The Government announced:

The Government has today launched a consultation document on a new Marine Protected Areas Act to replace the Marine Reserves Act 1971 that includes proposals for recreational fishing parks in the inner Hauraki Gulf and Marlborough Sounds.

“We are proposing a new system of marine protection that will include marine reserves, species-specific sanctuaries, seabed reserves, and recreational fishing parks. This more sophisticated approach with four different types of marine protection is similar to the graduated approach we take to reserves on land that vary from strict nature reserves to those for a specific or recreational purpose,” says Environment Minister Dr Nick Smith.

A more graduated approach is very sensible, rather than just a binary system of total protection vs no protection.

I’m a big fan of marine reserves and the like, because they have a very different impact to the same status on land.

When you declare an area of land off limits for commercial activity, then there is an economic cost to that. the minerals and resources in that land can never be utilized. So you need to consider the benefits vs the costs.

But with marine sanctuaries and the like, it doesn’t mean there is less fish to be caught. To the contrary it can mean that over time there will be more fish available. Unlike minerals, fish do not stay in the one area. So restricting fishing in particular areas doesn’t necessarily mean a decline in economic activity.

Richard Harman writes at Politik:

For Communications Minister, Amy Adams, who has launched a review of the 2001 Telecommunications Act which is relevant to the way the internet is regulated, the very idea of regulation almost seems like trying to wrestle with a jelly.

Not that she seems that philosophically keen on regulation anyway.

The review includes issues surrounding television which she says she does not think it is government’s job to try and figure out how the commercial businesses respond to the rapidly changing market.

Good. The smartest brains around the world are struggling with working out the answer, so to have a Government try and pick winners is a bad idea.

That comment will disappoint many in the TV industry who worry that a country of 4.4 million viewers will simply be rolled over in content terms by the big Hollywood or other international players.

We have NZ on Air, the Film Commission etc to support the local industry. That is preferable to dictating to providers what content they must supply.

It is that enthusiasm for light handed regulation and endorsement of the market which has made something of a rising star within the National Party.

My view is that Amy is doing very well.

On telecommunication regulation overall she says she has to walk a fine line.

“We have to get the balance right between investors seeing a value in spending on new and replacement technologies and services but at the same time not make it so attractive to investors that consumers get done in the pricing — and that’s a very fine balance,” she says.

“The biggest thing missing at the moment is certainty.

“You talk to any investor and it’s not even a matter of what the rules are, it’s knowing what the rules are so they can price it out and work out where they are and I think the biggest issue at the moment for investors in that market is not the pricing level so much as the complete uncertainty as to where it could go.”

There’s a clue here to how she might respond to the submissions that have been made on the Telecommunications Act and is pricing provisions.

“The very one off, individually created, unique in the world approach we have for pricing telecom services is creating some issues and we could look to a number of better understood processes like a utility style building block approach.”

There’s a lot of interest in the concept of treating telco infrastructure providers like other utilities. Instead of having the Commerce Commission determine prices for every regulated service, just have them establish a maximum rate of return as they do for lines companies and airports.

“I’m personally of a view that the internet stays free and open and outside state control,” she says.

Excellent.

“But that is not to say that we can’t have some sort of consistency of approach about things that our respective countries and residents expect us to regulate for like tax, like classifications, like law enforcement.”

But the picture that emerges is that of a Minister determined that telecommunications in New Zealand will have a light handed regulatory regime, but one which fits neatly into the overall globalised telecommunications industry.

Any infrastructure industry will always have a degree of regulation. It is a necessary evil to prevent vertically integrated monopolies destroying competition. But the regulation should be predictable and consistent.

Andrew Geddis blogs:

Last year, somewhat to my own surprise, I became quite vocal around the issue of “aid in dying” (or, if you are trying to scare the horses, “euthanasia”/”assisted suicide”). It happened almost by accident. It certainly wasn’t an issue I had given a huge amount of thought to previously; my knee-jerk socially liberal response was that I thought it ought to be permitted with appropriate safeguards and that’s about as far as things went.

However, the case of Lecretia Seales really focused my attention onto the issue. Not only did it raise a number of very important legal issues that fall within my area of academic study, but I could strongly identify with her determination that decisions about how her death should come about should be hers alone to make. That resonated with me at a quite fundamental level.

Likewise.

Having sat in on some of the High Court proceedings, I can only second the Herald’s choice. Seeing Ms Seales being wheeled into the court, clearly drawing to the end of her time on earth, was deeply affecting. It brought home strongly that the judicial proceedings weren’t just an abstract debate about theoretical matters. They were (literally) a life and death issue for a real, identifiable person … who stood for other real, identifiable people in similar situations.

As I’ve got involved with this issue, I’ve also found how real this is for so many people. Some issues only affect a small number of people, but this issue has a real impact on so many.

Of course, Ms Seales didn’t get what she wanted from the Court. Ihad hoped that she might be more successful, but perhaps it is for the best that (as Justice Collins concluded) our elected, accountable representatives must make the call on when and how aid in dying may be provided in this country. Clearly these issues are something that many of us have strong and contrasting views on, so let’s let those views be considered and acted on by people we choose to make laws for us instead of by an appointed ex-lawyer who happens to have been rostered onto a particular case.

That’s all OK, as far as it goes. However, if we’re going down that line of thinking, it then puts the onus back onto us. Because democratic representative government only works like it is meant to if we, the people who live under the laws our representatives choose, take the time and make the effort to participate in it. If we don’t, then it really doesn’t work at all.

So here’s the challenge to anyone with views on how, when and if individuals should be able to choose the time and means of their own death.

Tell Parliament’s Health Select Committee what you think about this issue.

You only have a little over two weeks left to do so – submissions close on 1 February.

This is an issue worth submitting on. Andrew gives some advice:

• Making a submission is really, really, really easy! Just go here, verify that you are a real person, provide some personal details and then type what you think into the text box. Once you hit the submit button, you’ve done your bit (unless you want to go in front of the Committee to give oral evidence, that is.)
• You don’t need to be an expert or to know everything (or even all that much) about the topic – part of the purpose of this inquiry is to find out what ordinary New Zealanders think on the issues. So just speak from the heart!
• If you have a personal story to tell about the hard choices that come at the end of life, so much the better. As Ms Seales showed, this isn’t an abstract issue – real people and real suffering underlie it. But just be aware that a submissions is made public unless you ask (and the Committee agrees) to keep it private.
• There is no magic formula or wording to use in your submission – just try to write clearly and make your point early in the piece. Remember that MPs are really busy folks who have to give their time and attention to lots of different matters. The more you can help them know what you want, the better.
• Finally, if you are interested in what those who are still carrying Lecretia Seales’ flame aloft think, you can read it here.

I’m working on my submission in the next week and a bit.

The Guardian reports:

UK Athletics wants all world records to be reset due to the sport’s doping crisis and has announced it will seek to bring in a lifetime ban for any athlete guilty of a serious drugs violation.

The governing body for British athletics has published A Manifesto for Clean Athletics, which calls for hard-hitting measures to be brought in to clean up the sport. It comes after the doping scandal in which Russia has been banned from international athletics, with allegations that former officials from the sport’s world governing body the International Association of Athletics Federations also took money to cover up positive tests from Turkish and Moroccan athletes. Kenya, one of the most high-profile countries in distance running, is also at the centre of doping-related allegations.

Their recommendation is:

A call to the IAAF to investigate the implications of drawing a line under all pre-existing sport records – for example, by adjusting event rules – and commencing a new set of records based on performances in the new Clean Athletics era.

I doubt it would be agreed to, but I think it is a good idea.

Far too many of the world records of the last 30 years were done through doping.

Make them all historical records, but set up a new set of world records from say 2018 onwards, once the sport is truly clean.

Pro-Life Auckland writes:

I’m the President of Prolife Auckland, which is a University of Auckland club committed to advocating for the rights and personhood of unborn children. I’m aware from reading Kiwiblog that you’re personally prochoice, however I think you’ll agree that the issues around ideological capture and groupthink are much broader than that particular debate, and I get the impression that you are generally supportive of freedom of expression.

By way of background, our club is setting up a scholarship to help pay childcare costs for solo mother students. We’ll be fundraising for this in the hope that we can help at least one young woman per semester through her students – obviously financial circumstances can be pretty difficult following the birth of a child. We like to think that our “pro-life” philosophy is pretty holistic so we’re putting our money where our mouth is.

We wanted to offer the scholarship under the auspices of AUSA and to get their support in promoting it, so I approached them sometime in October with a proposal. Imagine our surprise when the official answer we (eventually!) received was that they weren’t interested in helping us to help solo mothers. Given that their entire function is to serve the student population, I think it’s appalling they are prepared to allow ideology to get in the way of student welfare. I also don’t think it’s fair for the student union to hold itself out as representing all students when dissenting opinions are suppressed. It just goes to show, I think, that student union membership should be voluntary.

Oh, and by the way, I find it particularly ironic that this decision was made with the full support of AUSA’s President, Paul Smith, who earlier this year at the Auckland Writers Festival made a speech in his capacity as AUSA President on the absolute right to offend and to freedom of expression. The debate is mentioned here: https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/about/news-events-and-notices/events/events-2015/05/auckland-writers-festival.html however further details can be found here: http://www.kathrynvanbeek.co.nz/blog/yes-but I quote:

“Paul Smith, President of the University of Auckland Debating Society, opened by pointing out that free speech is the cornerstone of personal freedom and democracy. He said that offense is subjective and that people have the option of not engaging with what offends them. Referencing marriage and gender equality, he said that offense can be a catalyst for change and that the veneer of protection against offense is often used as an excuse to shut down ideas.”

I’m pro-choice, but that doesn’t matter.  AUSA should not be refusing a genuine offer of assistance to students, just because they don’t agree with the views of the group.

What this means is that an Auckland student who may have been able to get their childcare costs paid for, now won’t be able to, unless Pro-life can work around AUSA.

The Herald reports:

An Islamic cleric who defends domestic violence is among a string of extremist speakers touring British universities unchallenged, the Mail Investigations Unit can reveal.

Egyptian cleric Fadel Soliman spoke at five such events last year, using them to refer Muslim students to an online lecture series in which he speaks in favour of hitting women and outlines the Islamic case for sex slavery and polygamy.

Mr Soliman told students at Sheffield University that watching his lectures could be “a turning point” in their lives.

In his extraordinary videos, he advises physical punishment for wives who have displeased their husbands, saying “the hitting must be done with a small stick”.

The left will protest and try to stop speakers who not entirely politically correct such as Germaine Greer, because of her views n transgender people. But they’re quiet when someone speaks on campus condoning violence against women – because he is an Islamist!

Explaining why it is necessary, he says that when a husband is unhappy with the behaviour of his wife, that “after passing through two stages of non-physical interaction, the next stage must involve something physical, in order to escalate the intensity of the warning”.

And he gets to preach this. I’m for freedom of speech, but when you directly advocate violence, then that verges on the criminal.

Stuff reports:

US President Barack Obama hopes to visit New Zealand this year – just the third time in history a United States president has been here.

The visit could have been as early at February 4, for the signing of the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. But Cabinet minister Simon Bridges is pouring cold water on that, saying that agreement will be signed by trade ministers, not by leaders.

Instead, it appears Obama will tack his New Zealand visit onto one of two trips to Asia: either May or September.

if President Obama does come, he could dedicate or open a US memorial at Pukeahu National War Memorial Park.

This is the view from our room at the Club del Mar in Jaco.  Right next to the beach. We spent three nights there.

Our room – very spacious.

Sunset at Jaco.

We did a half day trek through the jungle on horseback.

I’d never rode a horse  before, so was quite pleased that the horses were not large – less distance to fall to the ground in case I fell off!

The trek was initially on road, but then most of the time through the jungle to a waterfall, where we bathed for half an hour (average temperature 30 degrees or so) before heading back.

Can highly recommend Costa Rica as a holiday destination. It’s like a tropical pacific island, but with heaps of activities and great biodiversity (largest per square km in the world) and rainforest. 30% of the country is in the conservation estate.

The company we used to arrange it was Vacations Costa Rica. Our travel consultant was Rachel Peck and she was great. We changed details six or seven times until we finalised it, and was never a problem. They arranged everything including private transfers between hotels, to and from the airport and all the accommodation and activities. Best of all they have a host meet you at the airport, before you clear immigration. Our host managed to get us through the empty diplomatic lane, avoiding a half hour or so queue!

Had been wanting to see Costa Rica for over a decade, and now I’ve been, I can’t wait to go back!

The Herald reports:

The Environment Court has refused an Auckland man’s application to remove a huge tree from his heritage property Valhalla because of a legal technicality – despite it presenting an “undeniable presence of risk to human life”, according to a judge.

The tree has caused thousands of dollars of damage, including branches spearing through the home’s roof during a storm, narrowly missing people inside.

Auckland Council last night seemingly contradicted the ruling, saying it would not prosecute if the tree was removed because of the risk it posed.

The Norfolk pine, on James Gilderdale’s $1.1 million Heritage NZ-listed property in Woodward Rd, Mt Albert is protected because it is listed as a notable tree on the district plan and one of a neighbouring pair, each estimated to be 39m tall.

It is good the Council are saying they won’t prosecute, but it is wrong that he even has to go to court to get permission to remove the tree. The law should allow a home owner to remove a tree which poses a danger to human life.

In 2015, a branch estimated to weigh 80kg was blown down and missed hitting the applicant by only 2m. “The insurers have understandably threatened to review the availability of cover.”

So he has been almost killed by the tree, and risks losing insurance for the house – yet still can not legally fell the tree. Ridiculous.

UPDATE: The tree is being felled. The poor owner has been trying since 2014 to get permission!

Stuff reports:

New Zealand will be among the bigger gainers from the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, boosting exports by around 10 per cent by 2030.

A study by the World Bank on the controversial trade agreement claims that while New Zealand will see a much smaller boost to economic output than the likes of Vietnam and Malaysia, the boost from being part of the TPPA would be far bigger than that accrued by Australia, Canada or the United States.

Calculating increases in trade and economic output, New Zealand ranks fourth out of the 12 members on both counts.

Well done NZ negotiators.

The study estimates that countries left out of the TPPA agreement will suffer. Even though trade overall would be boosted, with Russia seeing a slight gain to its GDP from spillover benefits, the economies of China and India would be about 0.2 per cent smaller than they would otherwise be.

Thailand, hit by declining exports from being left out of the agreement, would see its economy about 0.8 per cent smaller than otherwise.

Which is what Labour and Greens say we should do – walk away from it.

The full report is here. The growth in GDP per member is estimated as:

1. Vietnam 10%
2. Malaysia 8%
3. Brunei 5%
4. NZ 3.5%
5. Singapore 3%
6. Japan 3%
7. Peru 2.5%
8. Mexico 2%
9. Canada 1.5%
10. Chile 1%
11. Australia 1%
12. US 0.5%

So the US actually gains the least from the TPP.

The Herald reports:

A former Labour member plans to run a candidate in Te Atatu in protest at Phil Twyford’s use of Chinese-sounding names to analyse Auckland property purchases.

Former Labour staffer and political commentator Phil Quin, who resigned as a Labour member over the data analysis which he called racial profiling, said he hoped the candidate would win enough votes in 2017 to oust Mr Twyford from the seat. Mr Quin told the Herald he was searching for a candidate who could run as an alternative for Labour voters who had been made uncomfortable by Mr Twyford’s use of the housing data.

“I don’t expect such a campaign to win more than a couple of thousand votes – not nearly enough to win, but enough to force Twyford to rely on his high list ranking.”

If such a campaign were successful it would not damage the Labour Party overall or the number of MPs it would take into Parliament, Mr Quin said. “I’m not interested in helping National – that runs counter to my life’s work to date – and MMP allows us to target electorate MPs without affecting overall parliamentary representation.”

Many constituents in Te Atatu feel let down by Twyford over his Chinese surnames stunt. The electorate is 24% Asian and they don’t like being blamed by Twyford for high house prices because of their surnames.

Stuff reports:

Social Housing Minister Paula Bennett is denying claims she met with a representative of a Chinese property billionaire said to be eyeing up New Zealand’s state housing stock.

The State Housing Action Network said on Friday that it understood Bennett met with Roger O’Sullivan, recently appointed New Zealand manager for Henry Cheng Kar-Shun’s Pinnacle Group, on December 11 to discuss buying state houses.

 But Clark Hennessy, Bennett’s spokesperson, said no such meeting took place and that network convenor John Minto was “making stuff up”.

“I don’t know what he’s talking about. The minister keeps quite separate from the commercial process…[ministers] don’t want to be favouring any one provider.”

Minto said the information came from an anonymous source but it seemed credible as it matched with Pinnacle’s stated intentions.

Once upon a time this would not be a story. Printing allegations from a third hand anonymous source with no verification! In the absence of proof, and a firm denial, why publish the allegation?

This incentivises groups to just make things up, because if they do so, they get a nice big story with Fairfax.

A guest post by Gary Lindsay:

I once got in a lot of trouble at work for saying “don’t put your hand where you wouldn’t put your cock.”  Before you jump to saying things like “that’s totally inappropriate for work” or “what were you thinking” I will put it into some context.  It was at a toolbox meeting (the daily prestart safety meeting) in the oil and gas industry in Queensland and it was during a discussion about hand placement brought about because two geologists in my team managed to get hand injuries that week.  I was repeating something that I had heard several years earlier from an old guy in a similar meeting.  The only differences from when I first heard it on a rig in New Zealand as a green mudlogger in 2005 was that it was in 2012.

A lot has changed in workplaces in the 11 years since I got my first “real” job, particularly in the drilling industry, and even more in the 19 since I got my first job, working in a dairy after school.  One major change is that there are now many women working in the oil patch, mainly for service companies doing jobs such as rig geology, mud doctor, MWD/wireline logging, mudlogging and as safety officers – i.e. there still aren’t that many doing the hard jobs of offsiding/roughnecking, or drilling.  One of the consequences of their presence is that talking dirty, swearing, and general coarse language is now banned, but in reality still happens when the precious types are not present – you just have to suss out what your co-workers are like before you open your mouth.  Because of that a lot of rig culture has had to change.  I don’t really have a problem with the pressure sensor being called a pressure sensor instead of a donkey’s dick (which it resembles), or many of the other name changes that have taken place.  One area where it is detrimental is safety.

Men on drilling rigs used to have lots of different sayings about keeping safe, with the one I mentioned above being one of the cleaner ones.  There was a definite use for them.  You’re way more likely to remember something a bit lewd than something like “be careful with hand placement.”  You’ll have a laugh as you back away from putting your hand somewhere stupid instead of crushing your fingers.  I have anecdotal proof of this – if you ask any of my former colleagues what lesson from a toolbox meeting they remember the most it will be the one where I said “don’t put your hand where you wouldn’t put your cock,” with no exceptions.  It is a good way to get a message through to people.

Similarly you used to get yelled at for doing unsafe acts (I remember one instance in particular where I took a shortcut underneath the v-door, where drill pipe is hauled up from the ground to the drill floor – a big no-no since getting hit by falling drillpipe is a good way to get yourself killed).  You can’t do that now either, because the powers that be have decided that people not getting their feelings hurt is more important than people not getting killed in an industrial accident.  Instead it is all softer discipline, where you get stood down, you have to answer to a committee, and can be run-off or sacked, and of course it must be documented (which is in itself dumbing down safety but that’s a different rant).  Firing a keen but green worker for doing something dumb doesn’t make the industry safer.  If he gets another job he won’t have learned his lesson, since he probably doesn’t understand the danger behind what he did, and if he doesn’t get another job then the industry has lost someone who may have made a good worker.  But it’s OK because at least he didn’t get his feelings hurt.

There have been a few things come up in the last week or so that have prompted me to write this.  The biggest and most obvious one is the incident where Chris Gayle asked Channel 10 presenter Mel McLaughlan out for drinks during a sideline interview.  For god’s sake, if you’re paid good money to interview people who your company talks up as a ladies man and you are a reasonably attractive woman then of course he’s going to play up to it.  That’s part of her job and if she can’t handle it then hire someone who can.   You don’t hire a 50 kg scrawny weakling to haul bags of cement, although at a different job they did hire small women as lab assistants and then had to design an apparatus to help them move around core (sticks of rock) so nothing would surprise me.  The whole thing has been blown out of proportion by people who are on a moral crusade but are actually doing more harm than good.  Is that what we’ve been reduced to?

I might be old fashioned but I don’t think I am.  A man used to be able to support his family on a single wage, and there was no need for women to get into traditionally male dominated roles.  That is no longer the case – some women want a career and to a certain extent it is expected by society.  I have no problem with that, but I do have a problem with workplaces requiring change to accommodate it.  There is a reason why drill rigs are rough places, and that’s because it can be a dangerous job.  As well as helping to keep workers safe, it helps promote working together as a team and get the job done efficiently, and it helps guys cope with working in an uncomfortable environment (particularly in Australia) far from their families.  A definite command structure isn’t optional, it is necessary.  I haven’t ever been in the military, but I gather that it is the same there and they are having similar problems.  Put another way, males don’t go into a female dominated industry and expect the incumbents to stop their girly gossiping etc. which I think is much more destructive to a company (my previous employer mentioned in the first paragraph is a case in point).  Women should be able to work in oil and gas.  But things are done the way they are for a reason.  Please don’t use that as a reason to change something that was working.  And please don’t take my comments at anything but face value – I have worked with plenty of women who are as bad or worse than I am, and I have worked with plenty of men who are pussies.

Did a half to full day activity where we traveled to Sky Adventures Arenal Park where you can see rain forest, cloud forest and the Arenal volcano (very active up until 2010).

We did a three hour walk followed by a trip on their gondola. Both well worth doing.

The gondola going up through the canopy.

This was fascinating. It was a moth which got infected by a fungus. The fungus turns the moth into a zombie under its control and eventually kills it.

A view from the top of the gondola.

Going through the canopy.

One of the many types of butterflies they have.

This is a very small pit viper.

One of the two waterfalls we saw. You can see the more adventurous types trying to climb it.

Lots of these unusual trees around.

Can’t recall the name of this bird but lovely colouring.

A somewhat larger pit viper!

This is a photo of a tarantula in its hole. Quite glad it didn’t come out to complaint about the light.

Typical part of the path.

A fairly huge stick insect.

One of the dozen or so bridges we crossed on the walk. Amazing views from them.

Stuff reports:

A promising young rugby star has avoided conviction after punching his ex’s date in the head.

Teariki Ben-Nicholas debuted for New Zealand’s under-20 team at the Oceania junior champs last year.

The No 8 also plays senior club rugby in Wellington and for the Hurricanes under-20 team.

Ben-Nicholas moved from Auckland to Wellington to study law and commerce.

According to court documents released to The Herald, Ben-Nicholas was out drinking in Wellington, following a “rugby success” in October 2014 when he found out his ex girlfriend was at a Wellington bar with her new boyfriend.

A “slightly intoxicated” Ben-Nicholas went to the bar, approached the other man in the toilets and punched him in the head.

The 20-year-old admitted a charge of common assault in relation to the incident and made a “full and genuine apology” during a restorative justice meeting, The Herald reported.

At sentencing in the Wellington District Court, Judge Peter Rollo granted an application for a discharge without conviction.

Judge Rollo said the consequences of a conviction would be out of proportion to the seriousness of the offence.

However, police opposed the application for a discharge, arguing the assault was serious and any effects on travel plans and work as a professional rugby player were not certain.

During last month’s sentencing Judge Rollo said: “The information which is before me suggests that you have every opportunity to pursue a professional rugby career at the top level, maybe even rising as far as the All Blacks if your development continues.”

This is pretty appalling.

It was an unprovoked assault, due to jealousy. He should get a conviction for that.

If he really is a good rugby player, he’ll be able to travel to play for a top team. It just means they’ll need to get a visa. An assault conviction is not an automatic travel ban.

The judiciary is far too happy to let criminals off without a conviction if they are a sportsperson.

Saddened to read that David Bowie has died, and surprised to realise he was 69 years old.

I recall especially well his single The Laughing Gnome, as that was my nickname at school!

Also thought he made a great goblin king in Labyrinth.

An incredibly versatile and enduring entertainer. He will be missed.

“The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest amount of feathers with the least possible amount of hissing” 

– Jean-Baptiste Colbert

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.

Just done my monthly polling newsletter.

This graph of the last three years is quite telling. National is polling around 5% higher than three years ago and Labour around 5% lower.

After the amusement parks in Los Angeles we headed to Costa Rica for a week. Spent three days in the Arenal region which has a volcano and rainforest. Stayed at the Royal Corin Hotel which was quite amazing, especially for the price.

My mobile office in Arenal – our balcony.

A view of the pools from our room.

And a slightly wider view.

The restaurant will bring you lunch to you poolside. Great food.

This is Valentino, an iguana who hangs around the hotel. He’s around 40 cm long.

They have three large pools, plus four jacuzzis and a couple of private pools for spa clients.

A view of the gardens.

Poolside shade.

This was not at the hotel, but a few kms down the road. Around 20 to 25 crocodiles have set up home by a bridge. You really really do not want to dive off this bridge.

The Herald editorial:

This is a serious and urgent request of whomever is running the Government in the Prime Minister’s absence. Please fly the proposed new flag from the Auckland Harbour Bridge, either on one pole alongside the existing flag, or on both poles.

We will be voting on them in just two months and it is vital to see the proposed alternative in action before we can decide.

Until we see how it looks fluttering in a breeze, lying limp and performing in various conditions, we cannot know whether its design really “works”.

I agree. Both the current flag and the alternative one offer should fly. Having New Zealanders seeing them on flagpoles will better allow for an informed vote.