CBS announces:

CBS Television Studios announced today it will launch a totally new Star Trek television series in January 2017. The new series will blast off with a special preview broadcast on the CBS Television Network. The premiere episode and all subsequent first-run episodes will then be available exclusively in the United States on CBS All Access, the Network’s digital subscription video on demand and live streaming service.

The next chapter of the Star Trek franchise will also be distributed concurrently for television and multiple platforms around the world by CBS Studios International.

The new program will be the first original series developed specifically for U.S. audiences for CBS All Access, a cross-platform streaming service that brings viewers thousands of episodes from CBS’s current and past seasons on demand, plus the ability to stream their local CBS Television station live for $5.99 per month. CBS All Access already offers every episode of all previous Star Trek television series.

The brand-new Star Trek will introduce new characters seeking imaginative new worlds and new civilizations, while exploring the dramatic contemporary themes that have been a signature of the franchise since its inception in 1966.

Alex Kurtzman will serve as executive producer for the new Star Trek TV series. Kurtzman co-wrote and produced the blockbuster films Star Trek (2009) with Roberto Orci, and Star Trek Into Darkness (2013) with Orci and Damon Lindelof. Both films were produced and directed by J.J. Abrams.

Very excited by this.

There have been five main Star Trek series:

1. Original 1966 – 69
2. Next Generation 1987 – 94
3. DS9 1993 – 99
4. Voyager 1995 – 2001
5. Enterprise 2001 – 2005

I never got into Deep Space 9 much. I rate Next Generation as may favourite series, followed by the original and then Enterprise.

The Washington Post reports:

The U.N. refugee agency said Monday that a record 218,394 people crossed the Mediterranean to reach European shores in October — about as many as the total from all of last year.

That’s a huge number. Basically refugees respond to incentives as much as anyone. Given a choice between waiting for the UN to get them a place out of a refugee camp in Turkey, and trekking to Europe, they will of course choose Europe.

Slovenia has said it is considering a fence of its own. Foreign Minister Karl Erjavec described that action as “a last resort” but added that he is “very much concerned” that other countries will erect barriers, leaving his tiny Alpine nation shouldering an unsustainable burden. Even now, he said, Slovenia is struggling to cope.

“We cannot go on like this for a long time,” Erjavec said in an e-mailed response to questions. “We have received more than 100,000 migrants in just two weeks. This number represents 5% of our population. Our human, financial and material resources are limited.”

No country could cope with a 5% population increase in two weeks.

Stuff reports:

If Michelle Obama wants to up her game on social media, she could do worse than turning to former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark for a few tips.

Clark, who heads the United Nations Development Programme, has been named the sixth most influential female leader on social media by online business, economics and finance magazine Richtopia.

Her ranking on the Top 100 list puts her ahead of the First Lady of the United States, who came in at eighth, and Huffington Post editor-in-chief Arianna Huffington, who took out the ninth spot.

The list is of course subjective. Let’s look at something perhaps more objective, such as number of followers on Twitter for the top 10:

1. Hillary Clinton – 4.61 million
2. Oprah Winfrey – 29.5 million
3. Nancy Pelosi – 0.68 million
4. Maria Shriver – 2.33 million
5. Dilma Rousseff – 4.17 million
6. Helen Clark – 0.10 million
7. Katie Couric – 1.38 million
8. Michelle Obama – 5.39 million
9. Arianna Huffington – 2.16 million
10. Emma Watson – 19.8 million

So I don’t think Michelle Obama will be too worried!

This is a graph of power consumption for the last two Sundays. You can see the impact of the Rugby World Cup Final with the increase at 4.15 am as people start getting up. And a big spike at half time as people put on the jug, went to the toilet, opened the fridge door etc.

The Press reports:

A new review has slated the sea-level findings used by Christchurch City Council to assess risks to coastal properties.

While council has scrapped fast-tracked plan changes based on the findings, coastal residents want hazard warnings removed from their properties’ LIM reports.

The findings were in a report on 50-to-100-year climate change risk, written by consultants Tonkin & Taylor. The report identified 18,000 properties as being threatened by rising sea levels, and 6000 by coastal erosion. LIM reports were amended to match.

Mathematician and policy analyst Simon Arnold has now reviewed Tonkin & Taylor’s report. He considers it was statistically flawed, based on outdated law, and exaggerated the effects of sea-level rise.

“Scientists and engineers are good at talking about what is happening, but they struggle with this level of forecasting – it’s too complex,” Arnold said. “You really need to get a specialist statistician involved.”

Arnold said the report was not fit for purpose and the council should never have relied on it. He urged them to back away from it.

“The Council is in an untenable position. This exaggeration of risk is costing homeowners now, a lot of people are affected by it,” he said.

Arnold is a mathematician with experience as a policy analyst and forecaster for government , and has worked as an advisor to the McDiarmid Institute, and previous Prime Ministers. He lives on the Kapati Coast but said his property is not affected by coastal hazard projections.

He sent his review to both the Christchurch City Council and Tonkin & Taylor last month. 

So what do they say?

A spokeswoman for Tonkin & Taylor said they had already spoken to Arnold about his review, and did not want to wish to comment publicly. No-one was available from the Christchurch City Council to discuss the review.

I bet – very embarrassing for them.

Arnold’s review questions the statistical methodology of the report, which he calls misleading. He asserts much of it is based on 1994 coastal policy statements in the Resource Management Act, rather than the updated 2010 version.

The review also says while the Tonkin & Taylor report is based on possible hazards, the law requires recognition of likely hazards only when assessing risk. 

There is a huge difference between likely and possible.

He also pointed the city council towards a report written this year by retired principal Environment Court judge Joan Allin, which criticised how coastal risks were increasingly over-estimated.

Allin’s report said she had “developed concerns about what other NZ coastal experts are doing. It seems that a number of them consider that it is appropriate . . . to provide only results that are very unlikely, or overstated.”

This is from the former principal judge.

Stuff reports:

Social housing applicants will be taken off the waiting list for three months if they decline even one property for insufficient reasons, Social Housing Minister Paula Bennett says.

Opposition parties have criticised the crackdown as “dog-whistle politics” and accused Bennett of targeting the poor instead of addressing the housing shortage.

Bennett has confirmed a chance in policy regarding social housing applicants, saying some people were being “unrealistically picky” when offered a place to live and clogging up the waiting list.

“We actually pay hundreds of millions of subsidies for people to be in homes, and on the waitlist we’ve got people who are really desperate and we want to house them as quickly as we can.”

A state house is a privilege. You get a massive subsidy from taxpayers to cover its cost. I’m fine with that, as some people need assistance with housing. But if you want the massive subsidy, then you don’t get the same degree of choice as people who cover the rent themselves.

Of the 10,000 social housing offers made last year, Bennett said nearly 3500 had been declined, with 414 of those for “unacceptable reasons” such as wanting a garage or a bigger backyard.

So around 88% of refusals are for valid reasons, but close to 12% are not.

Social housing applicants would also be required to name a minimum of three suburbs they could live in, up from one previously.

That does not sound unreasonable.

The Herald reports:

‘We think there are six security problems that you should really worry about,” our spies told Prime Minister John Key.

Top of the list? “Violent extremism in New Zealand and by New Zealanders.”

The top-secret list was revealed in the Briefing to the Incoming Minister provided by the heads of the Security Intelligence Service (SIS) and the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB).

It was obtained by the Herald through the Official Information Act after the intervention of the Office of the Ombudsman and – with redactions – shows how Mr Key and Attorney General Chris Finlayson were briefed when returned to government in October last year.

The concern about “violent extremism” appeared linked to concerns over the ability of the extremist group Isis (Islamic State) to export terror and was linked to observations “significant migration” was “creating communities [in New Zealand] with distinct identities and links to overseas”.

A very interesting document. It’s good the Herald were able to get it. The six main threats are:

1 Violent extremism in NZ and by New Zealanders – the report warns migration is creating communities with “distinct identities and links overseas”. It appears to reflect information the SIS has learned from Muslim communities.

2 Loss of information and data – the means by which a cyber attack is done is “easier to acquire and easy to combine with insider threats”. It poses economic and reputational risks.

3 Hostile intelligence operations in and against the country – the report warns of “industrial espionage” against companies and “targeting of New Zealanders by foreign governments”. Again, the consequence of increased migration could be linked to these concerns.

4 Mass arrivals – the entire small section is redacted, but John Key has previously spoken of concern over boat-loads of refugees making landfall in New Zealand.

5 Trans-national organised crime – drugs, money-laundering and illegal fishing are highlighted, brought about by an “open economy, the internet and established networks among migrant communities”.

6 Instability in the South Pacific – the entire section is blanked out, but the SIS has had a close focus on Fiji, its leadership and anti-regime movements in New Zealand and Australia.

Tim Groser announced:

Minister of Trade Tim Groser has announced that, on behalf of the twelve members of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), New Zealand has released the text of the results of TPP negotiations in its capacity as Depositary of the Agreement.

The text is currently available on the international treaty depository section of the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s website, at www.mfat.govt.nz/tppdepositary.

That’s very helpful timing for Labour, just before their conference, as it means they can’t keep using the “We can’t take a position on it, as have not read it” line.

In related news the Government announced:

The Government has awarded New Zealand researchers $53.5 million in new Marsden Fund grants, Science and Innovation Minister Steven Joyce announced today. 

The 92 successful proposals will be funded over three years and include a diverse range of topics from exploring causal factors between earthquakes and volcanic eruption, to therapies for motor neuron disease and a research programme that will investigate the implications of prodrugs for many types of illness.

The full list of awards is here. One of them is:

Transcending embedded neoliberalism in international economic regulation: options and strategies

Professor Jane Kelsey is being paid $600,000 for this work! The Government is paying her $600,000 to campaign against its own trade agreements!

NBR reports:

The Electricity Authority wants lines companies to stop charging flat daily and consumption charges so they give the right economic signals to consumers about when the time is right to adopt emerging technologies.

Currently, lines company charges account for about 30% of the average household’s electricity bill with 22% of that being the daily charge and about 78% being determined by how much electricity they use, regardless of when they use it.

That’s even though it doesn’t actually matter to the lines companies how much electricity a consumer uses overall – they’re only affected if peak usage requires them to provide more capacity.

This is an important point. There is no marginal cost for supply in lines cost – unless peak usage requires greater capacity. So the sensible pricing signal should be around use at peak times. Fixed line charges are unfair on those who don’t use much electricity, especially at peak times.

The authority says if the pricing signals don’t change, that could mean between $2.7 billion and $5 billion dollars of wasted investment over the next 10 years.

That’s a lot.

That’s through the wrong pricing signals encouraging some consumers to install solar panels but that will mean those without panels will have higher bills.

The authority estimates those without solar panels could see their electricity bills in 10 years’ time being 10% higher than now as those with solar panels save money at their expense.

As well, lines companies would have to build more capacity to cope with peak demand if there’s no incentive to encourage consumers to use power at off-peak times when there’s minimal cost to the lines companies.

And solar power is good, but it has to compete fairly. And another story makes clear it is not solar vs renewables:

Mr Hansen said New Zealand’s experience with solar power generation was likely to be different from many other parts of the world, where solar rooftop panels displace high-cost electricity generated using either natural gas or coal. With 80% of New Zealand’s energy needs already met by renewable generation, all of which is less expensive than solar power to produce, there was no clear case in the short run to incentivise solar power installations.

Stuff reports:

NZ First MP Ron Mark has been accused of racism after telling a National MP to “go back to Korea” during a parliamentary debate.

Mark’s comments have attracted criticism from MPs across the political spectrum.

His remarks came during debate on Tuesday about the Shop Trading Hours Amendment Bill, which would allow local councils to determine whether shops can trade on Easter Sunday.

Mark took offence to a speech by Korean-born Lee in support of the bill, in which she said she had been surprised by New Zealand’s restricted shop hours having grown up overseas.

In response, he said: “Melissa Lee told the House in her rather condescending manner, which she is becoming renowned for, that we need to grow up in New Zealand.

“Well I have got a short message – if you do not like New Zealand, go back to Korea.”

Let’s have a look at the Hansard in which we see Ron Mark not just telling Melissa Lee to go back to Korea, but also getting it totally wrong on India when he has a go at MPs of Indian descent.

First what did Melissa Lee say:

MELISSA LEE: Exactly. Sometimes, as a migrant—well, not a new migrant; I have been here for nearly 30 years—it used to really surprise me, having grown up overseas and come to New Zealand, to see New Zealand shut down at a particular hour. That was really, really surprising. You know, we were closing shops at 5 o’clock when in other countries shops were open to 10 or midnight, or all night and 24/7. It is about choice. It is about people wanting to have that choice to either go and spend their money—go shopping and do touristy things—or to go and spend time with their family and have meals at a restaurant. Whatever it is, it is their choice.

Melissa is not alone in that observation. I recall the 1980s when shops closed at 5.30 pm four days a week and nothing was open on Saturday or Sunday. People visiting or new to NZ were always staggered by this.

RON MARK: Because, actually, Mr Hudson, you are like that old Hudson car—slow, smoky, rather rounded at the edges, and going nowhere fast—and no one buys the crap we just heard this evening, thank you. I want to go on to the other comments of Melissa Lee, one of these other wonderful National Party member, from Korea as Wikipedia says. Melissa Lee told the House in her rather condescending manner, which she is becoming renowned for, that we need to grow up in New Zealand. Well I have got a short message, if you do not like New Zealand go back to Korea.

A rather nasty contribution to the very reasonable observation Melissa Lee made. But he did not stop there:

RON MARK: Without any overtures of racism, let us look at the holidays in Korea that are public holidays that people do not work on. Coming to New Zealand and telling us we should grow up in our House, where we allow freedom of speech, is a little different to what we see. Buddha’s birthday, holy heck, so now we say that New Zealanders should have to work on a religious day but in Korea, where Miss Lee comes from, Buddha’s birthday on the eighth of the fourth lunar month is a public holiday where no one works. So let us look at another National Party member. Oh geebers, Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi. This gentleman also understands and respects the value of religious days and the need for public holidays but he sits in this House ready to take a call, I guess, to support this legislation. But let us have a look at India. There are so many, I just could not read them out in this time that I have available, but one of the religious holidays in India is Easter. where people do not have to work. And there is Good Friday, Easter Sunday, St Thomas the Apostle, the Blessed Virgin Mary, Feast of St Francis Xavier, Christmas Day. And let us have a look at a few others: Eid ul-Fitr, Eid ul-Adha, Eid ul-Ghadeer, and let us not forget Mahatma Gandhi’s birthday.

So Ron claimed there is no work in India on all those religious holidays. But he made it up.

KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI (National): Thank you for the opportunity to speak on the Shop Trading Hours Amendment Bill. First of all, I would like to clarify a few things that the previous speaker has raised. On any religious day in India, if there is a public holiday, every business is open and they pray. They do not—

Ron Mark: No.

KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI: Your knowledge is totally zero. The only two holidays—yes, I am from India, I lived over there for 35 years, and I can tell you that on every religious day, every shop is open, every shop is allowed to trade. The only 2 days when the whole of India is closed are not religious days; they are the Republic Day of India and Independence Day.

So, for your knowledge, clarify yourself before you speak, and do not try to be racist.

Nice slap down from Bakshi.

David Cunliffe gave a speech last in Parliament’s general debate which sounded more like a blog post on a left wing blog. In fact it reminded me of the Lord Ashcroft finding about UK Labour supporters who blamed their loss on the media and voters being dumb and fooled by the Government.

Here’s some quotes:

So why are the Romans still in Rome? Why is the National Party there? Well, it cannot be Steven Joyce and his talent for inflatable sheep; it cannot be John Key peeing in the shower and the pockets of the All Blacks. It has got to be more important than that, and it is. So I want to just reflect on the means of control by this Government, because, in rugby terms, it is very simple. It is not that it has a faster back line, it is not that it has faster forwards; they just screw the scrum. Here is how it does it: creeping influence in the media; undermining Public Service neutrality; politicising community groups; and threatening those who object to it. And, of course, the legendary National Party dirty tricks machine.

So Cunliffe says Labour lost because of all these things – nothing to do with policies or leadership.

It is a standing joke that prime-time TV is a choice between right Paul Henry, National candidate, and righter the irreplaceable Mike Hosking—irreplaceable because he pops up just about everywhere.

Umm Paul Henry is not in prime time. That is Duncan Garner and Heather du-Plessis-Allen. But Labour hates having any prominent media voices who don’t share their world-view.

If you do not believe me, just ask John Campbell , Carol Hirschfeld , Julien Wilcox , Brian Rudman , John Drinnan , and so on and so forth. Contrary independent voices that have been removed from prime-time TV and newspapers and have taken refuge in the Ark—Radio New Zealand.

So National is suddenly responsible for decisons of TV3, Maori TV and the NZ Herald. It’s all a big conspiracy and plot.

The reality, as I show in my media analysis, is that the vast majority of opinion columns in the NZ Herald and stuff are critical of the Government. It is a left delusion that they’re not.

Well, I wonder what is going to happen to Radio New Zealand given that New Zealand on Air is controlled by the Prime Minister’s electorate secretary—is it going to stop funding that broadcaster that is run by a former National Prime Minister’s chief media advisor?

One of six members of the NZ on Air board is Stephen McElrea. He has a long background in broadcasting but yes was also the Helensville Electorate Chair. But here’s what’s hilarious about Cunliffe calling him the PM’s chief media advisor (which he is not, and has no role in). Labour appointed Judy Callaghan to the NZ on Air Board – and she and her husband were in fact key media advisors to Helen Clark. I presume DC had no problem with that.

The High Court just found that the Ombudsman acted illegally in not forcing Tim Groser to disclose more about the Trans-Pacific Partnership background brief. It is a shocker when the Ombudsman is found by the High Court not to be defending the public interest. No wonder it has got a year’s backlog—and that is why Ministers act with impunity, not answering Official Information Act requests or parliamentary questions, because they know that by the time the appeal is heard, it will be too late. Why would it fund the Ombudsman—it is just a nuisance.

In the 2008 Budget Vote Ombudsman was $8.3 million. In the 1015 Budget Vote Ombudsman was $12.4 million. That is a 49% increase over Labour. Pesky facts I know.

Around Wellington, public servants are saying in hushed tones that the Westminster tradition of free and frank advice is gone. When was the last time that you heard Iain Rennie, the State Services Commissioner, standing up for public service neutrality and independence? He has not said boo since the Roger Sutton debacle. So where to from here?

Yeah gone are the good old days of sacking public servants because their boyfriend works for National, the lie in unison scandal in the Dept of Labour and the hounding of Erin Leigh for her free and frank advice.

Well, what about the Serious Fraud Office—Craig Foss knows all about that, the Minister of commerce. Well, it has gone belly-up because it no longer talks about taking criminals to justice; it just wants to recover a few pennies for National’s mates, the investors.

Really? He things the SFO is there for national’s mates? As I said, it sounds more like a blog rant.

Oh yes, the last Serious Fraud Office chief executive that actually stood up for New Zealanders’ rights got garrotted by Judith Collins and Cameron Slater—Cameron Slater who was exposed by Nicky Hager, whose banking records were given to the police voluntarily by Simon Power’s bank.

Oh yes Simon Power personally intervened I am sure. Again just barking mad conspiracy theory stuff. One can have a view that Westpac were too compliant with the Police request, but linking it to Simon Power is barmy.

UPDATE: The reference to a PM Chief Media Advisor may be to Dick Griffin (RNZ Chair) not McElrea.

UPDATE2: Worth noting of course that an inquiry found Judith Collins did not act against the former SFO CE – to the contrary she praised his performance and gave him good ratings.

Stuff reports:

Prime Minister John Key has stepped into the Foreign Affairs portfolio after a health scare for veteran minister Murray McCully.

McCully’s office announced in a statement on Wednesday the Minister of Foreign Affairs would be taking leave following surgery last week.

It said he was recuperating in Auckland and expected to make a full recovery.

Responsibility for the Foreign Affairs portfolio had been transferred to Key in the interim “to allow Minister McCully to focus on his recovery”.

McCully is understood to have required major surgery to remove a tumour. He has been given the all clear by doctors after it was found to be benign, but has been told long haul international travel is out of the question for several weeks while he recuperates.

It is not often the words benign and McCully appear in the same story 🙂

The Herald reports:

The Labour Party has closed the doors on vast tracts of its 99th annual conference this weekend, saying it wants to keep debate “in the family”.

The programme for its Palmerston North talkfest shows debate on policy proposals is closed to the media – a session that has been open in the past.

Campaign sessions are normally media excluded, but it is very rare to exclude media from policy debates. Not a good sign.

The order paper is here.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

1. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Finance: How does growth in the average wage compare to cost of living increases of 0.4 percent over the last year, according to labour market data released by Statistics New Zealand yesterday?
2. JAMES SHAW to the Minister in charge of the NZ Security Intelligence Service: Does he have confidence in the NZSIS in light of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security’s conclusion that the agency did not have “sound compliance procedures and systems in place”; if so, why?
3. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Health: What did he mean by his statement on 29 July that core Crown health expenditure since 2009/10 covers “most, but not all, inflationary pressures”?
4. JONO NAYLOR to the Minister for Social Development: What is the Government doing to support beneficiaries to find work as part of Budget 2015?
5. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: What was the rate of unemployment and the total number of people unemployed, according to the Household Labour Force Survey, when he took office, and what is that rate and that number now?
6. NUK KORAKO to the Minister of Health: Can he confirm that Canterbury District Health Board is receiving an extra $16 million in funding, which acknowledges Canterbury’s unique circumstances and will see the DHB break even for the 2015/16 year?
7. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: On what date was he or his office first notified that Agribusiness Training Limited was seriously under-delivering its contracted teaching hours and/or receiving funds to which it had not been entitled?
8. RON MARK to the Minister in charge of the NZ Security Intelligence Service: What is the Government doing to resource and address national security concerns identified in the Ministerial briefing he received from the NZSIS and GCSB?
9. JULIE ANNE GENTER to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by his statement that New Zealand is “the most electric-vehicle-ready country in the world”?
10. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister of Transport: What updates can he provide on the Southern Corridor Motorway improvements project in Auckland?
11. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Trade: What steps, if any, has his Government taken to renegotiate the provisions in the South Korean FTA to ensure New Zealand can ban overseas buyers of our homes since he received the select committee report on the South Korean FTA recommending that this be clarified, noting, as the select committee report did, that the Australian FTA with South Korea does allow Australia to ban overseas buyers of Australian homes?
12. SCOTT SIMPSON to the Minister of Local Government: What is the Government doing to ensure councils are best placed to support regional economic development?

National: Five questions on wage growth, work for beneficiaries, CDHB funding, Souther Corridor Motorway and local government

Labour: Four questions on health spending, unemployment, Agribusiness Training Ltd and the South Korean FTA

Greens: Two questions on the SIS and electric vehciles

NZ First: One question on national security concerns

Government Bills 3.00 pm to 6.00 pm

International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill – second reading

The Bill amends the International Finance Agreements Act 1961 in order to enable the Government to become a member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

• Introduced September 2015
• 1st reading: September 2015, passed 63 to 58 with Labour, Greens and NZ First opposed
• Select Committee report: October 2015, supported unanimously with amendments

The second reading consists of 12 speeches of up to 10 minutes each for a maximum debate of two hours.

Support for Children in Hardship Bill – second reading

This Bill is an omnibus Bill introduced under Standing Order 263(a). The Bill strengthens work expectations and increases assistance for parents on a benefit and who have dependent children from 1 April 2016.

• Introduced: May 2015
• 1st reading: May 2015, passed 109 to 12 with NZ First opposed
• Select Committee report: October 2015, supported by majority with amendments with minority reports from Labour, Greens and NZ First

The second reading consists of 12 speeches of up to 10 minutes each for a maximum debate of two hours.

New Green MP Marama Davidson’s maiden speech was on Wednesday. I especially liked the part about her Nan, as I think you get a feeling of how important family influences are on you:

My nana is Patricia Charlotte Broughton, nee Hancy, of Ngāi Tupoto in Te Rarawa. She was born in Motu Karaka in Hokianga in 1926. She grew up there, apart from attending St Joseph’s Māori Girls’ College in Hawke’s Bay. She was a native speaker of Te Reo, a staunch Catholic, a mother to seven tamariki, grandmother to nine mokopuna, and great-grandmother to 23, so far. Nan married my papa, Boyd Alex Broughton of Te Hikutu in Ngāpuhi. I had less time with papa as we lost him when I was 9, but I remember him as a beautiful, gentle, and kind, loving man, whom my nana loved deeply. My nan and papa were part of the Māori migration to urban centres in the 1950s . They left their tūrangawaewae in Motu Karaka and brought their young tamariki eventually to live in Ōtara in Auckland.

I was 14 years old when my nan passed away, so that was a long time ago, but the fact that I can almost never talk about her publicly without crying is testament to the impact she still has on my life. From the start, my nana was warm, overly doting, and exemplified our whakataukī “He taonga te mokopuna”. My beautiful older cousin Jean is the oldest mokopuna, but we did not find out about her until I was 6 years old, and we have been grateful for her ever since. But I, in effect, was the first person to make my nan an actual nan, and I was born on her and my papa’s 25th, silver wedding anniversary. I have been told I was a fantastic anniversary present.

My nan, to me, felt physically and spiritually like a soft, squishy, gentle, and caring nana. From a young age, I got a sense of us, her mokopuna, being the absolute centre of her universe. What I did not know of until later was her stubborn commitment to justice. I must have been about 12 or 13 when my nana took me to her work one day. She ran the lunch cafe at a large firm in Ōtara . Extra help was needed on this particular day, and the boss had asked my nan if she knew of anyone. Nan’s boss agreed that I could come in and help them out for the day. I remember helping my nana prepare kai for the workers, wash dishes, serve customers, and clean the kitchen. It was a good day of mahi. At the end of the day, my nana’s boss refused to pay me. He tried to worm his way out of the agreement, saying that I had come in for “work experience”. I will never forget my nan’s face as she glared at her boss in the eye. She sent me away to wait in the hall while she sat opposite her boss, trying to sort it, but even from a distance I could feel her staring the unfairness down. Here was my soft, squishy, gentle-voiced, lovable nana, whom I had never seen face conflict in my life, putting up a relentless fight for her wronged granddaughter—for me. I cannot actually remember what became of that heated debate, but what I can remember is how nan made me feel.

To this day, my whole being recalls her fierce determination to right a wrong, her courage to not let the power imbalance dominate her, her commitment to ensure that those most vulnerable had someone sticking up for them, and her gumption to hold her line no matter what. If I could bring a tiny bit of my nana’s mana to my work, then I will know that I have succeeded. My name is Marama Davidson, and I come from a long line of stubbornness.

From all accounts Marama is a lot like her nana.

The moral police are up in arms in Christchurch reports Stuff:

Opposition to Wendy’s Hornby’s bid for a liquor licence is building as it emerges there are 17 other places that sell alcohol within a kilometre of the fast-food outlet.

A misleading figure as only six are on-licenses.

Wendy’s Hornby, on Main South Rd, has applied to the Christchurch City Council for a liquor licence between 8am and 11pm, seven days a week.

It is the first-fast food outlet in New Zealand to make such a move.

I don’t think I have eaten at a Wendy’s for 20 years. But if they want to be able to sell beer along with their food, and they comply with the law, why not. Why is a fast food restaurant deemed unsuitable and cafes and other restaurants deemed okay?

Council information supplied to Woods showed there were 17 licensed premises selling alcohol within 1km of the Wendy’s outlet.

“I think there’s plenty of places in the Hornby area where people can go and enjoy a meal and get a drink with it. I don’t think there’s any need for us to be licensing our fast-food restaurants.”

There were six on-licence premises within 1km of Wendy’s Hornby, five club licences and six off-licences, according to the council information.

The 17 number is deceptive as the fact you can buy some wine at a bottle store isn’t a substitute for whether you can have a drink with your meal. So it is really six on-licenses over 100 hectares of area.

Nora Rangi said she would stop taking her seven grandchildren to Wendy’s if the application was granted.

And that’s a fine response. But the owner of Wendy’s should get to make the decision on whether allowing beer and wine with food will lead to more or fewer customers.

In her submission, she said it allowed easy access to view alcohol consumption for young people.

No it is an offence to sell to under 18s, and the Police are vigorous with doing spot checks and prosecuting those who break the law. If Wendy’s sold to under agers they would lose any licence they gained.

Vicki Bretherton said she was worried about Hornby students and the fact people under 18 could be serving alcohol to customers.

No, under 18s can’t sell alcohol.

Several people said they felt comfortable sending their children to Wendy’s unsupervised, but that would change if the application was successful.

And that is not a decision for authorities. That is a decision from them and Wendy’s. If customers don’t like Wendy’s selling alcohol, then stop going. But don’t try and stop them from doing so, unless there is some reason to think they will breach liquor laws.

Wendy’s chief executive Danielle Lendich said last week the company wanted guests to enjoy a beer with a burger if they chose to, and it was a way for Wendy’s to “up its game”.

Non-alcoholic beverages would still be available, and no alcohol would be served at the drive- through or for takeaway guests.

“Many other family and quick service restaurants have liquor licences including Valentines, the old Cobb & Co, Denny’s and Lone Star, and many QSR [quick service restaurant] concepts that have opened more recently also have liquor licences including Burger Burger, Mexicali Fresh, Zambrero, The Coffee Club and Columbus, ” she said.

 

“Our principal business will remain the provision of meals to the public and we have no intention of becoming a bar or hangout where people sit all night and drink beer.”

Mark Peck has announced on Facebook:

I have today informed Labour Party managers for the upcoming local body elections that I will not be seeking selection to contest the Lambton Ward, or any other ward for the Wellington City Council.

I have decided to clear the decks so that good candidates can emerge to put their hands up for selection.

I will complete my term and meet my responsibilities to the Council.

I want to thank all those who have supported me during this triennium.

By the time the term is over I will have completed fifteen years of public service and it is time to pull up stumps.

It is unusual to retire after just one term on a body. It will make Lambton Ward very interesting for 2016 to see who comes through.

There’s a lot I didn’t agree with Cr Peck on, but I did like his FB post just prior to this one:

I am interested in a discussion about the reform of councillor numbers in Wellington.

Do we need 15 on council (includes the Mayor) or multi member wards?

Downsizing to 7 or 9 councillors would save in salaries alone about $1.62m over the triennium. The reason for an odd number is to make it possible on most occasions for a majority to be achieved on any issue.

One councillor per ward makes accountability fairly obvious too.

There is a tonne of literature that the ideal size for a board or council for decision making purposes is around seven to nine, with 12 being probably as big as you want to go. So I support Peck in saying a smaller Council would be a good thing.

I also have long supported single Councillor wards. I think you would get better informed voting, and with smaller wards, have Councillors better in touch with their community.

Interesting to see the results of the elections for the Auckland Energy Consumers Trust. The results were:

1. Karen Sherry (C&R) 20,968
2. Mike Buxzkowski (C&R) 19,761
3. James Carmichael (C&R) 19,390
4. William Cairns (C&R) 17,824
5. Paul Hutchison (C&R) 16,942
6. Judith Tizard (CV) 12,285
7. Jeanette Elley (CV) 10,556
8. Anne-Marie Coury (CV) 10,364
9. Simon Mitchell (CV) 7,535
10. Kirk Sepes CV) 6,445

So the left wing City Vision ticket got trounced, not winning a single place, let alone a majority.

The incumbent C&R team had a clear position – they will let residents enjoy the benefits of community ownership through dividend payments, to help them meet their bills.

The Labour/Green ticket campaigned on making Vector invest in solar power, electric vehicles, Tesla batteries, home insulation programmes and demand smoothing. Not even a big name such as Judith Tizard could come close.

A Collection of Noises is a one woman show at Bats produced by Alexander Sparrow, whom wrote and starred in the very funny De Sade (2014 Fringe Festival).

This was a very different play, although still at the some what disturbing end of the spectrum.

It’s a Grand-Guignol inspired psychological horror about a troubled school age girl who has a bizarre relationship with her mother, but also gets betrayed by her best friend.

The set when you walk in, looks like a stalker’s lair. Dozens of black and white photos of the girls hanging up.

At first Alice (Georgia Latief ) talks about her mother  and just deceased grandfather, but mixed in with that is the situation at school, and her lack of date for the school formal. She talks directly to the audience at times, accusing us of being almost being voyeurs.

As the betrayal by her best (and only) friend occurs, the focus turns more on their relationship and you see the thin line between love and hate. It becomes apparent it will end badly for someone, but whom and how?

It was a very dark production, and superbly acted. You do get engrossed in the plot, and have many moments of suspense as it builds towards the climax. But be warned – this is a dark production. It won’t be for everyone.

My one criticism would be that I would have liked to see the rather twisted relationship with the mother explored more. It seemed to have great potential, and while it was important to the show, I think even more could have done with it.

It’s on at Bats Theatre until Saturday 7 November 2015.

Rating: ***1/2

The annual report of the IGIS is here, and her current work programme is here. Both are interesting reads.

What strikes me is how much more proactive the IGIS is, under their new powers and resourcing, than in the past when it was more cursory. The appointing of three lawyers to the top role in SIS and GCSB, along with of course the IGIS has made a huge difference.

Some items of interest in detailed 43 page report:

• In particular, my office is now in a position, for the first time, to give an informed certification of the extent to which the compliance systems of New Zealand’s intelligence and security agencies are “sound”, as required by the legislation governing my office.
• I am pleased to say the task of establishing a fully functioning, secure and fulltime oversight office has been achieved. The office, since February of this year, has comprised the Inspector-General, Deputy Inspector-General, IT Manager/Security Advisor, EA/Office Manager and four Investigating Officers.
• In the reporting year, I received eight initial complaints and queries concerning security clearance matters and commenced four inquiries as a result. … In the course of these inquiries, I identified systemic shortcomings in the procedures followed by the NZSIS.
• Where matters of expert judgement arose, NZSIS officers sometimes sought expert assistance, but on other occasions were left to rely upon their own non-expert assessments, for example in relation to clinical judgements and to financial audit matters. It did not disclose adverse information or inferences to candidates for response.
• As one part of those remedies, I am pleased to acknowledge the agreement by the Director of the Service to give apologies to affected individuals.
• The Office of the Inspector-General has not previously had a formal policy for dealing with protected disclosures. We have now developed a policy
• On 9 December 2014, the US Senate Committee on Intelligence published redacted findings, conclusion and executive summary of its report on the CIA’s detention and interrogation programme. This report documented instances of torture and inhumane treatment of detainees in the period between 17 September 2001 and 22 January 2009.
• As a result of the Senate report and related material, I identified a public interest in inquiring into whether New Zealand’s intelligence agencies and personnel knew or were otherwise connected with or risked connection to the activities discussed in the US Senate Report. To address that interest, I commenced an own motion inquiry.
• I certify that the (GCSB) Bureau has sound compliance procedures and systems in place.
• As noted above, the Service lacked a compliance framework and policy, audit framework and dedicated staffing throughout this reporting period. The absence of structures and policies meant that NZSIS staff, despite their best intentions, were not sufficiently supported to ensure compliance with NZSIS legal and policy obligations. For those reasons, I cannot conclude that NZSIS had sound compliance procedures and systems in place.

As I said the report is fascinating and far far more detailed than anything I have seen before. The IGIS has found that the GCSB systems are now sound, but the SIS systems are still a work in progress, and are not yet good enough. It is good to have this transparency.

Stats NZ reports:

The unemployment rate increased to 6.0 percent in the September 2015 quarter (up from 5.9 percent), Statistics New Zealand said today. At the same time, 11,000 fewer people were employed than in the June quarter. This was the first quarterly fall in employment in three years.

That is a concern. One needs measures to increase business confidence, to get more jobs created.

ANZ comments:

• The HLFS highlighted a sharp weakening in labour demand in Q3, with employment falling for the first time in three years (-0.4% q/q).
• While this sounds alarming at first blush, we note that other indicators were not quite as soft. Hours-based measures rose, as did alternative QES employment figures. Additionally, the HLFS weakness was entirely due to part-timers, with full-time employment actually rising a touch.
• Labour supply is also now responding to this softer labour demand environment. A 0.7%pt fall in the participation rate ensured that the labour force contracted for the first time in three years, and ensured the rise in the unemployment rate (0.1%pt to 6.0%) was only modest.
• The tone of today’s figures is soft, but not as soft as suggested by HLFS employment numbers alone. With some more timely measures of employment now improving (hiring intentions and job ads) we are cautious about overplaying the weakness.

The order paper is here.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

1. JAMES SHAW to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his Government’s policies?
2. ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: Why did he say in July last year that “We think unemployment will be down to 4.5 percent in the very foreseeable future”?
3. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Finance: How is the Government’s programme to improve housing supply supporting a growing economy and macroeconomic stability?
4. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of Education: Does she stand by her reported statement that student achievement would “absolutely” be a factor in a review of the school funding system?
5. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister of Conservation:Does she stand by all her statements made in the House yesterday in answer to Oral Question No 12; if so, why?
6. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister of Education: Does she agree with Massey University education professor John O’Neill that students’ home background, including factors like transience, dysfunction and a lack of resources were responsible for up to 80 percent of a child’s school success?
7. JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Trade: What recent steps has the Government taken to further New Zealand’s trading relationship with Europe?
8. IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY to the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety: Is he satisfied that the Employment Standards Legislation Bill will end zero-hour contracts?
9. STUART SMITH to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What steps is the Government taking to promote and protect the reputation of New Zealand wine?
10. MEKA WHAITIRI to the Minister for the Environment: Does he stand by his statement that the Land and Water Forum represents a “very constructive process”; if so, can he explain why Fish and Game felt compelled to resign due to restrictions on their ability to speak out?
11. SIMON O’CONNOR to the Minister of Transport: What recent progress has been made on the Government’s commitment to build the Glen Innes to Tamaki Drive urban cycleway in Auckland?
12. DARROCH BALL to the Minister for Social Development: Does she stand by all her statements; if so, why?

National: Four questions on housing supply, trade with Europe, NZ wine and Auckalnd cycelways

Labour: Four questions on unemployment, school funding, zero hour contract and the Land and Water forum

Greens: Two questions on PM standing by policies and education

NZ First: Two questions on Conservation and MSD Ministers standing by statements

General Debate 3.00 pm to 4.00 pm

12 speeches of up to five minutes for a maximum of an hour.

Government Bills 4.00 pm to 5.45 pm

Organised Crime and Anti-corruption Legislation Bill – third reading

• Introduced June 2014
• 1st reading: November 2014, passed unanimously
• SC report: May 2015, supported with amendments with a minority report by the Greens
• 2nd reading: May 2015, passed unanimously
• Committee of the whole House: October 2015, passed unanimously

The third reading has 12 speeches of up to 10 minutes, so a maximum debate of two hours.

Maiden Speech 5.45 pm to 6.00 pm

New Green Party List MP Marama Davidson will give her maiden speech at 5.45 pm

Note there is no evening session today due to the Royal Tour.