A guest post by David Garrett:

Readers will recall that during the level 4 lockdown, it was reported that Deputy Commissioner Wallace Haumaha was in regular contact with the president of the Waikato Mongrel Mob (Mob), one Sonny Fatupaito aka Fatu, and that Fatu had, with Haumaha’s assistance, become an “essential worker”, and was thus able to move around freely while almost everyone else was confined to their homes other than to go and buy food. The police denied, and continue to deny, that Haumaha had assisted the gang thug to become an essential worker, but did not deny they had been in contact. I decided to ask, pursuant to the OIA, a number of questions regarding that interaction. The formal response to my questions is here.

To summarize the response, Haumaha met the gang thug Fatu – a convicted killer – on at least three occasions as part of “their participation in a series of hui”. The purpose of these hui is said to have been “to bring people together”  to ensure that “the government’s Covid messaging was reaching communities in order to keep them  and their whanau safe” [emphasis added].  In other words, the Mongrel Mob and other gangs were given special treatment allegedly because if the police did not do so, gang women and children – said to be an “at risk population group” – might not be part of Ardern’s “team of five million”, and otherwise  be “unsafe”.

I note in passing that the major reason gang associated women and children are “unsafe” is because of their close association with gangs; part of the Mob code is to regard women as third class citizens – or “bitches” in gang parlance – to be “disciplined” at will. Many Mob members – such as the killer of Christchurch prostitute  Mallory Manning – get their patches as a result of the rape, and worse, of women.

Is treating gang members as “stakeholders” and holding hui with them a sensible and rational strategy to try and improve the safety of the misguided women and innocent children who form their “whanau”? I don’t think so. The Mongrel Mob and other gangs are criminal organizations (see below for the police comment on that) and ought to be treated as such at all times, and for all purposes. The only involvement the police should have with them is to harass and arrest patched members whenever possible, and do everything they can to help women and their children  move out of that benighted lifestyle.

The police deny that Haumaha assisted Fatu to become an essential worker, and make the point they have made elsewhere that a decision in that regard was not for them to make. That may be literally true, but if Fatu had a brain – and clearly no one gets to be president of the Mob if he is stupid – he would naturally make much of the fact to whoever was  responsible that he – Fatu – had taken part in several hui with Hamaha. In other words, he was a recognized “stakeholder” to use current parlance.

In their response, the police do admit that:

“Discussion within the hui  did address the existence of general advice on the status of essential workers that was posted on the Covid-19 website…”

In other words, to mangle an old metaphor, the police led Fatu to the source of  water, but left it up to him to work out how to drink from it. Again, Fatu would have to have been stupid not  to make much of his positive  contacts with Haumaha and the police generally in his apparently successful quest to become an essential worker with far greater freedom of movement than the rest of us.

My final question was a very simple and straightforward one, inviting a simple yes or no answer. That question was: “Is it still the position of the New Zealand Police that the Mongrel Mob is wholly or in part a criminal organization?”  I deliberately made the question somewhat loose  by including the phrase “wholly or in part” so as to avoid obfuscation about what purposes the Mob may have or serve other than criminal activities.

Rather than the simple answer “yes”, I got a long rambling disquisition on the Prohibition of Gang Insignia Act, the gist of which is as follows:

1. Section 4 (a) of the said Act includes a list of 34 named gangs, one of which is the Mongrel Mob;
2. Section 5 (2) of the Act requires that, to be identified as a “gang” under the Act, the Minister of Police [note NOT the Commissioner of Police] must be satisfied that the organization association or group concerned has  the following characteristics:

• A common name or common identifying signs, symbols or representations, and

• Its members, associates, or supporters individually or collectively promote, encourage, or engage in criminal activity.

I find the above response to be distinctly odd. In addition to not being responsive to my question – which surely invites a clear and unambiguous answer of “Yes”, given the framing of the question and the above extracts from the Act – the answer can be interpreted in at least two ways. One of those may be “Well, the  Minister may regard the Mob as a criminal organization, but we, the Police, may not necessarily agree”.  If the intention is not to obfuscate and blur how the Police regard the Mob and other gangs, why not simply answer the question I asked? I intend to follow up asking just that question.

On 10 June the Mongrel Mob took over a street in Hamilton for the purposes of holding a tangi for a deceased gang thug. Stuff reports that there were cars parked four deep on both sides of the street in question, that “hundreds” of gang members were milling about, and that residents were terrified by their presence and actions. The tangi apparently went on for three days, including loud music until the early hours of mornings.

Most disturbingly for me according to Stuff:

“Multiple police cars were seen in surrounding areas as gang members loitered in the streets.”

In other words the Police stood by for three days while behavior continued which would certainly have got any group of ordinary citizens arrested promptly.  It is surely significant that Fatu was reportedly among the gang members present during this clearly unlawful prolonged gathering.

In my view, what happened in Moeroa street Hamilton is a direct result – or at least a consequence – of Haumaha granting Fatu some form of status by treating him as a stakeholder two months before. Did Haumaha, either directly or indirectly, tell the Waikato police to “monitor” the tangi, but take no other action? Did Fatu call his mate Haumaha to get some advice on how to avoid police action? Who knows? I have made a formal complaint about the inaction of the Waikato police in this regard, so the answer to that might – eventually, once they have followed their usual obfuscatory delaying tactics – reveal why they did nothing in the face of blatant illegality.

What do we make of all of this? In my view the only conclusion can be that rather than harass them at every turn, using the numerous laws already at their disposal, the police have chosen – perhaps reluctantly – to accept the gangs as a reality, and to deal with their leaders if not as equals, at least as stakeholders with whom they are willing to engage, and who are entitled, at the very least, to have a blind eye turned to some of their illegal activities.

In my view this is emphatically not  the correct approach to the gang problem, and neither is it a necessity.  Some police commanders in some districts have shown they have balls, and instructed their officers to “turn over” gang members wherever they find them. There is some evidence that such an approach at the very least reduces the impact of these criminals on ordinary citizens. But that is a topic for another day.

Newshub reports:

Let me start with PPE.

I’ve reported very persistently on this issue. Health workers couldn’t get it. Nurses were instructed to remove masks. 

Those working on COVID-19 wards at Waitakere and Burwood Hospitals didn’t feel fully protected, and had gear that didn’t fit. Hundreds of thousands of old masks kept in pandemic storage had perished. 

But while all this was going on, the reassurances from Dr Bloomfield came as quickly as the complaints. The Auditor General John Ryan has now validated the concerns of health workers. 

In a nutshell, the claims of having “plenty” of PPE did not stack up. 

Dr Bloomfield’s reassuring comments about staff needing to “feel safe and be safe” and wear masks if they wanted led to “confusion”, when the Ministry’s guidelines for PPE use were actually much narrower. 

In February 2020, according to the Auditor General, the Ministry of Health actually had no idea how much PPE DHBs had, nor did it know how to forecast future demand. 

The reserve stocks that DHBs did have were suitable for population sizes in 2005. There’s been a population growth rate of 19 per cent since then. 

Importantly, the Health Ministry had stopped requiring DHBs to report what PPE stocks they had, and what had expired, back in 2016. That’s an incredibly basic failure in terms of having a robust pandemic plan. 

Fourteen DHBs had actually reported to the Health Ministry that their stock had expired or they had no national reserve stock at all. When I was first tipped off about expired PPE, the Ministry was anything but forthcoming. In fact staff at the Ministry bent over backwards to avoid revealing the true extent of the problem. 

A familiar pattern.

This brings me to the next point about the multiple quarantine fails. We’ve had lots of updates about no new cases, our strict border measures and the team of five million. 

Yet it took a journalist’s question on Tuesday before Dr Bloomfield acknowledged that two teenagers let out of quarantine to attend a gang tangi had run away afterwards. What occurred here is really important. If the pair had been COVID-19 positive, it would have been even more concerning. 

It’s interesting that this potentially very significant matter was basically hidden from the public until someone found out. It also raises questions about what else is being left out or watered down during the daily updates. 

What we now know for certain is that the two COVID-19 positive women allowed out of quarantine at the Novotel didn’t follow all the rules. The claim by Dr Bloomfield that they “did everything that was asked of them” and didn’t have any interaction with the public wasn’t true.

You wonder how much more bad news is out there hidden. No one in the Government it seems is able to answer the basic question about how many people have been let out of isolation or quarantine without being tested for Covid-19?

I accept that Dr Bloomfield may not have had all the information when he informed the nation on Tuesday that the Auckland to Wellington road trip went without a hitch, but if that was the case, why didn’t he tell the public this instead of being blatantly misleading. 

The quarantine blunders (yes there have been multiple) amount to sheer incompetence and poor communication from the Ministry of Health. 

We’ve heard so much about the importance of our borders and yet we don’t require returning travellers to wear masks at the border, or in quarantine, nor do we test travellers as they land in Auckland. 

 It’s been four months and we still have no testing at airports.

As I reported on Wednesday, another serious blunder occurred in Christchurch with up to 10 people being let out of quarantine early for a burial. That’s despite rules issued by the Ministry on June 9 stating that exemptions for funerals are not allowed. 

Remarkably, the Health Minister David Clark didn’t seem to know about any other breaches apart from what happened at the Novotel. 

This is nothing short of astonishing. 

If you’re the minister, and the borders are our biggest defence, surely you would be getting daily updates about who has been exempted, for what reason, and from which quarantine site. Surely it would be critical you receive confirmation that those who do get out have returned a negative test result. 

Tony Ryall would have been.

The Government has tried to deflect attention from their near hourly stories of incompetence in their quarantine and isolation regimes by blaming Hutt South Chris Bishop, saying he asked them to grant compassionate leave to the two sisters from the UK.

Bishops’s response is above. But Liam Hehir has got hold of a copy of the letter Bishop wrote to David Clark:

Looks legit to me.

Like almost everyone, I thought it was a good move that Ardern had called in the military to take over the quarantine system after the failures exposed this week.

But it turns out it was all spin, and we all fell for it.

Newshub reports:

Newshub has learned Air Commodore Darryn ‘Digby’ Webb, who was recently appointed to manage the border, isn’t so new after all.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced Webb would take charge of protecting New Zealand’s borders on Tuesday.

However, he has actually been “responsible” for a while. A spokesman confirming, he “started four weeks ago“. 

Therefore Webb was already in charge when the two women with COVID-19 were allowed to leave quarantine under a compassionate exemption.

We all fell for it hook line and sinker.

The Reserve Bank says New Zealand faces its worst economic crisis for 160 years – and today’s GDP stats confirm it.

Out of interest, New Zealand has experienced just two depressions and 12 recessions over the last 160 years:

• The Long Depression of the 1880s
• The Great Depression of the 1930s
• The Post-War Recession of March 1948 to December 1948 (4 quarters)
• The Waterfront Recession of March 1951 to December 1951 (4 quarters)
• The Wool Bust Recession of September 1967 to December 1967 (2 quarters)
• The First Oil Shock Recession of September 1975 to December 1975 (2 quarters)
• The Second Oil Shock Recession September 1976 to March 1978 (7 quarters)
• The Third Oil Shock September 1982 to March 1983 (3 quarters)
• The Sharemarket Crash Recession of December 1987 to June 1988 quarters (3 quarters)
• The Government Confidence Recession of September 1989 to March 1990 quarters (3 quarters)
• The Gulf War Recession of March 1991 to June 1991 quarters (2 quarters)
• The Asian Economic Crisis Recession of September 1997 to March 1998 quarters (3 quarters)
• The Cullen and GFC Recession of March 2008 to June 2009 quarters (6 quarters)
• The Canterbury Earthquakes Recession of September 2010 to December 2010 quarters (2 quarters)

The Reserve Bank said this downturn may be worse than any of these!

The latest abortion stats are here. They show another year of decline (which is good). What I find interesting is the vast drop in the number of teenagers having abortions.

It peaked at 4.277 in 2007 and 10 years later in 2017 it was 1,444. That is a drop of 66%. In the two years since then it has dropped to 1,238 – a further decline of 14%.

In terms of overall abortions, the ratio of abortions to live births peaked at 24.7% in 2003 and in 2017 was 18.1% and in 2019 17.7%.

The Bookseller reports:

Staff at Hachette UK working on J K Rowling’s new book The Ickabog have threatened to down tools over the author’s recent comments affecting the transgender community.

It is understood that between four and five employees, whose roles span the breadth of the full publishing team, communicated their reluctance to work on the project in a meeting held yesterday morning, and that these staff are now being spoken to individually by their managers.

The staff have the wrong idea. Rather than try to get Rowling’s book blocked because they disagree with her on trans issues, they should resort to what their predecessors did.

You allow the book to be published, then denounce the author as unsafe and hold huge public bonfires on which you burn the books.

Stats NZ reports:

Gross domestic product (GDP) fell 1.6 percent in the March 2020 quarter, the largest drop in 29 years, as the initial effects of COVID-19 restrictions impacted on economic activity, Stats NZ said today.

It is worth noting that 93% of this quarter was pre lockdown. The June 2020 quarter stats will be far worse.

The changes in each sector were:

• Agriculture -1.9%
• Mining +4.3%
• Manufacturing -2.4%
• Construction -4.1%
• Retail Trade/Accom -2.2%
• Transport -5.2%

John Armstrong writes:

After a brief hibernation, it is politics much as usual. When it comes to uniting for the recovery, there is huge disagreement between Labour and National as regards policy priorities, the desirable level of public spending and the extent of borrowing.

That’s further reason why the notion that Unite for Recovery is somehow not political is a nonsense. The campaign’s website might serve a purpose of being a one-stop shop which details everything you need to know about the Ardern Administration’s response to the pandemic.

In particular, given the No 1 priority now facing the country is the tackling of the scourge of unemployment and the resulting slashing of incomes in many households, it is essential that people are aware of benefit entitlements, training and apprenticeship opportunities, the mortgage repayment deferral scheme, protection from sudden rent increases, and so forth.

You won’t find any mention on the website of National’s policies dealing with such matters, however.

You thus might conclude the Unite for Recovery information campaign serves as a surreptitious means to define and dictate the debate about how best to rebuild New Zealand’s ravaged economy.

The problem is that the boundary between “informing” the public of Government measures and “promoting” those measures in order to gain political advantage is not easily drawn.

Even when such a line is demarcated, it can become blurred. The net effect is to hand Labour a massive advantage.

That would matter less if September’s general election was still some distance away.

But it isn’t. Any government contemplating either establishing a new taxpayer-funded information programme or rejigging an existing one when the country is little more than three months away from an election ought to think very hard about the constitutional propriety of embarking on such a course.

Good to see the propaganda get called out.

The story about the two UK travellers who were allowed out of quarantine despite having Covid-19 (they were not tested while in quarantine) has led to a floodgate of stories showing that there is a total mismatch between what we are being told, and what the reality is.

This is not the first time. We saw the same with testing and PPE in the early days – medical professionals on the ground were contradicting what the Government kept telling us.

Anyway here’s the stories out just in the last couple of hours:

• 10 people in quarantine allowed out to attend a funeral with 150 people, eight days after the Government said no exemptions for funerals were being granted
• A traveller from the United States went to a gathering with 40 people a day after she arrived in Auckland and before she was tested for Covid-19. This also occured four days after the Government said no exemptions for funerals and wakes.
• Six people absconded after being granted compassionate leave from Covid-19 quarantine to attend a Hamilton funeral.
• An allegation that two visitors from the UK did have undisclosed contact with people while travelling. (UPDATE: The allegations are correct, and the person who was in contact with them attended a gym the next day)
• The Chief Ombudsman has revealed his staff came into contact with people in quarantine.
• Health officials arranged a birthday party for a girl in managed isolation

Omnishambles appears to be the correct term to use.

One News reports:

A senior Defence Force official is taking charge of New Zealand’s Covid-19 quarantine procedure after it was yesterday announced a system failure allowed two cases slip through.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern outlined the changes at a press conference today, announcing that Assistant Chief of Defence Air Commodore Digby Webb will now be in charge of isolation facilities for Kiwis returning from overseas.

“Our borders and the controls at our borders must be rigorous, they must be disciplined and they must have the confidence of ministers and all of you, New Zealanders who got us here,” Ms Ardern said before outlining what Air Commodore Webb’s role will be.

“Air Commodore Webb will regularly report to ministers. As the Assistant Chief of Defence he can also seek access to our military logistics operational expertise, and if needed personnel to assist in the running of the facility.”

Basically an admission of failure. There have been multiple stories for months about people entering in NZ and never being tested for Covid-19. It took this latest incident for the Government to admit things were deficient.

The Herald reports:

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says she’s frustrated MPs are still getting full pay, two months after salary cuts were promised.

“They will still be happening and they will still apply for six months. What I am frustrated by is how long it’s taken.”

In the midst of the lockdown in mid-April, Ardern announced she, government ministers and top civil servants would take a 20 per cent pay cut for six months.

Today the Herald revealed two months after Ardern promised MPs would take a Covid-related pay cut to show solidarity, they all continue to receive full pay.

They could have passed a law change mandating the 20% pay cut in 24 hours, as they did with many other Covid laws.

Instead it won’t take place until three months after they announced it, and starts just two months before the election which means in fact the so called six month pay cut may be a two month pay cut.

Newshub reports:

An anti-prison group is calling for the New Zealand Police to be disarmed, defunded and abolished after the end of the Armed Response Teams (ARTs) trial.

The ARTs trial was ended on Monday after months of protest from the public. But while the battle may have been won, a prison abolitionist organisation says the war is far from over.

Emilie Rākete, a spokesperson for People Against Prisons Aotearoa (PAPA) which organised the Arms Down Aotearoa movement, says the disbanding of ARTs should just be the beginning.

“We are committed to disarming, defunding, and abolishing the bloodstained, racist institution of policing and replacing it with community justice.” she told Newshub on Tuesday.

I suspect their idea of “community justice” is similar to the Great Leap Forward.

I really wish we could find a spare island somewhere and let all those people who want to live in a society with no Police to move there.

Stuff reports:

Those behind the unique Hundertwasser Art Centre being built in Whangārei have welcomed extra Government money but say costs will not keep rising.

An extra $4.5 million of funding from the Provincial Growth Fund will ensure the $30m art centre and Wairau Māori Art Gallery has enough money to be finished.

Construction started in September 2018 when the cost was expected to be $26m, which was a jump from the original $16.25m estimate. But additional costs included asbestos removal from the old building, deeper pilings being needed and extra seismic strengthening.

Once again another government project that has doubled in costs. That means that even if there was a positive BCR for it, it almost certainly isn’t positive now.

Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones said the art centre was expected to bring more than 250,000 visitors to Whangārei each year, with an economic benefit of $26 million a year for Northland.

I can guarantee you it will not. Whangarei is not going to have an extra 5,000 tourists a week, just because of one arts centre. Especially while the road from Auckland is only two lanes some of the way. It’s a five hour return journey from Auckland.

They are basically projecting a near doubling of tourism to Whangarei, all because of this arts centre. It’s beyond wishful thinking to delusional.

Also even the local Whangarei tourism portal has more subdued numbers. They say 140,000 extra visitors with a net economic benefit of $3.5 million. I’ll take bets from anyone that Whangarei visitor numbers will not be 50,000 higher than in 2019, within two years of the arts centre being complete.

Also open to bets that the cost will exceed $30 million!

NewstalkZB reports:

The Government has suspended the exemptions for people in managed isolation to be granted leave on compassionate grounds.

The crackdown follows questions around the two women who tested positive for Covid-19 – and whether they should have been allowed to leave their Auckland hotel room if proper protocols had been followed.

Those protocols include the need to have spent at least a week in isolation and to test negative for Covid-19 before being granted compassionate leave.

Those protocols came into effect on June 9, and it remains unclear whether they were supposed to apply only to people who arrived in New Zealand from that date.

Health Minister David Clark, in a statement this evening, said compassionate exemptions would be put on hold until the Government had confidence in the system.

“Compassionate exemptions should be rare and rigorous and it appears that this case did not include the checks that we expected to be happening. That’s not acceptable.

“Our border measures are a key line of defence against Covid-19 and we must ensure they are as robust as possible.

“The Director General will be reviewing the processes around these latest two cases, noting that he has already made it a requirement that all individuals must return a negative Covid test before leaving managed isolation facilities from now on.”

It should always have been a requirement. The problem isn’t compassionate leave. It is a lack of rigour in the system.

Here’s what should happen to every inbound traveller:

1. Tested for Covid-19 as they enter New Zealand
2. Go into quarantine or isolation for 14 days
3. Tested for Covid-19 again the day before isolation ends

If there are compassionate circumstances, then you can shorten (2) but you never do away with (1) and (3). So if you have a dying relative maybe you only spend six days in isolation, but release is still dependent on a 2nd clear Covid-19 test.

A reader writes in:

Not sure if this is of any use to you, but I thought I’d do a comparison between the 2017 and 2020 Labour lists, and see if anything stood out. I ended up categorising the ‘movers’ as below, and certainly there is one thing that has stood out to me – of those candidates who are now in winnable list positions who previously were not (either because they are newcomers or because they were previously too far down), the overwhelming majority are women. Now maybe they are all there on their own merits, but I doubt it. Especially when compared with the rest of candidates who in 2017 were too far down to get elected, and in 2020 still are too far down – of that pool of 9 candidates, 6 are male, only 3 are female.

It seems to me that to be picked to succeed in Labour, first and foremost you need to not have a penis. 

Also, how the hell did Phil Twyford go up inside cabinet!

Anyway, here are my categories showing who has moved up or down. I assumed that Labour get 45% of the seats in parliament (so a little under that in party vote come 19 Sept):

Promoted inside Cabinet

Phil Twyford (up 1)

Jenny Salesa (up 5)

Kris Faafoi (up 4)

Damian O’Connor (up 3)

Demoted inside Cabinet

David Clark (down 8)

Andrew Little (down 4)

Stuart Nash (down 1)

Promoted inside Caucus

Kieran McAnulty (up 10)

Poto Williams (up 3)

Angie Warren-Clark (up 2)

Willie Jackson (up 2)

Trevor Mallard (up 22)

Demoted inside Caucus

Priyanca Radhakrishnan (down 21)

Willow-Jean Prime (down 21)

Jan Tinetti (down 19)

Ginny Andersen (down 19)

Paul Eagle (down 15)

Raymond Huo (down 13)

Jo Luxton (down 12)

Liz Craig (down 12)

Anahila Kanongata’a-Suisuiki (down 9)

Kiri Allen (down 6)
Jamie Strange (down 6)

Aupito-William Sio (down 5)

Deborah Russell (down 5)

Marja Lubeck (down 4)

Louisa Wall (down 3)

Duncan Webb (down 2)

Electorate Only to Winnable List (2/7 female)

Meka Whatiri (30)

Rino Tikikatene (31)

Nanaia Mahuta (10)
Peeni Henare (19)

Adrian Rurawhe (25)

Tamati Coffey (39)

Unwinnable List Position to Winnable (3/3 female)

Helen White (40 to 50), female lawyer from Auckland Central

Shanan Halbert (51 to 53), female Northcote candidate

Naisi Shen (50 to 40), female 

New, in winnable position (7/8 female)

Ayesha Verrall (18), female 

Vanushi Walters (23), female Lawyer

Camilla Belich (32), female employment lawyer, married to Andrew Kirton

Ibrahim Omer (44), male unionist, community advocate

Rachel Brooking (48), female lawyer

Angela Roberts (52), female former PPTA president

Neru Leavasa (54), female doctor

Tracey McLellan (55), female former vice-president

Unwinnable to Unwinnable (3/9 female)

Romy Udanga (47 to 73) male

Steph Lewis (42 to 57) female

Lemauga Lydia Sosene (44 to 56) female

Ala Al-Bustanji (62 to 74) male

Rachel Boyack (48 to 59) female

Nathaniel Blomfield (68 to 79) male

Kurt Taogaga (59 to 68) male

Dan Rosewarne (52 to 58) male

Gaurav Sharma (69 to 65) male

Winnable list to Electorate Only

Greg O’Connor (41 to nothing) male

Unwinnable List to Electorate Only

Anna Lorck (46 to nothing) female

Retiring

Clare Curran (was 23)

Ruth Dyson (was 24)

Thanks to the reader for a very good analysis. I’ve also done an analysis on Patreon detailing which candidates would get elected as which level of party vote.

Stuff reports:

Monday marked another deadline for the Government’s troubled Auckland light rail project. It was the last Cabinet meeting before the pre-election period kicks in on June 19.

That deadline has been kicked around – mainly by the Opposition – as the last possible day Cabinet would sign off on light rail, given the convention for governments to restrain their decision-making in the three months leading up to an election.

But light rail is the policy equivalent of Monty Python’s black knight: After each bout of terrible news, it rises to its feet, crying “I’m not dead yet”.

And technically they’re right: Light rail, unlike the capital gains tax, or the “feebate” electric car scheme, hasn’t been killed. Those projects were consulted on, axed by NZ First, and Labour and the Greens moved on. This is different: to this day, the Government continues to receive briefings on the project and Cabinet papers are still being prepared. Officially, the project is “on hold,” or “stalled”, but not “dead”.

To be killed off, you have to have been born in the first place, and hence light rail is more akin to still born. They promised light rail would be complete to Mt Roskill within four years and after three years they have yet to even decide how to proceed, if at all.

It is arguably a higher degree of incompetence that Kiwibuild.

Newshub reports:

The Simpson review recommends:

• Create centralised Crown entity called Health NZ to review financial performance
• Reduce the number of DHBs from 20 to 8-12 within five years
• Make DHBs more accountable to the entire population
• Health Minister should appoint DHB board members
• Create a Māori Health Authority 

I’m in favour of the first four major recommendations. I’d like to see the Government commit to them. Alas they have not, despite the spin.

Health Minister David Clark said Cabinet has accepted the case for health sector reform, particularly the recommendations to reduce fragmentation, strengthen leadership and accountability, and improve equity for access and outcomes for all Kiwis. 

He said decisions on individual recommendations will be taken to Cabinet over the coming months and into the next term of Parliament.

This means little. They have not indicated any acceptance of specific recommendations, and will probably try not to until after the election.

They’ve had the report for three months. Plenty of time to consider it and say what their response is. But they haven’t. We do not know if they will actually reduce the number of DHBs and make them all appointed.

National should show the Government up, and commit to the first four major recommendations asap.

Collette Devlin writes at Stuff:

Ardern has never said she lost confidence in Clark, and on Monday said he would remain in his role as minister, thanks to the success in beating Covid-19.

She gave him some credit for this, saying he had made “a lot of very good decisions” and was the right person to take the lead role in taking on the review’s recommendations.

But as most people will be aware, the person leading the charge against Covid-19 was not Clark. Health Director-General Dr Ashley Bloomfield was the public face of the response and the one actually in Wellington for lockdown.

He stood up day after day and fielded difficult questions from the media. Where was Clark? Where was the minister in charge?

During the last pandemic (swine flu) the Minister of Health fronted twice daily press conferences and fielded the bulk of the questions, with MOH staff in a secondary role.

Here the Minister of Health wasn’t just invisible, but he wasn’t even allowed to be in Wellington!

But Clark’s weakness was not just over lockdown. He often manages to mar what should be strong stories for the Government.

On Sunday the Government announced $92.6m of funding into testing labs, pharmacies, midwives, hospices and call centres to further strengthen their readiness for any future outbreak.

Clark, who was late arriving, took a tour of the SCL Covid-testing lab at Wellington Hospital for the announcement.

He did ask some (simple) questions but looked disinterested.

Perhaps he did not want to be there. It is understood he initially planned to remain in Dunedin and send out a press release instead. Some members of the media were even told he would do embargoed interviews on the Friday ahead of the PR.

But then came the nod from the powers above that he had to make a show in Wellington.

When it finally came to his moment in the limelight, he read from a script and did a very bad job of going off-script to answer questions. Incompetence was shining through.

He was unable to answer questions in much detail, and he should have been across the issues.

For a journalist to label a Minister as incompetent, is unusual, It means things have to be really bad.

Clark did not carry himself like a minister on Sunday. He came across as a first-term MP out of his depth.

The only thing he seemed to be interested in was the Highlanders’ win, the first thing he referred to at the start of what should’ve been an important Government message, and turned into a waffling mess.

After this poor performance, can the public have confidence in him to undertake such an enormous task as reforming the health system?

So we have a Minister of Health who can’t be trusted to manage a health crisis, or even a photo op. A No 4 on Labour’s List who has failed to deliver even 1% of Labour’s two iconic 2017 policies (Kiwibuild and light rail) and a No 2 who isn;’t trusted to hold a press conference be Acting Prime Minister.

Stuff reports:

The March 15 terrorist was wrongly granted a firearms licence due to a string of police failures, sources have told Stuff.

The terrorist, who pleaded guilty to New Zealand’s worst mass shooting in March, was not properly inspected by police vetting staff when he applied for a firearms licence in 2017.

Stuff has been told that, among other errors, police failed to interview a family member as required, instead relying on two men who met the terrorist through an internet chatroom.

The error was overlooked when police granted him the firearms licence, allowing the Australian citizen to stockpile the semi-automatic guns later used to murder 51 people.

You’ve got to be freaking kidding me.

Police gave Tarrant a firearms licence on the basis of two referees who he met through an Internet chatroom!!!! They didn’t talk to a single person who had ever interacted with him in real life. This is damning.

Sadly this is a not a huge surprise. I talk to a lot of firearms owners and almost without fail they are scathing of the Police’s role in vetting owners, as in they are nowhere near thorough enough.

If this report is correct, this tragedy was preventable. If the Police had demanded proper referees, they may have found out that Tarrant was unsuitable.

Any further changes to firearms laws should be conditional on taking vetting away from the Police, and transferring it to a dedicated agency.