The Daily Telegraph reports:

Under-performing civil servants will be identified and fired under plans to rank all government officials in order of ability, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

Now that would be a fun league table to compile!

Sweeping plans to overhaul the civil service are expected to be published within the next month. They are bound to infuriate public sector unions who yesterday staged another day of industrial action.

According to the Cabinet Office, there are currently 434,000 civil servants, the lowest number since the Second World War, as a result of an efficiency drive by the Coalition.

At the time of the last general election, in May 2010, the civil service numbered more than 500,000.

NZ had around 39,000 public servants and it is now around 36,000. A fairly modest 7% reduction compared to the 12% or so in the UK.

However interesting to note the UK has one civil servant per 143 people, and NZ is one per 119 people.

Andrea Vance at Stuff reports:

ACT leader John Banks says he gave away a luxury gift basket from German millionaire Kim Dotcom, who is at the centre of a series of allegations surrounding donations to the former Auckland mayor.

Mr Banks confirmed yesterday that he had failed to declare the gift in the register of MPs’ pecuniary interests. MPs are supposed to declare all gifts worth more than $500.

The register is due to be published by the end of the month and MPs were supposed to complete their declarations by February. They are allowed to make adjustments, however.

Mr Dotcom has reportedly claimed that in December he left the hamper worth about $1000 for Mr Banks at the Hong Kong Grand Hyatt.

Mr Banks responded to the gesture with a thank-you note signed “warmest best”.

In a statement last night, Mr Banks confirmed he received the gift basket but said he did not accept it and gave it to hotel staff.

“I have learned through the media today that the gift was supposedly worth more than $500, an amount which requires disclosure under the Register of Pecuniary and Other Specified Interests.

“Subsequently my office sought clarification from the registrar on the appropriate course of action. As we are unable to confirm the actual value, their advice was to make an addition to my return … which I have now done.”

An MP could complain to the Privileges Committee, if thy think the return was deliberately inaccurate. However that would only be accepted if there was some evidence that Banks knew the value of the gift basket was over $500. I have to say that I would not generally assume a hotel gift basket was worth over $500, so even if a complaint is lodged with the Speaker (which Labour could well do as a publicity stunt), I’d be surprised if it is referred to the Privileges Committee.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister John Key confirmed yesterday that he had met Mr Dotcom’s bodyguard, Wayne Tempero.

The meeting was about a self defence programme for young women and happened before Mr Tempero went to work for Mr Dotcom.

Good God. How is this relevent.

It was claimed yesterday that Mr Banks had proposed a meeting between Mr Tempero and Mr Key over Mr Dotcom’s “future efforts for New Zealand”.

Mr Key has repeatedly said he had never heard of Mr Dotcom till his arrest on internet piracy charges.

A spokeswoman for Mr Key said he has met Mr Tempero once at his electorate office “many years ago”.

“Mr Tempero had returned to New Zealand and was looking for support for self-defence programme he was looking to run for young women,” she said.

I suspect this was before Key was even PM. The reality is that once you are PM, you spend less time in electorate clinics.

Stephen Stratford blogs on lunch with Winston:

NBR has posted online the official text of the speech here. It was the usual stuff, a mixture of charm, bluster, fudging the historical record and blaming the media – especially two social-media operatives, Whale Oil and “a mischievious [that’s how he pronounced it] blogger known as Kiwiblog” who apparently are responsible for NZ First’s dismal result in the last election.

Heh. Again, if this is true I want a knighthood.

When in government Peters was notorious for not reading Cabinet papers. He seemed not to have read his speech either – we were all discovering it together. We were on the same journey. At one point he extemporised then went back to the speech notes – and repeated a couple of paragraphs. He didn’t notice but we all did.

Oh dear, senior moments.

On Kim Dotcom: “Tim Dotcom”.

On Jacinda Ardern: “Jacinda Ahearn”.

More blather followed about finance and speculation, all of it about John Key and all of it economically illiterate, as I said to Joshua later. He replied, “But he’s very politically literate.” Yes. I suppose that’s why he is still with us.

Among the audience eyebrows had been raised and eyeballs had rolled throughout. But not as much as when – after some shameless pandering to the audience about how wonderful “TV7” is – he got onto immigration and Asians, as we all knew he would eventually

Drive down Dominion Road, there’s 150 restaurants. Now there can’t be that many people eating.

A old yet still must read article in Vanity Fear on Greece:

The long-term picture was far bleaker. In addition to its roughly $400 billion (and growing) of outstanding government debt, the Greek number crunchers had just figured out that their government owed another $800 billion or more in pensions. Add it all up and you got about $1.2 trillion, or more than a quarter-million dollars for every working Greek. Against $1.2 trillion in debts, a $145 billion bailout was clearly more of a gesture than a solution. And those were just the official numbers; the truth is surely worse. “Our people went in and couldn’t believe what they found,” a senior I.M.F. official told me, not long after he’d returned from the I.M.F.’s first Greek mission. “The way they were keeping track of their finances—they knew how much they had agreed to spend, but no one was keeping track of what he had actually spent. It wasn’t even what you would call an emerging economy. It was a Third World country.” As it turned out, what the Greeks wanted to do, once the lights went out and they were alone in the dark with a pile of borrowed money, was turn their government into a piñata stuffed with fantastic sums and give as many citizens as possible a whack at it.

Yep, for some politicians all they ever advocate is how to give money out.

In just the past decade the wage bill of the Greek public sector has doubled, in real terms—and that number doesn’t take into account the bribes collected by public officials. The average government job pays almost three times the average private-sector job. The national railroad has annual revenues of 100 million euros against an annual wage bill of 400 million, plus 300 million euros in other expenses. The average state railroad employee earns 65,000 euros a year.

Something we can only aspire to with the billions we have thrown into rail.

Twenty years ago a successful businessman turned minister of finance named Stefanos Manos pointed out that it would be cheaper to put all Greece’s rail passengers into taxicabs: it’s still true.

In New Zealand we had politicians advocate in Wellington a rail extension that would only remove 100 motorists a day from peak hour traffic, yet was going to cost tens of millions of dollars. It would have been cheaper to buy each of the 100 motorists a helicopter.

The Greek public-school system is the site of breathtaking inefficiency: one of the lowest-ranked systems in Europe, it nonetheless employs four times as many teachers per pupil as the highest-ranked, Finland’s.

Yet, some still advocate it is all about teacher to pupil ratios.

The retirement age for Greek jobs classified as “arduous” is as early as 55 for men and 50 for women. As this is also the moment when the state begins to shovel out generous pensions, more than 600 Greek professions somehow managed to get themselves classified as arduous: hairdressers, radio announcers, waiters, musicians, and on and on and on. 

And France has just elected a socialist who wants to lower the retirement age from 62 to 60!

Oddly enough, the financiers in Greece remain more or less beyond reproach. They never ceased to be anything but sleepy old commercial bankers. Virtually alone among Europe’s bankers, they did not buy U.S. subprime-backed bonds, or leverage themselves to the hilt, or pay themselves huge sums of money. The biggest problem the banks had was that they had lent roughly 30 billion euros to the Greek government—where it was stolen or squandered. In Greece the banks didn’t sink the country. The country sank the banks.

Sad, but true.

It is not just Greece. though. The US deficit is almost unpluggable. France and Italy have huge deficits also. The UK is striving to close its massive deficit, but the political price will be high. In New Zealand, it is vitalget back from deficit into surplus – and not by just raising taxes to fund the unsustainable spending.

I get mad when I read this:

A report by the Housing Shareholders Advisory Group in 2010 found there was a 70,000 house shortfall across the country.

The Greens say yesterday’s announcement is ”just a drop in the ocean”.

Co-leader Metiria Turei said the housing crisis was ”a ticking time bomb”.

”We urgently need to increase the supply of housing to cover the 70,000 house deficit we have in New Zealand. At this pace it will take decades.”

Families were struggling with high-cost, low-quality, overcrowded housing while some families didn’t even have housing, she said.

And why do we have high-cost low-quality housing in Auckland especially? Because the Greens and others steadfastly campaign against the one thing which could massively lower the cost of land, and hence housing. That is to increase the urban limit.

The Greens are against this because that means people living further out will drive those evil cars more. Now that is a reasonable point of view to have – that getting rid of cars is more important than affordable housing.

But hell when you then come out all upset over the cost of housing, well go bloody look in the mirror.

Personally I regard making housing in Auckland more affordable as far more important than trying to force people out of their cars. The Greens do not however. Their solution is to keep land prices high.

Jordan Carter has blogged on Labour’s review, with the headline:

The Hope Project: changing Labour’s organisation

Inventory2 at Keeping Stock has some fun with the title, pointing out that such a glorious title is normally used for worthy third world projects, rather than a review about how to make Labour more electable.

Jordan usefully provided a link to the interim report. As someone with an interest in party organisational issues, some comments on a few of them.

The electorate organisation (LEC) become the main administrative unit for each electorate, with members belonging formally to the electorate (rather than to a branch).

I think this is a sensible move, and mirrors what is the case now in National. This does not mean an electorate can not have branches, but recognises that electorates are the core of a party. Most members get involved in electorate campaigns.

Regional (or sub-regional) co-ordination be strengthened. This structure should be the campaign-organising unit for a coordinated/integrated Party Vote campaign. This will require realigning of some regional boundaries and the establishment of sub-regional hubs.

Agree with this also, and think this is an area National lags a bit in. I’m of the view National’s five regions are too large and for example Wellington City with six electorates has little in common with say the Hawkes Bay seats (which are part of the region). Regions or sub-regions should be small enough to reflect a common community.

That the New Zealand Council structure be reviewed to ensure that it combines broad representation with the need to be able to make key decisions quickly. This could result in the re-establishment of an Executive of the Council.

Any body that is larger than 10 or so members tends to be a poor decision maker, and inevitably an inner core develops which develops most decisions. It is better that any inner core is recognised formally as an executive committee, rather than operate informally. So I’d either shrink the NZ Council to under a dozen, or have an Executive Committee which is responsible to the Council. Note National’s Board has just nine members.

Further work be carried out to develop recommendations for the Treaty partnership within the Party.

God knows what that means.

We discuss with affiliated unions ways of optimising affiliation.

This will never happen, but I think it would be much healthier if unions per se did not affiliate and gain bulk voting rights. It would be better if they merely acted as a vehicle through which union members could join and participate in Labour should they choose to do so as individuals – and paying the same fee as non union members.

We investigate means of affiliation for groups in the community.

Maybe then Grey Power and NZUSA could formally affiliate.

We continue to develop the use of social media, both within the Party and as an external communication tool.

I don’t think they need to developed their use of social medias, as much as moderate their use of it, so there are less SMOGs.

We increase the amount of issues-based continuous campaigning, which will help to increase the number of volunteers and organisers and provide organisational readiness for the Party.

This is the big difference between National and Labour activists. Most National activists only get involved in actual election campaigns. Labour activists will be involved in half a dozen campaigns at any point in time, from Save TVNZ7 to anti asset sales to stop mining to …

On that is built a policy platform: the high level set of agreed, evidence-based policies confirmed by Annual Conference, binding on all including the parliamentary party and able to be changed only by specific amendment at conference. These may be directional goals, policy principles or defined policy frameworks, but should allow caucus to refine the specifics.

It is at the annual conference that the unions gain their bulk votes where one union official can outvote dozens of delegates.

We develop and trial a candidate-training programme before the 2014 election.

An excellent idea. I know of a Mr S Lusk who would be very happy to assist with such a training programme 🙂

All candidates should be on the list and required to campaign for the Party vote via the regional campaign.

That is a good idea from a party disciple point of view, but I expect their caucus will fight it hard as senior MPs who don’t get particularly high list rankings prefer to not go on the list at all.

A working group be established to build a People Strategy for the Party which looks at issues of representation, including developing a mechanism for increasing the number of women in leadership positions in the Party and as MPs.

They could do what the Greens do, and require around half the top ten list candidates to have a penis, and half not to have a penis.

A Selection Working Group be established to develop selection processes which reduce central Party involvement in electorate-candidate selection. (Changes could include new member thresholds for representation, central short-listing with local decision-making, local representatives on the selection panel elected in a different way, full local choice, full local choice with a right of veto, or other ideas.)

Excellent. A move in the right direction. The party hierarchy should get a veto early on to ensure quality control, but after that it should be up to local members as much as possible.

The Selection Working Group develop recommendations to improve the list selection process through processes which are more transparent and better fit the Party’s goals. (The List process should continue to value quality and representativeness (of skills, background/occupation, regional representation, gender and ethnicity), and should promote continuous renewal and reflect MP contribution and performance.)

Well that is a cop out, considering the list ranking was the most heavily criticised aspect of 2011.

The Party move to a model that includes membership participation in leadership selection, and that the Selection Working Group propose possible models for further discussion.

I’ve blogged previously on this, and think it is an excellent idea. I expect the Labour caucus will block and delay it, as the ABC faction would be aghast at the thought of party members able to force Cunliffe into the leadership against their will.

Continue to seek financial support from a range of potential donors (including wealthy individuals, small and large businesses, and individuals) who share our values and/or who would benefit from our policies.

That is a very mercenary attitude. I would have said “who believe our policies are good for New Zealand”.

It will be interesting to see what actual constitutional changes are put to their conference in November, and if they get passed.

Emma Bailey writes:

South Canterbury District Health Board chairman Murray Cleverley has been photographed drinking from a beer bong.

A beer bong is a tube with a funnel at one end designed for quick beer consumption.

The photograph has been sent to The Timaru Herald, and was taken at a private function in October.

It has appeared on Facebook but was removed.

Cleverley, who became board chairman at the start of 2010, conceded the photograph did not look good, but described it as “a bit of tomfoolery” in a private setting.

“It was one 330ml stubbie of beer.”

He was disappointed that someone saw fit to pass the photograph on to the newspaper.

“This is the part of the job that I struggle with. When I signed up (to the health board), I didn’t think I was signing away my private life.

The reality is you are. Especially as Chairman.

I don’t think this is a hanging offence. Hell as a private citizen I’ve drunk from some bongs at various times, and I think a couple of those photos may be on someone’s facebook page somewhere.

However if I was a member of a DHB, let alone the Chair, I would not drink from a bong – let alone allow photos of it.  It undermines the activities of your own organisation.

The Social Service Providers Assn of Aotearoa (SSPA) has an seminar which may be of interest to some on Wed 30 May.

Working for Maori Youth: Insights from 30 Years of Whakairo and Ta Moko

Speaker: Mark Kopua

Mark Kopua is Te Aitanga a Hauiti, Ngati Ira and Ngati Porou (tribal groups) from the East Coast of the North Island of New Zealand. He is a tohunga (expert) ta moko artist and has been tattooing for around 16 years. Prior to doing ta moko, he did Maori whakairo (carving) for about 35 years.

Mark has been awarded the prestigious Toi Iho Maori mark of excellence in perpetuation, in recognition of his contribution to upholding the mana of traditional and contemporary Maori artforms.

Mark Kopau is an  master craver and ta moko artist and expert on Maori traditional art i.e. he was an expert witness for iwi on the Wai 262 claim, see http://tamokoake.wordpress.com   Mark has worked with disadvantaged Maori youth/apprentices for over 30 years and has some powerful coal face insights about what drives quality education and employment outcomes etc.  

The seminar is at:

St John’s in the City
Wed 30 May
5.30 pm to 7.30 pm

To attend, register with John Dickson, SSPA at [email protected] or phone 027 510-1517.

A good example of how putting something in the wrong context, can change its meaning entirely.

And personally I think it is a great joke!

Two editorials on the increase from $3 to $5. First the Dom Post:

With the Government promising a “zero budget”  next week the choice for him was simple: ask people to  pay slightly more for prescription medicines or tell patients needing cancer treatment and elective surgery to wait longer. He has chosen to ask families to pay up to $40 more a year for medicine. Few, apart from those who like to pretend the Government has a limitless supply of money, will disagree with that choice.

The increase, which takes effect next January, will push the price of a single item up from $3 to $5. For a family the maximum payable in a single year will increase from $60 to $100.

That is 11c a day per family maximum.

Prescriptions for children under the age of six will remain  free and families that cannot afford to pay the increase will be able to obtain assistance from Work and Income NZ and primary health organisations.

The reality is this is a very minor changes, that reduces the drugs bill to the taxpayer by just 4%.

In Australia the average fee is A$35.40 (NZ$45), although  those on low incomes pay a lesser fee. In England the average charge is NZ$16 and in Finland, Labour’s utopia,  Mr Ryall says individuals have to fork out  $1107 each before the cost of prescription medicines is limited to about NZ$2.50.

So we have a cap 10% that of Finland.

The NZ Herald:

Much angst has greeted the Government’s announcement that prescription charges are to increase from $3 to $5 next year to fund reinvestment in the health sector. Opposition parties have warned that lower-income groups, the elderly and the chronically ill will be hit hard. The Mana Party leader, Hone Harawira, has gone so far as to claim it “will lead to children dying”. Such concern is vastly overstated. This is, after all, the first increase in prescription costs in 20 years, and could be justified merely on the basis of inflation.

Vastly overstated? More like insanely hysterical. And the charge was originally $15, reduced to $3 in 2004, so at $5 is still just one third what it once was.

For many people, the rise in cost will be easily manageable. They need prescriptions relatively rarely, and their families’ requirements will get nowhere near the 20 items of medicine a year, after which prescriptions for the rest of that year are free. Such people would not have been unduly perturbed if the increase had been more than $2. Indeed, it would have made more sense for the Government to charge a larger sum for each prescription but to lower the trigger point for free prescriptions.

Not a bad idea.

At its worst, the increased prescription charge will cost a family an extra $40 a year. That sum hardly tallies with the dire consequences predicted by some Opposition politicians. Even so, the move is predicated on the universality that so marred the previous Government’s early childhood and welfare payments. A more astute targeted approach would have served those with substantial medication requirements better and left little room for criticism. Unfortunately, the Government has missed that opportunity.

Subsidies should generally be targeted at those in need, not made universal as this is economically inefficient.

Winston has just made a speech where Whale and I get a mention. Worth putting things in context:

No sooner had the Banks/Dotcom story hit the headlines than Newstalk ZB decided to interview a bewildered blogger called Whaleoil.

Without a fact to fan his considerable self with Mr Whaleoil explained to ZB listeners that New Zealand First had been a beneficiary of the giant German.

The ZB people did not bother to check with Dotcom or New Zealand First.

To be fair to Whale and ZB, considering NZ First has a long history of not disclosing donations it was legally required to disclose, and that Winston himself was found to have lied about not knowing about Own Glenn’s $100,000 donation to his lawyer, then you could argue checking with NZ First would be a waste of time. However would have been useful to check with Dotcom.

A mischievous blogger known as Kiwiblog made up a story the Thursday before the election that New Zealand First was an incorporated society and that Winston Peters was an illegal candidate.

That story running as it did immediately before the Election Day is a corrupt practice under our election law.

Except that there is a NZ First incorporated society. My story is here. Winston claims that there are in fact two NZ First’s – one incorporated and one unincorporated. But as I blogged here, this is not something his own party officers agree with him on:

Contacted by the Listener, Catchpole, treasurer from 2005 until the party’s convention earlier this month, says: “They are one and the same really, the incorporated society and the party, because the party constitution and rules are all registered with the incorporated society. That basically makes it one entity.” …

Asked about the incorporated society, Groombridge says: “That’s the party itself.”

So that was both the party president and the party treasurer contradicting Winston, and saving the political party NZ First is the same entity as the incorporated society NZ First.

By sheer coincidence, this blogger is the paid pollster of the National Party.

I blogged at the time that absolutely no one in National knew of this story before I published it. I only wrote the story that morning because I received an e-mail from a (non-National) friend who had come across the rules.

What I can also now reveal, is that in fact National got a bit shitty at me for running the story. They told me the last thing they wanted was more publicity for Winston on the eve of the election.  Just as National didn’t like me describing their campaign opening TV spot as looking like an excitable eight year old filmed it 🙂

The foreign owned newspaper Dominion Post felt compelled to also publish this garbage and the story appeared to be taking off until some spoilsport presented the true facts.

I’m still waiting for the true facts. Whom do we believe – Winston or his own party president and treasurer?

That story could have been the difference between eight and nine MPs for New Zealand First.

And the publicity it gave Winston may have been what got NZ First eight MPs instead of seven. A possibility that may haunt me for decades 🙂

With one more we could have stopped the sale of state assets – and the National Party knew it.

I’d love to take credit for getting the Government back into office with a clear centre-right majority, as it means I’d never have to buy a drink again at party conferences!

For NZ First to have gained a 9th MP, they would have needed 153,819 votes or 6.86% rather than 147,544 or 6.59%, an increase of 6,275.

I hear from someone who was at the actual speech, that in fact Winston blamed me for not just NZ First getting one extra MP, but maybe several. If this is true, surely the PM could consider a knighthood for me? 🙂

On the 6th of November we decided that we had to break free from this coalition that we had never entered.

At a public meeting at Kelston we carefully explained that we would be going into Opposition.

Again, there is a credibility problem here. He basically promised the same in 2005, and promptly went into Government with the Foreign Affairs bauble.

In 2008 Barack Obama credited social media with getting both grass root activists and the normally apathetic people involved in his campaign.

In New Zealand politicians have been trying to play catch up.

We, in New Zealand First are learning.

There is no doubt social media provided a way for New Zealand First supporters and candidates to stay in touch and organise for the 2011 election. 

We are using it in Parliament. …

Most members of the press gallery monitor Twitter and Facebook.

News breaks on these social media sites and politicians get themselves into trouble on them!

The technology is amazing.

With the advent of smartphones and iPads, MPs are tweeting from the House to their constituents, providing an instant information service.

It’s interesting to look at the demographics of people of those that like my page on Facebook.

The highest percentage of people who like my page are males aged 18-24. 

There is no doubt that social media provides an unprecedented way for people to connect with politicians.

Good to see NZ First recognising the potential of social media.

The CTU is a bit like Chicken Little at the moment. On RNZ yesterday on minor changes to employment law…

The Council of Trade Unions says the changes to industrial relations laws being considered are the worst attack on workers’ rights since the 1990s

In fact the changes are very much around the margins, and fairly in-substantive. The Government should require unions to collect their own membership fees, rather than force employers to be unpaid fee collectors ofr them – then they really would have something to complain about.

But the “worst attack since the 1990s” line is now new. It’s exactly what the CTU said about the 90 Day trial periods in their 2010 submission:

 “The largest step backwards in workers’ rights since 1990.”

I guess they have a macro on their computers that just inserts that phrase automatically into releases and submissions!

NZ Herald reports:

A tradesman allegedly caught by TV3 cameras committing an indecent act at a customer’s home was granted name suppression when he appeared in court today.

The carpet cleaner at the centre of a hidden camera sting by the Target consumer affairs show appeared in Manukau District Court this morning on charges of burglary and wilfully accessing a computer.

He was bailed to reappear on June 6, TV3 reported.

What is interesting is that he has been charged for what some might say are the less vile offences, yet there is no charge for masturbating on a woman’s underwear.

But while vile, what charges could be laid? It can’t be indecent exposure as he was not in public. Any lawyers out there want to opine on what charges could be laid for what he did?

Stuff reports:

A Whangarei childcare centre is planning legal action against the New Zealand Aids Foundation (NZAF) for slander.

The centre said NZAF made false comments about it, which have ruined its reputation – but NZAF said the centre needed to acknowledge it has made “really poor decisions”.

I would note it is very very hard for an organisation to win a defamation suite, as if I cam correct they have to show actual damage, not just reputational damage.

The centre received “mixed messages” about the level of care the boy needed and had never “excluded, expelled, or shut out” the boy, but rather asked him to stay at home while a care plan was established, Tipene said.

I’m sorry but that is an exclusion. It is doublespeak to argue otherwise.

More than 20 other early childhood centres in Northland have offered a space to the boy, without having to develop care plans, a NZAF spokeswoman said.

Restores may faith in the basic decency of Kiwis.

Danya Levy at Stuff reports:

Government cronyism is being blamed for delays in Employment Relations Authority investigations, caused by a 76 per cent turn over of its members in two years. …

The contracts of seven members had expired since 2010 and a further six would expire between June and the end of the year. They are appointed by the Governor-General, on the recommendation of Labour Minister Kate Wilkinson.

Labour’s industrial relations spokeswoman Darien Fenton said some members had wanted to stay on but their contracts were not renewed.

“The minister is clearly wanting to put her own people in there, what we would describe as cronies.”

How dare Kate Wilkinson appoint different people to whom Labour appointed. Just because they won two elections is no reason they should appoint different people to whom Labour did.

Council of Trade Unions president Helen Kelly said the organisation was consulted on appointments and had a policy of approving the reappointment of competent members, regardless of whether it agreed with their decisions.

I’m a bit cynical that the CTU doesn’t ever link their agreement with decisions with whether they think someone is competent. Are they really saying they regard someone as competent if they disagree with all their decisions?

As far as I can tell the vast majority of ERA members under Labour were former union lawyers. Now as far as I can tell, there are a few ex-union lawyers on there, a couple of ex-employers assn lawyers and the majority have just worked privately (for both employers and employees). That seems pretty balanced to me.

John Hartevelt at Stuff reports:

School class sizes are going up and the Government is working on performance pay for teachers, Education Minister Hekia Parata has announced.

In a pre-Budget announcement to a business audience in Wellington this morning, Parata said there would be an extra $60m invested over four years for boosting teacher recruitment and training.

“We will collaborate in the development of an appraisal system on driving up quality teaching and quality professional leadership.

Performance pay is but one of a basket of options to reward and recognise that,” Parata said.

“We are not investing in more teachers, we are investing in better teaching.”

Ultimately performance pay can only work well if you delegate funding to school boards and allow principals flexibility in deciding pay rates. You might have a nationwide collective setting minimum salary levels, but the funding should be flexible enough so that the best teachers could be earning say double the worst.

There had been “some trade-offs” so that the Government could afford the new investment, she said.

Teacher – student ratios in the mid-years of education (years two to 10) would be increased. Instead of the existing range of anywhere between one to 23 up to one to 29, there would be a single ratio of one to 27.5.

The ratio for students sitting NCEA at years 11, 12 and 13 would be standardised at one to 17.3, instead of the existing range of between one to 17 and one to 23.

“These ratios are a funding formula – they are how we as a Government fund schools. The actual number of children in a classroom is set by the school.”

New entrants (year one) would keep its one to 15 ratio.

The ratio changes would “free up” $43m, on average, in each year over the next four years.

In the last ten years, student numbers had grown by 2.52 per cent, but teacher numbers had grown 12.76 per cent over the same period, Parata said.

About 90 per cent of schools would either gain or have a net loss of less than one full time equivalent teachers as a result of the combined effect of the changes.

The changes look pretty minor.

Toby Manhire at the Listener blogs:

The New Zealand prime minister ranks ninth in theGallup survey (see below) of leader approval ratings in 21 nations in the Asian region, with 72% saying they approved of Key’s job performance, 24% disapproving, and 4% confused or profoundly shy or something.

The survey by the Washington-based Gallup, which polled 1,000 people in each country, has attracted widespread coverage across the region, but as far as I can tell has been overlooked in New Zealand.

I only saw it myself thanks to the daily summary by Bryce Edwards. I was surprised that Key ranked only 9th, as I know his ratings are much higher than national leaders in the US, UK, Canada, France, Germany and Australia. But then I looked at the table:

Laos is a one party state. Cambodia has been ruled by the one party since independence as has Singapore. Sri Lanka is one of the most repressive regimes in the world for press freedom. Haven’t looked into details for Philippines, Malaysia, Bangladesh and Indonesia but I suspect in a fair few of those, criticising the head of state can be a risky thing to do 🙂

Would be interesting to see such a poll in say the OECD countries.

The third and final part of my Internet Hall of Fame series. Today, the innovators:

• Mitchell Baker –  instrumental player in the development of Mozilla and founding chairperson of the Mozilla Foundation, Baker helped legitimize Open Source Internet applications
• Tim Berners-Lee – invented the WWW
• Robert Cailliau – developed with Tim Berners-Lee, a hypertext system for accessing documentation
• Van Jacobson – his algorithms for the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) helped solve the problem of congestion
• Larry Landweber – helped establish the first network gateways between the US and countries in Europe, Asia and Latin America
• Paul Mockapetris – invented the DNS
• Craig Newmark – founder of Craigslist
• Raymond Tomlinson – inventing network electronic mail and choosing the “@” sign in emails
• Linus Torvalds – creator of the Linux operating system
• Philip Zimmermann –  creator of Pretty Good Privacy (PGP)

No doubt many more names over time will be added to this category.

The Herald reports:

A petition has been launched over an adoption joke in the newAvengers movie that organisers have slammed as “insulting”.

The petition, which has 247 signatures, is over a line muttered by Chris Hemsworth’s character Thor, after Scarlett Johansson’s Black Widow tells him his brother Loki – a villain – has killed “80 people in two days”.

Thor replies: “He’s adopted.”

Petition organiser Jamie Berke said scriptwriter Joss Whedon should have thought about how the line would impact on viewers who were adopted themselves.

“According to your scriptwriter, the fact (Loki) was adopted is the reason he is a bad guy,” Berke said.

Mr Berke is a moron. The media are also stupid for giving publicity to a moron with a global petion petition that has only 247 signatures. How is this newsworthy? Is every idiot with no sense of humour now international news.

I happen to to know a bit about Thor. I’ve read well pretty much all 700 issues of the Marvel Comic the film is based on. I also have studied the original Norse mythology.

Even if the film was suggesting Loki is bad because he is adopted, Mr Berke should lighten up.  It is a film. But what Berke fails to know is that Loki is not the child of other gods, adopted by Odin. He is the son of Fárbauti and Laufey. Fárbauti (or Laufey in the comics) is a frost giant – one of those evil creatures that generally kill men (and gods). So the adoption reference is actually a reference to Loki being half-giant.

I still feel bad about the fact I once cost a former employer a few thousand dollars in tax penalties for late tax returns. So I’m not sure how I could cope with this situation reported in the Herald:

Three high-ranking executives at JPMorgan Chase are expected to leave their jobs this week after a trading blunder cost the bank US$2 billion,The Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday.

Only “expected” to leave their jobs??

The Journal, citing people familiar with the situation, reported that one of the executives is Ina Drew, who for seven years has run the risk-management division at the bank responsible for the loss.

Drew, one of the highest-ranking women on Wall Street, is the bank’s chief investment officer. She was paid $15.5 million last year and almost $16 million the year before, according to a regulatory filing.

So the loss was 120 times the annual salary!

Do you recall before the election when the media reported that John Key “stormed” out of a press conference refusing to answer any more questions, and then the video showed it was a total beatup. He just called an end to questions and calmly exited.

Likewise we are now seeing reports that John Key “slammed” the media in his comments on NewstalkZB. Luckily they videoed the show, so you can judge for yourself whether this was a “slamming” or in fact a reasonable critical analysis.

An interesting op ed by Massey Pro Vice-Chancellor James Chapman on proposed changes to teacher training:

Massey University is about to undertake a quiet revolution in the way we educate teachers. We are cutting our ties with the past and forging ahead with changes that will bring Massey’s teacher education in line with some of the best education institutions around the world.

From next year we will focus all our teacher education at the graduate/postgraduate level and phase out teaching in our three- and four-year undergraduate degrees.

For what it is worth, I think it is better for teachers to gain a general degree, and then a teaching diploma on top of that.

The changes we are making at Massey to focus on graduate/postgraduate teaching, will start to address these issues by taking the teachers to that next level. As graduates and postgraduates, our students will be able to progress to masters and doctoral degrees and will be well positioned to move up the career ladder and assist those entering the profession.

The advantage of graduate and postgraduate teacher education is that the students have already qualified in a wide variety of degrees – sociology, psychology, maths, science, technology, the arts, Maori studies etc – and they bring those specialist skills and the ability to apply them.

It is a long time since I was at university, but I do recall that the numeracy requirements for those doing teaching was massively below even first year maths. I would have placed it around school cert level.

One of the arguments repeatedly put forward against this move is that it is not possible to prepare a teacher in one year.

That misrepresents what we are doing. Those completing the graduate diploma path have already studied for a minimum of four years and will undertake a further two years of professional practice before becoming fully registered.

Around half of all graduates entering primary teaching come through the graduate diploma route; that rises to more than 80 per cent for the secondary sector.

We know graduates from our graduate diploma programmes are well-regarded. They have higher completion rates and higher rates of employment and registration than those going through undergraduate programmes.

Not often I have praise for Massey University Education Department, but I do think this is a good move.