Paula Bennett states:

I was recently contacted by someone who called themselves a victim. They talked of a Labour Party staffer who works in Jacinda Ardern’s office. The accused is senior to most of his victims, and the allegations being made are serious. The person who contacted me repeatedly named him. They said his behaviour had taken place both within and outside of Parliament. 

This is a key point. The staffer concerned is a parliamentary staffer and at least some of the behaviour occurred within Parliament. There is no way this issue should be dealt with by the Labour Party organisation. They have no authority over parliamentary staff.

If the staffer works in Jacinda Ardern’s office, then only three people can effectively make decisions about what happens to him. They are:

• His immediate manager (if he is third level or below)
• The office Chief of Staff (is responsible for all staff in the office)
• The leader (has final say on who works for them)

The Parliamentary Service has a role also, but their role is to support the decision makers and managers. They also have a role in ensuring a safe parliamentary campus.

If there were behavioural complaints about a staffer in the National Leader’s Office, then there is a 0% chance they would be referred to the National Party (even if the staffer was a member). The Chief of Staff would deal with it.

Yesterday the victims were told there would be an appeal process after the way the Labour Party originally handled their complaints. The President of the party called and said it would be run by a QC. They feel it’s just more of the same, a policy and process conjured up on the hoof without any consideration given to how an appeal process should be run. It’s not victim-led. Ultimately any decision making will rest in the hands of the Labour Party Council who the victims believe is not best qualified to make decisions like this because of the inherent political influence that the accused is able to wield.

The Labour Party Council should have no role in this. If the person is a parliamentary staffer, they have no authority over him in his staff role. The only reason you would have the party organisation involved, is to try and keep things quiet.

They say the Labour Party completely ignored them when they asked a process to be developed with a third party sexual abuse prevention agency. 

Wasn’t this promised after the alleged sexual assaults at the youth camp?

The victims say they’re fearful of the accused and his power and that it permeates from the Labour Party Head Office to staffers in the Prime Minister’s Office. They say there are other influencers who have made threats.

This is how Labour treats people who complaint of sexual harrassment or assault.

I have now had three people come to me, asking that I continue going public with their concerns as they don’t feel they can. They are scared for themselves and others.

The fact these Labour Party members and/or staffers have turned to Paula gives you some idea of how let down by Labour they must feel.

I believe in a victim-led response, they felt powerless and the last thing they needed was me dictating what would happen. I suggested they go to the Police, or Parliament’s Speaker, along with other options. They asked me to go to the Speaker and to go public. They hoped people would see how serious they were that they had to speak to me, a National MP, to be heard.

I still can’t believe that The Parliamentary Service is allowing this to be treated as an internal Labour Party issue when it involves parliamentary staffers.

I knew I would get criticised for going public with what they had told me, but I also knew I had to leave my politics and concerns for how I would be judged to one side. I believed them, I heard the fear in their voice. They also told me about a number of other serious effects this was having on them and others such as anxiety, panic attacks, vomiting and time off work. They talked of having no real hope and feeling powerless.
My role gives me a platform to speak from. I believe them and I feel I have to do what I believe is right. Too many victims suffer because they are threatened and silenced. The shocking and deplorable becomes their norm and they start to blame themselves. These people are courageous and brave and they deserve a voice.

And this is not the first time. The Labour youth camp victims also went public because Labour tried to close them down.

Since my initial contact I have seen emails where senior people in the Labour Party have responded to the victims by limiting access within Parliament of both the victims and the alleged perpetrator. I have seen an email where victims were told “you may not go to xxx office in Parliamentary buildings (I have changed the language slightly so as not to identify anyone)”. As one of the victims said “telling people to avoid parliament because of a predator, is very scary.”

And again Labour has no authority to tell people they can’t go to certain areas in Parliament. Only parliamentary offices can do that.

I have also been told that while the original investigation was happening the alleged perpetrator was put in charge of hosting an event at Parliament where senior MPs and officials knew at least three of the complainants would be present.

Wow.

The victims have been very clear with me that the Prime Minister’s office knew and that two complaints were made to the head of her Leader’s Office. 

It would be impossible for them not to know.

Now that an appeal is underway the victims have been told they can’t speak to anyone in the Labour Party, that includes the people who have formed their only support system.

Labour really excels in caring for victims eh.

It’s not my job to judge, I fully accept that I don’t know all the details and have only heard one side and that these are allegations – I have purposefully not outlined them or named or identified anyone. But I will speak up, and yes use different public platforms to do so. I would tell the Labour Party what I have been told, but to be fair they already know what I know and from what I can see have chosen not to act. I hope that changes.

I’m also careful not to draw conclusions on the allegations. What is the issue is the appalling process where what should be an employment health and safety matter has instead been decided by Labour’s governing council.

Radio NZ released:

On Sunday 13 November 2016, Radio New Zealand (RNZ) published an article on its website under the headline “Donghua Liu returns to China to face charges”.

The article claimed that Mr Liu had fled to New Zealand from China and that he was returning to face corruption charges there, for which he could be executed and his organs harvested.
RNZ accepts that none of these statements were true.
RNZ also accepts that Mr Liu is a well-known Chinese businessman, living in Auckland. Mr Liu is not a fugitive from Chinese authorities. Mr Liu has not returned to China to face corruption charges, and has not been asked to do so.
RNZ unconditionally retracts and apologises for the false statements it made concerning Mr Liu. RNZ accepts that those statements were deeply upsetting to Mr Liu and his family.
RNZ has entered into a confidential settlement with Mr Liu in respect of the false statements. Mr Liu has indicated he is satisfied with the terms of that settlement, which include this apology.

A confidential settlement means money, and I suspect a lot of money. It is rare to see such a total backdown.

You wonder how the story got through editorial controls in the first place.

Chris Trotter writes:

What has the long-defunct Alliance got to do with today’s politics?

Two word answer: Jacinda Ardern. The Prime Minister’s performance at the lectern in the Beehive theatrette on Monday (12/8/19) was a sad and deeply frustrating vindication of both Jim Anderton and Jim Flynn. All those transformational chickens set loose by Jacinda in the election campaign of 2017 are now flocking home to roost.

Labour’s promises, raising little short of revolutionary expectations, were never adequately shaken through the fiscal sieve in the manner of the Alliance’s fully-coasted manifesto. The hard economic work was never done – and it shows. The Prime Minister’s grasp of the way the New Zealand economy works appears weaker than that of the humblest Alliance parliamentary candidate.

Wow, and that comes from one of the most prominent voices on the left.

Politico reports:

Embattled Rep. Steve King on Wednesday said the human population might not exist if not for rape and incest, drawing scorn — and renewed calls to resign — from scores of Democrats and some in his own party.
The Iowa Republican, who was speaking at an event in Urbandale, Iowa, was intending to make the case for a GOP policy that bans nearly all abortions, including in cases when the woman is a victim of rape or incest.

“What if we went back through all the family trees and just pulled out anyone who was a product of rape or incest? Would there be any population of the world left if we did that?” King said, according to the Des Moines Register, which first reported the comments.

Such a repulsive creature.

Stuff reports:

Progress on the Melling Interchange has received a timely boost by the intervention of senior Government minister Chris Hipkins.
Ranked seventh in Cabinet, he recently called a meeting with local mayors and MPs to progress major roading issues in the Hutt Valley.
He has asked the New Zealand Transport Agency to provide a timeline for the business case and design for Melling.
Hutt mayors Ray Wallace and Wayne Guppy welcomed the involvement of the Rimutaka MP and believed progress was now much more likely.

It’s a trick.

This is like the LGWM plan which makes vague promises that maybe in 10 years we may do something.

National promised to fund and build the Melling interchange in 2017. If they had remained Government, construction would probably be starting about now.

Labour cut funding for roads (thanks Julie Anne) and the Government then said it won’t be considered until 2029.

This caused a huge backlash, which is why Hipkins is now trying to sound supportive. But note the total absence of anything concrete.

His aim was to get the project to a point where it could be built as soon as funding became available.

So his aim is not to get it built or funded. Just to get it to a stage where in theory it could happen.

There were a number of major projects that did have funding and it was inevitable that one of those would not proceed.
If that happened, it was important that Melling was at stage where it could pick up that funding, Hipkins said.

So Labour’s cunning plan is to wait for another project to fall over, and then hope people are gullible enough to think the Greens would allow them to spend it on Melling.

Hipkins said he hoped to hear back from NZTA within a few weeks and believed bulldozers would start on Melling well before 2028.

So after the 2020, 2023 and 2026 election.

NewstalkZB reports:

The leader of Britain’s biggest opposition party on Wednesday urged other opposition forces to unite, topple Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s Conservative government and prevent Britain from leaving the European Union in October without a divorce agreement.
The move came after Johnson accused anti-Brexit U.K. politicians of collaborating with the EU to stymie Britain’s exit from the bloc.
Jeremy Corbyn, who heads the main opposition Labour Party, said he planned to call a no-confidence vote in Johnson’s government “at the earliest opportunity when we can be confident of success” once Parliament returns from its summer break in September.
In a letter to other opposition leaders and pro-EU Conservative lawmakers, the Labour chief said Parliament should then unite behind a Corbyn-led “temporary government” that would seek a delay to Brexit day — currently scheduled for Oct. 31 — and call a national election.

The thought that Parliament would vote to make Jeremy Corbyn Prime Minister is laughable. Most of his own MPs don’t think he is competent or capable, let alone the other parties.

The latest Ipsos poll found a -50% net approval rating for Corbyn. Only 19% think he is doing a good job and 69% a poor job. Even of those who voted Labour in 2017 only 38% say he is doing well and 56% poorly.

News.com.au reports:

One of the weirder quirks of Donald Trump’s personality is his habit of telling easily disprovable lies.
Most politicians twist the truth to some extent. Many of them tell outright lies. Usually, they only do so when they don’t think they will get caught.
Mr Trump is more brazen.
Speaking in Pennsylvania today, he repeated one of his favourite fibs — a seemingly innocuous boast about a policy designed to help America’s veterans.
“I got it approved. Veterans Choice,” the President said.
Veterans Choice is a healthcare program that allows American military veterans to see private sector doctors, outside the US Government’s Veterans Affairs system, if they would otherwise have to wait too long for an appointment.
Mr Trump has repeatedly taken credit for creating the program, often saying he accomplished something other politicians had been trying to do — without success — for decades.
For example, at a rally in May he said: “We passed VA Choice and VA Accountability to give our veterans the care that they deserve, and they have been trying to pass these things for 45 years.”
CNN reporter Daniel Dale has been keeping a running tally for months and says Mr Trump has now made the Veterans Choice boast more than 80 times.

So he has claimed this 80 times.

“I said, you know, ‘I have a great idea. I’ve been thinking about it a lot’. This was during the campaign,” Mr Trump said.
“And I came back to my people, I had experts, and I said, ‘I have a great idea. These lines for the veterans are too long. It takes them three, four weeks sometimes to see a doctor. I have a great idea — let’s let them go outside, go to a private doctor. We’ll pay the bill, they’ll be all fixed up all perfect, and they can do it immediately and we’ll pay the bill’.
“And I thought, I said, ‘Man am I smart. I am the smartest guy, to think of that’. So I went before this panel of experts that were with me working on things, and I said, ‘How do you like that idea?’ And they said, ‘Sir, we’ve known about it for about 40 years, but we’ve never been able’.
“But here’s the thing. We got it done. Nobody else could get it done. Nobody else.”

It was even his personal brainchild.

Just one problem:

Here’s the actual thing. Donald Trump did not pass Veterans Choice.
The legislation was actually passed under his predecessor Barack Obama in 2014 before Mr Trump was even running for president. He had absolutely nothing to do with it.

And to make things worse:

Compounding the lie, Mr Trump has used Veterans Choice to attack the late Republican senator John McCain, who died last year after battling a brain tumour.

“McCain didn’t get the job done for our great vets and the VA, and they knew it. That’s why when I had my dispute with him, I had such incredible support from the vets and from the military. The vets were on my side because I got the job done. I got Choice,” the President said in March.
“Choice. For years and years, decades, they wanted to get Choice.
“For many decades, they couldn’t get it done. It was never done. I got it, five months ago, I got it done. Choice.”
In fact, Mr McCain co-sponsored the bill that created Veterans Choice

Of his many bad habits, lying about and denigrating a dead war hero is one of his worse.

Stuff reports:

A judge has let Marcel Sydney Geros out on bail after hearing that he was in the process of handing back his Black Power gang patch when a car chase developed in Christchurch last week.

Believing this claim seems to set a new level of gullibility.

Newshub reports:

Belgian officials will “no longer tolerate” parents who force their kids to be vegan.
It follows a number of cases in the European country of children being hospitalised and suffering health complications, and even a death in 2017, linked to vegan diets.
Government children’s rights official Bernard Devos asked the Royal Academy of Medicine of Belgium to make a ruling on the controversial diet, whose adherents avoid eating meat and dairy, and avoid using products made from animal-derived sources.
The academy did so on Thursday, reports local paper Le Soir, saying it was “not ethical” to impose veganism on children.
“This restrictive regime requires ongoing monitoring of children to avoid deficiencies and often irreversible growth delays,” the academy’s report said.
“It is unsuitable for unborn children, children, teenagers and pregnant and lactating women… This concept of nutrition is similar to a form of treatment that it is not ethical to impose on children.”

Adults can and should choose for themselves what they want to eat. But forcing your beliefs on kids can harm them.

NewstalkZB reports:

A food activist has been convicted for illegally importing plants and seeds from overseas in what he says was an attempt to protect New Zealand’s food sources from the threat of genetic modification.
Kyle Arthur, 30, was caught by biosecurity officials sneaking consignments of “wild, heritage, and heirloom non-genetically engineered plants and seeds” without permission from the Ministry of Primary Industries (MPI).
A raid on his Christchurch found he’d illegally imported papaya, mango, jackfruit, tamarind and banana between October 2017 and June last year.

So by his actions he was exposing NZ growers to potential diseases and parasites.

Arthur had earlier sought a discharge without conviction, telling a Christchurch District Court judge that a criminal blemish would stop him from travelling to various overseas countries and continuing his quest to legally source GM-free plants and seeds.

What bullshit. You don’t need to travel to legally source plants and seeds.

Judge Couch accepted that Arthur was motivated by genuine concerns that New Zealand’s plant diversity and purity is endangered by increasing genetic modification, and not by a wish to harm the ecosystem or personally profit.

Really? No profit?

Arthur then sold the unauthorised material, largely through Trade Me

Not giving it away?

The Press editorial:

Bungled, botched or butchered. Those are just three of the ways in which the notorious 2018 census has been described since a report into its shortcomings landed on Tuesday. All are accurate. 
The overarching narrative is that Statistics New Zealand’s controversial push into online data-collecting was supposed to increase the public response but had the opposite effect. Only 83.3 per cent of the national population responded. That was far short of the target of 94 per cent.

And another article gives us an idea of why:

Stats NZ had planned to use 3000 ground staff to knock on doors and gather responses; 40 per cent of the staff used in 2013. With an online census, less boots on the ground were required.
This reduction was “too aggressive”, the reviewers said. It was further reduced to 2300, a decision apparently made on the basis of a mathematical model without the risk being considered. 

Compounding this was a failure to hire staff. There were 1500 field workers needed for following up with people who hadn’t responded to the census, but only 900 were deployed.

So in 2013 there were 7,500 ground staff. In 2018 they reduced it to 2,300 and even worse only 900 over the entire country for followups. Most of the problems they had would have been avoided if they had hired more ground staff.

Greens co-leader James Shaw, who is only the latest of no fewer than six ministers of statistics to have been in charge during the period of the 2018 census, has seemed remarkably blase over the data collection failure, calling the census results “a mixed bag”.

And while the Minister is not responsible for operational details, you do expect them to be governing and seeking reassurances. Radio NZ report:

Mr Bridges told Morning Report Mr Shaw should have done more to ensure the census was on track and should have asked more questions of Stats NZ, instead of letting things spiral out of control.
“He was asleep at the wheel. He expressed blind confidence when concerns were raised. To give you the contrast, Maurice Williamson as statistics minister in 2013 for that census had 18 meetings on the census six months prior. Shaw didn’t have a single one. He had meetings on other things, measurements of our feelings, wellbeing and the like, but not the core business of the census.”

That is damning, if correct.

Mike Hosking writes:

Simon Bridges continues his slow but steady rehabilitation into what you might loosely call a pretty decent opposition leader.
The National Party conference might well turn out to be the turning point. A couple of weekends back his cancer announcement shamed the Government into a shambolic and patched together mini-announcement on getting some machinery to treat cancer into the regions.
The fact Bridges could make such a grandiose promise – when the Government having promised pretty much the same thing, but had done nothing two years into office – was a gift from the political heavens.
Then came a poll, with National at 45 per cent. The lead party and the chance to one, prove they’re still very viable, and two, shut the leadership critics down.
And now he’s on the front foot over Ihumātao.
And it comes as all the lefties, angsties, and virtue signallers have traipsed and trampled their way to South Auckland, as the media have fallen over themselves to give maximum coverage to a group of the rent-a-crowd, as Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has decided all building stops until she’s resolved it, and upon announcing that, she ran for Tokelau and left a couple of ministers to basically do nothing but more yak. Only to return to the country last week, see that nothing had happened and then announce it was the Government’s role to facilitate.
Facilitate what? More yak?
Meantime come on in Simon, who dare I suggest has articulated what most of us have been thinking. Tell them to go home, get the police involved, and as Prime Minister, not touch the thing with a barge pole.

Meanwhile we are still waiting for the Kiwibuild reset. They have to date built 239 houses of the 100,000 they promised.

The Guardian reports:

Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau violated the country’s ethics laws when he urged his attorney general not to prosecute an engineering company in a conflict of interest case, a watchdog ruled on Wednesday.
According to a bombshell report by Canada’s ethics commissioner, Trudeau engaged in “flagrant attempts to influence” his attorney general and minister of justice, Jody Wilson-Raybould.
The ruling marks a major blow to Trudeau’s governing Liberal party less than 10 weeks before a general election.

So Canadians have a choice to vote for corruption or vote for change.

The Guardian reports:

Jacinda Ardern has declared that “Australia has to answer to the Pacific” on climate change, saying that New Zealand is doing what it can to limit global emissions to 1.5C and expects other nations to do the same.

Lecturing Australia on what they should do is becoming a hallmark.

It also backfires horribly.

Jacinda repeatedly lectured Australia on how they shouldn’t deport so many New Zealanders back to New Zealand. Australia’s response was to change the law so they could deport even more back.

Her comments here will probably lead to Australia opening a new coal mine, and naming it after her.

Newshub reports:

Corrections says a letter sent out of prison by the alleged Christchurch shooter should have been “withheld”.
On Tuesday a post appeared on /pol/, a 4chan thread infamous for graphic content and controversial comments, which read: “A couple of months ago I sent a letter to Brenton Tarrant and today I finally got a response.”
The user, who claims to live in Russia, posted a photo of an envelope with a stamp that says ‘Auckland Prison’. The name Brenton Tarrant is written above the return address, which is that of the Paremoremo prison.

This is what happens when the ideology is all about prisoner’s rights. Oh, no, we can’t stop the accused terrorist from writing to his fanboys.

In the letter he writes of his fandom for the fascist Sir Oswald Mosley and tells the person how to find out more about his views. Incredible that Corrections let this occur. He even speaks of how there will be great conflict and bloodshed in Europe and how he hopes “our people” can survive.

Finally he urges his fanboy to “not forget your duty to your people”. My God that is pretty close to direct incitement and again the Government allowed him to write and send this letter.

And not just once. They approved at least five letters to go out. How could Corrections be so incompetent that all mail to and from him wasn’t being scrutinised by a very senior manager?

Again this is what happens when rights of prisoners are put ahead of rights of others, such as the community to be safe from him trying to radicalise others. It must be painful for the families of the victims to find out that he is still spreading his hate from prison.

Also worth remembering that the Greens are campaigning for Tarrant to have the right to vote, even if convicted. Yep even killing 51 human beings isn’t enough for the Greens to say he shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

I think two things are needed:

1. Someone at Corrections to be held responsible for what happened. This has made negative headlines around the world. This letter wasn’t even a marginal call. Someone should be losing their job over this.
2. Change the law so that certain classes of prisoners don’t have automatic rights to receive and send mail. For them mail would be a privilege, not a right.

One News reports:

As New Zealand’s hunger for affordable housing pushes suburbs farther and farther from city centres, the Government announced today it has a plan to shield the nation’s most fertile land from development.
Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor said the need to feed a growing population is “one of the greatest challenges facing the world right now”. 
“Continuing to grow food in the volumes and quality we have come to expect depends on the availability of land and the quality of the soil,” he added.

The biggest factor in house prices is availability of land, and here the Government is saying they want to remove land from the housing market.

As Eric Crampton noted it is easy to import potatoes from overseas, but it is impossible to commute to work from overseas.

Also only 3.1% of NZ’s land is urban. That is one of the lowest in the developed world. Here are some comparisons:

1. Australia 0.5%
2. Canada 1.4%
3. NZ 3.1%
4. Norway 5.6%
5. Estonia 6.2%
6. Finland 6.6%
7. Sweden 7.6%
8. Ireland 8.2%
9. US 8.8%
10. EU 12.9%
11. France 15.8%
12. Germany 17.9%
13. UK 24.3%
14. Netherlands 38.0%

So the only two developed countries with less urbanisation are Australia and Canada. And this is because they are both giant countries with huge areas of land that in not fit for habitation. Australia is 35% desert and Canada has massive ares of frozen wasteland.

So worrying about the 3.1% of NZ land being urban area growing slightly is ridiculous.

You know what is the bigger threat to productive NZ land? The Government’s subsidies for planting trees. This is incentivising land to move from productive land that employs people into being converted to forestry blocks in perpetuity.

Mia Sutherland at Stuff writes:

Students are taking to the streets, beaches and parks on 27 September, and we’re inviting everyone to join us. That’s right, this is an intergenerational issue, and you’re all invited to put pressure on politicians worldwide to pass bills which will take action to reduce the impacts of climate change. …

We want our government and governments worldwide to do everything in their power to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius by ending the use of fossil fuels and investing in a regenerative and renewable economy. Additionally, we are asking the government to acknowledge the severity of climate change and declare a climate emergency.

If the call is for governments to do everything in their power to limit global warming, that can only include promoting nuclear power and removing restrictions on genetic modification.

The median greenhouse gas impact (gCO2eq/kWh) of different electricity sources according to the IPCC is:

1. Coal 820
2. Gas 490
3. Biomass 230
4. Solar 48
5. Geothermal 38
6. Hydro 24
7. Wind 12
8. Nuclear 12

So nuclear power is an essential tool for what the students are demanding.

And genetic modification is estimated to increase crop yields by 70%, which means the impact per ton of crop is reduced by over a third.

So bravo to all the students marching to demand governments prioritise the environment over their ideological aversion to nuclear power and GM.

The Herald reports:

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says there is nothing explosive in the secret letter from Julie Anne Genter expressing her views on a multi-billion-dollar transport package for Wellington.

Then why not release it?

I agree it won’t be explosive. It will no doubt say that Genter is against any tunnels and any roads and wants them deleted from the programme or made lowest priority. This will not be a surprise.

Genter has refused to release the letter to protect free and frank discussions between ministers, and Ardern backed this up, saying its release would set a dangerous precedent.
“We have to be able to, as ministers, have discussions and policy discussions amongst ourselves before decisions are made, and if all of that’s exposed all of the time, it makes it harder for us to do our jobs.”

There is no precedent for refusing to release a formal letter from an Associate Minister to a Minister.

The Stuff headline:

Major report into reducing alcohol harm ignored for almost a decade

The report was not ignored. It was considered, debated and voted on. The fact a majority of MPs disagreed with Sir Geoffrey Palmer doesn’t mean it was ignored.

For the former prime minister, four of the 2010 recommendations could still have a huge impact in reducing alcohol harm: raising the age of purchase to 20-years-old; regulating advertising and sponsorship; raising prices; and introducing an excise tax.

Parliament has voted three times now on the purchase age and after submissions, hearing and considering the facts, voted each time for 20.

The facts MPs considered were things such as youth drink driving rates have halved. The proportion of 15 to 17 year olds drinking has declined from 75% to 57%.The rate of hazardous drinking in 18 to 24 year olds has dropped from 45% to 38%.

Also the liters of alcohol available for consumption per capita has not increased since the 1989 liberalisation. Here’s annual totals:

• 1989 10.96
• 1995 9.85
• 2000 9.43
• 2010 10.16
• 2018 9.24