The Herald reports:

A violent attack on a motorist who refused to have his windscreen washed at a South Auckland intersection has generated renewed calls for the controversial practice to be outlawed.

Does anyone ever find this a useful service, or it is just intimidation?

As you can wash your windscreen for free at any service station, I think it is a business model that operates on intimidation rather than providing a service people want.

Stuff reports:

Christchurch red zone stayers say they have no intention of moving despite city council plans that may cut back key services such as roading, water and wastewater.

A Christchurch City Council staff report recommends decommissioning infrastructure no longer needed and reviewing services to residents still living in the Brooklands and Avon red zones to save money.

The report, which will go to councillors on Thursday, says maintaining red zone infrastructure costs about $260,000 a month and last year cost $3.1 million.

About 74 red zone houses are still occupied by people who did not accept the Crown’s buyout offer after the earthquakes, the council estimates.

So each red zone rebel is soaking up $42,000 from other ratepayers. A very easy decision.

Jan Burney, one of about 25 people who have decided to stay in Brooklands, said she had no plans to leave.

That’s fine – just don’t expect subsidies from others.

Stuff has an article quoting dozens of groups saying terrible things will happen if bars can automatically open for RWC games.

To me this shows exactly why the law change is needed. Any bar that tried to get a special licence to open would have these same groups flood the licensing authority with objections. The cost of getting a licence, and ridiculous conditions imposed would mean few would actually be able to open.

The most hysterical submission was:

National Community Action on Youth and Drugs workers are concerned the RWC will become a “marathon drinking challenge” with “24 hour drinking” dares like the “ice bucket challenge” laid down on social media, and fighting in the streets.

Or rugby fans will just head down to the bar at 5.30 am to watch the All Blacks over a couple of beers.

NZ on Screen has done a collection of what they call the top 40 NZ TV shows from the 1960s on.

The ones I have fond memories of are:

• It’s In the Bag
• Play School
• Telethon
• Ready to Roll
• On the Mat
• Nice One
• Top Town
• Fair Go
• A Dog’s Show
• It is I Count Homogenized
• Gliding On
• After School
• Under the Mountain
• Radio with Pictures
• Gloss
• Billy T
• Holmes
• Shortland Street
• Nightline
• Outraegous Fortune

Which ones are your favourites from the top 40?

The NZ Initiative states:

Improving compensation for live organ donors is a rare opportunity to save both lives and healthcare dollars, according to a report released today by The New Zealand Initiative.
 
Author Elizabeth Prasad found that every transplant provides recipients with longer and better lives, while being much cheaper than dialysis – saving the government money over the longer term.
 
An indicative case of a 50-year-old male on dialysis who receives a transplant would live for eight additional years, and enjoy an improved quality of life. In this example, the Ministry of Health would save more than $120,000 by providing a transplant. Benefits are even greater for younger recipients as they avoid more years of dialysis.

So taxpayers save $120,000 if someone donates a kidney to someone on dialysis.

Many potential donors cannot afford time off work to assist a loved one. Currently, financial support for donors ranges from $140 to $350 per week for 12 weeks, depending on age and marital status. The average weekly wage in 2014 was $991.

The Chris Bishop bill would see donors get the equivalent of ACC – 80% of normal earnings. So around $800 a week for 12 weeks which is $9,600.

Paying a donor $9,600 to save $120,000 in dialysis costs. A no-brainer.

Dr Eric Crampton, Head of Research at The New Zealand Initiative, said that this issue was a case where an improved health policy brought about a win-win – the health of the recipient improved, as did the outcome for the funder.
 
“Usually policy is about trade-offs. When the government provides a favourable new scheme, it’s either at the expense of another policy, or taxpayers’ wallets.

Yep this is rare. Normally a policy has winners and losers. Here everyone is a winner – the donor, the recipient and the taxpayer.

Chris Bishop’s bill should complete its first reading tonight.

The order paper is here.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

1. NUK KORAKO to the Minister of Finance: How is the Government’s fiscal strategy supporting resilience in the New Zealand economy?
2. ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in the Minister responsible for Housing New Zealand Corporation?
3. SIMON O’CONNOR to the Minister of Health: What reports has he received on New Zealand’s health system?
4. METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all of his Government’s policies?
5. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with First NZ Capital that there is a 25 to 30 percent chance of New Zealand going into a recession in the next 12 months?
6. IAN McKELVIE to the Minister for Primary Industries: How is the Government supporting growth in the seafood industry?
7. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Trade: Will the New Zealand Parliament be able to modify the text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement if the Government signs the TPPA; and is it Parliament or Cabinet that ratifies the TPPA?
8. KELVIN DAVIS to the Minister of Corrections: Have any cases, other than the one he mentioned in Oral Question No 7 yesterday, been identified of Mt Eden Corrections Facility guards giving sparring prisoners “coaching on their technique”?
9. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister for Social Development: What reports has she received on Government initiatives to support young people into employment?
10. DARROCH BALL to the Minister for Social Development: Does she stand by all her statements?
11. ALFRED NGARO to the Minister of Transport: What recent reports has he received on progress on the Government’s Accelerated Auckland roading programme?
12. JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development: How many people who have made claims with the Historic Claims Team are still waiting for a response from the Ministry of Social Development, and of those, what is the longest period a claimant has waited?

National: Five questions on the economy, health system, seafood industry, youth employment and Auckland roading

Labour: Four questions on confidence in Housing Minister, recession,Mt Eden Prison and historic abuse claims

Greens: Two questions on Government policies and TPP

NZ First: One question on Minister of Social Development standing by her statements

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.

Members’ Bills 4.00 pm to 6.00 pm and 7.30 pm to 10.00 pm

• Introduced: August 2015 (by leave)
• 1st reading: August 2015, passed unanimously
• SC report: August 2015

Stuff reports:

Australia has a new fear – a brain drain to New Zealand.

Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey has sounded the alarm, warning that an increasing number of Australian residents are moving to New Zealand, including “high net worth” individuals, The Australian reported on Monday.

Hockey has outlined a proposal to cut taxes to make Australia more competitive.

He told ABC  Radio New Zealand’s lower income tax rate was “unquestionably” part of the reason increasing numbers of Australian residents were moving to New Zealand.

“New Zealand has a top personal tax rate of 33 cents in the dollar. We have a top personal tax rate of 45 cents in the dollar, plus two per cent for the Medicare levy, plus two per cent for the temporary budget repair levy – so 49 cents in the dollar.

“Sooner or later people start to move to New Zealand and that’s what’s happening. In fact, in the last 12 months, for the first time in years, there were more people moving to New Zealand than there were New Zealanders moving to Australia.”

Labour and capital is now globally mobile. If you tax either too much, they will move to where they get taxes less. It is not the only factor in the movement of labour and capital – but it definitely plays a role.

Stuff reports:

At least two people may have committed suicide following the hacking of the Ashley Madison cheating website, Toronto police said on Monday (Tuesday NZ Time), warning of a ripple effect that includes scams and extortion of clients desperate to stop the exposure of their infidelity.

Avid Life Media Inc, the parent company of the website, is offering a C$500,000 (NZ$580,750) reward to catch the hackers.

In addition to the exposure of the Ashley Madison accounts of as many as 37 million users, the attack on the dating website for married people has sparked extortion attempts and at least two unconfirmed suicides, Toronto Police Acting Staff Superintendent Bryce Evans told a news conference.

I hope the hackers are eventually caught, and prosecuted. Their actions will I believe lead to many deaths, and destroyed families.

This morning’s Herald Digipoll is blogged at Curia.

The Herald story has demographic breakdowns of party support. These have a higher margin of error so caution is needed. However the gaps are so huge in some of them, it is worth commenting on.

The gap between National and Labour is:

• 30% among men
• 27% in Auckland
• 35% among over 65s

When you can only get the support of one in four men, one in four Aucklanders and one in four retired NZers, you won’t be in Government.

The Herald reports:

It said schools offering Cambridge and IB made public assertions that portrayed the NCEA as not challenging or lacking credibility – which was not true – and therefore should be banned as it was further undermining the local qualification.

I’m used to outrageously bad proposals in education, but this might take the cake. Because some parents and schools hold Cambridge and International Baccalaureate in higher esteem than NCEA, the PPTA’s answer is to ban them!!!

Do their political allies in Labour and Greens agree with them?

And as for NCEA?

The union said it would only continue to support NCEA if changes were made to ensure it retained its quality and fairness.

And what do they mean by that?

These included the removal of the government target

So no accountability.

less required moderation

Which means it is less fair. Also ironically the NZEI argues national standards do not have enough moderation while PPTA says NCEA has too much moderation.

reduction in the dominance of universities over the qualification

So less quality.

and a ban on international qualifications such as Cambridge and International Baccalaureate

And no choice.

I look forward to Labour campaigning on this in 2017.

Stuff reports:

As far as in-flight break-ups go, at least it wasn’t the fuselage.

Rather, it was a relationship that disintegrated on board a delayed flight out of Raleigh, North Carolina, captured in all its devastation by a fellow passenger and broadcast to the world.

When Kelly Keegs live-tweeted the split as her plane sat stranded on the tarmac, it quickly went viral. The saga garnered thousands of retweets as followers hung on every word, and the hashtag #PlaneBreakup became a home base for observers to discuss the unfolding chaos.

I don’t have an issue with people live tweeting something happening in a semi-public place. But I do think it is appalling when you also take a photo of the people involved, and make that public. That humiliates them to all their friends and family, and shames them on a global basis.

Twitter has a very nasty streak to it, where people revel in public shaming.

Stuff reports:

The Department of Corrections has been criticised for failing to provide proper medical care for two inmates, one of whom eventually died.

The dead man, a Spring Hill inmate in his 50s with a range of health problems, complained of pain for weeks before he was eventually diagnosed with terminal cancer in 2013.

He went into hospice care and later died.

Corrections have since apologised to the man’s partner.

If this was a private prison, Labour and the unions would be demanding that the prison operator be sacked, and that the prison management be transferred to the state.

As this death occurred in a public prison, will anyone make a fuss, and demand it be handed over to say a private operator?

My point is that neither public nor private operators get it entirely right. I want a level playing field where they are judged equally on the results, not slammed by politicians only if they are privately managed.

Watch this video shot from a drone in Wairarapa? They spot a sheep in trouble with the drone, and then actually use the drone to help right the sheep, so it can get away.

Richard Harman at Politik wrote:

Sometimes it’s worthwhile listening to what the Government and Opposition have got to say about each other in private. And each has a very different view of the other at present. But there is a degree of validity ion each narrative. National think Labour is hopelessly divided and that Andrew Little has yet to stamp his authority on the Labour caucus. They also think the party’s front bench is not performing particularly well.

Labour on the other hand think that the Prime Minister looks tired and that the “body language” of him and Bill English suggests they have run out of ideas.

The Labour front bench is Little, King, Roberston, Mahuta, Twyford, Hipkins, Clark, Ardern and Davis.

It’s hard to read Labour’s caucus.

Obviously the “globalists” — MPs like Phil Goff, David Shearer and David Parker would like to be able to agree to the TPP. But Andrew Little and Grant Robertson have not been sending the same signals. The danger for Mr Little is that he ends up in the same position as Labour Leader Walter Nash did after the 1951 waterfront dispute which he said he was “neither for nor against”. National hounded him for years over that statement.

Sounds like their new position on the flag!

Meanwhile the Government does seem to have gone off the boil. Their response to the drop in milk prices at this stage is to say that things are not as bad as the critics suggest. But it’s early days. And there are plenty of doomsayers on the Opposition benches. NZ First MPs (for example) claim that they have “inside” information which says the milk price will drop another 50 cents a kilo. So what this all adds up to is that we are in the early stages of what will become a political debate focused intently on the economy. It will require a gear change from National as it leaves the rock star economy behind and it will require more engagement (and some policy) from Labour.

I’d love to see policy from all parties about what they’ll do to foster economic growth.

The order paper is here.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

1. ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in the Minister for Workplace Relations and Safety, given his decision not to include sheep, beef, and dairy farming in his Proposed Schedule of High Risk Industries?

2. JONO NAYLOR to the Minister of Finance: How is the New Zealand economy placed to be resilient to international economic fluctuations?

3. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Can he tell us all again about the socalled Rock Star economy and his policies to maintain it?

4. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement that “risks arising from Greece and China have receded somewhat and that there has been an improvement in the outlook for our trading partners.  That is positive for the New Zealand outlook”?

5. JAMES SHAW to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his Government’s policies?

6. TODD MULLER to the Minister of Transport: What update can he provide on the Tauranga Eastern Link, which is one of the Government’s Roads of National Significance?

7. KELVIN DAVIS to the Minister of Corrections: What was the date of the CCTV footage that led to a Serco staff member’s suspension for fighting an inmate at Mt Eden Corrections Facility?

8. TODD BARCLAY to the Minister for Primary Industries: What reports has he received on Government support for diversification in the dairy industry?

9. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Trade: Which stakeholder groups have been briefed as to the draft content of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement since the completion of the last round of negotiations in July; and which groups have been briefed as to the process going forward for the agreement?

10. BARBARA KURIGER to the Minister of Health: Can he confirm that the health target for emergency departments has been met for the second consecutive quarter, meaning that 95 per cent of people attending our emergency departments are treated, admitted, or discharged within six hours?

11. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Did he approve officials’ recommendation on 19 April 2012 to commence work on “finding an appropriate mechanism to meet Al Khalaf’s concern for ‘compensation’ (possibly through the joint venture)”; and was the $4m payment to Al Khalaf the adopted mechanism, given Cabinet noted part of that payment was for “the settlement of the long-running dispute”?

12. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by all his statements; if so, why?

National: Four questions on the economy, roads, dairy industry and emergency departments

Labour: Four questions on workplace safety, the economy, Mt Eden Prison and the Saudi farm

Greens: One question on TPP

NZ First: Two questions on the economy and Finance Minister standing by his statements

1. POTO WILLIAMS to the Member in charge of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave and Work Contact Hours) Amendment Bill: Why did she draft the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave and Work Contact Hours) Amendment Bill?

2. IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY to the Member in charge of the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave and Work Contact Hours) Amendment Bill: What indication of support has she received for putting forward the Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months’ Paid Leave and Work Contact Hours) Amendment Bill?
Tuesday, 25 August 2015

3. POTO WILLIAMS to the Member in charge of the Social Workers Registration (Mandatory Registration) Amendment Bill: Why did she draft the Social Workers Registration (Mandatory Registration) Amendment Bill?

4. POTO WILLIAMS to the Member in charge of the Social Workers Registration (Mandatory Registration) Amendment Bill: What indications of support has she received for putting forward the Social Workers Registration (Mandatory Registration) Amendment Bill?

There are also four questions to members in charges of bills.

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

Health and Safety Reform Bill – committee stage continued

The Bill replaces the Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 and the Machinery Act 1950 to reform New Zealand’s workplace health and safety system, following the work of the Independent Taskforce on Workplace Health and Safety and the Royal Commission on the Pike River Coal Mine tragedy.

• Introduced March 2014
• 1st reading: March 2014, passed unanimously
• SC report: July 2015, passed with amendments by majority with Labour, Green and NZ First minority reports
• 2nd reading: July 2015, passed 63 to 56 with Labour, Greens and NZ First against

There is no time limit for the committee stage but it is estimated to be a seven hour debate as the bill has six parts and preliminary provisions to debate. Three parts have been debated, so there are probably three to four hours remaining.

There are seven SOPs – two from the Minister Michael Woodhouse, three from Labour, one from the Greens and one from the Maori Party.

Employment Standards Legislation Bill – first reading

This bill promotes fairer and more productive workplaces by providing enhanced protections and benefits for both employers and employees through a number of improvements to the employment relations–employment standards legislative framework.

• Introduced: August 2015

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

I’ve blogged on this before, on how a few nutbars on the left think that Bill English and Nick Smith have devised a cunning plan to enrich themselves by a hundred million dollars or so by transferring land and houses to the Tamaki redevelopment company which they own 59% of.

Except they don’t of course. They are shareholders in their capacity as ministers, not in any personal sense. Anyone who has an ounce of common sense or intelligence could see this, and know this.

Now one nutbar facebooked Andrew Little saying:

Govt ministers Bill English and Nick Smith each have a third interest in a company BUYING state houses, the Auckland Council the other third. Wouldn’t this be subject to a conflict of interest?

What do you think and what will you say Andrew?

Now Andrew is not responsible for what nutbars post on Facebook, but he then responds to the nutbar:

The least I can do is make some inquiries. Company ownership is a matter of public record

Oh dear, that is an epic fail on the scale of an MP saying they will inquire into whether to ban dihydrogen monooxide.

So you have the Leader of the Opposition promising to make inquiries into the fact that shares in a government owned company are owned by the Government!

Danyl McL blogs:

I downloaded the dump files and took a look at the breakdown of top level addresses. It seems a little unfair that teachers account for about 0.2% of the addresses but close to 100% of the breathless coverage.

Many of the .co addresses are just private email addresses (xtra.co.nz, yahoo.co.nz) so you could claim that the focus is on teachers and public servants because they were stupid enough to use work addresses. But there are also literally thousands of work addresses included in that .co category including, amusingly enough, many from the media companies running these stories about dirty teachers and public servants. If these journos want to know why someone would sign up to one of these sites they should go ask their executives. Why are the teachers ‘exposed’ and not everyone else?

I think that the media have gone way over the top hunting down people who were registered on the site, just because they are a teacher or used a work address.

Unless there is gross hypocrisy involved (ie someone is a family values crusader), then there is no public interest in publishing stories about people who registered for the site.

As Danyl notes, some users are from media companies. Are they going to start doing exposes on their own staff?

The Guardian reports:

A new series of the 1980s BBC comedy Blackadder is on the cards, star Sir Tony Robinson has said – as long as they can afford Hugh Laurie’s wages.

Robinson, 69, who played Baldrick in all four series of the sitcom, joked that they might struggle to pay Laurie, who went on to become a major star in the US with the medical dramaHouse.

“I do think a new series of Blackadder is on the cards,” the comedian and TV presenter told the Sun. “I have spoken to virtually all the cast about this now. The only problem is Hugh’s fee. He’s a huge star now – or so he’d like to think.”

A 5th series of Blackadder would make me very happy.

Stuff reports:

An artist was refused entry to a bar because of his facial tattoos, despite offering to hide them with makeup.

Jesse Wright said he felt “degraded” by his treatment. He is considering making a complaint to the Human Rights Commission.

A tattoo is a choice. You can’t complain to the Human Rights Commission that you have been discriminated against because of your tattoos.

Wright has hundreds of tattoos covering about 50 per cent of his body, including his eyelids.

Those on his face meant the most, he said. Several were linked to his family.

Wright said he had never been refused entry to a bar in Christchurch because of his tattoos.

“I find it highly offensive. You don’t judge a book by its cover,” he said.

When people don’t know you as an individual, they will judge you by what they can see.

I’m not anti tattoo. I was around 20 years ago, but now I appreciate good artwork on people. But bars do have the right to have policies around appearance such as standard of clothing – and visible tattoos.

“Society exists for the benefit of its members, not the members for the benefit of society.”

– Herbert Spencer

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.

Michael Woodhouse has announced:

The Government is to enable local communities, through councils, to decide whether retailers can open on Easter Sunday, Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Michael Woodhouse announced today.

“The current rules around shop trading over the Easter period are complex and relatively arbitrary. The law allows certain shops selling specific items to remain open, while others must close their doors.

“It also includes several historical exemptions which allow shops in areas such as Queenstown and Taupo to open on Easter Sunday, while those in Wanaka and Rotorua cannot.”

“The result is that some businesses and regions have an unfair advantage over others, and there is a demand from communities across the country to allow for shop trading on Easter Sunday.

“The proposed law change will enable communities to choose whether or not to allow trading. It will mean regions, especially tourist areas, can respond where there is strong demand for Easter Sunday trading,” Mr Woodhouse says.

The current law is a nonsense. Sadly all attempts at reform by members’ bills have failed due to an unholy collusion between unions and churches. So very pleased to see the Government taking action, to improve the ridiculous status quo.

“In addition, the law change will give workers the opportunity to decline to work or accept work if they wish to on that day – with no reason necessary.

And this I support. It is about allowing workers to earn extra money – if they wish to do so, and retailers to open if they want to do so, and shoppers to shop if they wish to do so. But no one is forced to do anything.

Only changes to Easter Sunday are being proposed. Mr Woodhouse says this reflects the added religious and cultural significance attached to Good Friday, Anzac Day and Christmas, that remain subject to restrictions.

A step in the right direction, but more needs to be done.

For Easter, we should allow trading on all four Easter days of Good Friday, Holy Saturday, Easter (Sunday) and Easter Monday. But I’d also have all four as public holidays which they attract penal rates, and also that any employee can decline to work on those days. That would actually give employees more flexibility (they currently have to work Holy Saturday and Easter Monday if asked) and more pay (penal rates would apply for all four days, not just Good Friday and Easter Monday). So this would benefit employees, but also benefit retailers who could open for the whole long weekend – if they wanted to.