Glenn Reynolds writes:

The other hallmark of constitutional illiteracy is the claim that the First Amendment doesn’t protect “hate speech.” And by making that claim last week, Howard Dean, former governor of Vermont and Democratic presidential candidate, revealed himself to be a constitutional illiterate. Then, predictably, he doubled down on his ignorance.

In First Amendment law, the term “hate speech” is meaningless. All speech is equally protected whether it’s hateful or cheerful. It doesn’t matter if it’s racist, sexist or in poor taste, unless speech falls into a few very narrow categories — like “true threats,” which have to address a specific individual, or “incitement,” which must constitute an immediate and intentional encouragement to imminent lawless action — it’s protected.

The term “hate speech” was invented by people who don’t like that freedom, and who want to give the — completely false — impression that there’s a kind of speech that the First Amendment doesn’t protect because it’s hateful. What they mean by “hateful,” it seems, is really just that it’s speech they don’t agree with. 

Well said.

The latest Roy Morgan poll is at Curia. Projects NZ First having the balance of power.

USA Today reports:

Three Islamic State militants setting up an ambush in a bitterly contested area of northern Iraq were killed by a herd of stampeding boars, local leaders say.

Sheikh Anwar al-Assi, a chief of the local Ubaid tribe and supervisor of anti-ISIS forces, told The Times of London the militants were hiding on the edge of a field about 50 miles southwest of Kirkuk when the boars overwhelmed them Sunday. Five other militants were injured, al-Assi said. He said the group was poised to attack a band of local tribesmen who had fled to nearby mountains since militants seized the town of Hawija three years ago.

“It is likely their movement disturbed a herd of wild pigs, which inhabit the area as well as the nearby cornfields,” he said.

Well done the wild boars.

Interesting observation from the Espiner interview:

She also has some fascinating observations about working with Winston Peters, who may again be a key coalition player after the coming election.

Shipley, who sacked him as Treasurer in 1998 as the first MMP government fell apart over the sale of Wellington Airport, offers bouquets and brickbats.

“Winston could have been Prime Minister but for want of himself. His complexity often got ahead of his capability. Watching him on a good day he was brilliant,” she says.

“He was an 85 per cent outstanding leader. And the 15 per cent absolutely crippled him because he would get so myopically preoccupied with a diversion that it took away his capability and intent on the main goal.”

Shipley also says that Peters, Deputy Prime Minister from 1996 to 1998, was excellent at absorbing information but sometimes simply hadn’t done the reading.

“I would make a personal judgement as he came into my office as to whether the envelope with the papers in it was either open or closed and it often would tell me the extent to which he had read what we were then going to discuss. I learned to both respect and manage it and on those days the meetings were short.”

Very astute insights.

Stuff reports:

The first shots of an electoral showdown in Christchurch have been fired after Ilam incumbent Gerry Brownlee was confirmed as the next Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Current city councillor Raf Manji, who will challenge Brownlee for the Ilam seat in Christchurch’s northwest at September’s election, has questioned whether Brownlee can remain an effective local MP while carrying out his new role.

Brownlee has refuted Manji’s comments, saying former foreign ministers have managed to do both jobs.

I thought I’d look at the Foreign Ministers under MMP and see how many were Electorate and List.

• 1996 Don McKinnon, List
• 1999 Phil Goff, Electorate
• 2002 Phil Goff, Electorate
• 2005 Winston Peters, List
• 2008 Murray McCully, Electorate
• 2011 Murray McCully, Electorate
• 2014 Murray McCully, Electorate
• 2017 Gerry Brownlee, Electorate

So for the last 21 years, an electorate MP has been Foreign Minister for 15 of the 21 years.

The Washington Post reports:

I argued last week that anecdotal stories about disillusioned Trump supporters were overdone. The fact is that, on a broad scale, Trump supporters say they aren’t disappointed. In fact, a poll showed they were more pleased than disappointed, by about five to one.

The Pew Research Centre released a poll showing very little buyer’s remorse among Trump voters. The poll showed just 7 per cent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say Trump has performed worse than they expected him to. Fully 38 per cent – five times as many – say he has performed better. 

A new Washington Post-ABC News poll confirms this – in spades. And, in fact, it shows more buyer’s remorse for Trump’s opponent in the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton.

And were the 2016 election held again today, it shows Trump would avenge his popular-vote loss.

While just 4 per cent of Trump’s supporters say they would back someone else if there was a redo of the election, fully 15 per cent of Clinton supporters say they would ditch her.

That 15 per cent is split between those who say they would vote for Trump (2 per cent), Gary Johnson (4 per cent), Jill Stein (2 per cent), and either other candidates or not vote (7 per cent).

The Democrats will need a very different candidate if they wish to win in 2020.

Yael Shochat writes at The Spinoff:

Two years ago, after 17 years living here, I received my New Zealand citizenship. Now I can say that I am proud to be both a New Zealander and a first generation immigrant from Israel. …

I was determined to make something of my passion for food. In the 14 years since I started running restaurants and cafes specialising in Middle Eastern and Jewish cuisine, I have not only employed hundreds of Kiwis and immigrants alike, but I’d like to think I’ve had a hand in contributing to the new culinary renaissance in this city and left it a more exciting place than how I found it.

To Mr Andrew Little, and to dear Jacinda, whom I consider a friend: you’ve been to my restaurant, Ima Cuisine, many times. You’ve shared my company and enjoyed my most beloved dishes – immigrant food from all over the Jewish diaspora, and Palestinian food, the indigenous cuisine of my country.

So the author considers Jacinda a dear friend. Which makes her next works more compelling:

What are we going to say to each other next time you come in? Are you going to give “compliments to the chefs”, half of whom are not welcome here under your immigration policy? Am I welcome here? I certainly don’t feel welcome now that you’ve promised to cut “tens of thousands” of immigrants.

And worse:

Right now I, my friends and peers in the restaurant industry are all crying out for kitchen and wait staff. Stopping immigration – while refusing to actually address the underlying causes of problems in the job and housing market – will mean I won’t be able to hire anyone. I won’t be able to cook for you anymore. Many other industries will also suffer.

So Labour’s policy will see many businesses close.

Now we come to the elephant in the room. Mr Little, Jacinda – you know my background, so you know I am descended from people who suffered greatly from similar policies. As has happened before, when times get tough economically, the first people to be scapegoated and to blamed are immigrants and diaspora. This happened in the early 20th century in Europe and we all know how ugly that got. Stopping immigration won’t solve our problems but it will create more. Stopping immigration will divide our country and make it less safe.

Policies such as yours are dog whistles, mostly inaudible messages of demonisation and othering used for political gain.

Again this is from someone who is a dear friend of Jacinda’s.

I understand that you are desperate for more votes this election, and sure, blaming immigrants for the ills of society is an easy way of getting them. So shift the blame on us as many have done before you. I just hope you’re ready to face the consequences.

They are desperate indeed, unable to get above 30% in the polls.

Stuff reports:

The court heard that Preston was introduced to the “social welfare lifestyle” in 2001, when she was just 16.

Judge David Ruth said she has been on the “benefit treadmill” since then.

Preston’s offending included forging letters purporting to be from a landlord and Walker’s mother to obtain benefits, knowing that the information was false.

She also received a new $600 fridge freezer from the ministry after saying hers was broken. She advertised the new fridge for sale for $780 through an online trading site on the same day.

Preston also started a job at a fast food outlet while receiving benefit payments.

She was convicted of three charges of obtaining by deception, three of forgery, and 21 of using a document for monetary gain.

A ministry investigation found that Preston and Walker had been living together “in the nature of marriage” throughout the offending, while both submitted documents stating they were single.

Walker also continued receiving a benefit while working. He also received sole parent assistance while living with Preston and benefited from her fraud.

Hey the Government gives me money for nothing. I want more and more of it.

Mike Hosking writes:

But back to the unions and this claim for national wages.

As I understand the thinking, it would mean if you’re a bus driver or box builder you would be paid the same no matter where you work or who for.

I suppose I admire the cheek.

I guess in election year everyone is entitled to have a go at pushing a barrow, even if the barrow comes from 1971.

But the concept that as an employer of bus drivers or box makers you get told what you can pay is so absurd I’m surprised the perpetrators of the crime can argue it with a straight face.

Making it worse, it is reported Andrew Little likes the idea, mind you given his union credentials perhaps that should not be a surprise.

This would be the ultimate payback for the unions making Little leader – a return to the 1970s style national awards where the Government sets pay rates across entire industries.

But I would have thought having stepped into the new role of Opposition leader with the task of dragging your party into the real, if not modern, world, you might want to leave a few of the more fringe ideas behind.

What Labour must do this year is look credible, and if they think nationalising wages is credible then we can assume they’ve been taking tips from Jeremy Corbyn, who by the way will give them all the food for thought they could ever possibly want on June 8 by leading his party to a broad-based collapse based on the fact he fails to accept communism isn’t a vote-getter.

The only countries that vote for socialism are those that have never had it!

Wages are based on a variety of circumstances, and the main one isn’t what the Government or unions tell you to pay.

It’s location, product, profit margin, market size, competitiveness, experience, labour availability, the economy, the list goes on.

Exactly.

ITV reports:

The Conservatives appear to be on course to win the majority of Welsh parliamentary seats for the first time in more than 100 years according to an exclusive poll carried out for ITV Cymru Wales News.

The snapshot of voting intentions also puts Labour as losing a general election in Wales for the first time since 1918.

Amazing if it happens.

Also in Scotland, support for independence has dropped to 40% and only 26% support the SNP’s demands for another referendum before Spring 2019.

And election polls in Scotland show SNP down 6% from the last election, Conservatives up 15% and Labour down 10%. It is projected they could pick up 7 to 9 seats from the SNP as well as 10 in Wales.

Steven Joyce announced:

The Government will allocate $11 billion in new capital infrastructure over the next four Budgets in addition to spending already included in agency baselines, Finance Minister Steven Joyce says.

“We are growing faster than we have for a long time and adding more jobs all over the country,” Mr Joyce says. “That’s a great thing, but to keep growing, it’s important we keep investing in the infrastructure that enables that growth.”

Mr Joyce says that the focus will be on the infrastructure that supports growth, with capital investment in Budget 2017 being increased to $4 billion, including $812 million for reinstating State Highway One, north and south of Kaikoura.

“We are investing hugely in new schools, hospitals, housing, roads, and railways. This investment will extend that run-rate significantly, and include new investment in the justice and defence sectors as well.

The capital commitment in Budget 2017 will represent the biggest addition to the Government’s capital stock in decades.

“To put that into context, the net new capital allocated in the last four Budgets was $4.8 billion, of which $4.1 billion was funded through the proceeds of the mixed ownership model programme,” Mr Joyce says. “In Budget 2016 we were forecasting just $3.6 billion in new capital spend between Budget 17 and Budget 20 compared to $11 billion now.”

“The $11 billion is additional spend on top of investments already planned by the Government.

If you add the Government’s budgeted new capital investment together with the investment made through baselines and through the National Land Transport Fund – the total is around $23 billion over the next four years, or an average of nearly $6 billion per year.

So $6 billion a year of infrastructure and capital spending is a lot. The allowance for extra investment has effectively been tripled.

A reader sent me this. Interesting that Le Pen’s economic policies are basically all leftwing. Macron may call himself a centrist but his policies look pretty good. They include:

• Deregulate labour market
• End 35 hour working week
• Unemployment insurance rather than welfare
• Cut $10b of spending
• Tax cuts of $10b

The Herald reports:

Libraries are being inundated with unsupervised children during the school holidays.

A sweeping statement

Clendon woman Therese Luxton said her local library is teeming with unsupervised kids who have been dropped off by parents who can’t afford childcare.

What a miracle. She can read minds. She magically knows why these kids are at the library.

Ms Luxton by coincidence is on the executive of the lobby group, Child Poverty Action Group. Something not revealed by the Herald.

A Kaikohe library employee said that they used to have a big problem but they put a stop to it last year. Now they ask for ID and tell the parents that their children must be supervised.

Very sensible.

The Herald spent some time at Te Matariki Clendon Library and observed most children were supervised inside.

In other words, no evidence observed to support the claims.

But outside at the skatepark there were over 20 children and one adult. Kids as young as 7 said they were there alone. Most seemed to be among friends.

So not finding any unsupervised kids at the Library, we went to a skatepark and found some there.

When asked if they used the library unsupervised as well, they replied yes.

The solo adult, who only wanted to be known as Ash, said he always accompanied his children who are aged 12, 11, 6 and 5.

“Sometimes there’s trouble down here. The other kids might steal their bikes.”

Ash has seen kids younger than 5 come without a parent, but they are often with siblings. He thought some parents used the place as a daycare, and kids use it to get away from troubled homes.

Nowhere in all this were kids asked why they were out by themselves. It is quite possible they all have at least one parent at home, but they prefer to be out playing.

Child Poverty Action Group co-convenor Janfrie Wakim said abandoning children at libraries was the mark of desperate parents trying to survive.

Now we get the comment from CPAG, but of course no mention it was a CPAG member who made the allegations. So you make the allegations and then get to comment on it as a neutral party.

The Guardian reports:

The latest opinion polls show that Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour is facing a general election defeat on the scale of Michael Foot’s 1983 loss to Margaret Thatcher when Labour was reduced to just 209 MPs – its lowest total in the second half of the 20th century. …

Will it happen again this time? Will Theresa May’s snap election enable the Tories to drive into Labour’s heartlands in the Midlands and the north of England in a way not seen since that 1983 Thatcher victory? Will May in the process really be able to “kill off” Labour as the Sun newspaper predicted on Wednesday?

There’s been five polls since the election was called. The Conservatives are averaging 46% and Labour 26%.

Electoral Calculus projects that this would result in 410 seats for the Conservatives and 161 for Labour.

Keith Ng writes:

Winston Peters’ contemptible race-baiting rhetoric has hit a new low, but he’s able to go further than usually thanks to the party that gave us ‘Chinese-sounding names’ having already climbed half way, argues Keith Ng.

You can try to have a sensible debate about immigration – and you can say it’s not about race – but inevitably, someone is going to jump up and say: “Woah, woah, woah, it totally is about Asians, and anyone telling you otherwise are just bloody Asian immigrants!”

And inevitably, that someone is going to be Winston.

But here’s the thing. Immigration has traction as an issue because Labour made it an issue. And Winston can climb out further than he usually does because Labour has already climbed half way.

Labour seems to think that it can open a can of worms, and when the worms start crawling out, it’s not their fault – it’s the worms’. Maybe this would be true if Labour had painstakingly avoided fuelling xenophobia in their discussion of immigration. But they haven’t. They’ve done the exact opposite.

I would remind people that Keith is a former staffer in Helen Clark’s office. So him saying Labour have fuelled xenophobia has more resonance than me saying it.

Yes, it’s possible to have a responsible, non-xenophobic debate about immigration policy – but this ain’t it. Throwing in a bit of “immigrants are taking our jobs” – when the problem is supposed to be infrastructure! – and denigrating those migrants as low-skilled and rorters is the opposite of responsible.

The other key to having a responsible debate about immigration policy is: HAVING. SOME. GODDAMN. POLICY.

Intended or otherwise, Labour has created one hell of a vacuum. They’ve talked up immigration as a problem since last year, and last week they ramped it up to Very Serious Problem which requires cuts in the tens of thousands … but they don’t have any policy.

Little is simply trying to be a mini-Winston.

This isn’t a policy debate – this is a debate about whether an arbitrary number sounds aggressively-yet-responsibly big. Ten thousand? Not big enough! Fifty thousand? Too big!

And, sure, I guess that’s how politics works sometimes. But immigration debates are different. In the absence of actual policy proposals, there is nothing to consider except prejudices and gut feels. That vacuum is an invitation for the worst Winstons of our nature, and that is firmly Labour’s responsibility.

I labelled this the stench of desperation. Labour can’t win on leadership, competence or policies so they resort to what is left.

The Sensible Sentencing Trust has released:

Sensible Sentencing Trust has learned that Afghani sex offender Sultan Ali Abdul Ali Akbari has, since his release on parole at the end of February, been convicted and sentenced to community detention for harassing women at shopping malls. That is bad enough, but of far greater concern, he has had his parole conditions revised for misbehavior with young girls and women at a Henderson swimming complex.

“How on earth can it be that this man was granted a five year reprieve from deportation when he has reoffended, has had his parole conditions tightened, and received a conviction for harassment of women?” said Trust Founder Garth McVicar. “Why was his parole not immediately revoked for breach, rather than simply having further conditions added?” McVicar said.

“Presumably the Immigration Department knew about Akbari’s breach of parole, the subsequent variation to his parole conditions, and his latest conviction, for harassing women. Given those most disturbing circumstances, why on earth was he not deported?” McVicar said.

“If the grant of the reprieve preceded his latest offending, and the complaints of sexual misbehavior made against him, he has now clearly put himself in line for immediate deportation. For unaccountable reasons, Immigration New Zealand said he would not be deported if he did not reoffend within five years. As of 16 March 2017 – a little over a month ago – Akbari had been convicted of harassment of women, and received a community based sentence. That being the case, why is this man still here?” McVicar said.

The more that comes out about this case, the more appalling it looks. The decision maker within Immigration NZ should never ever have agreed to a five year stay on deportation and they must now do everything they can legally to remove this man from New Zealand.

I’ve been sent two reports from the Parole Board about this man. The first is dated 31 January 2017 and some key points:

• Akbari speaks no English
• His indecent assaults were on an eight year old girl, 10 year old girl and 18 year old girl and a female shop assistant
• Akbari has made no progress with rehabilitation and denies any wrongdoing
• Released on 21 February 2017 (sentence was due to end 16 October 2017) with release conditions including a curfew for three months and no unsupervised contacts with under 16 year olds

The second is dated 16 March 2017 and key points are:

• concerns have arisen in relation to his behaviour with children and women in public areas including a swimming complex and shopping mall
• Akbari has been given a pre-charge warning over the swimming complex and given community detention and work over the incidents at shopping malls
• Akbari now required to wear GPS
• Akbari banned from malls, parks and pools

But here is the key thing. He was released in 21 February and by 16 March he had already offended multiple times and been convicted. This should be enough to break the Immigration NZ decision of non deportation as it was contingent on no further offending.

So Immigration NZ must move to immediately deport Akbari. It is obvious that he has no self control if he is reoffending within days of release from prison. He speaks no English so can’t integrate in NZ society easily and he denies any wrong doing.

Stuff reports:

An Invercargill policeman allegedly shot dead his wife, tried to kill the man she was with, then handed himself in at the local station. 

Constable Ben McLean’s alleged Anzac Day attack could be the first of its kind in recent New Zealand history involving a serving police officer. 

Verity Ann McLean died in the shooting. Garry William Duggan, who suffered several gunshot wounds, phoned emergency services at 8.19pm on Tuesday. 

All killings can send a shudder through a community, and especially domestic violence killings. But to have the alleged killer being a serving police officer is even more disturbing. We rely on the Police to keep us safe, and the alleged actions will be a terrible blow to those in Invercargill, as well as all other Police officers.

A reader writes in:

Something you may be interested in, in light of your coverage of the controversy over funding pembrolizumab (Keytruda) in advanced melanoma.

Pembrolizumab has gained Medsafe approval as a first line treatment in advanced non small cell lung cancer:

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11841980

PHARMAC is currently considering a funding application, but there is of course no guarantee this will be successful. 

Would those who campaigned to bypass the normal processes last time around argue that the same thing should happen again? After all, advanced lung cancer has a very poor prognosis, with Maori and Pacific people having especially poor outcomes.

If not, how can favouring one group of patients over another be ethically justified, especially if doing so widens existing health disparities? (Melanoma is one of the very few cancer types where the incidence and fatality rate is much higher in non-Maori than in Maori).

Not only that, pembrolizumab being trialled for a LOT of indications. A quick search for “pembrolizumab” in ClinicalTrials.gov shows trials recruiting for breast, pancreatic, urological, gynocologic, and hepatic cancers among others, as well as myeloma and leukaemia. 

https://clinicaltrials.gov/

How many ‘exceptions’ can be made without blowing out PHARMAC’s budget? And did those who started down this road think about the unintended consequences?

All good points. Both National and Labour politicians should refrain from over-riding Pharmac decision making.

Stuff reports:

A Kapiti Coast District councillor is understood to have been stripped of some powers and is under police investigation after being accused of grabbing a council staffer and pressing himself against her in front of the local mayor.

Councillor David Scott allegedly put his hands on the hips of a female staffer and pressed himself against her from behind at a morning tea at the council’s headquarters in Paraparaumu earlier this month.

The woman was reportedly talking to Kapiti Mayor K Gurunathan when the alleged incident happened. …

But he claimed he would not have touched her “down below” as two weeks before the alleged incident he had undergone surgery to remove cancer from his penis – a very painful process that included a complete circumcision, which left him in intense pain and a desire to avoid contact in that area.

Well that is an original defence – I did not press my penis into that women as I’ve just been circumcised!

Stuff reported:

Westpac economist Satish Ranchhod said while those coming from overseas to live in New Zealand, much of the gain in net migration was actually down to fewer Kiwis moving to live overseas, because of the strong job market here.

“Arrivals only account for half of the strong pick-up in net migration that we have seen since 2012,” Ranchhod said.

“The other half relates to flows of New Zealanders in and out of the country. On an annual basis, this is at the lowest level since 1984. New Zealanders are being encouraged to stay onshore or come back from overseas by our positive economic conditions.”

I thought that this couldn’t be right. That this is the lowest level of net migration (for NZ citizens) since 1984. And it isn’t quite right.

It is actually the lowest level of net migration (for NZ citizens) since 1964!

The data is above. It is for March years. So the lowest level of net migration for NZ citizens since 1964. That is a 53 year record.

The economy can’t be going as disastrously as Labour and Greens keep telling us it is, with so few Kiwis leaving and also a lot returning.

In 2001 we lost 814 NZers a week. In 2008 we lost 658 NZers a week. In 2017 we lost only 26 NZers a week.

UPDATE: Westpac has commented:

I was looking over your comment on migration that mentioned our report(https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2017/04/kiwis_staying_and_returning_in_record_numbers.html ). I did another check of the numbers. I think the difference between the ones you reported and the ones we commented on was just the frequency. If you look at the March year data, you’re quite right that the low point was much earlier. However, what we did was a rolling 12-month total. Using those rolling annual total shows that the last time the net outflow of New Zealanders was at these levels was February 1984.

So for any 12 month period it is a record going back to 1984. For March years it is a record back to 1964!