This Greenpeace video is designed to convince people to oppose off-shore oil drilling in New Zealand.

However I reckon it is counter-productive. Videos of poor little seals, and penguins covered in oil tug the heartstrings and makes you want to boycott BP.

However a video of girls in bikinis posing covered in dripping sticky oil doesn’t have quite the same effect. In fact makes you want to go buy some shares in BP, and yell out “drill baby, drill” 🙂

Oh this should be very amusing. Whale Oil has announced he is standing for the Auckland Council in the same ward as Andrew Williams. Whale’s eight pledges are:

Mr Slater’s pledges are that he will NOT:

1. Piss on any trees
2. Sign paint­ings I have not painted
3. Send drunken texts after 11pm
4. Send drunken press releases after 11pm
5. Hold impor­tant meet­ings in bars
6. Vote to fund Brian Rudman’s theatre
7. Put booz­ing with my mates on my coun­cil credit card8. Stop putting piggy noses on trough­ing politicians
8. Punch ambu­lance officers

Can’t wait for the public meetings.

Peter McCaffrey has found a location for those in Wellington who want to watch the Aussie election over a few drinks. We will be at CQ Bar, Ground Floor, Comfort And Quality Hotel, 223 Cuba Street from 7.30 pm.

There is an inevitable Facebook event for it, which you can RSVP to. Should be a fun night – I’ll be blogging from there.

John Ansell is on The National today at 11 am, talking about the recent woes in ACT. This should be very interesting!

Go to Whale Oil, and read his revelations about who has been leaking stuff to him, and e-mailing him incredibly defamatory stuff about MPs and staff in ACT.

Maybe the media will reconsider their editorial stance of blaming Rodney.

Re-reading the Roy dossier, I noticed that her staff referred to her as HHR – Hon Heather Roy.

What amused me was if this including the Hon in the abbreviation caught on in the ACT office, this would mean that Rodney gets referred to as HRH 🙂

Have left it rather late, but how many people in Wellington would be keen to watch the aussie election results in a bar somewhere? Polls close at 6pm, which is 8 pm NZT. So starting say 7.30 pm?

Let me know if you are interested, and if enough are, I’ll try a couple of places.

Busted Blonde is still in the lead, but it could be close.

Go to NBR and vote for her (click on thumbs up sign next to her entry), so BB wins her weight in Veuve Clicquot. This is the final day of voting.

If Busted Blonde wins, I have been told I will be allowed to bring a couple of blog readers along to the party, where the 100+ kgs of champagne will be consumed.

So if you are a fan of Veuve Clicquot, make your case in the comments section, for why you should be my guest at the party, if Busted Blonde wins. Busted and Cactus will help me select the winners.

The white-heron was in a blillabong up near Darwin and I quite liked the setting of the scene. It seemed very peaceful.

The trickiest aspect of the shot was the fact a 4m crocodile was somewhere around. It’s the ones you can’t see that make me nervous.

As always, clicking the image will bring up a larger version

Hope everyone has a good day. Now, I really need to find some coffee… 🙂

NZPA report:

There is compelling international evidence that increasing the legal alcohol purchasing age reduces harm and saves lives, a United States professor and alcohol expert has told MPs.

Yes it does. Putting the purchase age up to 30 would save lives. So would putting it up to 40. Banning spirits would save live. Bannign motor cars would reduce the road toll.

Any moron can come up with a list of measures to reduce the harm caused by alcohol. A group of seven year olds could probably do so as a class exercise. But they all miss the point.

The point they all miss, is what impact does this have on adult New Zealanders and their ability to have a drink without causing harm.

The arrogance of some of these experts is best characterised by this quote from Professor Doug Sellman:

“So, even though the science points strongly to the four key actions described above, our leaders could very well allow ideology to trump science. This brings to mind political regimes we tend to look down on with great disapproval.”

Sellman’s taxpayer funded lobby group has demanded that everything they recommend must be implemented by the Government, without question. f not, then it means we are some sort of third world country or dictatorship.

What fucking arrogance.

I encourage Professor Sellman to go form a political party, and campaign on his agenda. Once he wins  general election, he can lecture us on what the Government must do.

Sellman is like many zealots in this field. They think it is only about the “science”, They don’t realise it is also about rights of New Zealanders.

Personally I am glad we have a Government that doesn’t give the zealots a veto on policy. That actually thinks adult New Zealanders have certain rights.

Have read through in detail the so called Roy Dossier, of 82 pages.

While it is designed to hurt Rodney Hide, I actually think that it reflects more poorly on its author. Incidentally the author is not necessarily Heather Roy, but more likely a former staff member of hers.

The first thing that strikes me is the massive sense of entitlement, as if ACT being in Parliament was all due to Heather. An extract:

In the 2005 -2008 Parliament, I maintained what I could of respectability for the Party through Rodney’s journey of reinvention.

News flash. Rodney won Epsom with a massive majority. He also increased the party vote from 2 MPs to 5 MPs. That was not due to the Deputy Leader’s so called maintenance of respectability.

The whole way through, it has this tone. Heather’s advisers have obviously convinced that she is ACT’s salvation.

I must, as an Associate Minister, have the ability to discuss issues freely and frankly with my primary Minister. The contents of the paper are entirely consistent with the ACT National Security Policy from the 2008 election which had sign-off from the policy committee.

But who decides it is consistent? That is the job of caucus, not the Minister or her aides solely.

Rodney sent me a text message asking for a copy of the Defence Document. I contacted Wayne Mapp to discuss this with him. I explained that the document was wanted because Rodney wanted to use it against me and that the ‘need to know’ provision in the security manual did not apply to him. I reminded him it was a draft intended for him only. He said it was my document and it was up to me. I said I was not going to give Rodney a copy

At this point I would have sacked Heather on the spot. This document was not sort sort of highly classified document, using top secret information. It was in fact authored by Heather (or her advisor), and her refusal to give her leader a copy is the most politically stupid thing I’ve seen since, well Chris Carter’s anonymous letters to the press gallery.

I then sent Rodney a text message in reply to his claim that he had discussed this with the Minister of Defence, informing him that it was a classified document and that I wouldn’t be giving it to him.

Again – I would have sacked her at that stage. What the hell was she thinking, or was she being advised. The sole reason Heather was Associate Minister of Defence is because Rodney Hide won Epsom, and is the party leader of ACT. Ministers are expected to consult their parties on what they do. I’ve never heard of a Minister refusing to share a document (that they authored) with a party leader.

There is a covering email that this document was sent with as an attachment (Enclosure 12). It is from my Advisor to his counterpart in the Mapp Office and the Deputy Secretary of Defence – the latter to whom feedback was asked to be directed. It states that in the event of having little time to scrutinise the paper he has made suggested changes but has not had time to run them past his Minister and, given the timeline for submission, he felt that he had no other choice and takes responsibility for this.

Rodney Hide states that my Advisor should not be making statements on ACT party positions. The comments made are all consistent with the ACT National Security policy for the 2008 election signed off by the policy committee and the email cover sheet covers off responsibility for comments.

So an unelected staff member is determining positions, and the party leader is not even able to see a copy. You get to see why there was a problem. The references to consistency with party election policy are a red herring as election policy tends to be very wide, and that doesn’t remove the need for approval for more specific positions.

After two very confrontational meetings with Rodney Hide in his office (both were called at very short notice with no indication of what they were about) and after discussion at a meeting with the Party President, I decided that I would not meet with the Leader alone.

I’m almost lost for words. The arrogance in that statement.

I was concerned he would take the paper away and copy it, which is why I said he could read it in my office, but not take it away. It is a classified document and he does not meet the security regulation ‘need to know’ criterion. His purpose for wanting the document was to use it in a witchhunt
against me.

Again the sense of importance and entitlement is staggering. Can you imagine a junior Minister telling her party leader he does not meet “need to know” because she unilaterally has decided she disapproves of his purposes for wanting it. And again this was not a secret or top secret document. It was merely restricted, and in fact authored by Heather or her advisor.

Makes it appear as though Rodney is afraid of Heather’s ability and ambition regarding leadership and so feels the need to remove her before she becomes too powerful.

Again, what were they smoking? The entire document reeks of this conceit.

Raises ser ious doubt s about John’ s judgement in challenging for Deputy role before Natural justice had occurred. Unlikely he would be taken as a serious future leader or ministerial option after that.

This part is hilarious. She thought she would stay on as a Minister if not Deputy, and is trying to scare Boscawen off.

Some Board members and highly placed list candidates may
publicly resign.

The only board member who resigned (later withdrawn) was in response to the lies in this dossier, not due to Heather’s sacking.

A Special General Meeting could be called by 20% of the membership causing further unhelpful media scrutiny.

You think you’re so highly reHgarded that 20% of the members will call an SGM to protest your sacking? After reading this dossier, they won’t manage 2%.

The Greens will likely offer a ‘make-up’ deal with National in an attempt to step into ACT’s support party space.

Ha ha ha ha ha. What fine political analysis.

I write this post again with sadness. But the “dossier” is so awful, I just can’t not point out that it in facts proves that Heather had to be sacked.

Two more large donations to National have been disclosed to the Electoral Commission.

Suzhen Zhou has donated $150,000. This is on top of an earlier $50,000 donation, so Ms Zhou is now National’s largest donor. Her combined $200,000 matches the $200,000 she gave to aid relief after the 2008  Sichuan earthquake.

Team McMillan in Newmarket have also donated $50,000.

Stuff has a gallery of the Miss Universe national costumes. I swear the so called national costume of Albania, is stolen from a strip club in West Auckland.

Pleased to welcome Roger Kerr to the blogosphere. Am looking forward to his contributions.

Roger has just blogged on the death of Tony Judt, described as a fearless Anglo-Jewish intellectual and academic historian who was one of the most brilliant and genuinely original thinkers of our times.

Judt caused great controversy, with this call in 2003:

Judt rocked the Jewish world in 2003 with an article in The New York Review of Books, Israel: the Alternative.

It described the Jewish state as “an anachronism” and argued that Zionism’s ethno-religious exclusivity be replaced by an inclusive liberal democracy. In effect, it called for a one-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian impasse, as he did again in a New York Times column only last month.

The so called one state solution, is ironically backed by elements of the Likud party.

The Business Roundtable has also just relaunched a refreshed website. Much more user-friendly.

From their latest newsletter:

The NZPF took the approach of engaging with the Minister to find a solution including a complete review of the National Standards system in partnership with the sector. Our preference remains still to work with the Minister and sector but until there is a commitment to work in a true and meaningful partnership, we can’t, in good faith engage with her. We do however leave the door open if the Minister should ever want to enter a partnership with us and the sector in the future. But we can’t just wait, doing nothing.

This is hilarious. Do you know why? The NZPF is refusing to actually detail their concerns about the standards. They keep saying they are flawed, but have declined every request to detail how exactly they are flawed. They say they will not detail the flaws, unless the Government agrees in advance to suspend the standards.

Their idea of a partnership, seems akin to a bank robber asking the bank manager for a partnership – hand over all your cash and then we will lower our weapon.

During last weekend’s executive meeting it passed a motion in respect of our moral obligation to our children which read NZPF encourages schools to take a principled stance on National Standards until such time as concerns are successfully resolved. By ‘principled stance’ the executive means making decisions and taking actions in the very best interests of the children of New Zealand and these may include moral and ethical considerations.

A principled stand – ha ha ha ha. And “best interests of the children of NZ” – they should write comedy. They are going to disrupt as many schools as possible to prevent parents from knowing how their kids are doing against a national standard, and claim this is to protect the children. My God.

National Standards are the most serious issue that the NZPF has encountered in its 27 year history. From many quarters there are warnings about hurtling down this path.

The most serious issue? Incredible. They are in fact a minor additional requirement, that school reports have an extra page where current reports are moderated so they can be measured against a national benchmark.

Downstage’s The December Brother was an eclectic mix of performances. There were three productions in one, or four if you include the ad at the beginning.

The evening started with an actor driving a car, and then you realise it is two actors – one is a sort of disembodied head. You see the head yawning and blinking and start to think this resembles an LTSA road safety ad. And in fact it turns out it was a road safety ad – a live performance one. Quite a novel approach, and did make an impact.

The first performance was about a woman finding out she was adopted and tracking down her adopted parents, and sort of linked to the third performance which was about finding out your long lost relatives are – well your step-brother is awaiting trial for killing your birth mother.

They were not particularly funny performances (with the exception of the scene with the aunt, which was slapstick funny), but were meant to be more dramatic, than humourous. I found them pretty good, but they went on a bit long. I doubt I would have gone to see them by themselves.

But the middle performance was the part I went for, and it was gold. It was a reconstruction of the Bain family murders, first showing how David would have done it, and then showing how Robin would have done it.

You could hear a pin drop during these scenes, and I found them quite emotional – the reconstruction of the poor kids getting shot, in some cases begging for their lives.

As for who did it, I think Danyl McL sums it up best:

They’re pretty even-handed; they don’t take sides and the actors make great choices to render both David and Robin’s actions believable. But sitting there watching while Robin Bain enters his house, takes off all his clothes, puts David’s clothes on, walks around the house and kills his family then takes David’s clothes off again, puts them in the washing machine, walks back through the house naked, puts his own clothes on and then commits suicide – let’s just say it removes any lingering doubts.

I actually had to stop myself laughing at one part, just at the sheer implausibility of the Robin did it scenario being played out in front of me. But despite that, it does have dramatic tension.

They used the same cast of four throughout, and they all performed well. Nikki McDonnell, as the adopted Rebecca was especially good I thought.

Overall was a good performance. However I never worked out what the hundreds of bottles on the stage for the third production represented. It looked like the world’s largest urine collection.

NZPA report:

Parliament has started digitising journals dating back to the 1860s, with the information to be made available online.

The project, to be launched in Parliament by Speaker Lockwood Smith today, involves 24 volumes of the historic Appendices to the Journals of the House of Representatives (A to J), covering the 1860s and 1870s.

The pilot volumes include 27,219 pages, 1807 reports and 158 foldouts comprising maps, plans and tables, and will be searchable online.

Very very cool. History should be accessible, and this will make it more so.

The journals cover a significant period of history including the land wars and confiscation of land, the discovery of gold and influx of migrants, Premier Sir Julius Vogel’s public works and immigration programme involving a mass government-assisted immigration scheme and the building of railways and roads, and the abolition of the provinces and strengthening of central government.

Parliament’s historian Dr John Martin said the volumes were “hidden treasures”. In all, 600 volumes will eventually be digitised, with progress dependent on funding availability.

Just get rid of a couple of MPs to pay for it 🙂

The Dom Post reports:

Thousands of secondary school teachers are preparing to strike after rejecting the Government’s pay offer.

Schools will close for half a day next week to allow more than 18,000 teachers to attend special meetings to vote on strike action. …

The PPTA is seeking a 4 per cent pay rise. It also wants an extra 1 per cent KiwiSaver employer contribution, laptops, immunisation against contagious diseases, and wants class sizes capped at 30 pupils, or 24 in classes with hazards such as woodwork, and some science classes.

Why stop there? Why not also demand company cars?

The sad thing is that good teachers are underpaid. Top teachers should be getting paid around $100,000 or more – and they are worth it.

But the PPTA refuses to consider performance pay, so the best teachers can be paid what they are worth. They insist that the worst teachers are paid the same as the best.

I am curious as to why the media think it is their job to try and help Winston Peters back into Parliament, just because it means that they get more interesting stories.

What I mean, is the media overkill that reports almost every utterance from Winston. Every speech to a room of oldies or students results in stories. An off the cuff comment about how he is not ruling out Helensville gets reported breathlessly on TV as a major story. Hello – what is news worthy about a guy who had a 30 year old beat him by 10,000 votes in his own former seat, speculate he may stand in a seat where the majority is 20,000 and he would be lucky to get his deposit back.

I do not advocate that the media should never report Winston. Of course not. If there is genuine judgement that something significant is said, they should consider it on the merits. But they give Winston free publicity massively in excess of what they give any other politician in his situation. I suspect they give him more publicity for one of his speeches to Grey Power, than they do to the Leaders of parties in Parliament such as the Maori Party.

On the average of the last polls by the three main public pollsters, NZ First is at 1.9% average. So he leads a party that is polling at under 2%, and got 4% at the last election.

I’ve tried to think of other party leaders in such situations, to compare the massively publicity Peters gets, against what they got. Perhaps a comparison could be the Alliance post 2002. But to be fair they only got 1.3% in the 2002 election.

The best comparison is the Christian Coalition post 1996. In 1996 they got 4.3% – a bit more than Winston’s 4.1% in 2008. So one would expect Winston to get as much coverage as they gave Graham Capill when he made a speech or press release, in 1997.

The only good thing about the leak of the 80 page “note” by Heather Roy is it has made people in the party realise how dire their situation is, and has prompted Heather to pledge to remain an ACT MP, and work towards rebuilding a relationship with Rodney Hide – and vice-versa.

I doubt I am the only person who is saddened by the considerable enmity that has built up between two MPs I have liked and respected.

The release of the “note” is very damaging to ACT, and at a time when they should be well above 5% due to National’s centrist agenda, they will remain down in the polls, as voters won’t support a party that is so caught up in infighting. Voters rightly think why should we trust a party to run the country, when they can’t even run their own party.

The number of people who had access to Heather’s “note” must be incredibly limited, and Heather may wish to consider the motivations of the person who leaked it. At a minimum it is someone who puts their own interests about that of their party’s.

There is also the issue of the defence report, as covered by NZPA:

In Parliament, Labour MP Trevor Mallard said Mr Hide gave the report to Mr Kearney, possibly through a staff member.

“Nick Kearney, who until last night was a member of the ACT board, has now resigned from the ACT board because he has been caught trying to give New Zealand defence assessment papers to a blogger,” he said. …

Mr Kearney told NZPA he was not given a copy of the report, had never seen it and did not know what it contained.

The allegation he was given the report was made by a fellow board member who was a supporter of Mrs Roy, he said.

The allegation was made during a confidential board meeting discussion, he said.

“It staggered me, it was jaw-dropping, and I said ‘I have no idea what you’re talking about’,” Mr Kearney said.

I don’t have first hand knowledge on this allegation, but I will say this – I trust the word of Nick Kearney, and would be amazed if he has had a copy of the report, when he says he has never seen it.

While on the other hand, if Trevor told me about gravity, I’d still want to throw a ball up in the air to verify what he said.

The NZ Open Source Awards 2010 have opened for nominations, They can be for:

• the contributions of New Zealanders to free and open source projects and free and open source philosophy
• exemplary use of free and open source by New Zealand organisations.

Categories include:

1. Open Source Use in Government
2. Open Source Use in Business
3. Open Source Use in Education
4. Open Source Use in the Arts
5. Open Source Software Project
6. Open Source Contributor
7. Open Source Advocate
8. Open Source People’s Choice Award

Nominations close on 15 September 2010.

I am a big fan of open source software – not because of the often lower cost, but because it leads to such great innovation when people from all over the world are free to take existing software and modify it.

I’m proud to be one of the judges for the 2010 awards, so am looking forward to seeing the entries come in.