Labour and Greens want us to run out of gas, having banned future exploration. They think the country can be powered by 100% renewables.

One problem is that many New Zealanders have gas powered heating and cooking. So what would be the cost of doing away with gas?

We now have an answer with this analysis by Castalia for the Gas Industry Company.

They find:

Consumers face higher direct cash costs from switching off the gas network than the BAU. Holding historical energy prices constant, switching off the gas network increases consumer costs by $1 billion over the 25-year forecast period, a 45 percent rise compared to the BAU scenario, as shown in Figure 0.2.

So an extra $1 billion cost to consumers.

At a regional level, switching off the gas network is projected to reduce emissions by 1.2, 0.2, and 2.1 million tonnes CO₂e in Hamilton, Gisborne, and Wellington, respectively. Under the historical energy price scenario, this produces an abatement cost per tonne of CO₂e of $879 overall.

Note the current ETS price is $57, so turning off gas would cost 15 times as much as other ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The Post reports:

A new charter school will be opening in Wellington – one of three new charter schools given the green light by the Government.

Altum Academy will be taking over the site of Wellington’s Cardinal McKeefry Catholic Primary School in Wilton from term one, 2026, said the school’s trust executive director, Jonathan Ayling.

Good to see the site won’t be wasted.

It will be teaching the “classical model” approach, and would be a secular school.

“Classical education is orientated towards the production of virtue and wisdom,” Ayling said.

He said the concepts being discussed weren’t necessarily religious or tied to any specific faith, but reflected values deeper than just transferring knowledge. He noted that the school had signalled a shared Judeo-Christian value basis.

That’s an exciting option, which parents will now have. A focus on virtue and wisdom!

Regardless of your views on whether an Internet based media outlet is a broadcaster or not under The Broadcasting Act, there can be basically no defence of how the BSA has gone about this issue.

I asked the BSA if they had ever asked an Internet based media outlet (such as The Platform or Reality Check Radio) to file an annual return with them, or broadcast a daily message of 15 seconds about the BSA complaints procedure. These are both statutory (ie mandatory) requirements of broadcasters under the Broadcasting Act. They replied (and credit to them – within 24 hours, not the 20 days they had) and said they have not.

This is not defensible. If the BSA thinks these platforms are broadcasters they should have years ago approached them and told them of these requirements. The BSA is basically saying they will define these platforms as broadcasters for the purposes of complaints, but not for other purposes. You can’t pick and choose.

Their “policy” of waiting for a complaint to then decide is a legal nonsense. The Broadcasting Act requires compliance regardless of complaints. Not filing an annual return is a $100,000 fine.

So not only is the BSA on shaky grounds legally, they are on even worse grounds in terms of fairness. The BSA has never reached out to Internet platforms to say we consider you bound by our codes. But now they are saying we may consider a complaint which finds you in breach of them – and we could fine you or order you off the “air”. This is basically entrapment.

If a media outlet knew they were bound by the BSA codes, then they might operate quite differently. But to not tell them in advance you consider them bound by the BSA codes, and then decide in a secret meeting that they are bound and you will consider if they are complaint is again against all natural justice.

Now the leaders of ACT and NZ First came out and made very clear they were appalled by what the BSA is trying to do. But sadly the Minister is not only not appalled, he even seems to be supporting them. Mediawatch reported:

“That’s in the media reform package that went out for consultation… and the government’s yet to make final decisions. But in the meantime the BSA is out there with what it considers is within its current ability to do,” Goldsmith told Mediawatch this week.

“There’s a lot of noise about it at the moment. Of course if you’re in the sector you want to draw attention to yourself and so a lot has been said. I don’t think our democracy is under threat, but it’s an interesting little exercise.”

“I think there’s a very small group of people in that category. They’re within their rights to test that and it may well go before the courts. I’m happy to let that flow through the system and see how it goes.”

So the Minister has said he sees no problem with the BSA taking an Internet media company to court to test things. Never mind that the $100,000 cost of defending this power grab in court would probably bankrupt the media organisation which run on a smell of an oily rag.

And here is where the politics is daft. trust in legacy media keeps dropping. Those on the centre right of politics especially thinks they do not get a fair go from legacy media. Taxpayers fund state broadcasters such as Radio NZ and Maori TV which are overwhelmingly hostile to centre right beliefs. But there has been some light for those on the centre right – the Internet. The Platform, Chris Lynch, RCR etc have found a niche where issues that are taboo for other media can get reported on and discussed. And now we have a government quango, with the apparent support of the Minister, doing their best to destroy them. Because make no mistake bringing them under the BSA would destroy them. They would face scores of complaints every week from activists who hate the fact they exist.

And this is (in my opinion) part of why National is losing support to other parties on the centre right. They simply don’t seem to care. How do you explain to a National Party voter who likes listening to The Platform why they should still vote National instead or NZ First or ACT, when those two parties are saying no to the BSA power grab, and National is a silent accomplice?

National needs to focus on improving the health system, schools, the economy etc to win centre votes. But unless they want to be in a government where they have no List MPs because they lose so much support to ACT and NZ First, they need to not be dismissive of issues like this.

In no way should National be making the BSA issue a major issue they spend a lot of time on. But what they could do is simply have a senior MP or Minister clearly state:

• It is up to Parliament to change the definition of a broadcaster, not the BSA
• That as the BSA has never asked any Internet based media outlet to file annual returns or publicise the BSA complaints procedure, they can’t suddenly declare via a secret decision that such an organisation is in fact a broadcaster

But instead they are giving the green light to the BSA to try and cripple new media organisations.

UPDATE: Good news. I missed it yesterday but it seems the PM was asked about this issue at his post cabinet press conference and three times he said that he thought this was overreach by the BSA. Great to see the PM aware of this issue, and being very clear that he sees it as overreach. I hope the BSA is listening – this now means the PM, Deputy PM and NZ First Leader have all said this is overreach.

It will be interesting to see who Andrew Little appoints as Deputy Mayor. There are broadly three paths open to him – an independent, a Labour Councillor, or a Green Councillor.

If he chooses an independent councillor (they are all centre to centre right) this will be a sign that he wants a unity council. There are ways he can do this, beyond the Deputy Mayor such as committee chairs etc. But that would be a powerful sign that he wants one team on council. The possible candidates are Nicola Young and Diane Calvert. As Young endorsed him while Calvert stood against him, I would say Young is the most logical choice.

If he wants a Labour councillor on the basis he is endorsed by Labour then the two candidates are Ben McNulty and Nureddin Abdurahman. McNulty would be the obvious choice based on his huge majority in Northern Ward, and also his clear political and communication skills. However two white men in charge might offend the woke police.

He could go with a Green councillor which would help him have a 10-6 progressive majority for key votes. The two Councillors who have done a full term or more previously are Laurie Foon and Rebecca Matthews. Both could be challenging. Foon was Tory Whanau’s Deputy Mayor so keeping her on may look like the status quo too much. However Matthews has very bad relationships with many in Labour (she used to be Labour) and it is hard to see Little boring up goodwill on her.

So the three most likely are Young, McNulty and Foon with Calvert and Abdurahman possibilities.

Radio NZ reports:

Wellington’s new Mayor says something has “gone seriously wrong” with council management processes that have allowed project costs to spiral out of control. …

Little said he would not freeze current initiatives – such as the Town Hall refurbishment – but projects needed to be reviewed and managed differently to protect ratepayers from ballooning costs.

In October 2023, councillors voted to continue work on the Town Hall despite projected costs reaching up to $329 million in the years following it’s closure in 2013 due to earthquake concerns.

“It’s making sure that the review processes – that we’ve got during the course of a project – are such that if we get to the point where you say ‘it’s a choice between writing off $50m spent or running the risk of another $200m’ actually we’re better off to write off the $50m and either start again or do something different” Little said.

It is good to see Little reject the sunk cost fallacy which is you must keep spending on a project whose costs have blown out, because of how much you have already spent. Let’s see if he can deliver though.

Last month I blogged on what Andrew was promising, and how we could judge if he has delivered. The summary is:

• Reducing the planned rates increase for next year from 12% to under 10%
• Reducing the planned rates increases for out years from 7% to under 5%
• Reducing the median time for a building consent from 10 days
• Increasing funding for community facilities in the LTP from $60.5m
• Improving the results of the annual residents survey from 23% who think WCC makes decisions in the best interests of the city

I hope he can achieve these.

Labour’s co called Future Fund is nothing like Singapore’s Temasek Holdings.

There are decent pros and cons towards a country having an investment fund. We already have one – the NZ Super Fund. Their job is to get the best returns on their assets.

Labour is proposing basically a giant corporate welfare fund, which can will either lend money to, or invest in NZ companies. Beyond doubt, they will pick favoured industries for the fund. So it will just be another version of the corporate welfare we already have.

Temasek Holdings invests around the world. It has 14 global offices from China to Mexico to the UK to France etc. Only around 27% of its investments are in Singapore.

The Government currently gets around $1.5 billion a year in dividends from various companies. These are currently used to fund health, education, police etc. Labour is promising to take that $1.5 billion and instead stick it in a corporate welfare fund. So they will need to either increases taxes by $1.5 billion a year, or borrow more for health, education, police etc.

Andrea Vance reports:

The Taxpayers’ Union-Curia Market Research poll of 1000 adults, conducted in early October, found 14% agreed or strongly agreed with the statement: “New Zealanders may have to resort to violence in order to get the country back on track.”

This is higher than I hoped for. It is a small minority, but not a tiny minority. However better than the US where almost 30% agree with a nearly identical question.

Supporters of Te Pāti Māori were the most likely to endorse the idea, with 26% agreeing or strongly agreeing.

Among ACT supporters, 20% agreed, while support fell to 16% among Labour, 13% among National, 10% for New Zealand First and 8% among Green voters.

The breakdown by party is interesting, but also small sample sizes so should be taken with caution. For example the MOE for TPM at around 13%.

Having said that, the constant violent imagery and rhetoric by TPM leaders makes their result not particularly surprising.

The poll also found a strong undercurrent of social tolerance: 80% of New Zealanders said they have friends with different political views, a result consistent across most parties.

This is almost identical levels to the same question in the US. Personally I think 80% is a bit low.

Just over half (53%) of respondents agreed that all immigrants who came to New Zealand illegally should be deported.

What I found interesting is that there is greater support in NZ for deporting all illegal immigrants, than there is in the US.

Stats NZ reports:

Aotearoa New Zealand’s consumers price index (CPI) increased 3.0 percent in the 12 months to the September 2025 quarter, according to figures released by Stats NZ today. …

Local authority rates and payments, up 8.8 percent, was the largest upwards contributor to the quarterly rise (28 percent of the 1.0 percent quarterly rise).  

The Government should implement their rates cap policy as a matter of urgency.

The left and many media claim that large rates increases were necessary due to under-investment in core infrastructure such as water. Now while it is true more needs to be spent on water infrastructure, they overlook that there is a huge amount of spending on discretionary and wasteful stuff.

Here’s the list I have been keeping, just for Wellington City.

1. $593 million on social housing capital (most councils don’t do social housing)
2. $510 million for a sludge minimisation facility at Moa Point
3. $330 million on rebuilding the town hall so we have another music venue
4. $325 million on social housing operational (most councils don’t do social housing)
5. $240 million on Civic Square 
6. $236 million on food recycling (will cost $19,000 per tonne of greenhouse gas emissions reduction)
7. $189 million on Te Matapihi library (the three existing CBD libraries are great)
8. $180 million on the Takina convention centre (which somewhat is managing to lose money on every exhibition it hosts)
9. $160 million on cycleways
10. $139 million on removing cars and redeveloping the Golden Mile
11. $55 million to upgrade destroy Thorndon Quay
12. $42 million on renovating St James Theatre
13. $32 million to Reading Cinemas (attempted but failed)
14. $13 million on a carpark building

That is a staggering $3 billion, which equates to around $38,000 per household.

Now most councils aren’t quite as fiscally laxative as Wellington, but all of them will have large expensive non-core projects. Rates increases are a choice, not a necessity.

The Government announced:

The Government is exploring ways to free up capital locked in its investment in Chorus, to redirect into capital projects of more use to New Zealanders.

National Infrastructure Funding and Financing (NIFFCo) will investigate the feasibility of selling the debt and equity securities it holds in Chorus.

These debt and equity securities were purchased as the Crown’s funding contribution to the delivery of the Ultra-Fast Broadband initiative, that was completed in 2022. 

Minister of Finance Nicola Willis says that with the completion of the Ultra-Fast Broadband initiative there is no longer a policy reason for the Crown to own these securities.

Absolutely not. I’m a shareholder in Chorus, as I decided to buy some shares. But I don’t want the Government to be having capital locked up in commercial companies, instead of schools and hospitals etc.

A great example of media bias in this The Post story about the failure of Tory Whanau to get re-elected to Council. This is meant to be a news story, not a column. But look at how they mix opinion and fact.

But Whanau’s personal problems were overshadowed by the bigger problems she inherited as mayor, including a massive infrastructure deficit thanks to years of neglect by previous councils.

The part in bold is an opinion, yet it is expressed as an uncontested fact. This is an example of why media trust is disappearing.

But she also inherited a CBD that was in desperate need of investment

Again, that is an opinion, presented as a fact.

This would be fine in an opinion column, but not fine in a so called news story.

Like many, I had never heard of Bari Weiss before 2020. She was employed for probably around $100,000 a year as an op-ed staff editor. She resigned after alleged bullying by other journalists because of her views.

She went to Substack and set up a newsletter which morphed into The Free Press. It grew to around one million subscribers including 150,000 paid subscribers. They grew to 25 staff, and she just sold it to Paramount for $150 million. This shows that there is a very good commercial model for quality journalism. I am one of those who pay to subscribe. They have such fascinating and well researched stories.

She has also been appointed as Editor-in-chief of CBS News , which will no doubt go down with some of their journalists as well as a bbq at a vegan retreat.

Judith Collins released:

We regret even more that the strike appears to be politically motivated by the unions.

What else could possibly explain that in early October, when we were trying to negotiate with the secondary teachers’ union, the number one item on their agenda for a meeting with Education Minister Erica Stanford was Palestine.

Palestine.  Not terms and conditions. Not student achievement. Not the new curriculum. Palestine. That’s not what students or parents should expect.

I wish I could say I’m surprised, but I’m not.

CNN reports:

Top Virginia Democrats have sharply criticized attorney general nominee Jay Jones but are stopping short of calling on him to leave the race after newly revealed text messages showed he suggested that a colleague be shot.

Gubernatorial nominee Abigail Spanberger and lieutenant governor nominee Ghazala Hashmi called Jones’ texts inexcusable, as did Virginia’s two Democratic senators.

Don’t you love the double speak – saying his texts were inexcusable, yet they still think he would suitable to be Attorney-General!

Let’s look at what he texted:

“Three people, two bullets. Gilbert, hitler, and pol pot. Gilbert gets two bullets to the head,” the text reads in part, referring to Gilbert and the two dictators.

Actually that part isn’t that bad. This is a sort of meme/joke which you hear a lot. Normally it is Hitler, Stalin and someone else – a bad taste way of saying how much you dislike someone.

What is more disqualifying is saying about his opponent:

• “I will go to their funerals to piss on their graves”
• Hoped their children would die so they feel pain personally, so they move on policy
• Said the parents are evil and breeding little fascists

It is one think to do a bad taste meme. But he seriously argues for the death of children to teach the parents a lesson. The fact the Democrats won’t unendorse him is a mistake, and hopefully one the voters will punish them for.

My view on the politics of US shutdowns is simple – the side that makes demands, and votes against a clean continuing resolution tends to eventually be blamed for it, and backs down.

The Republicans use to demand less spending or they would shut the Government down. That at least made some political sense.

The Democrats policy is to demand more spending, or they shut the Government down. Good luck with that one.

An interesting research note from Eric Crampton and at the NZ Initiative on the benefits of devolution on development. It details how Canadian First Nations have transformed their economic fortunes and have built thousands of new homes after gaining powers for planning, zoning, tax, and infrastructure finance.

A couple of examples:

The Squamish Nation’s 6,000-apartment development in downtown Vancouver is helping to solve the city’s housing crisis on its own terms.

An hour away from Vancouver, near Chilliwack, the Ch’íyáqtel (Tzeachten), has built over 1,600 homes. It has reversed its economic position from 90% reliance on government funding to 90% own-source revenue.

Crampton concludes:

The Initiative’s report argues that this incremental, opt-in approach could provide a practical path to realising a form of tino rangatiratanga, through local devolution, while delivering real benefits for all New Zealanders.

This is a form of tino rangatiratanga we should all support – allowing iwi to develop their own rules for their own land.

An interesting poll of Jewish Americans that shows they have a large variety of views on Israel and the Middle East. They are nota homogenous bloc. Key findings are:

• 61% say Israel has committed war crimes
• 68% disapprove of the Netanyahu Government
• 94% say Hamas has committed war crimes
• 46% aprove and 48% disapprove of Israel’s actions in Gaza
• 47% say US support for Israel is at the right level, 32% say it is too supportive and 20% not supportive enough
• 39% say Israel has committed genocide in Gaza
• 56% are emotionally attached to Israel
• 80% are concerned about civilian deaths in Gaza
• In terms of who is responsible for the war continuing, 91% say Hamas, 86% Netanyahu and 80% Israel
• 69% say Israel is not doing enough to allow food into Gaza
• 59% believe a way can be found for Israel and Palestine to co-exist peacefully
• 62% want Gaza governed by an elected Government, only 4% say Hamas would be acceptable

The Herald reports:

The Green Party’s director of communications, Louis Day, has resigned just weeks after its now-former chief of staff, Eliza Prestidge-Oldfield, made the same decision.

My first reaction to this story was this is not significant, as a year out from an election is the normal time political staff will leave, or commit through to the election.

But then I read more closely.

In an email to journalists, Day said that after taking time off over the parliamentary recess, he felt now was the right time to step away.

“I felt that now was the right time for me to move on from Parliament and take a bit of a break before finding a new challenge for my career.

If someone is leaving with no job to go to, this suggests things are not great.

According to his LinkedIn, Day started his director of communications role in June 2024 after working as a senior press secretary, press secretary and research and policy adviser.

This is also interesting – he was promoted just last year. Again a bit unusual to leave so soon after being promoted.

Konstantin Kisin writes:

The Trump plan is a roadmap to peace which delivers every single anti-war and pro-peace objective: an immediate end to the war, Israeli withdrawal, the release of over 2,000 Palestinian detainees in exchange for just 20 remaining living Israeli hostages, delivery of aid, re-opening of the Rafah crossing with Egypt, a non-Israeli and non-Hamas administration of Gaza, an economic development package, a commitment against the displacement of Palestinians, no annexation, no occupation and US-mediated talks between Israel and the Palestinians to achieve “peaceful and prosperous co-existence”.

To my complete lack of surprise, however, many of the most prominent campaigners against “genocide” who have graced our airwaves for the last 2 years have either stayed silent or openly called for Hamas to reject the deal.

I never heard John Minto demanding Hamas accept it.