NZ’s three strikes law is once again undermined by a third striker escaping a penalty of maximum sentence with no parole. Let’s look at the case of Bailey Sanders.

1. 1st strike – knife attack on two members of public in 2014. Got 32 months.
2. 2nd strike – assault on another inmate in 2016. Got five years
3. 3rd strike – wounding with intent a prisoner plus assaulting a guard in 2018.

He got the maximum sentence of 14 years (which is good). But he is 23 years old and already has 46 previous convictions. Does anyone think he will change?

So he got a non parole period of seven years, plus the sentence to be concurrent with current ones.

I guess the only upside is that as he seems determined to keep offending within prison, he probably never will actually get parole. The challenge will be how to keep other prisoners safe from him.

The Indian Weekender reported:

The fact that New Zealand government has so far not issued any public condemnation of the unfortunate killing of 45 Indian troopers in a terror attack by the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) in Jammu and Kashmir is raising a lot of questions on the manner it is treading in its foreign affairs.

The Foreign Affairs Minister finally got something out, after this article appeared, three days after the attack happened.

Either the Minister doesn’t work weekends, or they incorrectly judged the killing of 45 people in India in a terrorist attack as not needing comment.

The international community has strongly condemned the terror attack by the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) in Jammu and Kashmir that killed 45 CRPF personnel, with US President Donald Trump asking Pakistan to “end immediately” the support and safe haven provided to all terrorist groups operating on its soil.
“The US calls on Pakistan to end immediately the support and safe haven provided to all terrorist groups operating on its soil, whose only goal is to sow chaos, violence and terror in the region. This attack only strengthens our resolve to bolster counter-terrorism cooperation and coordination between the US and India,” Trump’s Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said in a statement.
“We express our deep condolences to the victims’ families, the Indian government and the Indian people for the loss of life in this brutal attack,” the statement added.
China’s Foreign Ministry on Friday also denounced the attack, hoping that “relevant regional countries will cooperate to cope with the threat of terrorism and jointly uphold regional peace and stability”.
It added that the “JeM has been included in the UN Security Council terrorism sanctions list and that China will continue to handle the relevant sanctions issue in a constructive and responsible manner”.
Russian President Vladimir Putin, in a message to Prime Minister Narendra Modi strongly condemned the “brutal crime” and said that “the perpetrators and sponsors of the attack, undoubtedly, should be duly punished”.
Putin reiterated Moscow’s “readiness for further strengthening counter-terrorism cooperation with Indian partners”.
The European Union in a statement said that “as a strategic partner of India, the EU reaffirms its full solidarity at such a difficult moment”.
Saudi Arabia also denounced the “cowardly” attack and said it stands with India against terrorism and extremism.
Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland said her country “remains steadfast in its support of the global fight against terrorism,” reaffirming a resolve “to prevent radicalisation and defeat terrorism in all its forms”.
Indonesia and Australia also slammed the strike.

So basically everyone else had condemned it in a timely manner.

However, unfortunately, the NZ government has failed to issue an official response and condemnation of the worst ever terrorist attack on Indian armed forces in the troubled state of Jammu and Kashmir.
While there is little surprise in NZ foreign policy mandarins and mainstream media failing to respond timely and cover the impact of this grave terrorist attack for obvious reasons (for long NZ foreign policy mandarins subscribe to the idea of treating India as a distant power out of their immediate strategic backyard).
However, this diplomatic-lethargy was least expected from the NZ government.
More so coming under Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern who takes enormous pride in kindness and compassion to fellow human beings, it is likely that many sentiments are going to be hurt within the Kiwi-Indian diaspora.

Better late then never I suppose

Marc Thiessen at the WP has some details:

Her document says that funding the Green New Deal requires World War II levels of government spending of between 40 and 50 percent of gross domestic product.
Today, federal spending amounts to 21 percent of GDP, or $4.4 trillion annually. Increasing it to between 40 and 50 percent of GDP would require doubling government expenditures to between $84 and $105 trillion over 10 years (and that’s without factoring in rising GDP). But Warren’s wealth tax would raise just $2.75 trillion over 10 years. And according to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, Ocasio-Cortez’s 70 percent marginal rate might raise at best $189 billion over 10 years, and could actually cost the federal government $63.5 billion in lost revenue by stifling economic growth and encouraging capital flight.
Taxing the rich won’t come close to covering the costs of the Green New Deal, which includes a bunch of socialist policies that have nothing to do with climate change. Manhattan Institute budget expert Brian Riedl has calculated the 10-year costs using liberal and nonpartisan sources. The results are stunning: $32 trillion for a single-payer health care plan; $6.8 trillion for a government jobs guarantee; $2 trillion for education, medical leave, job training and retirement security; and between $5 trillion and $40 trillion to fund universal basic income to support those who are “unwilling” to work. (The final price depends on how “universal” it is.) Grand total? Between $46 and $81 trillion.

So some Democrats are pushing a plan that would cost $40 trillion dollars or more.

I’m often asked if Donald Trump will win the 2020 election. I got it wrong in 2016 so I am more cautious now. I say he shouldn’t be able to win, but you can never underestimate the ability of the Democrats to select the wrong candidate and screw up. So at present I give him a 40% chance of re-election.

If the Democrats keep pushing the Green New Deal, I give him a 90% chance plus they retake the House and get over 60 seats in the Senate.

Audrey Young writes:

Earlier this week Ardern was downplaying the problems with China, saying not much had changed. She reiterated she had an open invitation to go to China and said the last communication she had had in a meeting [presumably with Premier Li Keqiang] they had said they “continued to be ambitious around the visit”.

She would not have been fooled by such platitudes, so goodness knows why she would trot it out this week and expect the public to be fooled into thinking the invitation is in the post.

Because its worked before?

Ardern brought more realism to her statements as evidence of a strain became more obvious, referring to the challenges in the relationship. Peters remained in fantasy land by describing the relationship as “excellent”.

Peters also thinks there will be 1,000 Kiwibuild houses built by July. Also fantasy land.

A useful article on how one can criticise Israel without being anti-Semitic. Their 10 guidelines are:

1. Acknowledge Israel and Israelis exist
2. Jews are not the same as Israel
3. Criticise specific policies
4. Make a fair attempt to understand Israeli policies
5. Speak from a place of accuracy, knowledge and context
6. Work towards solutions, not the destruction of Israel
7. Recognise the conflict is not one-sided
8. Avoid known racist tropes about Jews
9. Recognise Jewish indigeneity to Israel
10. Don’t blame Israel for the world’s ills

What is striking about this list is how a certain MPs in the NZ Parliament don’t come even close to half these points.

The Herald reports:

TVNZ bosses aren’t ruling out looking at buying a stake in Stuff or merging with Radio NZ.
But neither TVNZ board chairwoman Dame Therese Walsh nor TVNZ chief executive Kevin Kenrick talked up either possibility when they appeared before Parliament’s Economic Development, Science and Innovation Committee today.
Australian television network Nine Entertainment and newspaper publisher Fairfax Media announced plans to merge in November last year, and Nine chief executive Hugh Marks has since confirmed that a formal sale process for Stuff would begin in the next few months.
Stuff assets include the stuff.co.nz website, digital platform Neighbourly, and a number of newspapers including The Dominion Post, The Press, and the Sunday Star-Times.

The company, which employs approximately 1000 staff, has been grappling with the declining trajectory of print advertising, with earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation shrinking 27 per cent to $40.5m in the year ended June 2018.
TVNZ delivered a net profit of $5.1m in the year to June 2018, up $3.7m on the previous year.
At the committee hearing, National MP Melissa Lee asked TVNZ bosses if they were interested in buying any of Stuff’s assets.
Kenrick said the market was dynamic, and TVNZ had a keen interest on seeing what will happen.
“What we you have to do is make sure you preserve and maintain options. We have ongoing partnerships with multiple different players,” Kenrick said.
“So we don’t rule anything in. We don’t rule anything out.”

It should be ruled out. We already have a massive imbalance in New Zealand with state owned media. We have TVNZ, Radio NZ, and Maori TV. To have the state also own Stuff would be terrible.

Politico reports:

“The brilliance of McConnell’s campaigns are that they are comprised of a complex orchestra of political instruments brought together for a symphony of absolute destruction,” said Josh Holmes, a McConnell political adviser. “His opponents may hear a note or two before they decide to run but he saves the full composition to ensure it’s the last thing a candidate hears before they enter the political graveyard.”

I love that quote. And we see this in action here:

One of the co-authors of the Green New Deal is slamming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., for announcing he’s bringing the resolution to a vote.
Last week, Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., introduced a sprawling blueprint of an environmental and economic overhaul that has gotten the support of numerous Democrats, including most of the candidates who have announced 2020 presidential runs. …

The hilarious outcome is that Markey has accused McConnell of sabotage by allowing people to vote on the plan he co-sponsored and he is now saying he will vote against his own plan.

A recent biography of McConnell described him as one of the most consequential politics in the history of the United States, who hasn’t been President. Whether you agree with him or not, that is probably true.

Newshub reports:

The first promise Jacinda Ardern made as Labour leader looks to have gone up in smoke.
During her first big public outing as leader during the election, she promised rail for all – including a line from the Auckland waterfront to Dominion Rd to Mount Roskill, all to be completed by 2021.

And …

On Wednesday, Transport Minister Phil Twyford admitted the Government would fail to build light rail down Dominion Rd by 2021. Instead, he only expects work to start on it next year.
However the Government isn’t counting it as a broken promise.
Mr Twyford’s defence is that promises made by Jacinda Ardern as Labour leader are completely different from promises made by Jacinda Ardern as Prime Minister.

So basically their entire manifesto is null and void with that reasoning.

Phil Twyford announced in October 2018:

Minister of Housing and Urban Development Phil Twyford today announced that the ballot will open next week for the first KiwiBuild homes to be built in the Waikato.

The first 10 KiwiBuild homes to be balloted at the Lakeside development in Te Kauwhata are two-bedroom modern standalone homes, all fully landscaped with off-street parking and a home appliance package. They are priced at $480,000 each, well under the KiwiBuild price caps.

Initial works are already underway and construction of these 10 KiwiBuild homes will be completed by Christmas 2019. The ballot opens on Monday 29th October for these first ten homes.

So 108 days ago they opened applications for the ballot for these ten homes. How many applications did they get in 108 days? 200? 100? 50? 20? 10? 5?

It was zero.

Newshub reports:

As for the houses that Minister Twyford was very excited to show off in Te Kauwhata, the number of people interested in those is a big fat zero – no one has entered the ballot.

Zero interest after 108 days. They’d be bankrupt if they were a private sector developer. But they have an unlimited sources of funds from the taxpayer to keep them going.

A few weeks ago there was a horrifying story about Jessie Smollett, who allegedly was the target of a racist and homophobic attack.

Now sadly there are racist and homophobic attacks in the US, and in New Zealand. There was one just this week in New Zealand.

But there was something about the Smollett allegations that didn’t ring true for me from the beginning. It was because they were too “perfect”.

Two guys recognise him, know he is gay, and just happen to have bleach on them and also happen to have a noose on them, to hang around his neck. And of course they are Trump supporters who say this is MAGA country.

Do people really walk around with bleach and a noose just in case they run into a black gay person?

This story on PJ Media details some of the many doubts. For example the area it happened in is a very liberal area. Someone quipped that half the locals are gay or black. Smollett has refused to release full phone record to back up his allegations and there is no video evidence of an attack and he was out of camera coverage for 60 seconds only.

It will be sad if the story is false, because it denigrates those who actually do get attacked for their race or sexuality.

The depth of trouble the New Zealand Government is in has been made clear by this article in a Chinese newspaper. The article will have been approved by the Chinese Government.

During the seven-day Spring Festival holiday which ended on February 10, New Zealand was not ranked in the top 10 overseas tourist destinations on online travel platform lvmama, a spokesperson told the Global Times.  

Some Chinese tourists are considering dumping their plans to travel to New Zealand this year as a way to punish the country.

“Is it a kind of robbery? New Zealand stabbed us in the back but asks for our money? This is double-faced,” said a 30-something Beijing-based worker surnamed Li who identified himself as a patriot. 

Li has saved 15,000 yuan ($2,218.6) for a trip to New Zealand this year, but he plans to cancel the trip and travel to neighboring countries over resentment toward New Zealand’s move. 

What stokes industry insiders’ worries more is Chinese tourists’ personal safety regarding a new law in New Zealand, which enables customs officials to examine electronic devices at the border. The law took effect on October 1, 2018. 

New Zealand is a member of the Five Eyes global cyber-surveillance alliance. The members, led by the US, have all talked about banning Huawei from participating in local 5G network construction, according to media reports. “I cannot tell if the new law is related to Huawei’s case. But if the diplomatic rift escalates, stakes that Chinese visitors will be targets are high,” a worker at a major online travel platform who spoke on condition of anonymity told the Global Times. 

“How warmly a country treats tourists could also affect Chinese citizens’ choices of travel destinations. Bilateral travel exchanges need to be carried out in a good environment,” Xu Xiaolei, manager of marketing at China’s CYTS Tours Holding Co, told the Global Times.  

China is very important to New Zealand’s tourism industry. Last year, 450,000 Chinese visited New Zealand, making China the nation’s second-largest source of international tourists after Australia. 

So this is the Chinese Government saying that they are preparing to reduce tourism to New Zealand.

The Government’s decision to ban Huawei has been seen as an act of economic sabotage against China, so of course they were going to respond. We have banned their most successful company. This is equivalent to a country banning Fonterra from exporting to them.

What makes this even worse is that New Zealand hasn’t gained any benefit from joining the US campaign against Huawei. The US still won’t join TPP. The US won’t do a FTA with NZ. We didn’t even manage to get an exemption from their steel tariffs.

It takes a special level of incompetence to piss off our largest trading partner (whom we do have an FTA with) at the behest of another country, and not even gain anything in return.

But hey I’m sure Winston will sort it all out. Who better to fix the relationship with China that the man who campaigned against us having a FTA with them and built his career on attacking Asian immigration.

One News reports:

A new advertisement by the National Party has been called out online as being sexist towards women.
The video depicts a man simply explaining Labour’s KiwiBuild scheme missing targets, to a woman.
Some people have criticised the ad a “patronising” towards women, outdated and “embarrassingly awkward”.
One Twitter user slammed the ad, describing it as: “Mansplaining, sexist symbolism & fear based marketing. Embarrassingly awkward.”

National will be delighted that woke activists on Twitter are so stupid they managed to get all this free publicity for the advertisement.

From Hansard:

However, at present, there are 172 written questions that have not received a final reply. Many of the replies were due in December, but one was due in May last year. It appears that written questions are not working as they were supposed to as an accountability mechanism, so I intend to award the Opposition 10 additional supplementary questions each day until the end of this sitting block or until all the questions due last year have received their final replies—whichever comes first. I will review the situation again in the next sitting period.

That’s a huge and consequential slap to the Government. Very firm action by the Speaker.

CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Anticipating this issue would come up, my office contacted your office last week to find out how many questions you still had concerns about and was told by your office that you would not supply that information. It’s very difficult for me as the Leader of the House to follow up and ensure that those questions are answered if you will not supply me with that information.
SPEAKER: Just being very directly responsive to the member, I do not regard it as my responsibility to ensure that ministerial offices are well managed. I indicated through my office to the member’s office that there were many Ministers involved—very close to the majority of Ministers involved—and that the warning to get up to date should be a general one rather than directed at the specific individual Ministers.
If Ministers’ record-keeping systems are not good enough to know that they have overdue questions, then I think the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services should do some sort of review of their offices to make them more efficient.

And a big face slap to Chris Hipkins who basically has said that the offices are so dysfunctional they don’t even know which questions are overdue. Considering all questions are online, it should be trivial to find out.

No Right Turn notes:

Ministers playing bullshit games over written questions has been a theme of this government right from the beginning. And they have been repeatedly called up on it by the Speaker. In the process, they make work for themselves and bring parliament and the political process into contempt. But that’s what happens when you have a government of childish, petty control-freaks.

What a very apt description.

Stuff reports:

Up to three quarters of what KiwiBuild adds to housing investment will be offset by lower investment by the private sector, the Reserve Bank warns.
On Thursday morning, Reserve Bank governor Adrian Orr told MPs that there was considerable pressure on the construction industry, which meant that where the government built houses, others which would have been built will be “crowded out” by a shortage of land or labour.
“If they were going to build 100 houses, that means that between 50 and 75 houses elsewhere aren’t built,” Orr told a select committee.
In a statement linked to the monetary policy statement released this week, the central bank gave explicit assumptions about the extent to which it will eat in to the amount of house building which would have happened anyway.

“The construction sector is currently facing capacity constraints, which means that KiwiBuild developments may crowd out other private developments, particularly in the near term,” the Reserve Bank said.
“The bank has assumed that half to three quarters of what KiwiBuild contributes to residential investment will be offset by crowding out of other private investment over the forecast horizon.”
The bank warned that because of the time it takes to get going, the short term addition to the housing market would be virtually nothing.
“In the 2019 fiscal year, the Bank assumes that the net contribution of KiwiBuild to residential investment is almost zero, as the KiwiBuild programme is in its infancy and the construction sector is capacity constrained.”

So the net contribution of Kiwibuild is almost zero. The farce gets stronger.

Stuff reports:

Parliament’s powerful Finance and Expenditure Committee has collapsed at its first meeting with accusations flying between the two major parties over whose fault it is. 
Under Parliament’s strict procedural rules, the entire schedule for the committee has had to be abandoned because a quorum was not obtained.
But why a quorum was not obtained is now the subject of fierce debate, with neither side conceding ground over who was at fault. 
National’s MPs on the select committee maintain the meeting was killed because only “four out of seven” Government MPs showed up on time.

Once again Labour shows a new level of incompetence. There is nothing more basic than getting MPs to turn up on time to select committees. All other Governments have managed it. Excuses such as an MP was sick is just that – an excuse. The whips would have known this in advance and their job is to assign a replacement.

Now, the prime minister has been forced to weigh in and chastise her MPs for failing to show up on time. 
“My expectation is they do their jobs and there are no excuses,” she said. 
“I absolutely have an expectation that MPs fulfil their roles and requirements while they are in this complex.”

I understand this is not the first time – that Government MPs are habitually late.

Aside from more than 20 members of the public who had taken time off work to give evidence and submit on some of the items, Finance Minister Grant Robertson was also scheduled to appear in front of the committee later in the day, as well as Pike River Recovery Agency chief executive Dave Gawn and his officials. 
These meetings are some of the only occasions at which ministers are required to front to MPs to be held accountable for their agencies’ business. 
A quorum might have been obtained had the National MPs stepped back inside the room. But serious constitutional questions have been raised over whether Opposition MPs should outnumber Government MPs on such a powerful committee in anything other than the rarest of circumstances.
Under standing orders, a meeting has to have a quorum and that has to be obtained no later than 10 minutes after the meeting is scheduled to start. After that 10 minute deadline the meeting has to be abandoned, effectively because there is too much business before Parliament that cannot be delayed.

But National made the wrong decision to not assist the Government in getting a quorum. Sure you want to make the Government look incompetent, but you forgot that it stuffs over members of the public who have gone to some time and expense to appear. The submitters interests should have come first.

The public hate this sort of stuff, and the arguing over who is at fault – hence they conclude a pox on both their houses. Labour won’t be defeated because the public care they are late to a select committee. Labour will be defeated because they are not delivering on housing, health and education.

What National would have been smarter to do is use the absence of Government MPs to seize temporary control of the committee and elect one of their own as Chairperson. Another possibility would be to vote to hold an inquiry into something the Government opposes. That would teach the Government a lesson, without dicking over the submitters.

Stuff reports:

“It is totally unsatisfactory to be determining electorate boundaries that can effectively determine who will be the next Government on the basis of guesswork.”
Smith said the 2020 election should be conducted on the basis of the existing boundaries from the 2013 census, and then a new census carried out in 2021 so the following elections could use new boundaries.
He said National was not ruling out “alternative action” if this did not happen but would not elaborate on what this might be. 
The National Party would have the power to effectively torpedo the Representation Commission, or settle the matter in court.

I strongly support this also. A non completion rate of 10% or greater is too high too trust the data for electoral boundaries.

Also holding the next census in 2021 will get back to the traditional pattern of being in a year ending with a 1 or a 6 which the Christchurch earthquakes disrupted. This will help with long-term comparisons.

If the Government refuses to see sense on this, National can prevent the Representation Commission from functioning. The Commission is only quorate so long as both the Government and Opposition nominated members are present. If the opposition nominee refused to attend, then the Commission could not legally make any decisions.

Hopefully it won’t come to that and National and Labour will work out a sensible solution that means everyone has confidence in the boundaries data.

The Herald profiled Agnes Loheni, who replaces Chris Finlayson in Parliament:

It will be a proud moment for Loheni, who grew up in a state house – with up to 15 family members in three bedrooms – on McGehan Close, the “dead end” street that epitomised hopelessness for former party leader Sir John Key.
She went on to graduate with an engineering degree from Auckland University, and had a two-year OE based in London before starting a family business that became a trailblazer in contemporary Pasifika fashion.

From a state house to an engineering degree and then her own business. A great example of National being a party which attracts people who reflect what it means to have equality of opportunity.

“There was roughly a family in each bedroom and always people sleeping in the lounge, because at that time our families were coming from Samoa. It was a hub where we supported each other as they made a new life in New Zealand.
“There were rituals, prayer every night, communal eating, some adults staying at home looking after children while others went to work.
“Looking back, it was one of the sweetest memories for me. It was a very secure, loving home with lots of uncles and aunts, and no shortage of cousins to play with. There wasn’t a lot of money, but an abundance of aspiration.”

Aspiration is so important, and almost the opposite to the politics of victimhood where you are taught not to aspire but to blame others.

“We were just working from a room in the downstairs of our home, and some people came in and saw some of our stuff hanging up, and asked if it was for sale.”
They decided to take a leap and, with a small business grant, opened a small store in Apia. It had 90 dresses on opening day – and they all sold in four days.
“We were excited, but then we panicked because we had an empty shop.”
All four sisters joined the business, which they named Mena after their mother Filomena.
“She’s such a key influence in our lives and the inspiration for it. We were doing the designs and printing the fabric, but she was the expert dressmaker and would say to us, ‘No, you can’t do that dress like that, you have to do it this way.’
“Within five or six years, the downstairs room at our house became like a factory of 20 staff. Women sewing, men printing, buckets of fabric paint everywhere.”
Loheni worked in all facets of the company, including teaching herself how to use software to make digital prints.
She returned to Auckland as the business grew, and today Mena designs are sold in Samoa, Auckland, and online throughout the world.

A great success story.

She joined the National Party because of its values of “enterprise, hard work and personal responsibility”.

Which her life reflects.

As well as running a successful business, she is also a mother to five children ranging from eight to twenty years old.

The Herald reports:

A new national body will take over all of New Zealand’s 110,000 polytechnic students and 140,000 apprentices and industry trainees in a massive shakeup proposed today.
The proposed NZ Institute of Skills and Technology will take over programme design and administration for all campuses of what are now 16 separate polytechnics.

If you’re an optimist then this might reduce costs, bureaucracy and lead to a more unified sector.

If you’re a pessimist it will result in an inflexible centrally controlled system that won’t deliver what students want.

I suspect it will be somewhere inbetween.

The plan is designed to avert a crisis which has seen many polytechnics slide into deficits because of a 19 per cent slump in domestic enrolments between 2010 and 2017, as the buoyant job market lured young people straight into jobs instead of training.

I’m not sure that is a problem. The idea is to provide what young people want. If the job market is so buoyant they move straight into employment, is that a bad thing?

There is no indication in the Cabinet paper or Hipkins’ press release that any of the existing polytechnic campuses would be closed, and the Cabinet paper says “there may be more or fewer main campuses than the current number of ITPs [institutes of technology and polytechnics]”.

Of course there will be fewer.

The Treasury expresses alarm in the paper that decisions are being made “without a clear indication of the likely overall financial implications of the changes proposed, including short-term transition costs and enduring funding changes”.
“We do not think that sufficient analysis has been undertaken of the options for enduring funding system changes proposed for consultation,” the Treasury says.
“We consider that consulting on these funding system changes is likely to create sector expectations about future funding, without Cabinet having oversight of the associated financial implications.”

Doesn’t sound like it will save money!