Stuff reports:

What’s this? Detente? Or has Christmas cheer arrived early for our politicians?

As Parliament met for the last time this year, Prime Minister John Key finally backed down and gave a heartfelt apology for tarring Labour as the party that “backs rapists”.

Labour leader Andrew Little rose in return to apologise for criticising Speaker David Carter as being too partisan.

The dual apologies was a nice end.

Smart politics on Labour’s part also. The privilege complaint against Little was for saying that the Speaker is too partisan, but a very specific allegation that he conspired with the Government to disqualify his members’ bill.

As the Clerk of the House had revealed that he had advised the Speaker that the bill should be disqualified (as it was near identical to another one that had been voted on this year), then Little was facing the unedifying possibility of a hearing where he either has to call the Clerk a liar, or admit he made the conspiracy theory up. So it is a smart move to make it go away.

A demob happy Steven Joyce delivered chocolate santas around the press gallery.

Even Annette King’s two fingered salute to Health Minister Jonathan Coleman was done in good humour.

It all felt like a strangely cheerful end to what has been a particularly toxic political year.

 Even the spectators who dropped paper from the public gallery onto the heads of MPs seated below them seemed to enter into the spirit of things. They were there to protest the Trans-Pacific Partnership. But from a distance, the paper could have passed for confetti. 

Stuff reports:

The Prime Minister’s decision to send troops to Iraq will come back to bite New Zealand, says Labour’s foreign affairs spokesman David Shearer.

On Monday John Key disputed the notion that Kiwi troops training the Iraqi army had increased the chances of a terrorist attack in New Zealand by Islamic State, also known as Isis and Isil.

But Shearer, a former United Nations worker who has lived and worked in the Baghdad green zone in Iraq, said there was no doubt it would have a direct effect.

“Russia started bombing and it got an airliner blown up, France started talking about bombing and there was an attack on Paris. Of course there’s cause an effect.”

How appalling. Blaming the countries that are victims.

Hey Germany would have left us alone in WWII if we hadn’t joined the Allies. Thank God the 1st Labour Government has a better sense of good and evil.

Islamic State wants to create a global caliphate. They see all other countries as the enemy. Labour’s policy is to do nothing at all about Islamic State.

Tunisia has been attacked by Islamic State adherents. They don’t have any troops in Iraq or Syria, so how does Labour explain them being attacked? I think it is because they are the only Arab democracy.

There have been 102 (yes 102) Islamic terrorist attacks around the world so far in 2015. Does Labour really think it will never occur in NZ, regardless of whether we have trainers in Iraq?

Here’s the list of countries that have had an Islamic terrorist attack, just in 2015:

• Afghanistan
• Iraq
• Nigeria
• France
• Egypt
• Pakistan
• Denmark
• Tunisia
• Libya
• Somalia
• Kenya
• Saudi Arabia
• Bosnia
• US
• Turkey
• Kuwait
• West Bank
• Cameroon
• Australia
• Chad
• Russia
• Lebanon
• Philippines
• Mali
• Yemen

News.com.au reports:

FANS of Quentin Tarantino’s Kill Bill series can rejoice with news the much-loved director has not ruled out a third entry into the franchise.

A third Kill Bill volume has been talked about since the original two films were released in 2003 and 2004.

Tarantino even revealed his plan to set the third film ten years later, based around the child of Vernita Green, one of the assassins killed in the original films.

“I was going to do a new one every ten years. But I need at least fifteen years before I do this again. I’ve already got the whole mythology: Sofie Fatale will get all of Bill’s money. She’ll raise Nikki, who’ll take on The Bride. Nikki deserves her revenge every bit as much as The Bride deserved hers.”

Can’t wait. I loved Part I – one of my all time favourite movies.

Liam Hehir writes:

Elite political newsletter Trans-Tasman has named David Seymour its “Politician of the Year”. Seymour, who is the leader of the ACT Party and its sole MP, is said to have played a blinder and to have proved his doubters wrong. In giving him the title, the newsletter editors said they were surprised at “the degree to which he seems to have made ACT a potential vote winner again”.

It’s hard to think of a better example of the disconnect that exists between New Zealand’s political commentators and the voters.

It’s certainly true that, in many ways, Seymour has done very well. As the champion of our right to gather in pubs to watch Rugby World Cup matches, he managed to strike a pose that was both popular and libertarian. His earnest manner, together with his support for bien-pensant causes like the Red Peak flag and assisted suicide, has largely defused the hostility he could ordinarily expect from the liberal punditry, whose default setting would be to tar him as a Right-wing fiend.

He has also proven a stable and reliable support partner for the Government and, by all accounts, has worked well as parliamentary under-secretary to the Minister of Education and Minister of Regulatory Reform.

But while all of this might have been terribly impressive, one thing David Seymour has singularly failed to achieve is improving the standing of his party with the people who really count – ordinary voters. In the 2014 general election in which he limped in to Parliament, ACT received just 0.69 per cent of the vote. And yet despite Seymour’s supposedly outstanding year, the last five public polls (as recorded by Curia Market Research) have shown ACT registering just 0.5 per cent, 0.2 per cent, 0.5 per cent, 0.5 per cent and 0.6 per cent support in the party vote stakes.

Hehir is right that ultimately performance is judged by voters at elections, and prior to that in the polls.

But I think it is all about timing and foundations. I don’t expect ACT to poll above 1% until an election campaign. That is when people will really focus on whether to change their vote.

What Seymour is doing is changing ACT’s brand from negative to positive, so that potential voters may choose them again. That won’t show up for some time. They’re still at the foundation building stage.

It gives me no pleasure to write this. On an intellectual level I am probably closer to David Seymour than John Key when it comes to the economy and the importance of private property. But while he may have done a good job impressing some journalists in the past year, the people he really needs to make a mark on are actual voters. There is no sign of his having done that yet.

Favourable impressions with journalists and pundits can help with the voters eventually.

To me, there can really be only one contender for the title of Politician of the Year: Winston Raymond Peters. Again, this gives me no pleasure. In my opinion, he is an economic xenophobe who would make the country poorer. Time and time again, he has shown himself to be an untrustworthy cynic.

So I was feeling a bit hopeful when he started to look like he had lost his mojo in 2014. That was the year in which he turned in a parliamentary confrontation with the prime minister over the Oravida issue that was so befuddled and confused that it virtually allowed the Government to draw a line under the scandal and move on.  More than a few people asked if we were seeing the beginning of the end for one of New Zealand’s most outspoken politicians.

They’re not asking that any more.

Ever since Peters stole the Northland seat in a by-election this year, he has all but guaranteed himself a starring role in the next election. Assuming he can hold on to the electorate, he has essentially managed to take out an insurance policy against the tyranny of the party vote threshold. In the event that an improving Labour starts eating into the NZ First party vote (which I consider likely), he will still be around to play the kingmaker.

He thought he would be kingmaker in 2014, and he wasn’t. If National can get 45% or better in 2017 and ACT get over 2% (three MPs) then he probably won’t be Kingmaker in 2017. If he is Kingmaker, I hope he chooses Labour, so they can be a one term Government.

Stuff reports:

Kitteridge told the committee there had been a rise in the number of New Zealand women travelling to Syria and Iraq.

“It’s something we haven’t seen before.”

Key said after the committee there was “no question one or two people have left” for Syria and they and were known to have engaged in weddings “effectively at the very last minute”.

How sad for them. They tend to end up dead or as slaves.

Kitteridge said after the committee hearing the numbers leaving from New Zealand were small but significant – but declined to give further details.

But she confirmed it was fewer than a dozen. Their plight was a worry, however.

“Obviously I’d be concerned whatever they’re doing in a war zone of that kind so there would be a really significant concern about what they’re being exposed to, the kind of conditions that they’re in, their ability to get away if they want, or how heavily radicalised or exposed to acts of barbarism they might be seeing.

“So for a whole range of reasons its a real concern to us.”

My concern is if they return.

A wacky and funny 90 minutes Christmas production at Bats Theatre.

The Bacchanals produce a fast moving, self deprecating show which is a combination of A Christmas Carol and Dr Who.

It starts with Bri and David playing themselves, having a lonely meal. Bri just wants a fridge for Christmas, or maybe even David. David though wants something else – a robot. He designs one, and calls it Bri. How does human Bri and robot Bri get on? What happens when human Bri also builds a robot?

As a huge fan of Isaac Asimov, I was pleased they referenced his three (or four) laws of robotics, namely:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

Bri alters the first one though to be “A robot may not injure a human being, unless they are a dick“. Is this significant?

Eventually the two main robots get joined by a cast of many, including C3P0 and a Dalek. Also Father Christmas appears.

There’s lot of in jokes – at themselves, at Circa, at Ray Henwood, at Theateview. They break the fourth wall continually, and engage the audience.

For most of the show you wonder if it is a series of gags, but in the final scenes they bring it together well with a nice moral message.

I found it a great way to unwind at the end of a working week. Recommended for anyone who likes youthful humour and robots.

Rating: ****

The Herald reports:

The case has caused some division within the union. The Herald understands the PPTA Onehunga High School branch approved a motion supporting the Teach First programme, and objecting to the PPTA’s legal action.

The branch chair could not be reached for comment, and principal Deidre Shea referred questions on Teach First to the ministry.

PPTA president Angela Roberts said she was aware of some concerns and could understand why some members felt the union had been “a bit heavy-handed”.

I suspect Onehunga High School is one of those schools that has Teach First graduates and has found them wonderful. It is no surprise they would be unhappy with the PPTA’s lawsuit.

The New Statesman reports:

Jermy Corbyn stunned attendees at the party’s Christmas party by quoting Enver Hoxha, the Albanian dictator who served as chairman of the Democratic Front of Albania and commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces from 1944 until his death in 1985. 

Dubbing Hoxha a “tough ruler”, Corbyn quoted Hoxha’s phrase that “this year will be tougher than last year”. Hoxha is believed to have imprisoned, tortured and imprisoned at least 100,000 Albanians during his reign. 

Hoxha’s rule saw one in three Albanians incarcerated in labour camps or interrogated by the secret police. Travel abroad was banned, beards were banned and up to 25,000 people were executed for political crimes. Torture was commonly used.

Economically he turned Albania into the poorest country in Europe.

Meanwhile Corbyn’s leadership of the Stop the War coalition (he has resigned as patron, but remains active) remains a big issue, after they blamed the Paris attacks on Western foreign policy. They’re so toxic now, that even the Green MP Caroline Lucas has pulled out of them.

The Herald reports:

Private prison operator Serco’s contract to run the troubled Mt Eden Corrections Facility will not be renewed.

The company’s contract is up for review, and Corrections chief executive Ray Smith has recommended that it should not be extended beyond next year.

The Herald understands that the Cabinet has now approved Mr Smith’s recommendation.

This is the good thing about contracts – if a supplier doesn’t perform, their contract doesn’t get renewed.

The order paper is here.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

1. METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that “I will lead a Government that will govern for all New Zealanders”?
2. ALASTAIR SCOTT to the Minister of Finance: What progress has the Government made on its priority of delivering better public services in 2015?
3. ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: What actions, if any, is his Government planning for New Zealanders about to celebrate Christmas who are among the growing number of unemployed, or living in unhealthy rental housing, or trying to buy their own home, or waiting for vital surgery, or needing a life-saving medicine?
4. ANDREW BAYLY to the Minister for ACC: What recent announcements has the Government made regarding ACC levies?
5. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by all his statements?
6. IAN McKELVIE to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: How is the Government encouraging young people to study offshore and develop international linkages?
7. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?
8. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement in Budget 2015 that unemployment is expected to fall below 5 percent in 2016, and that economic growth on average will be 2.8 percent over the next four years?
9. Dr PARMJEET PARMAR to the Minister for Social Development: How does the Child Hardship Package help families on a benefit?
10. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister for the Environment: What specific action will he take to clean up waterways such as Lake Tutira whose algal blooms are so toxic that children have been banned from boating and kayaking there?
11. STUART SMITH to the Minister for the Environment: What improvements in water quality has the Government achieved from its Fresh Start for Fresh Water budget allocations?
12. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: Does he agree with the New Zealand Herald report that the “student funding scandal” is “the result of a funding crunch intersecting with a reporting and monitoring system that operates largely on trust”; if not, why not?

National: Five questions on better public services, ACC levies, offshore study, family support and water quality

Labour: Four questions on PM’s actions, Health Ministers statements, unemployment, and student funding scandals

Greens: Two questions on PM’s statements and water quality

NZ First: One question on PM standing by his statements

Government Bills 3.00 pm to 4.30 pm

Statutes Amendment Bill – first reading

This Statutes Amendment Bill consists entirely of amendments to Acts and is therefore an omnibus Bill that may be introduced by virtue of Standing Order 262(1)(f).

• Introduced: October 2015

The first reading is a debate of 12 speeches of up to 10 minutes each so a maximum debate of two hours. However it is expected to be a shorter debate.

Subordinate Legislation Confirmation Bill – second and third readings

This bill has two closely related purposes: to confirm, or confirm and validate, subordinate legislation that will lapse at a specified time unless it is earlier confirmed, or confirmed and validated, by an Act of Parliament; and to replace with standard provisions in the Legislation Act 2012, but not alter the subordinate legislation covered by, all existing confirmation provisions.

• Introduced: June 2015
• 1st reading: July 2015, passed unanimously
• SC report: November 2015, supported unanimously with amendments

The second and third readings are debates of 12 speeches of up to 10 minutes each so a maximum debate of two hours each. However it is expected to be a shorter debate.

Adjournment Debate 4.30 pm to 6.00 pm

A resolution to adjourn the House until Tuesday 9 February 2016

A 90 minute debate of 18 speeches of five minutes each.

A very useful post on Facebook by Pharmac build members Jens Mueller:

Let me see if I can help with some of the background to the discussion of whether PHARMAC should make its own decisions as to the funding of new, expensive and largely unproven-but-promising medicines, or be overridden by political agendas. Firstly, everyone at Pharmac wants to do the right thing. The more than 150 people working there, supported by more than 100 specialist clinicians in NZ and overseas, and the community advisory members throughout this country, ALL want to see New Zealanders have access to the best medicines.

Secondly, the money Pharmac spends comes from the DHBs, not from some slush fund politicians have available to shower over the country in momentary benevolence, and so the $900 Million Pharmac spends each year to buy medicines that would otherwise cost us more than $7 Billion on the open market, comes from the same fund that serves all DHB patients nationwide. If Pharmac spends more money that it has been allocated (a sum that increased well over the past 8 years), it comes from the money DHBs have for their patient care work. Note that this is an environment where No One, Never has All the money they would want to cure All ills.

Thirdly, decisions made by Pharmac are not made by administrators, but based on expert advise by highly esteemed clinicians in their field, who give time, in many cases a lot of time, to evaluate research submitted by drug makers, to review patient histories and to determine which medicine offers better outcomes than those we might already have, or other competing ones. When I contrast these serious efforts with the hype from commercial marketing firms working on behalf of the pharmaceutical makers of new drugs, I know where I would place my trust!

Fourthly, once Pharmac makes a decision to fund a medicine for a specific illness, it must make the same medicine available for all patients of the same illness, and it cannot withdraw after a year or so ‘because it hasn’t worked’. Anything else would simply not be fair and just. That means a decision to fund a $150,000 medicine for one patient for one year, means that the other 200+ patients with the same illness, and then for the lifespan of the patients, possible a decade or more, get the same access. This means a $150,000/patient/year decisions means that there is a flow-on effect of more than $100 Million, which is money otherwise used for new investments for thousands of New Zealanders for other medicines. To put this in perspective, Pharmac, in the 5 years I have served on the Board, has never made a decision to not fund a medicine solely on fiscal grounds. The primary reason to decline funding for the few exceptionally costly applications we get each year has always been based on expert advise that the benefits are either overstated by the pharmaceutical marketing firms, or not yet proven to the point of being expected as a standard, or that an equivalently effective medicine is already available.

Fifth and last, we do not make decisions to decline funding lightly. Board meetings are intense, and decisions are based on substantial submissions from the medical expert advisors. We read every line of the hundreds of pages of submissions for each meeting, and we understand the suffering of some, when their lives are affected by illnesses for which there is no conventional treatment. It has happened that our CEO and staff have travelled to the home of a patient’s family to explain personally how the process works, and why we have declined to fund. It has happened that we have referred our decision-making process to an external independent arbitrator to make sure we have a pathway in place that is transparent and fair.

This is a country where we stand together often. We have a high rate of volunteers who support thousands of causes. In health, we have thens of thousands of non-profit staff supporting our patients. Pharmac is all about doing the best job, a world class job, for ALL New Zealanders, including but-not-only those few who might be struck by a devastating illness and believe only a newly advertised medicine might help. When the TPPA opponents made Pharmac an ill-informed argument for their cries, doctors, patients, and many others rallied to support Pharmac. When the TPPA trade negotiators pushed the whole agreement to the wire for not agreeing to any degradation of the Pharmac operation, the country as a whole was relieved. It is this spirit of community that helps Pharmac do its job, free from the momentary swings of opinion, but rooted firmly on an impartial assessment of clinical science, need and outcomes.

It is an organization I believe in full-heartedly, and I have great admiration for our outstanding staff, who make incredibly challenging decisions every day – knowing that they affect the well-being of nearly 5 Million New Zealanders.

Thank you.
Prof Dr Dr Jens Mueller, MNZM, Pharmac Board Member since 2010
(and this is not an official communication from Pharmac, it is my personal view).

I’ve bolded the parts that I think are most pertinent. Good to see a board member engaging the public.

Stuff profiles the MP to be:

New Zealand’s newest Member of Parliament Maureen Pugh is excited to be going back to Parliament after being ousted after only two weeks last year.

Pugh, from Turiwhate, near Kumara on the West Coast, entered Parliament in the last election as number 52 on National’s list, but lost her seat after the special votes were counted.

This week, she got the call that she was back in after the departure of both Mike Sabin earlier this year and Tim Groser’s resignation this week pushed her up to 50th on the list.

Pugh, 57, is a proud Coaster and started in politics back in 1998 while was working in Kumara at the service station.

“I served in the shop and pumped gas and got to meet a lot of people. The Kumara ward had failed to find enough candidates and everyone who came into the garage that I thought would be suitable I would tell them to stand, and everybody was too busy or too afraid or couldn’t be bothered. So on the last day I put my name down,” she says.

She stayed with the Council for 15 years, with three terms as Westland mayor and chairwoman with Local Government New Zealand and 12 years as a member of the Public Health Organisation.

From pumping gas to being the Mayor.

Pugh has two sons, Shane, 40 and Taye 39, and six grandchildren living in Queensland and Christchurch.

Her husband John, 58, is a building contractor, and her parents still live on the Coast.

“We often apologise for being Coasters, we apologise for the rain, we apologise for the sandflies but we’ve got to get over that. I’m so proud to be a Coaster. Without that rain we don’t have this green, this green that is so lusted after by the rest of the country and other countries. All of that comes from the rain, it’s a liquid gold, it’s the new gold,” she says. 

She was sick of seeing bad news coming out of the Coast — Pike River, accidents, job losses — so with a friend set up a Facebook page called The Coasters Club, which only has positive stories about celebrating people on the West Coast.

She hopes to gain improvements to the Coast, particularly the Buller community which has suffered huge job losses. 

“Government can’t deliver everything to every community but they can deliver information technology and better roads to enable progress. I’m a real champion of the roads. They enable development.”

I’m sure the West Coast will appreciate having another MP in Parliament.

The Guardian reports:

French mainstream politicians have struggled to come up with a response to what one analyst described as the “major hangover” of a historic victory by the Front National in the first round of regional elections.

While the far-right had been predicted to do well, the FN’s record score of almost 28% of the national vote and first place in six of the country’s 13 regions by Sunday night left the traditional parties reeling.

The governing Socialist party came third as expected, but analysts agreed on Monday that the main loser was the centre-right opposition party Les Républicains, led by the former president Nicolas Sarkozy.

The Socialists announced they would withdraw their candidates in regions where the party was trailing and urge supporters to vote tactically to form a “Republican front” to see off the Front National in the second round this coming Sunday.

The results were:

• National Front 27.7% (+16.3%)
• Union of the Right 26.7% (+0.6%)
• Union of the Left 23.1% (-6.0%)
• Greens 6.6% (-5.6%)

The FN look likely to end up in control of two of 13 regions. What is fascinating is they got 55% of the working class vote, compared to 15% for the socialists.

Stuff reports:

Meanwhile Labour leader Andrew Little said there needed  to be a proper commemoration of the land wars.

“If we can find a space to have a public holiday I wouldn’t disagree with that either. We are at a time when more and more New Zealanders are comfortable about coming to terms with history both the good and the bad” including remembering the large loss of life in the wars, estimated at about 2750 including 2000 Maori.

Little said he would not rule out a public holiday.

“The first step is to say ‘let’s recognise it let’s have a formal commemoration’. And If we can find a space and a way to honour it, through a public holiday as we do for other conflicts that have led to mass deaths, then I wouldn’t rule it out.” That could include marking other conflicts and historical events, such as the assault on Parihaka.

Options raised for a public holiday that could be replaced have included the various regional holidays, Queen’s Birthday and Labour Day.

Little said many enjoyed their regional holiday, and he wasn’t going to suggest Queen’s Birthday be substituted out “because I said that before once”, but substituting an existing holiday was one option.

He said small businesses could gain from an extra holiday because people went out and spent more. “The economics of it pretty much favours small business.” 

Oh dear. I don;t think Andrew has ever run a small business. First of all he seem to think that every small business is a retailer. Around 25,000 small businesses are retailers. Around 350,000 are not. So the first fail.

The second is that he think any extra business will compensate for paying your staff two and a half times normal rates. It won’t.

And the third is he think people spending more on a public holiday is all new spending rather than just transferring spending that would happen at some other time.

But if this is the economic genius of Labour, why stop at one more public holiday a year to help small businesses. Let’s have an extra public holiday every week – that will be a gold rush of extra money for small businesses.

And people wonder why Labour re not trusted with the economy.

Over 1,100 votes were cast last week in the 2015 Kiwiblog Awards. The results are:

• 2015 Press Gallery Journalist of the Year – John Armstrong wins on 43% followed by Claire Trevett 24%, Jessica Williams 18% and Barry Soper 15%
• 2015 Minor Party Politician of the Year – David Seymour wins on a massive 78% followed by Winston Peters 11%, James Shaw 8%, Marama Fox 3%
• 2015 National Party MP of the Year – Bill English wins on 59% followed by John Key 42%
• 2015 Labour Party MP of the Year – Kelvin Davis has a crushing win on 85% followed by Andrew Little 15%
• 2015 MP of the Year – is David Seymour on 46%, then John Key 28% and Bill English 26%

Congratulations to David twice, Kelvin, Bill and John.

The winners over time have been:

Press Gallery Journalists – John Armstrong x2, Katie Bradford, Andrea Vance, Rodney Hide, Guyon Espiner, Audrey Young, Fran O’Sullivan

Minor Party Politicians – David Seymour x 2, Hey Clint, Russel Norman, John Boscawen, Tariana Turia, Rodney Hide, Heather Roy

National MPs – Bill English x4, John Key, Steven Joyce x2, Chris Finlayson

Labour MPs – Kelvin Davis x 2, Shane Jones, David Cunliffe, Grant Robertson, Phil Goff, John Key, Winston Peters

MP of the Year – David Seymour, John Key x3, Bill English, Russel Norman, Lockwood Smith, Rodney Hide

The Herald reports:

Being offered ministerial positions at the age of 32 was a huge honour, Act leader David Seymour says – but one he has nonetheless decided to turn down.

“I have got to get Act’s vote up by the next election. At the moment lots of people are saying nice things…but there is only one number that counts,” Mr Seymour said of his decision.

“It is a huge honour at 32, in your first year of Parliament to be offered a ministerial post…but I couldn’t do a lot more than I am doing now if I was made a minister. Being an under-secretary is quite a useful position. Well, at least that is my judgment.”

Not sure I can recall the last time someone who has never been a Minister turned down the opportunity. It can only help ACT and Seymour’s brand as being about policy, not baubles.

He told the Heraldthat, as well as rebuilding his party’s support, he wanted to ensure his member’s bill on End of Life Choice could progress, as “assisted dying is the kind of issue that brought me into politics”.

If he became a minister the voluntary euthanasia bill would have to be scrapped, and he was not confident any other MPs would put forward similar legislation.

I doubt anyone else would, sadly.

An interesting report at Politico:

Here’s how the game works: The negotiating framework established at a 2014conference in Lima, Peru, requires each country to submit a plan to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, called an “Intended Nationally Determined Contribution” (INDC). Each submission is at the discretion of the individual country; there is no objective standard it must meet or emissions reduction it must achieve.

Beyond that, it’s nearly impossible even to evaluate or compare them. Developing countries actually blocked a requirement that the plans use a common format and metrics, so an INDC need not even mention emissions levels.

And many don’t.

Or a country can propose to reduce emissions off a self-defined “business-as-usual” trajectory, essentially deciding how much it wants to emit and then declaring it an “improvement” from the alternative. To prevent such submissions from being challenged, a group of developing countries led by China and India has rejected“any obligatory review mechanism for increasing individual efforts of developing countries.”

So what will be the impact of Paris?

MIT’s Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change calculates the improvement by century’s end to be only 0.2 degrees Celsius.

I’ve seen others say it may be up to 0.7c

China, for its part, offered to reach peak carbon-dioxide emissions “around 2030” while reducing emissions per unit of GDP by 60-65 percent by that time from its 2005 level. But the U.S. government’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory had already predicted China’s emissions would peak around 2030 even without the climate plan. And a Bloomberg analysis found that China’s 60-65 percent target is less ambitious than the level it would reach by continuing with business as usual.

So China has a target that it is almost impossible not to make.

The INDCs covering actual emissions reductions are subjective, discretionary, and thus essentially unnegotiable. Not so the cash. Developing countries are expecting more than $100 billion in annual funds from this agreement or they will walk away. (For scale, that’s roughly equivalent to the entire OECD budget for foreign development assistance.)

And we’re put in $200 million.

Rich countries are bidding against themselves to purchase the developing world’s signature on an agreement so they can declare victory — even though the agreement itself will be the only progress achieved.

I think that is a bit harsh. I think having every country having a target, even weak ones, will be useful. If over the next decade the temperature gain is significant, then there will be greater pressure to strengthen the targets. It can be harder to get a country to have any target at all, than it is to strengthen it.

The Herald reports:

Auckland business boss Victoria Crone has ranked the city’s biggest challenges as rates rises, traffic and housing and revealed she will announce next week whether she will stand for mayor.

In her first media interview on major Auckland issues, the Xero managing director was frank on concerns about the city’s direction, leadership and its inability to grasp or take advantage of significant technological changes. …

“There are multiple issues for Auckland’s citizens: rates increases, traffic in terms of congestion and public transport, and housing affordability. I think the public is very dissatisfied with the level of rate increases. I don’t feel the city has used technology or innovation to solve some of its major problems,” she said, referring to remote workplaces, which she said was a major global trend.

“We can be setting up trials and programmes between the public and private enterprise.”

She also wants Auckland to examine driverless buses and car technology to ease road congestion.

“International research shows you can shift [traffic] volumes 50 to 100 times faster with driverless vehicles. It’s not about saying we’re going to solve it tomorrow, but where is the thinking in the next five to 10 years? I’m not sure we’re looking strongly at future innovations. I think there’s plenty of opportunities,” she said.

On the controversial port issue, Crone indicated she wanted facilities moved from the CBD. “There are two aspects to the port: cars and the port and secondly the question has to be asked of what city has a major port in prime land? It needs a look.”

Under Len the Port seemed to be running the Council. Would be nice to have it the other way around!

Victoria Crone

Position: Managing director of technology company Xero
Age: 42
Lives: In an Auckland apartment and at Muriwai
Family: Single. Daughters Megan, 15, Mackenzie, 11
Interests: Multisport and triathlon events, kayaking.

Victoria was eight years old when Phil Goff became an MP.

The order paper is here.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

1. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister of Finance: What upcoming announcements will the Government deliver on the economic and fiscal outlook?
2. ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in all his Ministers?
3. METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?
4. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: Does he condone the action of KiwiRail in closing bridge 143 over the North Auckland Line, thereby severing the connection between two parts of the property owned by Owen Clements?
5. ANDREW LITTLE to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by the Prime Minister’s statement in relation to the lack of Pharmac funding for Keytruda that “we’ve got to give health more money”, given his Government has cut health funding in real terms by $1.7 billion?
6. SIMON O’CONNOR to the Minister for Social Housing: What recent announcements has she made about community housing providers increasing social housing supply in Auckland?
7. KELVIN DAVIS to the Minister of Corrections: Does he agree with former Minister of Corrections Judith Collins that “Serco has a strong track record in manging prisons. I’m confident that the company will bring the high standards of professionalism, safety, rehabilitation and security expected by the Government to Mt Eden”?
8. MARAMA DAVIDSON to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: Will New Zealand join Canada, Australia, Tuvalu and the 43 other low-lying islands, and support the inclusion of a goal to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees in the Paris climate agreement; if not, why not?
9. STUART NASH to the Minister of Police: Does he have concerns that the Police’s planned new Human Resources Management Information System has been classified by Treasury as having “major risks or issues apparent in a number of key areas”?
10. SCOTT SIMPSON to the Minister of Education: What recent announcement has she made on driver licences in schools?
11. POTO WILLIAMS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement “you back the rapists” during question time on 10 November 2015?
12. ALFRED NGARO to the Minister of Justice: What new projects has she asked the Law Commission to begin in 2016?

National: Four questions on the economy, social housing, driver licenses and Law Commission projects

Labour: Five questions on PM confidenc in Ministers, Keytruda, Serco, Police and PM’s statement on backing rapists

Greens: Two questions on PM standing by his statements and climate change

NZ First: One question on Kiwirail

Government Bills 3.00 pm to 6.00 pm and 7.30 pm to 10.00 pm

New Zealand Public Health and Disability (Southern DHB) Elections Bill – first reading

http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/legislation/bills/00DBHOH_BILL67988_1/new-zealand-public-health-and-disability-southern-dhb

• Introduced: December 2015

The first reading is a debate of 12 speeches of up to 10 minutes each so a maximum debate of two hours

Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill – first reading

http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/legislation/bills/00DBHOH_BILL67988_1/new-zealand-public-health-and-disability-southern-dhb

• Introduced: December 2015

The first reading is a debate of 12 speeches of up to 10 minutes each so a maximum debate of two hours

Taxation (Residential Land Withholding Tax, GST on Online Services, and Student Loans) Bill – first reading

http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/legislation/bills/00DBHOH_BILL67988_1/new-zealand-public-health-and-disability-southern-dhb

• Introduced: November 2015

The first reading is a debate of 12 speeches of up to 10 minutes each so a maximum debate of two hours

Stuff reports:

An “anti-farming” animal rights charity is “applying human emotions on to animals” with their global anti-cruelty campaign, a dairy farmer says.

Federated Farmers Manawatu-Rangitikei president and dairy farmer James Stewart said he was disgusted by the recently released video of abuse to bobby calves, but said the practice of separating a calf from its mother, highlighted in the international ad, is simply the reality of dairy farming.

Yep.

SAFE are a New Zealand-based animal rights charity. 

Prime Minister John Key sad the ad was “a form of economic sabotage.”

“If you were to take an ad in New Zealand at least you could make the case you’re trying to influence other law makers and the New Zealand public. To take an ad in an international paper – what end is that other than to try and stop consumers buying our products?” he said. 

Also yep.

Farmer Stewart said the industry needed to stamp out the abuse seen in the video, but defended the practice of removing calves from their mothers at birth as a global standard.

“It’s mainly the male calves. Obviously on dairy farms it’s the female calves you are mainly interested in, to breed as replacement calves. We have no need to rear bull calves,” he said.

“What seems like a cruel practice is a reality of dairy farming. I’m sorry but that’s what we have to do.”

“[SAFE] are all about problems but there’s no solutions. Their solution is stop farming animals. That’s all well and good but it’s not what the market wants.”

“They’re imposing their veganist views on us all.”

That gets to it. SAFE doesn’t want any farming at all.

AP report:

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump says he is calling for a “complete and total shutdown” on Muslims entering the United States.

Trump says in a statement released by his campaign Monday that his proposal comes in response to the level of hatred among “large segments of the Muslim population” toward Americans.

Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski says Trump’s proposed ban would apply to “everybody,” including Muslims seeking immigration visas as well as tourists seeking to enter the country.

So no Muslims as migrants or tourists. And presumably no diplomats from other countries can be Muslims so half the embassies must close. Tim Groser is a Muslim, so he would be banned. And no visits from Heads of States that are Muslims. And of course the logical next step is to tattoo Muslims in the US so they can be identified and deported.

You expect this sort of call from the fringe of politics, but not from the leading US contender for the republican nomination.

Trump is going to destroy the Republican Party.

I quote the First Amendment to the US Constitution:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

Donald Trump would ban Malala Yousafzai from entering the US who won the Nobel Peace Prize for standing up to the Taliban!

Despite his lead in the polls, he must be recognising he doesn’t have a path to win the nomination, so he is getting desperate.

Stuff reports:

Wellington will host a combined convention centre and movie museum, with backers comparing it to a “Disneyland” in the capital.

Wellington City Council is expected to approve a land purchase for the $134.4 million project on Tuesday, hoping to give the region’s economy a multi-million dollar boost.

The three-storey building on Cable and Wakefield streets will include a 6000sqm convention centre on the top floor, capable of hosting 1100 people, and a 10,000sqm movie museum on the bottom two floors.

Sounds exciting. The movie museum is an awesome idea.

1,100 capacity for a convention centre seems pretty small. That’s around the same as the Michael Fowler Centre.

Construction will start next year and is expected to be completed by 2018.  

The Movie Museum Limited, a company formed Sir Peter Jackson and Sir Richard Taylor, will run the museum which will feature many props from the two Wellington film stalwarts own considerable collection.

Positively Wellington Venues will manage the convention centre.

Great. But will the rent they pay cover the interest on the $134 million? Not against a ratepayer contribution as both these facilities would attract tourism, but want to know how much.

Museum project Director George Hickton said it would draw from one of the most valuable collections of Hollywood memorabilia in the world, with thousands of the priceless designs, props, models and set pieces.

The museum will have permanent and temporary exhibition spaces, a retail shop, cafe and permanent offices.

Again sounds great.

A new convention centre was needed because existing facilities in the city were aging, too small and often not available. 

True, but is 1,100 enough?

The project was already funded within the Long Term Plan but council would consult because the museum was being brought forward by four years. It would have no effect on the ratepayers, Wade-Brown said.

Council has said that the construction alone would provide 440 jobs, with another 568 ongoing jobs created by the centre.

The project was expected to contribute $36m per annum to the Wellington economy and attract about 350,000 visitors a year. 

Always have some scepticism over these projections, but I am sure both will be beneficial.