If you believe the wowsers the 1989 liberalisation of our liquor laws saw a huge uptake in alcohol. That allowing supermarkets to sell alcohol was a mistake. That longer hours for bars was a mistake etc.

But Stats NZ has just released the alcohol for consumption stats for the year to June 2020. There was an average of 9.06 litres of alcohol per adult. In 1989 it was 10.97 litres. So it is 17% less than before liberalisation.

Since 2005 they have also tracked the individual types of alcohol. Changes since 2005 are:

• Beer -24%
• Wine -7%
• Spirits with under 23% alcohol +53%
• Spirits with over 23% alcohol 0%

The problem isn’t the law. The problem is the minority who are problem drinkers.

On my Patreon I have written at some length on why I think ACT are doing so well. I give ten reasons that range from Covid-19 to free speech to NZ First.

A guest post by Mikenmild:

Kiwibloggers may have noticed an article about one of New Zealand’s major art prizes being awarded to an artist for a sheet of paper covered with typewritten forward slashes.

The drawing prize was endowed in 2012 by arts patron Chris Parkin. Interviewed in 2013, he said “drawing should be every artist’s boot camp; an essential return to basics, the framework for everything which follows. I’ve got no idea why the value of drawing was diminished but I still think it forms a sound basis for any artist.”

The prize was established in partnership with the New Zealand Academy of Fine Arts. The NZAFA’s director at the time, Warren Feeney, also commented: “Drawing is so fundamental to making art; gathering information, note taking, testing out possibilities and ideas, recording accurately and speculatively, a record of time passing, evident in the artist moving ink, pencil, pastel, etc, across the surface of the paper.”

Many people, I am sure, would agree that ‘ moving ink, pencil, pastel, etc, across the surface of the paper’ is essential to a drawing.

The prize has now been awarded eight times:

2013 AO Folded Moire Drawing by Monique Jansen. A drawing by pencil on paper that was then folded to create an optical illusion.

2014 Observer by Douglas Stichbury. A a charcoal drawing on paper of a man absorbed in using a piece of equipment.

2015 The Floor We Walk On by Gabrielle Amodeo. Not a drawing. The artist described it as “rubbings of the entire 942m floor-space of the house,” creating a floor-print.”

2016 The Catastrophe by Hannah Beehre. Not a drawing. Blotches of Indian ink on paper, with some tea stains because ‘she was drinking a cup of tea over the paper and accidentally dropped the tea bag on it.’ Some claimed to discern shapes of frogs, mice and bats in the work.

2017 State Block by Kirsty Lillico. Not a drawing. ‘Salvaged’ carpet cut to the floor-plan of a 1940s apartment , then partly hung, partly draped on the floor. According to the judge, it ‘challenged the conventional idea of what drawing can be.’ Apparently, the work also ‘questioned the failure of privatisation to solve the current state housing crisis’.

Parkin admitted Lillico’s work would not have been his first choice as winner of the prize, felt the piece met the competition requirements. It was “still lines, at the end of the day”. “It certainly stretches the drawing concept … somebody has taken a knife, and started a line and taken it for a walk.”

2018 Long Echo by Jacqui Colley. Not a drawing. Aluminium etched with acid and black oil pigment.The artist said it “mimicked the colonisation of the now mechanised land”, and referenced Māori rock drawings.

2019 Every Valley by Michael Dell. Might be a drawing. Charcoal on canvas. The artist said that it represents Pigeon Valley, near Nelson.

2020 Forward Slash by Poppy Lekner. Described above － not a drawing. Lekner had ‘worked with typewriters previously, and created Forward Slash the day before entries closed.’

Seventy-six finalists were exhibited in 2020. By my count, over forty of them cannot really be considered drawings. Apart from the overall winner, seven of the 10 merit prizes of $500 were not drawings.

Some of these ‘not drawings’ were ingeniously constructed. Simon Attwool’s Home, which received a merit prize, was made from ‘charcoal collected from a burnt out house screen printed on paper mounted on 1176 matchbox trays.’ Julia Humpfer’s Runners – Beginning Taxonomic Collection was ‘recycled pantyhose stretched on MDF.’ Morag Stokes’s Just Dicking Around ＃2 used ‘graphite and Chinese ink applied to Yupo paper with extra-large ribbed condoms.’

Hey, I do get it. Either most of these artists are taking the piss, or they seriously believe that they are at the cutting edge of contemporary art. Artists can have fun with art; they can challenge boundaries; thay can confront viewers. But I can’t help but feel sorry for what has resulted from Chris Parkin’s desire to promote the value of drawing.

Stuff reports:

Covid-19 has contributed to median incomes falling for the first time since records began in 1998, Stats NZ says.

Stats NZ labour market statistics for income in the June quarter showed median weekly incomes were lower in the June 2020 quarter than they were a year ago, down 7.6 per cent to $652 a week.

This is why it is so appalling that Councils are increasing rates, when incomes are falling.

It also shows that what we really need from the Government is to lift after tax incomes or lower the cost of living. One way would be to temporarily cut the rate of GST, as this would benefit every household.

I strongly recommend people read the full sentencing notes of Justice Mander in R vs Tarrant. At the risk of sounding gushing, they are a judicial masterpiece.

It is not an easy read at first. It is very hard going reading the facts of the massacre. There are essentially four parts to it:

1. The facts – Justice Mander describes what Tarrant did, who he killed and wounded in the order he did it. This part is pretty awful, but it brings home how absolutely cold hearted and monstrous the massacre was.
2. The victims. Justice Mander spends a paragraph on each victim and turns them from names into people for those of us who didn’t know them. The 13 year old without a dad, the software engineer, the physician, the sportsman, the taxi driver, the student, the welder, the dentist, the farmer, the pilot, the geologist, the 14 year old, the three year old etc etc. Justice Mander pays tribute to all of them.
3. The survivors (also victims). Justice Mander also deals with their stories and the horror they carry with them.
4. Tarrant. Mander sums Tarrant up as empty of any empathy for his victims and entirely self-centered. A deeply impaired person who has hatred of people he sees as different to him.
5. The sentencing. Justice Mander has done such a thorough job of considering all the options around whether or not the sentence should be life without parole, that I’d say any potential appeal is doomed to failure. He has made sure this decision is watertight. He masterly dismissed the argument that a guilty plea means he should avoid a LWOP sentence saying “the massacre of so many people and that was undertaken in an attempt to kill so many more, cannot be moderated to any lesser finite sentence because the offender has finally faced the inevitability of his conviction and pleaded guilty”. Very cleverly he instead applies a discount for the guilty plea to the attempted murder sentencing, so it can’t be argued no provision was made for the guilty plea. A strike of genius. And then the summary “Parliament has provided a sanction for such crimes in the form of a life sentence without parole that can only be imposed in the case of the very worst murders. Its use must be taken to have been intended only when the circumstances clearly warrant its imposition. The unavoidable rhetorical question in sentencing you today is, if not here, then when?” And that leads to the Life Without Parole decision.
6. Finally is what is almost farcial, but necessary, Justice Mander ensures strict compliance with the law by issuing a first strike warning to Tarrant. Justice Mander recognises it is an empty exercise in this case, but makes sure again the sentencing is watertight.

One part I do want to quote is this:

It is difficult to look beyond the wicked nature of each murder and the pain and suffering you have caused to individual victims, to their families and loved ones.

However, you are not only a murderer but a terrorist.

Your actions go further than demonstrating contempt for the sanctity of life. In the name of a political or ideological cause, you sought to violently intimidate the community, and coerce the country’s peaceable form of government and social order — essentially to attack New Zealand’s way of life.

The beliefs upon which you rely to justify your crimes are rooted in religious and ethnic antipathy and intolerance. The hatred that lies at the heart of your hostility to particular members of the community that you came to this country to murder has no place here. It has no place anywhere.

New Zealand rightly places great value on its diverse and culturally rich
community. It recognises the contributions made by people of many racial and ethnic backgrounds and of varied faiths and cultures. Extremist beliefs and ideologies that seek to promote violence and hate are anathema to the values of acceptance, tolerance and mutual respect upon which our inclusive society is based and which this country strives to maintain. Where warped and malignant ideology manifests itself in such violence and causes such appalling harm, it is incumbent on the Court to respond in a way that decisively rejects such vicious malevolence.

The vicious malevolence will never leave prison alive. Let’s remember what he did, but forget all about him.

Personally I am a fan of private schools. They add diversity to the NZ school system and allow around 3% of students to attend schools which can be innovative in a way most state schools can’t. The 25% subsidy for their operations seems reasonable to me as it is only around $1,500 per student and taxpayers actually save money by having students attend private schools as if everyone was in a public school we would be paying over $6,000 per student.

The Green School New Zealand looks like an excellent innovative school. They have found a niche in the market and have invested in it. I don’t mind that it is owned by a for profit company and that the owners will profit from it, just as I don’t mind that the early childhood education centre my oldest son attends is privately owned.

But this $12 million grant to the Green School is horrendous, for a number of reasons.

1. This is a brand new school that only opened in 2020. It has no track record of governance, management or education to judge it on. This is not some long established school that has proven itself.
2. The school doesn’t even have full registration yet. It is on provisional registration
3. According to Radio NZ the current roll is only around 50 students, of which around half are domestic. This means that $12 million has been given to a school with 25 domestic students which is an average subsidy of $480,000 per student. Compare that to around $6,000 a student for state schools and $1,500 for other private schools.
4. It is one of the most expensive schools in New Zealand, costing around the same as Kings. It costs $5,300 just to register and $24,000 in tuition fees for NZ students or $43,000 for foreign students. So anyone attending in 2020 has paid $29,300 or $48,300.
5. If a child attended the school for all 13 years of primary and secondary it would cost the family $317,300. The families who can afford this are clearly in the top 1%
6. The school charges annual interest rates on late fees of 36%
7. The school said it was already planning to expand to 500 students, yet this $12 million is trumpeted as allowing it to expand to 250 students – a fewer number than they already planned

Former Green MPs are not happy:

Unions also not happy:

Post Primary Teachers’ Association regional chair Erin MacDonald also had equity on her mind.

“Providing a private school with $11.7 million of government funding is not a good use of government funds to provide equity of access to students in our region.”

MacDonald said the region’s Enviroschools – which also had sustainability focus – got $10,000 annually.

The Educational Institute represent 50,000 teachers.

Its national secretary Paul Goulter said teachers were angry at Green Party co-leader James Shaw.

“What really upsets is when they point to the Green’s policy on public education it actually says public funding for private schools should be phased out and transferred to public schools, so what gives?”

Goulter said spending public money on profit-orientated private schools was wrong.

“And then with an overlay of trying to attract overseas students … Why any school would be trying to have a business model that’s built around the attraction of international students at the moment, I have no idea?

Again I’m in favour of private schools receiving the modest $1,500 per student subsidy. I’m totally against a school hand picked by Green Party Ministers because it shares their name and ethos to get a massive $12 million for a school with 25 domestic students.

Also the claim by James Shaw that it will produce $43 million a year of economic growth to the region is just farcical. I bet you that is a claim from the people who got the money, and not the view of officials.

Brenton Tarrant gets sentenced today. It has been a moving three days as victims and their families testified on the impact of them. I’ve been moved to tears by the story of the three year old who was shot, but also by the families who told Tarrant they had no room for hate, so they forgave him. It was reported that even Tarrant reacted to this. One can only hope that perhaps it got through.

The other aspect which is worth noting is how many people told him that his plan to cause hatred and backlash backfired. This is objectively true. He picked the wrong country to do this in. Again credit to Jacinda Ardern for her role, but NZ’s response to this actually got praised around the world by many Muslim countries and caused within NZ a huge uprising of goodwill towards Muslim New Zealanders. I can only hope he realises what he did was wrong and achieved the opposite of what he wanted.

But we will never know. For reasons not apparent Tarrant both pleaded guilty and has also chosen not to speak at his sentencing. I don’t know whether this might signify some empathy for his victims, or it might just mean he thinks his message through his manifesto is stronger without him adding to it.

Regardless of his motives in pleading guilty and not speaking, I am glad of both. Many feared he would use the trial to try and justify what he did and promote his views.

One can only hope he does get a Life Without Parole sentence so his victims and families never have to think about him again. They will never have to face multiple Parole Board hearings in a few decades time, where they have to relive what happen as they argue to keep him in prison.

Just because he saved the state the time and money of a trial should not mean he gets a lesser sentence for such an unparalleled crime. Again yes he did spare the multiple victims a contested trial, but there are only so many victims because of what he did.

Let’s hope the Judge agrees.

UPDATE: He has been sentenced to Life Without Parole. Beyond pleased.

UPDATE2: Tarrant didn’t oppose Life Without Parole, which probably made it easier to occur. I do wonder if he didn’t oppose it as he wants to be a martyr to his “cause”, but regardless we can now forget about him and let him rot.

A guest post by Neil Miller:

Wellington City Councillor Rebecca Matthews should apologise to the Wellington hospitality and gaming industry for her unfounded allegation that venues with pokies machines had to frequently change chairs because gambling patrons “regularly” urinated on themselves rather than give up their seat.

I was immediately suspicious of this claim which she used to justify a ‘sinking lid’ policy for pokie machines. None of the six publicans I called had experienced this issue even once over many years. They also did not know of any others who had to constantly change urine-soaked chairs.

To find out the Councillor’s evidence for her comment, which was made in an official meeting and received media coverage, I sent in a request under the Local Government Official Information and Meeting Act 1987. To their credit, both Councillor Matthews and the Wellington City Council responded quickly.

However, that was because there was very little to report.

Councillor Matthews said “this was reported to me from a friend a few years ago who was researching the gaming industry in Auckland.” 

The Acting Head of Assurance at Wellington City Council declined my request for the evidence behind Councillor Matthews’ claim saying “the Council does not hold any information relating to your request.” The only material they held on urination in gaming lounges was Councillor Matthews’ own statement.

In my opinion, after a long time working in the political arena, “a few years ago a friend said it might have happened in Auckland” is one of the weakest justifications I have ever seen for a significant policy in Wellington.

For the record, I support the sinking lid policy.  However, decisions as important as this should be based on evidence, not an old anecdote which besmirches a whole industry.

Councillor Matthews should withdraw her comment and apologise.

You can email Cr Matthews here – [email protected]

Neil Miller is a former hospitality journalist and was New Zealand Beer Writer of the Year.
Disclaimer: Neil has an interest in the award-winning brewpub Fork & Brewer. The Fork has never had pokie machines.

HDPA writes:

Can you believe that the Government still isn’t doing the day three testing?

After all those times they promised us they’re testing people coming back into the country twice before they’re let into the community, they’re still not testing everyone on day three.

I couldn’t believe my ears when I heard Chris Hipkins admit that in today’s 1pm press conference.

Mostly, because we’ve been here before. Mid-June, they were busted not doing the testing when Thelma and Louise left their Auckland hotel without being tested. Following that, the Prime Minister went on her Facebook Live and told us her expectations hadn’t been met.

But we were assured everyone would now be tested. Twice. Day three and day 12.

But fast forward two months and their assurances aren’t worth the time we spend listening to them. Still not happening.

Now, before they start spinning you that day three tests are not important, yes they are. That’s why they assured us that day three tests would be done.

Day three tests are important so they can find the people who have Covid and move those people to other quarantine facilities so they’re not still mixing with other people in the managed isolation hotel lobbies without face masks – like we’re seeing in the pictures – and making them all sick too.

Because, by the way, if some of these people get sick just before leaving the hotel and coming into the community, their day 12 tests may not necessarily pick up the Covid which takes 5-6 days to incubate.

One more thing that we were told at 1 pm, that turned out to be false.

What is shocking is the Government can’t even say how many adults in isolation skipped their Day 3 test. It appears that even after many months of Covid-19, they still don’t have a database or even an Excel spreadsheet that tracks people in MIQ.

It starts with the time we were promised the police were checking on all returning Kiwis isolating when at home, and they weren’t checking. It includes us being told everyone coming out of managed isolation were being tested first when they weren’t. And it goes up to us being told all border workers were being tested when they weren’t.

It’s not an isolated example.

 I don’t believe a word of what she and her Government now say about their Covid response.

I now do not trust them to keep Covid out of this country anymore.

Can’t blame her.

Stuff reports:

The Green Party has been caught bending its own party policy after a private school in Taranaki was given $11.7 million to fund an expansion programme.

The money comes from the Government’s $3 billion shovel-ready projects fund, and was announced in a press release from Greens co-leader James Shaw who said the grant to Green School New Zealand would help the school expand its roll from 120 students to 250, creating 200 jobs.

This is a private for profit school that charges between $24,000 and $43,000 a year. It doesn’t even have full registration, yet it just got given $12 million.

Even if you accept the spin it will help expand the roll by 120 students that is $100,000 per student. But the last data the Ministry of Education has is it has 11 domestic students.

Green Party policy is opposed to state funding being given to private schools, and wants it to be gradually phased out.

‘Public funding for private schools should be phased out and transferred to public schools,” says the party’s current education policy.

So their official policy is to ban public funding of private schools (ie the 25% subsidy per student), and then they go give $12 million to one tiny private school, because well they personally approve of the school.

As far as I know no other private school in NZ has ever received public money for their property. They get 25% of the average operational cost for a state pupil which is around $1,500 per student. Pretty small biscuits. And here we get $12 million to one small private school.

The sheer scale of the funding is significant. When the Government announced a $400 million package to upgrade New Zealand’s ageing public school infrastructure, it was capped at $400,000. The grant to the Green School would be enough to fund nearly 30 schools at that rate.

Just up the road from Green School, New Plymouth Boys’ and Girls’ High Schools each received $400,000.

Both those schools have more than 1,200 students. So they get around $330 per student while the Green school gets over $100,000 per student.

Stuff reports:

A high speed rail service between Hamilton and Auckland is expected to slash travel times but could cost up to $14.425 billion to launch.

The tentative figures are contained in an initial rapid rail business case released by Transport Minister Phil Twyford​ on Tuesday.

No doubt Labour will announce this as policy in a few weeks, promising it by 2024, yet not actually delivering anything until 2124.

Let’s look at what numbers you would need using this service to keep the subsidy to say under $100 a person.

6% cost of capital on $14.425 billion is $865 million a year. So each day it costs $2.37 million. So if you could get 24,000 people a day using it, the subsidy would be *only* $100 per passenger per day.

Of course 24,000 would be around 1.4 of Hamilton’s working population. And to transport 24,000 people a day you’d need 310 carriages! That is equal to 7.5 kms of carriages. Of course you’d have more than one train a a day but say you have 10 – still need each stop to be 750 metres long!

Stuff reports:

An influential head of an ultraconservative US evangelical college has reportedly resigned amid incredible allegations about his sex life.

Jerry Falwell Jr – who Donald Trump called “one of the most respected religious leaders in the US” after securing his endorsement – was already on leave after posting a photo of himself with trousers unzipped on Instagram.

Now, a former pool boy has revealed he had an affair with Mr Falwell’s wife Becki, and that Mr Falwell liked to watch while they were having sex.

Why it is always the pool boy?

The Herald reports:

Finance Minister Grant Robertson has dug in his heels about not extending the wage subsidy by four days to cover keeping Auckland in lockdown until Sunday night.

If the Government has forced almost every business in Auckland to remain closed, the least it should do is extend the wage subsidy for four extra days, to match the period of the lockdown.

Stuff reports:

The Ombudsman is urging action to fix “serious and persistent” problems at New Zealand’s mental health units, after delivering scathing reports on the state of five units, where a litany of human rights breaches were discovered.

The Ombudsman, Peter Boshier, found two such facilities were in breach of the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, despite previous warnings.

Wellington and Waitakere Hospitals were singled out for particularly harsh criticism.

Te Whare o Matairangi Mental Health Inpatient Unit at Wellington Hospital came under fire for using seclusion rooms as bedrooms when over capacity, despite a previous recommendation from the Ombudsman that this should stop.

“These rooms contain little more than a mattress, and are supposed to be used as a short-term measure for patients who are assessed as an imminent safety risk,” Boshier said.

Absolutely seclusion rooms should not be used for long-stay accommodation.

The Government made a lot of noise around mental health and said it was spending $1.4 billion on it. So how come mental health units don’t have enough rooms?

Newsroom reports:

A Newsroom investigation reveals a Ministry of Social Development initiative to provide emergency housing made the housing crisis worse and enriched a small set of landlords and real estate agents.

A former Harcourts property manager in South Auckland has blown the whistle on an emergency housing scheme where a group of landlords were paid up to $3000 a week by the taxpayer for “marginal to uninhabitable” private rentals.

When the landlords ran out of houses they turned to real estate agents who procured vacant properties – allegedly without the consent of the people who actually owned them.

The Ministry of Social Development has admitted the scheme made the rental crisis worse – as people took rental properties off the market and used them instead to rent out to MSD to earn thousands more.

This is a real scandal. Taxpayer money was spent on this scheme which resulted in increasinging homelessness (as fewer properties available) and enriching a group of landlords.

Most people know the Emergency Accommodation scheme put people in motels and hotels at market rates of over $120 per night for every room rented.

What they don’t know is from 2018 – within this current term of government – the Ministry of Social Development extended this scheme to include private homes.

The catch is that MSD continued to pay the same motel room rates to landlords for every room in the house they would rent.

A three-bedroom house rented out at a “hotel” rate of up to $150 per room per night could bring in $3000 per week in areas of the country where median rent for those was $550. The rent was capped at the $3000 mark.

MSD did not visit the properties to check if they met basic living standards.

Gross incompetence.

Minister of Social Development Carmel Sepuloni declined an interview request on the grounds she was still waiting for a briefing on it.

When Newsroom asked Sepuloni about the scheme on August 10 she also appeared to have no knowledge of it. Newsroom received a similar response when an earlier query was made to her office, in June.

She seems really on top of her portfolio!

On the 22nd of July Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters alleged that I was part of a grand conspiracy of people who knew about his superannuation overpayments and leaked it to the media. This allegation was made under the absolute privilege of Parliament. It is of course totally false.

There is a little known standing order (159) that allows someone referred to in the House by name who has been adversely affected by the reference to submit a response to be considered by the Speaker for incorporation into the parliamentary record.

The Speaker has determined that my response should be incorporated, and it was tabled in the House this afternoon. One by Rachel Morton was also accepted and tabled.

The details of my response are:

The Right Honourable Winston Peters on the 22^nd of July 2020 stated in the General Debate that I was told by Jordan Williams about Mr Peters’ superannuation and that I was involved in breaching Mr Peters’ right to privacy.

The statement by Mr Peters is incorrect. I did not discuss or disclose, in any way or form, details of his superannuation prior to reports appearing in the media about it.

I know this for a certainty as I was totally unaware of there being any issue around Mr Peters’ superannuation until it was reported in the media.

I’m pleased that Standing Orders allow ordinary citizens who are smeared by MPs under parliamentary privilege to be able to have their responses incorporated into the parliamentary record.

Spiked reports:

For 24 years, the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS), headquartered at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust in North London, has been seeing, counselling and treating adolescents and children diagnosed with ‘gender dysphoria’. This, as the NHS describes it, is ‘the sense of unease that a person may have because of a mismatch between their biological sex and their gender’.

For much of GIDS’ existence, few paid it much attention. But over the past 10 years all that has changed. Not only have transgender issues become the object of fierce public controversy and mooted government legislation, but diagnoses of gender dysphoria among children and adolescents have skyrocketed. As The Sunday Times reported last year: ‘Since 2009-10… there has been an increase of more than 3,200 per cent in patients referred to GIDS, from 77 that year to 2,590 in the year to April.’ Moreover, 2019 was the first time the majority (54 per cent) of patients referred to the clinic were 14 or under – some patients were as young as four.

That is a huge increase in just one decade.

Unsurprisingly, GIDS’ activity at the Tavistock has been subject to increasing public attention, and, more recently, scrutiny. In 2018, an internal report, by then staff governor Dr David Bell, effectively accused GIDS of fast-tracking children and adolescents for gender transition. Featuring damning quotes from whistle-blowing clinicians and unhappy staff members, it reinforced the growing sense that GIDS has been a little too eager to encourage young people to transition and potentially undergo life-changing medical treatment. Indeed, since 2017, over 35 clinicians have quit GIDS because they are worried about ‘overdiagnoses’ of gender dysphoria. Sonia Appleby, who works at GIDS as its Named Professional for Safeguarding Children, is even bringing a case against the Tavistock on the grounds that it is failing in its duty to safeguard children, by encouraging staff not to report any child safety concerns to her.

If their own clinicians are quitting, it sounds like a real problem.

It is a difficult area because there is no doubt that many people do have gender dysphoria and transitioning is the right thing for them to do. I’m all in favour of people being able to live their lives in the way that will make them happier.

It gets more difficult though when the person involved is not an adult. I don’t think you should ban people from receiving treatment for transitioning until they are 18, because sometimes it will be very clear that is the best course of action and you may be certain about this at age 17 oe age 15.

But you should be very cautious about allowing what is effectively a permanent change through treatment for a young person, and the younger they are the more cautious you should be.

Hormone therapy, for instance, is a serious, life-altering treatment. ‘It should try to not be at all for children’, says Susan, citing the potential for future ‘sterility or infertility’. She points out how absurd it is that we are encouraging some young people to take a decision that could change their lives forever. ‘There’s a reason we don’t let children marry or have tattoos. And somehow we’ve unrolled this treatment!’

Certainly changing your gender is a much more consequential decision than having a tattoo.

Perhaps the biggest problem with the debate around trans children and their treatment is that there are so many unanswered questions. As many critics have pointed out, there are no reliable or long-term data on follow-up care for patients who have chosen to transition. We do not know how prevalent ‘de-transitioning’ is, how many patients continue to have mental-health issues after their treatment, or the long-term effects of treatment itself. Mermaids and other trans-advocacy organisations claim that fears around puberty-blockers are unfounded, and that the treatment is reversible. But even the NHS admits that ‘little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone- or puberty-blockers in children with gender dysphoria’.

Certainly more data would be a good thing.

Stuff reports:

A campaign to lower the voting age to 16 has taken the argument to the High Court, with a claim that the current permitted age of 18 is age discrimination and a breach of rights.

“Extending the vote to 16 and 17-year-olds would uphold human rights and give us a more representative, better democracy,” co-director of the Make It 16, Gina Dao-McLay said before the hearing.

Why just 16? Why not 12?

A move to 16 would be deeply unpopular. Earlier this month Curia polled 700 adult NZers on whether the voting age should be 16 or 18. The results were:

• 16: 8%
• 18: 88%
• Unsure: 4%

The support for age 16 by party vote was:

* National: 2%
* Labour: 11%
* ACT: 0%
* NZ First: 5%
* Greens: 27%
* Undecided: 17%

So even Green Party voters are against by almost 3:1. Labour voters by 8:1.

Bjorn Lomberg slays Joseph Stiglitz in his response to a review of Lomberg’s book by Stiglitz. It is a classic step by step destruction.

Radio NZ reports:

Morrah wasn’t leaping to a call for vengeance over a single Ministry of Health slip-up. His question came after nearly five months of reporting on the ministry’s shortcomings.

In April and May, he honed in on health workers’ struggles to access  personal protective equipment, or PPE, in hospitals and community care facilities. 

That reporting has since been reinforced by the Auditor General John Ryan, who found that Bloomfield’s repeated assurances that plenty of PPE was available, didn’t always match the situation on the ground.

In May, he reported on the Ministry of Health’s failure to distribute adequate supplies of flu vaccines to hundreds of GP clinics.

Morrah was also one of those reporting in June on the lack of testing for people in managed isolation and quarantine facilities, along with concerning decisions on compassionate leave.

Last week he broke the story on the fact that nearly two-thirds of all border staff hadn’t been tested for Covid-19, despite a government assurance in late June that they would be swabbed.

Morrah says he doesn’t regret asking whether Bloomfield should resign. He sees those sorts of hard questions as part of his responsibility as a journalist.

I think Michael Morrah has arguably done more than any other person in NZ to improve the public health response to Covid-19. Without his stories, the failures would remain hidden and probably not be acted on.

If National was in Government I’m sure there would be some on the right who would denounce him as a commie agitator just as some on the left today are calling him worse than Mike Hosking.

There are some journalists who do let their leanings show. I don’t think Morrah is one of them. He excels in being able to do solid investigative journalism and I am sure he will annoy future National Ministers just as much as he is annoying current Labour ones.

In that RNZ story it is worth reflecting on the huge range of stories has has broken or contributed to – from lack of PPE to lack of flu vaccines to lack of testing in isolation to lack of testing of border staff. He has obviously developed a very good network of people on the ground who trust him to reveal what is really happening.