Stuff reported:

A group of Manus Island asylum seekers are luring underage girls as young as 10 into sex, an Australian Government intelligence report claims.

The Australian Government has confirmed the accuracy of the diplomatic cable, obtained by The Australian Financial Review and Stuff.

However, the timing of the leak, and several others in Australian publications, suggests rising levels of frustration within the Australian Government that Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern was putting undue pressure on a domestic Australian policy issue.

Jacinda has turned this into a real aggravation between the two countries with her inexperience. Diplomacy is about looking for solutions palatable to both countries, that allow both countries to claim a “win”. Trying to browbeat our closest neighbour and friend to reverse a policy which is deemed fundamental to their border security will achieve nothing except pissing them off.

The report was concerned that male camp residents were travelling into the community to procure sex with underage girls.

It states that “some residents were renting rooms throughout Lorengau and luring underage girls between 10 and 17 years of age, with money, goods and food”.

While the report states police were unable to investigate the claims because they had not been reported, the local provincial health authority had written to the provincial police commander expressing concerns about “increased interaction between the residents and the young girls from a health perspective, saying they had seen an increase in sexually transmitted infections and HIV”.

So Labour wants to reduce the number of skilled immigrants coming to NZ, and reduce the number of foreign student but take 150 people from Manus Island. What a great policy.

According to the cable, Manus Island residents were also “unhappy with the stigma attached to the girls who engaged in the activities and the number of children born from the ‘relationships’ (reported at least 10 at the time of our last visit)”.

That’s ok. If their Dads move to NZ, they’ll be able to come also!

Ardern has been increasingly insistent Australia should let New Zealand take some of the 600 asylum seekers remaining on Manus Island, following the closure of Australia’s Regional Processing Centre.

It is understood the Turnbull Government is furious with what it views as Ardern’s “moral posturing and naivety” on the matter.

Yet much of the NZ media are reporting what a diplomatic success the PM is. If this is success, I’d hate to see failure.

Australian government sources say they are extremely concerned about the messages Ardern is sending to people smugglers.

“The smugglers are watching every interaction between governments in the region on this issue and looking for a chance to restart their businesses,” one senior Australian Government source said.

“They observe the statements of new leaders very closely and if they see a sign of policies shifting or changing, they take advantage of that.”

Yep. Policies and resolve of Governments matter. 1,200 people drowned during the previous policy.

A spokesman for Ardern said “the relationship with Australia is strong”.

This belongs to the same category as “We were sure we had the numbers, we just didn’t want a contested vote for Speaker”.

Duncan Garner writes:

I’ve never felt so out of my depth as I did when my first daughter decided to invade the planet. 

Hopeless, useless and sleepless, that was me.  

No book, no midwife, no mother or in-law could tell me what to do, but they all tried desperately and repeatedly. 

Like a powerful but tiny asteroid, this totally reliant little baby girl had the destructive power of a nuclear warhead backed up with the pipes of an air horn. 

Yep that is parenthood.

Dozens of countries offer paid parental leave. It’s a no-brainer. We pay every pensioner a guaranteed state income, it’s good for their health, yet it’s the early years where the differences are made. Supporting families should be the norm, not a luxury item. 

So why is it just for mums? Why can’t families split the 26 weeks so mum and dad can share it, spend time together, bond with baby? Because Labour says it’s best for mum to have 26 weeks with baby. Bullkaka. Plunket says flexibility would be good. Stop while you’re well behind. 

What is Labour to be telling us what’s best for our families? It has no right. No-one is asking for a dollar more. We just want flexibility for mum and dad to take the time together. I would have taken it – it would have been so very welcome. 

Yep a policy that won’t cost a cent more, but Iain Lees-Galloway and Jacinda know better than parents what they should do. ILG proclaimed that it is best for the child if the primary caregiver spends more time with them.

No, this is a case of Labour throwing its toys out of the cot. Labour can’t see past its own nose on this one.

It doesn’t want to pick up the flexible approach because it’s National’s idea. Plain and simple. It can’t be seen to be accommodating the baby blues when the Nats saw red over paid parental leave in the first place. 

This is truly pathetic from Labour on an overall policy that most support. 

Nothing National is asking for will cost more, it’s a disgraceful, short-sighted, pathetic and petty decision by Labour to deny families the chance for mum and dad to share the early weeks together at home. 

Just because they didn’t think of it first, they are refusing to do it.

Jo Moir writes at Stuff:

 Labour has a problem.

For the last week, Kelvin Davis has been acting prime minister and it’s been nothing short of a trainwreck.

It has been spectacular.

Every question Davis had thrown at him on Tuesday was answered first in muffled tones by ministers Phil Twyford, Chris Hipkins and Grant Robertson. Davis then stood up and repeated the answers.

The first and second time could have been written off as them helping him get started but it was just absurd when it continued for the entire stretch of supplementary questions.

The ministers didn’t even try to hide the fact they were doing it and Davis blatantly looked to them every time before rising to his feet.

I have never ever known this to happen before. Maybe a very junior Minister might get helped once by a colleague. But this is the Deputy Leader of Labour and Acting Prime Minister who is unable to even answer questions in the House without another Minister literally telling him what to say.

Labour knew Kelvin isn’t really up to his current role. He was elected because of his appeal to certain demographics. They gave him an incredibly light workload for a Deputy Leader – just Corrections and Tourism. Compare that to the portfolios Bill English, Paula Bennett, Michael Cullen and Wyatt Creech had.

Labour needs Davis to remain the party’s deputy leader because his promotion to that role ahead of the election was a smart one and no doubt went a long way to helping it win all seven Māori seats.

But the party can’t sustain the cringeworthy chaos on display of late and it needs a new plan by the time Ardern and Peters jet out of the country again.

Appeal is part of it, but you also need to have basic competence.

Ardern can appoint Robertson in the acting role and keep Davis as deputy leader. It’s messy, but not as messy as what was on display last week.

Failing that, the Government can choose who answers questions in the House on behalf of the prime minister.

If Ardern is away, then Robertson needs to be nominated as acting leader for the purposes of the House at least. It doesn’t solve the issue of press conferences but it gets halfway there.

That would be an effective vote of no confidence in Davis, and Labour saying he’s not up to it no matter how much help we give him.

Photo of Lake Hayes taken during the race

Did the Queenstown half marathon yesterday. Did the full two years ago but as I only seriously started training for it after the election, the half was a very good choice.

What also attracted me to the half was it started and finished at Millbrook. Great excuse to stay there and could leave your room just before the start rather than have to catch shuttles two hours before hand.

So I left my room around 7.15 am which would get me to the start around 7.23 am. But around 7.22 am I noticed I had left my blue tooth headphone behind so rather than face a couple of hours with no audio, I sprinted back to the room to get them. I then ran back to the starting area and got there at 7.30 am on the dot.

Sadly I had not realised there was a separate start area for the half marathon. I wondered why none of the couple of hundred people were actually on the track. I then noticed they all had different colour bibs. I inquired if this was the half marathon start and they said no, that is a few hundred metres up the avenue.

So I then started sprinting out of the marathon starting area to the amusement of the MC who announced David is starting his half marathon several hundred metres early. I got to the start of the half and there was no-one there. A couple of officials were surprised to see me run up, especially as the tail-end charlie was already a couple of minutes away.

I managed to catch up with the tail-end in around a km, fairly puffed by then as I had been basically running since 7.22. The one good thing about being at the very very back is no-one gets to overtake you – you just get to over-take others!

As I had not trained much, I wasn’t competing for time but just to enjoy the views and they were spectacular. You can see one photo above. Was a perfect day, and it truly must be the most scenic running course around.

The first 17 kms or so were the same route as the full marathon I had done in 2015. It was just a four km distance back from Lake Hayes to Millbrook. Sadly at 2 kms to go you come across a gigantic hill which makes you feel about as cheerful as a cat owned by Gareth Morgan. It was called Christine’s Hill and many of us were cursing Christine. But after the climb, then all downhill and flat for the last km to the finish line.

Despite Christine’s Hill, enjoyed the run and already thinking of coming back in 2018. It really is just the most beautiful area.

Greenpeace released:

As the usual suspects rail against ISDS (which is essentially just a dispute resolution system), David Parker hails a WTO ruling in NZ’s favour:

Minister for Trade and Export Growth, David Parker, today welcomed the World Trade Organisation (WTO) decision to uphold New Zealand’s case against agricultural trade barriers imposed by Indonesia.

On 9 November, the WTO’s Appellate Body confirmed that a number of Indonesian agricultural trade barriers are inconsistent with global trade rules. The decision upholds key findings of a WTO dispute settlement Panel, which in December last year ruled in New Zealand’s favour and was subsequently appealed by Indonesia.

New Zealand and the US initiated the case in 2013 in response to a range of next-generation agricultural “non-tariff” barriers applied by Indonesia to imports since 2011. They include import prohibitions, behind-the-border use and sale restrictions on imports, restrictive import licensing, and a domestic purchase condition.

Isn’t this a terrible undermining of Indonesia’s sovereignty, using the logic of those opposed to ISDS clauses?

A really good joint report from the NZ Initiative and InternetNZ on analog regulation in a digital world.

They propose a number of ways to update our regulatory provisions for the digital age, such as:

• Copyright must adapt to technological changes that open new ways of making, marketing, and accessing content. One example here is making our current “fair dealing” system more flexible, complementing copyright protections with room to innovate, and apply new technologies which open creative ways to reuse works and reach audiences.
• The government’s commitment to open data principles needs to be seen by greater open data practice. New Zealand has a wealth of microdata from surveys and we can do much to make access easier without compromising confidentiality.
• Anti-Money Laundering legislation should be more sensitive to the size of potential risks so it does not hinder digital innovation. The delay in setting up Bitcoin exchanges is a case in point.
• Regulatory Impact Statements should note whether compliance with comparable jurisdictions’ rules could also be adequate for New Zealand purpose.
• Film and television censorship regimes must be updated to better account for how users can learn about and access content with modern technology.
• The scheduled review of the Harmful Digital Communications Act should consider whether the Act has been proportionate to the harms targeted and whether it has chilled non-infringing speech.
• Small tweaks can sometimes make a big difference. Confirming that supersonic aircraft need only comply with chapter 3 of the International Civil Aviation Organisation noise specifications for take offs and landings will see New Zealand ready for the next generation of supersonic passenger aircraft – and six-hour trips to the California coast.

The report notes:

The fiercest opposition to digital innovations generally comes from
incumbent industries. This is not surprising given their bottom line is under threat from new entrants. That the industry demands to apply
regulation to new digital competitors rather than abolish it for themselves shows regulation as a barrier to entry. Note the response of the taxi industry to Uber or hotel chains abroad to Airbnb.

Both new services which have been great for consumers but bad for incumbents.

Incumbents suggest new entrants should follow the same rules as
existing players. Calls for level playing fields earn some sympathy. But
regulation should focus on protecting consumer rights or addressing
harmful effects on third parties. If new technology can solve those
problems just as well as existing regulation, shackling new players with rules designed for older systems hurts consumers and competition.

Technology can be much better at solving problems. The fact my journey in an Uber is GPS tracked is much more reassuring to my safety than whether a taxi has a video camera in it.

The report also looks at the issue of copyright and how the law has to keep being amended as new technologies arise.

The VCR meant we had to change our copyright laws in 1994 to make them legal.

Reverse engineering was only made legal in NZ in 2008, 16 years after the US.

Digital video recorders and cloud services are technically in breach of NZ copyright law.

We need a copyright law that is flexible and focuses on the use, not the copying.

The Herald reports:

Labour’s Finance Minister Grant Robertson has backpedalled on Revenue Minister Stuart Nash’s promise to start requiring overseas retailers to collect GST on goods bought by New Zealanders, saying the government was still looking at the issue.

This morning on Newstalk ZB, Nash said the Government would “absolutely” extend the law to cover all goods as well as services purchased from overseas.

Absolutely! Can’t get firmer than that.

However, Robertson later said the Government was only looking at the issue and no decisions had been made.

Absolutely no decisions!

Nash declined to do further interviews on the matter.

It normally takes years for Ministers to start hiding from the media.

The Business Committee has agreed select committee memberships. The breakdown by party on each select committee is:

• Economic Development, Science and Innovation – National 5, Labour 3, NZ First 1, Greens 1 – tied between Government and Opposition
• Education and Workforce – National 5, Labour 4, NZ First 1, Greens 1 – Government majority
• Environment – National 4, Labour 3, NZ First 1, Greens 1 – Government majority
• Finance and Expenditure – National 5, Labour 6, NZ First 1, ACT 1 – Government majority
• Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade – National 4, Labour 3, Greens 1 – tied
• Governance and Administration – National 4, Labour 4 – tied
• Health – National 4, Labour 4 – tied
• Justice – National 4, Labour 4 – tied
• Māori Affairs – National 4, Labour 2, NZ First 1, Greens 1 – tied
• Primary Production – National 4, Labour 3, NZ First 1 – tied
• Social Services and Community – National 4, Labour 3, NZ First 1, Greens 1 – Government majority
• Transport and Infrastructure – National 3, Labour 3, NZ First 1, Greens 1 – Government majority
• Regulations Review – National 3, Labour 3 – tied

So of the 13 select committees, eight are tied. That means that unless National agrees no amendments can be agreed to, or even get a recommendation a bill proceed. This is not fatal as the recommendation can be overturned at second reading and amendments can be done at committee of the house stage. But that is messy. Basically Ministers will need to work with the Opposition if they wish bills to get through those eight select committees.

Of the other five committees, on four the Government only has a majority of the Greens vote with them. They are not bound to support Government bills to the same degree as NZ First is, so they will also be influential.

There are so many maiden speeches I can’t cover all or even most of them. But this one from Denise Lee was particularly poignant, so I want to highlight it.

I drove into the local petrol station after the election to return yet another hired trailer used for signs, and the station attendant approached me and remarked, “Hey, are you that lady from the signs—the one that won? I’ve been watching you. If you know how to back a trailer like that, you deserve to win.” I laughed. I introduced myself to Lester, and he told me that he was a regular middle New Zealander working hard to make a living, and now that I was elected, “Miss lady from the signs”, he said, “don’t forget about us.” Pressing a little further about what he meant, I discovered it meant that he felt OK about working hard as long as he had enough to take his family on a holiday. He didn’t want lawmakers to take away that opportunity. It wasn’t complicated; he was outgoing and optimistic, and he felt strongly that he wanted to keep more of what he earned so he could choose how to spend it.

Most people want to earn more and get to keep more of what they earn.

One night, I woke, as a young parent, and decided to check on my two-year-old son Riley, to discover that he had died in his sleep. 

Every parent’s worst nightmare.

What ensued was a series of random interactions with a cold-hearted, function-driven system. The failure of police inquest officers, pathologists, and coroners to sensitively inform and communicate their process to two shell-shocked parents still mystifies me today.

Loss comes in all forms, not just death but loss of careers, loss of confidence, and loss of relationships and marriage—my own succumbing to the high percentage of those that end upon the death of a child. With all our collective legislative wisdom, there shouldn’t also have to be loss of faith in a system supposedly designed to protect those that need it at precisely the time that they need it.

Trying to keep up with where Riley’s body had gone, what they were doing to it, and what they were retaining from it; receiving an abruptly worded police letter informing us of our Coroner’s Court hearing date—it was all too much. No explanations, no frequently asked questions brochure—just a summons. You’ll understand, I thought that we were being put on trial for the death of our son. 

Treated more like criminals than victims.

Walking through the valley of the shadow of death, trying to understand the legalities, and desperately wanting to just stay away from the world to get on with grieving, my sense of indignance grew. I was the one who had to ask to meet with the police and the pathologist and others to get a handle on who else might face what we did. The indignance formed a seed that merged into a big part of the driving force that sees me standing here today.

I’m subsequently relieved that the coronial system has improved for people. The 2006 Coroners Act and later reviews better protect the interests of grieving families. Politics really did become personal for me then. 

Hopefully no one else has to go through what Denise did.

Stuff reports:

The new Government will not repeal the ‘Hobbit law’, but instead plans to make changes to the controversial legislation. …

Lees-Galloway said it was more important to get new legislation right than to do it in 100 days, and that was what industry and unions wanted.

“It would be pointless to stick to a manifesto commitment that didn’t actually get us the result that we were looking for.”

The Government would set up an advisory group to develop new legislation for the film and television sector.

Lees-Galloway said there needed to certainty to encourage continued investment in the industry.

“My message to the international film industry is that New Zealand will remain both a premium hub of film craft and innovation, and as easy to do business with in future as it is today.”

The new Labour Government had promised to set about changing the controversial ‘Hobbit law’ in its first 100 days in office.

A huge but welcome back down from Labour. It looks like they discovered just how many productions and jobs would be lost if they repealed the law.

Working with industry on an acceptable solution is a far better way to go, than their manifesto commitment of an urgent repeal of the law.

Stuff reports:

Finance Minister Grant Robertson maintains the Government still plans to cut New Zealand’s debt levels, as economists warn billions more will be borrowed over the coming years.

In Opposition Labour laid out a fiscal plan which would borrow around $11 billion more than National had proposed, but still cut debt as a share of the total economic output from 24 per cent to 20 per cent by 2022.

The plan formed a major point of contention during the election campaign, as National finance spokesman Steven Joyce was widely mocked for his claim that Robertson’s plan had a major “fiscal hole”.

But bank economists, who monitor the likely issuance of government bonds, are warning of pressure for Treasury to borrow billions more than Labour had signalled because of new spending promises.

National worked so hard to get us back into surplus so we could stop borrowing. So how much more do the economists think Labour will borrow?

ANZ has forecast that Labour will borrow $13 billion more than its pre-election fiscal update maintained it would over the next four years, although around $3b of that would go to the NZ Super Fund. This would see net Crown debt at 23 per cent of gross domestic product, 3 percentage points higher than Labour’s plan.

So Labour said they will borrow $11 billion more, ANZ reckon it will be $24 billion more.

Now there are around 2.4 million households in New Zealand so Labour are going to borrow an extra $10,000 per household to fund their promises.

Stuff reports:

The Green Party is considering opposing NZ First’s “Waka Jumping” bill – a deal struck in coalition talks – unless Labour gives it a national “Parihaka Day”.

Green Party justice spokesperson Golriz Ghahraman, in an internal email obtained by Stuff, suggested some horse trading with Labour to acknowledge the fact the party has long opposed waka jumping legislation.

Ghahraman’s suggested her colleague Marama Davidson’s bill, which recognises the anniversary of the invasion of Parihaka by making it a National Day, be put on the table for Government support.

So the Greens oppose the waka jumping bill but will sell out their principles and support it, in exchange for a Parihaka Day.

Nice to know what price they put on electoral law.

The proposed waka jumping bill is odious as it gives party leaders huge power, effectively to expel MPs from Parliament who challenge them.

If the Greens are willing to support a waka jumping bill in return for Parihaka Day, what would it take for them to support extending the term of Parliament to five years – a statue of Hone Heke?

A spokesperson for the Green Party said this was an “internal document that was sent in error”.

The Greens used to support extending the Official Information Act to Parliament. Do they still do so? Then we could see all their other internal documents detailing what they will sell out for what price.

Radio NZ reports:

A New Zealand man who worked at the Manus Island refugee detention facility is warning the government against taking any refugees, saying the ones still at the centre are dangerous men.  

Ian, who only wants his first name used, worked as a security guard at Manus Regional Processing Centre for 18 months, and said about eight incidents of violence, threats and illegal behaviour were recorded each day.

There were numerous refugees who had integrated into the community, some who even married, and did not pose a danger. But the ones who remain at the centre and have refused to leave after Australia closed it earlier this month, are people New Zealanders should fear, he told Checkpoint with John Campbell.

“We know what these people are capable of, we know there’s footage on hard drives that they’ve got of child pornography, etcetera. They are not the calibre of people you want to come into a country and try and re-establish themselves.

As I understand it the ones left (as in refusing to leave the former detention centre) are the hardcore.

Ian, who lives in Australia, said the refugees were living in good, air-conditioned converted containers while the centre was open, had Wifi, a volleyball court, took classes and went on fishing excursions.

Terrible.

If the refugees were able to come to New Zealand and gain residency, then they would be able to move to Australia.

“It opens a back door into Australia and if that happens you are looking at irreparable damage done to the Special Category Visa deal between New Zealand and Australia, which would affect a lot of people.”

He expected the Australian prime minister would respond by changing legislation so Kiwis have to apply for a visa before entering and living in the country.

I don’t think it would get that bad. But the more Ardern attacks Australia on this, the harder the response will be.

Radio NZ reports:

Solo mothers who don’t name the father of their child will no longer have welfare payments cut, under the Labour-led government’s changes to social security.

What this means is that deadbeat dads will escape financial responsibility for their kids and taxpayers will get left with the bill.

You will see a huge increase in solo mothers not naming the fathers of their children. That gets them off the hook for child support payments.

Child support liability for just one child can be as high as $340 a week. So of course many Dads don’t want to be named. They’ll happily pay say $40 a week unofficially to avoid paying the $340 a week they should be paying.

This policy change rewards dead beat Dads and punishes taxpayers. Watch and see the growth in Dads not being named.

The Herald reports:

New defence minister Ron Mark has been wearing military medals in a way which puts his foreign service above that which he performed for New Zealand.

The way Mark has his medals arrayed across his chest is in breach of NZ Defence Force protocols and not permitted for soldiers over whom he holds sway.

And it has led to questions about whether he is even entitled to wear the four medals awarded while in the service of the Sultan of Oman in the Middle East.

Mark would not answer those questions yesterday, but provided a statement in which he said: “I have the greatest respect for military service, and the way in which it is recognised. I am proud of the people I served alongside in both the New Zealand and Omani Defence Forces. 

“I have sought advice from the Honours Unit on the wearing of the medals I was awarded, and will take that advice when it’s received.”

It is an embarrassment for Mark, having worn his medals in front of senior officers who knew he was breaching the standards expected of all New Zealand military personnel.

Medal protocol is very important to Defence Force members and veterans, and the Minister of Defence has to be meticulously correct with what he wears.

There is no question about whether Ron Mark has earnt the medals he wears. It is about whether his wearing of the Oman medals is in line with the rules for New Zealand.

If Mark did have permission – which medals’ experts believe is unlikely – he has been caught out by the way he wore them.

The rules around wearing medals dictate that those earned in the service of New Zealand must be worn first.

Mark wears his medals from service in Oman first, giving them a pre-eminent position over his New Zealand medals.

Not a good look for the Minister of Defence.

NZ Medals Ltd owner Aubrey Bairstow – an expert in constructing medal boards – said: “His Oman medals must be after his New Zealand medals.”

Bairstow constantly deals with military veterans and said many were upset by the way the medals had been displayed.

I’ve had several contact me on this issue also.

“They are saying this guy values a foreign country over our own and he’s the Minister of Defence.

“It’s also ironic he’s party is called New Zealand First but he seems to put New Zealand after Oman. This is one thing where he didn’t put New Zealand first and given his capacity as Minister of Defence, you would expect him to.

New Zealand second!

Newshub reports:

Speaking on Tuesday morning, acting Prime Minister Kelvin Davis appeared to cold-shoulder National’s idea, saying Labour is happy with the bill as is.

“We’re really excited by the fact that by 2020, parents will be able to take 26 weeks’ paid parental leave.”

“We’re happy with the bill that we’ve put forward.”

But his colleague, Willow-Jean Prime said she knows how difficult being a new mother can be and would be talking to Minister for Workplace Relations Iain Lees-Galloway about adopting National’s amendment.

“That is one of the most challenging times – as soon as Mum has given birth – and I know in our own situation, that was a time I really appreciated having my husband there. Being a school teacher he only had about a week and that was difficult.”

It is amazingly difficult for parents to only have the other parent around for a couple of weeks. National’s amendment would give flexibility and allow parents to work out what best suits them.

The first three months after birth is to be honest a bit of a living hell. You love your baby to pieces, but my God it is hard. The sleep deprivation makes you unable to function well and working out how to stop your baby crying can be Mission Impossible. It is all worth it when they then smile at you, but it is damn hard. Allowing parents to both take paid leave at the same time so they can cope together, rather than apart, will really help.

Labour should swallow its pride and do what is best for parents by giving them flexibility, rather than keep insisting they know what is best.

Even the author of its previous bill on paid parental leave, Sue Moroney, has come out and endorsed National’s policy.

Ms Moroney, who retired at the 2017 election, said “getting everyone that attachment and bonding opportunity would be a great place to go to”.

She said men are as capable of looking after children as women are, and she wants families to have the flexibility to allow both parents to care for their child or children.

Exactly. Flexibility. Not we know best for everyone.

The Guardian reports:

Robert Mugabe remains in detention at his home in Zimbabwe more than 12 hours after the military declared on national television that it had temporarily taken control of the country to “target criminals” around the head of state.

The move by the armed forces appears to have resolved a bitter battle to succeed the 93-year-old president, which had pitted his former vice-president, Emmerson Mnangagwa, against Mugabe’s wife, Grace.

Mnangagwa was reported to have returned to Zimbabwe on Tuesday evening from South Africa, where he fled last week after being stripped of his office by Mugabe in an apparent attempt to clear Grace Mugabe’s path to power.

It is hard to think of a worst ruler than Robert Mugabe so this coup may be an improvement. From all accounts his wife would have been even worse, and it was his promotion of her than finally led the Generals to rebel.

One high-profile opposition leader said there was “a lot of talking going on”, with the army reaching out to them to discuss the formation of a transitional government after Mugabe steps down.

Negotiations had been ongoing for several months with “certain people within the army”, a second senior opposition official said.

The official said Mugabe would resign this week and be replaced by Mnangagwa, with opposition leaders taking posts as vice-president and prime minister. There was no independent confirmation of his claim.

That would be a good thing, if this leads to a government of national unity.

Stuff reports:

As United Future shuts down, its leader fears any chance of legalising cannabis will stall.

Damian Light said for him personally, United Future’s biggest achievement was the drug reform measures that were implemented during its time in government. 

“It’s unfinished though, that’s the problem. It needs to be carried on, and that’s one of our concerns, is who’s going to carry it on,” the United Future leader told The AM Show.

United Future was a valiant attempt at having a moderate centrist party in the MMP environment. One more socially liberal than National but more economically rational than Labour.

But unless you are a populist, the centre can be a very small place.

United started in 1995 with the defection of seven MPs to it. Peter Dunne, Clive Matthewson and Margaret Austin from Labour and Bruce Cliffe, Pauline Gardiner, Peter Hilt and John Robertson from National.

They only got 0.9% of the vote in 1996 with Peter Dunne the sole survivor in Ohariu-Belmont. 1999 was much the same with 0.5% of the vote.

They merged with the former Christian Democrats (now Future NZ) in 2000 and in 2002 was their peak with 6.7% and eight seats.

2005 saw them get 2.7% and three seats. The christian wing mainly left in 2007 and formed the Kiwi Party, later merging with the Conservatives.

2008 saw them drop to 0.9% and just one MP, Peter Dunne. 2011 was 0.6% and 2014 0.2%. In 2017 with Dunne retiring they got just 0.07%.

They’ve hovered up a lot of minor parties over the years. Parties that have been part of them over the years are:

1. Future NZ 1
2. United
3. Advance NZ
4. Ethnic Minority
5. Conservatives/ROC
6. Christian Democrats/Future NZ 2
7. Outdoor Recreation
8. WIN Party