Stuff reports:

During an earnest interview about the flag debate on the steps of Parliament on Tuesday afternoon, Seymour was talking about the symbols associated with countries.

“You don’t actually have to have every national logo on the flag,” Seymour said. So far, so sensible.

Then this: “The French, for instance, love the coq.”

Seymour immediately realised what he’d said, losing his composure as he burst into hysterics.

Watch the video, it’s hilarious.

To be fair to Seymour, others started laughing first, and then he lost his composure.

The order paper is here.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

1. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Finance: How is New Zealand’s labour market supporting resilience and delivering higher incomes for families?
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”, given unemployment has risen in each successive quarter, and now stands at 5.9 percent?
3. DAVID CLENDON to the Minister of Corrections: What was the reason for issuing each of the seven performance notices to Serco, which were then withdrawn; and what was the dollar amount for each of those notices?
4. MELISSA LEE to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: How is the Government helping students make more informed tertiary study decisions?
5. FLETCHER TABUTEAU to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?
6. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister for Building and Housing: Can he confirm that the 1,116 building consents issued in July in Auckland, and the 8,567 for the latest year, are the highest in 10 years, and what further steps is he talking to ensure the new build rate of houses in Auckland continues to grow?
7. PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister for Building and Housing: How much does MBIE estimate has been saved on building materials for a standard home by the Government’s suspensions of tariffs and anti-dumping duties on building products and, since its commencement in July 2014, by how many dollars has the price of the average Auckland home increased?
8. GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Does he agree with the Treasury that solar electricity generation is one of the opportunities with the “most potential” to “reduce our carbon dioxide emissions in the medium-to-long-term”; if so, does he think the current rules are working to give Kiwis going solar a fair go?
9. JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development: If reducing child poverty is a priority for her Government, why has the number of children living in poverty, based on the Household Incomes Report, increased from 260,000 in 2013, to 305,000 in 2014?
10. TODD MULLER to the Minister for Primary Industries: What recent reports has he received on growth in the avocado industry?
11. RICHARD PROSSER to the Minister of Conservation: Does she have confidence in all aspects of her department’s use of compound 1080 poison?
12. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: Does he stand by all his statements to the House last week in respect of tertiary education organisations?

National: Four questions on the labour market, tertisry students, building consents and avocados.

Labour: Four questions on unemployment, building tariffs, child poverty and tertiary institutes

Greens: Two questions on Mt Eden Prison and solar energy

NZ First: Two questions on PM standing by his statements and 1080

General Debate 3.00 pm to 4.00 pm

The general debate is 12 speeches of up to five minutes each for a debate of an hour.

Privileges Committee report 4.00 pm to 6.00 pm

Question of privilege regarding use of social media to report on parliamentary proceedings

Each MP can speak for up to 10 minutes on this debate. There is no time limit but it is likely the Speaker would close the debate before two hours.

Local Bill 7.30 pm to 9.30 pm

Wellington Town Belt Bill – first reading

This bill changes the legal framework for the Wellington Town Belt, with the aim of strengthening the protection of, and modernising the governance arrangements for, the Town Belt. It is in the name of Wellington Central MP Grant Robertson.

• Introduced September 2015

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

Members’ Bills 9.30 pm to 10.00 pm

New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income (Pro Rata Entitlement) Amendment Bill – first reading

The bill amends the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income Act 2001 to provide for a pro rata entitlement (PRE) to New Zealand superannuation (NZS) based on residence and presence in New Zealand between the ages of 20 and 65 years. The Bill also removes the “direct deduction” provisions of the Social Security Act 1964 which provide for the deduction of overseas pension from the New Zealand Superannuation paid to people who receive those pensions. It is in the name of NZ First MP Denis O’Rourke.

• Introduced June 2015

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

Extended Sitting 9.00 am to 1.00 pm (Thursday)

Government Notices of Motion

1. That, pursuant to sections 3(1), 3(4) and 5(1) of the Ombudsmen Act 1975, Peter Francis Boshier be appointed as an Ombudsman for a term of 5 years, with effect from 10 December 2015, and upon taking up the office of Ombudsman, he be appointed as Chief Ombudsman with effect from the date that the incumbent Chief Ombudsman vacates the position.
2. That, pursuant to section 11(2) and clause 2 of Schedule 3 of the Public Audit Act 2001, the House recommend to the Governor-General that Greg Mark Schollum of Wellington be appointed as the Deputy Controller and Auditor-General for a term not exceeding 5 years with effect from 28 September 2015.
3. That, pursuant to section 5 of the Independent Police Conduct Authority Act 1988 and section 32 of the Crown Entities Act 2004, this House recommends His Excellency the Governor-General reappoints Dianne Mary Macaskill and appoints Simon Murdoch, CNZM each as members of the Independent Police Conduct Authority, for terms of three years.
4. That, pursuant to section 10 of the Contraception, Sterilisation and Abortion Act 1977, this House recommends His Excellency the Governor-General reappoints Dame Linda Holloway as Chair, reappoints Dr Tangimoana Habib as a member and appoints Ms Carolyn McIlraith as a member of the Abortion Supervisory Committee each for terms of three years.

Speeches for the first two motions are ten minutes each and for the next two, five minutes each. There is no time limit but the debates are not expected to be overly long.

Government Bills

Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill – third reading

The bill makes a number of changes to the status of parcels of land, land titles, and previous Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Acts.

• Introduced: July 2008
• 1st reading: March 2009, passed 113 to 9 with only Greens opposed
• Select Committee report: September 2009, supported unanimously with amendments
• 2nd reading: May 2015, passed unanimously
• Committee of the Whole: July 2015, passed 109 to 12 with only NZ First opposed

The third reading consists of 12 speeches of up to 10 minutes each so the debate is a maximum of two hours.

Building (Pools) Amendment Bill – first reading

This Bill will amend the Building Act 2004 and repeal the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987 to reduce the compliance burden currently imposed on pool owners and territorial authorities in relation to residential pools while maintaining child safety.

• Introduced September 2015

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

The Conservatives are wasting no time.

Stuff reports:

Prime Minister John Key broke no rules in deleting text messages, the guardian of the country’s public records says.

Chief Archivist Marilyn Little has published a review of Key’s record keeping. She began the probe in November after Key revealed he binned texts from Dirty Politics blogger Cameron Slater.

Little says Key received poor advice from officials. But his practice of routinely deleting messages for “security purposes” is  “pragmatic” and unlikely to break laws surrounding public records. 

She added: “The Prime Minister’s current approach does not indicate any wilful or negligent disposal of records without authority.”

Advice and support offered to Key from Archives NZ, Ministerial and Secretariat Services and the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet was “inadequate” and a section of the law detailing with recording keeping is “confusing.”

But Little did not directly address the destroyed messages between Key and Slater.

She recommends text messages to and from ministers in their “official capacity” should be treated as a public record. If it is “of short term value” then can be disposed of.

It was always farcical to suggest that a Minister must keep every text message they send or receive, and have them archived. Sure if you negotiate a free trade agreement by text message, then that should be a public record, but most texts will not be.

But if the contents need action or are of “long-term” value then it must be retained and transferred to support staff for archiving. 

Key told Little he received a large volume of messages and the “vast bulk” were administrative. “Occasionally I may ask officials for information which is then provided to me usually in the form of an email or briefing note – the content of which is retained for the public record. I do not use a private cellphone.”

Green party co-leader James Shaw asked for the review, questioning if Key was in breach of the Public Records Act.

Shaw did more than question it. He said:

“The text messages are a public record under s4 of the Public Records Act; and disposal of these texts messages is contrary to s18.

So he was wrong.

“The laws are there to protect our democracy.

“The National Government has been eroding our democracy and this needs to stop.

Oh God, the hysteria.

This is Labour’s attempt to show they are a serious party. They included this in an actual bill to go before Parliament. Just two problems.

The minor one is they have used an incorrect description for the fourth flag. It is black, white and blue – not red, white and blue.

The major one is the referendum is meant to be preferential – you ranks the flags in order of preference. This is far fairer than First Past the Post. But in their haste they overlooked this and drew up a first pas the post ballot.

So two fails for them on this. How no one in Labour checks even bills for accuracy I don’t know.

And you know if they stopped playing politics and attacking National for implementing what was basically an identical policy to Labour’s, then the Red peak design could be included. All they have to do is back a bill which simply adds it on.

But they’d rather play politics.

Eric Crampton writes in the NZ Herald:

Last year, there were 72 kidney transplants from living donors. If fully compensating donors’ lost earnings enabled even only three more people to make that gift, the government would not lose any money from the increased compensation: it would save as much in dialysis costs as it would provide in compensation. Every additional donation enabled after that would save the government over a hundred thousand dollars.

A good policy.

One move that could help encourage donation while costing the government nothing would be the adoption of Israel’s priority system for live organ donors. Why does this matter? If you donate a kidney, there is always a small risk that you could, sometime down the line, regret your decision if your remaining kidney failed.

Those risks are small – the vast majority of living donors surveyed in the international literature are glad that they donated and would recommend it to others. But those lingering worries can make people hesitant to become donors.

Israel helped to solve that problem when its government provided live organ donors a guarantee that, should those donors ever need a transplant, they would not be at the back of a long queue.

Every living kidney donor has already made the queue one place shorter for everyone. Making sure those donors have a decent spot in the queue should they need a transplant encourages donation and helps makes the queue shorter. And it’s fair. The Select Committee should consider taking this extra step.

I agree donors should automatically go to the head of the queue.

I’ve managed to get a ticket to the next Donald Trump rally. It is on board the Battleship USS Iowa, so should be a doozy.

A Kiwiblog Foreign Correspondent has been dispatched to the event, and will blog on it here.

The Herald reports:

Lydia Ko’s dominance of world golf is well noted.

The youngest person ever to win a professional golf tour event. The youngest person ever to win an LPGA Tour event. The youngest player to be ranked number one. And now, the youngest woman to win a major championship, after – yes, another record – a record lowest final round in a women’s golf major.

Even if the All Blacks win the World Cup, I think Ko should be the Halberg Supreme Winner.

Being the best in the world in a globally competitive sport (tennis, golf, football, athletics, swimming) is a harder task than winning in a sport relatively few countries compete in.

Allister Heath writes:

This earthquake in social attitudes, the key to our political landscape,was captured in a little-noticed poll of 12,000 voters on election day by Lord Ashcroft, the Tory peer. The vast majority – 71 per cent – of Tory voters sensibly agreed that “overall, life in Britain is better than it was 30 years ago”. Shockingly, despite the substantial improvements to medical technology, incomes and life expectancy of the past 30 years, 51 per cent of Labour supporters disagreed. To them, 1985 was a better time, despite the unavailability of so many of the goods and services we now take for granted, the violent strikes, the Brixton race riots, the discrimination, the limited opportunities for women and of course the crippling 11.4 per cent rate of unemployment. …

Their pessimism is thus self-reinforcing. Lord Ashcroft’s poll shows that most Tories agree that “for most children growing up in Britain today, life will be better than it was for their parents”; yet 67 per cent of Labour supporters believe the opposite. While 86 per cent of Tories agree that “if you work hard, it is possible to be very successful in Britain no matter what your background”, 62 per cent of Labour voters take the opposite view. The world must look like a very bleak place to Corbynites.

On almost every important indicator things are better today in most countries than 30 years ago. Incomes are higher, people live longer, fewer children die.

In terms of recreation and entertainment we have infintely more choice – channels, stations, the Internet, games etc.

Air travel is no longer the preserve of the wealthy. Cars are safer, better and cheaper

Our medical knowledge is so much better than 30 years ago, and many things that used to kill you, don’t now.

We now have more computing power in our phones than almost any computer in the world had 30 years ago.

Crime and murder rates are much lower.

The world is no longer at risk of global nuclear war.

Many more homes are insulated

Services such as GPS maps that used to cost hundreds of dollars are now free.

The Internet.

Far fewer people die from smoking today.

And so on.

Is every single aspect of life today better than 30 years ago. Of course not. But in dozens and dozens of ways, and ways that matter to people, it is much better.

To those who claim it really was better 30 years ago, I wonder how many would be willing to go back in time and give up 2015 for 1985.

Audrey Young reports:

After it was confirmed late last night that Malcolm Turnbull would be the new Prime Minister of Australia, John Key said something he could only have hoped was true.

“I am confident our close and critical relationship with Australia will continue unchecked with the change of Prime Minister.”

By the end of Turnbull’s first press conference as leader, Key could be genuinely confident. New Zealand had a leader whose style should be emulated, Turnbull was saying. You have to be able to bring people with you by respecting their intelligence in the way you explain things. “Let me point to just one international leader – John Key, for example”

Key had been able to achieve significant economic reforms by doing just that: “By explaining complex issues and then making the case for them.”

Key managed to win the 2011 election despite a policy of partial asset sales. That is because he spent a year making the case for them. They were never popular, but they were accepted – people understood why the Government was doing them – even if they disagreed.

The Dom Post reports:

Former Wellington mayor Sir James Belich has died at the age of 88.

He was surrounded by family when he died on Sunday night after a short battle with Alzheimer’s.

“He died at home,” son-in-law, Colin Feslier said. “Shortly before his death he managed one of his last sentences, ‘I think I have had a good life’.”

Belich won the Wellington mayoralty in 1986 on the back of a campaign to end the practice of discharging raw sewage into the sea along the south coast.He brought a Labour majority with him on to council, which was a first for the capital city.

He held on to the mayoral chains until 1992, steering Wellington through a period of recession by encouraging investment in public works such as an extension to the Kilbirnie pool and the development of Civic Square. …

Belich was born in Awanui, Northland, to immigrants from the Dalmatian island of Korcula, off the coast of Croatia.

He studied at Otahuhu College, where he became head boy, before attending both Auckland University and Victoria University.

He spent a decade doing consular work in Auckland and Sydney, and forged a successful career in advertising before becoming mayor.

Belich was also an active member of the United Nations Association and was the founding president of Unicef New Zealand.

Belich was the third Wellington Mayor I recall – after Sir Michael Fowler and Ian Lawrence. Condolences to his family and friends.

The order paper is here.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

1. ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: What did he mean by his statement, “we want Housing New Zealand to be doing the best job it can”?
2. Dr PARMJEET PARMAR to the Minister of Finance: How is the Government’s programme of economic reform supporting the resilience of the New Zealand economy?
3. FLETCHER TABUTEAU to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?
4. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with the forecast of the Reserve Bank that unemployment will rise to 6.1 percent by March next year; if so what new action, if any, will he take to avoid this happening?
5. JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister for Economic Development:How is the Government helping New Zealand businesses to grow their exports?
6. JAMES SHAW to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement made yesterday on the flag referendum that “I’ve been very strongly of the view I think it’s in New Zealand’s interests to change, and I, you know, I hope the political parties can see past the petty politics of that”?
7. RON MARK to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?
8. Dr DAVID CLARK to the Minister for Economic Development: What concerns, if any, does he have about the state of the South Island economy, given the ANZ Regional Trends report shows that it shrank by 0.8 percent in the June quarter?
9. STUART SMITH to the Minister for Social Development: What is the Government doing to support sole parents off benefits and into study?
10. DAVID CLENDON to the Minister of Corrections: How many Specific Deductions were issued to SERCO, and then withdrawn, since SERCO took over management of Mt Eden Corrections Facility; and what is the amount of each of those withdrawals?
11. Dr MEGAN WOODS to the Minister responsible for the Earthquake Commission: Can he confirm that, based on the MBIE survey findings, EQC expects to remediate one-third of homes with “jack and pack” repairs in Canterbury; if so, what will the costs to EQC be?
12. SIMON O’CONNOR to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: What recent reports has he received on smart electricity grid development in New Zealand?

National: Four questions on the economy, exports, welfare reform and electricity

Labour: Four questions on Housing NZ, unemployment, South Island economy and EQC

Greens: Two questions on flag referendum and Mt Eden Prison

NZ First: Two idential questions on PM standing by his statements

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

International Finance Agreements Amendment Bill – first 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

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

Māori Purposes Bill – first reading

This Bill is an omnibus Bill that amends the Maori Purposes Act 1991, which governs the Wi Pere Trust and the Maori Trust Boards (Transitional Provisions) Order 2012.

• Introduced July 2015

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

Child Protection (Child Sex Offender Register) Bill – first reading

The bill establishes a Child Sex Offender Register that aims to reduce sexual reoffending against child victims, and the risk posed by serious child sex offenders by providing government agencies with the information needed to monitor child sex offenders in the community and providing up-to-date information that assists the Police to more rapidly resolve cases of child sex offending.

• Introduced August 2015

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

WCC Watch blogs:

WCC Watch’s insiders reliably inform us the Council employs over 40 people at Wakefield Street as part of its press and marketing operation – the figure of 43 is understood to be accurate. …

Britain’s capital has two tiers of government, much like metropolitan Wellington. Mayor Boris Johnson leads the Greater London Authority (GLA), which is the top tier. The GLA oversees transport, fire, planning and housing for 8.5 million residents of Europe’s fastest growing city.

Putting in new underground lines and housing an extra 1.5 million people in 15 years are huge challenges, but our man in the GLA (he’s one of Boris’s key lieutenants) says the GLA’s external comms team is no larger than 35.

So a Council with 8.5 million people has fewer PR staffers than Wellington City Council with 200,000 people.

The Court of Appeal has rejected an 11th attempt to delay the extradition hearing and it finally looks like it will happen next week.

I’ve long stated that I think the relatively low bar for extradition will be met. The hearing is not to determine of Dotcom is guilty of the US charges, but that there is a prima facie case, and that the charges are crimes under both NZ and US law.

That does not mean Dotcom is guilty. I think he does have a reasonable defence to the charges, and if extradited he may be found not guilty. It will depend on the details of the case and how the business was run.

So next week we should see some of the details in court, and then a decision by the District Court Judge. No doubt Dotcom, if he loses, will seek to judicially review that decision all the way to the Supreme Court if possible. so don’t expect any finality any time soon.

Some extracts from the judgment:

There are strong policy reasons weighing against constant disruption of pre-trial processes by applications to a higher court and then, potentially, further appeals from that decision. Micro-management of pre-trial procedure by higher courts risks delaying and fragmenting the criminal process. Policy factors militate toward only allowing review (or only granting relief) if the error is blatant, or will potentially lead to serious injustice that cannot be corrected on appeal.

That is actually from the High Court ruling, but quoted by the Court of Appeal.

For the reasons we have explained, this Court is unable to resolve that dispute with the urgency required. But we are satisfied that if there is a need, and it is not afforded to the appellants, they will have adequate remedies. In short, we are satisfied there is no risk of any breach of the appellant’s right to a fair extradition hearing going unremedied.

I imagine a very full media bench at the hearing.

The Spinoff has views of the election of socialist Jeremy Corbyn as UK Labour Leader by a couple of dozen people. Some interesting comments:

Jim Anderton

Jeremy Corbyn represents a return to the politics of inclusion, egalitarianism and the principles of social and economic justice required of a fair society. The outrageous and ever increasing gap between the rich and the poor, with the resulting crisis of rising child poverty and social dislocation, is increasingly seen as simply unacceptable to more and more people throughout the world.

Hopefully Jeremy has better luck with his caucus than Jim did with his.

Jacinda Ardern

I wonder whether the question might be, what can the UK Labour Party learn from the NZ experience?

What can they learn? How to lose three elections in a row, and have your vote share drop every time!

James Shaw

I am unconvinced that the generally accepted wisdom – that Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour is unelectable – will hold out in reality. The Obama ’08 campaign, Syriza in Greece, Podemos in Spain and others, show that many people are desperate for hope and change in the face of growing inequality and a sense that their own and their children’s futures are being sold down the river.

Oh dear. Not sure Obama would like the comparison to Syriza. And how is Syriza working out for Greece?

Helen Kelly

I think he will do very well and create new space for alternative policies including fiscal policies. I think the party will swing behind him and if they can organise those that recently joined, they will have a new invigorated movement come the next election.

Comrade Kelly predicts glorious triumph.

“The central issue of our time – of all times – is the size, power and scope of government.”

– Grover Norquist

The quote of the week is brought to you by the New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union. To support the Union’s campaign for lower taxes and less government waste, click here.

Malcolm Turnbull showed he can count and won the leadership battle 54 to 44.  There ends the leadership and prime ministership of Tony Abbott.

It is somewhat remarkable that Abbott ever became leader and prime minister. He was a senior minister under Howard, and effective. But he was seen not as a leader. Even then he was one of the most conservative and sometimes controversial MPs.

Like Labour here in opposition, the Liberals searched for an effective leader. After their 2007 loss they elected Brendan Nelson who was not high profile in Government, nor in opposition. Nelson beat Turnbull 45 to 42 and Abbott did not stand.

Nelson had never been in opposition and rated below 10% in preferred PM polls. He lasted 10 months and lost to Turnbull 45 to 41 in September 2008.

Turnbull also struggled as opposition leader and his role in an alleged Government scandal that proved false undermined him. His support for a price on carbon was a step too far and he got rolled 14 months later by Abbott 42 to 41.

So Abbott only became leader after two previous ones failed. No one a few years earlier would have thought he would be leader. But he got it, and he was surprisingly good at it. He ruthlessly destroyed Kevin Rudd and Jula Gillard’s Governments. To be fair Kevin Rudd mainly destroyed himself.

Abbott made a few blunders in opposition, but overall was surprisingly disciplined and on message.  He became Prime Minister in 2013.

But as Prime Minister it all went wrong. They achieved a huge victory with their policy on turning the boats back – the annual drowning toll went from hundreds to zero. But elsewhere it was chaotic. The Budget was a disaster as they were seen to break their promises, and it was too punitive. And then it just became backdowns and u-turns plus a number of Captain’s Calls which backfired.

He got given six months to turn things around after the February spill, but didn’t. After trailing for 30 polls in a row, his caucus voted for survival.

Turnbull is seriously not liked by some of his caucus, and many Liberal supporters. He will need to attract voters from elsewhere. However I give him a good chance of winning the next election, if they have unity, as Bill Shorten looks horribly exposed due to his actions as a union boss where he sold out workers in return for money from corporates.

I had the pleasure of attending an IDU function at Malcolm’s Sydney apartment around a decade ago. He wasn’t an MP then, but was Liberal Party Treasurer and seen as a potential future Prime Minister.  I’m not surprised he has finally become Prime Minister.

Well my post of earlier today proved very accurate, with Malcolm Turnbull a few hours later announcing a challenge, and Abbott calling the vote for tonight.

There are 102 votes in the party room, so you need 52 to win. The Turnbull camp is claiming they have 60, but MPs have been known to say one thing and vote another.

Of significance is that deputy Julie Bishop has also declared no confidence in Tony Abbott. This means if Abbott wins, he loses both Bishop and Turnbull from Cabinet. It is hard to see how the Liberals can win if Abbott remains.

But Turnbull is far more popular with the public and media than with his own colleagues. He may win tonight, but governing will be another challenge.

Either way a political career ends today – Tony Abbott’s or Malcolm Turnbull’s.

Robert Lord was a prolific NZ playwright who wrote at least 19 plays from 1971 to 1992, when he died.

The Travelling Squirrel was written in 1987 and produced only once in 1994. It has been resurrected for Circa this year, directed by Susan Wilson.

Despite the passage of almost 30 years, it is not at all dated. In fact it seems better suited for today, than possibly the 1980s.

The play is essentially about a couple, Bart and Jane. Bart is an unsuccessful writer and Jane a very successful TV star. They are played by Paul Waggott and Acushla-Tara Sutton, who have some real chemistry together.

Bart would like nothing better than to have a quiet night in with Jane, enjoying a “picnic” (code for getting it on, based on their initial meeting when they picnicked next to each other). But Jane needs to get her profile up and attend society parties in New York.

The parties are hosted by gossip columnist Wally, played hilariously by Gavin Rutherford.  His lusting for the hunky waiter Daryl, provides much comedy.

You also have Jane’s social climbing friend Julie, performed by Carrie Green. Sarah is the brash illustrator played by Claire Waldron and Terry the arrogant publisher who has more interest in Jane than in Bart’s book.

But where does the title come from. Well Bart talks often to a squirrel in Central Park he has called Roger. And most days he invents great tales of what Roger has been up to, sharing them with Jane and others. Bart projects himself onto Roger.

He finally finishes his book, but the publisher is not interested in a collection of prose. However the tales of Roger the Travelling Squirrel are another thing, and suddenly Bart is on the verge of becoming a literary blockbuster, while at the same time Jane’s career is in trouble.

The second half of the play focuses on the changed dynamics as Bart is the one heading out to the parties, and Jane is the struggling one.

Will their relationship survive? Will either of them be successful? Who will Daryl end up with?

The play was two hours long, and kept a good pace. The acting was excellent, and there were lots of laughs. However I did find the plot not as good as it could have been. The ending was slightly predictable, and less than satisfying. There wasn’t any great moral lesson, just a possible redemption. Still a very enjoyable show though.

It is on at Circa until Saturday 2 October.

Stars: ***1/2

Salient has a very long feature on NZUSA, in the context of a vote next week by Vic students on whether to remain members.

A very detailed account of all the issues and power plays over the last few years. I’m quoted a few times.

I said to Salient that if I was a Vic student I would vote for VUWSA to remain a member of NZUSA, but only in exchange for better performance and accountability.

What I suggested is that campus student associations should stop thinking of being members of NZUSA, and start thinking of contracting them for services provided.

What I mean is that associations like VUWSA could sign a three year funding agreement with NZUSA. We will pay $x to NZUSA in exchange for NZUSA achieving the following for us and our students.

This would give greater funding certainty to NZUSA, but also greater accountability for the money. It could also even lead to some competition. You could have another body, or group, say “Hey we can provide those services for the same or less money”.

I think NZUSA has been doing better this year, than in many previous years. An example:

McCourt runs through his, and Haines’, list of achievements. They’re not insubstantial; across the political spectrum, most agree that McCourt has done a solid job. This year saw the culmination of a long-term project between NZUSA and the Government that massively reduced Studylink waiting times and reduced the number of dropped calls by over 99 per cent. After years of campaigning—albeit by associations around the country as well as NZUSA—the Government has indicated it will introduce minimum rental property standards. 

But the question will be whether a better performance this year will be enough to compensate for the poor performance of previous years.

News.com.au reports:

Channel Nine today reported that Mr Turnbull received a message from Deputy Government Whip Andrew Nikolic on the prime minister’s behalf last Friday to make a public statement that he would not challenge Mr Abbott’s leadership.

Another senior minister close to Mr Abbott contacted Mr Turnbull with a similar request, according to Channel Nine.

But Mr Turnbull has remained tight-lipped about the speculations, saying his rule was to say “nothing”, as any comment would only give the issue oxygen.

However, the frontbenchers pushing for Mr Turnbull’s return to the leadership have declared a challenge inevitable as a new poll predicted the Prime Minister faces a savage 10 per cent swing in the Canning by-election.

As Liberal MPs prepare to return to Canberra, some ministers have even refused to rule out a revolt this week, before the WA by-election.

A senior Liberal MP said: “The Prime Minister’s future is done and dusted. Malcolm is the solution. The bottom line is it cannot go on.’’

Mr Abbott faces a swing of up to 10 per cent in the Canning by-election, according to a new Galaxy poll commissioned by The Sunday Telegraph.

It reveals that former SAS captain Andrew Hastie will retain the seat but with two-party support slashed to 52 per cent to Labor’s 48 per cent.

If they close Canning, then I believe Abbott will face a challenge. If they manage to hold on, then possibly not.

If there is a challenge, Abbott is probably gone, but it may not be Turnbull. Scott Morrison is well regarded and less divisive in the caucus.

I’m a very happy user of Xero, but not yet using their payroll as it has been too expensive for me. My business has a high number of staff who work few hours, so payrolls which charge per staff member are very costly as a percentage of wages for me. Hence I remain on MYOB for payroll.

Anyway I got excited to get an e-mail from Xero that said:

More flexible plans
From 19 October Xero plans will be more flexible – giving you more choice than ever. Now you can choose whether you want payroll in your plan and you’ll only be charged for the number of unique employees you post each monthly billing cycle.

More flexible – that should be good news – right?

What are the key changes

• Payroll is being unbundled from our Standard and Premium plans
• Customers on our Starter plan can now add payroll
• Adding payroll will cost +$10 which includes one employee
• Additional employees will cost +$1 per unique employee per billing cycle

The Premium base plan will be reduced from $75 to $70 per month

So what does this actually mean. Well let’s look at current prices here.

• Premium 10 $75
• Premium 20 $85
• Premium 50 $100
• Premium 100 $140

So what will these cost under the new flexible plans:

• Premium with 10 employees $89 (19% more)
• Premium with 20 employees $99 (16% more)
• Premium with 50 employees $129 (29% more)
• Premium with 100 employees $179 (28% more)

Yes the new prices are more flexible and it is useful you can now have payroll for multiple staff with the non premium plans. But if you’re a premium customer, that’s a pretty big increase – disguised as flexibility.  They have grandfathered premium prices until March in recognition as that.

I like Xero as it is normally straight talking. I’m not sure a price increase hidden by flexibility is good for the reputation.

Even with me as a standard user, I’d be paying $14 more a month with this flexibility, as we normally have around 100 employees.

Also it would be nice if Xero broke away from the traditional payroll pricing of charging you per employee, instead of for the service. You don’t pay per general ledger transaction or per invoice for other accounting functions, so why charge per employee?