Radio NZ report:

RNZ has crunched the numbers the latest annual reviews to Parliament from two dozen major government departments and agencies, and three district health boards.
The 2017/18 reviews show some have doubled the numbers of communications staff in a single year, some are stable, and overall the trend is up.
Overall, annual reviews show public sector communications staff numbers rising 60 per cent since 2013.

A 60% increase over five years is huge.

Public Relations Institute (PRINZ) chief executive Elaine Koller said these were signs the government was listening more, not spinning things more.
“Spin is a really unfair description of what public relations is,” Koller said.

Actually I thought the PRINZ response was wonderful spin – the more communications staff you have means the more listening you are doing. Just wonderful spin.

The Herald reports:

The Government will not intervene in the Ihumātao stoush as it is not its place to get involved in the saga, according to Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.
This comes as hundreds have turned out across the country to protest a housing development being built at Ihumātao, near the sacred Ōtuataua Stonefields Reserve, in Auckland.
Despite the Government saying it won’t intervene, Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson has vowed to continue pressing Ministers on the issue.
She told Parliament today that what is happening at Ihumātao was a “continuation of colonisation”.

That’s an interesting perspective.

My understand is that the local Iwi is strong full support of the housing development, and in fact have agreed with Fletchers that 25% of the land is returned to mana whenua.

The vast majority of the protesters are not mana whenua. In fact you could arguing they are acting as colonisers as they are trying to force their views onto the mana whenua.

Stuff reports:

Peter Ellis is fighting to clear his name some 26 years after he was convicted of sex offences against seven children at the Christchurch Civic Creche.
Supporters say Ellis – who has served his prison sentence and lives quietly in rural Canterbury – hopes to clear his name before he dies.
He has filed an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. He lost his case in the Court of Appeal nearly 20 years ago, in October 1999.

I hope he succeeds.

Not only do I think there is no way he could be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, I would go further and say I think he is innocent beyond reasonable doubt.

It was alleged the children were violated with needles and forced to perform bizarre and violent sexual rituals, drink urine, and were defecated on.

All at a busy childcare centre with multiple staff.

O’Mara was elected in 2017 as a Labour MP who was a member of Momentum and supported Jeremy Corbyn.

Stuff reports:

New Zealand’s law for dividing property on separation is out of date and needs to change, the Law Commission says.
It has tabled its final report for its review of the Property (Relationships) Act in Parliament today.

The key recommendations include changing how the family home is shared.
At the moment, the home that a couple lives in is usually “relationship property” and divided equally on separation.
The Law Commission said, if it was already owned by one partner before the relationship began, or received as a gift or inheritance, only the amount it increased in value during the relationship should be split.

This looks to be a very sensible change.

It has seemed bizarre to me that one person could own their own home, and if they meet someone who moves in with them, then bang after two years their partner gets half the house if they split.

Having only the increase in value during the relationship being the basis for calculating who pays how much is much more sensible.

As expected Boris won the members vote by a 2:1 margin and will later this week become the 77th Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. He will be the Queen’s 14th Prime Minister.

He really has only one task – to deliver Brexit. A failure to do so will see the Conservative Party wiped out.

Some of Boris’ more memorable quotes:

• She’s got dyed blonde hair and pouty lips, and a steely blue stare, like a sadistic nurse in a mental hospital. (on Hillary Clinton
• Voting Tory will cause your wife to have bigger breasts and increase your chances of owning a BMW M3
• Yes, cannabis is dangerous, but no more than other perfectly legal drugs. It’s time for a rethink, and the Tory party – the funkiest, most jiving party on Earth – is where it’s happening.
• No one obeys the speed limit except a motorised rickshaw
• I don’t see why people are so snooty about Channel 5. It has some respectable documentaries about the Second World War. It also devotes considerable airtime to investigations into lap dancing, and other related and vital subjects.
• I have not had an affair with Petronella. It is complete balderdash. It is an inverted pyramid of piffle. It is all completely untrue and ludicrous conjecture. I am amazed people can write this drivel.
• I have as much chance of becoming Prime Minister as of being decapitated by a frisbee or of finding Elvis.
• In 1904, 20 per cent of journeys were made by bicycle in London. I want to see a figure like that again. If you can’t turn the clock back to 1904, what’s the point of being a Conservative?
• The President is a cross-eyed Texan warmonger, unelected, inarticulate, who epitomises the arrogance of American foreign policy. (on George W Bush)

The fact both Labour and Greens have launched attack ads against Simon Bridges suggests his campaign against their car taxes is worrying them.

Stuff reports:

The Green party has deleted an ad attacking Simon Bridges because its members were not happy.
The ad paints National Party leader Bridges as a used car salesmen at “Simon’s Imports”, using old footage of the National Party leader dubbed by an impersonator highlighting Bridges’ thick accent.

So the party that once claimed they don’t go negative, launched an ad attacking a political opponent – for his accent.

Imagine if National ran an ad attacking Green Party MPs for their Australian or American accents.

Stuff reports:

Statistics NZ, as it tried to develop a marketing campaign for the 2018 Census (which has been beset by other problems with the findings yet to be released) asked the public to tell it: How would you describe your current level of positivity towards the Government?”
Initially, officials at the Department of Statistics proposed asking about “positivity towards the new Government”. The surveys were undertaken in late 2017 and again in early 2018.
As the “Government Chief Data Steward”, Statistics NZ chief executive  Liz MacPherson is meant to offer guidance to other parts of the public service to ensure surveys are free of political bias.
She said the organisation had learnt from its mistake. Although an external review found the intent of the question was reasonable, the wording was inappropriate. “I regret this mistake and have taken steps to make sure it doesn’t happen again.”

This is quite shocking. Of all the agencies, Stats NZ is the one you most need to be seen as totally impartial when surveying people.

And Stats NZ proposed asking people how they feel about the “new” Government which is nakedly partisan.

Stuff reports:

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll paints a decidedly less grim picture of US President Donald Trump’s 2020 re-election chances than previous polls. One question, in particular, suggests one of his main arguments could bear fruit next year. …

But there is one match up in which Trump actually leads: When voters have to choose between him and a candidate they believe is a “socialist,” Trump led 49 per cent to 43 per cent.

This is why the choice is so important. Trump will call whom ever the Democratic candidate is, a socialist. But that won’t wing true for Joe Biden, Kamala Harris or Pete Buttigieg.

However if the candidate is Bernie Sanders or even Elizabeth Warren, then the label may well stick – and a socialist is unelectable as US President.

The current top polling candidates are:

1. Joe Biden 28%
2. Bernie Sanders 15%
3. Elizabeth Warren 15%
4. Kamala Harris 13%
5. Pete Buttigieg 5%

Liam Hehir writes:

This was going to be the Government’s “year of delivery”. If you had ordered a pizza, instead of a transformed society, you would be asking for your money back by now.

I can’t recall a year in which a Government has delivered less except maybe 1974.

When the Government changed, the median rent in the country was $400 a week. Now, it’s $450. That the Ardern ministry has continued to sock it to landlords during the ongoing rental property shortage is no coincidence.
While having to scrape together more for their rent, many have also seen their petrol costs increase through new and increased taxes. Partly levied to fund more boutique transport options, these taxes are regressive. For one thing, battling families have less money to spare for such things. The fact that older, more affordable cars use more fuel just rubs salt in the wound.
So, it’s no surprise that Work and Income has had to issue almost half a million hardship grants in the past year. Photos of long queues stretching outside WINZ offices have been in the news, providing an illustration of the problem that should alarm the Government. And while ministers might protest this is a result of their comparative kindness, that’s not how it saw things in Opposition.

If kindness results in people having to queue up at 2 am for hardship grants, then maybe one should focus on effectiveness instead.

In 2017, following a much smaller increase in hardship grants under the old Government, Labour said it was a sign that Bill English had to go. According to the then leader of the Opposition, Andrew Little, the statistic was “a damning indictment of how Bill English’s Government has let things get worse for those most vulnerable in our society”. Ardern has been prime minister longer than English was.
The knock against Ardern has always been that she’s more about empathy than solutions. Time and time again, voters have rewarded the ability to understand and share feelings. The question is whether it will be enough.

Empathy doesn’t pay the bills.

Stuff reports:

The Government has extended an income tax exemption for oil rigs for another five years until 2024, despite leading a worldwide push not to subsidise fossil fuel companies.
It says the tax break is necessary to stop the oil rigs and seismic vehicles “churning” in and out of New Zealand waters every 183 days to escape all tax liability, and means that they will still pay other taxes to the Government.
Revenue Minister Stuart Nash simply told Stuff the decision was “the right thing to do” when asked on his way into caucus.
But Greenpeace head and former Green Party co-leader Russel Norman said the exemption was clearly a subsidy for oil exploration.

So the Government is going to make most motorists pay thousands more in car taxes but also is extending a tax break for oil rigs.

And it says climate change is their biggest priority!

Mike Hosking writes:

The Greens hate GE. They hate GE as much as they hate a 6.75-litre V12 in a Rolls-Royce. And yet driven, I am assuming by common sense and a desire to see outside what those around him would be preaching, James Shaw is calling for our laws to be looked at. Good on him.

I missed Shaw saying that. That is huge. Hopefully he means it, and it wasn’t just platitudes.

And in that, hopefully, is political gain. The chance for what I would guess is a not insubstantial group of New Zealanders who are into the environment, have broad-based green principles, but have been turned off over the years by the nutters who are the dangerous mixture of social engineer-come-communist.
A true Green party protects the environment – but not at the cost of jobs and progress. GE is progress. Yes, it’s got issues. Yes you need to be careful. But what we are being to this point is unengaged. And like technology, governments are woefully behind the big brains in the sector.
If GE can help farmers it can help all of us. Taxing our way to unemployment is a very blunt instrument to save the planet. Thank God a green like Shaw gets that – and given his position is prepared to show a bit of backbone and do the right thing.

Genter says climate change is her generation’s WWII moment. Well trying to reduce emissions and banning the use of genetic technologies is like trying to win WWII without an airforce.

Here’s the change in the number of people on the job seeker support (DOLE) benefit for the last five years:

• June 14 to June 15 -3,059
• June 15 to June 16 -118
• June 16 to June 17 +822
• June 17 to June 18 +3,737
• June 18 to June 19 +13,720

So in the three years to June 17 the numbers fell by around 2,000 and in the two years since they increased by over 17,000 or a massive 15%.

Now unemployment remains at a record low. So why such a huge increase in people on the dole? Could it be related to Labour getting rid of or watering down sanctions for stuff such as not turning up to job interviews?

A guest post by a reader:

Chlöe Swarbrick argues that our current treatment of cannabis as illegal is equivalent to an unregulated market for cannabis. In fact, prohibition is about as regulated as a market can get! What we actually
have is excessive and ineffective regulation. What Swarbrick is really
proposing is less and more effective regulation. She has a strong case that we can do better, but it seems that her mistaken view that she’s addressing an absence of regulation rather than improving upon existing regulation has led her to be complacent. Her proposal doesn’t just face the low hurdle of being better than nothing, but rather the higher hurdle of being good regulation. Where is the evidence that we will have good regulation before the nation votes in 2020?
 
We are being asked to trust that good regulation will be developed in the few remaining months. Why should we give that trust when the Greens did not develop detailed regulation during their many, many years of opposition? And when progress has been so meagre during the 20 months that the Greens have had access to all the resources of government? In May, a few brief bullet points of regulatory outline were released. But where is the detail on how cannabis will be taxed to encourage responsible use and to fund the costs of wellbeing programmes for those who use to excess (in the way other vices are e.g. cigarettes)? Where is the detail on how cannabis strength will be regulated to minimise the risk of harm (in the same way other vices are e.g. alcohol ABV)? Where is the thinking on how regulation will address the fact that cannabis is relatively unique in that it can be effective whether ingested or inhaled? One of those methods is vastly less unhealthy than the other. Are we voting for a new smokable product at the same time as we’re trying to achieve Smoke Free 2050 or will cannabis be legalised for ingestion only? How would that sit with our existing regime for all ingestible products (shared with Australia) that prohibits, for example, nicotine drinks?
 
We elect politicians to dedicate their time and intellect to understand issues better than we can. We elect them to delve deeply into the implications of potential laws and regulations and to optimise them. Punting to a referendum is an abdication of that responsibility no matter how much effort a politician puts into developing a draft law and educating the public on it, but that abdication of responsibility is vastly compounded with every day that passes. If we, the public, are to make the cannabis reform decision then we must have the time and information to do so.
 
Swarbrick’s lack of progress belies a perspective that anything will be better than nothing. We deserve the opportunity to require drug reform to be good for New Zealand. Will we get that chance?

Stuff reports:

Correspondence released under the Official Information Act show staff at Porirua City Council raised several issues about Mike Tana’s spending before he voluntarily handed his expense card back on March 27.

This is significant, if he ended up effectively having his card rescinded.

More than $120,000 of ratepayer funds were also spent on communications and strategic advice for Tana.

Did any previous Mayor spending $120,000 on PR advice?

Tana called his expensing “normal accounting” and explained cash withdrawals overseas as “the way that you have to do it when you go to China”.

What bullshit. If you need cash for a trip overseas, you get it issued to you in advance, and then account for it when you return. You don’t use your employer’s card as an ATM.

“I’ve been very frugal. I blag rides, get people to buy me coffees, stay at friends’ houses – I do all those things to keep my costs down.”
Tana reimbursed several expenses after council staff queried them.

If you were being frugal, you wouldn’t be reimbursing expenses. By definition they were things he should not have charged up.

Also getting other people to buy you coffee is not being frugal. Paying for your own coffee is being frugal.

“When you’re working at the level that I work at, it’s not just me – that’s anybody that works with receipts – there’ll be a certain level of receipts that go missing.”

Really? What level? 5%? 10%?

My policy when travelling on behalf of someone else is to not claim an expense if I can’t find a receipt for it.

Also I never ever asked for an expense card (except a taxi one). I would charge expenses to my personal card and claim back at the end.

Many were honest mistakes caused by him juggling three or four different bank cards in his wallet, he said. 

Yeah it is so difficult to tell the difference between four cards. So complex.

Others went through a “process” then reimbursed if they weren’t business expenses, he said.

In other words I would have the Council pay for personal stuff for me, and reimburse them if they noticed and asked.

After a withdrawal in August,  council chief financial officer Roy Baker emailed Chief Executive Wendy Walker and said: “This is a further withdrawal – and not what was agreed with Mike. I have withdrawn the ability to withdraw cash from the card.”

So the Council were so concerned they switched off the cash access of his card.

Tana said he withdrew the cash because it was difficult to use credit cards in China.

Really? I’ve never had any problems. To be fair, outside tourist areas they are not always accepted. But again the solution is to have the organisation you travel for arrange foreign cash in advance, which you reconcile when home.

Matthews suggested the solution was to organise cash before travelling overseas. “Cash transactions on your credit card are not the appropriate way of doing it.”

Exactly.

An interesting article in Stuff interviewing Otago Physiology Professor Alison Heather on the huge advantage a Y chromosome gives you in sports, and how it isn’t just about your current testosterone level. Some differences are:

• larger and stronger bones
• different shaped bones which changes the amount of  force that can be generated by the knee when lifting, jumping, kicking or cycling
• increased muscle mass and associated power
• higher percentage of type II muscle fibres, the explosive muscle type
• early life testosterone exposure in males increases the number of alveoli which have a greater capacity for oxygen uptake
• male heart can literally pump more blood per beat

She makes the point:

All of these male physiology components are regulated, at least in part, by the male sex hormone, testosterone. However, what is largely misunderstood or ignored by current debate, is it is not just current, circulating levels of testosterone that drive many of these components, but a life-long exposure to testosterone that started in utero, continued in early infancy, and then was cemented during the pubertal years.

Simon Bridges released:

Leader of the Opposition Simon Bridges has today apologised to Associate Transport Minister Julie Anne Genter for releasing false information about the Government’s car tax.
“In recent statements, National claimed Labour’s car tax would increase the cost of some of New Zealand’s most popular vehicles by up to $3000. We were basing this on information in the Government’s Clean Car Discount Scheme.
“But we’ve since had a good look at another piece of work by the Government – its Clean Car Standard Scheme – and discovered even more hidden costs.
“The truth is, the actual cost of Julie Anne Genter’s car tax on Kiwis could be more than $6000 per vehicle.
“Alongside the Government’s plan to tax higher-emissions vehicles, it is proposing a vehicle emissions target, meaning importers will be charged a penalty of between $50 and $100 per gram of CO2 on vehicles that don’t come in under the target from 2025.
“That could slap an extra $4500 onto the import cost of an average new car and an extra $2250 onto the cost of an average used car – costs that will almost certainly be passed on to buyers.
“More than 91 per cent of the vehicles being imported into the country today don’t satisfy the Minister’s emissions expectations, so this could be a massive tax grab for the Government.
“Julie Anne Genter wants to tell Kiwis what cars they can and cannot drive, and dictate to dealers what cars they can and cannot sell.
“She’s clearly spent too much time in Wellington and not enough in the regions because she hasn’t clicked that not all New Zealanders have low-emission vehicle options that fit their lifestyle.
“What, then, are car dealers in Feilding, Greymouth and Dargaville supposed to do? They can’t just start selling cars their customers don’t want.
“I’d like to say sorry to the Minister for underestimating the true cost of this tax on hard-working New Zealanders, which she thinks is just a ‘small fee’ they’ll be happy to pay.”

So the Government is going to impose taxes of over $6,000 on your car if they don’t approve of your choice.

It’s nuts.

You don’t need a special tax or rebate on cars with higher emissions. You just need to make sure vehicle emissions are fully part of the Emissions Trading Scheme.

Motorists should pay for the costs of higher emissions, but what the Government is proposing is they pay three times over – through the ETS, through their new car tax and through special emissions import tax.

Stuff reports:

The Silver Ferns’ remarkable rise is complete.
New Zealand stunned three-time defending champions Australia 52-51 in a thrilling Netball World Cup final in Liverpool on Sunday (Monday morning NZ time). 
It completes a massive 11-month turnaround from the Ferns under coach Noeline Taurua who took over last August, following last April’s harrowing performance at the 2018 Commonwealth Games under previous coach Janine Southby. 

Taurua must get coach of the year.

The Silver Ferns lost in the finals to Australia in the last three world cups, so a very sweet victory.

Very cool that of what is arguably our three major sports of netball, cricket and rugby we are world champions in two of them and moral champions in the third.

Damien Grant writes:

Bridges has two options. He can dance around the prospect of having to sup with Peters, debasing himself and his party for a chance to be humiliated, tethered and degraded for three miserable years.
Bridges will be required to apologise and excuse the behaviour of people he will have no authority over and probably has contempt and loathing for. Sounds great.
Or he can declare that he’d be happy to simply be the member for Tauranga rather than have a possible premiership cheapened by an association with Peters. At a stroke he makes NZ First irrelevant. Nothing more than a right-wing faction of the Labour Party.

I agree with Damien.

I was happy when Winston chose Labour last election as it would have been awful for National to be in coalition with Winston, subject to his every whim.

More importantly it is clear Winston was never serious about going with National. He filed a lawsuit against the then leader and deputy leader the day before the election, and never mentioned it during the negotiations. This is such an act of bad faith, that you could never have a good faith negotiation again.

It is a huge gamble but it also would define Bridges as a leader of courage, honour and integrity. It makes an effective contrast with the incumbent whose power is buttressed by Golriz Ghahraman on her left and Shane Jones on her right.
It would also make him popular. The promise of finally exorcising Peters and his handmaidens from our political process is a powerful campaign promise in itself. 
Bridges will then be free to apply the blowtorch to all members of the coalition with gusto and drive home the point to soft conservative voters than a vote for Winston is a vote for Labour. 

If National rules Winston First out, then indeed a vote for them is a vote for Labour and the Greens to be in Government.

Read these sentencing notes where Fraser Milne got a mere 30 months in jail (could be out in 10 months) for his offending. He should be facing multiple attempted murder charges and a hugely longer sentence in my opinion. His offending was:

• Driving too fast and swerved to avoid the victims’ car
• Did a u-turn, followed them and forced them to stop
• Demanded they pay for any damage to his car and threatened them that he was in a gang
• They drove away. He followed them and tried to cut them off again.
• They stopped. He tried to force the doors open. Hit the car. Swore at them and yelled his pit bull would eat them
• They drove away. He went to some shops where he made racist remarks about the victims (they were NZ Chinese) and spotted them driving past.
• He chased them for 10 minutes of over 140 km/hr
• When they wouldn’t stop, he hit the back end of their car with his, causing their car to flip into the air
• The car landed upside down. It almost slid down a steep bank. Two children were thrown from the car.
• He approached the upside down car and rather than offer assistance continued to yell racial slurs and threaten violence to the father
• All five people in the car had injuries including a skull fracture in the youngest child

How on earth does all that get just 30 months? The Police should have stuck with attempted murder charges. Ramming a car at high speed, especially with children in it, is just despicable.