Waatea News has an interview with Professor Lisa Te Morenga of the Health Coalition Aotearoa. Around four minutes into the interview:

Interviewer: You’re not advocating for temperance here are you, to get rid of alcohol might be a step too far. Some might say it is the way for us to go.

HCA: Yeah maybe, you know in the long term

So here we have it. They want prohibition. That is their end goal. If politicians listen to the extreme activists, then no more beer or wine.

The activists demand that the Government never ever listen to industry. I’d say the Government should never ever listen to prohibitionists.

Stuff reports:

Two recent Media Council decisions have been called out by media, with one labelled “a serious error” with “potentially wide reaching consequences”, and the other “alarming” and “potentially dangerous“.

NZME and RNZ have publicly criticised Media Council decisions upheld in relation to its stories. Such moves are highly unusual and speak to serious frustration at recent decisions.

It is rare for media outlets to say they disagree with the Media Council decision. 95% of the time the publisher accepts the Media Council decision.

In both these cases, I am with the minority of Council members who would not have upheld the complaint. I think both restrict journalists from doing their jobs.

Former Herald Editor Gavin Ellis writes:

Let me put it bluntly: The Media Council majority got it wrong.

How can the Daily Post have acted unfairly when the accused man’s name can be found in a simple online search and the accusations and investigation were well-known in the area. How can it be unfair when – for more than a decade – his name and association with the case had been referenced in a readily accessible Wikipedia article on Mona Blades’ disappearance?

Rewriting history is almost always a bad idea!

Stuff reports:

Celebration – tinged with anxiousness – has broken out in parts of Israel and Gaza after the announcement of a ceasefire deal between the warring parties.

Israel has begun implementing the ceasefire deal in Gaza, after it reached an agreement with Hamas for the Palestinian militant group to release all the hostages it holds.

Crowds in both areas gathered to welcome the news, with Gaza residents heard chanting “Donald Trump! Donald Trump!”

That is not a sentence you expected to read – Gaza residents chanting Donald Trump in celebration.

The ceasefire is a huge achievement, and all credit to Trump and the others involved in making it happen. A ceasefire is not a permanent peace, but it is a vital step towards it.

I look forward to the Green Party MPs getting up in Parliament and praising Trump for delivering what they have been demanding for so long.

The NY Post reports:

“My name is LaWhore Vagistan, my preferred pronouns are “she” or “aunty.” I chose ‘LaWhore’ because my family traces its origins to Pakistan: Lahore is an important city in Pakistan, and well, I’m a bit of a w*ore,” the drag queen said.

“And Vagistan because I see the subcontinent as one, big, beautiful Vag…istan,” he wrote in the tacky, naval-gazing self-interview.

Sounds like an excellent addition to the Harvard faculty.

To run a survey that doesn’t even include as an option having teams based on sex, makes it clear that this is not a consultation, but an exercise in propaganda.

The survey is about community level netball, not performance level. So it is school and club level. My general policy is to support participation based on gender identity at community level, but to have participation based on biological sex at the national and international competitive level. So if I was still involved in netball (I was at university) I wouldn’t choose the biological sex option. But to not have it as an option is appalling as it means those who disagree with me don’t get a say unless the choose other.

The Herald reports:

The University of Auckland’s controversial Treaty of Waitangi and te ao Māori courses are unlikely to remain compulsory after negative feedback from staff and students, and criticism from politicians.

The university senate has recommended that Waipapa Taumata Rau (WTR) courses become an optional choice, rather than a core requirement.

The courses were made compulsory for all first-year students this year. The backdown comes after just one completed semester. 

In March, Act leader David Seymour called on the university to scrap the compulsory courses, describing them as “a perversion of academic freedom” and “a form of indoctrination”.

“The university has been reviewing the feedback about the Waipapa Taumata Rau courses,” Auckland University Vice-Chancellor Dawn Freshwater posted online on September 12. …

“While students have found the courses valuable, they have also indicated where improvements could be made and told us they would like greater flexibility in how WTR fits within their programme of study,” she wrote.

“As we do with all courses, we aim to use staff and student feedback to strengthen how they are delivered. 

“To that end, and in response to that feedback, a proposal will be discussed at Senate on 15 September recommending that WTR become an optional choice within General Education for most programmes, rather than a core requirement.

This is a welcome backdown.

First of all no course should be compulsory across all faculties except something related to core academic learning such as how to do citations, references, not plagiarise etc. I would think it could be covered in a single one or two hour session.

The compulsory Treaty clauses were not about exposing students to diverse views on what the Treaty means. It was to tell them there is only one correct view.

Worse of all, students had to pay up to $6,000 for a compulsory course that many saw as of little or no relevance to their degree.

If the course does become optional, it will be fascinating to see how many students in each faculty elect to do it.

There is an article in the UK about an aborted prosecution of two men accused of spying for China.

Basically Christopher Cash worked for the China Research Group, a group of Beijing-sceptic Conservative MPs. He had a friend Christopher Berry who was commissioned to do 34 reports for a client, whom he thought was a Chinese corporate wanting to expand into the UK. In reality it was for a Chinese intelligence agent who passed it onto a Politburo member. Cash provided info to Berry for these reports.

None of the info was classified, or about defence issues. It has been described as:

it was said to be material in the public domain on how parliament or British politics works, or uncomplicated analyses – who he thought would win the next election.

It is absolutely normal for foreign governments to be interested in the domestic politics of a country. Over the years I would have had numerous conversations with several dozen Ambassadors or their staff on NZ politics. They’re interested in who may form Government, who may be key Ministers, likely major election issues etc.

Sometimes these are informal chats. Sometimes they are meetings. Sometimes over a meal. Sometimes one on one, sometimes with a dozen or more Ambassadors.

Sadly I have never charged for these. I get the odd meal or coffee in exchange! But I know some embassies in the past have paid government relations firms for advice. I recall a couple of decades ago one lobbyist returned from a meeting with an Asian Embassy, and they were very bemused that they were handed cash in an envelope at the end of the lunch to pay the invoice in advance!

Most of the Ambassadors or staff I have dealt with have been what you would call friendly countries, but not universally, In the 2000s I was acquainted with the Iranian Ambassador and when I got a visa from the Embassy to visit there in 2009, he asked if I could take some official papers over to Tehran for him, as he thought I would be more reliable than the diplomatic courier! If he had followed up, I would have declined, as I didn’t fancy explaining to a border officer why I had Iranian Government papers on me! I did take the precaution of getting advice from the then Foreign Minister’s Office.

I am not sure if NZ has any enemies, but I would not give insights to an “enemy” country. While Russia is invading Ukraine, I would politely decline any engagement there. But if the Chinese Embassy asked me to chat to them about how I saw the NZ political environment I would (they have not, by the way). I would probably be far more restrained in my observations than I would to say the Australian High Commissioner though.

So the attempted prosecution of the two men for espionage always seemed an overreach to me. What they were doing is pretty routine in most capitals. It isn’t spying. It wasn’t classified information. It was just political analysis.

Part of the prosecution case may have relied on whether China is officially an enemy of the UK – something which the UK Government might not want to declare in court. So we don’t know why the prosecution was dropped, but I think it was always a very weak case.

Governments of the left like to claim they are transformational, when they’re not. The Ardern Government achieved so little it was the opposite. They used wellbeing as a slogan, and did a couple of disastrous mergers. They spent a lot of money. To be fair the Clark Government did actually achieve some major stuff such as KiwiSaver, the Cullen Fund and the China FTA.

The Key/English Government was very competent, managed the economy well, and generally improved public services. But not even I would call them transformational.

However there is a case to be made that what this current Government is doing, is in fact transformational. By that, I mean implementing policies that will have a massive impact on New Zealand.

It is certainly true that the books are far from being balanced, and economic growth not where it should be. But we shouldn’t let that detract from some of the massively important, ie transformational, policies they are implementing.

What are they. Here’s the ones that come to mind.

1. The Fast Track Approvals Law will turbo charge around 200 to 300 projects, allowing them to be consented in months rather than years and years.
2. The scrapping of NCEA and replacement by new meaningful achievement certificates is massive for students and employers.
3. Legislation to allow congestion charging, which will have a huge impact on congestion in major cities
4. The planning law changes that will require Councils to allow for 30 years of housing growth, which will finally allow cities to easily build up and out.
5. The RMA replacement which will place property rights at the centre of resource management law
6. The changes to earthquake building codes that will save thousands of buildings from sitting empty.
7. The decision to have phonics as the primary method for teaching kids structured literacy
8. Changes to the Building Act which will make houses cheaper and easier to build
9. Replacing petrol tax with road user charges

These both individually, and collectively, will have a massive impact and transform New Zealand for the better.

In education, transport, housing and resource management the changes are profound, and vitally needed. The Government should be trumpeting them more.

Radio NZ today cover an Education Review Office Report on Education – with good detail.

Two mentions I would highlight.

1. Why attitudes are improving.

“The report said the improvements in student and parental attitudes were linked to schools providing clearer expectations, practical supports and rewards, as well as making students feel connected to school.

“Students are five times more likely to think daily attendance is important if they feel they belong at school. Three-quarters of students (73 percent) feel they belong,” the report said.

“Schools setting clear expectations about attendance is the most important factor for parents reporting that school is important for their child’s future – parents are twice as likely to report school is important if the school is setting clear expectations).”

2. One negative that can easily be fixed.

“The report said the number of days of instruction mattered for primary schools and 35 percent of parents said their children’s school was sometimes or often closed on days they thought it should be open.

“We found that frequent or poorly timed closures can encourage absenteeism. Closures on Thursdays or Tuesdays can lead to extended weekends. Similarly, halfday closures can result in full-day absences due to practical incentives, such as saving on transport costs and easier household arrangements,” the report said.”

Schools should not have ANY teacher only days in term time. They should also not be having half-day closures for Parent Interviews.

Not only are both hugely inconvenient – and often expensive – for families but they also send completely the wrong message on the value of a school day.

[email protected]

The BBC reports:

Speaking after the speech on the BBC’s Politics Live, Lammy was asked whether he thought Farage was a racist. 

He said the PM had been calling out policies “that would line people up who have a right to be in this country, who might be Indian, who might be Nigerian, and send them home”.

He added: “It’s not British. It doesn’t respect our values.

“I’m not going to play the man. I’m playing the ball, as our leader did.

“I will leave it for the public to come to their own judgements about someone who once flirted with Hitler Youth when he was younger.”

The UK Deputy PM says he is going to play the ball, not the man, and in the same breath alleges Farage flirted with Hitler Youth. The hypocrisy is so immense.

A small problem is that Farage was born in 1964 and Hitler died in 1945. But hey, let’s call our opponents Nazis because that always works so well.

The Herald reports:

The Reserve Bank has cut the Official Cash Rate by 50 basis points to 2.5%.

The bank delivered its latest Monetary Policy Review at 2pm today.

The Monetary Policy Committee reached a consensus to reduce the Official Cash Rate (OCR) by 50 basis points (bps).

The committee said it remained open to further reductions in the OCR as required for inflation to settle sustainably near the 2% target mid-point in the medium term.

This is welcome news for home owners and others. I was a bit surprised they did a 0.5% cut as inflation is still close to the top of the target range of 1% to 3%, but the fact it was a consensus decision seems to indicate they don’t think it will be inflationary.

The committee revised its assessment of spare capacity in the economy following the worse than expected second-quarter GDP results, but only marginally.

An unusually large seasonal balancing item had contributed to the weakness in the headline figure and was likely to be reversed out in the third quarter, it said.

A good third quarter result will be needed for business and consumer confidence.

Stuff reports:

The gunman who opened fire on an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Dallas, killing a detainee and critically wounding two others, left behind a note saying that he hoped the attack would “give ICE agents real terror,” the FBI director said Thursday.

Another case of someone using weapons instead of words.

Guido Fawkes points out:

The same judge who spared jail for a man who attacked someone burning a Quran with a knife gave a man a prison sentence for sending nasty email to John Bercow. Rule of lawyers in action…

Judge Adam Hiddleston gave Moussa Kadri a 20-week prison sentence, suspended for 18 months. In Knightsbridge in February Kadri had seen a man setting alight the Quran and shouted “I’m going to kill you” before “slashing at him with a knife.” …

In 2021 Hiddleston jailed a 35-year-old businessman for one year for sending rude and at times threatening emails to Bercow, Ed Davey, Ian Blackford, Corbyn, and Amber Rudd among others. He said: “I have no doubt that you did harbour a deep-seated animosity to those who held opposing views to your own and that appeared to have been your motivation. The contents of those emails were vile.” More vile than a knife attack?

While I can be critical of some of the NZ judicial decisions, they pale in comparison to UK ones which are just so terrible. An e-mail gets you jail and a stabbing does not.

Roger Partridge writes:

When Parliament says gang insignia “is forfeited to the Crown,” citizens are entitled to assume those words mean what they say. Yet on 11 August the District Court ruled otherwise. Judge Lance Rowe directed that a Mongrel Mob vest, seized under the Government’s new Gangs Act 2024 and forfeited following a guilty plea, should nevertheless be returned to its owner, Andrew “Andy” Leef.

Whether or not one agrees with the policy behind the Act’s provisions, the decision should alarm anyone who believes Parliament’s unambiguous words should be respected.

I’m not actually a fan of the gang patch law. But I am a big fan of judges not ignoring the clear words of legislation. This is yet another example of a judiciary thinking they can ignore the clear will of Parliament.

What should be done? Parliament cannot shrug. When courts stretch or ignore clear words, corrective legislation is legitimate and necessary.

The most urgent reform is specific to Ellis. Parliament should overturn the decision and reinstate the Loasby framework under which tikanga could only be recognised as law when it met the settled requirements. That approach had the virtues of clarity, predictability and respect for both tikanga and the common law.

Parliament may also need to amend section 7(3) of the Gangs Act to address the uncertainty created by Judge Rowe’s decision. That should not be necessary. But in the current judicial climate, clarity must sometimes be made clearer still.

The Leef decision may be only one case. But it signals a larger story. The Supreme Court’s doctrinal looseness in Ellis and Fitzgerald has filtered down to the District Court. Parliament wrote a simple two-step process: offence, then forfeiture. The court has turned it into a vibe-check.

Law is not meant to work that way. In a democracy, citizens deserve to know that a guilty plea under a bright-line statute means what it says.

If “forfeited to the Crown” can now mean “returned to the defendant,” the problem is not a single District Court ruling. It is a jurisprudence, seeded in the Supreme Court, that has taught judges and the public alike that even Parliament’s clearest words no longer anchor the law.

I think Parliament should act. The only way judges will stop ignoring clear statutes is if the moment they do so, Parliament passes an explicit repudiation of their decision. Parliament shouldn’t have to do this, but sadly it has become necessary.

Stuff reports:

Foreign Minister Winston Peters told a UN leaders’ breakfast in New York that the world needs to face the “elephant in the room” on global emissions.

Addressing the room this morning, Peters said, “We have to be honest and realistic here. Four countries comprise 60% of the world’s emissions, and the rest of the 191 countries… are wrestling with this problem.”

“We have to face the fact, deal with it – we’re in a battle we can’t possibly win.”

Reporters were asked to leave the meeting after Peters’ remarks, RNZ reported, but a staffer later relayed that the World Bank’s Global Director for Climate Change, Valerie Hickey, went on to say the Foreign Affairs Minister had “dropped a truth bomb” and reinforced how critical it was for major emitters to take meaningful action.

The top 4 emitters are:

• China 30%
• US 11%
• India 8%
• Russia 5%

What is interesting is the change in emissions since 1990 for the big 4. They are:

1. China +311%
2. India +199%
3. US -4%
4. Russia -13%

Also of note is that EU emissions are 37% lower than in 1990.

The only way global greenhouse gas emissions will stabilise or reduce is if China and India change track.

I have blogged previously on the disgraceful retrospective law change the Government is trying to put through Parliament, to protect the ANZ and ASB banks from a four year old class action lawsuit about their failures to comply with the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act.

It has just been announced that ASB has just reached a settlement with the plaintiffs for $135.6m.

This means that the only beneficiary of the retrospective law change will be a single bank – ANZ. The already weak rationale for the law change is now even weaker.

The Government must drop this unprincipled and repugnant retrospective law change.

The purpose of the so called aid flotilla to Gaza isn’t to deliver aid (they could deliver it via the normal route). It is to get arrested.

It is worth noting Israel has failed at times to get enough aid into Gaza, which they have a responsibility to do. However it is worth noting that the worse appears to be over. The JP reports:

A kilogram of flour, which cost between NIS 80-100 about three weeks ago, is now priced at NIS 18. A kilogram of sugar, which costs NIS 300, now costs NIS 50. A kilogram of pasta dropped from NIS 100 to NIS 10. A kilogram of rice, which was NIS 120 three weeks ago, now sells for NIS 30. Oil, lentils, and hummus, which previously went for NIS 90 per kilogram/liter, have now dropped to NIS 30, NIS 20, and NIS 10, respectively.

One can demand Israel does a better job of getting aid into Gaza, without thinking these flotillas have anything to do with actually helping get aid in.

The activists claim the naval blockade is illegal. The media repeat their claims without question. They ignore the fact that the naval blockade has been found by a UN panel to be legal, chaired by no less than NZ’s Sir Geoffrey Palmer. The report is here. Key conclusions are:

• Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza. The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law.
• All humanitarian missions wishing to assist the Gaza population should do so through established procedures and the designated land crossings in consultation with the Government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

Any media story on the blockade that doesn’t mention these conclusions is not giving readers the full story.

The activists on board know they will get arrested. They’ll be disappointed if they don’t. Their aim is publicity, not aid. They also know Israel will deport them as soon as possible. The Green Party hosted press conferences in NZ are pure performance.

The Herald reports:

Outgoing Wellington Mayor Tory Whanau has U-turned on plans for a future mayoral bid, and is instead looking to Parliament for a potential 2029 run with the Green Party.

Wellington’s loss will be New Zealand’s gain!

This is appalling. As I have said on many occasions, no MPs should be targeted at their homes. They have offices and Parliament where you can protest their decisions.

This is part of a trend of increasing violent rhetoric from the left, as detailed in this tweet:

Ani O’Brien covers here how the media just ignore stuff rom the left, which would be a major story if it was someone from the right:

Every single one of those events should have been a news story. They certainly would have been if it were Cam Slater calling for people to spit in the food of Labour/Green/Te Pāti Māori or Shane Jones who shared a video of a prospective candidate saying she would struggle not to punch Chris Hipkins and Chloe Swarbrick in the face. The incidents involve racial discrimination, political intimidation, incitement to violence, and claims of unsafe internal culture. In a functioning democracy with a watchdog media who reported equally as critically about both sides, those would be leading bulletins.

The Greens decry any random person on social media being nasty to their MPs, yet show their hypocrisy:

Chloe backs the protesters targeting Winston’s home, and her whip wrote letters of support to someone who vandalised other MPs offices. Yet they cry crocodile tears about threats to MPs.