NZ Initiative agrees with Helen Kelly

Jenesa Jeram writes:

Helen Kelly has not always agreed with The New Zealand Initiative on regulatory issues, but on the issue of medical marijuana, we certainly agree with her.
 
The outgoing Council of Trade Unions president is wanting to use medical marijuana for her own terminal illness. In the absence of medical approval, Kelly has used the black market to obtain the drug.
 
She acknowledges the therapeutic properties, but also the risks: “It just seems absolutely insane that I’ve got no idea what I’m taking, how much I should take or how it’s manufactured – it’s crazy.”
 
Kelly is not wrong. Because the drug is outside the realm of government safety and regulation, the quality and potency will be unpredictable.
 
Another less acknowledged consequence of prohibition is that the evidence-base is equally inconsistent.
 
A simple Google search will tell you there is not a lot of credible or accessible information out there. There is even less if you confine your search to neutral sources.
 
If I was a desperate mother wanting to know whether medical marijuana would be an option for my sick child, I would not know what sources to trust. Or even how to apply.
 
The evidence of effectiveness is mixed, and only one patient’s application so far – Alex Renton’s – followed the correct process.
 
Effective or not, prohibition does the evidence base no favours, by limiting the research and evidence required to support safe consumption.
 
Clinical trials have been illegal in many of the countries New Zealand would look to for regulatory guidance (though random-control trials are now underway in Israel and the United States). Anecdotal evidence and case studies would be equally thin in this context.
 
The current case-by-case process may also hide medical professionals’ support for the product, who must apply on behalf of their patient. It is certainly conceivable that doctors would be unwilling to recommend a medication without robust evidence.
 
Additionally, it is also possible that medical professionals would want to avoid the reputational effects of being the only doctor in town associated with a controversial substance. Not all doctors want to be thrust into the political sphere.
 
Sometimes though, banning risky behaviour just makes the risk even more risky. So in a rare move of supporting more regulation, I say lift the prohibition and apply the appropriate safety rules.

I agree.

Len will not run unless he wants to go out on 10%

Stuff reports:

Len Brown says he will announce “soon” whether he will run for mayor of Auckland again.

It’s now less than a year until the 2016 local body elections, and so far no significant contenders for the mayoralty of New Zealand’s largest city have officially declared their hand.

Brown is in his second term at the helm of the merged Auckland super city, and says his 2016 mayoral intentions are “certainly not the most important thing I’m dealing with at the moment”.

He would make it known whether he intended to go for the job again “soon”, but would not be drawn on a timetable.

Len wouldn’t get even 10% of he stands. I’ll be amazed if he does.

The other major possible candidate, Labour MP Phil Goff, has said it is likely he will stand and that he will make the call by the Christmas break.

Which will me more 10% rates increases.

A bitter valedictory

Russel Norman did his valedictory yesterday.  They are normally not partisan affairs, where you reflect on your highlights etc. But Russel decided to compare NZ to Russia:

I believe that democracy is a lot more than voting once every 3 years. In fact, I think in some ways that is the least part of it. It is all the institutions and culture that sits around it. I want to use my remarks to voice my concern about the state of democracy in New Zealand. Democracy is not a black and white thing. There are gradations of democracy. Putin has elections once every several years, or whatever, but that does not make Russia a democracy.

He also effectively compared NZ to the Joh Bjelke-Petersen Queensland Government.

I also think we have developed a bad culture around dissent. Look at what happened to Eleanor Catton

She criticised some people, and got criticised back in turn. The left thing criticising someone is an act of suppression. They seem to think if you are on their side, then you are beyond criticism.

look at what happened to Nicky Hager, and what he is currently going through, after the police raided his house because he dared to criticise and get involved in the Cameron Slater issue

He got raided because he worked with a criminal hacker, and used information from the criminal.

It needs to be said that there are too many cows.

People don’t believe me when I say it is official Green Party policy to shoot (or kill in some way) one in five cows.  Russel has confirmed this clearly.

I would just like to say that my view is that humanity faces some really big challenges in the decades ahead, particularly around sustainability and climate change, and around inequality and poverty, but also around democracy.

All too often Green MPs seem to have a view that humanity makes awful choices and everything is going backwards. In fact the world is a far far better place than it has ever been.

But we also have huge opportunities. The world is finite—that is true—but human creativity is infinite. Human generosity is infinite. Human courage is infinite. So we have access to some fantastic resources. As well as facing these big challenges and problems we have inherited from the past, we have also inherited lots of great things from the past, and we have the opportunity to really create a world of abundance for everyone and for all of us living within the finite limits of the natural world. I think that it is an opportunity that we really should grasp with both our hands, because our children deserve nothing less.

Finally a small amount of optimism.

Danger Will Robinson Danger

Stuff reports:

Direct flights to Singapore, Hong Kong and Dubai could be on the cards for the capital if an extension to Wellington Airport’s runway goes ahead, the council has heard.

Note the weasel words of “could be”. Not will be, probably will be, or should be but could be.

A torrid affair with Angelina Jolie might be on the cards for me, if ratepayers give me $300 million.

But any decision to proceed with the $300 million move will have to be made without an airline being locked-in to start operating the long-haul flights.

No, no, no no.

That is build it and they will come thinking. Or in this case build it and they could come.

If one or more airlines made a firm commitment to fly to Wellington if the runway was extended, then it could be worth pursuing. But with no commitment from any airline, this could be a huge white elephant.

Wellington City councillors were told on Thursday that the city would have to show its hand first when it came to the proposed 300-metre extension because it was unlikely a long-haul airline would put serious consideration into adding the capital as a destination until the longer runway was a certainty.

Buy me a $300 million chicken and I could lay an egg.

Cops tighten up gun rules

The Herald reports:

Police have today reacted to a current affairs TV story which exposed how easy it is to buy a gun online without a firearms licence by closing the loophole and bolstering its rules.

Good.

The fact that the journalist used fake details is beside the point. Do we think criminals wanting guns would worry about signing a form with false details?

There was obviously a problem with the system if Heather can fill in a form, and have a gun arrive in the post, despite having no licence. Claiming you have one is not enough – there must be a robust system to check.

But today, police have announced new rules, which immediately come into force.

Would-be purchasers are now required to physically take their purchase order into a police station and present their firearms licence to be checked by a police arms officer.

“Once police are satisfied, the form will then be passed to the dealer by police following verification,” a statement released to NZME News Service says.

“This will negate any need for dealers to cross check details – though police will be continuing to audit dealers on a regular basis to make sure the system is working appropriately.

It is unclear if the problem was with the gun dealer or the Police, but the system was obviously broken if it could be fooled so easily.

Gun City’s millionaire owner David Tipple told the Herald last night that he would go ahead with a private prosecution against du Plessis-Allan if a police investigation into the current affairs sting decided against prosecution.

“I’m ready for the battle,” he said. “She’s going down 100 per cent.”

He can try. She did break the law but she has a strong public interest defence. I suspect she’d get discharged without conviction.

O’Connor retiring

The Herald reports:

Long-standing Police Association president Greg O’Connor will stand down from the top position, saying returning to a “beat cop” again is an option when his term expires next year.

Mr O’Connor’s announcement at the Police Association Conference in Wellington this afternoon was the first public confirmation of his plans.

Greg has been a very effective president for the Police Association. In fact more than once people have said he is better at defeeding what Police have done that the Police Commissioner.

Reflecting on the past 20 years, Mr O’Connor said one of the worst moments of his presidency was witnessing the treatment of the police officer who shot Waitara man Steven Wallace in 2000.

The policeman, Keith Abbott, faced a private prosecution for murder.

Mr O’Connor described Mr Abbott as “a truly innocent man who just did what was expected of him”.

It was painful for him to watch Mr Abbott publicly vilified, Mr O’Connor said.

Mr Wallace’s family brought a private prosecution against the officer, but he was acquitted after a trial.

The Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) also cleared Mr Abbott, eight years and eleven months after the shooting.

That was appalling. As I said in 2009:

I have always been amazed that there has been any controversy over the shooting of . I’ve criticised the cops on many occasions, but not for shooting a guy who is trying to kill them.  If armed cops tell you to drop your baseball bat, and you not only refuse but you keep advancing on the officer proclaiming you are going to kill him – well I call it suicide by cop. He even continued to advance after they fired a warning shot .

Back to O’Connor:

Mr O’Connor said he still believed New Zealand had one of the world’s best police forces.

This was because it was a cohesive, national force, and the product of a society that was both non-corrupt and “nimble” or highly efficient, he said.

Being a national force is a big part of that.

He was sometimes aghast when people told him New Zealand ought to look abroad, such as to the USA, for better policing models, he said.

“People moan about MPs travelling. Every MP should travel every year, just to see how bad things are overseas, so they don’t make stupid decisions here that are ruining the things that make New Zealand good.”

Not a bad idea.

If Trudeau was female, would the media be reporting how hot he is?

Stuff reports:

The muscled, shirtless man stands facing the camera, fists up in a boxer’s pose, with a large tattoo of the Earth surrounded by a raven visible on his left shoulder. The photograph caused social media to swoon on Tuesday over Canada’s newly minted prime minister, Justin Trudeau.

The day after Trudeau’s stunning victory over Prime Minister Stephen Harper, the global focus was not on the Liberal leader’s promise to withdraw Canada from the combat mission against Islamic State, or his pledge to run a C$10 billion ($11.4 billion) annual budget deficit for three years to invest in infrastructure, but on the apparently universal agreement that he was not just good looking, but model handsome.

I’ve got no problem with people and media stating the obvious – that Trudeau is good looking.

However I suspect if he was Justine Trudeau, and she received the same amount of commentary on how attractive she is, we’d have endless lectures and denunciations about how sexist and wrong this is.

Should Labour decline Helen Clark’s membership?

I blogged on how a former Labour list nominee was refused membership of Labour because he had operated a Facebook page which “contained unhelpful comments”.

Well Helen Clark’s comments on how it would be unthinkable not to sign up to the TPP have been extremely unhelpful to Labour.

So will Labour’s NZ Council refuse Helen Clark as a member as she has said something unhelpful to them?

Five months of spending demands are more than actual increase of six years

I blogged last week how various lobby groups and political parties had made $8.4 billion of spending demands in the five months since the Budget.

Well by coincidence that is just about the level of actual increases over the last six years. So five months of demands (and I probably missed some) are at the same level of actual increases over six years.

2008/09 core crown expenses were $63.7 billion and in 2014/15 they were $72.3 billion.  An increase of $8.65 billion. That is less than just the last two years of Labour which saw spending go up $9.95 billion.

The reasons we are back into surplus is because of six years of fiscal restraint.

Guest Post: Tinker to Evers to Chance to McFly

A guest post by Tom Hunter:

In Back to the Future II there’s a scene where the character of Marty McFly, transported thirty years into the future world of 2015, sees a piece of sports news and exclaims:

 “Wait a minute, Cubs win World Series? Against Miami?”

 It’s somewhat of an inside-joke. When the movie was released in 1989 there was no baseball team in Miami and the Chicago Cubs had not won the World Series (WS) in 81 years. But the Boston Red Sox drought had then lasted for 71 years. The Cubs cross-town rivals, the White Sox, stood at 72 years. Moreover, the team was in the playoffs that year and it must have seemed reasonable odds to the scriptwriters to think that by 2015 they’d win it all. Surely no club could be such losers for that long?

 It’s now 106 years.

 No other major team in any sport has experienced such a drought. For 69 years they’ve not even won the National League (NL) pennant, which merely gets you into the WS. The next worst baseball team are the Cleveland Indians on 67 years.

 A writer once said that there were two types of baseball losers. The first type were the Red Sox, who specialised in regularly taking their fans to the brink of winning it all – before stabbing them right through the heart. The second type were the Cubs – who never win anything. But as if to show the way, the Red Sox in 2004, and the White Sox in 2005, would prove it was possible, leaving the Cubs stranded almost alone on a desert island of dull mediocrity.

 It’s a cruel reflection on their players and fans that many would take the fate of the pre-2004 Red Sox at least once in a lifetime. The famous Chicago journalist (and Cub fan), Mike Royko, would exhibit this feeling by inventing what he called “The Cubs Factor”: in any World Series one could predict the winner by counting up the number of ex-Cubs players on each team; the winner was whoever had the fewest. Fans created the Emil Verban society, celebrating a perfectly ordinary Cubs player – no Hall of Famer he – as the perfect example of the team. Verban was still alive when the club started in the 1970’s and felt it to be an insult, until he met President Reagan and discovered that he too, was a member of the society and a fan.

 It did not have to be this way. Chicago always had the population and wealth to supply a team with all the cash it needed to buy good players or produce them through the so-called “farm” system, the layers of minor league teams through which young stars can rise. The Cubs were one of the founding teams in the 19th century, helping create the National League. They dominated the 1900’s, winning two World Series against the new American League, losing a couple of others, but always threatening. Fans of other teams lamented the Cubs powerful infield defence, even writing a poem about them  – “Baseball’s Sad Lexicon” – Tinker-to-Evers-to-Chance,  who regularly destroyed opponents with their fielding. This strength continued well into the 1930’s, where they appeared in several post-season series, and lost, but no differently than did other storied clubs such as the New York Giants and the Brooklyn Dodgers.

 It was not until after the last World Series for the Cubs in 1945 that the decline truly began. For  almost four decades the team would linger at or near the bottom of the tables. This was not losing, it was futility. There was a brief burst of sunshine in 1969 when they dominated the NL teams – right up until the last month of the season, when they collapsed, the NY Mets sweeping past them to top the NL and enter the World Series, which they then won. Adding heat to the ashes in the mouths of Cubs fans was the fact that the Mets had only existed since 1962. It was in this period that the story of The Curse began to spread.

 The Red Sox had the Curse of the Bambino of course. The ghost of Babe Ruth, sold in 1918 after he’d pitched the Red Sox to yet another championship, because the owners thought his pitching days were done and that his batting did not fit the world of “small ball”, steadily moving runners around the bases. They were right on both counts but Ruth simply changed the game itself by hitting endless home runs, coming to dominate it as no other player had – and he would do it for their bitterest enemies, the New York Yankees, winning championship after championship. This was a curse of great power and evil, cast by the Dark Lord himself, a lightning scar stamped onto the foreheads of Red Sox players and fans for all to see and whisper about. The team that lived – while its fans suffered and died.

 The Curse of the Goat does not rise to that level, yet another example of the pallid nature of Cub-world. The story goes that in 1945 the owner of the famous Billygoat Tavern strolled uptown to Wrigley Field to watch a WS game, with his pet billygoat in tow. Refused entry to the stadium on account of the animal, he laid a curse upon the Cubs, declaring that they would never again win a championship. Nobody took any notice and the spread of the apocryphal story was likely due to the fact that the tavern was the watering hole of Royko, Studs Terkel and other Chicago scribes. But it stuck. So much so that at one point when the team had lost the first sixteen games of a season – leading a radio DJ to exclaim, “Come on guys! Let’s win ………. one” – the son of the owner was tracked down by fans, who persuaded him to walk a billygoat around the field before the start of a game. The Cubs lost anyway.

 Could fate be any more cruel.

 It turns out that it could. If anything the 1970’s were the bottom of the barrel. The real problem was not the magical powers of farm animals but ownership and management. The team had been owned for decades by the Wrigley Family (of Wrigley chewing gum fame) and they treated the team the way an ageing English Lord might treat some shabby castle he’s inherited. There was no focus, no fight, and perhaps not even much desire to make the team winners.

 Their fortunes only began to improve when the Wrigley family finally tired of their chew toy and sold out in 1981. Just three years later the Cubs made it to the playoffs. Perhaps not knowing how to cope with this, they lost against a team that seemed no better than they. The new owners were the Tribune Company. They made the team the centrepiece of their local TV station, WGN, and then linked it to other TV stations across the country to form a so-called “Super-Station”. With cable and satellite TV in their infancy the Tribune created hundreds of thousands of new fans and re-captured old ones in areas that had no major league team, or which contained pockets of Chicago and Mid-West retirees, where the big networks would often only show games from big name clubs. The team developed a substantial and unique nationwide following. But they were also pushed to win.

 They would hit the playoffs again in 1989, ’98, 2003, ’07, and ’08. Each time they fell short, but this was still manna from heaven for survivors of the Wrigley famine. Fans began to calculate that at a minimum the law of averages would begin to tell in their favour; make the playoffs often enough and sooner or later lightning must strike.

 The 2003 series showed that the game is something more than averages. Playing for the NL Championship against the Florida Marlins in a best-of-seven series, the Cubs were leading in games by 3-2 and, in the eighth inning of the decisive sixth game, by 3 runs to 0. With one out, a Marlin batter popped up a foul ball down the left-field fence, the ball falling just one row into the crowd. Moises Alou, a skilled and experienced fielder reached into the crowd to grab the ball with his mitt, his eyes following it all the way. But Alou suddenly found the hands of a fan – Steve Bartman – also reaching for the ball, which hit them and bounced further into the crowd.

 Despite his years of professional play Alou lost the plot, yelling at the fan and arguing for long minutes with the umpires. The ugly mood spread fast. It was as if a switch were thrown and the power drained from the fans and the players, although it would be in keeping with the Curse to imagine the feeling as one in which a magical, happy spell has suddenly been broken. In an instant stomachs fell, mouths went dry and throats closed as all the old fears rose up: the black bile that accompanies being the “Loveable Losers” of baseball, and cursed.

 The team went from being on cruise control to simply falling apart, the Marlins feasting on them for eight runs in that inning to win. A listless, demoralised Cubs team lost the next game and the series. They had been just five outs away from entering the World Series to play against a shaky Yankee team, whom the Marlins would beat up to gain their second WS win in just over a decade of existence. Steve Bartman needed four beefy cops around him to leave the stadium and found himself subject to almost intolerable abuse afterward just for being at the centre of sporting history and doing what any fan would – but the truth was that Alou, and then his team, had simply not coped with the ordinary adversity of a single mistake.

 Fans were annoyed rather than distressed at later losses in 2007 and 2008, when the Cubs were simply beaten by better teams. But 2003 was an introduction to Red Sox world. It was little consolation to know that the they had also fallen the same way that year – in seven games and getting to within five outs of winning the AL pennant. Naturally it was against the Yankees. Fans across America raised their eyebrows and marvelled at the power of the respective curses.

 So here we are in 2015 and the Cubs are in the playoffs again. Hopes, always pegged low, have steadily risen. They entered as a Wild Card team, due to finishing third in the Central Division of the NL. But this time it’s only because the two best teams in baseball – in terms of season wins and losses – came 1st and 2nd in the same division. The Cubs finished the season of 162 games with a better win-loss ratio than any other team in either league except those two – the Pittsburgh Pirates and old foes from down the I-55, the St Louis Cardinals. The latter had won 100 games, always the mark of a great team.

 Incredibly the Cubs have now beaten both, and beaten them well. They’re a young team and seem to be playing with joy and verve, uncaring of the weight of history. They will soon face the despised enemies of Cub fans everywhere, the New York Mets – a team whose evil I never fully understood until a TV break during a game when their “fans from Down Under” were introduced: Australian cricketers Greg and Ian Chapple. The series will decide the NL Pennant and see who goes to the show on October 27.

 So is this it? Will the capricious gods of baseball be appeased? Will the curse of the damnable goat be lifted? Will the shameful stain of Loveable Losers be wiped away? You’ll have to forgive this New Zealand fan if I turn my lonely eyes away from the All Blacks in late October. They’re already winners many times over and I must support the underdog of all underdogs.

 No Cub fan will ever get too confident, even if they’re leading three games to zero, holding a 10 run lead going into the 9th inning of the decider. But if a smoking DeLorean screams into existence at the entrance to Wrigley field on October 21st and Marty McFly steps from it to pronounce that the Cubs will win, the fans would not doubt their eyes and ears for a moment.

 After 106 years of failure they’ll believe anything!

The need for disclosure

TVNZ reports:

The Government is under fire for funding a study on euthanasia that’s being run by researchers who support assisted dying.

Opponents are angry, claiming the study asking doctors and nurses for their views on euthanasia is biased and flawed.

The study is being led by two Auckland researchers, Dr Phillipa Malpas and Dr Pam Oliver, who told participants “we are independent”.

But they didn’t reveal they’re members of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society which is pushing for a law change to let doctors help patients die.

I would have thought that was important information to disclose.

The survey is meant for doctors and nurses only. 

But ONE News accessed it online and found it easy to submit fake responses.

Oh dear. Not very robust. Were participants asked to supply details that can be verified?

 

The state of the environment

environment

For the first time, under new environmental reporting laws, we have an independent state of the environment report. Good data is the first step to sensible decision making on environmental issues.

The full report is here. It is very good and comprehensive and future reports will be a valuable indicator of whether we are making progress in key areas.

 

Productivity Commission on land for housing

The Productivity Commission has done a final report on using land for housing. The report is over 350 pages long with lots of data.

Their recommendations:

  • When councils review their rating policies in the future, they should review the evidence in this report with a view to adopting land value as the basis for setting general rates.
  • In future local government amalgamations, central and local government should take the opportunity to consider the merits of adopting land value rating to encourage the efficient use of land.
  • The Government should investigate removing the rating exemption on land owned by the Crown (including on land used for health and education purposes), land used by local government for recreation and community facilities, and the Crown’s exemption from other local government fees and charges.
  • Councils should remove minimum apartment size rules in District Plans
  • Councils should remove minimum parking requirements in District Plans and make more use of traffic demand management techniques (eg, variable pricing for on-street parking).
  • Councils should lift current height limits where it cannot be demonstrated that the benefits outweigh the costs; and undertake robust cost–benefit analyses before considering the introduction of building height limits.
  • Councils should review District Plan controls on the internal design and construction of buildings or dwellings that exceed standards set under the Building Act 2004, with a view to removing them.
  • The Government should amend the Land Transport Management Act 2003 to allow pricing on existing roads where a case has been made that it would enable more effective use of the roading network.
  • The Government should legislate to create a regime similar to Special Housing Areas whereby certain developments undertaken by local urban development authorities are designated by Order in Council as having the potential to deliver significant numbers of dwellings, and within which the urban development authority will operate with different powers and land use rules.
  • The Government should provide for ‘designated developments’ undertaken by local urban development authorities to allow higher height and storey limits than in the Special Housing Areas regime, and to allow non-residential uses that may be necessary for the development to be economically viable.
  • The Government should legislate to grant compulsory acquisition powers to local urban development authorities for ‘designated developments’, subject to the normal processes, compensation and protections of the Public Works Act 1981.
  • The Government should establish a threshold for the price difference between developable and non-developable land, beyond which it will ensure additional developable land is made available.
  • The Government should establish a process involving the relevant council to bring forward the release of additional greenfield land where relative land prices exceed the threshold set.

There is no one silver bullet there, but the combined impact of the recommendations would be considerable.

How much difference could this make:

A report considering global housing affordability issues concludes that “unlocking land supply at the right location is the most critical step in providing affordable housing” (McKinsey Institute, 2014, p. 7). The report estimates that unlocking land supply could reduce the annualised cost of a standard unit of housing by between 8% and 23%. Remarkably, in the world’s least affordable cities (including Auckland), unlocking land supply could help to reduce the cost of housing by between 31% and 47%. Productivity improvements in construction, by taking advantages of scale or taking an industrial approach to construction, could help to reduce the cost of housing by a further 12%–16%.

So in total, you could halve house prices in Auckland and reduce them by a third elsewhere.

Local regulatory constraints to releasing land and development capacity for housing have national and economy-wide impacts. Overseas research suggests that constraints on the supply of housing in high-wage cities can price out workers who would be more productive if they could move to take up the opportunities available. Lifting barriers to urban growth by releasing land and development capacity in these cities would increase a country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Quantifying the size of the prize is difficult, but it could be significant. One US study (Hsieh & Moretti, 2015) estimates that lowering regulatory constraints on land supply in three high-productivity US cities – New York, San Francisco and San Jose – to that of the median level of restrictiveness in the United States would increase GDP by 9.5%. A productivity bonus anywhere near this level would be of major significance to the New Zealand economy. Indeed, it is difficult to think of many other policies that would yield such an improvement in the nation’s economy.

I hope the Government adopts these recommendations, and also that opposition parties support them.

Net annual migration to Australia now just 70

The latest monthly data from Stats NZ is here.

migrationsep15

I think next month may be the one when annual migration with Australia turns positive for the first time ever.

In the year to September 2015 we had 24,820 leave to Australia and 24,750 arrive.

So net migration with Australia  is around one person every five days. In 2008 it was 100 people a day!

2nd biannual media opinion statistics

In April I published my inaugural data looking at the opinion of editorials and columnists at the two major media sites of Stuff and NZ Herald.

Six months has passed since then, and I can now publish an update. This will allow us to see both what the sentiment has been, but also has it changed from the six months previously.

Again some notes on the data:

  • It covers six months – from 1 April 2015 to 30 September 2015.
  • It only covers “opinion” columns and editorials. It does not cover news stories. It is designed to shed light on what the newspaper or journalist/columnist thinks – rather than what the story is. Of course it is influenced by the stories of the moment.
  • Data is collated from the NZ Herald and Stuff websites every morning, checking the main pages, news pages, politics pages and opinion pages. It is possible some columns and editorials have been missed if they were not on the websites until later in a day. However if seen on subsequent days they are added to the table.
  • Where a journalist or columnist has done fewer than three columns that reference the Government or political parties, they are not included in the six month summary below, but they may be included in summaries over longer time periods.
  • An editorial or column is assessed against whether someone reading it will feel more positive or more negative about the Government/National, Labour, Greens or NZ First.
  • If an editorial or column is not on a political issue, or just talks about an issue in a way that is neither supportive nor critical of a party, then they are not included. This is just an analysis of columns and editorials that are positive or negative for a political party or the Government. This is deliberate, it is about seeing the balance between positive and negative for those that do take a stance.
  • This is not an analysis of media bias. This is an analysis of opinion. It is quite legitimate for columnists and editorials to have views that are not split 50/50 between the parties. And it is fair to say one would generally expect an incumbent Government to be criticised more often than it is supported.

National

natsep15

Turning first to the editorials of the three metro newspapers (only they were included), the Dominion Post is the most relentlessly critical of National. Of 42 editorials referencing the Government or National, 35 are critical and only 7 supportive, so 83% negative.  I’ve also noticed a trend that the Dominion Post editorials have become something more akin to a left wing blog, than a more reflective editorial. Time and time again I’ve noticed the author never loses an opportunity to take a dig at the Government, stating opinion as fact. They are very very different in tone to the other newspaper editorials, even when they may both be criticising the Government.

The Herald is 62% negative and 38% positive.  This is less critical than the previous six months when it was 79% negative.

The Press is 50/50.

Turning to the columnists, the one who has written the most critical of National is Brian Rudman with 15 negative and no positives. Chris Trotter, Hamish Rutherford, Jane Bowron and Paul Little have also been all negatives – but have written far fewer columns.

Of those with a mixture of positive and negative, Dita de Boni is 94% negative, Vernon Small 89%, Duncan Garner 86%, Audrey Young 83%, John Armstrong 82%, Fran O’Sullivan 80%, Peter Lyons 80% and Tracy Watkins 69%.

Andrea Vance has been 50/50 and Bernard Hickey and Mike Yardley more positive than negative (but few articles)

Combining columns and editorials, the Herald website is 77% negative and 23% positive in its opinion, while Stuff is 83% negative and 18% positive.

Compared to the previous six months, the coverage has been slightly less negative, with the Herald dropping from 81% to 77% and Stuff from 85% to 83%.

Some left wing blogs insist that the media (and especially the Herald) is pro-National and too soft on it. In terms of editorials and opinion columns, it simply isn’t true.

Labour

labsep15

Turning to coverage of Labour there has been a significant change from the last six months. Up until March, 74% of Herald columns and editorials on Labour were positive, but in the last six months only 25% have been. Likewise Stuff has gone from 33% positive to 21% positive.

The only columnist who has been more positive than negative on Labour has been John Armstrong.

Greens

Turning to the Greens, the Herald has had seven editorials or columns on them and four were positive and three negative. Stuff has been the same – four positive and three negative.

NZ First

And NZ First has had the most positive coverage with five positive and three negative from the Herald. Ironic as they complain the most the media is biased against them.  With Stuff they have had two positive and no negative.

Who is claiming former MP travel perks

The Herald reports:

Former MPs and their spouses have been named for the first time for their travel spending on the taxpayer.

Between them they racked up more than $716,000 on the controversial perk in the year to June 30.

The biggest spenders include Rosalind Burdon, spouse of former National cabinet minister Philip Burdon, who claimed $12,913.

Of the MPs, former Labour MP Harry Duynhoven claimed $13,793, and Sir Roger Douglas spent $12,612 on international and domestic travel.

This information has long been secret – but a law change has seen it revealed, including what each former MP and spouse claimed.

Good to see this info is now public. Continues a trend of greater transparency.

Former MPs who were in Parliament before 1999 and their spouses can claim discounts on international travel pegged to the value of a business-class return trip to London. They also get 12 return domestic flights a year.

And also good that no new MPs since 1999 get them.

Seventy-seven former MPs claimed, at a total cost of $342,507 – $268,706 of which was for international travel.

A larger cost came from 77 spouses of former politicians, who between them claimed $373,729 – $305,956 of which was on international flights.

So the spouses and partners are claiming more than the former MPs!

Former MP/ year left Parliament and party/ amount claimed:
1. Harry Duynhoven (2008, Labour): $13,793
2. Sir Roger Douglas (2011, Labour/Act): $12,612
3. Michael Bassett (1990, Labour): $11,836
4. Sir Lockwood Smith (2013, National): $11,472
5. Sir Kerry Burke (1990, Labour): $11,351
6. Warren Kyd (2002, National): $9890
7. Chris Carter (2011, Labour): $9551
8. Marian Hobbs (2008, Labour): $9311
9. John Carter (2011, National): $9216
10. Sir Michael Cullen (2009, Labour): $9196
11. Sir Douglas Kidd (2002, National): $8936
12. Graeme Lee (1996, National/Christian Democrats): $8520
13. Sir Jim McLay (1987, National): $8339
14. Sir Don McKinnon (2000, National): $8332
15. Clem Simich (2008, National): $7721

And the spouses:

TOP 15 SPOUSES OF FORMER MPs:

1. Rosalind Burdon – Philip Burdon (1996, National) $12,913
2. Margaret Duynhoven – Harry DuynhoveN (2008, Labour) $12,144
3. Noeline Colman – Fraser Colman (1987, Labour) $11,778
4. Lady Clare De Lore – Sir Don McKinnon (2000, National) $11,469
5. Judith Bassett – Michael Bassett (1990, Labour) $11,444
6. Faheim Rastar Burke – Sir Kerry Burke (1990, Labour) $11,105
7. Dianne Kyd – Warren Kyd (2002, National) $10,987
8. Lady Jane Kidd – Sir Doug Kidd (2002, National) $10,907
9. Lady Glennis Douglas – Sir Roger Douglas (2011 Labour/Act) $10,827
10. Lady Alexandra Smith – Sir Lockwood Smith ((2013, National) $10,580
11. Susannah Walker – Bert Walker (1978, National) $10,380
12. Peter Kaiser – Chris Carter (2011, Labour) $10,088
13. Anne Collins – Sir Michael Cullen (2009, Labour) $9835
14. Leoni Carter – John Carter (2011, National) $9234
15. Daphne Lee – Graeme Lee (1996, National, Christian Dem) $8520

So Bert Walker was an MP for 18 years and his widow has been getting the perk for 40 years!

King to stay on as Deputy

Stuff reports:

Labour leader Andrew Little has snubbed rising star Jacinda Ardern for the deputy leadership after confirming veteran MP Annette King will stay in the role.

Little had previously signalled King’s appointment as deputy was only an interim measure while he sized up potential candidates in his first 12 months in the job.

With Ardern’s star on the rise it was widely expected she would get the job because of her broad appeal in the Auckland electorate.

You need to poll well in Auckland to win Government. The top three MPs in Labour are all Wellington based MPs.  They also make up four of the top six.

The irony is that Little has announced this on 21 October 2015 – the official Back to the Future Day.

Because when Back o The Future screened in 1985, Annette was already an MP. The film makers chose a date so far in the future they thought the world would be massively changed (and it has with the Internet). But Labour’s going to go into the 2017 election with a deputy leader who represents the past, not the future.

I can understand why. It is beyond dispute that Annette is their most capable MP. But it is hardly a vote of confidence in the rest of caucus, that Little doesn’t have anyone else up to it.

Is Heather going to jail?

Stuff reports:

TV3 reporter Heather du Plessis-Allan has found herself in the midst of a police investigation after illegally buying a gun for her current affairs show.

Auckland City Police has announced it has opened a criminal investigation into the purchase of the gun over the internet.

The purchase was made by the TV3 reporter for a piece on current affairs show Story, due to air on Wednesday night. 

In a statement released on Wednesday evening, a police spokeswoman did not name du Plessis-Allan but said police would not rule out charging the woman who bought the gun. 

The police investigation stemmed from a report “from a woman alleging that false details had been used to fraudulently obtain a firearm via an online dealer”, the police statement said.

“For anyone to possess a firearm without having the necessary license is a criminal offence and, if proven in court, could result in a sentence of up to three months’ imprisonment or a fine of up to $1000.

I doubt any prosecution would succeed as it was done to highlight the system was not working. But there may be consequences for signing a document with false details.

“Charges for obtaining by deception, if proven, carries penalties ranging from three months imprisonment up to seven years imprisonment depending on the value of the item obtained.”

The Police are embarrassed that Heather showed up the flaws in their system. They should fix the system rather than go on a vendetta.

One in 400 Auckland students turns up to fees protest

Stuff reports:

University of Auckland students have rallied to protest fee rises, saying it will saddle them with long-running debt issues.

Around 100 students gathered at the university’s quad on Monday to protest a proposed 3 per cent rise in course fees. …

Carrying lunches and the occasional placard, the students crowded the quad to protest those increases. A stage and PA system were set up for speakers, who included student representatives and politicians.

Probably wasn’t even 100 as some would have been there just for lunch.

So 41,853 Auckland students did not attend the rally, and 100 did.

I guess Princes Street Labour doesn’t have the members it once did.

You can’t negotiate an end to storms

A rather silly post by Danyl:

One thing we should have learned from the TPP is that we’re entering a period of diminishing returns from free trade deals. But there’s also an opportunity cost here. While all of our diplomats are trying to negotiate lower dairy tariffs to grow our economy they’re not doing anything about climate change, which is a major economic challenge that requires a diplomatic solution.

Droughts and extreme weather events are expensive things. The 2008 drought cost the country about $2.8 billion in one year (the TPPA is supposed to bring in $2 billion over ten years). To avoid entering a period of catastrophic droughts and storms we have to agree on a global reduction of carbon emissions. So that’s something need to be negotiated between states. Y’know – diplomatically. It is so, so stupid that we have all of these diplomats running around trying to eke out trivial gains from trade agreements while ignoring this massive looming crisis that is going to devastate our economy.

Wow this is pretty weak stuff. Where do I start:

  • Incredibly stupid to suggest that MFAT can’t both negotiate trade deals and negotiate on climate change. It is not an either or.
  • Comparing the cost of a drought to the gains from a trade deal is also stupid. MFAT can’t negotiate a drought away
  • Yes increased greenhouse gases will probably lead to more extreme weather events, but even if an agreement was made this year to reduce emissions, it would take decades to make an impact

 

Herald would have you think entire suburbs in Auckland can be demolished

The Herald reports:

Thousands of homes across Auckland have been stripped of heritage protection, according to new maps presented to councillors at a confidential briefing on Friday.

Entire suburbs, including Mission Bay, Kohimarama, St Heliers, Takapuna, Milford and Belmont, have virtually no heritage protection, leaving them open for demolition.

Yes,you could wake up next and find entire suburbs have been demolished!

We must protect home owners from themselves!

All that has happened is that the Auckland Council is now looking at only protecting homes with actual heritage value, as opposed to protecting every pre-1944 home in Auckland.

This is a good thing. Blanket rules are stupid.

Watkins on Key

Tracy Watkins writes:

Is Key too honest? It would be a bit rich to take him to task for that, given that honesty is an attribute we prize most highly in politicians. So the answer to that is yes and no. The Key we press gallery hacks see day to day is a politician through and through, someone who weighs up his answers, who knows his opponents’ weak points, and who understands the impact of his words. …

And then there is the other Key, the one who throws caution to the wind, jokes with a shock jock about his gay red shirt and horses around by pulling a waitress’ pony tail. That’s Key the anti-politician, the bloke who’s just like you and me, or someone we know at least. That connection with voters, still strong after nearly a decade, is National’s not so secret – and clearly most potent – weapon.

So Key the anti-politician will confess to Radio Hauraki that he stole. But Key the politician expands with the explanation that it was an apple off a neighbour’s tree.

My theft was milk bottle money and a chocolate bar!

Special economic zones

Stuff reports:

New Zealand does not capitalise on its regional potential and should create special economic zones for a better approach to policy-making, a new report has found.

The New Zealand Initiative has proposed creating special economic zones that would see policy changed for regions that ask for it, and need it, but not in others.

The public policy think tank report, In the zone: creating a toolbox for regional prosperity, says special economic zones could pilot policy reforms, with successful policies rolled out more broadly.

Allowing a more regional say on policy reform would not only let cities and regions find the policy solutions that work for them but would also act as case studies for other regions.

I hope the Government legislates to allow this. By having different policy settings in different regions, we could measure the impact of those policy changes – which will have beneficial impact of the rest of NZ.

The report highlighted China’s Shenzhen as a spectacular success, which showcased the possibilities of special zones.

Anyone who doubts the powers of a special economic zone should visit Shenzhen.

The SEZ was established in 1979. Back then Shenzhen was a town called Sham Chun Hui. It had a population of 30,000. So think of it as Timaru.

Today Shenzhen has a population of almost 11 million and GDP of US$261 billion – around 50% greater than all of NZ. And under 40 years ago it was a Timaru.

“Trying policies in limited areas and assessing whether they work would allow New Zealand to harness the advantages of federalism in encouraging policy innovation, but within a unitary state …We propose giving councils a bigger stake in economic growth … Councils will be able to identify barriers to their own growth that neither we, nor the Wellington bureaucracy, have thought of,” the report says.

Local Government New Zealand chief executive Malcolm Alexander said special zones were not new to New Zealand –  in essence special housing areas in Auckland and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA) were already special zones, he said.

Special zones deserved serious consideration and were one of the 10 proposals outlined in the Local Government Funding Review to incentivise stronger economic performance in regions.

The right resources and incentives must be in place to enable growth and a special zone would be a useful instrument to drive a better alignment between unlocking regional opportunities and achieving national economic objectives, he said.

If Labour wanted to be bold, they’d announce this as policy.