Radio NZ reports:

It is illegal in New Zealand to sell e-cigarette liquid containing nicotine; only Ministry of Health-approved nicotine replacement therapies such as patches and gum can be sold.

People smoke e-cigarettes by inhaling a liquid vapour produced by vapouriser – a practice backed by the government in the UK, which allows them to be sold everywhere, including in supermarkets and at corner shops.

Prof Blakely said the benefits of vapourisers included a 50 percent increase in quit rates when people vaped while trying give up cigarettes.

Yet they remain illegal.

Prof Glover said legalising vaping could be worth considering.

She said there were many “lies” circulating about the safety of vaping, including “dodgy research” that deliberately created negative results.

But British research such as the Public Health England report and a review by the Royal College of Physicians UK had concluded that vaping was about 95 percent safer than smoking, she said.

“There are some unknowns but all signals – looking at the UK, looking at the US, and the drop in prevalence in those countries – far more rapid than we’ve experienced here.”

If the Government was serious about reducing harm from from smoking, it would fast track a law change to allow people to access e-cigarettes as least as easily as actual cigarettes. The status quo of making it illegal to sell the liquid for e-cigarettes must go.

How interesting. This billboard is on Onslow Road. In the bluer areas of Wellington it appears the Labour logo is being painted over.

As the official Labour Party candidate for Mayor, you’d think he’d be proudly showing off their logo and have bright red billboards using their branding.

I blogged in May 2014 on a fraudster who was trying to get a website about him removed under the Harrassment Act.

An update on him in the Herald:

Three times bankrupt, Grant Norman King stood in the dock in Waitakere District Court where he was sentenced to 262 hours of community work.

It was July 30, 2012, and he had admitted charges of violating the terms of that bankruptcy after ripping off a west Auckland man over a $23,500 sleep out that was never built. ..

The convictions were added to the 60-year-old’s 40 previous convictions, many of which were for similarly fraudulent behaviour.

Judge Glubb said the fact the offending took place before and after sentencing on other matters showed particular audacity on King’s part.

“You were given 262 hours’ community work at that time and you brazenly re-engaged in the management of another business and further offended in the same way, albeit it escalated.”

King was jailed for 18 months despite arguing for home detention.

Sadly I don’t think we have seen the last of him.

King made headlines in 2012 when the Herald revealed he took $23,500, a 75-per-cent deposit for a sleep out, from Steve Taylor.

The work was never done.

Since then, Mr Taylor had set up a blog designed to warn others of the fraudster’s activity.

The blog is at http://www.grantnormanking.com/

Stuff reports:

A pensioner and convicted fraudster who faces deportation to South Africa doesn’t believe he will last “five minutes” if forced back to his homeland.

Wyndham man John William Jackson was served with a deportation notice after stealing more than half a million dollars off a company he held a directorship at, but is appealing the deportation notice on humanitarian grounds. 

He is a convicted criminal. Why would we let him remain?

Jackson, who receives a weekly $300 pension payment in New Zealand, has appealed against deportation on humanitarian grounds based largely on his ill health, with Jackson saying it had worsened in the last 18 months.

He takes multiple tablets on a daily basis for several conditions, has previously had a heart attack, suffers from diabetes, numbness in both feet, high blood pressure, circulatory problems, enlarged prostate and constant pain in his back, and pain in his leg which would remain the rest of his life, he said. 

He also said he smoked between five and 10 cigarettes a day.

If he had to return to South Africa he rated his ability to work as “not very good”, given his medical issues and said he had no finances to take to South Africa.

He did not think he would last “five minutes” if sent back to South Africa.

He should have considered all this before he stole half a million dollars.

The Herald reports:

Looking at the financial circumstances of elderly people before providing home support has been ruled out by the Government.

Health Minister Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga seemed to indicate such a step was being considered to help cope with the increasing cost of home support.

About 72,000 seniors currently receive home support, and that number and the associated cost is growing.

In question time today, Labour’s health spokeswoman Annette King asked Associate Health Minister Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga what work was currently underway to look at means testing and asset testing for older New Zealanders needing home and community support services.

“There is work being done on the health of older persons strategy, that does involve looking at the increasing flexibility and responsiveness of funding streams. It also looks at improving the integration and collaboration within the health sector,” Mr Lotu-Iiga said in response.

However, this evening his office clarified that means testing and asset testing was not being considered.

That’s a pity. You can do more for those who genuinely need help, if you target assistance to those less well off.

Politico reports:

BuzzFeed has pulled out of an advertising agreement with the Republican National Committee over objections to Donald Trump’s rhetoric.

The buy was for $1.3 million, a source close to BuzzFeed told POLITICO. The source said that the main consideration was the site’s employees – that BuzzFeed could not countenance “having employees make ads, or working at the company and having our site promoting things, that limit our freedom and make it harder for them to live their lives.”

Their specific objections:

The tone and substance of his campaign are unique in the history of modern US politics. Trump advocates banning Muslims from traveling to the United States, he’s threatened to limit the free press, and made offensive statements toward women, immigrants, descendants of immigrants, and foreign nationals.

Earlier today Buzzfeed informed the RNC that we would not accept Trump for President ads and that we would be terminating our agreement with them. The Trump campaign is directly opposed to the freedoms of our employees in the United States and around the world and in some cases, such as his proposed ban on international travel for Muslims, would make it impossible for our employees to do their jobs.

And now he claims an American born Judge can’t be trusted to do their job fairly because their parents were born in Mexico.

We certainly don’t like to turn away revenue that funds all the important work we do across the company. However, in some cases we must make business exceptions: we don’t run cigarette ads because they are hazardous to our health, and we won’t accept Trump ads for the exact same reason.

Ouch.

Labour have been going on for months claiming that health funding has not grown to keep up with our population and inflation. They cite a figure of $1.7 billion of under funding on this basis.

I made the mistake of assuming their figure was correct, and not checking up on it previously. I just assumed someone else would have.

But as I had some spare time last weekend I went through the Vote Health expenditure for the last decade. I then got the CPI figures and the resident population figures. And put them into the table below.

So health funding has increased by 35% in nominal terms. In real terms it has gone up 20% since 2008 and even in real per capita terms it is up 8.3%.

That’s pretty good considering the GFC and the Christchurch earthquakes led to huge deficits, which the Government also had to close.

Curia’s monthly newsletter is out. The summary is below:

Curia’s Polling Newsletter – Issue 97, May 2016

There were two political voting polls in May 2016 – a Roy Morgan and a Newshub Reid Research.

The average of the public polls has National 16% ahead of Labour in May, down 3% from April. The current seat projection is centre-right 58 seats, centre-left 51 which would see NZ First hold the balance of power.

We show the current New Zealand poll averages for party vote, country direction and preferred PM compared to three months ago, a year ago, three years ago and nine years ago. This allows easy comparisons between terms and Governments.

In the United States Clinton’s chances improved in May with a projected 126 elector lead in the Electoral College. Overall satisfaction with the direction of the US remains extremely low at a net -40%.

In the UK Remain is at 65% and Leave at 35% in the prediction markets. Brexit trails by 3% in the average of the polls.

In Australia The election is on a knife edge with the current seat projection being the Coalition having a one seat majority only.

In Canada Liberals remain sky high in the polls and confidence of the country direction has reached a new high of +27%.

We also carry details of polls on the Kermadecs, housing and US ship visits plus the normal business and consumer confidence polls.

This newsletter is normally only available by e-mail.  If you would like to receive future issues, please go to http://curia.us10.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=e9168e04adbaaaf75e062779e&id=8507431512 to subscribe yourself.

The Dom Post reported:

Mayoral aspirant Nicola Young has promised to freeze rates at the level of inflation if she wins the top job in October.

The first-term city councillor said rates bills for many Wellingtonians had increased 20 per cent over the past four years, despite record low inflation and a 0.4 per cent increase in the consumer price index. 

“This price-gouging is wrong, especially when many Wellingtonians are facing stiff rates increases from rising property values across the city,” she said.

“It’s particularly tough for the increasing number of retired ratepayers on fixed incomes, and the many Wellingtonians whose wages aren’t keeping up with the city council’s rates increases.”

Wellington City Council’s proposed rates increase for 2016-17 is 3.8 per cent, although councillors will debate measures this week to get that down to 3.6 per cent before the rates are struck in June.

Young said the capital’s rates were a brake on economic growth, especially for small shops that were locked in fierce competition with online retailers.

She also promised to shift the city’s priorities towards “core local government services” and put an end to “vanity” projects, such as leasing pandas from China.

“We are pumping huge sums into professional sport, including $1 million to convert community sports pitches in Berhampore into training grounds for the [Wellington] Phoenix, a professional soccer team,” she said.

“As mayor I will ensure our focus is on community sports facilities and creating opportunities for Wellington’s children, not helping highly paid sportsmen.”

This is a great pledge and should be an example to all candidates. You should not vote for any candidate who will not set up an upper limit on how they’ll vote on rates increases. Otherwise you’re giving them a blank cheque.

A 3.8% rates increase is massive – almost ten times the rate of inflation. And when they keep doing it year after year it adds up. Here’s what a $4,000 rates bill would look like at 3.8% annual increase.

• 2016 – $4,000
• 2019 – $4,474
• 2022 – $5,003
• 2025 – $5,595
• 2028 – $6,258
• 2031 – $6,999

So five terms of a Council increasing rates at 3.8% a year and your rates bill has gone from $4,000 to $7,000. That’s an extra $60 a week in rates.

Gareth Morgan writes:

If we close the worst of the loopholes in our income tax system we’ll not have to collect as much tax from salary and wage earners. Taxation will become more fair and capital will become more productive.

I agree with this. I support a tax system with a broad base and low rates. If we broaden the base, then we can lower the rates. What I’m against though is new taxes being imposed, without other taxes being reduced. Labour for example campaigned to both introduce a Capital Gains Tax and to increase income tax.

The report sets out in detail how to close these tax loopholes. In essence we assume that all assets generate a minimum 5% return, and tax on that basis.

I support a comprehensive Capital Gains Tax but this is effectively a wealth tax and politically would be lethal.

If you are retired on a pension and have used your life savings to get a $1 million house, then you will be deemed to earn $50,000 a year on the house and pay $16,500 or so tax on it.

Taxing capital gains is one thing. But assuming all assets produce a 5% return is another.

UPDATE: Gareth has commented below a couple of times.

The Washington Post reports:

Bangladesh has been in the grips of a hideous spate of assassinations and attacks on secularist intellectuals, academics and non-Muslims and others in the crosshairs of Islamist militants. The latest killing took place on Sunday, when the wife of an anti-terrorism police officer was brutally stabbed to death and shot by unidentified assailants in the port city of Chittagong.

On the same day, a Christian grocer was butchered in a village in the north of the country–a media wing linked to the Islamic State took credit, though it’s still unclear what actual tactical abilities the extremist organization based in Syria and Iraq has in South Asia.

Yes Islamic militants are killing people just because they don’t believe in Islam and write of the values of secularism.

But they are of course not to blame. Who is?

One senior official, though, suggested the root of the problem lay far away.

“Bangladesh has become the target of an international conspiracy. And a foreign intelligence agency has joined the conspiracy,” Asaduzzaman Khan, the country’s home minister, said on Monday.

He went on and referenced an earlier meeting between an opposition parliamentarian and an Israeli government adviser in neighboring India.

The gesture to link any domestic woe to a foreign plot, especially one with the imprint of American or Israeli meddling, is a common trope in South Asian politics. An Israeli government spokesman deemed Khan’s remarks “utter drivel” when they were put to him by the BBC.

Blame Israel!

Liam Hehir writes:

Labour and the Greens have signed a “Memorandum of Understanding” ostensibly committing both to cooperation in the service of changing the Government.

As the news buzzed around social media, you could be forgiven for thinking the Treaty of Waitangi had just been signed. That very night, Simon Dallow declaimed on the 6pm news that this “joint party power play is already changing the political landscape”. According to some cheerleaders of the Left, John Key’s fate is now all but sealed.

The thinking seems to be that Labour and the Greens are like Ross and Rachel, with the great voting public waiting eagerly for the resolution of the “will they or won’t they?” storyline. Now that Labour has finally committed to the nice guy Greens, a delighted electorate will finally be ready to make their own commitment to changing the Government.

Others think the agreement is a potentially serious blunder. In this narrative, the relationship upgrade with the Greens is an effective spurning by Labour of bad-boy Winston Peters. Because it’s generally considered that Labour won’t be able to govern without Peters’ support, the party’s decision to go with its heart and not its head may cost it dearly.

And in fact, Winston Peters does not seem particularly impressed with what Labour and the Greens have done, grumbling that his party doesn’t “like jack-ups or rigged arrangements behind the people’s back”.

As an aside, this argument is incoherent. By publicly announcing an intention to work together, Labour and the Greens are doing the opposite of going behind the people’s backs. What they are doing is arguably a lot more transparent than the standard New Zealand First method of refusing to state a preference until all the votes are cast and the backroom baubles auction is completed.

Hehir is right that Winston’s argument is incoherent.

So has Labour saved or doomed itself? Actually, the safer money is on the Memorandum of Understanding itself making zero to little difference one way or the other.

The One News Colmar Brunton poll shows that support for National and Labour went up and Greens and NZ First went down after the MoU was announced. But a one off poll change is not what matters – it is the long-term trend, and I doubt we’ll see much of an impact.

If the last half-decade or so has taught us anything, it’s that voters are about as indifferent to political minutiae as commentators are obsessed with it. As if to confirm this, the Greens themselves hailed the agreement as a “game changer” – a prediction that’s been wrongly affixed to any number of events and happenings since 2008 that were supposed to, but didn’t, bring about the end of the John Key era.

Issues that matter to voters are jobs, wages, schools, hospitals etc. MoUs far less so.

Stuff reports:

Britain is set for a showdown with the UN over its next secretary-general, after sources in Washington indicated the US was preparing to back the candidate from Argentina.

Susana Malcorra, its foreign minister, is said to be supported by both the White House and Susan Rice, national security adviser to Barack Obama.

The prospect of an Argentine head of the UN puts Britain in a diplomatic dilemma, given the lengthy dispute over the Falklands which Argentina and the UN say must be “decolonised” and returned to Argentina.

President Obama is said to have been won over by arguments for Malcorra from Mauricio Macri, his Argentine counterpart, on a visit to Buenos Aires in March – widely seen as an attempt to re-set US-Argentine relations.

This may actually help Clark. If the US refuses to back a Russian backed Eastern European such as Irina Bokova, then Russia will probably not support the US’s first preference.

In this game it is not being the first preference of P5 members that counts, but being an acceptable second preference.

There is no doubt Clark is acceptable to China, France and the UK. She may even be the preferred candidate for the UK and China (but they would never say).

The big unknown is Russia. They have no reason to back her, but no particular reason to support her. But if the other candidates all face vetoes, she may get through.

Still well under a 50/50 chance but not insignificant.

I’ve blogged at Curia the results of the latest One News Colmar Brunton poll.

What is interesting is they polled before and after the Labour-Green MOU was announced. Here’s how the seat allocation changed:

• CR – 59 before and 62 after
• CL – 49 before and 52 after
• C – 14 before and 9 after

Before the MOU was announced National could not form a CR Government without NZ First. After the MOU polling showed they would be able to.

Stuff reports:

Green Party claims that the Waitara River is so polluted it is unsafe for bathers have been described as “baseless” by councillors.

Over the Queen’s Birthday weekend the Greens released a list of 10 rivers around the country that they claimed were now unsuitable for swimming.

The 10 included the Waitara, which the party said was affected by raw sewage spills.

So what are the facts:

“The Green Party’s facts are totally misaligned with reality,” council chief executive Basil Chamberlain said. 

“It’s sad for the community of Waitara who can right now swim in their river 95 per cent of the time.”

So that is 345 days out of 365 it is fine for swimming.

The council’s director of environment quality, Gary Bedford, said he could find “no factual base to the Green’s claims”.

Strong words.

“We test the Waitara River every week during peak bathing season and have found it swimmable for 95 per cent of the time,” he said. 

Bedford stressed that the council’s water quality data was publicly available and audited by Niwa to ensure its accuracy.

So who do you trust?

Even before the results of today’s primaries come in, Hillary Clinton now has the 2,383 delegates to become the presumptive nominee. Sanders is well behind on 1,569.

So it is all on for Trump vs Clinton – the two most unpopular nominees in a generation.

Stuff reports:

A new political party founded by disgruntled pensioners has formed, calling itself the New Zealand Seniors Party.

According to a statement sent out by party spokesperson Barnaby Perkins, the party intends to enter candidates in the 2017 election.

Members have complained about the “lack of interest” shown by the Government in the deduction of employer and employee-funded overseas pensions from the New Zealand Superannuation scheme.

For every dollar a pensioner receives from an overseas pension, the New Zealand payment is reduced by a dollar.

If you spent 25 years working in the UK and paying taxes there, earning a UK pension, why should you also get a full NZ pension when you may have spent just 10 years in NZ?

“Today’s seniors are tired of being ignored and dictated to by politicians, government departments and their overpaid staff,” the statement says.

“They are educated and bring a lifetime of experience and knowledge to the table, and they are certainly capable of taking an active role in the running of their own country. Australian pensioners have already formed a political party as they too have been ignored far too long. Exactly the same is happening here in New Zealand. Now is the time to stand up and be counted and have dedicated representation in Parliament.”

The party’s goal was “to achieve fairness and justice” for all pensioners, including future generations.

Great – they may take votes off NZ First.

Note the level of superannuation has risen 28.4% since 2008, which is 12.4% in real terms. Far far more than anyone else on welfare has got.

If we want fairness and justice for all, we’d means test the pension, as we do for all other welfare payments.

Stuff reports:

Improving the driver licence donor system is one of many proposed changes to boost New Zealand’s woeful organ donation rates.

Health Minister Jonathan Coleman has announced public consultation on ways to increase organ donation from dead people will start on Tuesday, noting New Zealand’s low rates compared to many overseas countries, including Australia.

“While we already have many of the elements of an effective organ donation and transplantation service in New Zealand, we can do better,” he said.

“A suggestion as to how we could better support the hospital team is to improve the driver licence system so medical staff are informed if someone has indicated they would like to become a donor.”

I was staggered to find out medical staff don’t even check the database routinely. They only check it if family ask them to.

A simple first step should be that it is mandatory for the licence database to be checked for all patients who are eligible organ donors.

Other proposed changes included raising awareness, standardising how hospitals identified potential donors and how organ donation was discussed with families. 

Standardising is good, if the standard is good. But our standard at the moment seems to be very poor.

The most effective change would be to have the wishes of the deceased made paramount in law. Families should not get a veto. But law changes are outside the terms of reference for the review, so I have little hope of meaningful change.

Statistics showed 93 per cent of families agreed to donate deceased loved ones’ organs if they were on Australia’s register, whereas only four out of 10 families agreed to donate in New Zealand, he said.

So what are the differences between our regimes?

Stuff reports:

Incoming State Services Commissioner Peter Hughes been ranked not just the public service chief executive of the year – but as the most outstanding public servant of his generation.

The annual Trans Tasman Government Department Review has seen some big movers among its rankings of public service chief executives, but Hughes has stayed on top, being named chief executive of the year for the fourth time.

ACC was ranked the Government department of the year.

ACC now only has been the top ranked agency for two years in a row, but its 2016 rating was the highest of any agency in the history of the survey.

“Hughes has now been named chief executive of the Year four times, and his work at the Ministry of Education shows how leadership can make a dramatic impact in an agency and how many other agencies are being let down by lack of leadership, not just from their CEs, but also their Ministers,” trans-Tasman says.

“The Board of Advisers once again casts the finger of blame at the State Service Commission and there is definite relief Commissioner Iain Rennie has decided to step down. Last year the advisers made a strong case for Hughes to step into the hot seat when Rennie’s term ended, and this has come to pass.

“But Hughes will find it tough going. The Commission is effectively on a last warning. If the country’s best state sector leader can’t boost its performance it is likely to be rolled up and placed under the auspices of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.” trans-Tasman warns.

Hughes earned his top ranking after turning education around from a basket case.

The board of independent advisers said he had made an “amazing improvement in a short time,” and was a class act.

There are huge expectations for Hughes as he takes up the SSC role. But under his leadership the Ministry of Education has dramatically improved.

ACC chief executive Scott Pickering was similarly impressive, the trans-Tasman panel said.

“Pickering has taken the controversy out of ACC – evidenced by a big improvement in public trust and confidence in the agency,” said one.

ACC has managed the rare feat of being able to reduce levies while also have record high levels of satisfaction and trust.

The top ten agencies are:

1. ACC
2. Customs
3. Police
4. Corrections
5. Stats NZ
6. IRD
7. Defence
8. Social Development
9. Worksafe
10. NZ Transport Agency
11. DPMC

The Minister’s judged most able to get their policy agenda implemented are:

1. John Key
2. Bill English
3. Chris Finlayson
4. Judith Collins
5. Nikki Kaye
6. Anne Tolley
7. Simon Bridges
8. Gerry Brownlee
9. Murray McCully

The agencies seem as most improved were:

1. GCSB +0.9
2. ACC +0.7
3. Culture & Heritage +0.7
4. Customs +0.6

The agencies with the biggest drops were:

1. Reserve Bank -0.7
2. Crown Law -0.5
3. TEC -0.4

Note I was one of the 20 panelists.

AP reports:

The Philippine president-elect has encouraged the public to help him in his war against crime, urging citizens with guns to shoot and kill drug dealers who resist arrest and fight back in their neighborhoods.

In a nationally televised speech late Saturday, Rodrigo Duterte told a huge crowd in the southern city of Davao that Filipinos who help him battle crime will be rewarded.

“Please feel free to call us, the police, or do it yourself if you have the gun — you have my support,” Duterte said, warning of an extensive illegal drug trade that involves even the country’s police.

 If a drug dealer resists arrest or refuses to be brought to a police station and threatens a citizen with a gun or a knife, “you can kill him,” Duterte said. “Shoot him and I’ll give you a medal.”

Stuff reports:

In February, Smith and Primary Industries Minister Nathan Guy released a consultation document on new measures to improve the management of New Zealand’s rivers, lakes, aquifers and wetlands.

Among the proposals were national regulations to get stock out of waterways, strengthening requirements on councils to set nutrient limits, standardised water permit conditions on the efficient use of water and minimising nutrient loss, and improved iwi involvement in council development of water plans and water conservation orders.

Smith said today, that the Greens were “late” to the party. 

“Our Government has done more than any in our history to improve water quality of our lakes and rivers. We introduced the first National Policy Statement on Fresh Water in 2011 and the standards framework in 2014.

“We have ramped up investment in river and lake clean-up from the $29 million spent between 2000 and 2008, under the Labour government, to $115 million between 2008 and 2015 and committed a further $100 million in Budget 2016,” he said. 

He said the Greens proposal for a blanket, nationwide moratorium on dairy conversion was a “blunt approach that will punish regions”.

“The more sophisticated approach, where limits are set on nutrients, addresses the environmental issue without blocking growth in exports and jobs.

“Dairy conversions are, under this Government, being declined for the first time in areas such as Southland and Canterbury, where they would exceed the newly established limits on nutrients.

The Green Party policy to ban every rural landowner in NZ from being able to convert their land to dairy is a totalitarian policy.

One of the marks of a free society is you can choose what to do on your land. It is in totalitarian countries that the Government decides for you.

Now if in specific areas, there are issues of water quality, then local authorities can deal with that by declining specific applications (which is occurring) or requiring any new dairy venture to have no impact on water quality. That is called a balanced approach.

The Greens however want to ban every rural landowner in New Zealand from being able to establish a dairy farm. They hate dairy, and they think they should decide for everyone how their land is used.

It’s a great reminder of how dangerous their policies would be, if they ever made Government.

Stuff reports:

Immigrants from countries who “treat their women like cattle”, should be interviewed to check their attitude before entry into New Zealand, says NZ First leader Winston Peters.

He went further, repeating party calls for a reduction in immigration numbers, and calling for every immigrant to go through an interview process before their visa is approved. 

He made the comments on current affairs show Q+A, also calling for immigration numbers to be cut to between 7000 and 15,000 a year. 

I don’t agree with Peters on reducing migration numbers to the extent he does (his policy would see no international students in NZ – a huge export earner) but I do have some sympathy for the idea of interviewing those eligible for permanent residence to try and establish that they are likely to be able to integrate into New Zealand and that their values are compatible with New Zealand core values.