I’ve been forwarded an OIA showing that Meredith Connell has received $4.9 million in just five months (Feb 19 to Jun 19) from the NZ Transport agency.

Now lawyers are expensive but that is almost a million dollars a month. Or to be precise:

• $4.92 million for five months
• $984,000 per month
• $227,000 per week
• $48,700 per working day
• $6,100 per working hour

$50,000 a day is a nice gig if you can get it.

The Guardian reported:

Almost all countries are contributing to the rise, with emissions in China up 4.7%, in the US by 2.5% and in India by 6.3% in 2018. The EU’s emissions are near flat, but this follows a decade of strong falls.

So let’s look at this in absolute terms.

• China growth is 12,700 x 4.7% = 597 Mt
• US growth is 6,570 x 2.5% = 164 Mt
• India growth is 2,870 x 6.3% = 181 Mt

By comparison NZ is around 75 Mt so the growth last year in China is around eight times our total emissions.

And is China slowing down? An energy report noted:

China’s national oil companies (NOCs) will be the fourth highest upstream investors in Africa over the next five years, says GlobalData, China’s NOCs are increasingly investing in Africa to secure oil supplies to help feed surging domestic energy demand. As a result, their development and production capital expenditure (capex) in Africa’s upstream sector is forecast to be the fourth highest between 2019 and 2023

So why do climate activists always ignore China? Unless China reduces emissions, or at least stabilizes them, then the efforts of the rest of the world will count for little.

Newshub reported:

Taking away prisoners’ rights to vote was part of a “fascist” culture the National-led Government fostered against criminals, Justice Minister Andrew Little said on Monday. …

“There was a culture at the time – the three-strikes law was going in, ACT was absolutely off the leash when it came to kind of the more fascist sort of policies with criminals.

So Little thinks a law that keeps repeat violent and sexual offenders behind bars for longer is fascism. Good to know.

I find it interesting that defenders of Donald Trump are so blinkered that they can not distinguish between legitimate criticism of him, and partisan opposition.

They label anyone who is critical as suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome when in fact they suffer from TDS – Toady Defence Syndrome. There is nothing he does they won’t defend.

Take this story:

Two days after he said buying Greenland wasn’t a top priority, President Donald Trump canceled an upcoming trip to Denmark, which owns the mostly frozen island, after its prime minister dismissed the idea. …

But on Tuesday, Trump abruptly canceled the visit, also by tweet.
Just a few hours earlier, the U.S. ambassador to Denmark tweeted that it was “ready for the POTUS @realDonaldTrump visit!” using an acronym for “President of the United States” along with Trump’s Twitter handle.
Trump wrote: “Denmark is a very special country with incredible people, but based on Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen’s comments, that she would have no interest in discussing the purchase of Greenland, I will be postponing our meeting scheduled in two weeks for another time.”

Yes the President of the United States cancelled a trip because the Prime Minister of Denmark refuses to sell Greenland to him. My God, you couldn’t write fiction this bizarre.

He really does act at times like a toddler, throwing temper tantrums.

Fox News reports:

Fox News has been the most-watched cable news network for 70 consecutive quarters after finishing the second quarter of 2019 ahead of MSNBC and struggling CNN in both total day and primetime viewers — as Sean Hannity crushed Rachel Maddow’s show in the 9 p.m. ET hour.
Fox News averaged 2.4 million primetime viewers to rank as the most-watched network in all of basic cable from 8-11 p.m. ET. MSNBC came in second place with an average of 1.7 million, while TNT, ESPN, and HGTV rounded out the top five.
The lowly CNN finished fifteenth, averaging only 761,000 primetime viewers and finishing behind channels such as Discovery and the Food Network.

Wow coming 15th and behind the Food Network is humiliating.

A reader writes in:

Essentially the developer sold off most of the residential sections (except maybe the Kiwibuild ones), then after they were sold started making noises about building a big hotel there. Residents weren’t impressed. There were 141 submissions against and 0 for.
 
What makes this story interesting is that the Northlake residents signed a clause in their sale and purchase agreement where they agreed not to make any formal submission against the developer, and not to negatively discuss any activities by the developer. I understand the developer has been using threat of legal action to silence the residents (aka their customers). All the outcry against this thing is from other Wanaka residents, and no doubt the Northlake residents ranting under pseudonym.
 
I don’t know how prevalent these “don’t say anything bad about us” clauses are, and to be fair they did sign it, but the residents here have been utterly screwed by the developer here.

Very interesting to have developers require residents to never oppose anything the developer does, or even publicly criticise them.

I wonder if they would hold up in court, if described correctly.

Barry Soper reports:

The scalp of Paula Bennett is being demanded if National is to avoid a lawsuit by NZ First Leader Winston Peters, Newstalk ZB understands. 

Lawyers for both sides met in Auckland last week where the National side expressed their interest in settling the case before it goes to the Auckland High Court on November the 5th.
National’s lawyers, Bruce Gray QC and former Young Nat Peter Keily expressed their wish for the case to be settled out of court.
Peters’ side, led by his longtime friend Brian Henry apparently asked what were they prepared to offer return.
During the discussion, mention was made of a “National Party body”.

Newstalk ZB understands that was a clear reference to former Deputy Prime Minister Paula Bennett.

If Winston had a case with any substance behind it beyond speculation and conspiracy theories, he wouldn’t be willing to settle.

Oh the irony of him leaking to Barry lol.

— Paula Bennett (@paulabennettmp) August 20, 2019

Ironic indeed.

Kiwibuild isn’t only failing to build houses, it is also failing to keep key staff.

The first effective head, Stephen Barclay, only lasted six months in the job – from May to November 2018.

In February 2019 the Government announced Helen O’Sullivan as the new head of Kiwibuild Commercial. My spies report she has resigned and leaves on 31 August, so also lasting just six months.

To paraphrase Oscar Wilde “To lose one CE may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessnedd”

So after two years in office, Labour’s managed 239 homes out of the 100,000 they promised. They’ve gone through two CEs for Kiwibuild and they’re six months overdue with their reset.

Twyford promised in January a “reset” within a few weeks. Seven months later and still nothing.

Stuff reports:

After getting burnt by Steven Joyce’s “$11.7b hole” the Government is keen to set up a new watchdog to cost election policies.
But the new-look Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) will not be ready in time for the next election, and National leader Simon Bridges has come out strongly against it, with a move that could see the idea scuppered.
The PBO, similarly to the Congressional Budget Office in the USA, would provide independent costings of party’s election policies and monitor Government’s budgets.
The idea is that this office would provide voters with non-partisan analysis of what each party’s policies will cost the country, if they were to submit them to the PBO and agree for the costings to be released.

I have been an advocate of such a unit for many years. I was pleased to see the Greens promote it last election and Labour agree to implement one in their agreement.

The proposed model of an independent office of Parliament is the right one, as independence is key.

“I oppose it because I don’t trust the Government on it. I think it is an opportunity they see to illegitimately, undemocratically screw the scrum on the Opposition,” Bridges said.
He said he felt this way because he was having trouble getting a Treasury secondee to help National’s office, as is tradition, and had been asking for months.
Bridges was eventually offered a Treasury secondee but he said this staffer was clearly unsuitable for the role.
“I feel like we’ve been obstructed from the get-go by the Minister of Finance’s office and also by Treasury.”
“How can I trust them with a supposedly independent institution over the top of that to provide a view on our costings?” he said.

Simon is on the wrong side of this one. He may well be right in not trusting the Government, but that is even more reason to support this proposal of having costings done by an independent agency of Parliament.

Voters deserve to make informed decisions on the cost of promises by politicians. This proposed agency will be a key step towards that. You really don’t want parties self-costing their own policies as they often under-estimate the cost – especially Labour.

This proposal is good for voters, good for fiscal conservatives and good for responsible political parties that want to ensure their policies are affordable.

I hope it gets unanimous support by Parliament.

Stuff reports:

A Christchurch man who believes a Housing New Zealand (HNZ) property nearby is a drug house is frustrated no agency will act.
The Northcote resident told Stuff columnist Mike Yardley he estimated about 20 to 25 drug deals were happening at the house every day, and one day he noted 39.
He had complained to police and HNZ for months – even recording vehicle details – but HNZ said it was a police matter to deal with suspected crime, and police cited lack of evidence and resources.
“For police to obtain a search warrant for any address we require evidence, rather than suspicion. To date we do not have sufficient evidence to say whether the address in question is a ‘drug house’,” Senior Sergeant Stephen McDaniel told Yardley.

Oh what bulldust. They could simply have a detective observe the house for a few hours, and if you see 20 people come and go from it, that would be enough evidence for a search warrant.

So the Police will do nothing, and the Government changed the rules so state house tenants no longer get evicted for drug dealing, so basically the neighbours are powerless.

An excellent post by Hutt South MP Chris Bishop on the housing problem in the Hutt. First the facts:

• The average house in Lower Hutt is now $596,000. This is about 6 times the median household income in New Zealand.
• The average rent in Lower Hutt is $452 per week.
• The social housing wait list in the Hutt is at record levels, with 404 clients waiting for a house.
• The government is spending a million dollars every quarter on housing people in motels in the Hutt Valley.
• Housing NZ has only built 4 units (16 bedrooms) since September 2017.

Then the diagnosis:

It’s all about supply
Another point I have tried to get across is that solving our housing woes comes down almost exclusively to supply. The above facts and the worked example I have shown demonstrate that. Consider Canterbury after the earthquakes. Government, through the extraordinary powers given to it post the quakes, unilaterally rezoned a lot of land to clear the way for more housing. Supply filled the market and for many years Canterbury had flat to falling rents. I heard anecdotal stories of landlords having to induce university student tenants with heat pumps, insulation, and other things in order to encourage them to pick their flat to live in. In Wellington, students line up for hours for the chance to bid on a hovel with mould on the walls. When supply exceeds demand, the power is with tenants. When demand massively exceeds supply, as it does in the Hutt, landlords have all the power.

Then his solutions, which I paraphrase:

1. Acknowledge is that this is a regional and also national problem – we need our Councils to work together more and take a much more regional approach.
2. We need to build out – the cost of land is the biggest driver. Open up the Upper Fitzherbert Road area in Wainuiomata, and connecting the suburb to Naenae; some estimates I’ve seen are that around 2,500 to 3,000 houses could potentially be built there.
3. Better infrastructure financing. Endorses recent Phil Twyford speech to NZ Initiative on this issue
4. We need to build up. Supports changes in density rules and intensification around transport spine.
5. Be more cognisant of the trade-offs inherent in planning. Some recent studies estimate, for example, that rules setting minimum floor space requirements and minimum balcony requirements add $50,000 to $100,000 to the cost of an apartment. A study examining minimum car parking requirements in Auckland showed that the costs of the planning rule exceeded the benefits by a factor of at least six. That rule cost the economy (and apartment buyers) millions of dollars.  Platitudes like “quality urban design” etc sound great; but we have to be aware of the trade-offs.
6. Reform the RMA.

Great to see a local MP do a good job of identifying a problem, identifying what causes the problem and proposing solutions.

Housing in the Hutt is a disaster, and getting worse, but it doesn’t have to be this way. In this piece I’ve tried to outline some solutions. Some will be led by government, a lot by Council. Some require political courage and community buy-in. But if we carry on the way we are, then housing will continue to become more unaffordable, more people will be locked out of home ownership, and homelessness will become entrenched in our community.
Let’s fix it.

A good challenge for the new Council after elections in October.

Stuff reports:

The council’s figures, generated from an independent survey it commissioned, show bus commuters’ satisfaction levels dropped from 85 per cent to 66 per cent between May 2018 and May 2019.
In the same period, rail and ferry commuters reported a 10 per cent drop in satisfaction – down to 75 per cent and 72 per cent respectively.

Wellington had one of the best public transport systems around, and the Wellington Regional Council destroyed it with their “improvements”.

The best way to prevent this occuring again is to ensure accountability by sacking every member standing again. A few have bailed, but not all. These are the incumbents standing again:

• Kapiti – Penny Gaylor
• Lower Hutt – Ken Laban, Prue Lamason, David Ogden
• Porirua – Jenny Brash, Barbara Donaldson
• Wairarapa – Adrienne Staples
• Wellington – Daran Ponter, Roger Blakeley

I will do a blog post closer to elections on who I do recommend people vote for. But the key thing is to make sure that politicians understand that if they stuff things up so disastrously, they will be held accountable.

CNN reports:

The governor of Nairobi has ignited an explosive debate amongst Kenyans over the issue of children born out of wedlock to powerful politicians and their lovers.
After Member of Parliament Ken Okoth died from cancer at the age of 41 last month, Nairobi Governor Mike Sonko, publicly detailed an alleged affair between the late MP, who was a friend of his, and a woman who was nominated for Nairobi’s County Assembly. …

Sonko continued the debate about parental responsibility by taking aim at his fellow politicians. He posted two phone numbers on his Facebook page and invited women to contact his office if they’d had similar experiences with lawmakers.
“When sending details on which MP, Senator, Governor, Businessman has impregnated you, remember to send his full names and the position he holds plus any photos or videos of those happy moments so that we expose them,” he said in another post.

I can’t see this ending well. I suspect Mr Sonko will either end up with any of his own misdeeds made public, or dead.

Newshub reports:

Social media has erupted in debate after Jacinda Ardern was seemingly booed at during the All Blacks v Wallabies Test at Eden Park.

As the announcer called for the Prime Minister to hand the Bledisloe Cup to captain Kieran Read, there was a noticeably loud amount of booing from the crowd.

It’s led to debate on social media about whether it is acceptable to boo a politician at a sports event.

I’m firmly of the view you should never boo a politician when they are presenting awards etc. It is disrespectful to those receiving the award.

In fact I don’t support booing politicians at all. It’s just puerile.

I’ll heckle a politician at a political event, if they say something I disagree with. But I won’t boo them. Not even Winston.

So people shouldn’t boo the Prime Minister. It reflects more on them than her, if they do so.

Stuff reports:

Sir Peter Jackson is throwing his support behind a new Wellington mayoral candidate, current Onslow-Western Ward councillor Andy Foster.
“There are many people who are not happy about what’s been done, what has not been done, and the way things have been done,” Foster said.
It would be Foster’s third run at the mayoralty, the first in 2001, coming fourth, and the second in 2016, when he came fifth with 3,662 votes.

Even with PJ’s backing, Foster won’t win. He was 5th last time.

But what this does do is help Justin Lester. There are three significant candidates standing against him – Diane Calvert, Jenny Condie and Foster. Even with STV the reality is that Lester will do better with the opposition vote split.

Jackson had become a vocal opponent to a proposed Wellington Company development at Shelly Bay since penning an open-letter to Lester over the issue in March.

Personally I’m a huge fan of the proposed development. The place is derelict and needs revitalisation. I’m also a huge fan of Sir Peter – I just disagree with him on this issue.

The irony is that Jackson wants to defeat Lester, but by backing Foster he is probably going to help Lester win.

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.