Stuff reports:

Wellington’s Labour mayor and the Associate Transport Minister have been accused of putting party politics before Wellingtonians’ transport needs. …

According to Lester, he told the councillors he was supporting LGWM because it would be a transformative multi-billion-dollar transport project for Wellington, 60 per cent funded by the Government, and he rhymed off the benefits he saw for the city.
Calvert recalls councillors were told by the mayor that it was the best deal he could obtain, otherwise the Greens would walk away from the coalition.

It would be nice to have a Mayor who advocates on behalf of Wellington to central Government, rather than one who advocates on behalf of Labour and Greens to his own Council.

Interesting data from the 2018 census. Birthplaces of normally resident people in NZ was:

1. New Zealand 72.6%
2. England 4.5%
3. China 2.9%
4. India 2.5%
5. Australia 1.6%
6. South Africa 1.5%
7. Philippines 1.5%
8. Fiji 1.3%
9. Samoa 1.2%
10. South Korea 0.7%

Hardly being swamped are we.

I’m the after dinner speaker at the upcoming Petroleum Conference.

I was surprised to get a letter e-mailed to me today on PEPANZ letterhead informing me that the conference had been cancelled due to impending protest action outside the conference.

But as it turns out the conference has not been cancelled. One of the protesters forged the letter and sent it out to conference attendees. So according to these people, even forgery is a legitimate protest tool now.

The letter was not satire or an obvious hoax. It even listed the names of various energy CEOs at the bottom as signatories.

I’m all for democratic protest. But forgery does not fall into that category. It just shows that the persons responsible subscribe to the old mantra of the ends justify the means – an mantra that has led to untold misery worldwide.

Stuff reports:

A student’s body went unnoticed in a University of Canterbury hall for close to eight weeks, Stuff has learned.
The young man was found only after fellow students at the Sonoda Christchurch Campus accommodation noticed an odour and raised the alarm. 

This is bizarre.

Did none of his neighbours not notice him about?

Did his friends and family not notice him missing for eight weeks?

Did the staff at the hostel not notice him missing?

I was at a hostel at Otago University. If someone was dead in their room, I’d expect them to be noticed missing within a day or two.

AP reports:

President Donald Trump ordered his staff to freeze nearly $400 million in aid to Ukraine a few days before a phone call in which he pressured the Eastern European nation’s leader to investigate the family of political rival Joe Biden, a revelation that comes as more Democrats move toward impeachment proceedings.

Trump trying to use the aid budget to bully another country to try and investigate the family of his main rival is so clearly grounds for impeachment, it is hard to imagine a better case.

He was withholding funds appropriated by Congress to pressure a foreign country to try and interfere in their election by investigating his main rival. This makes Watergate look minor.

This is the sort of behaviour you expect from the despotic leader of a third world country, not the President of the United States.

Here’s what my position on impeachment would be if I was in the US:

• If I was a member of the House Judiciary Committee, I would vote for Articles of Impeachment
• If I was a member of the House I would vote to impeach
• If I was a Senator I would vote to convict and remove Trump from office
• If I was a member of the Cabinet, I would vote to use the 25th Amendment
• If I was the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, I would charge Trump with felonies on multiple counts
• If I was on a jury, I would find Trump guilty of fraud
• If I was the Judge, I would send him to jail
• If I was on a parole board, I would deny him parole

Let no-one be in doubt of where I stand 🙂

UPDATE: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has just announced an impeachment investigation.That is entirely proper. They are not saying they will impeach, just that they need to determine what exactly Trump did and said, and whether that constitutes grounds for impeachment.

Trump may have done some good things with his judicial appointments, but he is fundamentally unfit for democratic office. He should be removed.

Stuff reports:

In a major blow to Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Britain’s highest court has ruled that his decision to suspend Parliament for five weeks in the crucial countdown to the country’s Brexit deadline was illegal.
The unanimous Supreme Court ruling declared the order to suspend Parliament “void and of no effect.”
Supreme Court President Brenda Hale said the suspension “was unlawful because it had the effect of frustrating or preventing the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions without reasonable justification.”
She said the court’s decision means Parliament was never legally suspended and is technically still sitting.

Wow that is a major blow. Boris may have a very short tenure as PM.

Enter your captions below. As always funny, not nasty.

The Mood of the Boardroom also rates National’s front bench. In order their scores are:

1. Judith Collins 3.51
2. Nikki Kaye 3.31
3. Paul Goldsmith 3.14
4. Todd McClay 2.83
5. Mark Mitchell 2.73
6. Gerry Brownlee 2.68
7. Michael Woodhouse 2.67
8. Simon Bridges 2.50
9. Louise Upston 2.40

Newsroom reports:

The Royal Commission into state abuse has allowed a convicted child sex offender into meetings with survivors of sexual abuse.
The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, attended three meetings with members of the survivors’ advisory group.
One survivor in the group told Newsroom she was retraumatised by the man’s presence.

As you would be.

In 2000, the man, who has permanent statutory name suppression, pleaded guilty and was convicted of two charges: one of sexual violation by rape and the other of sexual violation by having unlawful sexual connection.
Court documents show the man pleaded guilty to the sexual abuse against a child in his care, who was aged between seven and eight and a half at the time. The judge’s sentencing notes said during this period the man raped and sexually violated the child on a number of occasions.

And here he is attending meetings of victims.

It is unfortunate that when a pedophile molests someone he is related to, or cares for, they get name suppression. It is designed to protect the victims, but more often seems to protect the offender.

Inquiry “ambassador” Betty Sio is facing charges laid by the Serious Fraud Office. She has pleaded not guilty.
And former advisory group facilitator, Harry Tam, was removed from the panel following allegations of domestic violence.

I tend to think the inquiry has been so compromised with these mistakes that it will end up doing more harm than good.

Marks said the internal workings of the inquiry was “a shambles”.
“It’s pretty much all over the place – from what I’ve seen.”
This made it hard for survivors to have confidence in the commission and its processes, he said, adding that it was not fair on those survivors, or taxpayers.
The inquiry has a budget of $78.85 million over four years.

So $80 million, which may end up achieving nothing.

On Monday I looked at the Wellington Mayoral Race. Today this is looking at the contests for the 14 Councillors.

The Council has locked in spending that could see rates double over the next ten years. As few of us will have our incomes double, this means we will end up with less disposable income unless a more fidcally responsible Council is elected.

An excellent tool for evaluation candidates, if you have the time, is Policy Local. Just enter in your address and you see all the candidates for your local elections, and their responses to nine different policy areas.

There is also the voting guide put out by Wellington Unions. Just rank people in reverse order to what they say, and you can’t go far wrong. Anyone with an X is probably worth voting for and a tick probably not.

Let’s look at the wards in order.

Eastern Ward

• Chris Calvi-Freeman
• Sarah Free (Greens)
• Bernard O’Shaughnessy
• Sean Rush (Wellington Party)
• Ajay Rathod
• Teri O’Neill (Labour)
• Steph Edlin

Sean Rush is pledging to hold rates to inflation. I would rank him first.

Inside Wellington has their analysis here.

While her politics are not mine, I think Sarah Free is a conscientious Councillor and would rank her in the top three. I should disclose that I was childhood friends with her sister.

Third choice probably a toss up between incumbent Chris Calvi-Freeman and Steph Edlin. Edlin supports making a 2nd Mt Vic tunnel a priority so would go with her.

So my top three would be:

1. Sean Rush
2. Sarah Free
3. Steph Edlin

Lambton Ward

• Nicola Young
• Brian Dawson (Labour)
• Shan Ng
• Harry Smith
• Tamatha Paul
• Lee Orchard
• Iona Pannett (Greens)

Nicola Young as No 1 is easy and obvious. Nicola is a great Councillor and one of the few who will call out hypocrisy (such as pointing out they declare a climate emergency at the same time as subsidizing Singapore Airlines to fly to Wellington)

Inside Wellington has their analysis here.

After Nicola it is harder. Of the new candidates, Tamantha Paul looks like she has potential. I’d give her a chance.

I’d also put Iona Pannett in the top three. Again I disagree with her on many policies, but she is undeniably an effective and hard working Councillor.

So my top three would be:

1. Nicola Young
2. Tamantha Paul
3. Iona Pannett

Northern Ward

• John Apanowicz (Wellington Party)
• Jenny Condie
• Peter Gilberd (Labour)
• Malcolm Sparrow
• Jill Day
• John Peters
• Tracy Hurst-Porter
• Graeme Sawyer

John Apanowicz has significant governance experience, and looks like he would be a very solid Councillor .

Jenny Condie has a real passion for public policy and is an innovative thinker, who would add value to the Council.

Of the current Councillors, I’d rate Malcolm Sparrow highest. So my top three would be:

1. John Ahanowicz
2. Jenny Condie
3. Malcolm Sparrow

Onslow-Western Ward

• Rebecca Matthews (Labour)
• Conor Hill
• Rohan Biggs
• Richard McIntosh (Greens)
• Ray Chung
• Simon Woolf
• Diane Calvert
• Michelle Rush
• Andy Foster

The Inside Wellington analysis is here.

My clear pick for No 1 is Rohan Biggs. Now I know Rohan as we attended the same ante-natal parents group, but why I endorse him is because he is clearly standing on a platform of preventing huge future rates increases.

A few months ago Rohan had little interest in local body politics but he got sick and was off work for a while. Which sick, he actually read the Council long-term plan and forecasts etc and realised (his background is financial analysis) the Council was locking in rates increases that would be unaffordable for most families. So he wrote a huge submission to the Council, and then of course when it was ignored decided to stand for Council. So he isn’t a professional politician, just a Dad trying to keep our rates down. His professional skills would be very valuable though, so he’s my number one.

After Rohan, the three incumbents are all decent Councillors. They each have strengths and weaknesses so I’d rate them 2, 3 and 4

1. Rohan Biggs
2. Diane Calvert, Simon Woolf, Andy Foster

Southern Ward

• Laurie Foon (Greens)
• Fleur Fitzsimons (Labour)
• Thomas Morgan
• Humphrey Hanley

The Inside Wellington Analysis is here.

I’d rate Fleur Fitzsimons 1st. She has generally done well in her first term, apart from the odd brain fart such as renaming the Basin Reserve.

2nd is a choice between Laurie Foon and Humphrey Hanley. They are both very focused in sustainable transport. I think Hanley will be more flexible on how to achieve this so he would be my second choice.

1. Fleur Fitzsimons
2. Humphrey Hanley

Tomorrow I’ll do the Wellington Regional Council and then the District Health Board.

The Herald has published the ratings from its annual Mood of the Boardoom. The scores are out of 5, so 2.5 or higher indicates a positive score. The ratings in order are

1. Kris Faafoi 3.58
2. Grant Robertson 3.52 (-0.10)
3. Andrew Little 3.14 (+0.26)
4. David Parker 3.08 (+0.02)
5. James Shaw 3.05
6. Jacinda Ardern 2.93 (-0.37)
7. Winston Peters 2.92 (-0.28)
8. Stuart Nash 2.49
9. Megan Woods 2.44 (+0.01)
10. Shane Jones 2.43 (-0.12)
11. Carmel Sepuloni 2.40 (nc)
12. Chris Hipkins 2.34 (+0.08)
13. David Clark 2.33 (-0.14)
14. Eugenie Sage 2.29
15. Nanaia Mahuta 2.10 (-0.18)
16. Julie Anne Genter 2.09
17. Jenny Salesa 2.01 (-0.38)
18. Kelvin Davis 1.96 (+0.12)
19. Iain Lees-Galloway 1.69 (-0.73)
20. Phil Twyford 1.61 (-1.16)

The biggest drops are:

1. Phil Twyford -1.16
2. Iain Lees-Galloway -0.73
3. Jenny Salesa -0.38
4. Jacinda Ardern -0.37

Stuff reports:

A 13-year-old alleges Christchurch City councillor Deon Swiggs gave him unwanted hugs and called him a “very attractive lad”.
Swiggs has revealed himself as the person under investigation for allegedly sending “grossly inappropriate” messages to three young people. However, he denies all allegations of misconduct.
Stuff revealed on Friday the city council was investigating a councillor’s behaviour after a youth group made a formal complaint on behalf of teenagers to the council’s acting chief executive Mary Richardson on September 4.
It was alleged Swiggs sent young people inappropriate social media messages, including a sexually explicit meme. The teenagers are reported to be as young as 13.

I’ve met Deon a couple of times and was impressed with him. His CV of service to Christchurch is exemplary. But none of that matters when such serious allegations have been made.

On Sunday, Dalziel confirmed she knew of allegations against Swiggs for months before an investigation started, and he was told to avoid contact with young people.
She was approached in May by members of a youth group about their concerns.

Dalziel has known since May! Unbelievable. And one can’t ignore the politics that Dalziel is a Labour Mayor and Swiggs a former Labour activist. In fact he stood to replace Dalziel as the Labour candidate in Christchurch East, losing to Poto Williams.

Dalziel said on Monday she had acted in good faith at all times and could only act on the basis of the information she had been given.
“I was not provided with the most serious of the allegations which has now been brought to my attention,” she said.
“The allegations that have now been made and advised to me last Thursday go much further than I was originally told and cast a different light on the situation.”

This is all very deja vu. It sounds near identical to Ardern and the allegations about one of her staff. They knew about them for months, but then claim once to goes public that they didn’t know about the most serious stuff.

Is this now the standard script for Labour Party scandals? “I knew, but I didn’t know how bad it was”.

There is no way that this should have all been kept secret for months, and an investigation only launched after nominations closed for Council.

Stuff reports:

New Zealand will gain one new North Island electorate at the 2020 election based on the troubled 2018 census.

This is pretty much what you would expect as the NI population tends to grow faster than the South Island.

ONE THIRD OF BOUNDARIES WILL NEED TO BE REDRAWN
The Representation Commission will be required to redraw the boundaries for many electorates, as about a third have populations well above or below the average size.

Actually it will be far more than one third because even electorates within the 5% tolerance will probably be affected by neighbouring seats needing to change shape.

I’d say the extra seat will be in Auckland as the areas most over quota are Papakura, Hunua and Rodney.

South Island will see some change also. Invercargill will take some land off Clutha-Southland. West Coast-Tasman will take a bit off Nelson. The two Dunedin seats need to grow so will take off Waitaki. Selwyn needs to lose some land.

Andrea Vance writes:

“The rot is very deep. [The] party is allergic to women.”
Those are powerful words from a former Beehive aide, appalled by how the Labour party has handled allegations of sexual assault by a staffer.

Read that again. This is how someone who actually worked for Labour in the Beehive describes them.

Is it any wonder then, that some complainants turned to National’s deputy leader Paula Bennett for help?

It’s hard to imagine how frustrated they must have been to take such an unprecedented step.

Jacinda Ardern has pledged two – secret – inquiries. It’s the bare minimum, and the cookie-cutter response to a PR crisis.
But look past the PM’s soothing platitudes, to the party’s defensive behaviour over the last fortnight. It reveals MPs and members are in denial about how badly they wronged these young volunteers.
Ardern, who chooses her words with care, dismissed the original media reporting, and interviews with complainants, as “speculation.”  

Kelvin Davis went further, calling the allegations rumours. When he was called out for disrespect, he tried to minimise the harm by playing victim.
Next to wade in was Willie Jackson. It was a devastatingly insensitive PR strategy from Labour: wheeling out the man who victim blamed and supported rape culture during the Roastbusters scandal.

And people wonder why the victims are upset.

Then, with all the sensitivity of your misogynistic old uncle, Peters stepped up to defend his coalition partners. He labelled the allegations “unfounded fiction”, an “orgy of speculation”, and “innuendo”.
In staggeringly boorish fashion, his MP Shane Jones followed up. He was “more worried about Spark, whether or not I can watch the World Cup Rugby than hearing any more about she said, he said.”
And Tracey Martin, chimed in: “[Peters has] got a point – I haven’t seen any evidence be produced.” Suggesting these young people must prove they were abused is an odd position for the Minister of Children to adopt.
Instead of trashing Paula Bennett, perhaps female Labour, NZ First and Green MPs should reflect on why the complainants choose her, and not them, as their advocate.

Remember this is a Government of kindness!

There are nine candidates standing for Wellington Mayor in 2019.

How you should vote depends very much on whether or not you think Wellington is heading in the right direction or the wrong direction.

If you think it is heading in the right direction, then you should vote for Justin Lester.

Personally I don’t think Wellington is heading in the right direction. In fact I can’t recall a time where Wellington appears to be going so wrong.Not all of this is the fault of the Mayor or Council, but leadership does make a difference.

The top 12 problems with Wellington are:

1. Long-term plans indicate rates will double over the next ten years, well beyond the rate of increase of family incomes
2. The previously excellent bus network has become a disaster for many commuters. Scores of buses simply don’t show up, many services have been cancelled and the new routes are less useful than the old ones
3. The rebuild of the Town Hall has tripled in cost from $45 million to almost $150 million
4. The much heralded Movie Museum is no longer happening
5. The Central Library is closed, and the Council seemingly has no plan for a new one. Instead we just have three smaller temporary libraries which means less chance of getting all the books you want at the one location
6. There is no plan, solution or even hope for separating out the North-South traffic and East-West traffic at the Basin Reserve
7. The convention centre is proceeding without the movie museum and/or a private sector partner, meaning it is highly likely to turn into a expensive loss making facility for ratepayers
8. The Council has signed up to a plan to not expand the Mt Vic tunnel to four lanes for at least ten years, maybe longer
9. The Shelley Bay development is bogged down in litigation and bad blood between the Mayor and Sir Peter Jackson
10. The Council has signed up to a plan to never expand the Terrace tunnel
11. The heart of the city, Civic Square, has become a ghost zone
12. Things are so bad even the highly capable and respected CEO is bailing out and not reapplying for the top job

So for me it is a no brainer to vote for change.

Of the eight alternatives to the Mayor, only four would be significant contenders. They are Jenny Condie, Conor Hill, Diane Calvert and Andy Foster.

Conor feels Justin is not left enough. Can’t say I agree, but if you want an even more left leaning Mayor go for Conor.

Of the other three candidates I’d classify Andy Foster and Jenny Condie as centrist and Diane Calvert as centre-right.

The key thing if you want change is to make those three you top three picks. Doesn’t matter so much the order so long as they are ranked 1, 2 and 3. STV means this will help whomever faces off against Lester.

So in summary:

• If you think Wellington is heading in the right direction vote to re-elect Justin
• If you think Wellington City Council needs to be more left wing vote for Conor Hill
• If you think that We need a more centrist Mayor, not beholden to the Labour Party and central Government, then rank Calvert, Condie and Foster 1, 2, 3 (in any order)

A useful voting guide has been out out by Wellington Unions. Just rank people in reverse order to what they say, and you can’t go far wrong. Anyone with an X is probably worth voting for and a tick probably not.

Also worth reading Inside Wellington’s analysis of the race in two parts.

An interesting case of manslaughter when Conrad Gray got 25 months for manslaughter. He has parole eligibility after just nine months, so seems a light sentence.

The manslaughter was he pushed the victim to the ground in an altercation and the victim hit his head on a pole and died of a brain bleed and skull fracture.

If one takes just the shove, then a light sentence is arguably appropriate but when you look at all the other circumstances, to me it seems light. They are:

• He left the unconscious victim alone
• He tried to create a fake alibi and lied to the Police
• He has 61 previous convictions and 34 sentences of imprisonment.
• The offence occurred while he was on bail

The previous offending and offending while on bail got an uplift of just three months. I would have thought 61 previous convictions would count for more than that.

The Competitive Enterprise Initiative has compiled a great list of all the failed predictions of Environmental Apocalypses.

These aren’t general predictions of things getting worse, but explicit predictions that something will have happened by a particular date. They include:

• Dire world famine by 1975
• Everyone dead by 1989
• A new ice age by the 21st century
• Oceans dead by 1980
• US to have water rationing by 1974
• US to have food rationing by 1980
• Fossil fuel burning to drop temperatures to ice age by 1981
• Maldives will be underwater by 2018
• Famine by 2012
• UK to be Siberian by 2024
• Arctic will be ice free by 2013

If one did not have the hysterical predictions (which the authors rarely concede were wrong, even after they clearly are), then people would be less skeptical of the actual environmental challenges we have.

Stuff reports:

Lawyers for a mentally ill man have tried to convince the Court of Appeal the law could be read in a way for him to avoid a seven-year jail term for kissing a stranger’s cheek.
Daniel Clinton Fitzgerald, 46, was convicted of a third strike offence of indecent assault for kissing the woman on Wellington’s Cuba St in December 2016. He also pushed her friend who tried to intervene.
Fitzgerald has been in custody since the night of the offence and serious mental health problems have seen him go from prison to hospital and back again.

The High Court judge decided Fitzgerald had to be sentenced to the maximum for indecent assault, seven years in  jail, because it was his “third strike”, but he said it was manifestly unjust for Fitzgerald to serve the sentence without the possibility of parole.

So the law worked – he was eligible for parole after two years four months for his third strike.

But Fitzgerald was declined parole in April and is not scheduled to go before the Parole Board again until June 2020. The board expected him to receive one-on-one counselling before he gets treatment to stop his sexual offending.

This is key. If the Parole Board is not releasing him they are convinced he will keep on with his sexual offending. So three strikes means the public is protected.

He has sexually assaulted women on multiple occasions. The SST estimated there have been dozens of convictions over thirty years.

He obviously needs treatment. He hasn’t gained it outside prison. Hopefully he will get it in prison.