia Hall – Rising Star Debater

Should be a good debate.