Blackland PR has looked at the backgrounds of our 121 MPs:

The study, by political researcher Geoffrey Miller and public relations expert Mark Blackham, researched and compared the career histories of all 121 Members of the current Parliament.

They found that business owners, agriculturalists and unionists have a falling share of voice in their traditional parties, and have been replaced by people with no specific career interests, or careers limited to government and politics.

Miller said 23% of National MPs had experience working in a business, and only 10% of Labour MPs had worked in a union.

“National is no longer dominated by business experience and Labour no longer by unions.

“In fact, the whole of Parliament is now dominated by generalists, people of no specific experience, and government specialists – people whose only experience is working for government or in politics.

This is not a good trend – the rise of the professional political class.

I’ve compiled this table from their data. The percentages add up to over 100% as some MPs have had multiple careers.

NZeno blogs:

At NZeno, we believe xenotransplantation is ready to enter the clinic because of the major advances made possible by new gene editing techniques.

The vast majority of xenotransplantation literature and news stories describe results with pigs created using genetic engineering technology that is almost 20 years old.  For instance, the recent research featured on Pig Hearts Survive more than 2 years in a Baboon used pig engineered with the same technology used in the 1990’s and early 2000’s.  Genome editing has advanced far more in just the last three years than in all of time previously.

Preclinical research on pigs created using CRISPR, if published at all, is released very quietly and normally receives no coverage.  Many researchers refuse to publish for fear of being scooped.  Those that do publish release cryptic results that are useful only to their patent strategy.  NZeno’s founders are seminal figures in the transition to use new techniques to solve the challenges of xenotransplantation.

Some people may find this yucky but if xenotransplantation can save human lives, or at least enhance them, then I’m in favour. The ethics need to be managed well, but this should not be a barrier to research here.

Tracy Watkins writes:

As for McCully’s handpicked appointees, these are the members of the Niue Tourism Property Trust whose members are indeed appointed by McCully on behalf of the Niue Government.

It has already been widely reported that they include the likes of the island’s High Commissioner and former police officer Ross Ardern. (Ardern also happens to be the father of Labour MP Jacinda Ardern so one would assume he’s not embedded with the National Party).

But this is where it gets complicated.

The Niue Tourism Property Trust appointed a board to oversee the running of the hotel and according to one of the four board members the agreement was negotiated and signed between Scenic Hotels and the board rather than the trust itself.

The tender process itself, meanwhile, was run by consultancy group Horwarth (which did the early feasibility studies for Auckland’s international conventional centre). So again, a step removed from the government appointees on Niue property trust.

Little is right when he says that it is his role as Opposition leader to ask questions when a big political donor is awarded Government contracts.

But suggesting it “stinks to high heaven” takes things to a different level.

Even if there hadn’t been a number of steps between the minister and the decision to award the contract, Little’s claim appears to rest on the assumption that everyone involved in the process – from senior diplomats, to government agencies and senior politicians – was either swayed by the donation, or leaned on by the minister.

In the absence of a whistle blower, or any documentation, leaked emails or other evidence so far to support that view, that’s a pretty serious accusation. Seemingly, it relies solely on the fact that Hagaman donated money to the National Party.

This is dangerous territory for Little and not because the Hagamans have threatened legal action.

With the involvement of Horwarth, Little’s allegations only stack up if the conspiracy involves McCully, the two Hagamans, the three trustees (including Ross Ardern), the four board members and the staff of Horwarth.

Little was right to ask the question but wrong to leap to judgement before the Auditor General decides even whether to take a look.

If Little had just asked for it to be reviewed, no problems. But he rushed to judgment and declared it stank to high heaven, and insulted the trustees by effectively referring to them as McCully’s handpicked mates when one of them is an MFAT Deputy Secretary and another the High Commissioner (and father of a Labour MP).

If every big donation is going to be decried as dodgy there seem to be only two alternatives – either barring donors from tendering for Government contracts, which is probably unworkable, or a fully state funded regime, which is where the first option ultimately leads anyway, given the inevitable drying up of campaign funds.

This is what Labour wants. They are broke so they want to force taxpayers to fund their party.

Went to a presentation by the global forecaster for Exxon Mobil about what they think the energy outlook will be in 2040. They’ve been doing this for several decades. I did ask how accurate was their 25 year forecast in 1990 for 2015 and he said that they got the overall demand level about right but thought nuclear would be a bigger sector today than it actually is.

The forecast is here.

Some key forecasts are:

• China will go from 10 cars per 100 people to 30 cars per 100 people
• Per capita incomes in OECD countries will increase 60% by 2040 while non OECD countries will go up 135%
• Coal generated electricity will drop from 40% to 30% of electricity
• Natural gas will grow more than any other energy source which will meet 40% of new demand from 2014 to 2040
• Energy related co2 emissions will peak around 2030 and then decline
• Fuel economy for light vehicles will improve by around 80%
• World population will reach nine billion and India reaches 1.6 billion to become the most populous country
• China will be 20% of world GDP in 2040
• India’s GDP per capita will triple
• Energy demand will increase 25% with OECD demand dropping 5% and rest of the world increasing
• OECD co2 per capita emissions will fall 30% by 2040 by which date China will have around the same per capita emissions
• Average growth rates for energy sources will be oil 0.7% a year, gas 1.6%, coal -0.2%, biomass 0.3%, nuclear 2.9%, solar/wind 4.8%, hydro/geo 1.3%
• World has 150 years supply of oil at current demand levels and estimates rise as technology gets better. So much for peak oil.

Stuff reports:

Prime Minister John Key has downplayed concerns over foreign companies bottling and exporting water for large profits, saying only “a very tiny amount” is being sent overseas.

Controversy has been sparked by the Ashburton District Council’s decision to sell a property, with rights to extract 40 billion litres of water over 30 years, to an overseas company.

Opposition parties and environmental groups have called on the Government to charge fees for large-scale water takes which are exported overseas.

Why would you charge only if it is being exported? You charge for all or none.

However, Key told reporters in Beijing that governments had operated under a “long-standing principle” that water did not belong to anybody, and could not be sold by the Crown.

“The point is that no-one owns water, and if we’re going to start charging for it, then arguably we’d have to be consistent and charge a lot of people.

Yep. And we should as the market would be better at allocating water than local government officials.

“That means Meridian, when it gets its water and puts it through its hydro schemes, they would need to pay for that water, and Meridian aren’t going to pay the bill, so you the consumer are.”

Key said the access permits were only temporary, while only 0.004 per cent of all water used in New Zealand was bottled and sent overseas.

It is a tiny amount, and as usual xenophobia is behind it. But again Meridian should pay for the water it uses.

Stuff reports:

The Canadian government says it will introduce legislation next year to decriminalise and legalise the sale of marijuana, making Canada the first G7 country to permit widespread use of the substance.

The announcement was made by Canada’s health minister, Jane Philpott, at a United Nations drug conference in New York. It follows through on a promise made during Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s successful election campaign last year.

Philpott said details of the legislation are being worked out, but she vowed that the government “will keep marijuana out of the hands of children and profits out of the hands of criminals.”

This follows three or four US states that have done the same.

One study by a leading Canadian bank estimated that legalisation could spark development of an annual marijuana trade worth about C$10 billion (NZ$11n).

Better to tax it than have a black market.

Her Majesty has turned 90. Many good photos of her but this one is my favourite. Those pictured from left to right are:

• James, Viscount Severn, 8 (10th in line to the throne)
• Lady Louise Windsor, 12, (11th)
• Mia Tindall (holding the Queen’s handbag), 2 (17th)
• Princess Charlotte of Cambridge, 11 months (4th)
• Savannah Phillips, 5 (14th)
• Prince George of Cambridge, 2 (3rd)
• Isla Phillips, 3, (15th)

The Queen is by far the oldest living British Monarch. Victoria and George III both made 81, then Edward VIII made 77 and George II 76.

NBR reports:

While Auckland mayoral candidate and ex-Xero NZ boss Victoria Crone appears to have backed off from a battle over billboards with Auckland Council, fellow candidate Penny Bright has decided to take up cudgels on her rival’s – and ratepayers’ – behalf. …

Although Ms Crone seems to have conceded defeat on the issue, however, perennial rates activist and mayoral Penny Bright has signalled her intent to battle the billboard bylaw, which she sees as a matter of freedom of expression.

“So here we have Auckland Transport not telling us where they’re putting our money but they do want to tell us where and when we can put our signs,” Ms Bright says.

“I’m actually prepared to fight it on the basis of the Local Government Act 2002 s.155 (3) – that Council bylaws cannot be inconsistent with the Bill of Rights Act 1990.

“If it had been previously ok for years for individuals to display election hoardings on their private property at any time they liked, what’s changed?

“Who died and made Auckland Transport ‘the boss’ regarding the lawful rights of citizens to freedom of expression?

I agree. The Council and AT can make signs for their own property but it is ridiculous that they ban people from putting up election signs on their own property or on commercial hire sites.

Stuff reports:

Police Minister Judith Collins and the police have spoken out against claims that community stations in Auckland and the rest of the country will close, saying that is incorrect.

 NZME had reported that sources within NZ Police had claimed there are plans for the 16 to at least temporarily shut their doors and that some may never re-open.

According to NZME, information provided by independent sources and also by Labour MP and Auckland Mayoral candidate Phil Goff claimed that “police may be under pressure to reduce their footprint and under pressure to close stations”.

Interesting that Goff has been using his parliamentary role to help his campaign by asking numerous parliamentary written questions on Auckland issues.

Collins quickly responded, saying that she was “really disappointed that Phil Goff is touting a false story to the media against New Zealand police”. …

Police  have denied the community station closure saying  that a new set of infrastructure design features are being introduced for safety measures at police front counters.

The new features are designed to deal with the most likely threats at publicly accessible police premises.

“Our review of existing infrastructure has highlighted a number of premises where more immediate practical steps are needed to increase security.  There are 105 stations we have identified in this category around New Zealand,” said Acting Assistant Commissioner District Operations, Bruce Bird.

“In some of these stations, one of the options may be to limit public access at times when constabulary staff are on the premises.

“This does not mean the stations will permanently close, but the public access at some stations may be, as an interim measure, restricted to those times when a constabulary/authorised officer is available to work at the front counter.”

So Goff is attacking the Police for making their staff safer and more secure from attack.

Nick Smith released:

The call from opposition parties for a moratorium or a new tax on consents for bottled water plants is typically uninformed and scientifically unsound in respect of dealing with the challenges New Zealand has in freshwater management, says Environment Minister Dr Nick Smith.

“New Zealand has five-hundred trillion litres of fresh water each year flowing through our lakes, rivers, and aquifers, and we extract only two percent of that for human purposes. Ten trillion litres are extracted, made up of six trillion for irrigation, two trillion for town water supplies, and two trillion for industries. The total water extracted for bottled water is only 0.004 per cent of the resource.

So that is 500,000,000,000,000 litres a year. That is 100 million litres per New Zealander. And the opposition parties are scaremongering over it.

The suggestion by the Greens of a moratorium on bottled drinking water takes is about as sensible as pretending you could solve Auckland’s traffic congestion by banning bikes. The New Zealand First proposal for a special tax would be like putting a charge on bikes but ignoring trucks, cars and buses and pretending that it would help traffic management,” Dr Smith says.

As I’ve said many times, I have no problem with a charge on water, but it should apply to all.

“There is also a contradiction by opposition parties calling for a more diverse range of export industries than dairying but then wanting to prohibit the export of bottled water. Each litre of milk takes about 400 litres of freshwater to produce and if the export market is prepared to pay a good price for bottled water, it may be a more efficient and productive use of the resource. It would also be difficult to justify a charge on bottled water but not on a bottled product made with minimal additives of juice concentrate or other similar bottled drinking products.

“There is no case for the bottled water industry to be treated any differently from the thousands of other water users.

A tax or ban on bottled water is simply kneejerk idiotic politics.

Some really good decisions from the Government on the passengers services. Simon Bridges and Craig Foss announced:

Currently there are separate categories and rules for taxis, private hire, shuttles, and rideshare operators. Under the changes, these services will be regulated under a single category of small passenger service, meaning one set of rules for all.

A good start – one simple set of rules.

“New technologies like smart phones and apps have changed the way the sector can operate. Modernising our rules will ensure they are flexible enough to accommodate new business models,” Mr Bridges says

“The Government has clearly stated our intention to encourage innovation and enable new kinds of services. Freeing up the regulatory environment will allow transport operators to compete on an even footing,” Mr Bridges says.

Some rules that impose costs on operators, but no longer provide any significant benefits, will be removed.

“Removing outdated rules will allow a broader range of transport services to develop throughout New Zealand, giving consumers more choice,” Mr Foss says.

People used to just pick whatever taxi was on a taxi stand. Now many people use apps to book a driver, and will swap firms based on quality.

The regulations being removed include:

• Signage requirements (including information about fares, mandatory branding, information supplied in Braille)
• An Area Knowledge Certificate
• Passing a full licence test in the preceding five years
• The need to belong to an approved taxi organisation
• Provision of small passenger services on a 24/7 basis
• Driver panic alarms, monitored 24/7 from a fixed location

These have all imposed a considerable cost and now little benefit. The q+a explains:

The Ministry’s review found that these requirements no longer add value. For example, GPS and mapping technology means that area knowledge is not as important as it was in the past. Removing these requirements means that the proposed regime will be more flexible, and reduces compliance costs. It encourages businesses to make their own decisions about what their services should include, depending on their customers’ needs.

They have also given an exemption from the silly rule about needing a video camera in the vehicle if:

1. Providing services to registered passengers only
2. Collection of driver and passenger information
3. Availability of driver and passenger information
4. Retaining a record of each trip.

Drivers still need a P licence and a full Police check. However the time taken to do this has dropped from 55 days to 20 days, and reduce further yet.  And the cost is likely to drop from $700 to under $200 which will make it easier for mreo people to become part-time drivers – say students between lectures or retired persons for a few hours a day.

Really good to see the Government not trying to protect incumbent industries with regulatory overkill, but instead responding to a new business dynamic by reducing regulatory obligations on all participants. The end result is better choices and prices for consumers.

On that note Uber has just announced their prices in Auckland and Wellington are dropping 20%. They are already a third cheaper than most taxis, so this will probably mean around half the price in future – great.

Reporters without Borders has released its 2016 Press Freedom Report and NZ has moved up one place to 5th place.

A slightly inconvenient fact with some of the deranged who would have you believe the media in NZ cower in fear because John Key complained to the Police over being bugged and Cameron Slater complained to the Police over being hacked.

The top 10 are:

1. Finland
2. Netherlands
3. Norway
4. Denmark
5. New Zealand
6. Costa Rica
7. Switzerland
8. Sweden
9. Ireland
10. Jamacia

Some other countries are Canada 18th, Australia 25th, UK 38th, and US 41st.

The bottom countries are:

1. Eritrea
2. North Korea
3. Turkemistan
4. Syria
5. China

Takes a lot to beat North Korea.

Stuff reports:

Geraldine and Peel Forest are a relative stronghold in South Canterbury for the Green Party, which received 12.5 per cent of the party vote at booths in the area at the 2014 General Election.

Frustration with the party’s inability to prevent partial state asset sales at a referendum in 2013 was evident in one member’s voice. She exclaimed she had spent “all my spare time” gathering signatures for a petition to force a referendum, which failed to change Government plans.

“Why are people so stupid?” one party member asked, prompting others to blame greed and New Zealand’s “really appalling media”.

Not everyone agrees with my views so they’re stupid.  Charming.

An audience member, who said he had been “looking up quite a bit on my wife’s iPad” asked if “these chemtrail things” were “real or not”.

Talking of stupid! …

Stats NZ reports:

Net migration from Australia continued to rise, with a net gain of 1,900 migrants. This is the highest annual net gain of migrants from Australia in about 25 years (since the August 1991 year) and the sixth consecutive month to show an annual net gain. One in five migrants arriving in New Zealand in the March 2016 year came from Australia, and most were New Zealand citizens returning.

This graph shows the trend:

Departures to Australia are at an all time low and arrivals from Australia at an all time high.

Stuff reports:

China will allow dairy to remain on the table as it progresses talks with New Zealand over an upgrade to an existing free-trade agreement.

But it’s not yet promising that formal re-negotiations will begin over an eight-year-old pact that the government would argue has fallen victim to its own success. 

Prime Minister John Key met with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing overnight (NZ time), and said he left the meeting more optimistic than when he went into it, about China’s willingness to progress free-trade talks. 

If an upgrade to the China FTA is negotiated, will Labour oppose it?

Once upon a time this would have been a ridiculous question to ask, especially as they negotiated the China FTA.

But consider these two points:

1. Labour now regularly rails against the Chinese – everything from investing in a farm to buying a house to being an Chinese chef
2. The initiated the TPP agreement in Government yet denounced it in opposition

Greens and NZ First both opposed the FTA with China. Labour’s policy has been getting closer and closer to the Greens, so it is not impossible they’ll oppose any upgrade to the China FTA purely because it may happen under National.

Stuff reports:

Pop superstar Prince has died at home in the United States, aged 57.

The ‘Purple Rain’ singer – full name Prince Rogers Nelson – was found dead at a compound in Paisley Park, Minnesota on Thursday morning (local time), his publicist Yvette Noel-Schure confirmed.

Sad so many of the great artists die so young.

His full name was Prince Rogers Nelson. At one stage his name was .

For quite a few years now I’ve been fortunate enough to get review tickets to many plays in Wellington. So once or twice a month I get to go to the theatre and (generally) enjoy a play. They range from local productions of international classics to unique productions and premieres of local plays.

One of the things which I’ve got interested in, is how do these productions occur. Who decides what gets made? Who decides who takes part? What are the economics of the productions? What sort of work does it involve for playwrights, directors and actors? I enjoy seeing the final product, but what is involved in getting a play to the stage.

So over a few months I’ve interviewed various people such as author Dave Armstrong, actor Gavin Rutherford, and the Circa Council co-ordinator to increase my understanding of how it all works. I thought I’d do a blog post on it, as some readers may find it interesting also.

The playwright

I used to think that the playwright was the central figure in that they would decide to write a play, get funding for it, and then get a theatre to show it. But actually is the the director who is the central figure. They tend to be the ones who pick a script, decide they want to direct it, and then make a proposal to a theatre. Playwrights can submit directly, but more often it is a director who does the pitch.

So when a playwright writes a play, they may not have any guarantee it will be picked up. Sometimes a playwright and a director will form a bit of a partnership, where they work together from the concept stage.

The standard royalty on a play is 10% of sales.

So if you have a play run for four weeks and it gets 150 per night average at say $35, then you may get just under $15,000 for the play. If it is a big hit and goes to other theatres then you can multiply that. But also many scripts never get picked up. You may write six plays, and five never get picked up.

Also 150 a night average is something you may get in Circa One as it can seat 228. But Circa 2 has a maximum 98. And smaller theatres like Bats are even less.

The bottom line is you need to write quite a few plays a year to get a decent income, or have one become a nationwide tour.

The director

The director is the one who generally makes the pitch to a theatre. Often it may be in combination with a playwright. In fact author/director pairings are quite common.

The director decides the makeup of the company that produces a play. The theatre does have a veto, but in practice this has never been used. They may have some people in mind for particular roles, or do open auditions.

While the director is sort of the CEO for the production, they may not get paid more than any of the other principals. At Circa the company tends to split profits equally amongst all the principals (lesser roles may be paid a half share or be on a flat rate) such as the actors.

The theatre

At Circa the theatre takes 20% of the proceeds to cover the operating costs of the theatre. Hence when deciding what plays to put on, popular appeal is an important factor.

However it is not the only one. With two theatres, the larger Circa One can do the more populist shows, and more niche shows in Circa Two. Sometimes they may say yes to a show because they want to nurture the career of someone they see promising. As a non-profit trust they need to earn enough to cover costs, but beyond that it is not solely about maximum sales. Of course the more tickets sold the more they can do, and the better for the artists.

Other theatres may have different models. Some will assume most or all of the risk and pay artists a fixed rate, and have lots of permanent staff including a chief executive. Circa however has no CEO, but a Council of 12 volunteers who are active members. Some will be artists and some may be lawyers or business people. Their common calling is a love of theatre.

The Council decides who to hear pitches from, and consider submissions from directors and playwrights.

The major plays are a nine week effort. They have four weeks of rehearsals, one week of production and four weeks of performances. So the revenue from the performances has to cover the full costs of the whole nine weeks.

The theatre also acts as a sort of bank for each production. They will advance the money up front (along with TACT) to cover the costs, and get reimbursed once sales have begun.

There are also private sponsors who will sponsor a show. This money generally goes only to the company members, and not to the theatre.

Actors

The principal actors in a show are on a profit share. So the more actors in a show, the less money per actor. Lesser roles may get a half share only but generally all the actors tend to be an equal share.

The income from a nine week show generally ranges from $3,000 to $9,000. At the lower end, that would come to just $18,000 a year (and if constantly in a show).

Almost no stage actors in New Zealand can survive just on the theatre. They either have “day jobs” or they supplement their income from related activities such as voice talent for radio commercials etc. They do it because they enjoy it.

TACT

This is the Theatre Artists Charitable Trust. They play a key role by giving a grant for each production – around $3,000 per production member. This effectively gives them an income during the rehearsals and pre-production phase.

It was set up in 1987 and has gifted $5 million since then. Donors include Chapman Tripp, Deloitte and Vodafone.

Non actor production members

Generally each actor and the director gets a full share of  the co-op proceeds (after costs). The stage manager tends to get a full share also.

Other production members such as publicists, designers, operators, technical support will either get a half share or may be paid directly as an expense. In the end the decisions are made by the co-op as a whole as to what split is fair to everyone.

Summary

This won’t be of interest to many, but as someone who has seen scores of shows and enjoyed most of them, I have always been curious about how the shows actually come together, and what the economics of them are. There’s a lot of work and sweat to get a show to production.

Anne Tolley announced:

Social Development Minister Anne Tolley says the number of people receiving a main benefit has fallen below 280,000 for the first time since 2008.

“The number of people receiving a main benefit has fallen by 4,369 (1.5 per cent) in the year to March 2016, taking the total number of people receiving a main benefit to 279,891,” Mrs Tolley says.

“Those receiving Sole Parent Support continue to drive the biggest reduction in numbers, with a drop of 3,986 (or 5.7 per cent).

Benefit numbers peaked in December 2011 at 350,932. Since then they have fallen away 20% to 279,891.

Since December 2011 the individual changes are:

• Job Seeker Support down 18.4%
• Sole Parent Support down 26.1%
• Supported Living Payment (Invalids etc) up 1.7%

Politik reports:

Non-Government organisations joined public servants in a packed all day “hui” intended by Finance Minister Bill English to convince the Government agencies to start sharing the huge volumes of data they hold on New Zealanders.

Mr English wants the data shared so that social services can be directed more specifically towards at risk individuals and groups.

But public servants have been reluctant to share information – perhaps worried that the more they empower the non-Governmental groups, the more they are likely to take over social serviced delivery traditionally undertaken by state agencies.

Not just delivery, but analysis. Open up access to the crime and offending data, and you could well have some dedicated NGOs and charities discover patterns and links which will help with policies to lower reoffending.

But it was clear from a keynote speech from Finance Minister, Bill English, that he is finding pushback from the bureaucracy in supplying the data to the NGO’s.

“Access to data shouldn’t be the exclusive reserve of government – but that’s what it largely is because in many cases access is being decided ad hoc,” he said.

“Iwi, NGOs, and Pasifika – many of you here today – have told us getting information out of departments is not easy.

“It’s a negotiation. Agency by agency. Official by official.

“You’ve told us contracts are entered in to as if each negotiation was the first, with the each negotiation’s success dependent on who you are talking to.”

Mr English said that just saying “no” as an approach to data security had meant we have made only limited use of all the data the Government had gone to the trouble of collecting.

“Data has no value if it is not used,” he said.

“So let’s fix the system.

“Let’s reverse the presumption and make data sharing the norm rather than the exception by clarifying the rules.

“Because, actually, it’s your data.

“Specifically, the data we hold belongs to the people, and the whanau that you are working for and with.

“Some of you here today have spoken of data sovereignty.

“You, as citizens, and collectively as Iwi, Pasifika and NGOs acting on behalf of citizens, own the data held by public agencies.

“We agree with you.”

Great to hear Bill English say this and he has been the champion of open data. But as he notes there is bureaucratic resistance.

The key is indeed reversing the presumption, and here’s how it can be done.

Pass a law (statute or regulation) that says all datasets managed by crown entities and agencies must be made publicly available within five years, with two exceptions:

• Any details that could identify individuals should be with-held
• Agencies can apply to Cabinet for exemptions for specific datasets, to opt them out

The idea is to change open data from opt in for agencies to opt out.

From the Economist, good to see NZ well placed.

The Royal Society has done a useful report on the possible impacts of climate change on New Zealand.

Some reports are very alarmist and talk about 10 metre sea rises, which is near impossible in the next 100 years. They say the likely increase in the next 100 years is around 30 to 110 cms. That is credible as the current rise is around 3 mm a year.

The report usefully looks at key risks such as flooding, droughts etc. By their own admission they don’t focus on potential benefits such as longer seasons for pasture growth, reduced electricity demand in winter etc.

Stuff reports:

New Zealand’s international reputation has been damaged by Immigration NZ’s decision to deny an Iranian film director a visitor visa, a film festival director says. 

Rokhsareh Ghaemmaghami was invited to speak at the screening of her film Sonita at next month’s Documentary Edge film festival. 

An immigration officer declined her visitor visa on the basis that she might become an overstayer. 

This is a pretty bizarre decision. Does Immigration NZ think she went to all the trouble of producing a film and having it screened in NZ, just so she could visit here and them overstay?

Jacinda Ardern, Labour’s arts, culture and heritage spokesperson, has added her voice to those frustrated by the decision.  

The denial “does not appear to be grounded in evidence or common sense” and will put New Zealand’s reputation at further risk of damage without resolution, she said.

I agree with Jacinda.

If someone is coming here for no specific reason, and has some risk factors, then you may need to be concerned about overstaying. But coming here to speak at the screening of a film you made is a very specific reason, and someone who makes films for a living is probably not that likely to try and hide in New Zealand, and become an illegal overstayer who lives off ash jobs picking fruit etc!

UPDATE: Immigration NZ has reversed the decision and granted the visa