The Herald reports:

A petition for an autistic man held in an isolated wing of a mental health unit has garnered more than 2000 signatures in a day.

The family of Ashley Peacock, 38, launched their latest bid to see him moved to a community facility on Sunday, by calling for Health Minister Jonathan Coleman to intervene in their son’s case. …

The petition is calling for the Mr Coleman to intervene under Section 32 of the Public Health and Disability Act 2000.

“We request that Ashley Peacock be urgently relocated to an individualised service in the community with appropriate levels of support, with a clear time frame,” it said.

So far the Government has defended Ashley’s treatment, saying his case is “complicated” and safety was paramount.

The Capital and Coast District Health Board has previously said he had some of the “highest and most complex needs” and had issues with unpredictable violence.

I have sympathy for Peacock’s family. No one would want to see a family member locked up 22 hours a day.

However if Peacock does have unpredictable violent outbursts, the DHB does have a responsibility to staff and other patients to keep them safe.

The status quo looks pretty horrible, as being locked up 22 hours a day may be making his condition even worse. But finding a safe solution is I imagine very challenging.

It is easy to sign a petition as 2,000 people have done. They are demanding he be placed in the community. Would they be willing to have Mr Peacock in their community, or do they mean someone else’s community?

The Telegraph reports:

The debate on Trident opened with Theresa May’s first appearance at the dispatch box as Prime Minister. It was an ideal way to start, given that not only was the Government on her side, but almost all of the Opposition.

Little more than five minutes had passed before a Labour MP (John Woodock, Barrow and Furness) leapt up to denounce the anti-Trident stance of his leader, Jeremy Corbyn. Mrs May welcomed this intervention, and quoted Labour’s official view on Trident, which is firmly pro.

British politics in 2016, ladies and gentlemen: a Tory PM approvingly quotes Labour policy, while a Labour leader argues against it.

Corbyn demands loyalty, but won’t even be loyal to his own party’s policy.

The SNP, who shared Mr Corbyn’s opposition to Trident, asked Mrs May if she was really prepared “to launch a nuclear strike that could kill a hundred thousand innocent men, women and children?”

“Yes,” replied Mrs May, without hesitation. “Wow!” gasped the SNP benches theatrically, pretending to be shocked – as if they’d expected her to say, “Heavens, no. Our enemies must understand that if they attack us, I would never fire back!” 

Which is Corbyn’s policy.

Mr Corbyn spoke next. It was some spectacle: the Labour leader arguing one way, his MPs disagreeing.

“My honourable friend is very fond of telling us that party conference is sovereign when it comes to policy,” snapped Angela Smith (Lab, Penistone and Stockbridge).

“Last year, conference voted overwhelmingly in favour of maintaining the nuclear deterrent!” Other Labour MPs cheered.

If Corbyn hangs onto the leadership, I have no doubt Labour will split.

The Herald reports:

Property investors will need a 40 per cent deposit under tough new restrictions revealed today.

The new rules are being urgently introduced in an attempt to put a lid on New Zealand’s spiralling property prices.

Reserve Bank Governor Graeme Wheeler has outlined the new rules this morning, and told banks they will be expected to act immediately.

The new loan-to-value ratios (LVRs) would take effect on September 1, but the Reserve Bank wants banks to “observe the spirit of the new restrictions” in the lead-up to the new policy.

The rules are:

Investors
• Restrictions for investor lending extended from nationwide from Auckland only
• Banks will be forced to require a 40 per cent deposit – up from 30 per cent – for at least 95 per cent of the loans they make in this area.

Home buyers
• Restrictions for owner-occupier lending extended from Auckland to nationwide.
• Required deposit level remains at 20 per cent for at least 90 per cent of bank lending.

It will be interesting to see how much impact this has. The large property investors may have enough capital that this won’t impact them greatly.

Stuff reports:

Cheaper bus fares, slower speed limits, free Wi-Fi and a renewed push for light rail in Wellington are among the election carrots being dangled by the region’s Green Party local body candidates.

Party-affliated councillors from across the region have revealed what will the top of their agenda if re-elected in October.

Greater Wellington regional councillors Paul Bruce and Sue Kedgley said they would push for a 25 per cent discount on off-peak bus fares as well as a 50 per cent off-peak discount for students. …

Kedgley said introducing light rail in Wellington and replacing the city’s “polluting, noisy diesel buses” with modern electric buses within a decade would also be a top priority.

A previous story from 2013 reported:

The cost of a light rail system for Wellington has skyrocketed to nearly a billion dollars, with Mayor Celia Wade-Brown now conceding it looks unrealistic in the near future.

A detailed business case for light rail between Wellington Railway Station and Kilbirnie was made public for the first time today.

It put the cost of building the network at $940 million, largely because it would require its own tunnel through Mt Victoria.

This is the problem with the Greens. They never let reality get in the way of their ideas.

Rational people would say sure we’d love light rail but the cost is unaffordable.  Their fantasy would cost $10,000 per household.

Even worse the light rail proposal would produce very low level of benefits, compared to a bus rapid transit system. The benefit cost ratio for light rail is a minuscule 0.05 or a benefit of $1 for every $20 spent.

This is what the Greens are demanding for Wellington. Spend $1 billion to get a benefit of $50 million. Per household that is take $10,000 per household and get a benefit of $500 back!

Stuff reports:

Support may be building for Helen Clark’s bid to head the United Nations as John Key talks up her prospects of emerging the compromise candidate.

Clark has long been considered a frontrunner for the job based on her credentials, and shored up that position after being widely rated the winner of a debate with other contenders last week.

To win Clark has to overcome three critical hurdles – a prevailing view that it’s Eastern Europe’s “turn” to lead the UN; winning the backing of all five permanent members of the UN Security Council (the P5), any of which can veto a candidate in order to promote their own pick and, finally, the winning candidate won’t necessarily be chosen on merit, but on the basis of horse-trading between the so-called P5.

It is hard to see why Russia would support a candidate not from Eastern Europe, and it has a veto. Clark’s chances are based on that no Eastern European candidate is acceptable.

At present she is second with the bookies, with Bokova still deemed most likely.

But Clark now faces another potential obstacle — former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has finally been forced into the open as a potential contender, after denying for months that he wanted the job.

The country’s foreign minister, Julie Bishop, confirmed on Monday the new Australian Cabinet would consider whether to nominate Rudd this week.

Rudd also believes he can be the compromise candidate, and is said to have been on the international circuit for months lobbying governments for their backing on that basis.

Australia would have to renege on a previous deal to back Clark if it nominates Rudd – former Australian prime minister Tony Abbott promised his support for Clark’s candidacy and even gave Key a letter promising her Australia’s backing.

But that’s not Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s biggest headache – Rudd is widely disliked in Australian politics, with fellow politicians, and media, lining up to lambast his bid.

One Australian politician labelled him “dysfunctional”, “vengeful”, “unstable” and “megalomaniac”, while another made the comment “Kevin’s ego makes Donald Trump’s look like a rounding error”.

Even the fiercely parochial Australian media are urging Turnbull to back Clark over Rudd.

Normally a country would automatically back one of their own, and especially a former PM, for any international role. But it speaks volumes about Rudd that so many are hesitant.

Stuff reports:

With the Rio Games less than three weeks away, the International Olympic Committee on Monday (Tuesday NZ Time) promised “the toughest sanctions available” after a report found Moscow had concealed the positive doping tests of athletes in many sports in the run-up to the Sochi Winter games.

The IOC did not spell out whether it would heed growing calls for Olympic bans already imposed on Russia’s track and field athletes and weightlifters to be extended to all its competitors in Rio.

But IOC President Thomas Bach said the independent World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) investigation had revealed “a shocking and unprecedented attack on the integrity of sport and on the Olympic Games”.

“Therefore, the IOC will not hesitate to take the toughest sanctions available against any individual or organisation implicated.”

WADA itself explicitly urged the IOC to consider banning Russia from the Rio Olympics altogether.

The WADA-backed report confirmed allegations made by former Moscow Anti-Doping Laboratory head Grigory Rodchenkov, who two months ago told the New York Times that dozens of Russians used performance-enhancing drugs in Sochi with approval from national sports authorities.

It said the catalyst for the development of a system to conceal widespread doping had been Russia’s performance at the 2010 Vancouver Winter Games, where a country that cherishes its status as a sporting superpower finished 11th, with only three gold medals.

“The surprise result of the Sochi investigation was the revelation of the extent of State oversight and directed control of the Moscow Laboratory in processing and covering up urine samples of Russian athletes from virtually all sports before and after the Sochi Games,” said the report, unveiled in Toronto.

Russia should be banned until the state sponsored doping programme is independently verified as having ended. It obviously extended beyond just athletics, so only banning the track and field team makes little sense. As the IAAF have done the right thing, let’s hope the IOC does also.

There will always be some athletes that dope and try to get away with it. The difference here is that the entire programme was endorsed by the state, and in fact run by the state.

The report was led by Canadian sports lawyer Richard McLaren, who had sat on the independent commission that last year exposed widespread doping and corruption in Russian track and field, leading to its exclusion from international competition.

He said Russia’s Sports Ministry had overseen the manipulation of athletes’ analytical results for years before Sochi.

“The State implemented a simple failsafe strategy,” the report said. “If all the operational precautions to promote and permit doping by Russian athletes proved to have been ineffective for whatever reason, the laboratory provided a failsafe mechanism.

“The State had the ability to transform a positive analytical result into a negative one by ordering that the analytical process of the Moscow Laboratory be altered.”

In Sochi itself, where international observers were scrutinising the drug tests, positive results could not simply be brushed away, so a system of sample-swapping was put in place with the help of the FSB intelligence service, the report said.

Rodchenkov had spoken of a clandestine night-time operation in which he said staff secretly took urine samples from the lab via a “mouse hole” cut into a wall, and replaced them with clean samples taken from the same athlete months earlier and sometimes manipulated.

Such an operation was only possible as it was government sanctioned.

Stuff reports:

European Union foreign ministers urged Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan on Monday (Tuesday NZ Time) to respect the law and human rights in dealing with defeated coup plotters, warning that reinstating the death penalty would likely end Ankara’s EU membership bid.

After a breakfast in Brussels with US Secretary of State John Kerry, the ministers condemned the weekend coup attempt in a common EU statement, but expressed alarm at Erdogan’s public comments on Sunday (Monday NZT) that there could be no delay in using capital punishment.

“The EU recalls that the unequivocal rejection of the death penalty is an essential element of the union acquis,” ministers said, referring to the body of EU law that underpins the bloc.

The statement was agreed by all 28 EU ministers, including new British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, who campaigned successfully for Britons to vote to leave the bloc, attending his first EU Foreign Affairs Council in Brussels.

Germany, Austria and France also warned separately that bringing back the death penalty, which Turkey abolished in 2004, would undo years of membership talks that began in 2005.

“Reintroduction of the death penalty would prevent successful negotiations to join the EU,” said German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, a position echoed by his French counterpart Jean-Marc Ayrault in less direct terms.

EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini noted that Turkey was a signatory of the European Convention on Human Rights, which bans capital punishment across the continent.

It will be interesting to see what Erdogan does. Being able to join the EU has been an ambition for Turkey for many years, and will he want to walk away from that?

Having said that, the chance of membership in the foreseeable future is minimal. A few years ago there was considerable support for Turkey being able to join, but since then freedom of speech and other aspects of democracy have been whittled away.

“Those who promise us paradise on earth never produced anything but a hell.”

– Sir Karl Popper

The quote of the week is brought to you by the New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union. To support the Union’s campaign for lower taxes and less government waste, click here.

Stuff reports:

Borrowers appear set to see even lower interest rates in the wake of lower than expected inflation.

On Monday Statistics New Zealand revealed that the consumer price index (CPI) rose by a less than expected 0.4 per cent in the year to June 30.

With the Reserve Bank forecasting that inflation would be 0.6 per cent, economists now see the central bank as odds-on to cut the official cash rate to 2 per cent on August 11, a new all time low.

Westpac, which was already forecasting an August cut, said market pricing of financial products suggested there was now an 80 per cent chance that the Reserve Bank would cut the OCR on August 11, up from 70 per cent before the figures were released.

So long as one doesn’t have deflation, I think low inflation is great.

In the last three years prices overall have risen just 2.5% over three years. While from 2005 to 2008 prices went up 9.5%.

Elizabeth Farrelly writes in the SMH:

We really need to talk about Kevin. Our choice is between a wildly inexperienced but bumptious male and a wise, experienced female, respected, accomplished, fit-for-purpose. But really, is this even a contest?

I’m not talking Trump v Clinton (although if the cap fits, right?) I’m talking Kevin Rudd v Helen Clark, vying for UN Secretary-General. …

If Malcolm had just one act left, one wave-of-the-wand to restore Australia’s tattered image as a grown-up nation, it should be this. Transcend national rivalry. Forget the Bledisloe Cup, won by NZ 43 times of 55. Be big. Support Helen Clark for Secretary-General. 

There is significant opposition to a nomination for Rudd in Australia. The SMH reports:

Immigration Minister Peter Dutton said in April that Mr Rudd was behaving like a pest, and should take up a more normal retirement hobby “and play golf or buy a caravan“.

“Kevin was never happy just running Australia. He believed he was always destined to run the world,” Mr Dutton said. “Kevin’s ego makes Donald Trump’s look like a rounding error.”

Quote of the week.

An interesting article in the Guardian comparing the policy platforms being adopted by the Republicans and Democrats

Immigration – Democrats want a pathway to citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants while Republicans will build a wall,

LGBTI – Democrats support same sex marriages, GOP defends “natural marriage” and embraces “conversion therapy”

Environment – Republicans praise coal, Democrats want to reduce greenhouse gases 80% by 2050

Washington DC – Democrats want DC to become a state, Republicans don’t

Porn – Republicans see pornography as a “public health crisis”

The Herald reports:

Tukoroirangi Morgan says he will be on a corporate fundraising campaign as new Maori Party president to finance a strong election campaign next year.

In a bid to win all seven seats, he wants current voters to desert Labour.

He wants the Maori Party to have greater engagement with younger voters, to improve communications and to have a higher profile in general seats.

“That means we will go across the country, reigniting the flames of desire, the hearts and minds of our people, to come back home, to desert the Labour Party in readiness for us taking back all the seats,” he said – although the party has never held all Maori seats.

“If we want to become a force in this country, a real genuine political force, we’ve got to have universal appeal amongst the young, amongst the disenfranchised, amongst our women.”

The party has already attracted former rugby league star Howie Tamati who will seek the nomination for Te Tai Hauauru, currently held by Labour’s Adrian Rurawhe.

Morgan said corporate sponsorship would be hugely important.

He said he would use the connections he had built over the years.

Morgan is the representative of King Tuheitia on the executive body of Waikato-Tainui, Te Arataura, and is a director on the tribe’s commercial arm, Tainui Group Holdings.

This is what is interesting. The Maori King and Tainui are normally seen as supportive of Labour. Possibly because of the demotion of Nanaia Mahuta (a cousin of the King), they are less supportive now.

The Herald reports:

Three officers are confirmed dead and three others wounded after a shooting in Baton Rouge, a sheriff’s office spokeswoman said Monday. One suspect is dead and law enforcement officials believe two others are still at large, the spokeswoman said.

Casey Rayborn Hicks, a spokeswoman for the East Baton Rouge Sheriff’s Office, said in a statement that the public should call 911 immediately if they see anything suspicious.

The shooting – which happened just before 9 a.m (local time), less than 1 mile from police headquarters – comes amid spiraling tensions across the city – and the country – between the black community and police. The races of the suspect or suspects and the officers were not immediately known.

This is the second targeted execution of Police officers. The US is on the brink of a very nasty conflict.

Stuff reports:

The man described as the world’s best-known conspiracy theorist is strangely mild-mannered. He has light blue eyes and a scruffy white mullet. He has a tendency to stare into the distance when talking, as if spotting some great unmentionables from afar.

David Icke, 64, sips weak tea while sitting in a hotel foyer near Sydney’s Central Station, glancing at a television showing Maggie Beer baking what may or may not be a flan.

He believes terrorist attacks such as 9/11 are part of a global conspiracy to control the masses. He believes the moon is a hollowed-out alien space station. He believes 60 per cent of the world’s leaders, notably Queen Elizabeth II, are shape-shifting humanoid reptiles.

An equally surprising score have paid up to $140 each to attend Icke’s Worldwide Wake Up Tour here. Tickets to his first Australian talk, in Perth, sold out. His Saturday night show at Sydney Town Hall was almost filled by Friday, with more than 1100 tickets sold.

I reckon we need a law that says anyone who pays money to hear David Icke speak is automatically removed from the electoral roll for say ten years.

The former British football player, BBC presenter and Greens spokesman sees the world as a great big spider web of Satanic rituals, mind control and skulduggery.

This may explain things!

The Herald reports:

Even before the unrest was under control, Erdogan’s government pressed ahead Saturday with a purge of Turkish judicial officials, with 2,745 judges being dismissed across Turkey for alleged ties to Gulen, according to the state-run Anadolu news agency. It said 10 members of Turkey’s highest administrative court were detained and arrest warrants were issued for 48 administrative court members and 140 members of Turkey’s appeals court.

Erdogan is using the attempted coup as an excuse. The coup plotters should be arrested, but sacking 2,475 judges is an authoritarian act.  Sadly the once great country of Turkey looks to have a dim future.

Stuff reports:

A new signature building for the University of Waikato isn’t a sure bet yet – although there are already three suggested concepts.

Estimates are that a marae and multicultural complex could add up to around $60 million but it wouldn’t happen fast.

Three concepts for a complex on the site of the old law school prefabs have been shown to the university and Maori communities. …

University chancellor Jim Bolger asked if there were financial parameters in place “or are we still in starry-eyed optimism?”

Quigley explained that a project of this scale could cost around $60m.

“Last time I saw [chief financial officer] Andrew [McKinnon]’s balance sheets he didn’t have $60m,” Bolger said.

“He may have a bottom drawer that he hasn’t told me about.”

The university could have the necessary funds in a few years’ time, with some borrowing, McKinnon said.

A marae complex idea won support from council member Richard Jeffries and he said the Kingitanga was also keen to see an upgrade.

“For the university that has by far and away the largest proportion of Maori students and Pasifika … I think it’s a really important kaupapa for us.”

It is important universities have come space and buildings set aside where students can gather. But $60 million for such a facility seems obscenely large.

Stuff reports:

A 46-year-old man must pay $500 to the woman he terrified by tailgating her for 17km across North Canterbury, but is allowed to keep driving. 

Michael Dean Teague was on Friday ordered to make the payment for emotional harm to the woman, who declined to meet him at a restorative justice meeting while he awaited sentencing for intimidation.

Defence counsel Paul Norcross told the Christchurch District Court that Teague was genuinely remorseful and had been willing to meet the victim to apologise. …

The woman he followed was terrified by his actions. In her written victim impact report she said she “had never been so scared in her life. Your reaction was so over the top it was unbelievable,” Judge Stephen O’Driscoll said.

She said she had not expected any reparation, but hoped Teague would lose his driver’s licence. 

“Just thinking about it even now makes me feel anxious, I can feel that frightened emotion that I felt that night and it’s still very vivid in my mind when I’m driving at night … I’m not the same.”

I would be terrified also. If someone followed me in a road rage for 17 km, I would conclude they were determined to kill or seriously wound me.

The police said that about 10.20pm on April 8, Teague was driving his Mitsubishi Outlander on Glasnevin Road, Amberley.

The woman flashed her lights because Teague’s lights were on high beam and he then braked heavily, did a U-turn and accelerated hard up behind her car.

His vehicle was so close that all she could see in her mirror was the bonnet of his vehicle.

He kept on tailgating the victim for about 3km, while she became frightened and phoned the police.

Teague continued to follow her into Waipara township, where she turned into a dead end street.

She drove to the end of the street, turned around and stopped. Teague stopped in the middle of the road about 30m away with his lights on full beam.

The woman managed to get past him and drove back to State Highway 1 where she drove to Amberley with Teague still chasing her.

This is almost psychotic behaviour and totally unacceptable. I’d classify it as near threatening to kill and personally would throw him in jail for say four weeks to get across the message he must never ever do this again.

A joint statement by 13 groups in England:

We all agree that e-cigarettes are significantly less harmful than smoking. One in two lifelong smokers dies from their addiction. All the evidence suggests that the health risks posed by e-cigarettes are relatively small by comparison but we must continue to study the long-term effects.

And yet, millions of smokers have the impression that e-cigarettes are at least as harmful as tobacco. Over 1.3 million UK e-cigarette users have completely stopped smoking and almost 1.4 million others continue to smoke. We have a responsibility to provide clear information on the evidence we have, to encourage complete smoking cessation and help prevent relapse to smoking.

The public health opportunity is in helping smokers to quit, so we may encourage smokers to try vaping but we certainly encourage vapers to stop smoking tobacco completely.

We know that e-cigarettes are the most popular quitting tool in the country with more than 10 times as many people using them than using local stop smoking services. However, we also know that using local stop smoking services is by far the most effective way to quit.

The current national evidence is that in the UK regular e-cigarette among youth use is almost exclusively confined to those young people who have already smoked, and youth smoking prevalence is continuing to fall. …

Yet in New Zealand it is still illegal to sell nicotine for e-cigarettes. Why is the Ministry of Health so slow to change?

The groups that signed the joint statement are:

• Public Health England
• Action on Smoking and Health
• Association of Directors of Public Health
• British Lung Foundation
• Cancer Research UK
• Faculty of Public Health
• Fresh North East
• Healthier Futures
• Public Health Action
• Royal College of Physicians
• Royal Society for Public Health
• UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies
• UK Health Forum

The Economist has done a report on the 2016 presidential election. Their findings include:

• The Economist Intelligence Unit expects Hillary Clinton to win the 2016 presidential election
• The Democrats are likely to win back a majority in the Senate
• The Republicans will retain control of the House of Representatives
• Ms Clinton will benefit from the broad unpopularity of her opponent, Donald Trump.
• Mr Trump’s plans for a huge wall on the southern border with Mexico and mass deportations of millions of undocumented workers are completely unrealistic.
• Filling the vacancy on the Supreme Court will be the most consequential act by the new president.
• We expect Ms Clinton to serve for one term.
• The business cycle will turn in 2019, pushing the economy into recession. Voters will desert the Democrats, disappointed with its failure to maintain economic growth.
• The Republicans will win the 2020 presidential election, having made small concessions on immigration policy and toned down its nativist rhetoric. The party will field a better salesman than Mr Trump as its candidate, but its long-term success will depend on changing some of its policies, which appeal to a shrinking proportion of the electorate.
• A long-term realignment of the two parties is possible. We expect union influence to weaken in the Democratic Party, enabling a pivot towards policies supportive of free trade. The Republican Party, swayed by its voters, will increasingly adopt protectionist rhetoric and will grow more suspicious of globalisation. This could trigger the biggest shift in voters’ allegiance since the Democrats embraced the civil rights movement in the mid-20th century.

It will be very sad if the Republicans do become more protectionist.

A guest post by Anthony Morris:

It is quite likely that Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) policies are adding to traffic congestion in Wellington. Peak-time public transport fares are set too high because simple economic logic has been disregarded and those fares are not subsidised. The subsidies are instead all funnelled to less-used off-peak services.

Fares contribute 52% of the cost of running public transport services in Wellington which is high compared to other cities in Australasia. Given most of those services are running at off-peak times with lower passenger loadings, it is certain that the peak-time services are at least covering their cost.

If everyone tried to drive into work at peak traffic times, the roads would completely block up. The use of peak-time public transport by commuters benefits other road users by lessening congestion, providing what economists call an external benefit. This benefit justifies subsidising peak-time public transport fares from the petrol taxes collected from road users. Trains give a bigger external benefit than buses because they usually get commuters off the arterial roads completely.

Unfortunately, GWRC sets fares that recover the full cost or more of peak time services and pushes all the subsidies to less-popular off-peak routes. This means we get the illogical situation of it being cheaper for a couple to drive to work in the city and pay for city fringe parking than catch public transport, which for three zones would cost them $14.52 per day.

But it gets worse. We have buses and trains traversing almost identical routes at almost identical times, with buses often being cheaper and/or more convenient! For example, using a smartcard it costs $3.63 to get from Johnsonville to the city by bus, and the city means anywhere along the golden mile from the bus depot to Courtenay Place. Using a 10-trip ticket the train costs the same but only gets you to the main station, and you then have to walk or catch a bus to get to other parts of the city. This may be fixed with the new integrated ticketing system but this is not arriving until 2018.

The Newlands buses running from Johnsonville and traversing the golden mile with all the other commuter buses also increase congestion. If all commuters got free inner-city bus trips, the Newlands buses could run to the main depot only, and train users would also not have to pay extra to get further into the city.

Outside of peak traffic hours people with cars usually prefer to use them to get around because it is more convenient. Not everyone has a car or can afford a taxi, so for social reasons it is desirable to have off-peak public transport services.

However, some of the off-peak transport services are likely very expensive per passenger carried, like late night suburban services with one or two passengers. We don’t know for sure because there is no publicly available data available on the average loadings of those services, despite all the data that must be collected by the Snapper system.

Some off-peak public transport routes could be more efficiently served by shuttle vans or even cars. Apps such as Uber organise individual taxis to peoples’ homes so something similar could be applied to get taxis to act as public transport to bus stops. Conditions are ripe for the development of new, innovative and cost-effective public transport solutions. Peak-time users are not getting a fair deal!

Anthony Morris is a Wellington commuter and policy analyst working in an unrelated field.

Michael West writes:

The “Big Four” global accounting firms – PwC, Deloitte, KPMG and Ernst & Young – are the masterminds of multinational tax avoidance, the architects of tax schemes which cost governments and their taxpayers more than $US1 trillion a year.

Although presenting as “the guardians of commerce” they are unregulated and unaccountable; they have infiltrated governments at every level and should be broken up.

This is the view of George Rozvany, Australia’s most published expert on transfer pricing, which is one of the principal ways large corporations pursue cross-border tax avoidance. Rozvany stepped down last year as head of tax in Australia for the world’s biggest insurance company, Allianz. Formerly, he was an insider at Ernst & Young, PwC and Arthur Andersen.

“The Big Four have, under a Rasputin-like cloak of illusion strayed from their original and critical role of verifying the accuracy of financial accounts for all stakeholders, to be “accountants of fortune” merely representing the accounting position for multinationals and developing aggressive international tax avoidance practices,” he told michaelwest.com.au.

Rozvany is writing a series of books on corporate tax ethics. “This is not a victimless crime,” he says. “While Western governments have been cutting back their aid to the most underprivileged in society, from the homeless to orphaned children in Africa, multinational companies have been diverting ever larger profits into tax havens”.

“The global community must also recognise the links between aggressive taxation behaviour, money laundering, corruption, organised crime and terrorism, of which the Brussels bombings and 9/11 are chilling reminders. This, unquestionably, is the financial sewer of humanity where the purpose for such money, no matter how malevolent, is simply hidden until used”, Rozvany says.

At the heart of the issue is a conflict of interest. While the Big Four advise governments on tax reform, they make lavish fees advising their multinational clients how to avoid paying tax.

“They are both architect and engineer,” says Rozvany. “They sell the (tax avoidance) schemes to the multinationals; and in the case of the LuxLeaks scandal last year, they arranged the deals in secret with government, to the detriment of all other sovereign nations and their taxpayers”.

In the PanamaPapers scandal earlier this year, Panama City law firm Mossack Fonseca was singled out as the major culprit behind a global tax avoidance scam, says Rozvany, but who signs the financial statements for Mossack’s clients? Who is guarding the guards? “And by the way, if one enters a Mossack Fonseca office, one knows that one is entering an aggressive law firm not one pretending to be something else”.

“From a regulatory viewpoint, it makes perfect sense to split the accounting and tax functions of each of the Big Four to improve financial integrity and to split each of these firms again into two firms to create competition. International commerce will then have eight international audit firms and eight international tax firms from which to choose.”

Don’t think the firms should be split just because they’re big. But the proposal that their tax and accountancy functions should be separated may have merit.

Tim Blair blogs:

An extract from the Special Commission of Inquiry into the Greyhound Racing Industry in New South Wales, the report that convinced Mike Baird to ban greyhound racing:

“The evidence shows that 40% of those greyhounds whelped never make it to the race track. As one breeder stated, “Dogs who don’t have the instinct [to chase] or the tools to be a consistent winner – well a good handler can spot it a mile away … Most of the time I’d drown the pups.” In the greyhound industry, this mass slaughter of young and older greyhounds bred for the purpose of greyhound racing, and which are subsequently destroyed either prior to being named or raced, or upon retirement from racing, is euphemistically called “wastage” or euthanasia.”

That breeder’s comment is credited to a 2008 study subsequently cited last year by the Australian Working Dog Alliance in their “Review & Assessment of Best Practice, Rearing, Socialisation, Education & Training Methods for Greyhounds in a Racing Context.” So it’s relatively recent and applies to Australia, right?

Wrong.

The comment comes from a 2005 report by Canadian academics Michael Atkinson and Kevin Young, and is from anAmerican breeder identified only as Ernie. His full remarks reveal that he was discussing practices undertaken some years prior to the report’s decade-old publication:

“Culling happens, it really does. As a breeder, one of the skills you acquire is the ability to look at a pup and watch its gait for potential. Dogs who don’t have the instinct [to chase] or the tools to be a consistent winner, well, a good handler can spot it a mile away. From time to time, a pup might have poor eyesight or be born blind, and that’s the worst … When a dog has no place in the business at all, you face an ugly task. We won’t risk letting the puppy go to a pet store or family, because they might breed it and get a champion from one of the litters. So, to save time and money on a dog, it, and any of its siblings in a similar condition, are culled … Most of the time, I’d drown the pups or, towards my last few years breeding them, I’d go to a local vet. No one I know tortures the dogs or neglects them, though. There’s no need for it.”

Baird’s ban relied, at least in part, on abbreviated testimony from an unknown man somewhere in the US who was talking about something that happened before he stopped breeding greyhounds. Seems a flimsy basis upon which to outlaw an entire industry.

I agree. This is not evidence based decision making and fairly shocking that it is referenced in a report implying it is a view and practice in Australia.