UMR have just released a poll on the Christchurch Mayoralty.

• Bob Parker 55% (+27%)
• Jim Anderton 41% (-19%)
• 88% say Parker has handled earthquake well
• 55% have positive impression of Parker (+20%)
• 44% have positive impression of Anderton (-19%)

What I find interesting is not that Bob Parker has gone up, but that Anderton has had a 19% drop in his favourability. That should be unaffected.

I think two things have contributed to it. The first is his statement that he could do Mayor and MP standing on his head came back to haunt him. And the second is his snide comments about Parker. He couldn’t bring himself to say anything genuinely nice about the job Parker did, so he did a veiled insult – “Bob is very good at appearing on television” type statements. It looked (and was) cheap.

The only bad thing about the poll is it means we probably keep Jim as an MP for another year!

The Dominion Post is unimpressed:

Labour’s promise to remove GST from fresh fruit and vegetables reeks of desperation.

With his party languishing at 32 per cent in the latest Colmar Brunton poll – a formidable 22 points behind National – Labour leader Phil Goff’s desire for a circuit breaker is entirely understandable. However, that does not make his choice any less wrong-headed.

And the inconsistencies:

Mr Goff and his senior colleagues are experienced enough to know that to open the door for exemptions is to also open a can of worms.

They will be asked why those who buy their peas fresh should be favoured over those who buy them frozen – there is little, if any, difference in the health benefits they deliver.

They will be asked why the exemption should apply only to fruit and vegetables, and not to other elements of a healthy diet, such as fish and lean meat.

They will be asked why they do not provide for other exemptions to promote other activities that benefit society – removing GST from bicycles or solar panels, for example.

Most of all, they must pledge to also remove GST from condoms. Does Labour not care about herpes? Are they unconcerned over AIDs? Do they want to be responsible for tens of thousands of abortions, because they have not removed GST off condoms?

And The Press:

After spending more than two decades assiduously defending the integrity of the GST system it originally introduced, Labour has back-pedalled with its promise to scrap the tax on fresh fruit and vegetables. …

Despite Labour claims to the contrary, retailers have rightly warned that making fresh fruit and vegetables exempt would still compromise the simplicity of the system, which was one of its greatest virtues. This will inevitably lead to added compliance costs for many businesses and, in terms of monitoring or administering the GST change, for the government as well.

The benefit accruing to families, which Labour puts at $6 a week and National at just $1 a week, must be offset against the hidden compliance costs and the lost tax revenue of around $250 million a year. …

Rather than increase the costs to retailers, the Government focus, especially in post-quake Canterbury where employment losses are likely, should be on providing an economic environment which fosters job and income growth. This is a preferable way to ensure that fruit, vegetables and other healthy foods are affordable.

Exactly.

Quiz is here. Beat 21 seconds.

Martin Kay writes:

Labour has yet to set a date to hear disciplinary charges against rebel MP Chris Carter as time runs out before nominations for his Te Atatu seat close.

Labour president Andrew Little said the party was in talks with Mr Carter’s lawyers to arrange a meeting of the ruling council to hear charges that could result in the MP’s expulsion from the party.

Labour wants the matter dealt with before nominations for the party’s Te Atatu candidacy close on October 8 to avoid having to reopen the race if he is expelled.

Mr Carter said yesterday he was still the only nomination and had not withdrawn his candidacy.

Carter is obviously not going to agree to be available until after the 8th of October.

Unless Labour delay the deadline for the close of nominations, then it is possible Carter will be the only nomination. That would be hugely embarrassing for the leadership.

The Dom Post reports:

The career criminal who killed Kapiti man Raymond Piper has 175 prior convictions, including for serious violent offences. …

Last year Anderson was convicted of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. …

Anderson has 175 previous convictions since 1977, many for serious assaults and for threatening to kill, assaulting police, dishonesty and drug convictions.

I’m pretty sure at least three of those 175 convictions would be for serious offences which now carry a strike. If after his third serious offence, Piper had been sent away, I dare say there would be scores less victims and Raymond Piper would probably be alive.

In the Herald’s story on the Wilson decision, they report:

Sir David is a lay person, not a lawyer, but during his inquiries into the complaint he had the assistance of a former Chief Justice of Australia, Murray Gleeson.

Not a lawyer? Well Sir David Gascoigne has a Master of Laws degree. Perhaps he never practised? But as he was Chairman of Minter Ellison Rudd Watts, I guess he is a lawyer after all.

Colin Carruthers, on behalf of Justice Wilson, has had a partial victory with the judicial review of of the decision of the Judicial Conduct Commissioner’s recommendation that a Judicial Conduct Panel be established.

Dean Knight blogs on what it means:

First, it’s very much a technical decision about how the Commissioner should have framed and referred the complaints for consideration for the Panel.  In a nut-shell, the Commissioner was wrong to refer the whole bundle of complaints.  He should have formed a view on each and every complaint and specified with some particularity which conduct warranted inquiry by the Panel.  As a consequence, some complaints which were trifling were wrongly added into the mix; the main complaint – while sufficient for further investigation – was not framed carefully enough when it was referred; and complaints about the judge’s conduct between the two Supreme Court decision were referred without an opinion being specifically reached on whether they justified further investigation for the Panel.

This seems fair and reasonable. It means that the JCC must be very specific with which actions of Justice Wilson are thought to have been misconduct, rather than just refer the entire saga.

Secondly, on the marquee complaint that the Commissioner relied on to recommend a Panel be convened, the High Court is clear that the Commissioner’s vetting process was proper and consistent with the Act.  The Commissioner properly appreciated the standard of conduct that, as a matter of constitutional law, justified removal of a judge from office and justified further investigation. The Commissioner also properly applied this standard when reviewing the factual allegations made. The Court said (at [91]):

“The important point is that the Commissioner considered that deliberate non-disclosure was a sufficiently plausible possibility to warrant further inquiry being made.  We agree with the Commissioner’s conclusion that conduct of that type, if established, might warrant consideration of the removal of the Judge.  We also accept Mr Goddard’s submission that in reaching that view the Commissioner formed the opinion that s 15(1) required of him.”

Justice Wilson did not win on this point, but it is worth stressing that the finding is that deliberate non-disclosure was a sufficiently plausible possibility to warrant removal. That does not mean that the panel will necessarily find it is – just that it could be.

Finally, this decision is undoubtedly not going to halt the process.

Presumably the JCC will now frame more specific “complaints” for the panel to consider.

The Herald reports:

iPod users are being warned by police to be vigilant on the roads after the death of a young woman who was hit by a car while listening to music.

It is believed to be the third case in the past year in which a pedestrian or cyclist listening to an iPod has been distracted and killed.

Well that has killed more people than drivers aged over 25 with a BAC between 0.05 and 0.08.

Clearly the Government needs to ban pedestrians and cyclists from walking/cycling with an iPod.

The Herald reports:

Without any attempt at double entendre, it could only be described as a slip of the tongue. The former French justice minister, Rachida Dati, 44, has become an overnight internet sensation after accidentally using the word “fellation” instead of “inflation” in a television interview.

A clip of her mistake has become one of the most viewed items on the French-language internet. The former minister, now a Euro MP, was talking about job losses at Lejaby, a foreign-owned French company which specialises in lingerie.

“These foreign investment funds are only interested in excessive profits,” she said. “When I see some of them demand a return of 20 or 25 per cent, when fellation is almost non-existent… I say they are just trying to destroy businesses.”

Oh this is a superb gaffe. Almost as good as John’s Carters “cunning stunt” a few years back.

To make it worse for the MP she is rather attractive, which makes her comments more noticeable.

Did I say rather attractive? Maybe a bit more than that!

The Dom Post reports:

ACC is poised to take legal action to liquidate the Wellington Phoenix football club, saying it is owed more than $260,000 in unpaid player levies.

The club, owned by Terry Serepisos, had repeatedly “promised” to pay the levies and had failed to honour agreed payment plans, the Accident Compensation Corporation confirmed to The Dominion Post.

ACC plans to go to court today to liquidate Century City Football, whose sole director is Mr Serepisos.

He said last night that he was “shocked” by the legal threat. The matter would not go to court because “we have made arrangements to pay” today, he said.

Terry, Terry, Terry. I don’t think they want an arrangement to pay. I think they want a cheque.

ACC acting chief executive Keith McLea confirmed the legal action earlier yesterday. “Century City Football owes more than $260,000 in unpaid levies to ACC, some of it dating back several years.

“They have promised to pay many times but not done so. We have even agreed payment plans with them but these have not been honoured.

I can’t recall ACC ever liquidating someone before. IRD do it heaps. Maybe ACC do also, but are lower profile about it.

Mr Serepisos said he and his lawyer had agreed on a plan with ACC on Friday to pay the levies and “they have not even advised me of this [the move to liquidate].”

The amount of levies was “in dispute”, he said, and he would fight any legal action.

The claim the amount of levies is in dispute is a red herring. I actually worked in credit control for Wellington Newspapers once. You get very good at knowing the difference between those with a genuine dispute and those disputing as an excuse not to pay on time.

Those with a genuine dispute always agree to pay the undisputed part of the account, and only with-hold the (often quite small) aspect under dispute.

Those who can not or will not pay, refuse to pay anything due to the “dispute”. They are the ones you cut off further credit to, or refer to the debt collector/court.

Hopefully for the sake of the Phoenix, Terry Serepisos can actually pay, so the team is not liquidated.

AP report:

A wealthy British businessman who owns the company that makes the two-wheeled Segway people transporter has been found dead in a river in northern England after apparently falling off a cliff on one of the vehicles, police said.

I now it is not funny to his family, but I’m sorry the owner of Segways going off a cliff on one!!

If it was an accident, he must have been at maximum speed on a very slippery road!

If it was suicide, then why not just jump off? What statement was he making by riding a Segway off a cliff?

The Herald reports:

Auckland Council candidates are split almost equally over whether the new council should play a bigger role in providing social housing for low-income people.

Mayoral candidate Len Brown and 17 other candidates have told a survey by the Waitakere Housing Call to Action group that the council should maintain or expand the pensioner units it will inherit from existing councils, and work with the Government and community groups to provide more social housing. …

Mr Brown told a social issues forum in Otahuhu yesterday that he wanted to double the existing number of units.

He advocated putting “1000 new units of affordable housing, both personally owned and rented”, into Housing NZ urban renewal projects at Tamaki, Clendon and Papakura.

No no no. Local Government isn’t there to find schools, hospitals and provide housing. That is the role of central Government, Len Brown wants to spend over $1 billion of ratepayers money on housing – money that could either lower rates, or be far better spent on public transport, roads, parks etc.

Not everyone thank God wants to spend $1 billion on housing. No I dodn’t mean John Banks, but the two communist (Annalucia is standing for the Communist League, and Penny – well if it sounds like a duck, walks like a duck ….) candidates:

The candidate survey found some unexpected bedfellows. Far-left mayoral candidates Penny Bright and Annalucia Vermunt both urged expansion of social housing – but by the state, not the new council.

And Penny and Alllucia are right. This is the role of central Government – through Housing NZ. What next from Len – have the Council start its own welfare department?

This is very serious. The Herald reports (offline):

Police are investigating a death threat against a political organiser in relation to a possible Super City voting scam in South Auckland.

Citizens & Ratepayers campaign organiser Jim Stephens received a letter mentioning a “hit list” and “shooters” if the right-leaning ticket did not desist from maligning “our winning candidate Daljit [Singh]”.

It was purportedly signed by “Daljit Singh supporters”.

Last night, Daljit Singh, one of two Labour Party candidates in the Papatoetoe subdivision of the Otara-Papatoetoe Local Board, was “100 per cent sure” none of his supporters had sent the letter.

I hope the Police test the letter for fingerprints and handwriting samples etc. Totally unacceptable to make not very veiled threats like this.

Andrew Geddis blogs a letter from 27 legal scholars expressing concern over the powers granted to the Executive under the Canterbury Response and Recovery Earthquake Act.

The authors are:

Professor Stuart Anderson, Faculty of Law, University of Otago.
Mark Bennett, Faculty of Law, Victoria University of Wellington.
Malcom Birdling, Keble College, University of Oxford.
Joel Colon-Rios, Faculty of Law, Victoria University of Wellington.
Richard Cornes, School of Law, University of Essex.
Trevor Daya-Winterbottom, Faculty of Law, University of Waikato.
Professor John Dawson, Faculty of Law, University of Otago.
Richard Ekins, Faculty of Law, University of Auckland.
Associate Prof. Andrew Geddis, Faculty of Law, University of Otago.
Claudia Geiringer, Faculty of Law, Victoria University of Wellington.
Kris Gledhill, Faculty of Law, University of Auckland.
Professor Bruce Harris, Faculty of Law, University of Auckland.
Professor Mark Henaghan, Faculty of Law, University of Otago.
Dr John Hopkins, Law School, University of Canterbury.
John Ip, Faculty of Law, University of Auckland.
Carwyn Jones, Faculty of Law, Victoria University of Wellington.
Dean Knight, Faculty of Law, Victoria University of Wellington.
Prof. Elizabeth McLeay, Faculty of Law, Victoria University of Wellington.
Steven Price, Faculty of Law, Victoria University of Wellington.
Vernon Rive, Law School, Auckland University of Technology.
Mary-Rose Russell, Law School, Auckland University of Technology.
Katherine Sanders, Faculty of Law, University of Auckland.
Dr Rayner Thwaites, Faculty of Law, Victoria University of Wellington.
Professor Jeremy Waldron, New York University School of Law.
Ceri Warnock, Faculty of Law, University of Otago.
Nicola Wheen, Faculty of Law, Univerity of Otago.
Hanna Wilberg, Faculty of Law, University of Auckland.

Maxim Institute has also endorsed the letter.

My view is that it is desirable for Parliament to amend the Act in say two or three months time. By then it should be clear which acts may need to be amended by order-in-council, and the CERR Act can be changed so that it only applies to a small number of specified acts, rather than to every act (bar five) in New Zealand.

The list of signatories is impressive, with no less than seven law professors. I would make the point that it would perhaps carry more weight if they had also obtained signatures from lawyers outside the universities. A few senior partners from the big law firms would make it harder to dismiss as just “academics”, as would the senior officers of the Law Society?

Doesn’t the Law Society have a rule of law committee? I’d like to hear their view on the law. People should debate this issue – not because there is a risk that King Gerry I is going to declare martial law, but because of the precedent it does set for future disasters.

I think the One News poll had 89% approval (a staggering figure) of the Government’s response to the earthquake. This shows that the public like the fact the Government has put such emphasis on the earthquake recovery. But that doesn’t mean it would still not be a good idea to narrow the scope of the CERR Act in the not so distant future.

What did Phil Goff say yesterday about National’s changes to policy on foreign ownership of land:

Labour leader Phil Goff said it was a half-hearted effort that did practically nothing.

“It will do nothing to discourage the increasing foreign ownership of New Zealand land.”

Now I wonder how much actual land has been sold under National. According to Maurice Williamson it is 31,000 hectares or 310 square kms. That is an average of around 20,000 hectares a year.

And how much land was sold under Labour to foreign owners?

Over nine years, you would expect it be 180,000 hectares, if at the same rate.  In fact it was a massive 650,000 hectares!!!

Now personally I think it is a good thing Labour allowed NZ land owners to sell their land to the highest bidder, rather than be forced to accept lower bids.

But the hypocrisy is just staggering.

In a profile on new UK Labour Leader Ed Milliband, The Independent said:

He is soft, cuddly and panders to every oppositional instinct in the party. There has been no position taken by the Labour Government of which he was a member that he was not prepared to trash if he thought Labour members would like it.

Is that not a perfect description of Phil Goff?

• One of the architects of GST campaigning against it
• One of the architects of our inflation focused monetary policy campaigning against it
• One of the Ministers who reaped $3b in profits from state power companies at a time of massive surpluses, now campaigning for them to be lower despite the record deficits
• One of the Ministers who refused time after time to reduce the blood alcohol limit, not campaigning for it to lower
• One of the Ministers who sold 650,000 hectares of land to foreigners, campaigning against 30,000 hectares of sales.

Someone should compile a fuller list of these. Feel free to add others to the comments.

The Herald editorial:

According to the Finance Minister, overseas investment regulations to be introduced in December will “provide extra clarity and certainty for potential investors”. More likely it will produce doubt and confusion.

The only thing more certain, is that Ministers are more likely to interfere if the political heat gets too much.

The regulations are an invitation for pressure groups to create as much fuss as possible to get the ministerial thumbs-down for what may well be desirable bids in terms of efficiency and economic benefit. Some opposition may be driven by xenophobia; others may not wish land sold to any overseas interests, whether they are Canadian or Chinese. Clearly, there will now be added uncertainty. Overseas investment policy, rather than being based on a clear set of principles that are applied without fear or favour and that recognise the limits on foreign control, will be hostage to the ministerial pen. …

Overseas investment, like immigration, has always been a key driver of the New Zealand economy. It also is far too important to be hostage to ad hoc politicking.

What people always forget, is that when you ban land owners from selling to the highest bidder, you are reducing their net wealth – and reducing the amount of money they may have to invest in other ventures.

The Herald reports:

The Super City will open for business on November 1 with 1223 fewer staff than the existing councils and their business units, leading to a $66.5 million cut in the annual wage bill.

The agency designing the Super City has trimmed staff numbers from 9430 staff a year ago to 8207. …

The agency said staff numbers would drop by another 300 when people employed to bed down the Super City completed their work by July 2012.

This would lead to a $91 million overall reduction in the wages bill to $513 million by mid-2012.

This is good news for Auckland ratepayers. Obviously not great for those losing their jobs, but reducing costs on ratepayers will lead to greater economic growth and more jobs in the private sector.

The chances of cost savings from fewer staff leading to lower rates appear remote.

None of the main Super City mayoral candidates or political tickets are promising lower rates from the savings and efficiencies expected from the reforms.

As well, setting up the Super City has cost $200 million, which will be borne by ratepayers.

Which is around the first three years of lower staff costs only. After that rates should be lower than what they would have been under eight different Councils.

If one goes to the Stats Household Expenditure Survey, it give details of spending on fruit and vegetables by income decile.

The poorest 10% of households spend $9.80 a week on fruit and vegetables. Assume two thirds is “fresh” and that is $6.53 they spend on fresh fruit and vegetables.

The “rich pricks” households making up the top 10% spend $30.70 a week on fruit and vegetables. Assume two thirds is “fresh” and that is $20.47 they spend on fresh fruit and vegetables.

The Goofynomics announcement yesterday means a weekly saving of 98c for the poorest households and a saving of $3.07 for the rich pricks. So the rich pricks gets more than three times the benefit of Goofynomics than the poor.

But let us give the final word on Goofynomics to Dr Michael Cullen, who said on 4 August 2004:

Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN: I am aware of many countries that have appallingly inefficient GST systems where they exempt various articles, where they have differential rates, and where one has to differentiate between food taken away from a place and food consumed within a place. Thank goodness we have not followed those very bad policies.

So we have it officially from the last Govt – “very bad policies”.

Once again FitnessNZ has their annual gym membership promotion. Details are:

• 40 to 70% off for 1st time gym members, or someone who hasn’t been a member for 12 months (can buy for a friend, but check that they aren’t a current member 1st!)
• 100+ gyms nationwide
• 3, 6 and 12 month memberships avail at most gyms
• limited # of subsidised membership at each facility, and some sell out fast
• No government money involved. 🙂

And even better, Kiwiblog readers can obtain a further 10% discount on your membership if you use the special code “Blog57″ (without the quotes). This means you will be getting 50% to 80% off effectively.

So if you have been wanting to join a gym, this is a good time.

I’m in Sydney for the rest of the week, as I’m speaking on a panel at the 2010 Pacific Rim Policy Exchange Conference. The conference is organised by Americans for Tax Reform Foundation, the Property Rights Alliance, the Institute of Public Affairs, and the Heartland Institute.

My panel is on “Getting the message out”, so focusing on effective “retail” communication.

Most of the conference is policy focused. Sessions are on:

• Obstacles to Investment
• Free Trade
• Financial Regulation
• Digital Liberty
• IP, Jobs, and the Economy
• Best Practices for Reducing the Size of Government

So a real bonus for me, is I also get to attend all the other sessions. As time permits, I hope to blog some of them.

news.com.au reported: