Shane Reti announced:

Following recommendations from the Science System Advisory Group, a single, independent board, called Research Funding New Zealand, will be established to make most funding decisions.

“The message from the science and research community has been loud and clear – the current funding system is too complex, too bureaucratic, and takes time and energy away from actual research,” says Dr Reti.

“So, this Government is simplifying the way we fund science, so our researchers can spend less time on paperwork and more time on discovery, innovation, and results that will grow our economy and benefit New Zealanders.

“Research Funding New Zealand will replace the multiple layers of decision-making, taking on the Endeavour, Marsden and Strategic Science Investment Funds – currently administered by three separate funding bodies.

This looks to be a very good move, not just because the Marsden Fund is removed from the uber woke Royal Society whose criteria for grants appears to have been how often an applicant could mention the Treaty of Waitangi.

I am a huge fund of science funding. Science is the key to discovery and why we are today so much better off than people 100 years ago.

But far too much of our science and health funding goes on political projects, rather than hard science. Hopefully this change will see a much greater focus in future on science funding going towards, well science!

The Herald reports:

The Government’s fees-free policy reset is at risk of following its predecessor in failing to incentivise tertiary study and only benefiting the more advantaged.

The warning is included in a Ministry of Education-led analysis, which found the “deadweight” policy to be so poor that it recommended axing it and spending the money elsewhere.

But keeping it in amended form – for the final year of study instead of the first year – was part of both the National-Act and National-NZ First coalition agreements.

Having the final year fees-free rather than the first year, is a better policy. But both versions of the policy basically transfer money from all taxpayers to students who will over time earn $1.5 million more on average than non-students.

National next election should campaign on abolishing fees-free altogether. We have a very generous student loan scheme, and the fees-free policies do not help poorer families go to university – it just transfers money to more well off families.

Michael Littlewood of pensions policy fame has written a novel about his great great great grandparents – William and Tiraha. The blurb is:

Paihia, 1823, and William Cook is injured, abandoned by his whaling ship. He is nursed at the Mission by Tiraha, whāngai daughter of the great chief Nene.

Fifty years later, this couple’s grandson meets his grandparents for the first time and hears the story of their long life together.

Abraham senses long-buried secrets as his grandfather tells how, abandoned once again, this time with a young family in the isolated deep south, he and Tiraha drew on the knowledge and skills of both their cultures to survive, and to escape.

Pioneer shipbuilders on remote Stewart Island, and making ingenious use of scarce resources, William and Tiraha eventually cross the Tasman with their growing family to deliver a new-built vessel for the Weller brothers. They return, finally, to the Bay of Islands to witness the coming of British law, the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, and the Flagstaff Wars. Despite the tensions from their own divided loyalties in these turbulent times, William and Tiraha grow to understand each other and the new country they are helping to shape.

A first-person story inside a nineteenth-century memoir, constructed as a novel – Michael Littlewood has taken historical evidence and family lore and produced a compelling work of biographical fiction for adventure-seekers, seafarers and anyone intrigued by the earliest days of Pākehā–Māori relations.

As a big fan of historical novels, I’m keen to read it.

It is a good interview.

Radio NZ reports:

The New Zealand Media Council has upheld a complaint from the Brewers Association of New Zealand against Radio New Zealand (RNZ), citing a breach of Principle (1) Accuracy, Fairness and Balance in its reporting on alcohol consumption guidelines.

The complaint centred on two RNZ articles published in July 2025, which reported that Canada had officially lowered its recommended alcohol intake to two drinks per week. The articles, part of a broader series on alcohol harm, relied on documents obtained under the Official Information Act and included commentary from health experts and advocacy groups.

Dylan Firth, Executive Director of the Brewers Association, argued that RNZ inaccurately presented the Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction’s (CCSA) recommendations as official government policy. In reality, Health Canada had not adopted the CCSA’s proposed limits, and the official guidelines remained unchanged. Despite being alerted to the error, RNZ initially amended the 14 July article only partially, leaving misleading information and graphics in place for two weeks.

You could possibly forgive Radio NZ for the initial mistake. But they took two weeks to correct their mistake, which was very significant. The entire thrust of their article was that NZ was lagging behind Canada as Canada had changed their guidelines. And the reality is that Canada has not at all changed their guidelines.

The Taxpayers’ Union released:

The New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union can reveal through Official Information Act request that the Ministry of Social Development is spending $2.8 million on a youth wellbeing survey that included sending brownie boxes worth $7,544 to schools to encourage participation.

The Ministry confirmed that research firm Ipsos, which is contracted to deliver the Youth Health and Wellbeing Survey, sent brownie boxes to 170 schools and 14 kura at $41 each including postage – bringing the total cost of the survey to more than $350 per response.

The survey is an excellent one, which provides a lot of great data. However it should not cost $2.8 million to get 8,000 responses – in my opinion.

1. The Charter School model is about improving opportunities/outcomes for “underserved” communities. The schools currently being approved in the NZ system would not be internationally recognised as Charter Schools.
   
2. The Charter School agency has spent 30% of the funding on themselves. The current CEO is being bumped so good things may happen.
   
3. The Alturm School is being significantly challenged re the apparent NZ Initiative conflicts of interest in the approval process. I am hearing that there are significant legal challenges about to be lodged.
   
4. David Seymour has announced two schools that are attempting to have a different provision angles – but is appears that Seymour, and the providers, do not understand the law re Charter Schools.
   
   Seymour has, with significant ignorance, promoted a Wellington Phoenix Charter School as NZ’s first sports academy with attached academics. He is wildly wrong as there are at least 100 entities that fit that description and Westlake Boys, St Kentigerns, Kings College, etc – excell in that area.
   
5. It seems that neither the New Zealand Performance Academy Aotearoa or the Sisters United Academy understnd that they cannot can put any requirements on who comes to the school.
   
   The Wellington Phoenix school and the Sisters United Academcy must accept applications from all students/families and cannot add any criteria.
   
   South Auckland Middle School was always over subscribed and we went to the police for balloting. It was tough as we had a waiting list of over 100 students and many people attempting to get preferential treatment.
   
   The new schools must do the same. The Phoenix school could/should end up with a whole bunch of kids who have never kicked a ball. The Sisters United Academy could/should end up with boys and girls from a range of demographics.
   
   Charter Schools do not have the privileges of Designated Character Schools. I sincerely hope that St Stephens/Tipene is not prioritising Maori students or rugby players … as it is clearly against the law.

Alwyn Poole
[email protected]

An interesting poll at Electoral Calculus, where a 2,000 person poll of the British Establishment was done. They found:

• 75% of Britain’s establishment voted for left-of-centre parties in 2024, compared with 54% of the general public
• Teachers, academics and culture workers (the “lecturing class”) overwhelmingly support leftish parties (81%)
• Three quarters of the lecturing class voted to remain in the EU, compared with 48% of the public
• Most of the establishment is left of centre except those working in the police and armed forces, who are right of centre
• Nearly half (49%) of the lecturing class thinks freedom of speech can damage society.

It would be interesting to do the same poll here.

Very telling.

Hating your country’s history!

A guest post by Lucy Rogers:

Access to a lawyer is a human right, as is the right to argue your case in court. Unfortunately, although these freedoms exist within Israel itself, it engages in the practice of administrative detention in the West Bank. I have spent the last two years of my life protesting the hypocrisy of anti-Israel protesters across the Western world, who generally do not acknowledge Israel’s side of the story. Accordingly, I feel a sense of obligation now to speak up once more for the Palestinian side of the story following Hamas agreeing to release the hostages.

At present, Hamas is overwhelmingly popular in the West Bank. Having talked with Palestinians at the weekly protests over the last few months (in fact, years) I am told that the reason for this is that the Palestinian Authority is failing to prevent rampant settler violence in the West Bank. The Times of Israel covered one such settler attack here: https://www.timesofisrael.com/afp-photographer-injured-in-settler-attack-during-west-bank-olive-harvest/

I have been told many firsthand accounts of settler misdeeds. For example, someone told me that his neighbour was held at gunpoint by settlers who forced him to hand over his car keys and they stole his car right before his eyes. This sort of thing apparently happens all the time. Stories of Palestinian children arrested and held in prison for months or years simply for throwing a stone I also find appalling. There is no concept of proportionate punishment.

When settlers are going berserk, setting fire to your villages and fields, shooting people, getting behind the wheel of a car and running down civilians, and stealing people’s property, and when Palestinians have zero civil rights and can be arrested without trial on the whim of an Israeli soldier, of course the Palestinians will turn to Hamas if the Palestinian Authority fails to stop this, because there is no other option.  

Worse, the settlers have the full support of the IDF. In January of this year, Katz ordered the release of every single settler held in administrative detention for crimes against Palestinians: 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/katz-says-settlers-in-administrative-detention-to-go-free-ties-it-to-palestinian-release

I think the Western obsession with the Israeli settlements is just a distraction from the main problems here. Sure, I think Israel should stop settlements immediately. But Israel’s supporters perceive Israel’s actions here as “just building houses” and it turns into a debate about who owns the land. Because the focus is on the settlements Israel’s supporters don’t realise the extent of the main problems. What is clearly and unequivocally wrong is killing Palestinian civilians for no reason, and that should be the focus of Western media.

I think a two-state solution in the near future is unrealistic. Israel cannot simply hand over East Jerusalem to the Palestinians because there is no geographical buffer zone to prevent repeats of October 7. I am also not so naïve as to think that Palestinian hatred of Jews is a purely proportionate response to settler violence. Hamas would hate Jews and Israel regardless. This amply illustrated by (say) the hatred of Hezbollah or Iran or the Taliban towards Jews despite the fact that they are not living in the West Bank.

But if Israel will rein in the settlers and end its practice of detaining Palestinians without trial, then with the passage of time it is possible that for Palestinians in the West Bank practical self-interested concerns will supersede hatred of Jews. (In other words, a rapprochement between Israelis and Palestinians may be more possible than people who are not actually having to live under Israel’s control.) Hamas’ plummeting popularity in Gaza gives me hope in this regard, because Gazans are realising that they don’t like being treated as human shields. If that day comes in the West Bank, then a two-state solution and the withdrawal of Israeli troops may become possible. Palestinians and Israelis do not have to like each other, just to live in peace. But whether or not it leads to peace, settler violence and imprisoning people without trial is wrong and must end. Thousands of prisoners in Israeli jails are being exchanged for the hostages, but sadly I don’t think it’s women and children imprisoned for throwing a stone whom 

The NZ Initiative has published a report looking at what changes we should make to MMP as it approaches its 30th birthday. I’m on a panel discussing the report at 2.30 pm tomorrow (Wed 29th) for those interested. The report will be made public at that time.

Radio NZ reports:

Labour has agreed to campaign on a capital gains tax (CGT) covering just property – excluding the family home and farms – to help fund three free doctor visits for everyone.

The policy was announced abruptly on Tuesday morning after RNZ was earlier leaked details over the long weekend.

The fact their tax policy was leaked is in itself significant. In government leaks almost invariably comes from disgruntled public servants. But an opposition policy doesn’t involve the public service. This means it was either leaked by a Labour Party MP, a senior parliamentary staffer or Labour HQ. This is a sure sign that not all is well. Readers will recall National in opposition had a spell of leaking before Chris Luxon became leader. A united caucus doesn’t leak. A disgruntled caucus does.

As to the policy itself, it is typical Labour tax and spend. They promised they’d keep spending to under 30% off GDP, below it out to 34%, and now want more tax and more spending.

The most important thing people should realise about Labour’s CGT is that it will be based on nominal, not real, increases in house values. This means the higher Labour gets inflation to, the more revenue it brings in, and the worse off you will be if subject to it. Here’s an example.

You own a second home worth $1 million. Let’s say inflation is 3% a year. In 10 years you sell that home for $1.3 million. You will be taxed at 28% so pay $84,000 tax.

However that $1.3 million in 10 years is equal to $968,000 in today’s dollars. So in real terms you have lost $34,000 on that house and Labour will tax you $84,000 on top of that $34,000 loss.

I would suggest anyone who has contact with Labour MPs asks them why they are going to tax inflation. They could have made their policy to only tax real gains, not nominal gains. It was a deliberate decision to maximise tax revenue.

Waatea News reports:

That the Te Tai Tokerau Electorate Executive be reset by way of a Special General Meeting, on the basis that the Electorate Executive is no longer functioning in accordance with Party requirements and the Kawa.

This is basically head office sacking the local electorate committee because they don’t support head office.

That the Te Tai Tokerau MP be suspended.

This is a step towards deselection.

Waatea understands that all four resolutions were passed by the Members present  (Agreed: Tāmaki Makaurau, Hauraki-Waikato, Waiariki, Ikaroa-Rāwhiti, Te Tai Hauāuru) with one Abstenation (Te Tai Tonga).

So it is a 5-2 split.

Erica Stanford released the following data on new school entrants:

• 58 per cent of students were at or above expectations, up from 36 per cent in Term 1.
• 43 per cent of students exceeded expectations in Term 3, more than double the Term 1 rate. 
• Māori students performing at or above what’s expected have increased from 25 per cent to 43 per cent
• In high equity (low-decile) schools, children meeting expected levels has gone up from 18 per cent to 35 per cent
• Pacific students, from 27 per cent up to 43 per cent.

These are incredibly pleasing results, and so early on. We need to make sure Erica Stanford has another four years (at least) as Education Minister, so all this progress isn’t lost.

I got sent a link to this website about Naenae College.

I have no first or even second hand knowledge about Naenae College, except I note that it is about to implement an enrolment scheme, which usually happens because too many students want to attend.

What struck me about the website is how absolutely detailed it is. It is not uncommon to have criticism sites set up, but this one is incredibly detailed, even getting into faculty level details.

I’m somewhat puzzled by the motivation of the person behind it. If you’re a parent, you don’t tend to care once your kids are no longer there. My guess is a former long serving staff member, but I may be wrong.

A guest post by Lucy Rogers:

At the moment, different sides on the Israel/ Palestine conflict are accusing each other either of antisemitism on the one hand or of weaponising claims of antisemitism to silence criticism of Israel on the other. Anti-Israel Westerners then say that criticism of Israel is not hostility to Jewish people in general. (Checkmate!)

And the truth is that I do not think that most Westerners who hate Israel would be hostile to a Jewish person in (say) a social context such as a dinner party. In other words, I think there are a significant proportion of people who hate Israel who are not antisemitic per se. But I also believe that the vast majority of the anti-Israel movement in the Western world is intellectually dishonest (with the caveat that of course movements are diverse, and I am not accusing them all of this).

And that, not “antisemitism”, is what we ought to call out, because the fact that they are intellectually dishonest is so obvious that it’s beyond argument, whereas accusations of antisemitism just run into the above problems.

It is intellectually dishonest to organise a protest against Israel three days after the Hamas massacre of civilians on October 7 2023. That is what the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) did:

https://www.facebook.com/events/7231802770185706/?post_id=7231802783519038&view=permalink&__cft__[0]=AZWoBfrIDs17XnzZGJEoS2MIvvbrTlUsft9KoSgDzrClvahymVBhYhAFrQlqYqWg8mGNGIz0MHmQF1Y-w6GnhfRnXGLfQISKxCovFj6Ho7cVAJowS-Sjd2avBGVKPsY9rm_J9g7_3rleFtB1ClD_KGGD&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R

It is intellectually dishonest to accuse Israel of “genocide” three days after October 7 before it had even started its counteroffensive in Gaza, which is what the PSNA did.

It is intellectually dishonest to expand the definition of genocide for political purposes because you know that Israel’s actions do not meet that threshold, which is what Ireland did (and which Chloe Swarbrick does on a daily basis): https://news.sky.com/story/icj-asked-to-broaden-definition-of-genocide-over-collective-punishment-in-gaza-13271874

It is intellectually dishonest to turn up to a pro-Palestine protest with a transgender flag, which protesters in Auckland do constantly: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ixkqumttrQM

It is intellectually dishonest to call for a ceasefire every week for the past two years, but when Israel accepted the terms of a ceasefire last week proposed by Donald Trump not to call on Hamas to accept the deal, which is what the PSNA in Auckland did.

It is intellectually dishonest to call weekly for a ceasefire while in the next breath calling for an intifada, which is what the PSNA does constantly. (There were 138 suicide bombings during the Second Intifada, primarily targeting Israeli civilians.)

It is intellectually dishonest for the anti-Israel protesters to criticise Israeli human rights abuses against Palestinians, but not to so much as mention the mass protests by Gazans against Hamas earlier this year when they risked their lives to stand against Hamas, which is what the PSNA in Auckland did.

It is intellectually dishonest for the anti-Israel protesters to put up posters in Auckland describing detained activists who sought to violate Israel’s naval blockade on Gaza as “abducted”, while never once ever publicly calling on Hamas to release the Israeli hostages: https://israelinstitute.nz/2025/10/the-moral-bankruptcy-of-the-flotilla-activists/

It is intellectually dishonest for the self-same people who obsess over an American border wall with Mexico (“no human being is illegal”) and accuse anyone who believes in national borders of being a racist not to say a single word about Egypt’s border wall preventing Palestinian refugees from fleeing Gaza.

The intellectual dishonesty and limitless hypocrisy of the likes of Max Harris I have expounded here: https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2024/11/guest_post_response_to_max_harris.html

And if it’s screamingly obvious that a significant proportion of (but not all) anti-Israel protesters are intellectually dishonest, the question naturally arises as to why exactly that is. I’m not sure the answer is antisemitism per se. But I’m certain there’s much more to it than a genuine concern for truth.

Conclusion: accusations of antisemitism just fall afoul of the banal response that criticism of Israel is not hatred of Jews. In my opinion, we should stop accusing them of antisemitism and start accusing them of being intellectually dishonest. They have no answer to that, because they are.

The Post reports:

About one in five ACT local candidates won the seats they stand for and party leader David Seymour says he’s happy more weren’t successful because now they can stand to run for Parliament.

“In some cases, I was kind of hoping they wouldn’t get elected so we can run them next year,” he told The Post.

In total, ACT ran 46 candidates in 25 councils at ward and constituency levels from Northland to Otago, including nine candidates in Auckland Local Board positions. It was the party’s first attempt at local government.

Candidates signed up to a set of ACT values, like lower rates, reducing “waste” and opposing the push to “get people out of their cars”. They fundraised for their own campaigns, but were supported by the party machine.

On provisional results, it appears nine were elected

Getting 20% of your candidates elected is a pretty reasonable result for the first time a party has contested local elections.

So long as National doesn’t contest local elections (or even provide guidance on who is worth supporting) I suspect ACT Local candidates will do better and better, as the brand will be a guide to fiscal responsibility.

A good article by Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger on how to fix its liberal bias.

• End decision making by consensus. Have an editorial committee that votes.
• Enable competing articles
• Abolish source blacklists
• Revive the original neutrality policy
• Repeal “ignore all rules”
• Reveal who Wikipedia’s senior editors are
• Let the public rate articles
• End indefinite blocking
• Adopt a legislative process

I find Wikipedia excellent for non-political topics, especially in history, science, entertainment etc. But it does have a significant liberal bias on political topics.

An interesting chart from Yahoo:

I found this very interesting. It is no surprise perhaps that Justices have backed emergency requests from the Government of the President whose party appointed them. The range is from 96% (Alito, Gorsuch) down to 78% (Roberts).

What is more interesting is how often they have backed an emergency request from the Government of a President from the other side. In order the percentages are:

1. Roberts 59%
2. Barrett 53%
3. Kavanaugh 47%
4. Gorsuch 35%
5. Alito 18%
6. Thomas 18%
7. Kagan 17%
8. Sotomayor 9%
9. Jackson 0%

I think this reflects well on Roberts, Barrett, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch.

Radio NZ reports:

LGNZ president Sam Broughton told Morning Report part of the reason for low turnout was voters having to deal with postal voting in the digital age, or not having access to polling places and not knowing the candidates.

The Electoral Commission should run all the elections in a standardised process across the country, he said.

“One of the key recommendations is that we should return to having a polling day, as well as the open voting beforehand,” he said.

These are all worthwhile things, but won’t change things much. The one change that would massively lift turnout is allowing people to return their voting paper via the Internet.

By this I don’t mean Internet voting, which is where you vote on a website, and your vote is recorded and tallied over the Internet. I mean simply using the Internet to deliver your ballot paper to the Returning Officer.

Every resident gets a voting paper with a unique barcode that identifies them (so verifies they are enrolled). What I propose is that once they have completed it, they can take a photo of it on their phone, and then either e-mail the ballot to the Returning Office, or upload it via a website to the returning officer.

This is in fact more secure than relying on the post, as you get a receipt acknowledging it has been received.

And this method has actually been in place for the last few general elections – it is how the vast majority of NZers overseas vote in a general election. I estimate over 200,000 New Zealanders have used this method to vote in general elections.

Postal voting is a dying mechanism. Booth voting can help, but you’re still going to have much lower turnout than general elections, as the stakes are less. You need to make it as easy as possible to vote, and sending in your ballot via the Internet (which is not Internet voting) is a tried and tested method we have used for the last four or more general elections.