The Herald editorial:

A little over a year ago we learned a tertiary education provider, Te Whare Wananga o Awanuiarangi, had given the players and staff of the New Zealand Warriors league club an 18-week tourism course in one day. An investigation into such funding irregularities resulted in the institution returning $5.9 million to the Tertiary Education Commission.

Since then, investigations into six tertiary institutions, from Southland to the Bay of Plenty, have identified more than $25 million in misappropriation. One of them, we reported this week, has been stripped of its registration.

Why is this happening on such a scale? And how is it that only one of these places has been deregistered? On the face of it, this is fraud with public funds.

This is a reasonable question. If the only sanction for shall we say creative accounting is that you have to pay the money back, then these issues are likely to continue.However if the sanction is deregistration, then tertiary providers should be far more cautious.

It is well past time that when found out, these places face much greater penalties than merely handing back the money if they can. The Serious Fraud Office needs to make an example of someone. A salutary prosecution could wake up the sector to take its social responsibility seriously. It needs to ensure no course is a waste of money and everyone’s time.

If we prosecute people for stealing $1,000 from the Government, shouldn’t we do it if they steal $25 million?

CNN reports:

The action will keep the All-Russia Athletic Federation, the nation’s leading athletic association, out of international competition for an indefinite period that may include the2016 Summer Olympics in Brazil.

“This has been a shameful wake-up call and we are clear that cheating at any level will not be tolerated,” IAAF President Sebastian Coe said.

“Today we have been dealing with the failure of ARAF and made the decision to provisionally suspend them, the toughest sanction we can apply at this time,” Coe said. “But we discussed and agreed that the whole system has failed the athletes, not just in Russia, but around the world.”

The 24-1 vote was taken by teleconference. Russia was not allowed to vote

This is the right call, as noting short of this will convince the Russian Government that it needs to take action over drug cheating, rather than cover it up and facilitate it.

Very sad for the clean Russian athletes. They need to hope that enough changes occur so that they can compete in the Rio Olympics.

The Herald reports:

Isis has claimed responsibility for the coordinated terror attacks in Paris which killed at least 127 people, and warned that more will follow.

A statement released by the extremist group said it masterminded the horrifying attacks on the French capital in revenge for “insulting” the prophet Muhammad.

The terror group singled out France for its involvement in the bombing campaign against Isis territory in Iraq and Syria and said it murdered French citizens because the nation ‘boasted’ about its military contribution.

Some people may argue that the way to stop such attacks is to leave ISIS alone, and make it illegal to insult Muhammad. But they are fooling themselves as you’ll see further on:

It said an attack at the Bataclan Theatre, during a rock concert, was aimed at “idolaters” who were “together in a party of perversity” and said the French are Isis’ “principal targets”. …

“The targets included the Bataclan theatre for exhibitions, where hundreds of idolaters gathered for a concert of prostitution and vice.

So the 100 people who died at the rock concert were targeted because the Islamic extremists of ISIS think rock concerts are immoral, and that if you offend their definition of morality, it is justified by their God to kill you.

There is no reasoning or political response to such thinking. They can’t be appeased.

The killers didn’t just randomly shoot people at the concert. They executed people one by one, shooting them as they lay wounded on the floor. Even more sickening is that they targeted a group of concert goers in wheel chairs:

Miss Wilson, 49, originally from New Orleans, also told how she witnessed the gunmen deliberately targeting concert-goers in wheelchairs. The gunmen hunted down disabled people who were sat in an area specially set aside for wheelchair users.

In the last year or so we have seen Islamic terrorist attacks in France, Australia, UK, Canada and the US. Our risk profile is lower than those countries, but we are fooling ourselves if we think we are immune. Sadly it is probably inevitable that our time will come.  In 2015 there have been 59 Islamic terrorism attacks already.  They are growing rapidly in frequency. The annual numbers are:

• 1999 – 0
• 2000 – 4
• 2001 – 12
• 2002 – 35
• 2003 – 20
• 2004 – 28
• 2005 – 16
• 2006 – 8
• 2007 – 6
• 2008 – 7
• 2009 – 4
• 2010 – 14
• 2011 – 19
• 2012 – 14
• 2013 – 20
• 2014 – 35
• 2015 – 59 to 13 November

How to reduce the incidence is a question, there is no easy answer to. I’ll blog on options later this week.

USA Today reports:

Caddie Steve Williams said he had no idea using the word “slave” in his new autobiography to describe his relationship at times with Tiger Woods would trigger a storm of controversy that has spanned the globe.

After a New Zealand newspaper published an excerpt from his book, Out of the Rough, 10 days ago in which Williams said at times he felt he was treated “like I was his slave” while working for Woods, Williams has been heavily criticized.

It is estimated that Williams earned US$12 million while caddying for Williams. That’s not bad for having to pick his clubs up off the ground occasionally.

The Telegraph reports:

US official claims Islamic State jihadi ‘eviscerated’ as he left a building in Raqqa in a ‘clean hit’ drone strike as Pentagon try to get confirmation Mohammed Emwazi is dead

Eviscerated sounds good to me, if correct.

Hopefully Jeremy Corbyn will condemn it and call it a tragedy!

UPDATE: Almost. Corbyn said it would have been better too try him in court. He failed to explain how you arrest him and put him on trial!

The NZ Herald has an in depth feature on the Taxpayers’ Union second birthday.

My thoughts and tears are with France as Paris is under multiple attacks as I write this.

The death toll so far is thought to be at least 60, and there is at least one major hostage situation.

It is very clear that these were co-ordinated attacks by Islamic terrorists.  It is France’s 9/11 and Britain’s 7/7.

Eventually focus will go on the attackers, and how to prevent a reoccurence. But for now let us just hope the French Police can prevent the death toll going any higher, and catch those responsble.

It will be a terrifying time for the millions who live in Paris. They need to know the world stands with them.

The Daily Telegraph has very good up to date coverage.

UPDATE: President Hollande has declared a state of emergency through France

UPDATE2: Death toll now at least 153, including 112 at the Bataclan concert.  The sheer terror for those at the concert must be unimaginable. They went around executing people one by one.

Hospitality CEO Bruce Robertson writes:

They can be funny things, laws.

We may not always agree with all of them, but a civilised society requires clear laws to function.

Those laws should be fair and reasonable, reflect the views of citizens, and be easy to understand and obey.

This is not the case with the lower drink-drive limit, brought into effect in December last year.

It’s not the law that Hospitality New Zealand takes issue with. The real issue is that police and NZTA are purposely ignoring that the law means you can have a few drinks and drive.

Worse still, they are using scare tactics to promote public ignorance of how to stay within the law.

The role of police is not to make moral judgments. Their role is to enforce the laws put in place by Parliament and catch those who break them.

So let’s be absolutely clear – it is perfectly legal for an adult to have a drink and then drive.

The law is explicit about this. It’s also explicit that there are limits. But what do limits practically mean if no one understands them?

What’s the point when those legal limits are deliberately ignored and misinterpreted by the authorities?

That’s the nub of it – the police and NZTA should not be promoting their “interpretation” of the law. Their job is to make it clear how the law applies.

The police and the NZTA decided we couldn’t handle the law or the truth. Their campaigns do not “inform” us about the limit.

They say you should not drink anything because even a few drinks will push you over the limit. This is not true.

The key point is that we should know what the legal limit is, so we can make sure we don’t break the law.

Of course one should also exercise judgement about safeness to drive regardless of the law. But we do that anyway. If one feels tried, or thinks one may be overly affected by alcohol, you often get someone else to drive.

Our “rule of thumb” shows men can have three standard drinks over two hours and women two standard drinks over two hours.

By following this simple, easy-to-understand guide, the vast majority of adults will be easily under the lower limit.

That means you safely have a couple of after-work beers with mates, or a couple of glasses of wine with dinner  – just as the law intends (and despite what the police and NZTA would have you believe).

It’s important to note, too, that we didn’t simply pull these figures out of a hat.

The rule of thumb is based on analysis by the Institute of Environmental Science and Research (ESR), which fully supports it.

What’s more, our rule of thumb is even more conservative than ESR’s own recommendations. Three drinks will have most men easily within the limit.

It is conservative. A BAC calculator shows the following estimates for standard drinks to remain below 0.05 over two hours:

• Male 80 kgs – 4.2
• Male 70 kgs – 3.9
• Male 90 kgs – 4.5
• Female 60 kgs – 3.1
• Female 70 kgs – 3.4
• Female 80 kgs – 3.7

So the guidelines of 3 for men and 2 for women is pretty conservative.

Even a 30 kg woman will only get a BAC of 0.03 with two standard drinks over two hours.  And unless a male weighs under 45 kgs, three standard drinks will have them under 0.05. Of course there is some variation beyond weight and gender but the guideline of three and two for men and women looks very sensible.

Now you may argue that any alcohol is too much, and there is increased risk at below 0.05. Well here’s the official data on BAC levels in fatally injured drivers.

BAC of 31 to 50

• 2014 – 0/171
• 2013 – 0/164
• 2012 – 1/183
• 2011 – 3/183
• 2010 – 2/227
• 2009 – 1/238

Stuff reports:

A $35 million seaside path linking Wellington and the Hutt Valley has been confirmed.

The NZ Transport Agency announced on Friday it had plumped for the more expensive seaside route for a cycle and pedestrian pathway to finally unite the valley and the city, and siphon cyclists off the busy highway.

Consent applications were expected to be lodged next year and the agency would look to start construction on the pathway in 2019 at the latest.

Wellington Cycling Action Network spokesman Patrick Morgan said the decision was a long time coming, with calls for a cycleway mentioned in Hansard records from 1905.

“This ticks all the boxes, it’s going to be a great tourism asset, it’s going to ease traffic congestion and make parking easier in Wellington.”

He said the pathway would boost cycle safety by drawing riders away from the highway.

“Most people can’t travel between the Hutt and Wellington by bike, because they don’t want to mix with State Highway 2 traffic.”

There is a sort of cycleway at the moment but it is very narrow and stops 250 metres from Petone, on the wrong side of the road. So to get to Petone you have to then cycle into oncoming traffic!

A proper dedicated path for cycling, walking and running will be very popular.  Once it is built I’ll be brunching in Petone a lot more!

In a rare moment of motorist and cyclist unity, the Automobile Association’s motoring affairs general manager Mike Noon said the announcement was “very good news”.

“It’s extremely good news because the current route is inadequate and forcing people to ride on the road, which is a much higher risk.”

Agency central regional director Raewyn Bleakley said the preferred option would act as a buffer against events such as the 2013 storm that saw waves crashing onto the railway and highway, “contributing to massive disruption”, she said.

Frith said the extended seawall would prevent debris being blown inland from the sea and would be designed to “minimise sea spray and, where possible, to withstand environmental effects”.

“It will be well maintained to ensure it is kept clear of any hazards for cyclists. The result will be a far safer route for cyclists, and a more resilient rail and road corridor.”

So good for motorists also.

Pete Burdon blogs:

The comment John Key made in Parliament yesterday about rapists and child molesters has been taken out of context to make it sound worse than it was.

This post is not written to debate the rights or wrongs of the comment, but to point out what it actually meant in context. I was in the public gallery at the time.

The Prime Minister was asked what the Government was doing for the detainees. His response what that the best support was to get them back to NZ while awaiting their appeals. He added that it would take longer for some like rapists and murderers because he wanted to make sure that other New Zealanders on the same commercial flights as them were safe. That would take more time and could involve other options like chartering planes.

When this explanation was dismissed by opposition MPs, he said something like, “You can support the rapists and murderers, but I’m more concerned with the safety of other New Zealanders when they are coming home.”

In that context, it’s more understandable why he made the comment. He wasn’t talking about rapists and murderers generally, but only those who could potentially be a threat to other travellers. You would think that’s a sensible response, but judging by the response to his reasoning for the delays, Labour appeared to disagree with it. That led to his comment. This context has been left out of many media reports.

Hansard backs up this interpretation, if not the exact words:

Andrew Little: Which of his statements of earlier today is correct: his statement to Radio New Zealand that the New Zealand detainees are “free to leave” and “are staying there voluntarily” or his statement to reporters that the New Zealand detainees who wanted to leave face many weeks of delays in a remote detention centre before they can go anywhere?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: For a start, I did not make the last statement. What I did point out was that it depends on the circumstances. In terms of an individual, there are a number of factors that have to be considered: firstly, as I pointed out this morning, whether the person has travel documentation, a passport; secondly, whether the person has a history of violent or criminal activity; thirdly—

Hon Annette King: You said it was easy.

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: Well, it is not actually easy, because these people—some of them are rapists, some of them are child molesters, and some of them are murderers. These are the people whom the Labour Party is saying are more important to support than New Zealanders, who deserve protecting when they come back here.

Burdon is correct that the context is that Key was explaining that you just can’t out some of these people onto a commercial flight if they have a history of violent activity. Labour rubbished this, which is what Key responded to.

Later on he said:

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: We spent a considerable portion of the one-on-one meeting that we had with Malcom Turnbull talking about this issue. Two Ministers have gone to Australia to talk to Minister Dutton about this issue. I have raised this issue with Prime Minister Abbott. There have been considerable conversations going on. When it comes to these people coming home to New Zealand, they are free to come home, and we will allow them to come home and we will ensure that they can come home as long as they have the travel documentation. They cannot go on a commercial aircraft if they are violent or if they have mental health issues. I have a responsibility to the New Zealanders here at home that they are looked after. What the Labour Party is saying is: “To hell with the rest of New Zealanders; these people should be put on a commercial aircraft and despatched to New Zealand.” Well, you back the rapists; I—[Interruption]

So Key was focusing on Labour saying he should just be able to magically wave a wand and fly every detainee back here tomorrow. Key pointed out why that is not possible for ones who have serious violent offending, and his comments were aimed at that.

Stuff rates the James Bond actors from best to worst:

1. Daniel Craig
2. Sean Connery
3. Pierce Brosnan
4. Roger Moore
5. Timothy Dalton
6. George Lazenby

I’d rank them differently. My list would be:

1. Sean Connery
2. Daniel Craig
3. Roger Moore
4. Pierce Brosnan
5. George Lazenby
6. Timothy Dalton

UNGN reported:

“I understand that renegotiation may be difficult, particularly with so many parties involved,” Sen. Orrin Hatch said, adding, “The alternative to renegotiation may very well be no TPP at all.”

Republican U.S. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch said Friday that the Obama administration might have to renegotiate parts of the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, the text of which was released Thursday. …

Hatch said he was concerned that negotiators failed to secure 12 years of protection for next-generation biological drugs, which could push companies to leave the industry, make it more difficult for innovators to recover investments made in new products and leave Americans subsidizing cheaper medicines in other nations, according to Reuters.

Biological drugs are given a minimum of five years of data protection under the agreement, along with an extra buffer for administrative processes. The U.S. campaigned for 12 years of protection to ensure incentive for innovation, while Australia and New Zealand pushed for five years to give patients access to cheaper medicine, according to BioPharma Reporter.

Hatch said the U.S. should not have agreed to Australia’s “greedy” demands for a smaller monopoly period.

Do you remember Jane Kelsey telling us for years how the the NZ Government was going to sell us out to the US.

Here’s the reality. A top US Senator is saying that the Australian and New Zealand negotiators were too strong, and that the deal should be rejected because there is not enough in it for big US pharmaceutical companies.

If I was an Australian or NZ negotiator, I’d be rather pleased that a senior US Senator is saying you were too stubborn and got too good a deal for your own countries, at the expense of the US.

They’re behind Australia which has had an openly ginger Prime Minister!

Captions below. As always, funny, not nasty.

In June 2015 Labour declared milk prices (for consumers) were a crisis:

Kiwi families are paying over the top prices for their milk and someone is creaming off big profits, says Labour’s Consumer Affairs spokesperson David Shearer. …

“Milk has been an important daily staple for generations of New Zealanders. At a time when child obesity and diabetes are causing major problems in our health system, it seems perverse that Coca-Cola is now more affordable than fresh milk,” David Shearer says.

Incidentally it is not at all perverse that coke may be cheaper than milk. Coke is some syrup added to water. Milk has to be milked from cows, transported, pasteurized etc.

Anyway as always it doesn’t take long for Labour to declare something is a crisis or similar, and the problem goes away.  The Herald reports:

Falling fresh milk prices led the way for grocery prices to go down last month, Statistics New Zealand says.

“Grocery food prices fell 0.8 per cent in October, led by a 5.7 per cent fall in fresh milk prices,” Statistics NZ consumer prices manager Matt Haigh said today.

Seasonally lower prices for fruit and vegetables also influenced the overall drop in prices.

“The average price for 2 litres of blue-top milk was $3.13 in October 2015, the cheapest since January 2008 when it was also $3.13,” Mr Haigh said in a statement.

Maybe one day Labour will learn that in markets prices go up and down, and claiming a temporarily low or high price is a crisis which needs government intervention isn’t the stuff of credible government, but just tiresome hysteria.

This is the class introduction from Professor Mike Adams  at UNC-Wilmington:

Welcome back to class, students! I am Mike Adams your criminology professor here at UNC-Wilmington. Before we get started with the course I need to address an issue that is causing problems here at UNCW and in higher education all across the country. I am talking about the growing minority of students who believe they have a right to be free from being offended. If we don’t reverse this dangerous trend in our society there will soon be a majority of young people who will need to walk around in plastic bubble suits to protect them in the event that they come into contact with a dissenting viewpoint. That mentality is unworthy of an American. It’s hardly worthy of a Frenchman.

Let’s get something straight right now. You have no right to be unoffended. You have a right to be offended with regularity. It is the price you pay for living in a free society. If you don’t understand that you are confused and dangerously so. In part, I blame your high school teachers for failing to teach you basic civics before you got your diploma. Most of you went to the public high schools, which are a disaster. Don’t tell me that offended you. I went to a public high school.

Of course, your high school might not be the problem. It is entirely possible that the main reason why so many of you are confused about free speech is that piece of paper hanging on the wall right over there. Please turn your attention to that ridiculous document that is framed and hanging by the door. In fact, take a few minutes to read it before you leave class today. It is our campus speech code. It specifically says that there is a requirement that everyone must only engage in discourse that is “respectful.” That assertion is as ludicrous as it is illegal. I plan to have that thing ripped down from every classroom on campus before I retire.

One of my grandfathers served in World War I. My step-grandfather served in World War II. My sixth great grandfather enlisted in the American Revolution when he was only thirteen. These great men did not fight so we could simply relinquish our rights to the enemy within our borders. That enemy is the Marxists who run our public universities. If you are a Marxist and I just offended you, well, that’s tough. I guess they don’t make communists like they used to.

Unbelievably, a student once complained to the Department chairwoman that my mention of God and a Creator was a violation of Separation of Church and State. Let me be as clear as I possibly can: If any of you actually think that my decision to paraphrase the Declaration of Independence in the course syllabus is unconstitutional then you suffer from severe intellectual hernia.

Indeed, it takes hard work to become stupid enough to think the Declaration of Independence is unconstitutional. If you agree with the student who made that complaint then you are probably just an anti-religious zealot. Therefore, I am going to ask you to do exactly three things and do them in the exact order that I specify.

First, get out of my class. You can fill out the drop slip over at James Hall. Just tell them you don’t believe in true diversity and you want to be surrounded by people who agree with your twisted interpretation of the Constitution simply because they are the kind of people who will protect you from having your beliefs challenged or your feelings hurt.

Second, withdraw from the university. If you find that you are actually relieved because you will no longer be in a class where your beliefs might be challenged then you aren’t ready for college. Go get a job building houses so you can work with some illegal aliens who will help you gain a better appreciation of what this country has to offer.

Finally, if this doesn’t work then I would simply ask you to get the hell out of the country. The ever-growing thinned-skinned minority you have joined is simply ruining life in this once-great nation. Please move to some place like Cuba where you can enjoy the company of communists and get excellent health care. Just hop on a leaky boat and start paddling your way towards utopia. You will not be missed.

So refreshing to have someone say there is no right not to be offended.

Professor Adams gets excellent ratings from his students, including those who don’t agree with him.

Christchurch Airport is fully Government owned – 75% Christchurch City Council and 25% NZ Government.

Christchurch City Council is very short of money – it faces having to borrow a lot of money, unless it can free up capital.

I’ve been sent an interesting analysis of performance stats of the three main NZ airports. They are:

• Christchurch dividend $148 million vs Wellington dividend $399 million
• Returns on aeronautical assets is 1.1% for Christchurch, 5.7% Wellington and 6.0% Auckland
• Earnings per passengers is $2,52 for Christchurch, $8.00 Wellington and $9.40 Auckland

Shalom Kiwi blogs:

New Zealand group, Kia Ora Gaza claims to be a humanitarian organisation dedicated to delivering aid to Gaza, breaking “Israel’s siege” of Gaza, “fostering fraternal relations”, and “enhancing the understanding of the Middle East”.

The reality is that Kia Ora Gaza’s activities are hardly humanitarian, and it actively works against peace and reconciliation between the Palestinians and Israelis. In effect it works to prolong the conflict, while fomenting hate and distrust through a deliberate campaign of misinformation and incitement.

In short, Kia Ora Gaza is a hate group. How do we know this? Quite simply, we listened to its rhetoric, the rhetoric of its representatives, and reviewed and analysed what it posts on its website and onsocial media.

Here are six good reasons why Kia Ora Gaza is a hate group:

The six reasons are:

1. Kia Ora Gaza supports terrorism
2. Kia Ora Gaza promotes anti-Semitic libels
3. Kia Ora Gaza seeks the destruction of Israel
4. Kia Ora Gaza uses humanitarian aid money for illegal and foolhardy publicity stunts
5. Kia Ora Gaza is completely one-sided in its condemnation
6. Kia Ora Gaza promotes the bigoted Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement

Sadly this group gets support from Maori TV, so is effectively taxpayer funded.

Five Thirty Eight rates the candidates:

• B+: Marco Rubio
• B-: Rand Paul, Ted Cruz
• C+: Jeb Bush, Carly Fiorina, Donald Trump, Ben Carson
• C: John Kasich

A much better debate than last time, with actual policy exchanges rather than gotcha questions.

Bush has kept his campaign alive. Rubio still looks like the most likely eventual candidate. Cruz has another good performance and for the first time Rand Paul has a good debate.

The Telegraph reports:

President Thein Sein also pledged to honour the results and co-operate on a smooth transition of power to the opposition as the staggering scale of the National League for Democracy’s victory became clear.