Very sad news. Rob was one of the smartest and nicest guys you could meet. He started in the press gallery around the time I started at Parliament so I have known him for over 20 years.

He was one of the most policy focused and wonkish journalists around. That is why he was always so good to talk to and deal with. He focused on what was important, rather than the sound byte of the day.

He was only in his 50s, so has left us at far too young an age.

Rob was one of those guys who I doubt you can find someone to say a bad word about. His colleagues, MPs and staffers all liked and respected him.

He will be greatly missed.

Mike Hosking writes:

In the most open honest and transparent Government we have ever seen, just where are the relevant operators to shed light on exactly what’s happened to Barclay and presumably a shed-load of taxpayers’ money, our money?
Was he paid to do nothing? Was he paid out? Why did he quit? Was he pushed? If so, why was he pushed? Why after such a spectacularly short period of time do we not have a boss of the biggest policy the Government has? Given it’s public money, why the silence? Where is the accountability?
One of two things happened, either he didn’t like it, didn’t want it, and couldn’t bail fast enough. Or he wasn’t liked, wasn’t competent, didn’t do the job, and they wanted him out.

Losing your CEO after four months is highly unusual. The public pay the bills so should know what happened.

Here’s the net approval rating of each US President at the two year mark (which occurred this week for Trump). They have a strong correlation to re-election but not absolute. For example Bush 41 went on to lose and Reagan to win. But still very important.

1. Bush 41 +71%
2. Kennedy +56%
3. Eisenhower +53%
4. Truman +40%
5. Johnson +39%
6. Bush 43 +23%
7. Nixon +16%
8. Obama +8%
9. Ford +5%
10. Clinton +2%
11. Carter +2%
12. Reagan -17%
13. Trump -22%

The Herald reports:

A hard, no-deal Brexit could be damaging for New Zealand business, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has acknowledged.
Speaking to reporters in London ahead of a meeting with British Prime Minister Theresa May, Ardern agreed that if Britain left the European Union on March 29, which would see it exit with no deal in place, it could “absolutely” be damaging for New Zealand business.
“My job is to highlight and focus on the best interests of New Zealand business … and there’s no question that a no-deal situation would be very damaging and very difficult.”

So Ardern says a no-deal Brexit is a disaster and bad for NZ businesses. I’m not so sure about that incidentially. It would be bad for UK businesses, but if the UK loses preferential access to the EU, then in fact they are more likely to want to import from New Zealand.

But anyway the main thing is our Prime Minister is saying a no deal Brexit is very very bad. So what does our Foreign Minister say:

When asked if he believed New Zealand could go back to a relationship with Britain before the European union was introduced, Peters was optimistic it may actually benefit Kiwi farmers if that did happen.
“I saw opportunities for New Zealand farmers a few years in the farming area because of a consequence of Brexit. The real issue is the outcome was always going to be a hard Brexit, and a soft negotiating one.”

So Winston says hard Brexit will be good, the exact opposite of what the PM says.

Now normally two politicians disagreeing is not a big thing. But time and time again we see the PM and the Foreign Minister saying totally different things on foreign policy – and that is bad.

Jami-Lee Ross writes:

Leaving bitterness and hatred behind
The last time I actively took part in public debate, over three months ago, I found myself at the apex of a mental health crisis that became a life and death situation. My absence from Parliament and the media since then has understandably raised questions. I hope to now answer some of them.
I’ve been to hell and back. I almost lost everything, including my own life. I just can’t be driven by hatred anymore, or the pursuit of getting even with Simon Bridges, Paula Bennett or anyone else in the National Party. Life is too short for that. My time and energy needs to be focussed on doing everything I can for my family, my constituents and my country.
If I could go back in time, my biggest wish is that I could have spared Lucy from this painful experience. She never deserved any of this, and politics is always harder on those loved ones in the background, than on the MPs themselves.
I can’t spare Lucy that pain or take back any hurt I have caused. But what I can do is dedicate myself for however long I have left in public life to making those around me proud of the good work that I can, and will, do.

I wish Jami-Lee well in his focus on doing good work in public life.

David Cormack writes:

We’re getting screwed. We’re getting screwed and it’s dressed up as convenient and fitting in with our lifestyle. We’re getting screwed and it’s so that those with power and money can entrench their power and money while at the same time reduce protections, stability and security for those actually doing the work.
It’s called the “gig economy”, a name to make it sound cool and accessible. “Hey man, want to work for yourself? You don’t have to answer to the man anymore! You just work when you want to and don’t when you don’t.”
Except you also get paid less, you have no worker safety-nets and the workers are doing more and more work for somebody else who does very little but still takes ridiculous amounts of money.

The world’s largest taxi company is Uber. It owns no vehicles. The largest hotel chain is Airbnb, it has no hotels. Largest retailer? Alibaba. It has no stock. Despite these companies owning very little of anything tangible they receive inconceivable amounts of revenue. While the people who do the work – the Uber driver, the Airbnb host – those people are seldom able to live on just that income alone.
There are websites where I can put up a piece of work that I want done and then individuals “bid” on that work, offering me that piece of work for a fixed cost. All this does is create a race to the bottom in terms of what people get paid.
Nearly every service in the “gig economy” offers nothing more than what already exists, but allows some Silicon Valley jerk to clip the ticket while taking zero responsibility.

This is such a misunderstanding of the gig economy, I can’t let it pass.

Let’s look at some of these companies or sites that Cormack sees as offering nothing more than what existed. We’ll look at Uber, Airbnb, Trade Me (our Alibaba) and Builders Crack.

Uber. Customer service before Uber was crap. You couldn’t call a cab through an app. You had no idea if the cab was actually coming or not. You didn’t know which cab was picking you up. You had no idea of the fare. You had no idea of when it would arrive. You had to wait for a call to be answered and hope they got the address right.

Uber improved the customer experience massively. That is why tens of millions use it. Not because it is cheaper. But because it is better. And you get better drivers also as Uber allows you to effortlessly give feedback.

But Uber wasn’t just better for customers. It allowed hundreds of thousands of people to start making money by driving passengers about. In most cities or countries you had to pay shitloads of money to become a taxi driver and you had to work the hours set by a taxi company in the area they assign you to etc. Uber allowed people to earn revenue from their car whether it would be 5 hours a week or 50.

Now AirBnB. Finding a holiday home to stay at previously was a nightmare. You’d have to go to four different websites and search them all. Each site had different search features and criteria. Worse of all most of them didn’t tell you if a place was available so you had to fire off dozens of e-mails. And you couldn’t pay a deposit through them, so couldn’t get an immediate confirmed booking.

AirBnB changed that. They were so successful everyone listed with them. They provided you with much better info on the holiday homes but best of all allowed you to see dates they could be booked and book it online. No more dozens of e-mails. And you could set criteria such as a room in a house or a whole house to yourself.

And for house owners, it has been great also. I stayed at an AirBnB last weekend. It has in fact been a holiday home for rent since 1977. The current owner has owned it for 20 years. I asked if he listed on other sites. He said no. He found the quality of “tenants” through Air BnB much better because of course both owner and tenant can give feedback for ratings which incentivises both sides.

Now Trade Me, our Alibaba. Do I even need to argue it has added value. Who doesn’t use it to buy and sell stuff. We got so many great second hand baby clothes through it. It has saved us thousand of dollars, and also allowed us to easily sell stuff we no longer want.

And Dave Cormack also complained about sites where you can put up work to be done, and people bid to do it. Well one such site is Builders Crack. You describe the job you need doing, and builders tender to do it. You may go with the cheapest, or like me, you also look at their ratings for quality etc. Where once choosing a builder was near blind luck or work of mouth, you can now easily see customer satisfaction and get a reasonable price.

And the builders seem to like it also. For many it is a great source of new customers, who become repeat customers if they do a good job.

Historically you could get a job that would pay you a salary so you have the security of knowing how much you would get every fortnight or month, and that you’d continue to get paid if you fell ill, or wanted a holiday.

And this is Cormack’s real problem with the gig economy. It’s different to how things have been done the last 100 years. But he ignores the massive benefits to both customers and “suppliers” from the gig economy. It has allowed people to succeed, to earn more money, to grow their business, to earn more money.

Sure it doesn’t work for everyone, but painting companies such as Trade Me, Uber and AirBnB as offering nothing beyond what traditionally existed is about as wrong as you can get.

Stuff reports:

New Zealanders aren’t taking short-term jobs because it’s not worth their time to do so, workers’ advocate say.
It was reported last week that there is a shortage of people to plant the trees required by the Government’s one billion trees by 2028 campaign.
Pay rates in the North Island are up to 60c a tree, or up to $400 a day if workers plant a tree a minute over 10 hours.

$400 a day is $2,000 a week or $100,000 a year. Yet they can’t find workers.

Worker advocate Chloe King said work such as the tree-planting roles often required people to shift to a rural location, uprooting their lives in the process.

Better to be in Auckland on the dole than earning $2,000 a week in a rural area eh.

“To make the $400 a day you’d have to plant 83 trees an hour over an eight-our work day, without taking a break, to make this kind of cash. I’ve spoken with seasoned tree-planters who say this would be nearly impossible as the work is back-breaking, especially in rugged terrain and varying temperatures and weather conditions.

Sure that may be hard to do. But let’s say they plant 60 an hour. They still earn $1,500 a week.

Radically different views here. The Greens:

The Green Party is pushing for the Government to make police pursuit policy more restrictive following the deaths of three teenagers fleeing the police earlier this week.
Green MP Gareth Hughes said he has contacted Police Minister Stuart Nash to make his party’s wishes clear.
Hughes hoped that a new report from the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) on police pursuits, due out in February, will stir a conversation around police chase policy.
“No pursuit is worth the deaths of innocent bystanders or the potential offenders. Things just aren’t working and current policies are making it worse,” Hughes said.

So the Greens want a policy where anyone who wants to escape the Police can do so, so long as they are willing to speed.

And by letting all the offenders escape, how many more victims get created by their ability to carry on? They themselves may kill innocent people by being able to carry on driving dangerously.

NZ First takes a very different view. Here’s Darroch Ball:

We need to stop the “police blame game” when it comes to the rise in fleeing driver incidents and related deaths on our roads.  
We need to stop focusing on police pursuits as being the cause of the problem and instead look at the individuals whose actions create the need for the pursuit in the first place.
The data shows us police have been abandoning more and more pursuits, but the number of those who choose to flee from police has continued to climb.
Over the past decade, the number of drivers who fled from police on our roads has almost doubled from about 2000 in 2009, to about 4000 when the final official count for 2018 is published. That is an alarming increase.  

Some useful actual data. So the results of the Police changing their policy to restrict pursuits has led to more drivers fleeing the Police. This is no surprise.

Not only do the total number of incidents show an enormous increase over the past decade, the number of “police abandonments” has dramatically increased too.
In 2009, the proportion of car chases abandoned by police was about 25 per cent. In 2018, it was nearly 60 per cent.
Over that same period, those drivers have caused more than 400 deaths or serious injuries on our roads. 

The offenders know that the more dangerously they drive, the more likely it is they will get away and face no consequences.

Fleeing drivers now understand that all they have to do is immediately begin to drive dangerously – wrong side of the road, excessive speed, putting the public in danger – and the pursuing police officer must abandon the pursuit.
The greater danger the drivers then place on the public and themselves, and the more crashes and deaths we see. It is a perfect storm.

Good to see some common sense from NZ First.

There also needs to be harsher penalties for the “failure to stop” charge, including mandatory community service. Additionally, there needs to be a separate offence of “failure to stop while driving in a dangerous or reckless manner”, which comes with much harsher penalties than what is currently in the law – including prison time.
Fleeing drivers need to be held to account for the danger they present to both police and the public.
They think they can just drive erratically and get away with it.
It’s a problem that is adding to the death toll on our roads and needs addressing urgently.

I look forward to NZ First introducing such a law change. If National back it, it can get passed.

Max Christoffersen writes:

There are few things more insulting than the platitudes used by elected councillors when it comes time to hit the hustings.
And so it has begun already. It’s local body election year and those seeking another turn at the ratepayer trough are lining up for the October bun fight.
Hamilton has its first candidate out the gate with Councillor Angela O’Leary confirming a run for mayor.
It’s been obvious to anyone watching, O’Leary has been posturing and posing as the mayor in waiting since the middle of last year. The social media grandstanding and platitudes in the chamber have been thick in the air while O’Leary enjoys posing as the people’s champion.

There can be few more disturbing sights than sitting councillors positioning themselves as the solution for the very problems they were in part responsible for creating.
And so it is with O’Leary. No-one should be under any illusion Hamilton’s fiscal and social problems of today have been crafted by the councils of the past and O’Leary was present for all of it.

That’s a pretty brutal take down.

The V8s is council’s smoking gun of institutional and council bungling and O’Leary was there for crucial decisions, the Waikato Times reporting, “after the 2007 elections the (V8) subcommittee came under the chairmanship of Maria Westphal and with Kay Gregory, Angela O’Leary and Mr Redman, continued to make crucial contract spending decisions”.
This is not a track record of sound financial governance that lends confidence to any aspirations O’Leary may have for city mayor.

Blunt.

If elected it will be O’Leary’s fifth term and she represents all that is wrong with local body politics. She is a career politician with little to show for more than a decade in Hamilton City Council chambers.
She now believes she has the answers to the city’s woes she has been powerless to implement over the past decade. It is why there should be a limit to three terms for elected representatives. In time councillors become jaded and subject to group think and round-the-table point scoring.

I support term limits but nine years is a little too short. I think 15 to 18 years would do.

Stuff reports:

Businesses caught handing out plastic bags to customers after July 1 could face six-figure fines.
The Government announced in August plans to phase out single-use plastic shopping bags, later opting for a ban after feedback that included 9000 submissions.
Ministry for the Environment documents confirm rule-breakers could be fined up to $100,000, depending on the seriousness of the offence.  

Only a $100,000 fine? No jail time? Surely giving a shopper a bag to hold their groceries in merits prison time. I mean this is a heinous crime.

At home we have almost run out of the plastic bags we used to get the shopping in, which we of course use as bin liners. So in a few weeks we’ll have to start buying bin liners.

Kiwiblog regulars will be sad, as I was, to hear the news that Flipper passed away today. He recently had his 80th birthday.

I will miss his comments here, and his regular e-mails sharing his views on issues of the day.

Stuff reports:

The text message high profile personality Richie Hardcore sent the Prime Minister concerning the Karel Sroubek case has been released.
The text, released to Stuff under the Official Information Act, confirms that Hardcore’s message was made in gratitude.
On October 30, after the decision to cancel Sroubek’s deportation was made public, Hardcore wrote: “Myself and my friends and the community wanted to pass on their respects and praise for the decision about Jan Antolik, Karoul Sroubek, he’s made a bunch of really bad choices but he’s a good guy deep down, so thank you to Ian and yourself for giving him another chance.”

Yeah a really good guy deep down. Heart of gold.

National Immigration spokesman Michael Woodhouse said the release raised “serious questions”.
 “Why was Sroubek’s main supporter texting her directly to pass on his ‘respect and praise’ over the decision to allow Sroubek to stay in New Zealand in spite of Sroubek’s criminal history and the fact he came here on a false passport?” Woodhouse said.
“Why was one of Sroubek’s fellow inmates – Alex Swney – texting and emailing the Prime Minister information on the case, which has only now been revealed in spite of months of questioning? And what was that information and what is her relationship with Mr Swney?”

This explains why ILG made the decision he did. Not that these messages influence him, but that some Labour politician live in a bubble world where giving residency to convicted drug dealers has all your friends praising you for being wise and compassionate.

Then they discover their friends are not that representative of New Zealand.

Whale Oil blogs:

In late October Cam had to go to hospital by ambulance not once but twice. After being discharged from his first stay in hospital he had to be readmitted due to complications. Cam suffered a serious stroke that left him partially paralysed down his right side and totally paralysed in his right arm including his hand and fingers as well as severe impairment in higher order functioning and moderate speech impairment. Prior to this event Cam was perfectly fit and healthy with no predisposing stroke risk factors. Doctors have concluded that the cause of the stroke was entirely due to stress.

Off memory Cam is being sued by three different people or groups. A collection of public health activists in one, Matt Blomfield in another and Colin Craig in a third. One can only imagine the stress that causes.

Now that more than two months have passed, we have decided it is time to let you, our loyal audience, know what has been going on behind the scenes. There will be no other public announcement or comment regarding Cam’s health other than to say that he is approaching his recovery with typical determination (some would say obsession) and a never-give-up attitude.
Progress is being made, but it is very long and very hard. Cam cannot concentrate, read or take phone calls for more than ten or fifteen minutes a day. He cannot cope with loud noises, background noises or being interrupted and he certainly does not have the ability to form complex thought structures. The vision in Cam’s right eye has also been affected.
On the day he was discharged from hospital Cam was presented with the results of a nerve impulse conduction test performed on his right arm which said there was exactly zero nerve impulse conduction detected by electrodes they had attached to that arm. That test is prognostic of long term outcomes. Obviously, zero nerve impulse conduction means zero movement.

Cam is absolutely determined to battle on. He is one the most determined guys I know. But this is a real battle.

Please help us to help Cam with his recovery by supporting our efforts to minimise further stress which could prove fatal to him. You could do this by donating to his legal fighting fund, buying a subscription to Whaleoil, upgrading your existing subscription, or by buying lots of lovely restaurant quality meat from The Whale Meat Company.
Legal fund details:
Account Number: 12-3084-0009523-50 
SOCIAL MEDIA CONSULTANTS LIMITED

I’ve just donated and hope others will also.

The Herald reports:

New Zealand’s human rights record – including the high rate of family violence and a disparity in health outcomes for Maori versus non-Maori – will come under scrutiny from the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
Justice Minister Andrew Little will lead a delegation to New Zealand’s universal periodic review at the council, which will take place on January 21.
“Generally speaking, our human rights record is a good one,” Little told the Herald.
“It’s important for New Zealand and for its reputation around the world that we maintain that reputation and continue to do the right thing.

“We’re not perfect. We won’t be perfect. But we should continue to strive to do the best we can.”
The council will consider a national report on New Zealand’s record, a compilation of UN information, and a report from civil society institutions such as the NZ Law Society, the Chief Ombudsman and Amnesty International.

These sessions are a hilarious farce as representatives from other countries tut tut us on stuff such as prisoners not getting the vote, and the NZ hasn’t managed to abolish domestic violence etc.

Here’s some of the countries on the UN Human Rights Council who will be telling us how we have to do better on human rights:

• Egypt where protests are banned and regime opponents arrested and tortured
• South Africa, where they are threatening to confiscate farms without compensation
• China, well need one comment
• Saudi Arabia, where women are second class citizens
• Cuba a one party state with no free press
• Congo where security forces kill, torture and rape
• Nigeria where politicians hire gangs to rig elections and you can go to jail simply for associating with a gay person
• Pakistan the home of honour killings of girls
• Eritrea a one party state with no free press

Stacey Kirk writes:

In a lineup where the first iteration only just managed to tick the box of adequate female representation, Ardern has to replace one woman who was arguably there to fill a quota in the first place – as incompetent as Clare Curran proved to be.
She also faces complications with sacked Meka Whaitiri, who is widely acknowledged to have bruised a staffer, yet is still fixing for a ministerial return. ‘Fat chance’ would be the appropriate response, but with the apparent support of the Māori caucus it’s an added layer of complexity at the least. 
In a pool of 14 potential women that could be brought to or near the Cabinet table, only three have been in parliament for more than a term. Poto Williams, Ruth Dyson and Louisa Wall. 

If Labour wasn’t obsessed with quotas, and the promotions were on merit, it would be very easy.

There is once vacancy in Cabinet. You look at who has been the best performing Labour Minister outside Cabinet. It is clearly Kris Faafoi. So on competence and ability he should move into Cabinet.

There is also a vacancy outside Cabinet. If you look at the next rank down you have a Parliamentary Under-Secretary in Michael Wood who is clearly capable of being a Minister.

So on ability and competence the two promotions should be Faafoi and Wood. But they have a problem. They have penises.

The Herald reports:

Auckland must dump the ideology of a compact city and spread out and grow to make housing affordable, says Auckland councillor Greg Sayers.

“Auckland should spread out predominantly to the south where there is a lot of suitable land,” Sayers says in a self-published book, How to Fix Auckland’s Housing Crisis.

The Rodney councillor joins other right-leaning advocates who believe the solution to the city’s housing crisis is to abolish the rural-urban boundary that controls land supply for housing, freeing up planning rules to make it easier for developers and funding infrastructure through user-pays.

It is not just right leaning advocates who say this. Phil Twyford campaigned on abolishing it. But to date I’ve not seen any legislation to do this. He should make it a priority.

The solutions in the book, he said, are essential to solving Auckland’s rapidly growing wealth inequality and poverty issues, dealing with homelessness, eliminating diseases associated with overcrowding and reversing house prices from being the ninth most unaffordable in the world.
“It is morally wrong that many of our next generation of youth have given up any sense of hope of ever becoming homeowners,” Sayers said.
When the Herald approached Mayor Phil Goff for comment, a spokesman said he had not seen or read the book yet.
For information about the book go to: www.gregsayers.co.nz

The Herald reports:

Labour MP and former police union boss Greg O’Connor has been hit with a $150 fine and 20 demerit points after a member of the public photographed him driving on the wrong side of the road.
It is embarrassing for O’Connor, who was the longest-serving president of the Police Association before he became the MP for Ohariu in 2017.
A member of the public reported O’Connor’s car to police as it travelled through Central Otago on Wednesday last week.
Police failed to locate O’Connor’s vehicle that night, but have since spoken to O’Connor.

“Following further inquiries, the driver of a vehicle which was reported to police on 9 January on SH6 near Queenstown will be issued with an infringement notice for ‘failing to keep left’,” a spokesperson for police said.
“The penalty is a $150 fine and 20 demerit points. Police would like to thank any member of the public who helps us keep our roads safe.”
Last week O’Connor said he had no memory of driving in a way that would warrant police attention, and he repeated that when contacted by the Herald yesterday.
But he had been shown photographs of him crossing the centreline.

I don’t think the infringement is a big thing. Few of us drive perfectly.

What I find interesting is the fact this story got out to the media. It looks like someone in the Police leaked it to the media. As Greg is a former head of the police union, this raises interesting possibilities about motives.

Stuff reports:

Work is under way on law changes that will impose a 10kmh speed limit for Lime electric scooters, with the Government set to consult on the new rules early this year.

How stupid.

I run faster than 10 km/hr. Some sort of speed limit for scooter use on footpaths might be sensible, but 10 km/hr is just nanny state overkill.

From the WSJ:

Nearly half of millennials say they prefer socialism to capitalism, but what do they mean? “My policies most closely resemble what we see in the U.K., in Norway, in Finland, in Sweden,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez told “60 Minutes.” Yet Sweden’s experiment with socialist policies was disastrous, and its economic success in recent decades is a result of market-based reforms.

Sweden is not a socialist state.

In 1991 a market-oriented government came to power and undertook far-reaching reforms. Policy makers have privatized parts of the health-care system, introduced for-profit schools along with school vouchers, and reduced welfare benefits. Since 1997, government ministries that propose new spending plans have been required to find offsetting cuts in their budgets. As a result, public debt has declined from 80% of GDP in the early 1990s to 41%.
To increase incentives to work, Sweden reduced unemployment benefits and introduced an earned-income tax credit in 2007. The electricity and transportation industries were deregulated in the 1990s, and even the Swedish postal system was opened up to competition in 1993. The corporate tax rate was cut from its 2009 level of 28% to 22% today, and is scheduled to decline to 20.4% in 2021.

A corporate tax rate of 20%. Nice.

This policy mix has earned Sweden a Heritage Foundation ranking as the 15th freest economy in the world. The U.S. is 18th. And it’s paid off. Since 1995, Swedish economic growth has exceeded that of its European Union peers by about 1 point a year. Sweden is now richer than all of the major EU countries and is within 15% of U.S. per capita GDP. While Sweden still has a larger government than the U.S., its tax code is flatter. The progressivity of the U.S. tax code distorts incentives. These distortions would become even larger under the tax-increase proposals of democratic socialists like Ms. Ocasio-Cortez.

AOC wants a top tax rate of 70%. Good luck with that. No one would actually pay it.

Tyler Cowan blogs:

China Daily reported Friday that unnatural deaths have taken the lives of 72 mainland billionaires over the past eight years. (Do the math.)
Which means that if you’re one of China’s 115 current billionaires, as listed on the 2011 Forbes Billionaires List, you should be more than a little nervous.

I don’t know about you but I find it somewhat improbable that among such a small population there could be so many “suicides,” “accidents” and “death by disease” (the average age of those who died from illness was only 48).

I guess killing off the super rich is one way to redistribute wealth.