The Campaign for Change announced on 17 June:

“The Campaign for Change will channel the energy and passion of New Zealander’s who want to see a change of Government this election.” says Director Matt McCarten.

This non-partisan campaign is being created in order to get people engaged and involved. The disconnect between a million citizens and political participation is a threat to our democracy.

We now know this was a lie. McCarten set up Campaign for Change as a taxpayer funded staffer for Little. It was run by two Labour Party paid staff and two Labour Party officials. They recruited unpaid foreign workers for it under the guise of Labour Party fellowships. We also know that some of these foreign workers were being assigned to campaign for specific Labour candidates.

So why was this Labour Party campaign pretending to be independent of Labour?

Presumably as a way to get around the electoral laws that restrict how much you can spend on a campaign.

If Campaign for Change phones 100,000 people to persuade them to vote Labour, then that is invisible advertising. It is not like a billboard or pamphlet which you can see has an authorization statement.

Mike Hosking writes:

Under party rules, three months before an election the caucus can roll the leader without going through the drama they have to the rest of the time.

Namely giving votes to party members and unions.

We have seen this before of course, the famed “Mike Moore” solution in 1990 that almost worked, and in so many respects it’s a shame it didn’t, because he remains one of my favourite politicians of all time, and given the chance I have no doubt he would have been a brilliant Prime Minister.

Andrew Little in many respects doesn’t deserve to get rolled, he by and large has got the factionalism under control, he is the best of the crop, and I include the much-hyped Jacinda Ardern who will undoubtedly one day lead them, but if you’re looking for a game changer 90 days out, she, let me tell you, is no Mike Moore.

Not in stature, gravitas, experience or kudos.

Besides I am sure she is way too smart to want to catch that particular hospital pass, when she will get three clear years heading towards 2020 if things go pear shaped this time round.

Sp Hosking thinks Little will stay leader this side of the election, but Ardern will take over after the election.

Stuff reports:

A father who became upset at his 5-year-old son’s behaviour during prayer time made the boy get a hammer and kneel on a sheet so he could be executed.

The offending by Hastings man Kiimatangiroa​ Junior Samuel, 41, was described by Judge Max Courtney as “the cruellest set of facts I have ever come across”.

Before making his weeping son kneel and close his eyes, Samuel told his other children, aged 7, 9 and 10, to fetch sheets as he didn’t want blood to get on the floor.

This man should not have children. What sort of sick fuck would do that?

The incident, which ended with Samuel laughing at his terrified son, occurred in his Hastings house on February 26, after he and his children had returned from prayers at the Hastings mosque.

Samuel told police he had become upset because his son had been running around the mosque during his prayer time.

He said he had no intention of carrying out the threat and had only threatened to execute his son to get him to be more honest.

Yes threatening to execute your children is an excellent way to get them to be more honest.

The judge said he agreed with the probation officer’s report that said Samuel had attempted to minimise the offending. 

He was also concerned at Samuel’s insinuation that physical discipline was part of his culture.

“It’s quite clear that in New Zealand, whatever anyone’s culture is, it is totally inappropriate and it is clearly illegal… Quite frankly I do not believe any culture would condone the type of behaviour you have committed against your children,” the judge said.

The judge noted Samuel had several previous convictions including two for assault and two for breaches of protection orders. …

Samuel was sentenced to four-and-a-half years in prison.

Good.

This is pretty disgusting. Labour are now implying that our high level of youth suicides is due to immigration. How much more desperate can they get?

Not even NZ First would go that far.

Stuff reports:

An American student who flew to New Zealand at her own expense to work for a scheme associated with the Labour Party says things did not seem right from the get-go – but she says the party is not at fault.

I can’t believe the media are reporting this as credible. This was not a scheme associated with Labour. It was a Labour scheme.

It is call a Labour campaign fellowship. It was run by two Labour Party staff members and applications for it went to the Labour staff.

The scheme, whose failure caused party leader Andrew Little to apologise on Thursday, was accused of using the students as “slave labour”.

Emily Dunne, 21, was one of 85 interns from across the world expecting lectures from Helen Clark and real world campaign experience.

The political science student from Virginia said the campaign had almost nothing to do with the Labour Party, and instead she blamed the organisers.

The organisers were the Labour Party. Look at who were named in the bFM interview:

I am probably the one who knows the most about the situation for certain reasons and I would just say that it is not the Labour Party’s fault. It is Matt McCarten, Paul Chalmers, Simon Mitchell, Caitlin Johnson, Kieran O’Halloran. They kind of organised on their own, lied to the Labour Party, went off and said they were bringing over 15 Americans to work on campaigns, and really tried to bring over 115 at peak capacity

I’m sorry but this is crap. Newshub has reported that documents show they were budgeted for 100 students. It was never intended to be just 15.

And the five people named are all Labour Party.

• Matt McCarten organised the scheme out of the Labour Leader’s Office, being paid by the taxpayer to do so
• Caitlin Johnson and Kieran O’Halloran are paid staff for the Labour Party, It’s ridiculous to think they were doing this independently and without approval of the party.
• Paul Chalmers is on the Council of the Labour Party and is a regional chair
• Simon Mitchell is a longtime Labour activist and off memory the guy who burnt the painting at the centre of Paintergate to protect Helen Clark

To argue this scheme was independent of Labour when it was called a Labour fellowship, and run by staff from the Leader’s Office and Labour field offices, plus a member of Labour’s National Council is beyond credibility.

And here is the final proof:

This is one of the Labour fellows talking about how they will be working for Labour’s Auckland Central candidate Helen White.

This was not some independent effort. The Campaign for Change is a front organisation for Labour, run by Labour Party staff and office holders.

Stuff reports:

A Canadian sniper has reportedly killed an Islamic State fighter in Iraq with a bullet fired more than 3 kilometres away.

It’s a shot that has stunned the military world, and, if confirmed, would shatter the current world record for a kill shot in military combat by almost a kilometre.

A member of Canada’s Joint Task Force 2 shot the “insurgent” from a distance of 3450 metres during an operation in the past month, The Globe and Mail reports.

The shot was fired from a McMillan TAC-50 sniper rifle from a high-rise building in the area and required the sniper to take into account not only wind and distance, but also the curvature of the Earth.

It took just less than 10 seconds to hit its target.

The shot, verified by video, disrupted an IS attack on Iraqi security forces and was considered appropriate given the situation, multiple sources told The Globe and Mail.

The world record was previously held by British sniper Craig Harrison. He shot a Taliban gunner with a 338 Lapua Magnum rifle from 2475 metres away in 2009.

A military insider told The Globe and Mail: “This is an incredible feat. It is a world record that might never be equalled.”

That is an incredible shot that may indeed never be equalled.

Just imagine that you can see in all directions for say three kilometres, and you can still be taken out!

There are many aspects to this story about the unpaid Labour interns, ranging from hypocrisy to electoral spending to taxpayer funding. I’ll focus on all of these over time.

But the key one for now, is whether Labour has taken part in a massive case of immigration fraud.

If the “fellows” are here on a visitor visa, then the rules from Immigration NZ are very clear:

On a visitor visa you can do volunteer work while in New Zealand, provided you receive no gain or reward.

And what is gain or reward?

Gain or reward is any payment or benefit that can be valued in terms of money.

Examples include:

• accommodation, such as board or lodging

• goods, such as food or clothing

• services, such as transport

• training.

We know these “fellows” are being given free accommodation in exchange for their work, so they are in breach of their visitor visa conditions, if they have visitor visas.

It is possible they have other visas, such as work visas. But it is hard to imagine they could qualify for work visas, and the hypocrisy would be great – Labour bringing in unpaid fellows on work visas, while campaigning against such work visas.

So it looks like either Labour has arranged 85 work visas for its unpaid fellows while campaigning to reduce the number of work visas for unskilled jobs or Labour has been complicit in a huge case of immigration fraud.

I’m not sure which scenario is more damaging, but I’d say the fraud scenario is worse than the hypocrisy scenario.

Stuff reports:

The man behind a proposal designed to deter people from cattle rustling says he hopes the final law goes further to include other rural crimes.

Rangitikei MP Ian McKelvie had his member’s bill proposing the law change pulled from the Parliamentary ballot recently.

The Sentencing (Livestock Rustling) Amendment Bill proposes making stock theft an aggravating feature when thieves are sentenced in court.

McKelvie said stock rustling was a big issue for farmers, especially those in remote areas of the country.

So how big an issue is this?

Federated Farmers rural security spokesman Rick Powdrell said rustling cost farmers more than $120 million a year.

“The successful passing of this bill would show the victims of livestock rustling that the justice system is prepared to take these crimes seriously,” he said.

“It’s frightening when you are faced with someone in a remote rural area who is most likely armed.”

Federated Farmers wanted to see rustlers have the potential to lose the vehicles and equipment used in the crime, just like what happens in fisheries, he said.

Figures from a survey Federated Farmers did of more than 1000 farmers showed 26 per cent had had stock stolen in the past five years, but almost 60 per cent of stock thefts had not been reported to police.

That’s a lot bigger than I realised.

Politik reports:

A Labour Party scheme to recruit  85 overseas students to campaign for the party during this year’s election has hit trouble.

Yep the party complaining there are two many overseas students in NZ has brought 85 of them over to campaign for them.

The students rebelled over their accommodation and their disappointment with what was supposed to be a high powered learning programme but which appears to be not much more than political campaign drudge work.

In other words Labour conned them into being free labour. No living wage for them. Not even a minimum wage.

POLITIK has seen emails which show that the students have now held two meetings with party officials to complain about their accommodation on an Auckland marae and the work they were being asked to do.

Last night Labour’s General Secretary Andrew Kirton confirmed that there had been issues with the scheme which had arisen over the past week.

He said the scheme had been originated by Andrew Little’s former Chief of Staff, Matt McCarten, who now runs Labour’s campaign office in Auckland.

They openly call it their campaign office, despite it being funded and paid for by The Parliamentary Service.

The heart of the row appears to be the living conditions under which the interns have been accommodated at Awataha Marae in Northcote.

POLITIK has been sent photographs showing:

• Cramped dormitory alcoves

• A broken and unusable shower

• Bathroom cupboard doors hanging off their hinges

• Unfinished construction work with material piled beside mattresses

So Labour has turned into a landlord putting people up in crowded and unsanitary conditions at the same time they demand all other landlords meet a WOF standard and camoaign against over-crowded accomodation.

The students met Labour party officials on Saturday to protest about their accommodation and were asked to sign non-disclosure agreements.

Trying to silence them.

The emails continued: “They were told that they are broken down into teams- they will be either phone soliciting ( they’ve bought 30-ish Alcatel phones, and they sit in a room and call, from this marae, very disorganised, many of these people have been called already ) , door knocking in regions in Auckland, or approaching universities and “unions” to recruit votes and more volunteers. They have one day of ‘training’ tomorrow. There is nothing else planned for these guys as far as I am aware.”

So this marae has turned into a Labour Party calling centre.

“Fellows will be instructed in the fundamentals of a successful campaign – from knocking on doors to recruiting volunteers to use the party’s campaign software – but will progress quickly and ultimately may build and train their own teams and lead campaign activity across Auckland.

The campaign Fellows serve an important leadership role and will report directly to the field organisers.

“They will be tasked primarily with projects surrounding the recruitment and retention of volunteers and direct voter contact activity. “

The programme is billed as an education opportunity for the interns which will give “the fellows a glance into what a career in politics would be like, as well as offering the fellows special access to senior MPs and important decision makers in the party.”

Short lectures are promised from some top Labour Party names:

• Andrew Little
• Jacinda Ardern
• Helen Clark
• “Current ambassadors to NZ.”
• “Senior party stakeholders and staff, including the President and Chief of Staff “
• Teleconferences with senior staff from US Democratic Party and UK Labour Party

However, Kirton said there were now problems organising these talks because the volunteers were no longer in one place.

The party might use webinars for the talks, he said.

They really have conned the poor students. They thought they were attending some high powered campaign school, when in reality they are just unpaid labour for Labour. They are getting none of the talks or discussions they were promised – just at best an ability to watch some videos on You Tube!

And the website explains that “although we are unable to compensate our fellows financially, the campaign fellowship will stand out on your CV and both organisers are happy to serve as a reference upon successful completion of the fellowship.”

It is very sad that Labour is so short of volunteers in New Zealand they have had to con 85 foreigners to come here and work for them for free.

Barry Soper writes:

But the volatility of that mine, and what occurred at the time, understandably tends to be forgotten. The first methane gas explosion occurred on November the 19th, there was a second explosion five days later, another one two days after that and the final one two days later.

And when that second explosion occurred, they were set to go in. Many more lives could have been lost.

The latest footage to emerge from deep within the mine shows a wooden crate and hoses and a pair of spectacles which obviously shows that that part of the mine wasn’t engulfed in flames. That’s all it shows.

No one actually knows what went on in that mine and what sort of conflagration took place.

One thing was clear though, it was unsafe then and the debate has raged ever since whether it’s still unsafe. For anyone to go in under new health and safety laws that virtually require a risk analysis for sharpening a pencil, someone has to take responsibility.

Little and Peters aren’t willing to take the responsibility. They want to force others to take it.

No Government in its right mind would deliberately prevent the bodies from being recovered if they thought there wasn’t a risk.

This is the key. No one in Government benefits from not having the mine entered. Peters and Little know this. They know it is risky.

Labour’s Andrew Little says the new footage provides a compelling reason for the mine to be re-entered. Little’s committed to a safe re-entry, with the operative word being safe which would in reality, put a Government led by him in the same place as the current Beehive incumbents.

Weasel words. If it was safe, it would have happened years ago.

Unmanned re-entry into the mine is planned at the moment. The families want their advisors involved in the process and want to see the footage sent back by the drones and robots.

That seems more reasonable than drawing conclusions from the latest six year old footage.

Yep.

The annual abortion stats have been published. Some interesting stats:

• The number of abortions has dropped for the 13th year in a row – down from a high of 18,511 in 2003 to 12,823 in 2016 – a drop of around one third.
• The abortion rate per 1,000 women of fertility age has dropped from 20.8 in 2003 to 13.5 in 2016.
• This is the lowest rate since 1989
• The proportion of pregnancies that end in an abortion has dropped from 24.7% in 2003 to 17.7% in 2016
• The number of abortions for people aged under 20 has dropped from 4,277 in 2007 to 1,478 in 2016. That is a huge drop.
• 57% of abortions occur before week 10 of the pregnancy and 94% in the first trimester
• By ethnicity the decline in the number of abortions since 2007 is Pasifika 40%, Maori 33%, European 31% and Asian 13%.

The Herald reports:

National MP Todd Barclay has announced he will not stand as the candidate for Clutha-Southland in the 2017 election – but will stay in Parliament until then.

“I got into politics because I was inspired by the people I worked for: Bill English, Gerry Brownlee and Hekia Parata. I wanted the opportunity to make my contribution too,” Barclay said.

“I don’t want the issues that are important to Clutha-Southland and all of New Zealand to be distracted by an employment dispute.

“This has been a hard decision to make, but it is in the best interests of our government and the National Party, and I wish the Prime Minister and our team all the best for the General Election.”

Barclay’s executive assistant and staff were in tears shortly after the statement was sent.

Barclay said he wanted to pay tribute to his friends and colleagues in the party and caucus, particularly Invercargill MP Sarah Dowie.

Barclay said being elected Clutha-Southland MP was the proudest moment of his life, and it was a privilege to serve the people in the electorate.

A brutal end for a new MP. Very loyal of him to give up a very very safe seat in order to stop this issue festering for National.

After the second round of voting in the French legislative elections, the seats are:

• Macron and allies 350
• Parliamentary right 136
• Parliamentary left 45

Macron’s party has 53% of the seats, increasing to 61% with his allied party. Incredible result for a new party.

The formerly dominant Socialist Party got just 6% of the vote and 5% of the seats. In 2012 they got 41% of the vote and 49% of the seats.

Mark Mitchell announced:

Disability advocate and former paralympian Paula Tesoriero has been appointed as the Human Rights Commission’s next Disability Rights Commissioner, Associate Justice Minister Mark Mitchell announced today. …

“Ms Tesoriero has a significant record of working to increase awareness of disability issues. She is well informed on New Zealand’s international human rights standing and her legal background and understanding of the machinery of government will be advantageous in the context of the Commission’s work,” Mr Mitchell says. …

Ms Tesoriero created history with her world record-breaking time in the women’s 500m cycling time trial at the Beijing Summer Paralympics in 2008, securing New Zealand’s first gold medal of the Games. Her services to cycling were recognised when she was made a Member of the New Zealand Order of Merit in the 2009 New Year’s Honours.

Ms Tesoriero also has a high profile in the disability sector, where she served as Deputy Chair of the NZ Artificial Limb Service and a Board member of the Halberg Disability Sport Foundation. She holds an LLB, BA, and Postgraduate Diploma in Public Management qualifications.

This is a great appointment, and Paula will be awesome in this role.

I’ve known Paula since she was teenager. She was born with a rare condition that damaged three of her four limbs and led to her needing an artificial left leg. Her right leg has no ankle so she has to power her cycle purely with her thighs. And despite this she managed to set a world record gold medal time in the 2008 Paralympics through intense training around the clock.

So she is a great role model for what people can do, despite having a disability. But she also knows the barriers disabled people face and has been a staunch advocate for reducing barriers to participation for them – something which will be a key part of her new role.

The IGIS has reported:

The Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, Cheryl Gwyn, released the public report of her inquiry into the Government Communications Security Bureau’s (GCSB) processes for determining its foreign intelligence activity today. This inquiry was initiated as a result of issues raised by the public about claims of GCSB assistance to the New Zealand Government’s campaign to advance the Hon Tim Groser as a candidate for Director-General of the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

“The inquiry has found that the GCSB did not act unlawfully or improperly in providing assistance to the New Zealand government campaign”, Ms Gwyn said. “I have reached that finding for two reasons.

First, the New Zealand government had made a foreign policy decision to support Mr Groser as a candidate. The decision reflected a considered assessment that Mr Groser would, if selected, advance the effective functioning of the WTO (an international, multilateral organisation) and so have a significant impact on New Zealand’s economic well-being.

Second, under the terms of the Government Communications Security Bureau Act 2003 which applied at the time, the GCSB had a statutory responsibility to provide foreign intelligence assistance in support of New Zealand’s foreign policy objectives. In line with the government’s decision and the foreign policy basis for that decision, the GCSB acted lawfully and appropriately in providing its assistance to the campaign.”

The full report is very detailed, and usefully suggests ways in which future decision making can be done, but it very clearly finds that the GCSB acted appropriately.

And the IGIS has not been shy in the past in pointing out areas where she feels the SIS and GCSB are not acting appropriately.

Henry Cooke writes:

Over half of major political donations come from wealthy individuals able to splash out $15,000 or more, new research shows.

Fully 52 percent of the money from donations over $1500 in 2011-2016 came in chunks of $15,000 or more. Donations under $1500 aren’t declared, but aren’t thought to make up a significant percentage of party funding given the small population of New Zealand.

This is not correct in the case of National.

National has around 30,000 to 40,000 paid up members. If the average member donation is $50 (I think it is in fact higher than that) then small donations bring in over $1.5 million a year in income.

Journalist and academic Max Rashbrooke put together the numbers for a report on open government being released on Tuesday. He thinks that the donations clearly buy some kind of influence.

“If parties are reliant on very wealthy people for half of their donations, then they aren’t going to ignore them are they? I think it must lead to influence for at least a certain class of people,” Rashbrooke said.

Rashbrooke falls into the trap of thinking of donors as a class, rather than a collection of individuals and businesses. Donors have very varied interests – most just want a Government that delivers a good strong economy.

Someone who donates say $15,000 to National is donating around 0.5% of their campaign funding. The good thing with having lots of big donors, is that none of them become particularly influential.

“We are very sceptical of politics and politicians usually. It would be very strange if we were all of a sudden naive and assume these people are just giving money as a public service or because they really like the party.”

They like the policies. They think the policies are good for the country and good for them. In my experience money follows policies, not the other way around.

While the general public often think about donations in terms of trade unions and industry lobby groups, Rashbrooke said the vast majority of funding comes from individual donors.

Unions are large and active donors on the left. Very very few business and industry groups donate to political parties. Individual businesses may not their industry groups.

National is overwhelmingly the largest recipient of donations, raising $11.7m over the six years between 2011 and 2016, almost three times Labour’s $3.9m. But just 22 percent of their funds come from donations of over $15,000.

Yep, and that is 22% of the donations over $1,500. I’d say National probably had another $10 million from small donors in that time, so donors over $15,000 probably contribute just 10% of the party’s income.

Large donations are not necessary for success and certainly do not guarantee it.

The Internet Party and the Conservatives both raised more than the Greens and Labour over the period, but neither have MPs in Parliament.

And New Zealand First – who raised the least by far over the period, just $319,000 – are polling on level with the Greens and are widely seen as “kingmakers” in the next Parliament.

Money helps. You’d rather have more of it than less of it. But as the article says it doesn’t have as big an influence as people think. People have to be receptive to the message for advertisements to work – no matter how often they play.

New Zealand First leader Winston Peters said his party delivered more with less.

“New Zealand First has the most professional presentation and efficient delivery of party policies, which belies the fact we don’t have a substantial amount of donations.”

Of course in the past New Zealand First has received substantial donations – they just didn’t disclose them until the donations were outed!

Like many, I have been puzzled about what has been going on in Clutha-Southland over the last couple of years. So over time I’ve chatted to quite a few locals down there to try and piece together what has happened. As it has flared up again, I thought it would be useful to share how I see things.

Note I have had no conversations at all with any of the participants in this, such as the current or former MP, or their staff. I do know them all of course.

Here’s my take:

1. Todd ruffled more feathers than was necessary when he became the candidate and new MP.  Some of the criticism was unfair (some were unhappy that he chose to live in Queenstown instead of Gore, that he has a social life) and some was justified. His relationship skills were not at the level they needed to be, and he needed to learn to take people with him. The feedback I have had is that he has taken this on board and most of the criticism is historical.
2. For reasons unknown he and his senior electorate staffer fell out quite badly. In hindsight he probably should have brought in new staff who were personally loyal to him but it made sense at the time to keep on people with such experience in the electorate. A fallout between an MP and a staffer is not uncommon, and in fact all parliamentary contracts have clauses that say you agree to resign if your MP loses confidence in you. I don’t know who is most to blame for the fallout – probably some blame on both sides.
3. The staffer started publicly and privately criticising Todd (as mentioned in this Newsroom article), and as I understand it actively working against him. This is simply unacceptable. If you think an MP is no good, then you resign and campaign against him but you don’t bad mouth your employer when you are a parliamentary staffer. Doing so is basically grounds for termination for misconduct.
4. Todd presumably heard that one of his own staff was using his own office resources and time to bad mouth him, and/or spread rumours about him. It seems (I have no first hand knowledge) he may have left a dictaphone running in the office to gather proof of this. It goes without saying he should not have done this and doing so (if he did) was a serious error of judgement.
5. Since then a small group within the local party have been campaigning against Todd. They tried to get elected to the electorate committee and challenge him for the nomination. They failed massively, with Todd receiving the overwhelming support of the members.
6. The reason the members are supporting Todd isn’t because they approve of everything he has done. They do not, and many members will freely give advice as to how he could do better in certain areas. But they are supporting Todd because they are disgusted with the behaviour of those trying to bring him down, regardless of the damage it does to the party.
7. Basically if you want to roll an MP in National, you don’t do it through a public campaign of media vilification, You just quietly arrange a good challenger, do the numbers and challenge. Trying to force an MP out as a piece of personal utu does not make you a lot of friends. Most members down there are furious at the former staffer and electorate chair for how they are behaving.

So absolutely Todd has made some mistakes, including allegedly deciding to record a staffer bad mouthing him so he could dismiss her. But he was in an intolerable position of having a subversive campaign against him being run from his own office.

Almost every member down there knows exactly what has gone on. It is not as if his critics haven’t told every person they can. Yet they failed to beat him in democratic elections and selection, so instead they are continuing their campaign through the media. It is rather sad.

Liam Hehir writes:

Faced with rejection at the polls, pundits like to find fault with the electorate.

Prominent Left-winger Martyn Bradbury, for example, likes to call New Zealanders “sleepy hobbits”. The idea is that we are too fond of simple pleasures to engage with revolution and ideology. 

He intends this as criticism, of course. The problem is that I’ve never really understood why we should take offence at the suggestion. 

Things aren’t perfect in this country and, actually, they never will be. Imperfection is part of the human condition. Societies reflect the imperfections of the individuals and families which inhabit them. I don’t mean to say that we should be blind to the injustices around us. 

Nor should we be complacent about the threats to what we have. Nevertheless, is it really such a bad thing to desire a pleasant life? 

I think some activists do not understand that most families are focused on what really matters – have they got a job, a decent income, good schools, a good healthcare system, good friends and a pleasant life. They are not obsessed by what someone said on Twitter.

I am also not saying we haven’t had periods that were, relative to today, fractious and violence. The New Zealand Wars, the Waihi miners’ strike and the 1981 Springbok Tour are all examples of troubled times in our history. It would be naive to think we won’t go through such times again.

But we are not living in those times now. In the most recent Roy Morgan survey, 60.5 per cent of respondents said they think the country is on the right track. Just 27 per cent said we are on the wrong track. Sentiment has remained at around those levels since 2008.

Roy Morgan’s most recent numbers for Australia have 40.5 per cent approval and 38.5 per cent disapproval. According to the Real Clear Politics average, the numbers for Americans are 34.8 per cent and 58.6 per cent respectively. I can’t find recent figures for Britain but I am willing to guess they’re not very pretty. 

The UK is around 40% approval and 60% disapproval. So net approval in the UK is -20%, in the US -24% and in NZ it is +33%. Some on the left don’t understand this.

And if it seems strange, try to think about some of the things which we aren’t going through.

The country is not paralysed by political gridlock. It is not constantly swapping governments. We are not always on the brink of a constitutional breakdown. We are not stalked by the terrorism of radical extremists. We do not kill each other over our religious differences. We don’t have people committing mass murders because that’s what they think God wants them to do.

I think the biggest factor is we have effective Government. The fact we have no upper chamber, no states and a Government that has to have the confidence of Parliament means things actually get done. You may not agree with them all, but in no way is Government broken like in some countries.

We are not a flawless people by any means. But this is still a country where fatal road accidents remain shocking enough to lead the news bulletins. We do know how lucky we are. Can you really blame us if, having looked at the outside world, we prefer the quietude of the Shire?

By coincidence I’ve just visited Hobbiton. A great tourist attraction that now employs around 250 people.

A release from The Jewish Council:

Don’t close the door on kids’ singing by censoring Jewish history

The Wellington Regional Jewish Council has asked Artsplash Co-ordinator Mary Prichard to (in her words) “keep life simple” by reinstating three songs from Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat into its programme for the September festival, using the correct words.

An apology for changing one word without permission has been made to the librettist, Sir Tim Rice, and he has accepted the apology, so there is no reason why the performance of the song with the correct words shouldn’t go ahead, Zwartz said.

“As we see it, the ‘trouble’ Mary Prichard refers to is an attempt to censor without explanation an event in Jewish history that took place about three-and-a-half thousand years ago.

“It is wrong to indicate to primary school children that something in the Jewish Torah – also included in the Christian Old Testament, and the Koran – needs to be altered, or avoided altogether,” Zwartz stated.

“It also undermines a strong move in New Zealand society for better understanding of every religion, as shown by the National Statement on Religious Diversity and the work of the Human Rights Commission.

“Far better to teach the children, and their parents, that each religion’s historical background is something to be treated respectfully, not censored or banned.

“In the case of Joseph and his Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat, it is obviously something that inspired Sir Tim Rice and Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber to create uplifting and enjoyable words and music.

Its universal acceptability is shown by the more than 20,000 performances of the work worldwide. 

“As a Wellingtonian, I don’t want our city to be branded as a place that refused to perform this popular adaptation of Jewish history,” David Zwartz said.

The Regional Jewish Council has offered to meet Mary Prichard and others from Artsplash to discuss and explain its opposition to censoring Jewish history.

The WCC should not fund a festival that censors history like that. The correct response to being told by Tim Rice not to change his lyrics, is to include the songs as written by Tim Rice, rather than remove them all together.

UPDATE: Artsplash has said:

“As Artsplash Co-ordinator I must take full responsibility for this unfortunate and regrettable error. 

You have my complete assurance that this was an unintentional and innocent error on the part of one of my team, and I apologise for it.  The person concerned, and myself for that matter, are religious people and would never consider intentionally doing anything racist or anti any religion.    

I have run Artsplash for 30 years and have always included children of all sorts of backgrounds including Jewish.  There has never before been an incident of this sort, and I don’t expect there will be again.

Action has been taken over the weekend to ensure that the original song words are all reinstated, with immediate effect.

I look forward to a very successful Artsplash event again this year for the  10,000 primary school children taking part”.

That’s an excellent outcome. Am pleased it has occurred.

Stuff reports:

New Zealand can handle up to 5000 refugees a year, says the Green Party, which has announced a policy to double the quota twice over.

They would then set the goal of doubling that to 4000 within six years. A new visa category would also allow for up to 100 climate change refugees, primarily from the Pacific, to be allowed to migrate to New Zealand. 

There is no such thing as a climate change refugee. There will be one day, but not for some decades as current sea level growth is 3 mm a year.

It was expected to cost an additional $66m in 2018, rising to $350m once the quota had reached 4000 places. 

So the Greens want to spend $350 million a year to take in more refugees while at the exact same time they are arguing we need to take in fewer migrants who actually have jobs to go to.

It’s one thing to argue we should have more migrants and more refugees. But the Greens are arguing for more refugees and fewer migrants. .