NewstalkZB reports:

Winston Peters is promising to boost the wool industry by forbidding the use of synthetic carpets and insulation in government-funded buildings if NZ First is part of the next government.

“Whether a government office or a Housing New Zealand property, where carpet is specified it will be natural wool or fibre from here on in,” he said on Monday.

“New Zealand First will swing government procurement in behind natural, renewable and sustainable wool and natural fibres.”

Why stop there? Why not also promise the bricklayers than wood buildings will be banned. Also promise the dairy farmers than no government office will have any liquids other than milk.

The Taxpayers’ Union described the policy as “a refreshing step back to the 1970s”.

“Carpets, as well as all other government supplies, should be selected on value for money alone,” said executive director Jordan Williams.

“This sort of crony favouritism by politicians is exactly the sort of thing which sent New Zealand bust in the early days of Peters’ career.”

It is cronyism. And expensive cronyism. The NZTU point out:

NZ First’s ‘carpet policy’ announcement this morning, to line all Government offices with woollen carpets, would cost approximately $120 million, based on the Government Property Group’s estimate of Government floor space.

Executive Director of the Taxpayers’ Union, Jordan Williams, says “While smarter carpets for government bureaucrats may be appealing to some, in comparison to what $120 million will buy you in nurses, policeman or teachers, we’re not so sure.”

Yep $120 million on nicer carpets for public servants!

Using a standard price of a woollen carpet of $79 per square metre, and a floor space of 1,524,524 metres squared, the total cost is $120,437,396.

If new carpets were only installed as part of usual replacements, the marginal cost of wool is $60 million to $93 million (in today’s dollars) more than usual synthetic commercial carpets.

Either way a huge amount of money as a naked bribe.

The latest One News Colmar Brunton poll is at Curia. Labour is now at 27% and Little is at just 5% Preferred Prime Minister. WInston is at 11%, twice the level of Little.

The 2017 election is shaping up for Labour to be like the 2002 election was for National.

Once upon a time the Dominion Post was known as a sensible newspaper. Today it has an editorial slant which would fit in on The Daily Blog.

Look at this editorial on petrol prices:

If Mr Little wanted to actually win the election he might take a leaf out of Jeremy Corbyn’s book, who would probably advocate fining the oil companies google-style and threaten to nationalise them if they didn’t buck up their ideas. 

That would greatly antagonise the business community and the media, but thousands of Kiwi motorists would say ‘onya Andy’ as they filled up.

Yes having the Government confiscate all the oil and run the industry themselves is a great idea – it worked so well in Venezuela.

Funnily enough the Dominion Post doesn’t seem to care about competition when it comes to media. They were cheerleaders for the merger with NZME.

UPDATE: The column isn’t an editorial but from columnist Dave Armstrong. I didn’t see any name on it when I first blogged it. So thankfully the Dom Post hasn’t yet gone full socialist!

Stuff reports:

Labour has thrown in the towel in the fight to win one of two seats in New Zealand’s fourth largest city, left-wing commentator Chris Trotter says. 

The party is poised to confirm nominee Gaurav Sharma on Monday night as its Hamilton West candidate just 77 days out from the general election on September, 23.

Since the Aucklander is 69th on the list, Trotter sees that as Labour’s admission it’s not a serious bid. 

Hamilton West used to be a competitive seat that was a key indicator of who would form Government. Labour used to hold it often. The fact they now can’t find anyone in Hamilton to stand for them in it speaks volumes.

It was previously held by Labour from 1972 to 1975 and 1984 to 1990 (Trevor Mallard) and between 1993 and 1996 and 1991 to 2005.

The majority in recent elections was:

• 2002 Labour 5,574
• 2005 Labour 825
• 2008 National 1,618
• 2011 National 4,418
• 2014 National 5,784

So it was a safe Labour seat and now is a seat they can’t find anyone in Hamilton willing to stand for Labour in.

Stuff reports:

Senior Green MP Julie Anne Genter says she has rebuffed an approach by Gareth Morgan’s The Opportunities Party (TOP) to jump ship.

But the fledgling party denies any “formal” approach was made.

Genter said she had rejected the proposal, made about a month ago after her bill to legalise medicinal cannabis was drawn from the ballot.

She would not disclose who made contact on Facebook, but said it was not Morgan or TOP deputy leader Geoff Simmons.

“I got a message from one of their senior people, a Facebook message, asking if I could talk. This was about four weeks ago the day my bill got pulled from the ballot so I thought it was about that.”

She had supplied her phone number and he called and said, “Do you want to come over and join us.”

“And I said ‘you can’t be serious’ – no I think I said ‘you’re not serious’ and then he said ‘I’m dead serious Julie Anne’.”

TOPs was seeking a candidate for Auckland Central and he said she was a great performance and “evidence based” so right up TOP’s alley.

No wonder the Greens are so anti TOP. It is one thing to try and steal their votes, but another to try and steal their MPs!

Stuff reports:

Wellington is to get new $50m children’s hospital paid for by millionaire property developer Mark Dunajtschik.

The philanthropist will pay for, build and gift the hospital to Capital & Coast District Health Board (CCDHB).

That is a stunningly generous gift to the families of Wellington.

The current hospital was the first of it’s kind in New Zealand, and each year more than 30,000 children passed through its doors, including the 4000 or so babies born there annually.

Existing child hospital and outpatient services – currently housed separately – will be merged in the new hospital.

“This amazingly generous offer will have such a big impact on the children we look after, their families and our staff,” CCDHB chair Andrew Blair said.

With an eight month old son we have been fairly frequent users of the maternity and outpatients wards.  The service has been great, but having everything in one modern location will make things easier.

The Herald further reports:

“Dunajtschik has said his philosophy is that people are blessed with a sound mind and body can look after themselves, but those born with or suffering illness and disability need our support.”

Coleman said Dunajtschik, aged in his 80s, had been a substantial benefactor in health, sport and education for 40 years, but this donation was unparalleled.

A good philosphy.

Dunajtschik said he was often asked why choose to build a hospital.

“It is no secret, nor commercially sensitive, that a large part of my income is from government departments as my tenants.

“One particularly large department punctually pays their rent every month throughout the year, but they have the curious habit, at the end of the year they ask for one-third back. It is not called a rent refund. It is a three letter word.

Tax!

“Needless to say, thoughts had crossed my mind – how to stop this money-go-round?

“Suggestions like contacting some creative accountants in Panama were quickly dismissed…the suggestion [of a hospital] appealed to me on the spot.”

Again incredibly generous. And one of the benefits of removing the tax rebate cap on charitable donations a few years ago.

The other day I heard the Prime Minister say that in the last year the New Zealand economy created an extra 10,000 jobs a month.

This sounded far fetched to me. I knew we had reasonable job growth but surely not 10,000 a month. So I checked and indeed the Prime Minister was wrong.

In fact the job growth was 11,500 a month!

In March 2016 there were 2,402,000 in employment and in March 2017 there were 2,539,000. And 81% of the new jobs were full-time.

That is:

• 137,000 net new jobs in 12 months
• 11,500 new jobs a month
• 2,600 new jobs a week
• 66 new jobs per working hour (40/week)

So think about this. You attend a one hour meeting. By the end of that meeting, there would have been (on average) 66 more jobs than at the start of the meeting.

For a country with such a small population, 11,500 new jobs a month is remarkable. That is the equivalent of the US growing by 800,000 jobs a month.

As a percentage that is a 5.7% increase in the number of jobs in a year. Here’s the growth rate for jobs for some other countries:

1. NZ 5.7%
2. Germany 2.9%
3. Ireland 2.9%
4. US 1.8%
5. OECD 1.6%
6. Australia 1.6%
7. Sweden 1.5%
8. UK 1.4%
9. Canada 0.7%
10. France 0.6%
11. Finland 0.5%

Can’t you just imagine them all sitting together in Cabinet!

Stuff reports:

NZ First leader Winston Peters says he is “calling out” the Greens and warning of “consequences”, after its co-leader Metiria Turei referred to his immigration stance as “racist”.

Good coalition building there.

And she implied that would not be blank cheque of support for a Labour-NZ First Government.

“But any government that we support or are part of has to be genuinely progressive. We are not going to accept an inferior deal.”

However, she did rule out working with the National Party to form a government.

Which means they have no leverage at all. Morons. If they are unwilling to deal with National, then they have absolutely no choice but to allow a Labour – NZ First Government to govern – well unless they want to force another election on New Zealand which would see them wiped out.

But it was her comments about Peters’ immigration policy that saw him bite back.

Turei said he was “on a roll at the moment, which is I think a very racist approach to immigration, for example. The worst of his rhetoric is coming out.”

In reply, Peters said he had a warning for the Greens: “Don’t call NZ First racist – an allegation that is spurious – and think there won’t be consequences.”

I find it interesting that the Greens can say “Oh yeah they are a racist party but we’ll work with them anyway”.

It is quite possible Donald Trump will be re-elected in 2020 if he suceeds in casting the media as his opposition, and some of the media continue to behave as they do.

The Herald reports:

#CNNBlackmail was the top trending Twitter topic Wednesday morning, thanks to the efforts of a furious Trump internet, which had concluded that the user’s apology was forced by a “threat” from CNN. Their evidence? A story CNN itself published, detailing its attempts to contact and identify the anonymous Reddit user ahead of their apology, whose offensive posting history suddenly became part of a national news story.

The part of the article that infuriated the Trump internet – and people on both sides of the political spectrum, who questioned the ethical standards of the network’s decision – had to do with how CNN described its reasoning for not identifying the Redditor by name. Reporter Andrew Kaczynski wrote that CNN had spoken with the person behind the account, and would not identify the user because “he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology,” who had promised not to continue flooding the internet with offensive memes.

But, he wrote, “CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.”

Like many online controversies of this era, it’s difficult to explain exactly what’s going on here in one smooth narrative. The ethical question of whether a news outlet should withhold the identity of a private citizen who posted extremely offensive things online on the apparent condition that they behave better in the future is one that resonated well beyond the bubble of the Trump internet.

A real own goal by CNN.

ACT have published their party list. The top 10 are:

1. David Seymour
2. Beth Houlbrooke
3. Brooke van Velden
4. Bhupinder Singh
5. Stephen Berry
6. Stuart Pederson
7. Anneka Carlson
8. Shan Ng
9. Sam Purchas
10. Toni Severin

It is a very youthful list, with a diverse range of backgrounds ranging from small business owners to a former professional cricketer. Half of the top ten happen to be women (no quotas in ACT).

I hope ACT get enough votes that they get more than just David Seymour. At just 2% of the vote they’ll get three MPs.

Stuff reports:

A new law means Customs will no longer be able to demand that people entering the country hand over the passwords to their devices without reasonable cause.

Currently, Customs can stop anyone at the border and demand access to any of their digital devices.

But ACT leader and sole-MP David Seymour has secured a change to this in the new Customs and Excise Bill, which is soon to have its second reading.

Officers will need to have “reasonable suspicion” or belief of offending. There will be no appeal process. …

“Unrestricted power to demand people’s passwords and search their files is an affront to civil liberties, and it will inevitably lead to violations of privacy,” Seymour said.

“Customs practices are simply out of touch with modern reality. In the past, people would only pack a suitcase with a few paper documents, but younger generations often travel with all their personal files. Meanwhile, if a genuine criminal is determined to keep incriminating files, they’ll do it on cloud storage, not on their personal device.

“This will prevent countless New Zealanders and visitors from facing intrusive and unjustified searches.

“Customs’ powers to examine and access electronic devices will be restricted through a two-stage search threshold. This means that Customs will only be able to search a device if they have a reasonable suspicion or belief of offending under the Act,” Customs Minister Nicky Wagner said.

Well done David Seymour on getting this change.

Well worth watching this 12 minute video of the US Chief Justice speaking not as a justice or a lawyer but as a parent.

The comments just after the 10 minute mark are especially good.

Gordon Campbell writes:

In reality, Labour’s working class hero was anything but a champion of the battlers. While in Parliament, he was the attack dog for his corporate cronies in Sealords against the company’s environmental critics. In the dying days of the Clark government, he was Labour’s ministerial go-between for a high profile immigration decision involving a wealthy Chinese migrant and party donor. (Hardly the best credentials for a future New Zealand First MP.) Despite the Greens being the only realistic ally that Labour had in forming an alternative government of the centre left, Jones spent almost as much time in publicly attacking them as he did in attacking the National government, which eventually rewarded him with a cushy bureaucratic job. Female voters have always shunned him. Now he’s back, standing for New Zealand First in Whangarei, and looking for his next ride on the gravy train.

Yet… the media are also back at it, and are still touting the magic sympatico that Jones allegedly has with the voters.

Please, no. There’s never been any ballot box evidence of this pixie dust. Jones entered Parliament in 2005 on the Labour list. He stood (unsuccessfully) for Labour in Northland in 2008 but was rescued again by his list position. In 2011, he lost to Pita Sharples in Tamaki Makaurau, and was rescued once again by the party list. When the Labour leadership came up for grabs in 2013, Jones came in third and last place of the three candidates on offer. Only months before the last election, Jones resigned from Labour to take up National’s kind offer of a well-paying sinecure. (So much for blokey loyalty to his mates.)

In sum, there’s absolutely no evidence to support the theory of Shane Jones, blue-collar hero and irresistible vote magnet. 

I think the vast majority of New Zealanders will have never heard of Shane.

There are other implications. Given Jones’ track record of animosity to the Greens, this should finally put paid to the hopes still being entertained (in some parts of the centre-left) of a Labour/Greens/New Zealand First alternative government. The air kisses that Andrew Little has been sending to Jones in recent days (eg praising him for the ‘intellectual grunt’ he will supposedly bring to NZF) won’t change that reality. Winston Peters was never going to play third wheel in any such centre-left arrangement, and with Jones now set to cruise back into Parliament via a high ranking on the NZF party list, the Greens’ chances of playing a major role in any alternative government would now appear slim to non-existent.

At this point, the most credible chance of a change of government would be if a Labour/NZF pairing can get the numbers to enter into a formal coalition with the Greens situated outside government, but lending support on confidence and supply. For the Greens, this would mean propping up a new government that on issues like law and order, welfare and immigration would be barely distinguishable from the current government. It would also leave the Greens scrambling for a few gains on the environment – provided such measures would be OK with Shane Jones.

It is fascinating that the Greens are more than willing to put NZ First into Government, despite NZ First constantly demonising them, yet they refuse to even consider any sort of co-operation with National.

Stuff reports:

The North Korean missile that soared high above the Sea of Japan was hailed by state-run television as a “shining success.”

But to US officials, it was a most unwelcome surprise: a weapon with intercontinental range, delivered years before most Western experts believed such a feat possible.

Hours after the apparently successful test on Monday, intelligence agencies continued to run calculations to determine precisely how the missile, dubbed the Hwasong-14, performed in its maiden flight.

But the consensus among missiles experts was that North Korea had achieved a long-sought milestone, demonstrating a capability of striking targets thousands of kilometres from its coast.

So North Korea is now very close to its goal of being able to deliver nuclear weapons to US cities.

The danger is not so much that they will do so (as there would be only one possible response, and it would result in their extinction), but that this ability will make them feel immune and they will start acting more aggressively in other areas – maybe sinking a Japanese ship and threatening a nuclear response if they get attacked back.

The Guardian reports:

The French prime minister has vowed to make a raft of public-spending cuts to stem France’s “intolerable” reliance on state borrowing, which he said had left the country dancing on a debt “volcano”.

In his opening speech to parliament on Tuesday, Edouard Philippe side-stepped the notion of one-size-fits-all austerity, instead insisting that the plan of the new centrist president, Emmanuel Macron, was to reduce public spending while launching a €50bn (£44bn) investment programme and cutting a range of taxes, including slashing corporate taxes to boost businesses.

Cut spending and cut taxes – there is hope for France.

“Businesses must want to set up and develop on our territory rather than elsewhere,” he added, announcing that corporate tax would be cut from 33% to 25% in the next five years.

As corporate tax rates around the world reduce, we will need to do the same.

The Herald reports:

Since Parliament had its very first debate in the mid-19th century, MPs have uttered about 500 million words in the debating chamber.

Nearly every one of those words has been transcribed verbatim and bound into volumes called Hansard, after Thomas Curson Hansard, the first official printer in the UK Parliament.

And this week, as Hansard celebrates its 150th anniversary, they will be published online in their entirety.

Ahead of the anniversary, the Clerk of the House David Wilson began investigating the possibility of a complete digital record of the debates.

In an extraordinary stroke of luck, much of the work had already been done without him knowing. The University of California digitised every Hansard volume from 1867 to 1985, as part of Google’s ambitious attempt to scan every book in the world.

This included the painstaking task of manually scanning every page of the volumes. Because many of the older volumes are fragile, it was done with a high-definition camera while a Google employee carefully turned the pages.

One of the Hansard project’s co-ordinators, Peter Riches, said that was a huge relief.

“It was 723 volumes at about 1000 pages each, so it’s quite a big project, and quite expensive. And someone has to physically do it.”

Great work to have the entire history of the NZ Parliament online.

The Herald reports:

New Zealand superannuation is unaffordable and could even be called “a pyramid scheme”, according to a senior tax lecturer at the University of Auckland Business School, Mark Keating.

Either the amount paid in superannuation will have to fall or taxes will have to be significantly increased to cover the rising costs, says Keating – adding that a universal pension is socially desirable but it is generally accepted sharply increasing costs will make it unaffordable. 

“It should be a warning that New Zealand is now the only country still paying a universal superannuation, regardless of the asset wealth or income of the recipient,” he says. “All other countries have changed their system because it is simply unaffordable.”

Yep we have the most generous superannuation scheme in the world – universal, linked to average wage and no income or asset testing. Raising the eligibility age helps but only a bit.

Currently, an average New Zealander will work for approximately 45 years on an average annual salary of $50,000, and will pay approximately $8000 per year in income tax. They will then retire at age 65 and receive superannuation while they live until almost 90.

 

“The problem is that average person can expect to receive more back in superannuation than they paid in income tax during their entire working life,” says Keating.

When doing the maths, using current tax rates and superannuation rates, an individual will pay approximately $360,000 in income tax on wages over their working life, but will receive approximately $500,000 in superannuation. 

We need as many people as possible to save for their own retirement, and superannuation should just top up those who are short.

That means the Government has to fund all non-superannuation services and benefits from other sources of taxation (mainly GST, corporate tax and user-charges). 

A universal superannuation system is sustainable in only two circumstances: either there are significantly more workers than retired people or many taxpayers die either before reaching retirement age, or shortly after, says Keating.

The ratio of workers to retired people is dropping.

The Herald reports:

The family of a woman killed more than a decade ago by a drink driver are flabbergasted to learn the man has been at it again.

Dean Anthony Martin got behind the wheel in the early hours of November 18 and veered over the opposite lane and crashed into a ditch in Dunedin’s North Rd.

He slept there for some time before police were called and was then abusive when they took him to the station and tried to breathalyse him.

And he has form:

He jailed Martin for 13 months and banned him from driving for a year and a half.

When the Otago Daily Times informed Vicki Smillie about the defendant’s latest crash, she was stunned.

Her daughter, 33-year-old Kellie-Rachel Smillie, a mother of two, was in the passenger seat of Martin’s car when he crashed near Waikouaiti on October 13, 2006. She died in the crash.

He was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment and ordered not to drive for four.

He has killed one person already through drink driving. After this incident you would think he would face a lifetime ban?

The Herald reports:

Labour Waiariki candidate Tamati Coffey says it is a “missed opportunity” after he was denied a political stall at tomorrow’s Te Arawa Secondary Schools Kapa Haka Competition.

But the event’s committee is standing by its decision, saying the competition is about kapa haka, and nothing else.

Mr Coffey took to Facebook last night to air his concerns about not being allowed to set up a stall at the event.

How dare they not allow Tamati a stall. Do they think all those parents have gone there for Kapa Haka or something?

The post received mixed reactions.

“Oh man, let the tamariki do their thing without the politics – this post is the very reason organising committee has ‘banned’ political parties. You’ve lost sight of the kaupapa already. Our kids especially those that hit that stage are already inspired, by their whanau/hapu/iwi, their kura and aspirational kaiako,” one person wrote.

How can they be inspired without a Labour Government? Impossible.

Ms Mohi said the Electoral Commission and Te Puni Kokiri – Te Arawa would have stalls at the event.

“We are making sure there is election information there, but just through organisations that have no party affiliation.”

But you can’t just tell people there is an election on. You have to tell them who to vote for.

The Herald reports:

Some women are being penalised over $100 a week for not naming the father of their children.

Auckland woman Stephanie, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, can’t prove the father of five of her 10 children.

This is the example the left put up as to why there should be no sanctions for not naming the fathers?

She said the father of four of her children has denied he is their parent. The 33-year-old is currently pursuing court action to get a paternity test. 

As far as I know she does not need to prove he is the father to avoid a benefit sanction. She just needs to name him. There is a process for disputed paternity.

The father of her youngest child claimed he hasn’t had the birth registration papers delivered to his house for him to sign.

I’d say he’s lying.

Parents who don’t legally identify the other parent have $22 deducted every week for each child. A further $6 per family is added if it continues for over 13 weeks.

If you are not on welfare, then there is no sanction of course. But if you are on welfare, then taxpayers expect that the father of a child will partially contribute to the child’s upbringing, rather than be reliant purely on taxpayers. That is why the sanction exists – to make fathers face up to their responsibilities.

Stephanie said it was like the Government was punishing her and her children, when the blame sat with the fathers.

All she has to do is name them.

“Caring for them isn’t hard, but financially it is. We can’t afford heaps of things.

The most prosperous family would struggle to care for 10 children, let alone someone on welfare. The answer is not to have 10 children unless you can afford to.

Turei had felt the sting of the sanction herself when she didn’t name the father of her daughter. She said she did it to protect him from Winz harassment with the goal to keep their relationship positive for their daughter.

By WINZ harrassment, Turei presumably means pay child support as required by law.

Other reasons could include the child resulting from a rape or the woman was worried about the father exerting legal rights over the child, particularly if the relationship had been violent, Turei said.

In cases of rape and violence, no sanction is applied.

“The reasons why women do not name the father are complex and personal.”

But for many it is to cheat the taxpayer. The father pays the mother say $40 a week so long as she doesn’t name him, as his child support obligations would probably be over $100 a week. So he is better off, she is better off, but the taxpayer is worse off.