A firm working for Momentum has sent me their PR in relation to the Wilce inquiry. I’ve not seen any media carry their view, so here are key extracts:

“Momentum Consulting does not accept the assertion of the New Zealand Defence Force Court of Inquiry that the company carried out reference checks on the preferred candidate for the post of the Director of the Defence Technology Agency.

“We supplied the NZDF with information from referees used by the preferred candidate when he applied for a job in another organization. This information was partial because Mr Wilce did not become the preferred candidate in that process and it was not intended to take the place of the reference checks suggested in our original proposal to the NZDF. That proposal recognized that the post of Director of the DTA required high-level reference checks. At no stage in the recruitment process did the NZDF ask us to complete these checks on Mr Wilce.

“If Momentum had been asked to carry out the full reference checks, as the Inquiry agrees was set out in our initial proposal to the NZDF, his claims about his performance in previous jobs would have been tested more rigorously. Although the checks were included in our proposal the client decided to take responsibility for these themselves.

I have no first hand knowledge of course on this issue, but as someone who has recruited CEOs and the like through a recruitment agency, I can say that it is not uncommon for the client to ask to do the referee checks? Why? Because by doing so you get a better feel of the applicant’s strengths and weaknesses which can help in managing them and/or setting performance targets.

Audrey Young also reports in the Herald:

He and the recruiting firm Momentum Consulting are in dispute about who actually conducted the checks on the referees for Mr Wilce. Momentum said it did not conduct full reference checks because the Defence Force took responsibility for doing so.

The inquiry concluded that Momentum had conducted referee checks that met a basic standard but did not satisfy a higher standard of thoroughness required by its contract.

It would be nice to be able to read what the inquiry says about whether it was agreed that Momentum not do these, but I still can’t locate a copy online. Not on the Beehive site, the NZDF site or even Scoop.

The inquiry reveals that the most expert member of the panel set up to interview the shortlisted applicants recommended that no appointment be made, but was overruled.

As I said, I’ve been a several appointment panels for senior roles (in my role as a non executive Director). If a member of my panel strongly felt that no appointment be made, I’d be very reluctant to proceed.

The Herald reports:

Actresses and unionists have received threats, including some against their lives, during the heated row over The Hobbit movie.

Police have been called and private security arranged for some of those targeted.

Anyone making death threats should receive a visit from the Police – at a minimum. But I am sceptical of believing that death threats have been made, just because MEAA says so – they have a record of lying and exaggeration.

Remember Helen Kelly’s lynch mob – led by gentle Richard Taylor.

Remember the Matterhorn incident which was described as needing a Police escort, and turned out to simply be a guy with a video camera politely asking Whipp why he targeted the Hobbit.

Nowhere in the story do they quote an actual threat – just the MEAA saying they had received them. Why do journalists not ask for details to back up claims?

Finally I recall the words of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who could be called an expert on death threats – she has to live 24/7 with Police protection. She said that “I am coming to kill you” is a death threat while “I hope you die” is constitutionally protected speech. Now I certainly do not endorse the latter sentiments against any New Zealander, but even if people have said them – that is not a death threat.

Of course we can’t judge in this case, as we have no details – just MEAA claims.

I don’t know if anyone out there actually still believes a word the MEAA or CTU has said re The Hobbit dispute, so this is probably flogging a dead horse. But the rebuttal of the MEAA newsletter by SPADA is so good, that it deserves a bigger audience:

1. MEAA Position:

“NZ Equity has also sought to bargain with the screen producers association SPADA. For a variety of reasons none of these attempts have been successful.”

SPADA Response:

It is surprising that these ‘variety of reasons’ are not specified in their newsletter to members. …

SPADA initially offered to meet with NZ Actors’ Equity in February 2009 to discuss the Code of Practice for the Engagement of Cast in the New Zealand Screen Production Industry dated 6 June 2005 (and more commonly known as the “Pink Book”). Subsequently SPADA offered to meet on a non agenda basis to have an open discussion in good faith.

However NZ Actors’ Equity would only agree to meet to discuss an industry wide agreement containing conditions of employment no less favourable than those in Australia to be negotiated by the MEAA. This was unworkable given SPADA, as has been confirmed by the Attorney General, cannot legally enter into a union negotiated agreement.

So MEAA all along has refused to meet or negotiate unless an illegal demand was met.

2. MEAA Position:

“All NZ Equity sought was to meet with the production and discuss the conditions under which performers would be engaged.”

SPADA Response:

All the polite chit chat about having a ‘cup of tea’ is a fantasy. The boycott (because that’s exactly what it was), began back in June. Well before the ‘cup of tea’ suggestions.

At a meeting believed to be n in June 2010, the FIA resolved as follows:

“Resolved, that the International Federation of Actors urges each of its affiliates to adopt instructions to their members that no member of any FIA affiliate will agree to act in the theatrical film The Hobbit until such time as the producer has entered into a collective bargaining agreement with the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance for production in New Zealand providing for satisfactory terms and conditions for all performers employed on the productions.”

At this point the production had not issued any final performer’s contracts. Accordingly, neither MEAA nor FIA had any reason to believe that performers wouldn’t be contracted on “satisfactory terms and conditions”. They were prepared to boycott without any justification. Those terms and conditions have subsequently been found to be satisfactory by the NZ actors cast in roles.

So they resolved to have a boycott in June 2010, prior to even seeing a contract. And Labour and the unions dare talk about good faith bargaining.

3. MEAA Position:

“The Board formed the view that in the interests of harmony between cast and crew and for the sake of the NZ screen industry the commitments made in discussions with SPADA were significant enough to justify ending the dispute with The Hobbit.”

SPADA response:

What SPADA agreed recently is exactly what we’ve been trying to achieve for some time. What SPADA “committed to” is to meet. What MEAA have achieved is what they would have got if they had sat down with us over 18 months.

The inability admit they were wrong is staggering.

7. MEAA Position:

“In the past the conditions set out in the Pink Book have been completely disregarded by producers.”

SPADA Response:

Not true and no examples have ever been given by union.

This claim has been repeated by Labour friendly journalists, and others. Has anyone asked MEAA to cite examples? If not, why not?

9. MEAA Position:

“Our actions in no way jeopardised the filming of The Hobbit in New Zealand.”

SPADA Response:

Patently not true… and not believed by the NZ public as per public opinion polls

Simon Whipp would make a good President for Iran – I could just see him denying there ever was a Holocaust. He seems to be able to say the most false things with conviction.

11. MEAA Position:

“New Zealand performers approached this issue in a calm and professional manner and have every reason to be extremely proud of themselves.”

Oh that is just too funny by far. They should do stand up comedy!

In deference to the time of the year, this morning’s photo is of a mallard duckling.

You should be able to see I’m shooting wide open to narrow the depth-of-field and defocus the background.

Hope everyone has a good day today. Going to be crazy-busy at work so will be hitting the espressos hard and often.

Len Brown is off to a good start. He reached agreement quickly with the Government on Queen’s Wharf, and has now announced the various chairmanships for Auckland. Almost every Councillor gets a “job” which is sensible, rather than allocate over to those on your side of the spectrum. The appointments are:

Committees of the Whole

• Strategy & Finance Committee – Penny Webster
• Accountability & Performance Committee – Richard Northey
  • CCO Strategy and Appointments Sub-Committee – His Worship the Mayor
  • CEO Review Sub-Committee – His Worship the Mayor
  • Tenders & Procurement Panel – Jami-Lee Ross
• Regional Development & Operations Committee – Ann Hartley
  • Social & Community Forum – Cathy Casey
  • Culture, Arts & Events Forum – Alf Filipaina
  • Economic Forum – Arthur Anae
  • Community Safety Forum – George Wood
  • Environment & Sustainability Forum – Wayne Walker
  • Parks & Heritage Forum – Sandra Coney
  • District Plan & Urban Design Forum – Cameron Brewer
• Auckland Future Vision Committee – His Worship the Mayor / Deputy Mayor
• Transport Committee – Mike Lee

Standing Committees

• Hearings Committee – Noelene Rafills
• Regulatory & Bylaws Committee – Des Morrison
• Audit & Risk Committee – Sharon Stewart
• Civil Defence & Emergency Management Group – Michael Goudie

Advisory and Statutory Panels

• Maori Statutory Board – Alf Filipaina
• Pacific Peoples Advisory Panel – Arthur Anae
• Ethnic Advisory Panel – Mike Lee
• Business Advisory Panel – Cameron Brewer
• Rural Advisory Panel – Des Morrison
• Youth Advisory Panel – Michael Goudie
• Social Policy Forum – Calum Penrose

With all these new committees and panels, it will be interesting in say a year’s time to look at what, if anything, they have achieved.

Peter Dunne has done a PR:

Zealandia’s proposed rotenone poisoning of the upper lake and tributaries of the Karori wildlife sanctuary is quite literally “short-sighted, ideologically driven extremism”, UnitedFuture leader Peter Dunne said today.

“The fact that Zealandia – with the backing of DoC and Wellington City Council – is poised to flush a waterway system with rotenone within the city boundaries in the name of conservation is almost beyond belief,” said Mr Dunne.

“To poison a lake and all of its tributaries in order to kill some introduced trout, which most people see as a positive recreational resource, just because they are an exotic species is just crazy.”

It does seem over-kill, literally.

A reader pointed out this PQ to me:

Hon David Cunliffe to the Associate Minister of Health (07 Sep 2010): How much was spent by the Waitakere DHB on mental health services, both hospital and community based, in June 2010?

Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman (Associate Minister of Health) replied: There is no Waitakere DHB.

NZPA report:

Mr Key was today on his way to Vietnam, where he will attend the East Asia Summit in Hanoi, but his bilateral meetings with world leaders outside the summit will draw most attention, one of those with Mr Ban.

The two were likely to discuss a possible bid by former prime minister Helen Clark for the secretary-general role when Mr Ban’s term ended in 2015.

Miss Clark heads the UN Development Programme.

Climate change, New Zealand’s bid for a seat on the UN Security Council and the Pacific Islands Forum, to be held in Auckland next year, would also be discussed.

I can only imagine that NZPA’s reporter interviewed themselves. I can’t imagine there is any way John Key will be chatting to Mr Ban about how to make Helen his successor for four reasons.

1. First of all Ban is still in his first term in the job and has yet to gain re-appointment to a second term. There is no way you talk to someone not yet reappointed about their possible successor.
2. Secondly his first term ends at the end of 2011 and his second term would end at the end of 2016 – so no idea where 2015 comes from. Clark’s term ends in 2013 incidentally. Anyway you don’t talk job succession six years before there is a vacancy.
3. Helen does not speak French, and that is an unofficial requirement for the job.
4. Also NZ belongs to the Western Europe and Others regional grouping. The job is rotated amongst the regions and the next region due is the Eastern European group.

So Helen will not be the next UN Secretary-General, and media who say she might be do not understand the UN system. She is from the wrong region (not fixable) and does not speak French (she could learn if she thought she had a chance).Also there will probably not be a vacancy until 2017.

Further, it is my personal view she does not have the skills and experience necessary to do the job. I think she was qualified to be UNDP Administrator, but Secretary-General is a very different ball game.

The Herald has a full list of all the claims Stephen Wilce made:

• claims to have served in the Falklands War, Northern Ireland and the First Gulf War;
• Claimed service in Forces/ Special Boat Service;
• Having been awarded the Distinguished Service Order, Military Cross and Bar, and
• Giving the impression he was a helicopter pilot at the same time Prince Andrew was present.
• was on the IRA death list;
• had a degree of medical experience or background,
• played guitar on the British folk circuit;
• claimed to have been a member of the Royal Society in the United Kingdom;
• a member of he British Olympic bobsled team;
• the captain of the Royal Navy Swimming Team;
• Represented England in the 1990 Commonwealth Games swimming team;
• was a member of the Welsh Rugby team that played against the All Blacks.
• hold an honorary PhD in Astronomy from Cambridge
• a Masters degree in aerospace and astrophysics from Cranfield and Cambridge;
• have been a university lecturer, professor and doctor.
• To have served in MI5 and MI6 or at the Home Office.
• to have designed the guidance system for the Polaris missile.

What I find most amusing is the claims to have been a champion bob-sleigher, swimmer and rugby player. How many people really do become champions in three very different sports like that?

I can’t find the full report online anywhere, but blame seems to lie with both the NZ Defence Force and Momentum. Amazingly his actual CV turned out to be correct – he just lied about everything else verbally. The failing was not talking to all his referees it seems.

Readers may recall that Hone Harawira called Rodney various things, including fat, a week or so ago.

A reader alerted me to this video. Is this the same Rodney? I suspect Hone would struggle to bench press 110 kgs.

And here’s another – 180 kgs in a deadlift.

This ad is attacking Bill Brady, the Republican candidate for Governor of Illinois. Brady is leading in the polls and 538 give him a 77% chance of winning it – quite remarkable considering the state.

Parliament has an open day on Sunday 7 November, and for the curious there is a rare treat – access will be provided to the National Crisis Management Centre, which is located underneath the Beehive.

The Library and the Speaker’s Office will also be open, and the tunnel between Bowen House and the Beehive.

And the kids can get to sit in CR1 which will be parked on the forecourt.

The open day will run from 10 am until 3.30 pm, and the cafe will be open for those wanting a bite.

And for those who want to make a day of it, the Supreme Court, Reserve Bank Museum, Old Government Building, Old Saint Paul’s and Katherine Mansfield house will also  be open for tours from 10am – 4pm.

A great initiative. Hopefully will be a sunny day. I might even pop in to see the NCMC – I did see it once, but many years ago.

I’ve now got a copy of the full release from Peter Jackson regarding the 17 August global boycott letter, and a copy of the letter itself. Read them both carefully and then try telling me this is not the cause of what happened.

Media Release – The Hobbit 271010

And in case one thinks Sir Peter is lying, here is the letter itself.

FIA 17-VIII-10_en

So Warners and co have had this boycott threat hanging over them for over two months.

Scoop have set up a specialist “Parliament Today” site which has audio summaries, questions, and articles. A great resource.

TV3’s Patrick Gower blogs:

The union movement has cost the taxpayer $34 million. It’s that simple. That’s what the Government had to pay out to keep the Hobbit.

The unions have also given the Government room to ram through a law change that will seriously weaken their position – whoops!

The unions were so far off the mark they even caused what were essentially anti-union marches, on Labour Day of all days.

And the unions have written a script that says: “John Key saves the day for New Zealand from the nasty unions”. That seriously undermines their credibility – what a shocker. It also strengthens the hand of Key – who the unions have been targeting.

This all adds up to give a new meaning to the word “perverse outcome”.

It’s the most incompetent political or industrial action for some years.

There’s been a lot of talk about this Hobbit business.

It’s best to stick to the facts.

There was no problem with The Hobbit until the unions kicked off.

The facts are, that on August 17 the international actor’s union threatened to boycott the Hobbit on behalf of the New Zealand actors.

That’s huge.

And this makes the claims of the New Zealand actors that “we just wanted to get in the room” with Peter Jackson look totally disingenuous and misleading.

The letter shows they wanted far more than that – collective bargaining that would change the industry permanently – and that’s not Jackson’s role.

Once industrial relations get to the point of a threatened boycott, you can’t just sit down and have a chat. Every word, every action matters.

In Jackson’s words, the unions had a gun to his head.

A few conspiracy nuts are convinced that Warners would have tried to move the films anyway, even if the global boycott had never been instituted. Their problem is they have not one grain of proof – and nor do they have a precedent they can point to.

And in a scene more reminiscent of Quentin Tarantino than Peter Jackson, Warner Bros turned up with an even bigger gun and put it to New Zealand’s head.

Warners said, take your gun away – and give us all your money.

It’s like that scene from Crocodile Dundee where he says, as he is threatened with a pocket knife “That’s not a knife, this is a knife” as he pulls out his blade.

The Aussie union saw Peter Jackson as a light touch whom they could bully, and they forgot that the ultimate decisions are not made by Jackson, but by the studios.

But the conspiracy theory advanced by unions that Jackson and Warners set this all up to get some cash out of the government is just ridiculous.

There is just no way to engineer something like this.

If Jackson did manage to engineer al this, then his talents are being wasted. He should be in charge of black operations for the CIA.

John Key, Gerry Brownlee and company have done a good job negotiating against Warners who sources have told me were ruthless in there.

Key and Brownlee would be as unhappy about having to pander to Warner Bros as the next Kiwi.

They just did what was needed to keep the movies here.

They’ve tacked on some good spin-offs for New Zealand on the tourism front.

Imagine the power of having a “Visit New Zealand” segment on every Hobbit DVD. That is massive.

The unions and the left have been looking for something to nail Key with, and make them relevant again. A grassroots union revival like what happened with John Howard’s “work choices” policy in Australia.

They got so desperate, that they got star-struck when the actors’ issue came along. They thought it could launch unions back into the spotlight via their popular actor friends.

But all they’ve done is make their target, Key, even more popular.

It was a flop.

The best scripts are simple.

And this one says: John Key winner, Unions losers.

And now we have union vs union in Mana.

What I have also found interesting is how much coverage the possible loss got overseas. A reader in the UK e-mails:

Just to let you know the pro-Hobbit rallies made the main bulletin of Channel 4 news over here tonight. The coverage was entirely positive and featured Richard Taylor speaking at the rally.

Very much focussed on the natural beauty of NZ and how that was central to the heart of the film – and then highlighted a pole showing NZ’ers rejecting the unions. Some pompous twat from the UK union said his piece and was wholly unconvincing.

Not an epic piece – but worth relaying to the rally organisers that their efforts had global reach. Well done to them!

And got a text from a friend in the US telling me that a couple of taxi drivers and a waitress all raised the Hobbit issue with her unprompted, when they realised she is from NZ.

I have a policy that I will not fly Jetstar in NZ, based on reports of their delays and service. In fact my policy now even applies to when someone else is paying for the travel – if they really want me to attend their conference etc, then a non Jetstar airline mist be found.

Incidentially I have used them in Australia, where they have been good, It is just their NZ operations which seems to be so bad.

Whale blogs his experience at giving them a try. He has learnt the hard way.

I blogged on Tuesday a comparison between the NZ ETS and the European ETS, concluding the NZ ETS is more “pure” as it includes all gases and all sectors.

The British High Commission has sent me this response, articulating the European view:

Same Game – Shared Targets

Many people note that New Zealand generates only a small proportion of global emissions and ask whether it matters if NZ acts or not. It very much does matter. If New Zealand – with its clean, green image – can’t make the move to low carbon, what hope for other countries? The important statistic in terms of global responsibility is greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions per person, that puts New Zealand near the top of the global league table.

Accurate figures vary depending on the source but the global average is around 7 tonnes of GHG per person per year. The UK and EU average is about 10 tonnes per year while New Zealand is around 19 tonnes GHG per person per year. To meet our global target of reducing emissions by 50%, everyone in the world needs to be at around 2 tonnes per capita by 2050. This shows the scale of the challenge facing New Zealand and all other countries.

The EU’s Game Plan

The ETS is only part of Europe’s response (more on this below). Commentators can only sensibly critique the European approach if the ETS is viewed in this context. More generally, no comment on European efforts should be made without acknowledging what Member States’ are already committed to. For example, by 2050 the UK is committed in law to having GHG emissions 80% less than those in 1990 (and so move from 10 to 2 tonnes per capita). In the nearer term the EU as a whole is committed to 20% (or possibly 30%) reductions by 2020.

It is misleading to make too much of a direct comparison between the EU and NZ ETSs. The crucial fact is that action to reduce an economy’s greenhouse gases requires a portfolio of policies. This is what we have in the EU. The key issue is to look at the best policy tool for reducing emissions in each sector. For example, the EU has looked at light vehicles (cars and vans) and recognised that they produce 12% of the EU’s emissions and so need to be tackled. So the EU passed legislation on the fuel efficiency of cars. It is now EU law that the fleet average for all cars registered in the EU is 130 grams per kilometre (g/km). This is being phased in over the next few years and there are hefty fines for companies that exceed the limit (up to 95 Euros per extra gramme of CO2 over the limit!). This is a sensible and effective approach to tackling transport emissions. So the fact that it is not in the EU ETS does not mean action is not being taken.

The same argument applies to housing, agriculture and waste. Each country also has a binding renewable energy target and their own range of policies (energy tax, feed-in tariffs etc) to ensure those targets are met. In addition the EU is contributing EUR 7.2 billion to climate finance over the next three years. Ultimately when comparing and contrasting the response to climate change of different economies the most important fact is the overall impact on GHG emissions. This shows that the EU is on the right track – 2009 emissions were around 17% below their 1990 level.

If forced to compare the NZ and EU ETS one key difference is that the EU ETS sets binding caps on emissions. So participants in the scheme will have their allocations gradually reduced to 21% below the 2005 level by 2020. There is currently no similar cap in the New Zealand scheme.

Climate change matters

Every country in the world will face stresses from climate change. Increased frequency and severity of floods, storms I and droughts will have a direct impact on New Zealand’s agriculture sector and infrastructure. The faster we all move to a low carbon economy – and there are a whole range of policies to get us there – the better.

Its great to get a response on what is a complicated and challenging issue.

Our per capita emissions are high, but that is partly because of the large number of cows we have, relative to humans. I have not calculated what it would excluding the cows, but suspect we would then be close to the UK average.

The UK response does impress upon me that doing nothing is not a viable option. Even Tony Abbott is not a proponent of doing nothing – he just proposes direct Government spending on climate change mitigation rather than an ETS.

NZPA report:

A court has been told two blondes got into a fight in a bar, drinks were thrown, glasses were smashed and blood was spilled – all over who looked better in a dress.

Victoria Clapham, 22, wore a silver dress given to her by her friend Matthew Vibert and his mother to the former Temperance Bar in Wellington on November 28 – unaware that he had previously given the dress to another woman.

Its first owner, Bridget Masters, 20, Mr Vibert’s former girlfriend was also at the bar and sparks flew when they met in the toilets, The Dominion Post reported.

Ms Clapham told Wellington District Court Masters was first to throw a drink and she retaliated by chucking her vodka on Masters.

The clash escalated when Masters smashed her tall glass on Ms Clapham’s head.

Ms Clapham’s face and chest were covered with blood and she needed stitches for cuts to her chest.

Masters has pleaded not guilty to injuring with intent to wound.

The trial continues today.

I would have sat in on the media bench for this trial, if I had been aware of the details! I wonder if they do re-enactments in court?

Quiz is here. 33 seconds.

Since Matt McCarten announced he was standing for Mana, I’ve been thinking about how well he could do. My initial inclination was that would probably receive modest support.

But then it occurred to me that he could siphon off a lot of Labour votes by highlighting their policies on wages, and that he has been walking the walk on those issues, with Labour being a reluctant convert to some of them – and Kris having no history with advocacy for those on low incomes.

Matt can walk to up voters and ask them if their kids have ever worked for McDonalds, and if so Matt is the one who got them paid adult rates.

Matt can walk up to voters and ask them if any of their family have been on the minimum wage, and how he got 300,000 signatures on a petition to raise it to $15.

Matt can point out that Labour refuses to commit to a $12 minimum wage until Greens and NZ First forced them to do so, and how they refused to commit to a $15 minimum wage in Government until his union got all the sugnatures.

Matt can point out they kept youth rates in place for eight years, until the Greens forced Labour to vote to get rid of them.

If Matt succeeds in defining the race as “Who will be a more effective advocate for the low paid workers of Mana”, then he could do quite well.  And the irony is that Labour was planning to make wages the centre-point of their campaign – yet if they do so they may face Matt saying “Who do you think will be a more effective advocate for increasing low income wages – the former TV reporter or me”.

UPDATE: Bryce Edwards has a must read analysis of McCarten and Mana.

UPDATE2: For a different view, Phil Quinn blogs on why McCarten will struggle to get even 400 votes.

I think I have worked out the ultimate revenge scheme for Chris Carter, which would make Labour regret throwing him out.

It’s quite simple.

1. Chris waits for Labour to do candidate selection for Te Atatu
2. Then if they select front runner Phil Twyford, Chris resigns from Parliament
3. Having selected Twyford as the general election candidate, they have to stand him in the by-election also
4. Twyford wins the by-election
5. Judith Tizard rejoins the Labour Caucus as a List MP for the next year

I think the prospect of Judith returning to Caucus would make even Phil Goff join up to the “We forgive you Chris” club 🙂

John Key has just announced the two Hobbit movies will be produced in New Zealand, and have at least one world première here. Details of the deal are:

• Government will tomorrow introduce a bill to clarify law on contractors for the film industry (only)
• A widening of the criteria for major film tax rebates which will come up at US$7.5m per film
• Govt to commit US$10m towards marketing of the films, in exchange for NZ tourism information being included in materials such as DVDs
• Govt and Warners to work together to promote NZ as a film production location and a tourist destination.

There is no way these concessions would have been necessary if it were not for the damage caused by the union organised global boycott. The decision has been made to film them here and no one was suggesting that was being reconsidered.

The US$500 million cost of producing the films will now largely be spent in New Zealand, and should be a useful contribution to economic growth.