Women’s Refuge do a great job supporting female victims (and their children) of domestic violence. I always donate to them, and it is a disgrace how many women get beaten, and often killed, by their partners. Of course domestic violence is not all one way, but far far more women are hospitalised and killed then men.

However they sometimes let themselves down with their advocacy, and the Advertising Standards Authority has just upheld complaints over their recent advertisements. The Herald reports:

The Advertising Standards Authority has labelled Women’s Refuge claims that a third of women live in fear as “exaggerated”.

The body upheld two complaints about fundraising print and television advertisements that ran in July. In the newspaper version the Saatchi & Saatchi ads said: “One in three New Zealand women need your help. Because living in fear isn’t living.”

The television version repeated the statistic and asked viewers to “stop the abuse before it starts”. …

In its response, Women’s Refuge said the statistic came from sources including 2004 research which found 33 to 39 per cent of women experienced intimate partner violence in their lifetime.

Further, a World Health Organisation study in Auckland and Waikato found one in three women experience physical or sexual violence from a partner in their lifetime. …

“While the majority of the complaints board acknowledged the veracity of the statistics, it was concerned that a study restricted to women living in Waikato and Auckland was used as the basis for national statistics.”

Similarly, it was concerned with the 2004 lifetime violence finding, which was based on an episode of violence becoming the “basis for fear”.

“In the majority view, it was inappropriate to extrapolate the claim ‘one in three women … are living in fear …’ from the research.

It is a good decision. If WR had said one in three women will experience domestic violence in their lifetimes, then they would have been on solid grounds. But to interpret that as one in three women live in fear was painting a false picture of NZ and NZ women. Thankfully, many women don’t live in fear. The moment a partner whacks them, they throw the bum out, and move on with their lives. I wish more women would do this – few things are sadder than seeing women continue in abusive relationships because they think “something” is better than “nothing” when it comes to relationships.

The Herald reports Treasury recommends:

• Move work-ready people from sickness and invalid benefits on to dole.
• Make sole parents look for paid work before youngest child turns 6.
• Contract out welfare services to private companies and charities.
• Increase sick leave and parental leave to give employers incentives to help workers back to work.

This will give Sue Bradford something to scream about.

I’m hesitant over the work testing when the children are under six, but the other stuff looks pretty sound.

It draws heavily on recent reforms in Australia and Britain, which have both moved work-ready people off disability benefits on to the unemployment benefit. In Britain, the paper says, 69 per cent of previous disability beneficiaries were classified as “fit for work” and moved on to the dole.

“On the basis of the recent UK reforms, the reclassification of all sickness and invalid beneficiaries could result in more than 80,000 New Zealand beneficiaries moving on to the unemployment benefit,” it says.

The principle is very sound, and the UK has shown the potential. I do want to make the point that many who are on the Invalids Benefit are quite literally unable to work, through no fault of their own. They deserve as much support as possible. But there certainly are some on there, who are work capable.

France, Germany, Switzerland and Norway all require sole parents to look for work when their youngest children turn 3, and some countries treat sole parents the same as any other unemployed person regardless of the children’s ages.

One could lower the age from six to five, but I’d rather not go below that.

The paper says Australia’s decision to contract out job search services for the unemployed to private companies and charities in 1998 halved the cost for every job placement from A$12,000 to A$6000.

Superb.

UPDATE 1225: TVNZ have taken my advice and suspended Paul Henry without pay until 18 October. Okay, may not be on my advice, but I do note that most people were calling for either just a better apology or outright sacking. As far as I know few people advocated suspension as the appropriate response.

A sacking would make Paul a martyr. The suspension both is humiliating for him, but also sets a very clear boundary. If he does similar in the future, then clearly the response needed from TVNZ will be stronger than suspension.

ORIGINAL: I’ve been thinking about what would be the appropriate response from TVNZ in relation to Paul Henry’s comments yesterdays. A “sorry if you were offended” apology does not come close. However I’m not in the camp demanding he must be sacked, and never work in broadcasting again. I do respect greatly the decision of Ben Gracewood to quit his beloved spot on Breakfast reviewing gadgets – a very principled gutsy call which will have far more impact on TVNZ than the few hundred people who have joined the anti Paul Henry facebook group (his pro one has 35,000).

What TVNZ should do, is the same as radio stations do when a “shock jock” steps over the line. They should suspend Paul Henry from on air duties. That sends out a very clear message about what is acceptable, without being commercially reckless. It may also serve as a learning exercise about boundaries.

I enjoy Paul Henry’s humour greatly, and think he is remarkably talented broadcaster. However what he did yesterday was not humouous. It was simply ugly. And I don’t think TVNZ (or Paul) have realised how different this is to other incidents.

If humour is sincere, you can get away with a lot. For example when friends ring me up and tell me awful Jewish jokes, I don’t mind a bit – because I know it is 100% humour and they don’t really have an anti-semitic bone in their body. If however some neo-nazi skin-head was telling the joke, it would be creepy as genuine dislike or contempt or even hatred is what motivates them.

And that is the challenge with watching Paul Henry in future. He no longer will be that funny offensive guy Paul Henry. He will be that guy who looks down on people with a different skin colour, and you will wonder if what motivates his humour is racism?

There’s a fair bit I don’t agree with Joris de Bres on, but his quotes in the Herald are spot on:

Mr de Bres said Henry often said things to challenge or shock people “but this one was off the planet”.

“What he was saying was that if you were an Indian New Zealander and you were born here, you went to school here, you went to university here, you practised law here, you became a judge, you became an ombudsman and you became a Governor-General, that a key presenter on national television still thinks you don’t look like or sound like a New Zealander.”

Mr de Bres said Sir Anand probably knew Henry well enough to ignore his comment, “but I know that it does have an impact on other Indians and other New Zealanders”.

This is the truly sad thing. We should celebrate Sir Anand’s achievements. He was born in New Zealand to immigrants from Fiji. He succeeded at school, at university, was a successful lawyer, became a Judge and then a hugely respected Ombudsman. Finally he is appointed Governor-General. But despite all of that, some people think he is still not a real New Zealander. Now think about the awful message that gives to young New Zealanders who have immigrant parents. It is that no matter how well you achieve, there are some New Zealanders that will think you are not a real Kiwi because of your skin colour.

This is not about offending a singer from the UK. This is about a statement that really will affect  lot of Kiwis. This is not an issue of freedom of speech – because that is not the same as freedom from consequences.

TVNZ issued a separate statement defending Henry – a release that Mr de Bres said was more “discouraging” than Henry’s original one.

Issued by spokeswoman Andi Brotherston, it said: “The audience tell us over and over again that one of the things they love about Paul Henry is that he’s prepared to say the things we quietly think but are scared to say out loud.”

I agree that the statement in defence was disgraceful. TVNZ badly miscalculated. This is very different to Paul’s other complaints.

A stronger response is needed than an apology. I think an on-air suspension would be the appropriate response. Anything less, and TVNZ looks like it condones racism. Because this is not just about Paul Henry, but also about TVNZ’s initial response defending him as saying he is prepared to say out loud what we think quietly.

I’ve now got comparisons from Neilsen for NZers who read Kiwiblog vs all NZers who are online.

• Gender – 52% Male KB vs 42% NZ
• Age – similar profile
• Household Income – 30% $40 – $100k KB vs 36% NZ, 34% $100k – $250k KB vs $28% NZ and 7% over $250k KB vs 4%
• Occupation – similar profile
• Location – Auckland 32% vs 34%, Wellington 28% vs 18%, Canterbury 15% vs 14%, Otago 5% v 4%
• Area – 86% urban KB vs 82% NZ
• Ethnicity – NZ European 80% KB vs 76% NZ, Maori 4%, vs 4% PI 2% vs 2%, Other European 7% vs 10%, Asian 2% vs 4%
• Internet Connection – 1% dial up KB vs 3% NZ
• Average Internet use – 36% up to 10 hours/week KB vs 50% NZ, 34% 10 – 20 vs 31%, 16% 20 – 30 vs 11% and 15% over 30 vs 10%
• Web 2.0 – 62% have used social network site vs 53%, 46% have commented n blog/discussion site vs 32%,
• Online Services – 86% use Internet Banking vs 83%, 34% have used VOIP calling vs 30%, 5% gambling vs 5%, 8% gaming vs 7%, 39% auctions vs 37%, 85% read newspaper vs 76%, 46% download or listen to music vs 37%, 28% listened to radio vs 19%, 60% download/view video vs 48%, 33% download/view TV or movie vs 26%, 41% download software vs 33%, 29% used RSS feed vs 18%, 30% monitored sports event vs 24%, 35% used IM vs 32%, 21% accessed Net via mobile phone vs 17%

At the 2006 Labour Party Conference, Mike Williams said on Agenda (8 July):

“I can think of between six and a dozen people in that caucus who could lead the Labour Party.”

My question to readers. Who do you think was on that list? This is from the 2006 Caucus.

1. Fri 15 Oct – Laban resigns
2. Wed 20 Oct – GG to issue writ
3. Wed 27 Oct – Nominations close
4. Sat 20 Nov – Election Day
5. Thu 9 Dec – Return of Writ final day

After the local body elections, I’m keen to review the various public polls that were published, and compare them to the actual results. I’m especially interested in the ones that used Internet panels.

If you know of a poll that has been published for your local elections, can you leave a comment with the details (or e-mail it to me).  A link to the story, if online, is desirable. If offline – details of the results, the sample size and the type of poll would be wonderful.

Wellington will be one interesting example – the Wellingtonian has done a phone poll which shows Kerry Prendergast with a large lead (15% to 20% off memory) while the Dom Post has only a 8% lead based on a readers survey.

So again, any details of local polls – even in community newpspaers, would be welcome.

I cringed when Paul Henry asked the PM this morning whether in appointing a Governor-General would “choose a New Zealander who looks and sounds like a New Zealander this time?”.

I have a lot of time for Paul’s humour, even his offensive humour, because humour is often offensive.

But this was not a joke, this was not even comparable to Paul Homes with his “cheeky darkie” comment, which was meant to be a parody.

This was a blatant statement that NZ born Sir Anand does not look and sound like a New Zealander because his parents are Fijian Indians.

What Paul really meant is that he does not sound like a white or British New Zealander.

If TVNZ don’t take firm action on this one, they will find themselves in a very umcomfortable position. They should also arrange for an apology to the Governor-General. He was born in New Zealander, and is every but as much a New Zealander as Paul Henry.

UPDATE: Paul Henry has apologised:

I sincerely apologise to the Governor General, Sir Anand Satyanand for any offence I may have caused.

I am aware that Sir Anand has made an outstanding contribution to New Zealand.

Anyone who knows anything about me will know I am a royalist, a constant defender of the monarchy and the role the Governor General plays in our society.

If my comments have personally offended Sir Anand, I regret it deeply.

I am sure it will still be the lead item on the news tonight, and in newspapers tomorrow.

A small fanatical cult in Timaru has called for their religious leader to be exempt from the laws of New Zealand, reports TVNZ:

They said in a statement today, issued under the name of Paul Carruthers, that the petition also sought the immediate removal of the Hubbard’s from statutory management, and for the removal of the investigations that are being carried out by the Serious Fraud Office.

That is a call for official corruption. No Government should interfere with an SFO investigation. The cult members obviously have lost grasp on reality, and do not understand little things such as separation of powers.

What is interesting is that the cult are being actively supported by Labour. Do they support the call for the Serious Fraud Office to be told that certain people in New Zealand are too highly regarded to be investigated?

Through my advertising network, I am on Nielsen Net Ratings. Apart from the normal stuff on page impressions, visitors, I also get a demographic breakdown of visitors to Kiwiblog. I figured people may be interested in them also.

• Gender – 52% Male, 48% Female (this is readers, not commenters)
• Age – 2% under 18, 21% 18 – 30, 28% 31 – 45, 31% 46 – 60 and 17% over 60
• Household Income – 15% under $40k, 30% $40 – $100K, 34% $100K – $250K and 7% over $250K
• Occupation – 23% professionals/managers, 9% self employed, 7% tertiary students, 3% secondary students, 7% retired
• Employers – 32% work for employers with less than 20 staff, 15% for 20 to 100 and 29% over 100
• Homes – 39% own with a mortgage, 31% own and no mortgage, 25% rent
• Children – 14% have children aged under 5, 13% 5 to 9, 13% 10 – 14, 13% 15 – 17, 63% no children at home
• Shopping – 44% say main household shopper, 39% say split equally, 17% say not primarily them
• Location – Auckland 32%, Wellington 28%, Canterbury 15%, Otago 5%, Waikato 4%, BOP 3%, Manawatu-Wanganui 3%, Northland 2%, Nelson/Marlborough 2%, Hawke’s Bay 1%, Southland 1%, Taranaki 1%, Gisborne 0.3%
• Area – 86% urban, 14% rural
• Ethnicity – NZ European 80%, Maori 4%, PI 2%, Other European 7%, Asian 2%
• Internet Access – 32% work, 63% home
• Internet Connection – 1% dial up, 97% broadband
• Average Internet use – 36% up to 10 hours/week, 34% 10 – 20, 16% 20 – 30 and 15% over 30
• Web 2.0 – 62% have used social network site, 46% have commented n blog/discussion site,
• Online Services – 86% use Internet Banking, 34% have used VOIP calling, 5% gambling, 8% gaming, 39% auctions, 85% read newspaper, 46% download or listen to music, 28% listened to radio, 60% download/view video, 33% download/view TV or movie, 41% download software, 29% used RSS feed, 30% monitored sports event, 35% used IM, 21% accessed Net via mobile phone,

What would be interesting is to see how Kiwblog readers differ from the average online Kiwi.

How excellent to see a media outlet investigate a claim made, rather than merely report it. The Herald reports:

The head of the secondary teachers’ union has claimed teachers deserve a bigger pay rise than police because nobody is queuing up to be a teacher – but Herald inquiries have found the claim does not stack up.

Universities have reported significant increases in the numbers applying to become secondary teachers over the past two years, which most attributed to the recession prompting people to retrain in areas such as teaching because of job security.

Most schools of education have had at least double the number of applicants for the spaces available. This year, Auckland University had 905 applications for the 340 places available.

So the claim there are no queues is in fact completely untrue. Not only is there a queue, it has doubled recently and less than 1 in 2 in the queue will even get in.

Post Primary Teachers’ Association president Kate Gainsford made her “no queues” claim after Finance Minister Bill English said the union needed to explain to nurses, civil servants, police and doctors why teachers deserved double the increase they had settled for.

The salaries of nurses, police and teachers are usually comparable.

Ms Gainsford’s response was that there was a queue wanting to become police officers.

“There is no queue for people wanting to become secondary school teachers. That is the problem, and we don’t want that to become a crisis.”

Problem solved. There is a queue and there is no crisis. You can call the strike off now.

E-mail from a reader:

My name in xxxxxxx xxxxxxxx and I was on holiday in Rotorua with my family this week as it rained the entire time I spent most of time in the pool with the kids and had some very surprising conversations with other guest 2 who were teachers that disagreed with the strike of the post primary school teachers.

One Maori lady was a teacher from Hastings who told her principal that she didn’t agree with the strike and her principal told her “well your job isn’t safe then is it”. She replied “yes it is”. She also felt that some teachers are worth much more than they are getting paid but some teacher are “just lazy and not worth anything”. She felt the union should be protecting good teachers but they are protecting bad teachers.

The second teacher we met has been teaching for 20 years (not sure where) and she had never seen such political bias and bullying from Principals and left leaning teachers and it was pointless arguing with anyone as your on a hiding to nothing. She said that at election time you can’t admit you vote National or you are harassed as the only point of the union is to get Labour elected. Even the placards are red and white.

If what these teachers say is correct then a lot of good teachers don’t agree with the strike and they disagree with the union but are too scared to do anything or don’t want to because it’s a hassle then that is the bigger story.

By the way the primary school my kids go to is xxx xxxxx primary school and they support National standards so a lot of schools do. But as a primary school they are great and very inclusive so in fact national standards will make no difference to xxx xxxxx as they are excellent to start with.

You are in the position to canvass a wide audience you should ask for stories from other teachers about political bias and bullying from principals and unions. It’s time the teachers unions stopped bullying other teachers and parents as they only care about 1 thing – to gain power.

Goes without saying, other stories are welcome.

Gerryorder 6 –Canterbury Earthquake (Historic Places Act) Order 2010

• Last until 31 March 2011
• Only applies to CCC, SDC and WDC
• provides for applications to be made for emergency authorities to damage, destroy, or modify archaeological sites where it is necessary or desirable to respond to damage arising from the Canterbury earthquake

I’ve covered on Kiwiblog the antics of Roger Payne and his electoral petition against Amy Adams in Selwyn. He recently got ordered to pay costs to National, but I doubt they’ll ever get money out of him.

He also spends time trying to the name of Muff Lane changed!

Anyway for those interested the Timaru Herald did a profile of him. People can form their own opinions of him.

I’m quoted briefly in the article. Also a minor correction – I did not veto his application for membership in Wellington Central. I wish I had the power of veto as I’d happily use it 🙂 but I merely suggested to certain officers that they should veto him, and the electorate committee did.

Just been looking at an old press release from Bill English. It compares the nine years from Sep 90 to Sep 99, the same period from Sep 99 to Sep 08 and the 21 months since then to June 10.

The average weekly earnings went up 27% in the 90s, 37% under Labour and 7% since Sep 00. The average increase per year is 3.0%, 4.1% and 4.0%.

But if you take account of tax paid, to look at what someone on the average earnings/wage gets to take home, then the increases are 33%, 33% and 11% – or annualized it is 3.7%, 3.7% and 6.3%.

Finally thought you want to look at the purchasing power – has someone earning at the average (mean) had their purchasing power increase during each of those periods, and by how much. Now inflation during each period was 16%, 29% and 2% Annualised this is 1.7%, 3.2% and 1.2%. This is worth remembering when Labour talks about cost of living.

So what was the increase in real after tax average earnings. They were 15.5% from Sep 90 to Sep 99, 3.0% from Sep 99 to Sep 08 and since Sep 08 8.7%. On an annualized basis, real wages went up 1.7% a year under National, then only 0.3% a year up until Sep 08, and a massive 5.0% a year since Sep 08.

This table above shows the difference. I’ll update it after we get the Dec 10 figures which will include the latest tax cuts, but also the GST impact.

The moral of the story is wage growth by itself is not enough. You also need low inflation and tax cuts to offset fiscal drag.

The Herald reports:

People will find it harder to avoid jury service from today, and the Government is promising major changes to simplify the criminal justice system.

Under the new rules, if you get a jury summons and can’t make it, you will have to do jury service at a more convenient time within 12 months.

This seems very sensible. It removes the incentive to find an excuse not to do jury service, if it means a postponement only. But look at these dismal stats:

2008

* 358,865 summonsed.
* 221,032 excused.
* 81,372 failed to show.

So only around 15% of those summonsed make themselves available. Around 60% get excused and disgracefully over 2205 simply do not turn up.

I’m fairly rare – I’ve never been summonsed. But would never consider saying no, unless it really was at a time that was unmanageable.

Makes you wonder about the so called jury of your peers, when in fact it i the jury of 15% of your peers.

The Herald reports:

Dozens of homeowners are asking more than $20,000 a week in rent for the Rugby World Cup and at least one website is now threatening to remove those charging exorbitant prices.

Who cares? There is no monopoly supply which forces people to pay such a price. The question is whether there is such a shortage that people are agreeing to pay $20,000/week.

The number of top-end listings continues to grow on accommodation websites but many remain unrented despite being advertised for months.

So problem solved.

Many Auckland homes, especially near Eden Park, are being offered for up to $1500 a night and, in some cases, even more than the $20,000 a week.

One website, Luxury Rentals 2011, has around 65 Auckland homes for rent during the Cup; nearly half are listed in the $20,000-plus category. The exact prices are by inquiry only.

Its a website specialising in luxury rentals. If some rich person is willing to pay $20K a week for said house, then good on them.

What would be interesting is what is the cheapest accommodation still available, not what is the most expensive?

I’ve got a TomTom GPS. Don’t use it too much in Wellington but great for trips out of town, and especially useful overseas. You can buy maps for most places on Earth.

You can choose what accent it speaks to you on. There is no New Zealand accent, so I have it set for an Irish accent – named Noelle for obvious reasons 🙂

Anyway if you want to be the Kiwi voice for TomTom, check out this site before 15 October. The winner gets a Suzuki Swift.

There are also daily prizes of a TomTom, and those who don’t enter can still go to the site, and listen to their favourite ones.

The HoS reports on the request by the Republican Movement to the Prime Minister, to let Parliament vote on who the next Governor-General will be.

Over 1,200 nominations have been made, through the Movement’s campaign site. The 10 most popular (in alphabetical order) are:

Ray Avery: 2010 New Zealander of the Year, a scientist whose work has enhanced the lives of many in third-world countries through his low-cost healthcare inventions.

Jim Bolger: Prime minister 1990-97. Taranaki-born Bolger oversaw the introduction of MMP and radical economic and social changes.

Justice Sir Eddie Durie: The first Maori appointed to the high court. He was chief judge of the Maori Land Court 1980-98 and Waitangi Tribunal chair 1980-2004.

Jeanette Fitzsimons: Co-leader of the Green Party 1995-2010. An MP from 1996-2010.

John Hood: A Rhodes Scholar, Oxford vice-chancellor 2004-09.

Sir Peter Leitch: Known as the Mad Butcher and famous for his charity work and support of sport. Pictured above with daughter Angela.

Lieutenant-General Jerry Mateparae: Current Defence Force chief. First Maori appointed to position in 2006.

Sir Don McKinnon: Commonwealth secretary-general 1999-2009, minister of foreign affairs 1990-99 and deputy prime minister 1990-96.

Sir Geoffrey Palmer: Prime minister 1989-90 and deputy prime minister 1984-89. Currently Law Commission president.

Dame Anne Salmond: Noted historian who is a member of the British Royal Society and was pro-chancellor of the Auckland University 1997-2006.

I’m against politicians being GG, but would be very comfortable with John Hood, Sir Peter Leitch, Lt General Mateparae or Dame Anne Salmond.

The HoS editorial:

But plainly the actors want to discuss a collective agreement – essentially unionising the workplace – in order to ensure that wages and conditions are protected. On the face of it, that sounds unexceptionable, but the prime mover in the matter is an Australian-based union, the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA), which is not registered in this country and which, therefore, cannot legally negotiate an agreement.

And it is hard to read what is going on as anything other than a grab for membership by that group.

And if MEAA got re-registered a a union in NZ, there is no reason it can’t represent that tiny (10%) minority of actors who choose to be members in their negotiations.

But what is unacceptable is their attempt to force every actor to be covered by the MEAA through a collective contract.

Support for the MEAA from the guilds representing the behind-the-camera talent – such as camera operators, designers and lighting teams – has been conspicuous by its absence.

As they are the ones who will be screwed over by the consequences.

Film-making, even on a small scale, is capital-intensive and high risk. Hollywood productions have a long history of being held to ransom by unions. One of the reasons so called “runaway” productions choose to film here is that they relish the versatility and can-do mentality of local actors and technicians.

Many media have missed the point about why the movie may move. It isn’t about whether NZ actors get paid less than other actors (and I am not sure they are), it is about union ransom demands. What really cripples a film is when you are halfway through shooting it and the union calls a strike – holding the production to ransom.

Any move away from New Zealand will not be because of pay rates. It will be because of union tactics.

There is no reason that actors here should be exploited; but there is no evidence that is happening. We are already facing competition from countries offering bigger tax incentives than we do to lure runaway productions. Our actors may rue their disproportionate militancy sooner than they think.

Well remember it is not all actors. MEAA represents only 10% of actors. But yes, the MEAA may end up screwing all actors in NZ if the NZ movie industry gets wiped out.

But it will go even further than that, in terms of bad consequences for actors. Much of the local industry relies on government subsidies through NZ on Air, Film Commission etc etc. And can you imagine there being any political willpower to increase funding to the arts, after a group of actors succeed in destroying the film industry? God no. So there will also be fewer plays, TV shows and local movies for all actors.

If you want to avoid this outcome, consider signing the petition started by Wellington film-maker Chaz Harris, and Richard Whiteside, a Wellington actor. It calls for an end to the boycott. If you sign it, and are involved in the arts, state your involvement.

There are 1,365 signatures to date. That is seven times as many people as are members of the MEAA in New Zealand.

The HoS headlne:

Paul Henry talks his way into trouble

The issue is:

TVNZ is investigating four complaints after its controversial Breakfast frontman repeatedly mispronounced the name of Delhi’s Chief Minister, Sheila Dikshit. Newsreader Peter Williams interjected, saying her name was pronounced “Dixit”. But Henry was undeterred and continued, with rollicking laughter.

Paul Henry is being unfairly picked on here. I’d say every radio channel in New Zealand has also done the same thing – with said laughter also.

New Zealand Indian Central Association president Paul Singh Bains said it was a cheap shot. “It wasn’t in good taste, making that kind of comment,” he said. “Sometimes he makes lighthearted comments but when you do it at the expense of other nations it’s not so respectful. The media should be cautious when making cheap shots.”

Oh don’t be so precious. It certainly is a cheap shot, but not at the expense of a nation.

If a New Zealand Minister had a surname, which had s spelling that resembled a rude word in another language, we would not feel insulted as a nation. We’d probably find it hilarious also.

The Herald on Sunday reports:

Outspoken MP Chris Carter is writing a “kiss and tell” book about Labour’s nine years in power.

The autobiography is to be in bookshops next year just as the election campaign begins.

An autobiography, no doubt scheduled for release the day of Labour’s campaign launch. Carter is again showing the political cunning he used to be renowned for.

Otago University lecturer Bryce Edwards said a book by Carter would have difficulty exposing too many Labour secrets because of his friendship with former leader and Prime Minister Helen Clark.

“He will know where the bodies are buried – but every body will have the DNA of Helen Clark on it.”

I suspect Helen will have some sort of editing veto!

The Herald on Sunday has learned Random House is the publisher – and that the deal was discussed after involvement from author and outgoing Waitakere Mayor Bob Harvey.

Carter said “should Goff and I be reconciled – unlikely but possible – then the book will have to wait until I retire”.

Now that is a blatant threat. If you kick me out, I will spend the entire election campaign reminding people of all the stuff people hated about the last Labour Government.

I would not underestimate how damaging the book could be. Carter can reveal how Goff voted in Cabinet on every major issue, and even quotes from Helen as to what she really thinks of Goff.

The news came as the Labour Party’s Te Atatu branch prepared to confirm Carter as its candidate for the election – handing party leadership a headache as the national board prepares to kick him out for good.

Carter said the local electorate committee was “totally supportive” of him and had passed a resolution that it wanted him as the candidate for Te Atatu, posing a likely tricky situation with head office party brass.

The final day for nominations is on Friday and no other candidates have emerged.

I do not believe Carter will be the candidate, but neither do I think Goff has the ability to get him expelled. My prediction is a suspension which means Carter will be back once Goff goes.

Carter said he “had not considered” running as an independent even though encouraged by supporters to do so.

Herald on Sunday inquiries last week found strong support for Carter in his Te Atatu base and across Auckland. Local party workers and Labour voters in Te Atatu – and on other local electorate committees – backed Carter as a Labour member.

In the context “had not considered” means “yet”. Would Labour lose Te Atatu if Carter runs as an Indepndent? Probably.

Carter’s initial strategy against Goff, with the letter to the press gallery had the political savvy of a retarded five year old. But since that blew up, his political savvy of old has returned – not so much with regard to his own reputation, but with regard to blocking Goff.

Don’t think Carter is totally isolated. Spies have reported that he has been seen at least twice talking to other Labour MPs – despite being officially expelled from Caucus. They don’t approve of what he did with the letter, but they don’t want him expelled from the party he has spent his life working for.