Chris Keall writes at NBR:

“Right now, the internet, with all our mobile devices is consuming about 10% of all the energy we produce as a species,” former British Telecom chief technology officer Peter Cochrane says.

He’s explaining why the so-called internet-of-things will be huge, 5G and other wireless technologies will never make fibre redundant (fibre, of course, being close to the heart of Chorus, which is hosting his New Zealand visit). …

Some say the nightmare scenario for Chorus is that just as the UFB fibre rollout wraps up at the end of 2019, Spark, Vodafone and 2degrees will be upgrading their mobile data networks to 5G, with bandwidth matching what most people get from a landline fibre connection today. The UFB will be finally complete, and suddenly surplus to requirements.

But the ex-BT CTO says there’s “not a chance” that will happen.

People who say that don’t understand the nature of wireless or the capabilities of fibre, he says. And nearly every pundit would agree with him, NBR would have to say – at least with data compression technology as it stands today. The bands of spectrum that suit mobile data transmission can only get so crowded and are subject to interference. But you always lay more fibre or upgrade its capacity.

You can get amazing speeds now on mobile, but fibre will always be able to be faster, with greater capacity and less latency.

How does New Zealand’s UFB rollout stand up internationally? Is it world-class, as our government says?

Mr Cochrane reckons so. He says it’s “ahead of the UK and every other country in Europe.”

High praise.

Stuff reports:

Air New Zealand has issued a total ban on fire-prone Samsung Galaxy Note 7 smartphones on all of its flights from 5am on Sunday morning.

A spokeswoman said the airline strongly advised travellers not to bring these devices to the airport with them.  

“They cannot be accepted for travel and there is no storage facility available for them at our check in areas,” the spokeswoman said.

It came after the United States Department of Transportation issued a total ban on passengers and flight crews bringing the phones on airline flights into and out of the United States.

Is this the worst product defect in modern times? A phone that can catch fire or explode but itself?

Politico reports:

Long the thought that came after the afterthought of the 2016 presidential campaign, independent conservative Evan McMullin now has a chance to make his mark in the race — thanks in large part to a leaked tape of Donald Trump talking about sexual assault.

Trump’s lewd tape appears to be cutting into his standing among social conservatives, nowhere more so than in Utah, where the Mormon faith holds sway and tolerance for the latest revelation of Trump’s lasciviousness has pushed his already strained relationship with state Republicans past the breaking point. That, combined with a broad rejection of Hillary Clinton, is good news for McMullin.

Story Continued Below

 

McMullin, a former Capitol Hill and CIA staffer who’s running a barebones campaign as a conservative alternative, not only grew up in Utah, he has made the state the focus of his campaign.

It’s paying off. While McMullin is almost unknown nationally and on the ballot in only 11 states, a new poll released Wednesday by Utah-based Y2 Analytics found McMullin with 22 percent support across the state. That’s just behind Trump and Clinton, who were tied at 26 percent, and ahead of Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson’s 14 percent and Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s 1 percent. (Trump’s campaign did not return a request for comment on the poll results.)

It’s just one poll, but it’s enough for Utah’s political insiders to take notice.

“I’ll make a prediction: He’s going to win the state,” said Dave Hansen, a political adviser to Rep. Mia Love (R-Utah), on Wednesday. “I think people don’t want Trump and they don’t like Clinton out here, and he is kind of the unknown, but people like him. He’s a safe place to go to cast their ballot.”

Utah only has six electoral votes and is highly unlikely to matter for the overall outcome. But if Trump did fail to win Utah, it would be the first time since 1964 the GOP candidate didn’t win Utah.

If McMullin did win Utah, there is a very slim chance he would become President. It would require Trump to recover in the polls and come so close to Clinton that neither of them get 270 Electoral College votes.

Then the election shifts to the House of Representatives who have to choose between the top three candidates. Each state delegation gets one vote and Republicans control 33 of the 50 delegations.

The Republican would not choose Clinton. And in a choice between Trump and McMullin, I’d say most would go for McMullin!

But very unlikely that it will be close enough between Trump and Clinton. Currently Trump is projected to get under 200 Electoral College votes.

Stuff reports:

A newly-elected district councillor plans to take her baby to meetings because the available subsidies exclude childcare. 

Hurunui District councillor Julia McLean said juggling council responsibilities with caring for a 6-month-old, 4-year-old and 7-year-old put her “on the back foot from the start”.

She wrote to the Remuneration Authority (RMA) asking for council expense policies to be brought into “modern times”.

As well as councillors’ salaries, the RMA covered cellphone and internet use and mileage, but there was nothing for childcare. 

McLean, 33, said it may explain why more women, especially mothers, were not involved in local body governance despite the number of decisions that affected families. 

“I’ve been elected as an equal, but I’m not being treated as one”. 

McLean had no immediate family in Canterbury. Her partner worked full time, Monday to Friday.  While her older children were covered under the 20 hours free early childcare programme, her 6-month-old and the school holidays were a problem.

She was required to attend an eight-hour council meeting every Thursday, as well as reading and preparation. She has fielded calls to sit on advisory boards.

After taking childcare costs out of her $20,000 salary, there would be little left, she said. 

This doesn’t quite add up. As I understand it a day of childcare is around $35 so childcare for the six month old for one day a week would be around $1,700 a year. The older kids are at school or get the 20 free hours a week.

A great example of the extreme rhetoric from the Greens in Stuff:

Genter said research from Nelson Marlborough District Health Board principal dental officer Rob Beaglehole showed the cost of treating and individual case of tooth decay under anaesthetic ran close to $4000. 

“The proceeds from a sugar tax should be used to fund health awareness and promotion, there should also be restrictions on advertising and marketing and a ban on selling sugary drinks in particular in public buildings,” she said. 

“Ultimately the junk food industry is a culprit and we need to treat them like tobacco companies.” 

Yes chocolate and tobacco is just the same.

As the number of children hospitalised for tooth decay reaches new peaks, the Greens are renewing calls for the purveyors of sugary drinks to be treated like tobacco companies. 

That included restrictions on the advertising and sale of such drinks to children, and high rates of taxation. 

Ministry of Health figures show the rate of hospitalisation for dental caries, or basic tooth decay, in under 19-year-olds, had increased 13 per cent over the six years to June 30 2014. 

Yet the sales of sugary drinks has been consistently falling in NZ. So if tooth decay is increasing, and sugary drinks consumption is dropping, what does that mean?

Central has been my favourite play of the year. It is an iconic New Zealand play that delivers a barrel of laughs while also making you think.

The setting is Central Otago, where author Dave Armstrong got to live for a few months in 2011, staying at the old Bannockburn Post Office.

The set is a large living room with a real Central Otago feel to it. The house and accompanying vineyard is owned by Michael (Tom Trevella), a former Aucklander who is a script writer. His partner is Cherie an actress and also a creative talent. I wondered if the play was slightly self reverential with Michael being a version of the author. Michael has done well not just locally, but internationally. He’s written scripts for some Hollywood blockbusters, but hating Los Angeles has escaped to Central Otago where he can enjoy the lifestyle and work on more independent creations.

Cherie is in her late 30s and thinks she is too old to be a successful actress anymore.  She once appeared with Brad Pitt! She has written a script for a film about an older women who is widowed with her in the starring role. Michael is very enthusiastic about the project, which also becomes the source of some tension between them.

The real tensions, and comic relief, comes in the form of Brian (Alex Greig), a local tradie building a deck for them. The down to earth local tradie against the liberal wealthy vineyard owner. They only drink their own Pinot Noir and Pinot Gris, he prefers beer – Speights of course. He regards the early gold miners a pioneers, while Michael thinks they destroyed the environment. And Brian’s next job is on an affordable housing development in Arrowtown – a project Michael secretly opposes as out of character for the area.

Armstrong does a great job of highlighting the tensions between economy and environment, affordability and character, locals and jafas without in any way being preachy. Many plays fall into the mistake of trying to impose the author’s views on the audiences, but Central uses the tensions for both drama and large dollops of humour.

Brian has some classic lines such as referring to Colin McCahon as that bloke who spoiled all his paintings by writing words on them (Michael of course has one) and also where he reels off the names of his hens such as Helen Cluck and Richie McClaw.

L-R: Claire Waldron as Cherie and Harriet Prebble as Karen. Photo: Paul McLaughlin

The fourth cast member is Karen, played by Harriett Prebble. She’s their young housekeeper who is a typical South Islander (accent to boot) working in hospitality and also doing housekeeping, nannying etc.

One of the things I really enjoyed about the play is I was unsure until near the end, why Karen was in the play, and what her creative role would be. The Michael vs Brian tension was obvious, and well done. But why was Karen there? Brian thinks he knows her, but she says he is mistaken. Are they possibly going to end up together? There doesn’t seem to be romance, in fact far from it.

Dave Armstrong excels in iconic New Zealand humour, as seen in previous productions such as The Motor Camp and Kings of the Gym. The settings and characters seem incredibly real and almost unique to New Zealand. Central continues this pattern. You don’t even need to have been to Central Otago to feel the vibrancy of the play.

There were a couple of minor defects. The set looked great when the lights were dim, but the central back wall of the house looked too artificial when under full lighting. A softer focus on it would work better. And there were a few flubbed lines, but we were at the preview night instead of the official opening, so probably first performance nerves.

It has a brisk pace, running for 105 minutes approximately (plus an interval). All four actors did well, making their characters believable and quirky but without falling into one dimensional stereotypes. Trevella and Greig especially had great performances.

Overall I loved it for the many comic moments, and the well developed plot with political themes, drama, betrayal and a good ending. Highly recommended. On at Circa One until Saturday 12 November 2016.

Rating: ****1/2 (out of five)

Stuff reports:

Two stalwarts of Toast Martinborough have pulled out of next month’s festival, with one complaining about overzealous policing of liquor laws.

Heavyweight vineyard Palliser Estate – whose former director, the late Richard Riddiford, was one of the driving forces behind the festival – has dropped out, as has neighbouring Escarpment Vineyard. 

Escarpment director and winemaker Larry McKenna said changes to liquor law enforcement “makes it too difficult. They [police] have prosecuted various sites for breaching the liquor act … now, it’s just not worth getting involved”.

“Really, any one of the sites at any time could be considered in breach. It’s jeopardising the future of the event.”

Palliser Estate chief executive Pip Goodwin said Toast used to be “extremely fun for all those involved. However, things have changed, including the environment under which we operate”.

McKenna blamed Wellington police’s “alcohol prevention squad” for taking a harder line than local officers. However, Wellington alcohol harm prevention officer Sergeant Damian Rapira-Davies said police were simply carrying out their jobs.

Their jobs seems to be to try and kill off every fun event in the region.

If you swing Green and want to have your say on 2017 election issues, join up or renew your membership by Thursday! https://t.co/Cp0IlMt12M

— Hayley Holt (@theHoltBolt) October 11, 2016

I don’t think it is a great look for someone who co-hosts a politics show (Backbenches) to be actively recruiting members for a political party.

I’m a huge fan of Hayley, and think she is a good host on Backbenches. But MPs who go on Backbenches will wonder if they will get a fair go.

Thailand’s new King once made his poodle, Foo Foo, an Air Chief Marshal.

That is one up on making a horse a Senator!

A chilling article from the Washington Post:

“[My wife] is just a woman, like every other woman,” he says coldly. “Women exist to be married and have children. In jihad, feelings do not matter. Women survive; they do not live.”

The sad reality for women in ISIL controlled territory.

Through my interviews, it became clear to me that the Islamic State has perfected a process of dehumanisation that allows its members to indulge their misogyny, aggressive sexual tendencies, and need for power – all in the name of Islam. …

Following the militant group’s assault on the Sinjar district of Iraqi Kurdistan in August 2014, thousands of Yazidi women were sold into temporary “marriages” with multiple men.

While Sunni women in Islamic State territory are forced into marriages as well, the Islamic State considers Yazidis to be little more than animals, fit only for bondage and exploitation.

Though Islamic State clerics bless short-term “marriages” with Yazidi women, these one-sided arrangements are nothing more than a pretense to justify rape and sexual slavery.

Some Yazidi women say they were bought for as little as US$10 (NZ$14) or a carton of cigarettes

The difference between ISIL and the Nazis is one of degree only.

“What if that were your mother?” I ask him, trying to keep my voice even. “How would you feel about your mother being sold as a slave and raped, or even if she was Sunni, being married off to several of your friends?”

That gets a response. When he looks me in the face, the overwhelming hatred in his expression is utterly chilling.

“Even if it were my mother, that is Islamic sharia law and I would not mind because it would be for the jihad,” he says finally.

“We treat women the way we are required to by Islamic law, not human law. This is how they are supposed to live. They are second-class humans.”

This is what happens when you apply seventh century writings to the 21st century in a literal sense.

A guest post by Mike Kirk:

Why Labour can’t win.

The dominant discourse of modern Western democratic politics, since 1985, has been neo-liberalism. This hegemonic discourse shapes what the news media and public see as “realistic” in policy terms. The primary belief and “policy” of neo-liberal governments is non intervention, or as Reagan put it “Don’t just do something, stand there.” Essentially National and Conservative governments do not believe in government action, except for the staples of law and order plus ‘free’ education and Health Service. State provision or policies invoking State actions to improve society, are not legitimate to this mindset. Left wing agendas for changing society are dismissed out of hand by John Key, as out of date and a threat to prosperity . Markets must receive primary obeisance. Andrew Little has fallen into the man-trap, laid by the Right: don’t scare the horses. The anodyne result is a turn off.

Labour’s political lifeblood is the idea that the power of government can act against capital in favour of the have-nots, or/and the majority of “wage-earners”, or what used to be called the working class. This is a collectivist perspective. Labour has a big challenge to pit this philosophy against the individualist approach that occupies centre stage in cultural socialisation in Western capitalist democracies. A related problem is that the target of media communications is the individual consumer, plied with inducements to see himself as special and unique. The polarity of ‘separate’ v ‘communal’ is thereby culturally skewed in favour of Right wing economic and political messaging via the suffusion of consumer messaging.

The Right (National in this instance) make psychological appeals to the electorate based on self interest. The message sold is “we are more competent to run the economy than the other lot, don’t risk change.” Meanwhile, Labour seeks to sell a message which requires the listener to see themselves as part of society – a well-meaning enterprise for the greater good. Right wing messaging taps straight into individual psychology of “I.” Labour, however, has to jump extra hurdles putting the “I” in the context of “we” – in terms of sociological perspective. This requires more time and, – significantly – makes more demands on the cognitive capacity of those it seeks to reach and persuade.

For many years neither National nor Labour has made any attempt to sell their Party as a vehicle for making society a better place to live (as opposed to straight materialistic appeals to individuals.) No appeal is made to imagine the possibility that there might be a better way of living than being slaves to mortgage payments, consumption and commuting. As the economy is the dominant discourse, discussion of the society we live in is occluded.. The pretty exclusive domain staked out for debates is economic – who will raise GDP most? This is a passionless political landscape devoid of meaning, inspiration or charismatic leadership.

John Key has a further advantage – he is seen by the non political voter as easy going and having a sense of humour (as related to me by a service clerk in Kiwi Bank last year.) Personality sells, policy doesn’t and the Labour leader is no salesman. Policies need explaining and reading. The news media caters to what they see as punters’ short attention spans. News likes superficiality, pictures and personality: policy requires analysis, time and thinking, things that “flicking” viewers are not thought to be keen on. Policy is not sexy.

John Key is the incumbent: potential swing voters need a reason to switch. Policies need to be simple, clear and distinctive from those of the existing regime. Little tacks too close to the orthodoxy set out by National. Leaders are given sound bites and little time to elucidate on TV. Looking unconfident or hesitant, and saying that the Party is working on new policies, as Little repeatedly has, 17 months after a crushing electoral defeat, is lame and instantly forgettable. Labour supporters tend to be younger and poorer. They have a lower propensity to vote than older, National voters. The younger, poorer voter needs incentivising (perversely) to vote. Labour cannot win on the economy , which is National territory. They must inspire by inviting people to think about what sort of life and society they want and how Labour can assist in that. That requires passion and vision addressing concerns of the bottom 75%, not crying over the bottom 20%.

Labour “policy”

• TPPA – clear as muck.
• Capital Gains Tax – – running scared
• Personal allowance or redistributive ideas? Silence.
• Addressing poverty inducing high rents? Tumbleweed blowing down the street.
• Eye-catching rail investment from Auckland to Warkworth? No risk approach.

Oppositions don’t win elections unless they lead in mid-term by at least 10%. Labour is still 16% behind. At the last election they trailed National by 23%. Labour needs about 7% of National votes. It shows no sign of getting them. National votes will not be peeled away by banging on about worker rights and poverty. The middle third of the electorate (by wealth and income) want to know what is in it for them and where “it” will come from. So re-distributive policies need careful costing. Why not suggest a tax free allowance? In the UK this means people do not pay tax on the first $26,000 of their earnings. This might be paid for by CGT and/or ACC surpluses and a restoration of inheritance tax on estates worth more than $2m.

National has two further advantages. Firstly, much of the adult population is getting better off, especially in the last 3 years. This is down to terms of trade – basically what NZ imports is getting cheaper and what NZ exports has increased in value and quantity. Wages may not rise much but costs fall. Secondly, NZ seems pretty proud of itself and a party called “National” tends to benefit from that. This may be seen as anecdotal but rugby obsession and success, concerns for outdoor living and relaxation as cultural themes, as well as ‘she’ll be right’ do not chime with Labour’s hand-wringing routine re poverty and what’s wrong in NZ.

A much more positive and inclusive approach needs to be projected. Labour seems to have no electoral strategy. More dangerous, they have no image-promotion strategy. Perhaps they think it is beneath them to sell themselves. That is what Labour thought in the UK in the 1980s: it cost them 18 years in opposition. Little is inarticulate and lacks charm. People vote for people, not Parties, especially in NZ. Labour needs Jacinda.

The Guardian explains:

“Traingate” seems to have developed as much from Guardian flaws as Guardian strengths.

The video of Jeremy Corbyn sitting on the floor of a train, disclosed exclusively online on 16 August, was mistakenly treated by the Guardian more as freelance journalism than what it actually was: a kind of gonzo news release by two Corbyn supporters.

Basically they ran a press release word for word as a news story.

Stuff reports:

The $300 million price-tag for Wellington Airport’s runway extension could blow out to $458m, and may even soar as high as $507m, an independent expert says.

This is not of great concern to me, so long as any cost over-run is met by the Airport Company, not ratepayers or taxpayers.

The much-vaunted $2.3 billion in economic benefits expected to flow from the extended runway may have also been overstated to the tune of almost $800m, according to a new council-commissioned report on the project.

This is the bigger issue. If either local or central Government contributes money, they should only do so after commissioning their own independent advice on likely benefits.

The Herald reports:

Labour has pledged to put 1000 extra police officers on the beat in its first term to reverse a “surge” in crime, in new policy unveiled by leader Andrew Little today.

A rare Labour policy I approve of.

It just gets worse for Donald Trump after he claimed his boasting of grabbing women without consent was just locker room talk, but he had never done it. Stuff reports:

A fourth woman has come forward with details of Donald Trump touching her without consent.

Natasha Stoynoff, who was working as a reporter for People magazine in 2005, revealed in a first-person accountthat the businessman kissed her without her consent right before an interview she was about to conduct with Trump and his wife.

She was due to talk to the couple for a feature story on their first wedding anniversary.

“I turned around, and within seconds, he was pushing me against the wall, and forcing his tongue down my throat,” Stoynoff wrote.

He told her later: “You know we’re going to have an affair, don’t you?”

Stoynoff had been covering “the Trump beat” for a number of years, and maintained a professional relationship with the business magnate and his wife, Melania.

The alleged assault happened after Trump invited Stoynoff to view a “tremendous” room. He then closed the door behind him and committed the offence.

I feel sorry for Melania.

Stoynoff’s revelation comes after three other women accused Donald Trump of groping or kissing them without their consent, in news reports published on Wednesday.

The accusations emerged just days after Trump insisted in the second presidential debate he had never engaged in such behaviour.

One of the four women alleges Trump grabbed her breasts and tried to put his hand up her skirt during a flight more than three decades ago, the New York Times reported.

Manhattan woman Jessica Leeds said it was the first time they had met, and Trump happened to be sitting next to her in first class, during a business trip.

“He was like an octopus,” she told the paper. “His hands were everywhere.”

Leeds fled to the back of the plane after the encounter. “It was an assault,” she said.

When Leeds heard Trump denying he had ever sexually assaulted women during the debate earlier this week, she said she “wanted to punch the screen”.

Meanwhile, Rachel Crooks said she was experiencing similar feelings while watching the debate at her home in Ohio.

Crooks said Trump’s claim that his “locker room talk” never reflected his actions was a lie.

She was a 22-year-old receptionist at a real estate investment and development company in Trump Tower in Manhattan, when she encountered the Republican presidential candidate outside an elevator in the building one morning in 2005.

Crooks told the New York Times she introduced herself to Trump and they shook hands but he wouldn’t let go of her hand.

She claimed he started kissing her cheeks, then he kissed her “directly on the mouth”.

It felt like a violation, Crooks said.

“It was so inappropriate … I was so upset that he thought I was so insignificant that he could do that.”

What amazes me is that these stories never came to light during the primaries. Where were the Republican researchers?

The final WCC results are online now.

It is interesting to look at how the preferences flowed.

Lester won with a decent margin of over 7,000 votes and led on every iteration. But some of the preference flows are interesting.

On 1st preferences Lester was 36.5%, Leggett 25.4% and Coughlan 20.3%.

Lester picked up a plurality of the votes from Overton voters. Young got the most from Johnson voters. Leggett got the most from Ritchie and Foster voters.

What is interesting is how Young voters were re-allocated. Young endorsed Leggett as her 2nd pick but her preferences went 42% Couglan, 32% Lester and and 27% Leggett.

Coughlan’s preferences went 59% Leggett and 41% Lester.

If more Young and Coughlan voters had preferenced Leggett ahead of Lester he would have won. It reinforces to me how having multiple candidates on one side of the race helps the other side.

Not to take anything away from Lester’s win. He campaigned well and got a good result. I wish him well.

I’m getting ready for 2017 NZ election. This time I’ll spend far less, corrupt media won’t stop me, will change Govt with brilliant plan! ?

— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) October 13, 2016

This is great news – for National. Nothing motivates National voters more than Dotcom seeking to change the Government in the hope he can cut a deal to avoid extradition.

Sad but inevitable news that Helen Kelly has died from her lung cancer. A stark reminder that lung cancer is not just a disease that hits smokers.

I got to meet Helen several times over the years and always enjoyed chatting to her. Of course our politics were dramatically different, but I respect anyone who stands up for their beliefs – something she always did.

Helen died aged 52, far too young. My thoughts are with her family, friends and colleagues.

Stuff reports:

Compulsory voting for local elections – with fines for those who don’t have their say – is worth considering to tackle record low turnout, Labour says.

Fewer than 40 per cent of eligible voters cast a ballot in last weekend’s local elections, leading to calls for action in order to reverse the downward trend.

So Labour is saying that they want to look at fining two million New Zealanders for not voting. Good luck with that.

Stuff reports:

An 11-year-old girl and her 9-year-old brother became homeless when their mother was sent to prison.

Their grandmother ‘Nanny’ Lisa Carter had given up her job to help look after them and until July this year they got by on $220 a week.

This is incorrect. If their grandmother has gone onto sole parent benefit she gets $326 a week from that and $157 a week family tax credit for a total of $483 a week – more than twice as much as claimed.

Also should point out that as both kids are at school, would be even better off with a part-time job as that would pay more than the benefit and you get the in work tax credit on top of that.

The family had been living together in a Housing New Zealand property, with Carter’s daughter as the tenant, before she was jailed in February for a handful of offences.

So the poverty is caused by the criminal offending.

Carter and her grandchildren had to move out. For three months they lived in motels, while they waited for a home to become available.

And why are we not told the nature of the criminal offending that meant they had to move out?

The Herald reports:

Finance Minister Bill English has disputed reports Housing New Zealand is going broke, saying it has to significantly scale up its housing development and had a “complete reassurance” the Government would fund that.

A Treasury paper showed Housing NZ was due to run out of cash for development and maintenance by February.

English said that was because Housing NZ was moving from building 300 new houses a year to between 1000 and 2000.

It had previously been able to pay for its building developments out of its revenue from rental subsidies.

“If they’re going to build 1000 or 2000 they’ll need more money to fund it. It will probably need more support from Government to do that, just because of ramping up the building programme.”

This is standard practice. If you want to expand from your normal activities, you need to finance the costs of any capital investment. You generally do that by either equity or debt.

English said it did not mean Housing NZ was in financial straits.

“Housing NZ is heading into a very strong expansion mode and, like any other business, as it expands it needs cash to finance its activities.

“Housing NZ is not going broke. This is an organisation with $20 billion in assets and $3-4 billion of liabilities, there is no way it is going broke.”

Solid Energy is broke. Housing NZ is the reverse.

Earlier today, Labour MP Phil Twyford accused the Government of running the housing corporation into the ground.

“English has taken Housing New Zealand to the brink of financial ruin while at the same time publicly musing about getting it to build 30,000 extra state houses,” Twyford said.

Twyford is talking nonsense. I suspect he has never worked in the private sector. He seems to not know the difference between needing to finance an expansion and “financial ruin”. God forbid if this is the state of Labour’s financial literacy.

NewstalkZB reports:

Andrew King has been elected as Hamilton’s new Mayor by a margin of just 9.

He edged out Paula Southgate for the top job.

The results come days after the two candidates have been waiting since Saturday to find out who will be the city’s next Mayor. Before special votes were counted Andrew King held the lead by just 14 votes.

Today’s official results include all valid special votes.

Mr King got 8728 votes to Ms Southgate’s 8719.

Mr King said he was so excited by the result that he nearly cried.

“It’s exciting. I nearly cried – but I didn’t. But yeah, it’s pretty cool. I really wasn’t hanging my hat on it. It could have gone either way.”

I’d be surprised if the recount changes things as there are so many fewer special votes at local body level.