Adam Pearse writes:

But what came in the days following the cyclone cannot be justified.

Some of the aforementioned communities saw no support for days. Looking around at their homes and livelihoods reduced to nothing, they thought help was surely on its way.

As reserves of fuel, food and water ran dangerously low, they thought a supply drop by chopper or truck must be imminent.

Without power to pump their water, they thought portaloos and medical kits were en route, as any cuts risked becoming septic while they waded through the sludge that filled their living rooms.

Unfortunately, it seems the demand nearer to town was too great.

It’s something rural communities are aware of and freely recognise – resources necessary to survive days of isolation aren’t usually common the closer you get to the city centre.

The cyclone first hit nine days ago, and we still have 2,000 or so people that can’t be contacted.

Farmers are paying thousands of dollars out of their own coffers to charter private helicopter flights to arrange evacuations of children or bring in supplies because publicly contracted operations are too busy with rescues.

Looting, becoming common in town, is spreading into rural areas, putting already traumatised residents further on edge.

Puketapu was among the first of these areas to install roadblocks or checkpoints at access points into their village, and others appear to be following suit.

It is unimaginably tough for those in affected rural areas.

Given the latter point, it was perhaps telling Hipkins continued to insist to reporters that the Government was “throwing everything” at the cyclone response.

When Civil Defence controller Ian Macdonald, who was appearing with Hipkins, was asked if the region had enough helicopters, he casually said more would be nice, but he was confident there were enough.

That will provide little comfort for the likes of Puketitiri, which reportedly hadn’t had a supply drop as of Sunday, six days after the cyclone.

Six days with no supplies??

Stuff reports:

A Tongan national accidentally killed his partner with a single slap to the head while the pair were stuck in Auckland due to Covid-19 travel restrictions.

Umukisia Fiva​, 34, died in September 2020 after she was hit in the head at a party in Manurewa.

Penitiketo Uhatafe previously admitted a charge of manslaughter.

He was sentenced to five months’ home detention at the High Court at Auckland on Tuesday by Justice Anne Hinton. …

“I want to make it clear, that sentence is much lower than it would have been because of the seven months you have already spent in prison and the 22 months you have spent on restricted bail conditions.”

So he got seven months jail and five months home detention for killing his partner. Boy that will teach him.

The offending was:

• Fiva started videoing someone singing at the party, which angered Uhatafe.
• He told her if she did it again, he would slap or smack her and took the phone from her, the court heard.
• She picked the phone up, Uhatafe then stood up and hit Fiva once on the left side of her head with significant force.
• She slumped forward in her chair, unconscious, then collapsed onto the wooden deck.
• Uhatafe ran from the party to a nearby family member’s house
• Fiva died

So he killed her because she wouldn’t obey him. So sad.

This is a post by PaulL, regular commenter and sometime contributor.

The recent floods have highlighted (again) the problem of forestry slash. It seems only a couple of years ago that there was a washout on the Napier – Taupo highway because of a bridge blocked then blown out by forestry slash. There was talk in the media, then no action.

I see again talk on twitter about this being a problem, but mostly in the context of blaming forestry or blaming global warming. I haven’t seen proposed solutions.

This post proposes a two part potential solution.

Let’s start with the problem. We have lots of pine forests because govt policy encourages them in many situations as compared to alternative farming. Those forests need to be harvested to provide an income both to their owners, but also to the country as a whole. We’re ultimately an agricultural country, and our farmland needs to remain productive.

Harvesting trees means cutting them down. The logs that have commercial value are extracted, and there is a lot of residue – logs that were unsuitable, tops and tails, branches, stumps etc. This residue is typically left to rot where it is. The larger bits (logs and stumps) take a long time to rot. A major flood or rainfall event can drive this residue into a river, from where it can back up against bridge pilings and then cause a dam. That dam will either blow the bridge out from the weight of water behind it, or cause the river to jump out of it’s channel and go places we’d rather it wasn’t.

The slash is clearly a by product of the forestry operations, and it’s imposing a cost on the rest of society. It’s an externality from logging. The logging operations currently have no reason to do anything about slash. It’s hard to trace a problem (e.g. a bridge blowing out) to an individual forestry operation, and therefore hard to attribute liability. There’s no penalty for not managing slash, and it would cost money for the logging operation to do something.

Standard economic theory says that we need a way to internalise this externality. We need to make it cost money to fail to manage it, or we need to make it profitable to manage it.

My potential solution includes both those elements.

From Hansard:

David Seymour: Wouldn’t it be important to understand that his Government is taxing $118 billion off New Zealanders—$32 billion more per year than just four years ago?

Rt Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I welcome the opportunity to set out for the member that our Government is actually taking less tax out of the economy as a proportion of the economy than when we became the Government.

This could see the PM up before the Privileges Committee for misleading the House as it is clearly wrong. In 2017 taxation was 27.5% of GDP and now it is 30.2%.

The difference is not minor. GDP is around $400 billion a year so the difference is around $10 billion a year, or $7,000 per household.

After sitting on the data for two months, the Minister has finally released attendance data for Term 3 of 2022. Here’s the key points:

• Only 46% of students attending regularly, compared to 60% in 2019
• 13% of students are attending less than 70% of the time, compared to 7% in 2019
• Only 33% of Maori And Pacific students attending regularly, and 22% are attending fewer than 70% of the time
• Regular attendance for Decile 1 schools is just 30%

So one in eight students are chronically absent from school, missing at least 12 weeks a year.

Stuff reports:

Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has conspicuously dropped the “Three Waters” label from the Government’s contentious water reforms, though he has promised to “get on with the job” of fixing water infrastructure.

Hipkins tabled a 24-page statement outlining his priorities in Parliament on Tuesday, as he delivered his first speech as prime minister in the House. In both the statement and the speech, he did not once mention Three Waters.

Stuff understands Hipkins’ Government has decided to stop talking about Three Waters – a politically charged title for the reform of fresh, waste, and storm water systems – and instead talk of the issues facing cash-strapped councils: unsafe drinking water, broken pipes, and inadequate infrastructure.

So rather than listen to the tens of thousands of New Zealanders who submitted against the Three Waters law, their cunning plan is to simply rename it!

Newsroom reports:

Some residents in Hawkes Bay are furious at the attitude of Prime Minister Chris Hipkins in an interview on RNZ’s Morning Report today in which he said an incident involving firearms was unsubstantiated and insinuated the report was without basis.

In an extensive recorded interview with Newsroom on Sunday, Ryan Lawson, whose company East Coast Traffic is contracted to set up the necessary traffic management in the region, provided a detailed account of an incident on Pakowhai Road between Napier and Hastings in which firearms were used to threaten his staff.

“Two of my staff members were encountered with firearms being directly pointed at them while they were sending out temporary traffic management. Honestly for us it was a very, very scary moment and that crew just had to up and leave.”

Like many people here, Lawson and his staff don’t want the attention and are just getting on with the job. Lawson didn’t want to comment further, but plenty of other locals were angry and upset at the comments Hipkins made downplaying the extent of the issues they’re facing. …

The PM said on RNZ that many of the things being reported as facts in fact “aren’t facts.” And in the same breath used the story about traffic workers being threatened by firearms as an example.

“There’s been no substantiation to the allegations that people on checkpoints had had guns pulled on them. If anyone wants to report that that happened they should do so to the police,” said Hipkins.

“All police have got at the moment are third hand accounts that they haven’t been able to substantiate.”

The interviewer said: “So you’re saying that particular incident that was raised of someone pulling a gun on someone at a checkpoint didn’t happen – is that the one you’re referring to?

Hipkins: “So the feedback I had, as of this morning, is that the police have not been able to substantiate that.”

But locals in Hawkes Bay spoken to by Newsroom felt the PM was out of touch and didn’t understand what it’s like on the ground.

“Not everyone reports everything because the police are busy, and so is Civil Defence. It shows the force isn’t actually coping with the amount of crime that’s happening in the Bay,” said one Awatoto resident who lost everything in the flooding.

“There’s been people everywhere you go, making the most of the situation, stealing stuff.”

Checkpoints have been put up by locals at multiple spots, including tractors at Whirinaki up the coast and tree stumps blocking the entry to Waiohiki, which lost the bridge that connects it to Taradale.

In rural Puketapu, which resembles an apocalyptic war zone, residents are putting trucks across the road to keep looters and other opportunists out.

“Seventeen cars turned around about two or three hundred metres away and sped off on the first night we set up the roadblock,” said one couple, who had their fridge and washing machine – both of which they were hoping to salvage – taken early on. A neighbour had to board up their garage when they went off to work for the day, so thieves couldn’t see what they had inside.

So basically the PM is gaslighting the locals in Hawkes Bay, and telling them there is no gun use, no crime, no looting etc.I guess the locals are just setting up roadblocks because they are bored and have nothing else to do – is that the view of the Government?

This is straight from the Ministry of Education’s data arm (who are VERY good) – Education Counts.

What will be done about Tinetti’s admission that she sat on this data since December and refused all OIAs? It MUST be the first resignation of the Hipkin’s government.

The Herald reports:

The Government is open to raising taxes at the Budget in May to cover the cost of the Cyclone Gabrielle clean-up, potentially reversing a position taken earlier this month to stick to former Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s revenue policy.

Their 2020 election policy was clear:

No new taxes, or further increases to income tax next term

Inflation is triple what it should be, families are struggling to cope, and Labour’s looking to break their election promise and decrease your take home pay.

One graph tells a major story.

Labour – under former Minister if Education Hipkins – have driven this off a cliff.

Jan Tinetti was unbelievably poor on the AM show this morning. She did a Sgt Shultz impression for some of it.

– She admitted she had the attendance Term 3 attendance data by Dec 22. There have been many OIA requests for it – all denied.

– She says she is not responsible for releasing it but then says it would have been cynical to release near Christmas.

– She doesn’t see it as cynical to have the data released later today after releasing a new policy at 5am this morning.

– We have 120,000 chronically absent, over 10,000 enrolled nowhere, she says average full attendance up to 46% – but their main policy is 84 more truancy officers. Nothing about improving schools, improving teaching standards.

When high decile State school students (low Equity Index Number in the new parlance) are not seeing the point of going to school as they are finding more efficient ways of learning – the system is shot. This is the best illustration of how Labour are going about it.

Radio NZ reports:

The government has confirmed it will establish 82 new attendance officer roles, plus additional further investment, for a total $74 million.

Education Minister Jan Tinetti said it would include a commitment to improved and standardised attendance data.

“We are going back to basics on attendance,” she said. “This $74 million package puts resources on the ground to support schools and students.”

She said the Attendance Service already worked with students with low or declining rates of attendance, and the funding would allow it to support another 3000 young people.

Just 3,000?

100,000 students are attending school less than 70% of the time, or missing 12 or more weeks a year.

210,000 students are attending school less than 80% of the time, or missing eight or more weeks a year.

440,000 students are attending school less than 90% of the time, or missing four or more weeks a year.

The Government should be collecting attendance data in real time from schools. Instead it takes six months to find out what the attendance rate is. We are in February 2023 and we don’t even have data on attendance for July to September 2022.

“We know that there are many reasons why a child might not show up to school, which is why we’re also continuing our initiatives that are focused on removing barriers to education such as free period products, free healthy school lunches, school donations, preventing bullying and redesigning our curriculum.”

All of these policies have been rolled out at a time which has seen attendance plummet. I think most parents just want their kids to be in school learning, regardless of whether they get period products from their school or not!

Sam Stubbs writes:

But let’s look at the numbers, especially in the light of the recent floods and cyclone, which highlight that we are going to face vast bills to fix, never mind future-proof, vital infrastructure across the North Island. …

Once again, let’s look at the maths. The line is estimated at 24km, 12 underground and 12 overground.

So assuming the current cost of the central rail link of $1b per km, that’s at least $12 billion spent on the underground section, before we get to the other 12km overground.

If we repeat the Central Rail Link experience, and double the original estimate, the proposed line could cost over $28 billion.

Think of the opportunity cost for that almost $30 billion. It could pay for a four lane motorway between Auckland and Wellington. Or say put $10 billion into local highways, $10 billion into water infrastructure and save $10 billion!

The Herald reports:

Critics are accusing the British publisher of Roald Dahl’s classic children’s books of censorship after it removed colourful language from works such as Charlie and the Chocolate Factoryand Matilda to make them more acceptable to modern readers.

A review of new editions of Dahl’s books now available in bookstores shows that some passages relating to weight, mental health, gender and race were altered. The changes made by Puffin Books, a division of Penguin Random House, first were reported by Britain’s Daily Telegraph newspaper.

Augustus Gloop, Charlie’s gluttonous antagonist in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, which originally was published in 1964, is no longer “enormously fat”, just “enormous”. In the new edition of Witches, a supernatural female posing as an ordinary woman may be working as a “top scientist or running a business” instead of as a “cashier in a supermarket or typing letters for a businessman.”

The word “black” was removed from the description of the terrible tractors in the 1970s The Fabulous Mr Fox. The machines are now simply “murderous, brutal-looking monsters”.

The worst part of this kind of revisionism is it insults the readers. It treats us as imbeciles who can’t deal with context. If a book has language that isn’t appropriate for today, then it is a teaching opportunity.

I recall a while back when my five year old started saying “Eeny, meeny, miny, moe” and I was holding my breath, and enormously relieved when he used the “tiger” version. I presumed he picked it up from friends at school.

But if he had used the older version, then it would have been an opportunity for me to explain to him why that word should not be used.

Let’s not rewrite every book published before 1980.

David Seymour released:

“Police Minister Stuart Nash and Defence Minister Andrew Little need to start listening to the needs of local communities and send help,” says ACT Leader David Seymour.

“The first duty of Government is to keep people safe. People on the East Coast are terrified and their pleas for help should be listened to. As a local MP, Nash should understand that better than anyone.

“More than 6,200 Defence Personnel were involved in MIQ and yet the Napier Mayor told media this morning her requests for military assistance have been turned down. How can the government justify having the army available to stand at hotel doors but not out in a cyclone ravaged community?

“The Defence Minister needs to invoke Section 9 of the Defence Act. This means the military can assist the Police with civil powers. Looting gangsters might not think they’re so tough when they meet the NZDF.

“More than 600 Police were sent to the Parliament protest and yet only 100 have been sent to Hawke’s Bay.

Seems a no-brainer to do this. Puzzled as to why the Government has refused.

I started writing this post around three years ago when J.K. Rowling wrote a long piece on sex and gender issues, specifically around trans issues. Most of my posts I complete in a few minutes, or maybe a couple of days. The fact I have not finished this until February 2023, indicates how challenging the area can be. I have wanted to get the facts and the tone just right, which means I needed a decent spell of unbroken concentration.

These issues are very complex, despite those who prefer one line slogans.

So here is my fairly lengthy post explaining my views on these issues.

My starting point is I want a society where we maximise happiness. If people can live happier lives by living and identifying as a gender different to their biological sex, then we should be fully supportive of that as a society.

I can only imagine how hugely challenging it must be to not identify with your biological sex, and the mental health challenges involved with that. I absolutely support people being able to change their gender to reflect their sense of identity, and we should support and accept that both as a community and as individuals.

A good read is this blog post by a man whose partner transitioned from female to male.

But, and of course there is a but, there are some situations where biological sex needs to still be regarded as a factor, not just gender identity. I’m going to outline some of those areas below. Returning to my theme of maximising happiness, we should be fully supportive of allowing people to live and participate in their gender identity, unless doing so might reduce happiness to others. By that I don’t mean reduce happiness in the sense of personal disapproval, but in terms of substantive harm.

This is not an issue such as same sex marriage (which I actively campaigned for) where there was no real balancing of competing interests. Allowing same sex couple to marry doesn’t negatively impact anyone else, but (for example) the issues of trans participation in sports does bring in competing or clashing interests of inclusiveness vs fairness.

Now where things get difficult is that some (not all) trans people feel any discussion of these issues invalidates their identity, and marginalises them further. And I accept this can be the case. But I don’t think the solution is not to ban discussion and label any women who disagrees as a TERF. It is to try and have the discussion in a respectful way.

As a society I believe we need to recognise people have a biological sex and a gender identity. In most cases they are the same, not not all. Generally the gender identity is what should be determinative, but there are a few areas where biological sex is also a factor.

In terms of the science, this June 2021 article in Endocrine Reviews makes some good points.

The terms sex and gender should not be used interchangeably. Sex is dichotomous, with sex determination in the fertilized zygote stemming from unequal expression of sex chromosomal genes. By contrast, gender includes perception of the individual as male, female, or other, both by the individual and by society; both humans and animals have sex, but only humans have gender.

Now it is also worth nothing that while biological sex is for most people a binary issue – you are male XY or female XX, there are some who fall outside those two. Sarah Bickerton wrote an excellent article in Stuff on how she is intersex. Also another article on Sarah here.

The fact some people are intersex doesn’t change the fact that there are still biological differences between men and women. Humans are described as a bipedal species, even though some humans are born with a disability where they are not bipedal.

Politicians get in trouble trying to answer the question “What is a woman”, and my answer would be

“It depends on whether you mean biological sex or gender. In terms of biological sex it is an adult with no Y chromosomes, in terms of gender it is an adult who’s identifies as female”.

So what are the issues in this area, where there is contention between people?

Identity Documents

I support people being able to change their gender on their passport and their birth certificate.

The issue is should there be criteria, and what should they be.

It used to be that you could only change your birth certificate (so it matches your passport) by way of application to the Family Court. This was far too burdensome, I agree. But I do worry the current law (to take effect this year) of simple application by way of statutory declaration is open for abuse by the who are not genuinely trans. As an example, Lauren Southern used a similar process in Canada to change her legal gender to male. I’d be more comfortable with a simple medical certificate from a GP affirming the person genuinely identifies as a gender different to their biological sex.

Names and pronouns

If someone changes their name, you should call them by their new name. It’s the polite and decent thing to do. I don’t think you should be banned from social media for failing to do so, but I think deliberately misnaming someone is an arsehole thing to do. Appalling to read this story about how someone transitioned and some of her colleagues would not call her by her new name, and would refer to her as it. What an nasty thing to do.

The use of preferred pronouns in signatures can be useful in a lot of situations – someone may be trans, or they may have a name commonly used by both genders, or a non-English name which many would not know as male or female. I have found it useful on a number of occasions to find out my assumptions are wrong, due to people using their preferred pronouns.

But for many people there is no benefit in listing your pronouns. My name is David. I am biologically male and identify as male and have done so all my life. I don’t feel the need to state I am he/him in my e-mail signature. And God save me from woke mobs who insist that every single adult must now include preferred pronouns, to prove they are allies. Use them if they would be useful to you, or you want to – but also understand that bullying people into using them is wrong.

Another language issue is the drive to remove the word women from the language. Instead of pregnant women, we now have pregnant people. This is silly. If you want to be a man, great – go for it and transition. But if you want to be pregnant and have a baby, that is hardly consistent with wanting to be a man. Now on an individual level, you should respect what choices someone has made, but that doesn’t mean you have to throw out the word women from all literature.

Sports

This is one of the highest profile and most difficult areas. Most scientists have concluded that biological males who go through puberty as males have significant advantages in terms of strength and speed that persist, even if testosterone levels are decreased. A review of the latest science found adult male athletes have on average a 10-12% performance advantage over female competitors in swimming and running, 20% advantage in jumping and 35% in strength-based sports.

One should have sympathy for transgender athletes. They work and train hard to get to the top tier, and banning them from competing because they are transgender is harsh on them. And no, I don’t think anyone would go through hormone and/or surgery just so they can better comparative sporting results.

But you also have to have sympathy for the female athletes who are biologically female. They can train just as hard and be the best in the world, but then have someone who is not biologically a female beat them, and feel that nothing they can do will allow them to win.

The trade-off is inclusiveness vs fairness.

The difference between the sexes can be immense. The national women’s football teams from Australia, USA and Brazil were beaten comprehensively (7-0, 5-2, 6-0 respectively) by club teams of 14- and 15-year-old boys in practice matches.

I would divide sports into three levels – school age, adult and elite.

At school age sports I would prioritise inclusiveness over fairness. I think it would be incredibly damaging to a trans student to not be allowed to participate in sports in line with their gender identity. The mental health risks at this age are huge.

I despair at Republican state legislatures passing laws to ban transgender students from competing in school athletics etc in line with their gender identity. A former Chief Judge of the US District Court of the Southern District of West Virginia issued an injunction against one such law.

At the other end of the spectrum, at elite or professional level, I think you have to prioritise fairness. Elite athletes can spend thousands of hours training to be the best in the world at an event, and it isn’t fair if they have to compete against someone they literally have no chance of beating.

I think each sports bodies should make their own rules. In archery it might not matter if a biological male competes with biological women, but in swimming it does. Decisions should follow the science.

At adult non-elite level, I tend to favour inclusiveness over fairness, so long as it is safe. So in contact sports you may not allow a trans-woman to compete with biological women, but in table tennis you might. Leave it to each sport again.

Toilets

I just don’t get the hysteria about trans-women using women’s toilets. You have cubicles. If it were not for urinals, I’d have all toilets unisex anyway. The notion of toilets are a place where you are safe from people who may be sexually attracted to you is outdated. If someone behaves inappropriately, then deal with the behaviour. I absolutely support people using the toilet of the identified gender.

Changing Rooms

While concerns around toilets are, in my view, grossly overstated, changing rooms are a more challenging issue. In LA a transgender woman disrobed in a women’s changing room, displaying her penis. I can understand how women in a changing room don’t want to view a penis in there. But also trans people need to change somewhere, and having her change in the men’s changing room is also problematic. The solution is not a law, but good faith. On an individual basis, you just need to work out an acceptable solution. Maybe a third small changing room?

You need to allow any organisation with changing rooms to decide for themselves what the policy is.

The same goes for places like women’s refuge. The law should not dictate if a refuge or shelter for women goes off biological sex or gender identity. Each refuge should be able to decide for themselves what is appropriate.

Prisons

In California’s largest female prison, they are now introducing pregnancy resources because of the possibility a transwoman could get a ciswoman pregnant.

Nicola Sturgeon has just resigned as Scotland’s First Minister because her Government put a convicted double rapist into a women’s prison because they changed their gender.

This is again one of those situations where decisions need to be made on a case by case basis. Someone who is a trans-women who is in a male prison will face real danger. But putting a rapist into a women’s prison can put women prisoners at risk.

The law needs to allow prison authorities decide the best course of action taking into account the crimes committed, whether the prisoner has had surgery or hormone treatment, the security levels of the prisons involved etc.

Crime

This article details how media are routinely referring to some rapists as female. The general rule is refer to someone using their gender identity. But if an offender has a penis and has raped someone, then I think it can revictimise the victim to have their offender described as a woman in court documents and reporting. In this rare case, the rights of the victim should have precedence over the identity of the rapist.

Treatment for Children

I have read a huge amount in this area. It is complex, but let’s start with a basic statement.

I do think people aged under 18 who are firm about wanting to change their gender identity should generally be able to start treatment before they are 18, but decisions on individual cases should reflect the individual circumstances, and not just be treated as an automatic yes.

The two major factors are the age of the young person, and the severity of the treatment. The younger someone is, the more caution you should apply to starting treatment. A 12 year old is not the same as a 17 year old.

Also taking hormone blockers is different to having sex change surgery.

The concern over whether children are receiving appropriate treatment is widespread. In this article two prominent providers in the field of transgender medicine detail their concerns, and incidentally both are themselves transgender women.

This more recent article is by a former staffer in a paediatric gender clinic and details very worrying cases. The former staffer is not some right wing conservative but a queer woman, politically to the left of Bernie Sanders, married to a trans-man.

A report into the controversial Tavistock Clinic in the UK made a very salient point:

At primary, secondary and specialist level, there is a lack of agreement, and in many instances a lack of open discussion, about the extent to which gender incongruence in childhood and adolescence can be an inherent and immutable phenomenon for which transition is the best option for the individual, or a more fluid and temporal response to a range of developmental, social, and psychological factors. 

The key point is that one should not start with an assumption that transition is the answer to every child who has gender incongruence. It may be the correct course for the majority, but there is a legitimate concern that in some clinics, you are not allowed to argue against transition. There are concerns that some (not all) of the children wanting to transition may just have same sex attraction.

Just in the US there has been a 300% increase in gender dysphoria diagnosis in five years. It is not anti-trans to want to know what is causing this increase – is it just increased social acceptability and awareness, or is it that it is being diagnosed wrongly for some?

Two long-time feminists raise issues in this op ed about why gender confusion and transgender is not the same thing and caution is needed.

Now again I support there being services that will help youth transition. This is not a binary issue where you think there should be no support at all or you think there should be no criteria. In many cases transitioning as a young person is absolutely the right thing to do, and puberty blockers or hormone are an appropriate treatment. But clinicians must be able to assess each patient on their individual circumstances, and not be pressured to just affirm transitioning regardless of the specifics of a case.

Anyway so that is my take on the issues around trans, gender and sex. It is worth noting that these are mainly issues around the margin. The vast majority of trans people are not competing in the Olympics, in prison etc. The most important thing, in my view, is to treat people who are trans with kindness and respect for their gender identity. If you are a parent of young children, there is a chance your child may turn out to be trans, and I am sure you would want them to have a great life where they are adored for the unique individual they are.

CNN reports:

The director of a leading German ballet company is being investigated by police and has been fired for smearing dog feces on a critic’s face after taking offense to a review she wrote.

According to journalist Wiebke Hüster, Marco Goecke, the head of Hanover State Opera’s ballet company, verbally attacked her during the intermission of a ballet premiere performance. The confrontation seems to have been spurred by a previous review that Hüster had written, Hüster said. 

“Goecke rubbed the dog feces hard and most brutally into my face,” Hüster told CNN Wednesday. “It was in an open dog plastic bag which usually is tied up with a knot,” the journalist added.

If this happened in NZ, the ballet director would probably get a grant from Creative NZ for creating a new artwork! 🙂

A great speech by Matthew Hooton to his old school of Auckland Grammar. Deserves a wider audience, so am blogging it.

Stuff reports:

The total amount owed in rent arrears by Kāinga Ora tenants has increased from $2 million to nearly $17m in three years.

The average rent arrears owed to Kāinga Ora by its tenants had increased from $483 in November 2019, to $1901 in November 2022, Housing Minister Megan Wood said in a reply to a written Parliamentary question from ACT housing spokesperson Brooke van Velden.

The total amount owed in rent arrears has increased from $2.32m in September 2019 to $17m in September 2022.

The largest sum owed by an individual was $41,371 as at November 30, 2022.

How can you let someone get that far behind with the rent?

And these are rents that are massively subsidised so they are never more than 25% of a tenant’s income. If the income drops, the rent drops.

Once again there seem to be few consequences if Kainga Ora is your landlord.

Stuff reports:

New Zealand needs to “get real” about its vulnerable roading network in the aftermath of Cyclone Gabrielle and build roads 

I agree. But the problem we have is the Government now spends barely 50% of the revenue from petrol tax on roads. They waste tens of millions on a failed bridge project, hundreds of millions on a doomed light rail fantasy, and there is no money leftover for roads.