The Herald reports:

Charter school closures will have a disproportionately detrimental effect on Māori, educators Sir Toby Curtis and Dame Iritana Tawhiwhirangi say in a Treaty of Waitangi claim.

Curtis said most of the 1500 students at the charter schools the Government is shutting down were Māori, many of whom had enrolled to get a fresh start in education and get their lives back on track.

Six of the 11 partnership schools (Kura Hourua) had 87 to 100 per cent Māori rolls.

“The rights of these students to make that choice and the rights of parents and whanau to choose and support what’s best for their children are being taken away from them,” Curtis said.

Tawhiwhirangi said there had been a “total lack of consultation” with the schools and their students’ whanau.

“This Government has ridden roughshod over the futures of these young people in spite of claiming that they are placing a priority on helping our most vulnerable children.

“The evidence shows that Kura Hourua have been delivering very positive results for Māori students who for decades have been falling through the gaps,” she said.

Its putting ideology over evidence. The schools are delivering positive results for those who were failing in the state system. Labour’s answer is to force them back into the state system which failed them.

The Brexit Secretary David Davis has resigned over the Brexit plan agreed to by the Government. He (and many others) said that it would leave the UK still bound by most EU policies, yet be unable to influence them.

It is quite possible the Government may fall over this, or at least Theresa May could be goneburger. But if there is a change of leadership, the chances of an agreement with the EU will go from fairly slim to very slim. So it could be a hard Brexit.

Sadly the biggest beneficiary could be Jeremy Corbyn who may end up being elected despite his manifest unsuitability to be in charge of a fish and chip shop, let alone the UK.

If May goes, the favourites to replace her (for now) are:

1. Michael Gove
2. Sajid Javid
3. Jacob Rees-Mogg
4. Boris Johnson
5. Jeremy Hunt
6. Andrea Leadsom

Daniel Ikensom from Cato writes:

The last 13 presidents of the United States — going back to Franklin D. Roosevelt, who signed into law the watershed Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act in 1934 — considered trade to be mutually beneficial for their fostering of economic growth and good relations among nations. Those presidents aimed to avoid trade wars and committed their administrations to reducing barriers, respecting the rules, and supporting the institutions of trade.

Trump sees the world differently. He has departed from more than 80 years of US trade policy continuity, charting a new and deeply troubling course. Although Trump is not the first president to blame foreign trade practices for problems real and imagined, he may be the first to believe that protectionism is essential to making America great. He is certainly the only head of state ever to tweet that “trade wars are good, and easy to win.” Trump’s trade policy is motivated by a toxic blend of ignorance, petulance and nationalist grievance.

When it comes to trade policy, Trump is the most left wing President in modern history. He is more protectionist than Bernie Sanders.

Unlike his predecessors, he sees trade not as a win-win proposition, but as a zero-sum game with distinct winners and losers. Exports are Team America’s points; imports are the foreign teams’ points; the trade account is the scoreboard. 

Which is totally wrong. Imports are not bad. Both exports and imports are good. Imports allow you to focus on areas where you have a competitive advantage rather than try and do everything yourselves.

In 2017, US goods imports totaled US$2.2 trillion — of which US$1.1 trillion were purchases of raw materials, intermediate goods and capital equipment — and US goods exports totaled US$1.5 trillion. If Trump were to impose, for example, a 10 percent across-the-board tariff on all imports, producer costs would rise by roughly US$110 billion (or 10 percent of US$1.1 trillion). Commensurate retaliation abroad would reduce US export revenues by roughly US$150 billion (or 10 percent of US$1.5 trillion). Together, the increased costs and reduced revenue would amount to a US$260 billion reduction in manufacturing-sector profits. Last year, the US manufacturing sector’s profits were US$550 billion, so a 10 percent import levy alone could end up cutting profits nearly in half.

Tariffs don’t protect many companies. They damage them as they increase costs.

For every US$1 that steel producers add to GDP, steel users add US$29; for every one job in steel production, there are 46 in steel-using industries. While Trump wants credit for “protecting” the steel industry with a 25 percent import tariff, he and his advisers downplay the adverse impact on steel-consuming producers.

Yep consumers get screwed.

Those who subscribe to Trump’s points of view — that trade is an “Us versus Them” proposition — probably think that the president is doing the right thing in subverting the institutions of global trade and provoking trade wars. More sycophantic supporters consider Trump’s strategy to be ingenious. Apologists who know better say that the president is merely fulfilling his campaign promises — and how refreshing is it that a politician is making good on his promises! All are complicit in the unenlightened, provocative and possibly unhinged trade policy that Trump has wrought.

Yep.

NewstalkZB reports:

Transport Minister Phil Twyford has been fined $500 for using his mobile phone while his plane was taxiing, the Civil Aviation Authority has announced.

The CAA had been investigating Twyford’s use of a mobile phone after the plane doors had closed and was taxiing for take-off during a flight from Wellington to Auckland in May.

Twyford had been issued with an infringement notice for breaching CAA rules relating to the use of portable electronic devices onboard devices.

“Mr Twyford stopped using his phone before the aircraft took off so his actions did not pose a significant risk to the flight. Nevertheless, he did breach the rule, has been issued with an infringement notice and is required to pay a $500 infringement fine,” the CAA said in a statement.

Seems fair. I don’t think what he did was that big a deal. The problem for Twyford is he made such a federal case of what Brownlee did, he got hoist by his own petard.

Rob Goodman at Politico argues that as Trump has broken so many norms, Democrats should do the same and abandon self-restraint in order to regain power. The possible actions are:

• Grant statehood to D.C. and Puerto Rico
• break California in seven, with the goal of adding 16 new Democrats to the Senate
• Expand the Supreme Court and the federal courts, packing them with liberal judges
• Move to multi-member House districts to roll back the effects of partisan gerrymandering
• Pass a new Voting Rights Act, including nationwide automatic voter registration, felon enfranchisement and an end to voter ID laws
• Grant citizenship to millions of undocumented immigrants, creating a host of new Democratic-leaning voters

Those actions would indeed cement a liberal majority in the three branches of Government.

This got me wondering what would a similiar program look like in NZ, if Labour or National decided to ram through massive electoral or constitutional changes on a bare majority.

Here’s what I’ve come up with so far. Feel free to add ones on in comments. These are not things which are desirable or popular. Just things that would give one side a significant advantage.

Labour

1. Spin off an affiliated Maori Party that contests the Maori seats but not the party vote, meaning they get a seven seat overhang.
2. Allow any citizen of a Pacific Island automatic citizenship and voting rights in NZ.
3. Lower voting age to 13
4. Allow all prisoners to vote
5. Establish an Upper House exclusively of Maori MPs, and no bill can be passed without its support
6. De facto compulsory unionism to increase funding for Labour
7. A fund to encourage voting where you get a $250 payment if you vote
8. Ban donations of over $20 to political parties

National

1. Spin off an affiliated Rural Party that contests rural seats but not the party vote, meaning they get a 15 seat overhang.
2. Ban anyone convicted of any crime in the last 15 years from voting
3. Ban non-natural persons (ie unions) from joining political parties or voting in them
4. Direct public service to offer public servants much higher salaries if they go onto individual contracts (which reduces funds for unions and hence Labour)
5. Require photographic proof of identity when voting
6. No representation without taxation – restrict the vote to those who pay income tax
7. Increase MMP threshold to 15%
8. Abolish spending limits for campaigns

Hopefully NZ will not go down the path of such partisan electoral or constitutional changes.

Stuff reports:

The Government has quietly cancelled extra funding for cochlear implants, despite a successful campaign for publicly-funded devices for every Kiwi who needed one.

Levin surf lifesaver Danielle McKay spearheaded the campaign after she waited three years for the surgery. She said the decision to slash the $6.5million funding boost was “shocking” and “disappointing.”

Health Minister David Clark refused to comment on the cut. But a spokesman confirmed that extra funding was not extended in this year’s Budget.

The Ministry of Health said there were 224 adults in line for a cochlear implant, and the average wait time was just over two years. But there are many more who still haven’t been officially accepted onto the cochlear programme.

I guess the Government needed the $6.5 million for free tertiary fees.

That was the position McKay, 23, found herself in last year, after three years of waiting for an implant. Despite a specialist telling her she had only a few months to save her hearing, when McKay contacted officials, she found she was only on a secondary review list.

So, the lifeguard launched a petition and teamed up with the YesWeCare health funding coalition. After she delivered the petition, with 26,643 signatures to Parliament, then Health Minister Jonathan Coleman stumped up an extra $6.5m in that year’s Budget.

It almost doubled the programme’s budget and allowed an extra 60 people to have the surgery. McKay underwent the procedure in October, although she had already gone completely deaf in one ear.

Now she’s furious others won’t get the same chance.

And she’s called on Clark to reconsider his decision. “No, it’s not right. It should be ongoing funding,” she said.

And the former Associate Health Minister comments:

As Associate Health Minister I launched cochlear implants programme in Wellington and saw the sensation and indescribable joy of people able to hear sounds and voices of their loved ones for often the first time. Extraordinary, and even more incredible that funding has been cut

— Peter Dunne (@honpeterdunne) July 7, 2018

It’s one thing not to provide extra funding in the first place, but to cut funding seems bizarre.

The Herald reports:

The promoter of a controversial Canadian pair accused of hate speech has cancelled their tour of New Zealand after Auckland Mayor Phil Goff denied them access to city venues. …

But promoter David Pellowe said the tour was instead cancelled when Goff moved to bar the pair access to Auckland Council venues.

He told Newstalk ZB there were no other venues available at this late stage and that all tickets would have to be refunded.

Goff minutes earlier tweeted that council venues shouldn’t be used to stir up ethnic or religious tensions in a city that’s multicultural, inclusive and embraces people from all faiths and ethnicities.

“Views that divide rather than unite are repugnant, and I have made my views on this very clear. Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux will not be speaking at any council venues.

“Let me be very clear, the right to free speech does not mean the right to be provided with an Auckland Council platform for that speech.”

So the Mayor now personally decides whose speech is acceptable, and can use an Auckland Council facility. Governments tend to own many large speaking venues so this in fact does massively restrict the ability of someone to do a public session.

Will Goff apply his new standard of not stirring up religious tensions to ban any speakers who support Hamas or Hezbollah?

Of course not.

All these precious snowflakes who can’t handle a 24 year old Canadian from exercising her speech in public.

No Right Turn makes the point:

Unfortunately, being insulted is just something people have to put up with in a free and democratic society, and our Supreme Court is on record (in Brooker v Police) as saying so. We have a right to freedom of speech in New Zealand, which covers not just the right of these racists to speak, but also the right of their racist audience to listen. Restricting that right pre-emptively requires a very high test: basicly an announced intention on the part of the speaker to incite a riot. If that test isn’t met, there’s no justifiable reason to prevent them from speaking. And as I’ve said in other cases, the answer to speech you don’t like is more speech, not less. If they’re giving a speech, then protest outside, and make it damn clear to everyone that kiwis don’t agree with their racism and Islamophobia.

The threshold for suppressing speech should indeed be that high.

But now Goff has unilaterally announced his own test, let’s keep him to it. If you ever see a booking for a Council facility which has a speaker from an organisation with a history of anti-semitism or supporting terrorism, then make sure we all know so we can demand Goff be even handed.

Stuff reports:

Inventor and philanthropist Sir Ray Avery fears opposition, including from former prime minister Helen Clark, could jeopardise a planned charity concert at Eden Park.

“It’s a fall from grace for her, she’s really come down to be a petty politician,” Avery said of Clark’s submission opposing planning permission for the Waitangi Day event.

Avery hopes $4 million can be raised from the concert, and linked fundraising events, to supply incubators he invented for premature babies in developing countries.

The event requires planning approval and has re-ignited opposition from some locals to Eden Park hosting concerts.

“The proposed charity element is not directly related to the concert nor specific to this venue in any meaningful or concrete fashion within the application,” Clark’s submission was reported to have said.

It’s a bad look to be seen to be against a charity concert, but the issue is more nuanced than that.

Successive applications to hold concerts at Eden Park have not succeeded. They are not permitted activities. This man’s concert could easily be held @MtSmartStadium where concerts are a permitted activity.

— Helen Clark (@HelenClarkNZ) July 4, 2018

Exactly. Residents have rights under RMA to object. Five previous applications to hold concerts there have failed. Now the ruse is to put up one in support of a charity = Trojan horse. @MtSmartStadium is popular & well accepted concert venue & should be used. @Scungo @tmurphyNZ

— Helen Clark (@HelenClarkNZ) July 4, 2018

Clark has a valid point that this would set a precedent for Eden Park, and concerts are permitted at Mt Smart, so why not hold it there. It could well be that Eden Park are wanting to use such a good cause, as a precedent.

But at the end of the day, hopefully some solution can be found so the great work by Ray Avery is supported.

The Herald reports:

Acting Prime Minister Winston Peters says he will not opt out of his taxpayer-funded winter energy payment on principle because he has built his political career on universality.

Peters, who earns around $330,000 a year in his usual parliamentary role of Deputy Prime Minister, is eligible as a pensioner for the winter energy payment for superannuitants and some beneficiaries.

The payment, of $450 a year for singles and $700 a year for couples or those with dependent children, began on Sunday as part of the Government’s Families Package.

Winston is on a very good wicket. His annual remuneration isL

• $334,734 salary
• $16,980 allowance
• $13,600 perks (as calculated by Rem Authority)
• $100,000+ parliamentary superannuation (he is on the old gold plated scheme)
• $16,035 NZ Super
• $450 winter energy payment

So all up Winston is getting over $480,000 a year from taxpayers. But that isn’t enough. He needs his extra $450.

The Herald reports:

Education Minister Chris Hipkins has issued an open invitation to Auckland principals to meet with him later this month as a further 23 secondary principals joined the 37 from Auckland who took out a full page advertisement criticising the review of NCEA.

The group of 60 principals dubbed the NCEA Coalition have called for the review of NCEA to be halted, describing the consultation process as “bizarre,” putting the views of children ahead of professional educators and lacking proper consultation with school leaders and teachers.

In Parliament Hipkins remained unmoved by their calls, saying he still believed the process would be sufficient.

However, he said as a result of the principals’ advertisement he had set aside the morning of Friday July 20 to meet with any Auckland secondary principals who wished to do so. 
“That’s an open invitation and I’m more than happy to engage with any of them.”

He said he had no plans to extend the consultation period, which still had more than two months to go, and was being overseen by a group of principals and the Ministry of Education.

“I don’t agree with the assertion put forward by the principals that this Government is placing too much emphasis on the voices of young people in this process. I think young people’s futures are what we are taking about and they have every right to be heard in this.”

The reviews being done in the education space are farcical. I speak as someone whose job is to design meaningful surveys.

One of the questions is along the lines of “If you were the boss of the education system, what would you change”. This will not get you anything useful. It is a feel good question designed to give the appearance of consultation.

True consultation will have specific issues and usually specific options.

The principals’ spokesman, Glen Dunham of Massey High School, said the Minister’s office had been contacted and the group was happy to meet the minister in Wellington at any time.

He said said they were from a mix of deciles and while they agreed NCEA needed to be reviewed, professional educators had to be at the heart of that.

“Principals are appalled at the lack of consultation and how this bizarre process is going to hurt the life prospects of a generation of young New Zealanders.”

The consultation process is so amateurish that there are really only two possible conclusions you could reach about it. They are mutually exclusive:

1. The Government has absolutely no idea about what to do in education, and is hoping to get some ideas
2. The Government knows exactly what it wants to do, and the consultation underway is a trojan horse to be used as “proof” the public were consulted

I suspect it is No 2.

The Herald reports:

A highly regarded politician who died 18 months ago was a paedophile, his distraught widow has claimed.

Anihera Zhou Black said her husband – regional councillor and Māori Party candidate Awanui Black – had preyed upon children throughout his adult life. …

Sobbing back tears and occasionally wailing in grief, she said: “I have an announcement to make on behalf of my kids and I and perhaps it will shock a lot of you and perhaps it will help some of you find some comfort.”

It was, she said, “something that needs to be done”.

The video spread like wildfire and had been viewed 30,000 times in the handful of hours since being posted this afternoon.

“Those good deeds Awa did for individuals will live on in the memory of their lifetimes. 
However the pain and suffering he caused others may live on for generations to come if things are left unsaid.”

Anihera Zhou Black said her former husband had come across as a larger-than-life leader with a booming voice but was actually “a shrivelled up cowering soulless shadow of a man”.

The couple met aged 15 and married aged 18 before spending 26 years married.

Throughout that time, she said he lived a double life that – she believed – stemmed from sexual abuse he had suffered as a boy.

“In turn it created the same behaviour in Awa. Awa became a paedophile and over the years, honing his skills, waiting for that perfect moment he had preordained to steal the innocence of others.

“I wondered why Awa invited so many young people through our home over the years and I thought it was to be a good aunty and uncle. I know differently now.

“He became a predator, a recruiter, a teacher, a pimp, a ringleader of one of the many child-adult sex rings here in his beloved Tauranga Moana and he took that shit nationwide with all his contacts in every stream of life.

“They would recruit the innocent…. share them around like a box of beer, consume every last drop and discarding the empty vessels into the gutter, soulless, cold and broken.

“I am so extremely sorry and devastated. You are all my babies now and I will do what I can to navigate through your healing process.

Anihera Zhou Black said those who were victims had “permission to speak your truth”.

There’s something about this which makes me just hesitate. It may all be exactly as his widow has described (and kudos to her, if so). But I note three things at this stage:

1. No details of how she discovered this have been given. There is nothing substantive such as “I discovered photos”
2. At this stage no victim has come forward
3. The reference to “many child-adult sex rings” in Tauranga seems over the top.

I have no knowledge of the people involved, or if it is true. But all I would say is that there isn’t enough yet for people to conclude what the truth is.

Paul Embery writes:

As a socialist and trade unionist, I despair of the modern Left and its propensity to do everything in its power to alienate the very people for whom it purports to speak. So wrong is its stance on so many social and moral questions, that you wonder whether it even wants the votes of traditional left-wing voters anymore. Perhaps it would be happier as a self-indulgent protest lobby, its ranks of middle-class, city-dwelling, bohemian types smoking their weed and listening to Bob Dylan tracks.

There is a definite divide between the old working class and urban liberals.

These people preach peace and harmony, while reciting the mantra of ‘Live and let live’ and speaking of the need for ‘tolerance’, ‘diversity’ and ‘respect’ – all the usual buzzwords. Except that in practice they do the precise opposite of these things, openly frowning upon the lifestyle choices of working-class folk, while displaying a sneering intolerance towards their opinions and demanding rigid conformity of political thought.

Hence why Trump won some blue collar states.

For example, try discussing with these people – the self-appointed guardians of enlightened society – the idea that immigration levels are too high and should be reduced. You’re a xenophobe. Try saying that kids are better served being raised by two parents, one of each sex. You’re a homophobic bigot. Don’t believe someone with the anatomy of a man can suddenly become a woman just because he says he is? Transphobe.

Transphobia is my favourite.

Believe multiculturalism, the active promotion of separation and difference, has been a monumental failure? Racist. (A bizarre one this, since one can of course be a committed multiracialist while disavowing multiculturalism.)

A key point. Race and culture is not the same thing. They can be linked but it can be quite appropriate to consider certain cultural practices in a negative light (such as a 41 year old man marrying an 11 year old girl).

It wasn’t always thus. In fact, the extent to which those who comprise the modern Left understand so little of the traditions of socialist politics is remarkable. They fail to realise that their dogmatic authoritarianism is, in fact, inimical to the best traditions of the labour movement, which understood from its early days that open discussion and debate around competing views and ideas was fundamental to building democracy and unity throughout its ranks.

Debate should be welcomed.

In the end, these zealots threaten the freedom of all of us. And that’s why they must be faced down remorselessly. To hell with their dictatorial assaults on free speech, with their echo chambers, safe spaces and phoney outrage. No more the craven apologies for having expressed a genuinely-held view. Make your case, stand your ground and be prepared to take the brickbats. If people are offended, tough. It’s time to hit back against the group-thinkers and no-platformers.

The modern Left, with its hectoring, screeching intolerance, must be confronted. It doesn’t speak for me, nor for millions of fellow working-class people. And it never will.

Paul Embery is a trade union official and firefighter in London.

Radio NZ reported:

Two Auckland charter schools should not be allowed to join the state system because they are little different to other schools in their area, the Educational Institute says.

In a submission to the Education Ministry, the primary teachers’ union said it strongly opposed the Villa Education Trust’s application to turn its schools in South Auckland and west Auckland into designated character schools.

The schools are among 11 that would shut at the end of the year unless the government allowed them to join the state system.

What a nasty vindictive move.

NZEI doesn’t like the principal of those schools, Alwyn Poole. So they are trying to get them closed down. This is despite the fact that kids at those schools are achieving way way better than in their previous schools.

The Point of Order blog observes:

Now the messages out of Wellington are mixed, confusing. And they are compounding the aura of dismay spreading through the electorate.

Even the feel-good factor supposed to follow the start of the Families Package looks frozen on the ground, as the regressive impact of the regional fuel tax hits low-income working families in Auckland hard.

Instead of a collegial coalition, individual ministers are acting as loose cannon. Kelvin Davis manages to put a foot in his mouth every time he opens it, Phil Twyford sounds like an old-time preacher, David Parker has fumbled as Minister of Everything, and even Grant Robertson – who says he talks to business “every day, every week” – doesn’t appear to understand the pressures on employers.

There doesn’t seem to be any coherent plan or strategy. Each Minister seems to be a silo. Almost every day there is another stuff up story.

Instead of radical “transformative” policies, the coalition has produced a handful of contradictory measures: a $1bn regional development “pot” at the same time as signalling the end of oil exploration and development, a pillar of the Taranaki regional economy.

Other examples include the winter electricity payment, which will cost taxpayers about $1.8bn over the next four years. This goes to everyone over the age of 65, from struggling working-class widows to billionaires.

Labour are spending ten times as much on middle class welfare as they are on actually helping poor struggling families.

A PR machine at the top of its game couldn’t make anything out of the inchoate thrashing within the Beehive. Only with a clear, practical and progressive narrative can the government re-establish its forward momentum.

Ardern, returning from maternity leave at the end of the month, will not find it easy to get her coalition back on message.

Their problem isn’t PR. It is a lack of leadership and direction.

The Media Council has upheld a complaint against Stuff. The background:

Stuff ran an article on June 11, 2018 headlined “Scout leader who molested nine-year-old boy jailed for five years”

A follow up article published the following day was headlined “Paedo’s unhealthy Scout fetish: ‘Creep’ was ‘an oversized little boy’.”

The same articles were published in the Waikato Times on both days under shorter headlines “Scout leader molested boy” and “Paedo’s ‘unhealthy’ Scout fetish”.

But here is the thing. He wasn’t a Scout leader. He had been thrown out in 2015, before his offending.

After he was thrown out he set up his own youth group (which should have been a huge warning to people), but it wasn’t a scout group.

The Council found:

Nimmo could have accurately, and just as readily, been described as a youth leader. It would have been as compelling without tainting the Scouts, an organisation which has a brand which it has a right to protect. It did, after all, dismiss Nimmo before the offending took place and should not bear an unwarranted taint for his subsequent crimes.

A good decision.

Jenna Lynch writes:

KiwiBuild promised to deliver 100,000 affordable houses to help first-home buyers realise the Kiwi dream.

It promised to help average Kiwis into their first home.

But the income test is anything but average. The income caps are so high they may as well not exist.

A solo buyer can earn up to $120,000 a year. A couple can earn up to $180,000.

Well over twice the median income.

But in effect there is no real income cap. Only the top 8 percent won’t be able to buy these homes.

It’s a free-for-all.

It is no surprise that 6,000 people registered in the first day. Well it is as surprising as when student unions started handing out free cash and food to students and they reported increased uptake every year.

Basically it is going to be like winning Lotto, except you don’t have to pay to get a ticket and other taxpayers cover the prize.

Further there’ll be no asset checks for those buying a first home meaning so long as your income is below the caps, you could have millions locked away in assets other than housing and still be eligible to get the keys to a KiwiBuild house.

Anyone with a decent trust lawyer will be below the income threshold.

Smart young investors will see this policy for what it is – an opportunity for them to get their foot on the property ladder, exploit a government system and put them one step ahead of their peers.

There’s already more than 6000 registrations of interest. The Government is only building 1000 houses in the first year of KiwiBuild. Just 30 are under construction.

So when you look at all those factors what chance does the average New Zealander actually have at realising the Kiwi dream?

The reality is the odds are stacked against them.

Yep.

Stuff reports:

Up to a dozen kids have used a popular neighbourhood tree house in their games of “war”.

But now a larger battle is unfolding as the property owners take on the Dunedin City Council (DCC), which has ordered its removal.

“I really, really don’t want to remove it,” homeowner Janice Norman-Oke, of Mosgiel, said.

The hut was built by her father, Trevor Norman, for his grandsons, Logan, Devon and Ethan.

What a great idea.

The tree house, which met the definition of a building according to the inspectors, “does not comply so must be removed”.

Eventually you’ll need resource consent to tie a tyre to a tree as a swing.

“It is a tree house, it shouldn’t have to meet all of the specific building codes.

Kids climb trees, with or without a tree house. That can be dangerous also. Maybe the Council should decide which trees are safe for kids to climb also.

I’ve been looking through the list of columnists that the Herald has, and it is remarkable how skewed it is.

I am excluding those who are NZME staff such as Simon Wilson (left) and Mike Hosking (right). This is looking at people who don’t work for NZME but have been offered a regular column that discuss politics. The Editor makes a deliberate decision that we need them to have a regular column.

The sole right columnist is Matthew Hooton, a very recent addition.

On the left we have:

1. Brian Rudman
2. Rachel Stewart
3. John Tamihere
4. Jarrod Gilbert
5. David Cormack
6. Bryan Gould
7. Lizzie Marvelly
8. Bryce Edwards

So media is meant to be about holding the powerful to account, but actually the Herald is full of people who are ideologically very supportive of the Government. An 8:1 ratio is why trust in media is so low.

Now in no way am I saying any of those eight columnists shouldn’t be in the Herald. What I’m saying is the Herald is failing in having a diversity of views within its columnists. They have basically no one (bar Hooton) who is not a supporter of the Government. It’s like Fox and Friends!

The Herald reports:

Women made up nearly half of state sector board and committee membership last year but Minister for Women Julie Anne Genter says that’s not high enough.

The Government today released the latest Gender Stocktake of State Sector Boards and Committees which shows a record high level of participation by women.

As at the end of 2017, women made up 45.7 per cent of state sector boards and committees.

But Genter said the figure should be higher.

The 46% all happened under National. And I think it is silly to try and aim for exact demographic representation. If you did that, you’d be complaining we have too many Maori MPs in Parliament. It is desirable to broadly reflect the community, but the difference between 46% and 50% is pretty minimal.

“This Government is committed to increasing women in leadership across all boards in New Zealand and we are leading by example,” she said today.

“We will ensure half of all directors on state sector boards and committees are women by 2021.”

Wow. They aim to increase the numbers by basically 1% a year. This is less than National over the last three years which went from 41.7% to 45.7%, or 1.3% a year.

This Government is saying they want to achieve 4.3% over four years or 1.1% a year.

Stuff reports:

Former prime minister Helen Clark has called on the board of law firm Russell McVeagh to resign in the wake of the sexual assaults and misconduct against women interns.

If what happened is sufficiently serious to require the RM board to resign, surely then Clark should also be calling on the entire Labour Party Council to resign over the summer camp allegations.

What happened there has actually resulted in prosecution. Nothing was done for victims until they went to the media, and minors were assaulted in an environment where unlimited alcohol was available to them.

So why is Clark not calling for the Labour Party Council to also resign?

Richard Rudman writes at Politik:

The Minister of Workplace Relations and Safety, Iain Lees-Galloway, says the aim is to design a collective bargaining system to lift wages and productivity. A fair pay agreement between workers and employers would set minimum terms and conditions for all workers in the industry or occupation covered by the agreement.

Dust off your copies of awards made by the Arbitration Court from the late 1800s through to the 1970s — because they set minimum terms and conditions for all workers in an industry or occupation, nationally or regionally or, in some cases, for a single enterprise.

Indeed this is effectively a return to national awards.

But there was one key difference which makes this an unlikely recipe for the future.

The state-sponsored system of collective bargaining and arbitration relied on what was commonly known as compulsory unionism.

As a result, for example, every typist and filing clerk in the country — in the private sector anyway — had to be a member of the clerical workers’ union and had the minimum terms and conditions of her or his employment set by the national clerical workers’ award.

This is even worse. You may choose not to join the union, but the union may get to negotiate on your behalf the terms and conditions for the entire industry you work in. And them I suspect you’ll end up being forced to pay them for the privilege.

The notion that all employers of workers in a particular industry or occupation would willingly agree to be parties to a single agreement, or that all those workers would voluntarily have their pay and conditions set in collective bargaining, flies in the face of trends in the world of work.

Labour claims to be focused on the future of work, but their policies are about trying to return to the past.

David Bennett catches the Government out in a lie:

In a striking admission Corrections Minister Kelvin Davis has confirmed the Government was not bound by any public-private partnership contract despite comments from his senior colleagues indicating it was, National’s Corrections spokesperson David Bennett says.

“When asked specifically about a contract for a PPP between the Department of Corrections and private sector consortium, Mr Davis admitted there had been none.

“This is completely contrary to answers given by the Finance Minister and Associate Finance Minister where they claimed that a contract had been signed under National.

“David Clark said, when asked why a PPP was now being used to fund Waikeria Prison, that ‘They [the National Government] signed the contract and it cost $34 million’.

“Grant Robertson subsequently doubled down when asked what date the contract was signed by saying a ‘PPP contract for Waikeria Prison was in place and that breaking it would’ve cost significant sums of money to this Government’.

“Both statements are false. No contract was signed by the former Government and certainly nothing costing $34 million.

“Why Ministers would so confidently announce they were bound by a contract that doesn’t exist beggars belief, but isn’t entirely surprising from this incompetent Government.

PPPs are often very sensible. Nothing wrong with doing the prison as a PPP. But Labour has spent so long campaigning against them, that they had to invent a fictitious contract as the reasons for using one.

At the rate they’re going, Donald Trump will be taking lessons from them.