DNYUZ reports:

Meg Smaker felt exhilarated last November. After 16 months filming inside a Saudi rehabilitation center for accused terrorists, she learned that her documentary “Jihad Rehab” was invited to the 2022 Sundance Festival, one of the most prestigious showcases in the world.

Her documentary centered on four former Guantánamo detainees sent to a rehab center in Saudi Arabia who had opened their lives to her, speaking of youthful attraction to Al Qaeda and the Taliban, of torture endured, and of regrets.

Film critics warned that conservatives might bridle at these human portraits, but reviews after the festival’s screening were strong.

“The absence of absolutes is what’s most enriching,” The Guardian stated, adding, “This is a movie for intelligent people looking to have their preconceived notions challenged.” Variety wrote: The film “feels like a miracle and an interrogative act of defiance.”

So this is a film which humanises four terrorists. Not exactly my cup of tea, but sounds worthwhile as understanding the complexity of individuals is usually a good thing.

But attacks would come from the left, not the right. Arab and Muslim filmmakers and their white supporters accused Ms. Smaker of Islamophobia and American propaganda. Some suggested her race was disqualifying, a white woman who presumed to tell the story of Arab men.

Sundance leaders reversed themselves and apologized.

Abigail Disney, a grandniece of Walt Disney, had been the executive director of “Jihad Rehab” and called it “freaking brilliant” in an email to Ms. Smaker. Now she disavowed it.

The film “landed like a truckload of hate,” Ms. Disney wrote in an open letter.

Ms. Smaker’s film has become near untouchable, unable to reach audiences. Prominent festivals rescinded invitations, and critics in the documentary world took to social media and pressured investors, advisers and even her friends to withdraw names from the credits. She is close to broke.

So because she is white, the woke jihadists made the film untouchable. They are the same ones that think actors can never play someone of a different gender identity, different race etc.

The cowards like Sundance and Abigail Disney who loved the film then cowed to the mob and decried it and apologised for it.

The one film festival that still ran it is one in NZ – yay we are less insane than the rest of the world.

The Herald reports:

The bill, which is likely to be debated by Parliament next month, has two measures: ban alcohol advertising and sponsorship for broadcast sports, and block appeals of councils’ local alcohol policies.

Swarbrick said she felt they were two uncontroversial proposals which were strongly backed by evidence. They would give councils more control over alcohol availability in their areas and prevent young people from being exposed to the “normalisation and glamorisation” of drinking. …

Within Labour, MPs have expressed support for the proposal to prevent councils from facing constant, endless appeals when they try to introduce their own alcohol policies. But there is concern among some of its MPs about the ban on alcohol sponsorship.

Actually I think the worst part of the bill is around the local alcohol policies. The sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 only allows appeals against Local Alcohol Policies if it is “unreasonable”. What this means is that the Council needs some evidence that the restrictions they propose will reduce alcohol harm. This should be pretty simple.

But Council after Council has failed to do this. They think the Act allows them to place whatever restrictions appeal to them, regardless of any evidence that it will reduce harm. And so they pass LAPs, and then get them struck down because they have no evidence to back them up. And as a society we should demand that Councils have evidence before they restrict citizens from being able to do something they want to, such as buy alcohol conveniently.

I’ll give an example, which I have first hand experience of. Some Councils put into their LAPs a policy that supermarkets can’t sell alcohol after 9 pm. They have no idea whether or not that will reduce harm, but they have been persuaded that the more restrictions you have, the better it is.

The supermarkets hire Curia to survey shoppers at a dozen supermarkets who are shopping between 9 pm and 11 pm, who have purchased alcohol as to whether the alcohol is for consumption that night, or later, and why they are shopping at that time. The vast vast majority say they are purchasing it for later consumption, and are merely buying it as part of their weekly shop because that is most convenient for them as they have kids etc.

So the supermarkets have evidence that the LAP will not reduce harm. It merely inconveniences peoples doing their weekly shop. The vast majority of people at a supermarket at 9.30 pm buying alcohol are not halfway through a party and needing to top up their supplies.

So the supermarkets present their evidence, and they wait for the Council to produce their own evidence that their LAP will reduce harm. And the Council doesn’t. It just ignores the evidence, and then has a tizzy fit when the supermarkets appeal.

And what Chloe’s bill does is reward councils for ignoring evidence by making their decisions, no matter how irrational, unappealable.

It is an appalling bill. All Councils have to do is show their LAPs are reasonable. This is not a high barrier.

Oliver Hartwich writes in The Australian:

Good journalists do not start with a message but with a question.

This makes the New Zealand government’s “Public Interest Journalism Fund” (PIJF), set up in mid-2020, a questionable exercise. For local media to apply for a slice of the available NZ$55 million, they first need to sign up to supporting a list of political causes.

The standard funding agreement to access the PIJF contains a section titled “New Zealand Identity and Culture and Public Interest requirements”.

“You will use best endeavours to ensure all Content reflects and develops New Zealand identity and culture,” it states.

It then asks journalists to ensure, among other matters, that content “actively promotes the principles of Partnership, Participation and Active Protection under Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty of Waitangi) acknowledging Māori as a Te Tiriti partner.”

If you are unfamiliar with New Zealand politics, this requirement may sound innocent. Who would object to good race relations? No-one, hopefully.

However, the wording makes it clear that the actual agenda goes well beyond an acknowledgment of the Treaty of Waitangi as an historic document of constitutional significance. It demands that journalists accept the government’s interpretation of the Treaty and then promote it actively.

The problem is that the meaning of the Treaty is a contemporary political issue, and there is more than one political interpretation. Therefore, the expressed requirement to take a side necessarily collides with journalists’ professional ethos, irrespective of their personal stance on the Treaty.

The government paying journalists only on the condition that they agree to spread the government’s message on the Treaty creates an obvious challenge for journalism in New Zealand.

Hartwich gets the heart of the problem – the $55 million is conditional on media organisation’s agreeing with the Government’s view on the Treaty. This is repugnant. Polling by Curia has shown a massive 59% think the PIJF undermines the independence of the media. Only 24% of Kiwis support retaining the PIJF.

I hope the next Government will scrap it entirely. However there may be a case for funding reporting on court cases and local councils. But this would need to be done with no conditions around the Treaty and through some sort of neutral body not appointed by the Government of the day.

For sport around the globe the last week has been incredible.

First of all the retirement on Roger Federer at 41 years of age and with 20 grand slam singles titles in his resume. A few years back (2003) I was wandering in Melbourne and as I walked past the gate to the Rod Laver Arena the billboard said, “Davis Cup – Roger Federer vs Mark Philippoussis and Marc Rosset vs Leighton Hewitt.” I checked my watch and they were playing that afternoon/evening. I checked at the box office and bought one of the four remaining tickets for this Davis Cup clash. Davis Cup is known for the explosive parochialism of the crowds. Federer was so good, truly a class above, that when he had demolished Philippoussis, in straight sets, he received a standing ovation. Truly a sporting GREAT and seeing Borg and McEnroe farewelling him as the greatest a few days back was special.

Yesterday in Wollongong was the men’s race at the world road cycling championships. Again I have been lucky to attend one of the events (Richmond, Virginia in 2015) along with 650,000 others. The world champs is a grueling one day event of over 260km – ridden in big laps that drives everything to a frenzy over the six hours it takes. It is never slow or easy and every nation’s team is strategizing the whole day through. A twenty-two year old from Belgium, Remco Evenepoel, rode away from the remarkable field of athletes to ride most of the last thirty kilometers on his own and win this highly prestigious race. Incredible. Our media chose to concentrate on another cyclist being arrested when after hours of being disturbed the night before the race by kids banging on his door – he told them to shove-off and push them on their way. The race took over six hours and these people are stunning examples of what humans can do.

As that race was finishing in Australia the Berlin marathon was starting with over 45,000 runners from 120 countries and a million spectators. In terms of a winner all interest was in 37 year old Eliud Kipchoge from Kenya. His resume is the running equivalent of Federer’s tennis one. Yesterday he ran so superbly that for the first 25km he was tracking towards a sub-2 hour certified marathon (he has bettered that time in a tailored time-trial). In the last 17km he slowed a tiny amount but still set a new world record of 2:01.09 – and managed to look like he been up the driveway to check the mail.

New Zealand has adopted a fortress mentality with our response to covid and become very introvert. It is good to know that the world has moved on and great people have gone back to doing extraordinary things.

So – as you spend your day mourning the loss of Queen Elizabeth the 2nd. If you want a pick-me-up please look up those three events above.

The ODT headline:

The gauntlet for drink-drivers is getting narrower, Dunedin police say, after hundreds of motorists were breath-tested in the city yesterday. 

Constable Nick Turner, of Dunedin, said their impairment team tested 700 drivers during their shift yesterday.

During one checkpoint in Brighton at 4.30pm, 24 drivers were found to have alcohol on their breath, which suggested people were having a beer before driving home, Const Turner said.

None of the drivers was found to be over the legal alcohol limit.

This should be a good news story. 700 people were tested and not a single one was over the legal limit.

It’s great that the 24 people who had a small amount of alcohol in their system knew to only have one or two drinks, to remain safe.

Two polls have both shown Wayne Brown now in the lead for the Auckland Mayoralty.

A Curia-Auckland Ratepayers’ Alliance poll from 11 to 18 September had Wayne Brown 2% ahead of Efeso Collins, and a Kantar-Q+A poll from 16 to 20 September has Brown 6% ahead. The Curia poll had Viv Beck withdraw halfway through the polling period while the Kantar poll was taken entirely afterwards (they also did a poll before hand, but redid it once Beck withdrew).

This confirms it is clearly a two horse race now between Brown and Collins, with Brown in the lead.

Collins is a very decent guy, and he would be more independent than Goff was. Yes he is Labour and backed by Labour, but he has been quite independent in how he voted on Council. If you were to have a Labour aligned Mayor, he would be a better choice than Richard Hills whose only mission as Mayor would be to help get Jacinda re-elected. Collins is not just a partisan hack.

That is not to say that I agree with his policies. I don’t. Free public transport is a monumentally stupid idea. The reason is simple – it will increase usage of public transport, but massively decrease quality as there will be no money to pay for extra capacity etc.

Brown has a formidable reputation as a very competent change manager, and if elected he is promising to upend the status quo. This is a good thing, as the vast majority of Aucklanders think the status quo is terrible. But there are question marks over his ability to take people with him – and the Mayor is only one vote.

Most promising is Brown has pledged to reduce the staffing bill for the Council, especially at the top end. It is pretty much impossible to keep rates increases low, unless you focus on staffing, as that is by far the largest cost. If Brown is elected, I suspect there will be a massive turnover of staff at the second and third level.

I would certainly vote for Brown if I loved in Auckland. If anyone can get the CCOs under control, it will be him.

For meaningful change, one needs to change not just the Mayor, but also the Council. Below are the candidates worth voting for, if you want a Council less likely to sign off huge rates increase. Inclusion here is not an endorsement of everything they do – it may be simply they are the lesser evil 🙂

• Albany – Wayne Walker and John Watson
• AEP – Christine Fletcher and Will McKenzie
• Franklin – either Andy Baker or Keven Mealamu
• Howick – Maurice Williamson and Sharon Stewart
• Manukau – Malcolm Turner
• Manurewa-Papakura – Daniel Newman and Rangi McLean
• Maungakiekie-Tamaki – Troy Eilliott
• North Shore – Danielle Grant and George Wood
• Ōrākei – Desley Simpson
• Rodney – Greg Sayers
• Waitākere – Ken Turner and Shawn Blanchfield
• Waitematā and Gulf: Mike Lee
• Whau: Tracy Mullholland

Marina Nemat at CNN writes:

Mahsa Amini is dead because she let the world see a few locks of her hair. She was 22-years-old, beautiful, and full of hope and promise. She died in the custody of Iran’s morality police. She was neither the first, nor will she be the last.

Iranian officials claim she died after suffering a “heart attack” and falling into a coma (she was detained for allegedly breaking rules on wearing the hijab). But Amini’s family – and demonstrators across the country – aren’t buying it. Watching dramatic images of protesters burning their hijabs, cutting their hair and violent confrontations with security forces, shows how little has changed since my own teenage years at the hands of police and Revolutionary Guard brutality.

She was murdered by the regime because she showed some hair. Barbaric.

I was one of those who spoke out against the regime and paid the price – though not as dearly as some of my fellow activists. At the age of 16, I was accused of being an anti-revolutionary and sent to Tehran’s notorious Evin prison.

Even now, decades later, every night when I go to bed, I think of my cellmates. Many are dead, executed by the Islamic Republic of Iran in the 1980s. And those who survived, like me, were tortured in prison. Guards and interrogators, all men, tied us to bare beds in small, windowless rooms that stunk of sweat, urine, and fear, and they lashed the soles of our feet with lengths of cable – heavy, hard, and cruel. It hurt so much that I could not even scream. I was later led to a mock execution, threatened, and raped. I was practically a child and so were many of my cellmates.

Makes the Taliban look civilised.

The recent election in Sweden saw the Sweden Democrats gain 11 seats and about to join Government for the first time. In 2010 they entered Parliament with 20 seats and now have 73 seats.

Many people have wondered why so many people in Sweden now vote for a party that is seen as hard right.

Well the reason is pretty simple. Guess how many bombings there have been in Sweden since 2018? Most people would think maybe 1 or 2, perhaps half a dozen. I mean a bombing is a major event, you would expect to hear about.

The answer is around 500!

Paulina Neuding writes at Common Sense:

Yesterday morning, Swedes woke up to news of a kind that has become all-too familiar: During the night, powerful bombs exploded at apartment buildings in two different towns in southern Sweden. 

One person was severely injured in Åstorp, where a witness told the press: “People screamed and cried. It felt so unreal.” A resident told Radio Sweden that his 7-year-old had come running into his bedroom screaming, as the blast made their apartment shake. 

In Helsingborg, the explosion was so powerful that, according to the police, cars parked nearby were destroyed. It is still unclear if the bombings are connected to each other, or who is behind them.

Since 2018, there have been almost 500 bombings—yes, bombings—in what is known as one of the most stable societies in the world.  

There’s not just a bombing problem. There are shootings, too. 

Sweden, which has a population of around 10 million, has the highest per-capita number of deadly shootings of 22 European countries. Forty-seven people have been shot dead so far this year, which, while far from American levels of gun homicide, is extreme for Europe. Other European countries have come to look at Sweden with horror. 

Around 100 bombings a year and a fatal shooting every few days.

Among shooting suspects, 85 percent are first- or second-generation immigrants, according to the newspaper Dagens Nyheter, as immigrant neighborhoods have become hotbeds for gang crime. National Police Commissioner Anders Thornberg has described the violence as “an entirely different kind of brutality than we’ve seen before” and his deputy, Mats Löfving, says that 40 criminal clans now operate throughout the country. Spreading fear are “humiliation robberies,” targeting children and youth, in which victims are subjected to degrading treatment by assailants, such as being urinated upon. Just this week, four men were sentenced for robbing, beating and urinating on an 18-year-old, who was also filmed by his tormentors. 

I am a big fan of immigration, done well (as generally done in NZ). But immigration done badly where integration doesn’t occur can be very harmful, and this has happened in Sweden.

In response to Sweden’s increasing problems with gang violence and social unrest in immigrant suburbs, the government’s strategy for many years was to deny how serious the situation had become. ​​In the meantime, those people who noticed the problem—many of whom were working class—and spoke out about their diminished safety were accused of racism by leading politicians, the mainstream press, and the cultural elites. Only one political party did not: the SD. And in election after election, they gained more and more popular support.

If the moderate centrist parties won’t confront an issue for fear of being called racist, then the parties further away from the centre who do confront it will gain support as people think there is no other option.

Many immigrants have integrated well into Swedish society, but too many have ended up in segregated suburbs, where unemployment is high and crime is rampant. In an area like Malmö’s Rosengård, for instance, labor force participation among adults is less than 50 percent, and 21 percent of households rely on social welfare.  

Again integration is key.

When stories started appearing about gang-rule and attacks on people going into immigrant neighborhoods, sometimes referred to as “no-go zones,” a government agency started a PR campaign to rename them “go-go zones.” The government had help from left-leaning Swedish media. In 2015, the editorial page of Dagens Nyheter, for instance, said that people expressing alarm about crime were “safety-deniers,” and compared them to climate deniers. 

Laughing at the PR campaign – could imagine that happening in NZ also.

Josie Pagani writes:

Fifty-seven per cent of voters in Wellington want their city council to fix their ‘’pipes and water infrastructure’’. It’s their highest priority.

Two per cent want more cycleways, the lowest priority.

The council has reflected voters’ preferences by agreeing to spend $226 million on more cycleways. However much it might have spent on fixing pipes, they continue to eject effluent on to the streets with metronomic regularity.

Voters don’t dislike cycleways. They are over the priority placing they get compared to other civic enhancements.

Exactly. We need a Council that will focus on core services and facilities such as water, playgrounds, libraries, parks etc and less on white elephants.

The annual Herald Mood of the Boardroom has occurred and as usual I summarise the scores CEOs give to key politicians. While CEOs are not representative of all NZers it is interesting to see how their scores have changed from last year and which MPs are seen as better and worse performing.

A huge decline for most Ministers this year, with some saying it is the worst Government since Muldoon.

Scores are on a 1 to 5 scale so 3 is middle.

1. David Seymour 4.08 (-0.28)
2. James Shaw 3.27 (+0.21)
3. Chris Luxon 3.24 (+1.18 from Collins)
4. Grant Robertson 2.98 (-0.70)
5. Chris Hipkins 2.95 (-0.01)
6. Damien O’Connor 2.92 (+0.34)
7. Kiri Allan 2.83 (-0.32)
8. Ayesha Verrall 2.49 (-0.32)
9. Stuart Nash 2.43 (+0.09)
10. Megan Woods 2.42 (+0.04)
11. Peeni Henare 2.39 (-0.12)
12. Andrew Little 2.37 (-0.48)
13. Jan Tinetti 2.34 (+0.12)
14. Jacinda Ardern 2.30 (-0.73)
15. Kieran McAnulty 2.25
16. Michael Wood 2.19 (+0.04)
17. Carmel Sepuloni 2.13 (+0.04)
18. Aupito William Sio 2.12 (-0.28)
19. Meka Whaitiri 2.03 (-0.30)
20. David Parker 2.00 (-0.57)
21. Priyanca Radhakrishnan 2.00
22. David Clark 1.96 (-0.21)
23. Nanaia Mahuta 1.93 (-0.83)
24. Willie Jackson 1.89 (-0.31)
25. Marama Davidson 1.93 (-0.20)
26. Phil Twyford 1.78 (-0.1)
27. Poto Williams 1.62 (-0.36)
28. Kelvin Davis 1.66 (-0.07)

Amazing that the Labour Deputy Leader is rated bottom. Could you imagine Don McKinnon, Michael Cullen or Bill English being outside the top 10, let alone bottom?

And could you imagine Helen Clark or John Key being rated only 12th best performing Minister?

Also very amused that the Minister ranked highest by CEOS, and by a large margin, is Greens co-leader James Shaw. That won’t help him when the Marxist faction come again for him next year.

The largest drops are:

1. Nanaia Mahuta -0.83
2. Jacinda Ardern -0.73
3. Grant Robertson -0.70
4. David Parker -0.57

hil Twyford will be glad he has Kelvin there to make him look good.

They also rate Ardern in a number of different areas:

1. Leverages personal brand 3.56 (-0.34)
2. Security and intelligence 3.41 (+0.96)
3. Stands up to China 2.90 (-0.38)
4. Climate change response 2.63 (-0.21)
5. Political performance 2.54 (-0.76)
6. Child poverty reduction 1.73
7. Transformative change 1.70 (-0.38)
8. Build confidence with business 1.61 (-0.36)

So Ardern has shot up for her handling of security and intelligence, but massive drop in political performance and large drops in all other areas.

Simon Wilson and Bernard Orsman have given their ratings for the incumbent Auckland Councillors. I’m amazed so many got 8/10s or higher because if they were all so brilliant, then why does the Council have only 20% or so of Aucklanders thinking they are doing a good job. Seems a mismatch.

Anyway here are their ratings (averaged), for those interested.

• 9/10 – Desley Simpson
• 8/10 – Phil Goff, Jo Bartley, Bill Cashmore, Angela Dalton, Richard Hills
• 7.5/10 – Pippa Coom, Chris Darby
• 7/10 – Cathy Casey, Efeso Collins
• 6.5/10 – Linda Cooper, Alf Filipaina, Shane Henderson
• 5.5/10 – Daniel Newman, Paul Young
• 5/10 – John Watson
• 4/10 – Christine Fletcher, Tracy Mulholland
• 2.5/10 – Greg Sayers, Sharon Stewart, Wayne Walker

Those who vote with Goff seem to all get rated very highly and those who don’t, very poorly.

The Herald reports:

Finance Minister Grant Robertson remains committed to passing legislation to create a state income insurance scheme before next year’s general election.

Every working Kiwi will see their take home pay slashed under Grant’s plan. It’s a $3.5 billion tax hike which will see workers pay up to $1,800 a year so people made redundant can get paid up to $400 a day to not find a job.

The only way to stop this massive tax hike will be to vote them out next year.

CNBC reports:

New York Attorney General Letitia James on Wednesday sued former President Donald Trump, the Trump Organization, three of his adult children and others for allegedly widespread fraud involving years’ worth of false financial statements related to the company’s business.

The 220-page civil lawsuit filed in Manhattan Supreme Court seeks at least $250 million in damages.

It also seeks to permanently bar Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and Ivanka Trump from serving as an officer of a company in New York, and permanently prohibit the Trump companies named in the suit from doing business in New York state.

James said she has asked federal prosecutors in Manhattan and the IRS to investigate Trump for possible federal crimes. She said that evidence obtained during her three-year civil probe of Trump indicated possible crimes of bank fraud and making false statements to financial institutions. …

James pointed to a Manhattan property listed in the lawsuit, 40 Wall St., as an example of that.

She said that the Trump Organization and Trump received appraisals from a bank calculating the value of that property at $200 million as of Aug. 1, 2010, and $220 million as of November 1, 2012.

But in Trump’s 2011 Statement of Financial Condition, 40 Wall St. was listed as having a value of $524 million. That valuation then increased to $527 million in Trump’s 2012 statement and to $530 million in the 2013 statement, or “more than twice the value calculated by the ‘professionals,’” the suit said

Can’t wait for the trial. Hopefully the defence will be better than Trump’s current efforts in the classified documents saga. Mediaite reports:

Donald Trump claimed the president of the United States can declassify government documents simply by declaring them as such, or “even by thinking about it.”

Declassification by mere thought!!

Stuff reports:

Give children “the vote when they’re seven, and the world will be a whole lot better”, says lecturer, child counsellor and neuroscience educator Nathan Wallis.

Speaking to Simon Bridges on the latest episode of Stuff’s long-form interview podcast Generally Famous, Wallis explained why he thinks the younger generation should have a say in choosing our next PM.

All the reasons people say an 8-year-old can’t vote “are the same reasons they gave for why you couldn’t give black people the vote, or women”, Wallis says.

People remain black all their lives and remain women all their lives. You don’t remain seven years old all your life. It is an inane argument.

Dear Kiwiblog Folk

After the release of all of the new Equity Index (EQI) numbers yesterday I did a, long/late night process to match those numbers to: 

– L3 Achievement

– UE Achievement

– Retention to 17yo

– Progress to Degree Level Study

… for every high school in NZ.

The final sheets in the dataset have trend line diagrams which strongly indicate that the 37 Variables used to develop the data set by no means explain what is happening in many schools (for good and bad). 

It would be interesting to know if being male  was a variable given how far NZ boys are behind girls. 

The good aspect for teacher practice/school aspiration is the schools that are clearly beating their EQI “expectations”). Examples are:

– Baradene College

– Iona College

– St Peter’s Epsom

– Columba College 

– Marist College

– Nga Tawa

– St Paul’s Ponsonby

– Al Madina

– Hato Paora

– Manukura

– Christchurch GHS

– St Catherine’s Kilbirnie

– Roxburgh Area School

– TKKM o Hoani Waititi

– Swelwyn College

– Zayed School for Girls

– Liston College

– Auckland Grammar Girls School

– McAuley College

Seems like a good group to learn from!

This is a very valuable data set for overall programme evaluation and goal setting/planning. All data is for LEAVERS – the most important category.

If you would like a copy of this data-set please let me know.

It is highly informative and I would be very happy to discuss aspects.

Regards

Alwyn Poole
[email protected]

Stuff reports:

Public Service Minister Chris Hipkins has apologised in the House to former finance minister Sir Bill English for dragging his family into an exchange over government contracts awarded to the husband of Foreign Affairs Minister Nanaia Mahuta.

Hipkins on Wednesday afternoon interjected during Question Time with an apparent reference to English’s brothers being provided government appointments. This came after ACT leader David Seymour questioned the Government on the contracts awarded to Mahuta’s family.

“Let’s talk about Bill English’s family, shall we?” Hipkins said, suggesting English’s family members were treated differently because they were “white”.

Labour love to play the race card to defend themselves. But this has backfired on them, because the facts are so bad.

What Hipkins was referring to was the appointment of Mervyn English to a fixed term role in the Ministry of Health in 2011, to set up a Health Sector Forum.

Mervyn was a career public servant. He had spent six years as a general manager at the Electricity Commission before the Health role. After that role, he held senior roles in the State Services Commission and DOC.

His brother, Bill, was not a Minister of Health.

Labour did actually question the appointment at the time, with Grant Robertson asking questions in Parliament.

The Minister Tony Ryall immediately asked the SSC to investigate, and they found everything was done properly.

Now compare this to the Mahuta contracts:

• None of the Ormsbys seem to have had a background in the public sector and only gained contracts once Mahuta was a Minister
• They were given consulting contracts, not an employment contract
• Three of the four contracts were in portfolios that Mahuta was a Minister
• Internal reviews to date have found proper processes were not followed
• The Government has spent months resisting an inquiry

So Labour playing the race card and trying to smear the English family over the Mahuta saga is very disappointing.

The Free Speech Union has surveyed local candidates on whether they would try and ban events where they disagree with the speakers from council facilities. Use this guide to find out who not to vote for.

The Herald reports:

Public service commissioner Peter Hughes is looking into the awarding of contracts to businesses associated with family members of Cabinet minister Nanaia Mahuta.

National Party spokesman for Public Services Simeon Brown first requested the commission investigate the matter in August, as details of a series of government contracts related to two companies owned by or related to Gannin Ormsby continued to emerge.

Ormsby is Mahuta’s husband.

This is a good thing.

Agencies appear to have bent over backwards to shovel work to Ormsby and co. Most contractors have to go through a burdensome tender process where you spend a couple of days filling in an RFP and then a panel considers all the RFPs against known criteria and recommend a contract. But in all of these cases Ormsby was contracted with no tender and sometimes without even a written contract.