I blogged previously on how the integrated ticketing system for NZ will cost a staggering $1.2 billion.

A reader points out that Queensland, with the same population as NZ, using the same company, is getting a ticketing system for A$371 million.

So why are we paying three times as much?

Stuff reports:

School principals around the country warn new literacy and numeracy standards could “provoke a crisis” and “undermine the credibility” of the NCEA assessment system. …

During the pilot, principals spoke out about their concerns the tests would leave behind Māori and Pasifika students, worsening “institutional racism” in the education sector. …

Nic Richards​, principal of Naenae College in Lower Hutt, wrote that his staff were “highly concerned” the literacy and numeracy standards would “exacerbate institutional racism in the education sector”.

The tests would “potentially exclude our most vulnerable students from equitable access to educational credentials” at all levels of assessment, he said.

That last sentence sums up everything wrong with education today. The belief that that requiring students to be able to read, write and count is less important than “equitable” access to educational credentials.

Bruce Cotterill writes in the NZ Herald:

This is major constitutional reform, involving the deliberate confiscation of assets from ratepayers and the councils that represent them, to a government and a policy that will be controlled by iwi-based or tribal interests. The consultation process around it has been minimal and most of us would say what little consultation has occurred has been ignored.

The French would have people marching in the streets and tractors blocking the freeways if this was occurring in their country. Not us. Let’s just sit back and let it happen! …

We should be staggered that this legislation, delivering major constitutional change, is sleepwalking its way through Parliament via an aggressive majority government, while it appears that there is nothing that opposition politicians can do about it. …

That’s why we have elections. When governments become this corrupt, they and the laws they created must go.

Well worth reading the full column, He is right that the opposition can not stop this law in the current Parliament. But if you vote to put the current Government into opposition, then the law can be repealed.

To fully realise how bad the 2022 mid-terms were for the Republicans, you need to compare them to the last two mid-terms for a first term President – 2010 and 2018. The table below shows how well the party not holding the Presidency did in each mid-term.

So in the House the Republicans gained 63 seats in 2010. The Democrats gained 41 seats in 2018 and in 2022, the Republicans managed a net gain of just five.

In the Senate the Republicans gained seven seats in 2010 and lost one in 2022. To be fair Democrats lost two in 2018, but different seats do come up at different mid-terms in the Senate.

For Governors, Republicans gained six in 2010, Democrats gained seven in 2018 and Republicans lost three in 2022.

Finally we have state chambers. A huge wave in 2010 saw the Republicans flip 21 state chambers. The Democrats flipped seven in 2018. In 2022 the Republicans went backwards, losing (so far) five chambers.

So the Republicans will need to make serious changes for 2024 if they want to win.

Stuff reports:

Former Waiariki MP Tāmati Coffey has been unsuccessful in his bid for a third term on the Rotorua Trust.

It comes as preliminary results on the trust’s election are published, which show the return of four out of five candidates who stood for re-election.

So every other trustee was re-elected. That suggests it was not anti-incumbent, but anti-Coffey.

Last election, Coffey came second out of 30 candidates but in 2022 dropped to ninth out of 16 candidates. 

How do you go from 2nd to 9th? That takes some work.

This post is by PaulL, a regular commentor and occasional contributor. It is tangentially related to the series on effective marginal tax rates and incentives to work. The index to all posts in the series can be found here.

NZ is a relatively low productivity country, with low productivity growth, as compared to developed western countries. This should be a concern to us. Productivity is fundamentally a measure of how much stuff we make from given inputs – how much stuff we make from an hour of work, how much capital and property we need to make things.

Productivity is the predicter of long term wealth for a country. Wealth isn’t everything, but it isn’t nothing either. Everything else being equal, most people would prefer to be wealthier.

NZ is currently running into worker shortages. There aren’t as many workers as we need to make all the things we want to make (whether products or services). This is reflected in our low unemployment rate. We either need more workers, or we need our workers to make more stuff (i.e. increase productivity).

Many people are suggesting that the correct answer is to increase immigration (again). Whilst this is a way to access more workers, it also increases our population. More people need more stuff, so we end up in a cycle where we import workers, who increase demand for products and services, so we need more workers.

There have been some posts recently about how the Labour government are restricting immigration so as to drive up wages, and how that’s some form of voodoo economics. My question is, if that’s not how you drive up productivity, then what is?

The Reserve Bank has put the OCR up 75 basis points in an attempt to get inflation under control.

They project the OCT will reach 5.5% which historically will mean mortgage rates of 8%.

They also project unemployment will also double to 6% and that we will spend 12 months in recession.

What is the difference between 3% mortgage rates and 8%?

On a $500,000 mortgage your repayments at 3% are $2,108 a month, for a 30 year term.

At 8% the repayments are $3,669 a month so an extra $1,500 a month or $18,000 a year.

They also project house prices will dip to 30% below the peak, so there will be mortgagee sales.

There is a lot of pain coming.

Just when you think their contempt for the public can’t get larger, they try and sneak this through Parliament. They expanded the scope of the mandatory water statements by Iwi and hapu from the existing three waters to include coastal and geothermal water also.

This is a huge policy issue in its own right – something that should be carefully considered with much consultation. And they tried to sneak it into the committee stages of the bill.

And when they get caught out, they lie, and try to blame it on Federated Farmers.

95BFM reports:

A University of Auckland PhD student, Sophia* has come forward with allegations about a University employee reportedly providing the Iranian regime with intelligence about Iranians in New Zealand who are protesting.

The employee, who is also a PhD student, has a record of openly supporting the actions of the IRGC (Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps) and reporting protestors- and they’re not alone. 

The employee is among other students who Sophia says have been reporting individuals speaking openly in opposition to the regime, and attending protests. Sophia told Jessica Hopkins on The Wire that the University promised complainants they would investigate the matter, but no information has been released about the situation. 

She believes “the University should share the results of this investigation, (and) stop providing shelter for these individuals,” saying the reporting of protestors was “abusing democratic values in New Zealand”.

If this is correct, this is outrageous. You can’t have a university staffer reporting students to the Iranian Government for peaceful protests in NZ. This could lead to harm against their families back home.

Auckland University needs to clarify what exactly has happened, and what they have done in response.

I have a Christian faith. I came to that decision in my late teens/early twenties. I was not brought up with those beliefs. I read heavily and asked all manner of people all sorts of questions. I was anti-, sceptical, insulting at times … and eventually convinced.

It is a faith based on one person who, should you choose to read the gospels, was far from politically correct. His freedom of speech, and that of many of his followers, came at great cost.

I was/am heavily influenced by the work of C.S. Lewis – a person who also came to faith after many highly antagonistic comments and entrenched atheism. I believe he would have stood very strongly for full freedom of speech around religion.

Christian faith is highly misunderstood. I by no means claim to be a perfect – or even good – person. No Christian should. I have a long way to go to be the human I ought to be.

Neither should any Christian Church claim to be perfect in any way. I am reminded of an old friend who – when someone posed the challenge that the Church is full of hypocrites – responded; “Yes and there is room for one more.”  

It is a faith based on grace but, at best, also on openness, transparency and challenge.

Bringing religion under the Human Rights Act and Hate Speech Laws is high problematic. According to the Spinoff:

“Currently, under the Human Rights Act 1993 it is illegal to publish or distribute threatening, abusive, or insulting words likely to “excite hostility against” or “bring into contempt” any group on the grounds of colour, race, ethnic or national origins.”

Those grounds will now be extended, in both the civil and criminal provisions, to cover religious belief.”

According to Newsroom:

“In order to have breached the law, a person has to have published, broadcast or said in public words which are “threatening, abusive, or insulting” that are “likely to excite hostility or ill-will against, or bring into contempt or ridicule” any group of people based on their skin colour, race, ethnicity or national origin while intending to do so.”

• The Life of Brian?
• Cartoons?
• Public ridicule of Christian leaders?
• For the older ones – Dave Allen jokes?
• The words of Richard Dawkins, the late Christopher Hitchens, or the writings of Douglas Adams (my second favourite author).
• My friend Bryan’s Bruce’s book Jesus: The Cold Case?

Kiri Allan might have easily dismissed such concerns is this, somewhat bizarre interview but I, for one, felt far from reassured upon looking at the proposed text.

I was talking to a good friend recently and faith came up and he said: “I have no idea why you believe that pie in the sky crap.” I defend his right to say that to me both privately and publicly – even if I feel a bit ridiculed.

Steve Hughes is relevant.

Kiri Allan – please stay away from Free Speech and Religion.

Christian people and Churches please stand to keep this government intrusion out of the lives of Kiwis.

There has been a long-term decline in the proportion of adults who smoke, but one can see that in the last three years it has really accelerated. There is no doubt this is due to smokers transferring to vaping.

Vaping is not harmless, but it is massively less harmful than smoking. Thank to vaping, we may achieve the goal of getting the smoking prevalence rate to under 5% by 2025.

This chart shows the proportion of the population who are classified as hazardous drinkers. The wowser brigade would have you believe that hazardous drinking is increasing and dramatic law changes are needed. But the official data shows its is somewhere between steady and slightly declining.

Audrey Young has written an excellent summary of the recent memorial service to Sir Wira Gardiner, which I attended.

Hundreds of people packed St Paul’s Cathedral in Wellington to hear tributes to Sir Wira Gardiner, including from Sir Bill English, Hone Harawira and Gardiner’s widow, Hekia Parata.

I can’t imagine there is anyone else in New Zealand who would have both Hone Harawira and Bill English speaking at their memorial service. I reflected that it summed up Wira’s amazing ability to work constructively with everyone to serve the country.

His last prominent public role was as chief executive of Oranga Tamariki, a job that Public Service Commissioner Peter Hughes described as one of the toughest in the country and which he had agreed to do at the age of 77 as a service to his country.

Most people would be happily retired at 77, but Wira took on the job through a sense of responsibility to his mokapuna.

Those who came to honour him included former Prime Minister Jim Bolger, former Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters, Willie Apiata VC, Supreme Court Judge Joe Williams, Labour Ministers Kelvin Davis and Willie Jackson, National leader Christopher Luxon, former National Party president Michelle Boag, former solider and public servant Leith Comer, former broadcaster Derek Fox, spy chief Rebecca Kitteridge, and GCSB chief Andrew Hampton who worked for Gardiner as a junior public servant in Te Puni Kokiri.

Hone Harawira said Gardiner had been an exceptional man who had been confident in his ability to front anyone – tribal leaders, gangsters, politicians, whanau, activists and treat them all with the sincerity and dignity.

I don’t think anyone phased Wira.

Gardiner served in Vietnam and retired from the Army with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. The NZ Army band played at the service and the Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment Colour was taken to the front of the cathedral by members of the 1st Battalion.

The military aspect of the service was superb. Wira’s military service shaped him into the man he was.

Stuff reports:

Lesley Elliott’s husband of 50 years has paid tribute to the domestic violence campaigner, who has died following an “incredibly difficult” battle with Parkinson’s disease and dementia.

The 76-year-old, who was the mother of Sophie Elliot, died at Ross Home in Dunedin on Sunday.

Following the brutal murder of Sophie by her former boyfriend Clayton Weatherston in 2008, Lesley set up the Sophie Elliott Foundation and toured New Zealand teaching young people about safe and healthy relationships and the warning signs of abuse.

She had the most horrific thing possible happen to her family, but rather than let it crush her, she spent her remaining years helping other families escape bad situations.

Lesley Elliott co-authored a best-selling book about her daughter’s death, Sophie’s Legacy, with Bill O’Brien. At least eight women credited it as being the catalyst for them leaving their violent partners.

May Lesley rest in Araboth with Sophie, while in due course Weatherston move permanently to Gehinom.

Radio NZ reports:

A victim’s advocate is describing sentencing discounts for offenders as a courtroom “lolly scramble” that lets survivors down and offenders off the hook. …

National was now considering changing the sentencing process to limit the discounts people could get.

This might look like making some discounts like ‘youth’ or ‘remorse’ one-offs and establishing a hard discount cap to restrict how much sentences can shrink.

This could include factors like youth or remorse being unavailable for reoffenders and hard caps on how much a sentence can shrink.

“There are good arguments for discounts … but where it becomes difficult is if you get multiple discounts, one on top of the other, and the outcome being so far removed from the original, then we know we have an issue,” Goldsmith said.

You absolutely need discounts (and add-ons for aggravating factors) to have fair and reasonable sentences. A first time 18 year old offender should get a lesser sentence than a 45 year old repeat offender, for example. Someone who is genuinely remorseful should get a lighter sentence than someone who is not. Someone who pleads guilty straight away should get a lesser sentence than someone who doesn’t.

But Goldsmith is right that the cumulative effect of the discounts can end up with ridiculously light sentences such as home detention for raping multiple girls.

I also suspect that some Judges reverse engineer their discounts. They know if they get the sentence to under two years they can sentence them to home detention rather than prison. So they ensure that the discounts add up to enough to get it down to 18 – 21 months or so.

So we need discounts but I like the idea that there is some limit to how often you can get a discount for youth and remorse. If you keep bashing people up, you are obviously not very remorseful.

So a limit of say three sentencing decisions where an offender can get a discount for remorse or youth could work well.

I also like the idea of an overall cap on the discount an offender can get. Perhaps two caps – one for pleading guilty of up to 25% (which is the status quo) and one of up to 20% for all other factors. That means the discounts would never reduce the unadjusted sentence by more than 45%.

Nate Cohn at the NY Times reports:

Overall, his preferred primary candidates underperformed other G.O.P. candidates by about five percentage points.

This is a very good analysis. The Republican’s actually won the actual overall vote for the House by close to 5% it seems. But they barely scraped in with a majority as in the competitive districts the Trump endorsees under-performed – in fact they went backwards from 2020.

This analysis didn’t include the Senate but there six of the seven competitive seats were lost by Trump nominees.

Hopefully for 2024 they will select better candidates.

The article by Anne Salmond on Te Tiriti o Waitangi and ‘Race’ is well worth a read. It is 23 pages long but makes a very strong argument that the Court of Appeal got it wrong by starting us on the path that the Treaty is a partnership between races.

Michael Bassett writes:

Have you noticed recently how many shops have signs wanting staff? How many tradesmen are hard to hire because they can’t find enough skilled workers? How many hospitals are bursting at the seams because they lack sufficient nurses and doctors? How many buses and trains aren’t running because there aren’t enough drivers? And how slow the government is to open up the borders to skilled migrants who could help? …

Why then are our shortages currently so dramatic? I’m convinced that the borders are deliberately being kept closed because Jacinda Ardern’s so-called Labour government believes it can force employers to lift wages for workers by maintaining a super-tight labour market. Some of this is the belief of a few mad scientists like Immigration Minister Michael Wood who seems convinced that pushing wages up for low-skilled jobs will benefit our society in general, and not accelerate inflation.

Our hospitals have a staffing crisis, and the Government maintains it hostility to making it easy for skilled migrants to reside in NZ.

Neither Jacinda, nor Carmel Sepuloni seems to care a fig about the consequences of the mad scientists in their ranks who keep the borders closed but then refuse to restore meaningful incentives to find jobs. The rest of us suffer because services that society needs – plumbers, electricians, builders and odd-job people – can’t be found for love nor money.

It is happening everywhere. Takes two months to get an electrician in. No doctors appointments available for three weeks. The first appointment for the panel beater is in three months time. This must be what like in the USSR was like!

Liam Hehir writes:

Age is not an immutable characteristic. Treating children differently to adults is not the same as treating people differently based on race or sex. And 18 years is the generally agreed-upon age at which a child becomes an adult.

For most New Zealanders, the idea of 16 and 17-year-olds voting defies common sense. Large majorities of people surveyed reject the idea. Letting kids vote is less popular than letting prisoners vote.

Liam is right. Three separate polls have found NZers massively opposed – Colmar Brunton had just 13% in favour and 85% against.

Of course, there is increasingly little room for common sense in New Zealand’s appellate courts. Not, at least, when the opportunity for the promotion of liberal opinion is concerned. Our justices are no longer so shy of broad political questions that touch upon subjects not usually reducible to legal reasoning.

In the case of the Three Strikes Law, the Supreme Court decided it can over-ride the statute, despite there being no legislative authority for them to do so.

Liam proposes four reforms:

• Repealing the recent amendment to the law requiring the elected branch of the government to respond a judicial finding of legislation being inconsistent with the Bill of Rights.
• Add a new section to the Bill of Rights specifically stating that the courts have no jurisdiction to make decisions involving inherently political questions, particularly those where voters and representatives can be reasonably expected to resolve those matters.
• Add a new section to the Interpretation Act 1999 providing that no international treaty, agreement or other instrument will have any bearing on the interpretation of New Zealand except to the extent it is incorporated into legislation.
• Add a further provision that that legislation should be interpreted based on the understanding of their meaning at the time they were enacted.
• Perhaps most controversially, amend the Constitution Act 1986 so that a judge’s flagrant unwilingness to carry out the will of Parliament provides grounds for removal from office.

I disagree on his first point, but like the other four points, especially the last one.

Guess what proportion of prisoners are enrolled in literacy programmes? 25%? 15%? 10%? 5%?

The answer is 1.2%.

And now guess what proportion are enrolled in numeracy programmes?

0.8%

Isn’t this Government meant to be about rehabilitation?

Shouldn’t a priority be getting prisoners able to read, write and count so they may one day be able to have the option of a job, rather than welfare or crime?