Stuff reports:

A potato-top pie has won the top pie award at the 19th annual Bakels New Zealand Supreme Pie Awards.

The tasty treat, from New World Greenmeadows bakery in Napier, beat 512 other competitors at the gala dinner on Tuesday night.

Judges described the pie as a “perfect ratio between a flavoursome filling, a super creamy potato top, and a delicious pastry shell.”

Great that we have pie awards.

But I detect something very sinister in the list of winners. Have a look:

Gold Award Winners

Mince and Gravy: Khemara Yin, The Bakehouse Café, Thames

Steak and Gravy: Bunchoeun Keo, One Tree Bakery, Mt Maunganui

Chicken and Vegetable: Srieng Choeu, Fresh Bun Café, Tuakau

Gourmet Fruit (Blueberry and Spiced Apple): Sao Bunarith, Dairy Flat Bakery, Albany

Gourmet Meat (Butter Chicken): Srieng Choeu, Fresh Bun Café, Tuakau

Vegetarian (Bok Choy, Carrot, Parsnip and Kumara): Bunny Te, Angkor Wat Bakery and Café, Bay of Plenty

Bacon and Egg: Vong Hean, Mairangi Bay Bakery, Mairangi Bay

Mince and Cheese: Sopheap Chouk, Te Awamutu Bakehouse Café, Te Awamutu

Steak and Cheese: Roger Cathro, Pak n Save, Petone

Potato Top Pie: New World Greenmeadows, Napier

Commercial Wholesale: Phil Lyons, Couplands Bakeries, Christchurch

Café Boutique (Caramelised Walnuts, Pear and Blue Cheese Tart): Zaqeeyan Zakhiyan, Divine Cakes and Desserts, Christchurch

Nine out of the 11 winners have chinese sounding surnames. According to the Labour Party and Phil Twyford it is absolutely implausible they could all be New Zealanders, as Chinese are just 9.5% of Auckland.

So I expect Labour to demand an urgent inquiry into the foreign takeover of the Kiwi pie industry.

The Herald reports:

The school under fire for bribing its kids with takeaways says it never served fried chicken – only pizza.

Villa Education Trust, which runs Middle School West Auckland, is yet to respond to questions from the New Zealand Herald, but told the Ministry of Education today they don’t use food as part of any rewards or behaviour programme at the school.

“The school had a shared lunch just before the end of term where pizza was brought in.

They have told us Kentucky Fried Chicken hasn’t been served to students,” the ministry said.

“This was not part of any behaviour programme. It is common for schools to have shared lunches.”

There may be some substance to the other allegations, but I’m sceptical.

One has to put in context that there is a vigorous campaign to discredit and destroy charter schools. No other schools in New Zealand face such a well funded and ongoing campaign. Everything possible to undermine them has been attempted from boycotts, to press campaigns.

This doesn’t mean that allegations should be ignored. But it does mean that allegations without any proof should not be treated as authoritative, even if the media does.

We have a robust system of checks of schools, and even ore on charter schools than most schools. They have targets agreed with with the Ministry, which they can be held against. The ERO can and does review them. And most of all as they have no zones which force people to attend the local school, not students are forced to attend them. If they do not provide good educational outcomes, then parents won’t enrol in them.

Russel Brown at Public Address said that I won’t report negatively on any charter schools. This is false. Not only did I blog earlier today on the allegations, I also have blogged on the Whangaruru charter school that is having considerable problems.

I’d turn about the false claim by Russel, and ask him when has he (or maybe any left blogger) ever published a positive article on a charter school? And what would it take for him to do so? Are the academic results achieved at Vanguard not sufficient?

Stuff reports:

Police have been snooping on people’s Facebook profiles, and using the evidence to carry out drug raids.

The monitoring has been exposed by members of a blackmarket Facebook group, who complained of receiving letters out of the blue from police, warning them they were being watched.

One unidentified user received a letter from the Canterbury Organised Crime Squad, dated July 15, warned that their membership of a group suspected to be aiding illegal drug deals had been noticed. 

They might wish to “review” their membership of the group, the letter suggested – and it had a card for a drug abuse helpline stapled to it.

“Police have been monitoring your Facebook profile and established that you are engaged in a Facebook group that actively sells and trades in controlled drugs,” the letter said.

“Committing offences against [drug laws] can lead to penalties, including imprisonment.” 

Police confirmed on Monday that they were monitoring social media pages, and sometimes using the evidence they found to mount raids.

This is smart work by the Police. And it isn’t spying or snooping. If you’re stupid enough to join public groups devoted to criminal activity, you shouldn’t be surprised the Police take an interest.

Stuff reports:

Prime Minister John Key has signalled the Government may tighten rules on foreigners buying houses if a new register shows a scale the public is unhappy with.

In his first day back at work since Labour released data showing a large proportion of house sales in Auckland in early 2015 were to buyers with Chinese sounding names, Key conceded that the public wanted to know the scale of foreign buying. …

“We’ve been a pretty pragmatic government. If we think we need to take steps to address an issue which we see coming of great concern, we’re prepared to look at it.”

Under proposed legislation the Government will begin to collect the residential tax status of buyers as a proxy for how many houses are being sold to foreigners.

So rather than judge off people’s surnames, the Government will collect much more reliable data. And this decision was announced months ago – so Labour’s stunt was an unnecessary own goal.

Key said information on buyers from markets from Britain and Australia would be “a bit polluted by New Zealanders who live over there”, whereas the “vast bulk” of buyers from mainland China were unlikely to be New Zealanders.

So this data won’t be perfect, but it will be reasonably robust.

Key said that he believed the scale of the issue would not be on the level which Labour appeared to suggest, but if it were he would consider it “a problem”, he told reporters.

“If you’re asking me if 30 per cent of all sales of residential property in New Zealand was to foreigners, would I think that’s much bigger than I expected and be a problem, I’d say ‘yes’.

“Because around New Zealand I’d be amazed if that was the case. Even in Auckland I’d be absolutely staggered if that was the case, but let’s wait and see the data.”

I’m looking forward to seeing the data.

He was dismissive of Labour’s research, based on personal examples.

“My next door neighbour’s Mark Ching. I look more Chinese than he does, but according to Labour, he’s a problem,” Key said.

“My son’s Max Tim Key, and he’s born in Singapore. If you saw that name on a piece of paper and I wasn’t prime minister, you’d assume he was Asian.”

I wonder what Labour’s Bayesian analysis says about whether someone named Key is Chinese?

I’ve been told my the ISP which hosts Kiwiblog (the wonderful Inspire Net) that for the second time in around a month there has been a  large scale distributed denial of service attack on Kiwiblog.

They haven’t managed to bring the blog down, but when it happens it can slow responses considerably. So if you have been affected, this is why.

The Herald reports:

Fried chicken, pizza and cakes were used as rewards to keep a handle on spiralling student behaviour, according to angry parents and teachers from a new charter school.

The claims, and further concerns about behaviour policy, bullying, lack of cultural awareness, safety and drugs at Middle School West Auckland, are under investigation by the Ministry of Education.

About 40 children attend the Henderson school, which opened in January. It shares a location with private Maori school Nga Kakano and teaches Years 7 to 10. …

Complaints about the school were sent to its board, with some then forwarded to government officials after a perceived lack of action.

“The present leadership … is found wanting,” said a letter written by Veronica Allen, a Maori educator who came from Nga Kakano to help at MSWA.

“In fact the method used is an appease system where students are bought pizza, hot chips, cakes and then taken on trips to the beach or unrelated outings to keep them happy and engaged.”

Mrs Allen said that on average, each year level had been fed takeaways four times over three weeks, with some promised KFC if they scored well on behaviour tracking sheets.

Another staff member wrote to the Education Review Office, saying the behaviour policy “highlights a lack of leadership management and lack of effective teaching practices”.

The staff member informed ERO that bullying was rife at the school, and that there was drug use. She said one student had attempted suicide. Students were ejected from class, and left in the hallway with no supervision.

Accusations of drug use, bullying and an attempted suicide are serious, and need to be properly investigated.

Katrina Casey, head of the ministry’s sector enablement and support, said the school’s sponsor, Villa Education Trust, had confirmed there had not been any instances of drugs or bullying or any suicide attempt by a student at Middle School.

So those alleging this has happened, need to substantiate their claims. I have no idea who is right or wrong, but such serious allegations should be substantiated and investigated.

The order paper is here.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

1. Dr JIAN YANG to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he received on the performance of the New Zealand economy and the Government’s management of its finances?
2. ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his justification for the $26 million process to consider changing the flag that “It’s just sheer confusion with Australia. Even at APEC they tried to take me to Abbott’s seat”?
3. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?
4. Dr PARMJEET PARMAR to the Minister for Building and Housing: What are the costs and benefits of the recently announced changes to the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 that will require homes to be insulated and to have smoke alarms?
5. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: When did he first become aware that there was an international glut of dairy products and does he stand by his reported comments that he has no plans to take active steps to diversify the economy in response to falling dairy prices?
6. JAMES SHAW to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his answers to Oral Question No. 4 yesterday?
7. RICHARD PROSSER to the Minister of Finance: Is he still sceptical about how effective a register of foreign property buyers would be; if so, why?
8. Dr SHANE RETI to the Minister of Health: What recent reports has he received on the effectiveness of the child immunisation programme?
9. PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement about whether inequality was a problem in the Auckland housing market, “We’ve been concerned about that for some time, that there’s part of Auckland where there’s been really no new supply of lower value houses that low and middle-income families can afford”?
10. JONO NAYLOR to the Minister of Justice: What announcements has she made about improving the oversight and supervision for offenders deported to New Zealand?
11. METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that “You certainly wouldn’t want to say to a low-income family they can never own a home, because I believe that they can own a home.”?
12. KELVIN DAVIS to the Minister of Corrections: Does he stand by his statement in regards to the July 2014 report on fight clubs in Mt Eden Corrections Facility, that he “became aware of the report’s existence only late last week”?

National: Four questions on the economy, rental properties, child immunisations and deported offenders

Labour: Four questions on the flag referendum, dairy prices, Auckland housing and Mt Eden Prison

Greens: Two questions on Pm standing by an answer and housing affordability

NZ First: Two question on PM standing by his statements and a foreign buyers register

There are also two questions to members:

1. MAHESH BINDRA to the Member in charge of the New Zealand International Convention Centre Act 2013 Repeal Bill: What is the intention of the New Zealand International Convention Centre Act 2013 Repeal Bill?
2. CLAYTON MITCHELL to the Member in charge of the Fighting Foreign Corporate Control Bill: What is the intention of the Fighting Foreign Corporate Control Bill?

General Debate 3.00 pm to 3.00 pm

The general debate consists of 12 speeches of up to five minutes each, so a maximum of one hour.

The Herald reports:

Up to 25 councils may have forgotten to set speed limits on their roads, meaning tens of thousands of tickets could be invalid.

The Government moved urgently last night to fix the blunder, rushing through a law change to validate the speed limits and any tickets issued since 2004. …

Under law changes made more than 10 years ago, councils were given responsibility for setting speed limits on all roads except those with 100km/h limits.

These included roads outside schools where the speed limit dropped to 20km/h and stretches of highway where drivers were forced to slow down as they passed through townships.

Councils had to review their speed limits every five years or they expired.

So why did 25 Councils not realise this? Surely they must have some system for monitoring regulations that need to be reviewed and renewed?

The Herald reports:

The black director of South Carolina’s public safety agency said he was surprised a photo showing him helping a white man wearing a racist T-shirt went viral. But now that it has, he is hoping it will be a catalyst for people to work toward overcoming hate and violence.

Leroy Smith said in a statement that the photo, taken at a Ku Klux Klan rally, captured “who we are in South Carolina” and represents what law enforcement is all about: helping people “regardless of the person’s skin colour, nationality or beliefs.”

“I consider myself like every other officer who was out there braving the heat on Saturday to preserve and protect,” he said.

The photo, taken by Gov. Nikki Haley’s spokesman, shows Smith leading the unidentified man, who is suffering from the heat, to shade at the top of the Statehouse steps, to be treated by local emergency workers. The man has a swastika on his T-shirt.

The photo shows just the hand of black Columbia Fire Chief Aubrey Jenkins, who also was assisting the man.

“I hope this photo will be a catalyst for people to work to overcome some of the hatred and violence we have seen in our country in recent weeks,” Smith said.

There’s times when our faith in humanity is justified. A black police officer helping a member of the KKK, because he needed assistance. Hopefully the KKK member concerned, and some of his colleagues, might reflect on the dignity and decency of Leroy Smith.

A good speech by Paula Bennett to the LGNZ Conference. Some extracts:

I imagine there are some who think that because the Commission has decided to take large reorganisation off the table for greater Wellington and Northland, and because I have clearly stated I will not legislate for large amalgamation that you can all continue as you have.

Well you can’t.

It is not in the best interests of the people of New Zealand.

We simply have to look at growth across a region, and your current structure does not strategically or cohesively support that.

A clear message the status quo is not acceptable.

They are going to work alongside you and your communities to ensure that we have the right structure, legally, financially, and with the right accountabilities to ensure sustainable growth in our towns and cities.

This might mean a CCO on water or transport across a region.

It could mean a different business structure or increased responsibilities and accountabilities for Regional Councils.

It could even mean in areas that might put a number of CCOs in place for key growth and infrastructure that there is no longer a need for a Regional Council.

Some councils may even choose to amalgamate.

I fully understand and accept that one solution will not work across all of New Zealand.

That is why the Local Government Commission will be working up various structure options for each region to look at and decide what works best for them, and then where necessary I will legislate to either set a new CCO up across a region – or even to take something away.

And in case there was any doubt:

I have zero interest in imposing unwanted change on you.

But you know that our regions are not as cohesive as they need to be to support our challenges and our future growth.

So I implore you to do something about it.

Be brave – own the change and both the Commission and I will do everything we can to assist and support you.

But let me be clear – there will be change.

Good.

The Government is aware of the cost pressures many councils face, and the Funding Review document launched this morning shows you are thinking about different mechanisms to manage growth.

Structural change should be one of them.

This is a conversation worth having, but first and foremost local government needs to demonstrate that it can live within its means.

Ratepayers are not willing to pay more for services while they see waste.

Most Councils seem to have little fiscal discipline. If they can show some fiscal discipline, then I’m for looking at expanding their funding tools beyond rates.

I expect you to look closely at your costs and have free and frank conversations about what is driving your expenditure and whether that discretionary spend is assisting your council to achieve its strategic goals. 

This is exactly what the Government has been doing, with our Better Public Service targets driving a more integrated delivery of services in a way that gets results and saves taxpayers’ money.

Wouldn’t it be great if local Councils did that also – commit to actual specific outcomes from the money they spend, rather than just outputs?

Eric Crampton writes:

Australia National University’s Dr George Barker suggested this week that New Zealand could do well by strengthening its copyright legislation. He warned against the fair dealing exceptions that have crept into the law and asked, “Why not have copyright law like property law – i.e. it lasts forever?” 

That is a good question.

Eric is being generous. I think it is a stupid question. But it allows a good answer from Eric:

Five years ago, Larrikin Music, who bought the rights to an old Australian folk song, sued Men At Work for including an 11-note flute sequence from it in their 80s-hit, “Down Under”. Where Men At Work had intended homage in its celebration of all things Australian, Larrikin, and the law, saw copyright infringement. 

But does that really go far enough? If an 11-note sequence counts as infringement, how much do modern artists owe Pachelbel’s descendants? The four-chord sequence making up the core of his Canon in D has been repeated in dozens, if not hundreds, of subsequent songs. Should evidence produced by Australia’s Axis of Awesome be used in copyright lawsuits by anyone who can document that, ten generations back, Johann Pachelbel was a great-great- grandfather? It seems absurd.

Even from the perspective of a profit-seeking artist, copyright is a double-edged sword. Stronger copyright both increases the rewards from having produced a piece of work and increases the cost of creating new works. Artistic works feed off each other. New works build on older traditions, reinterpreting old folk tales and old folk tunes for new generations. The Brothers Grimm collected and published older folk tales like Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty in the 1800s. In the 1900s, Walt Disney brought those stories to life in a new form. In the 2000s, well, it is hard for new innovation to occur because copyright law, at least in the United States, has frozen the usage of most important works produced since 1923. 

Why should copyright be limited? Because current creators draw on a global commons in their artistic creations. And future generations of artists deserve a commons too.

A good answer indeed.

I think copyright should apply for the life of the creator plus 20 years. That gives an incentive to innovate, but provides a commons for our future.

Local Government NZ has released a 10 point plan on how to fund local government and incentivise economic growth.

I’m against an increase in the overall funding for local government, but do think the current rates based system is inadequate, and we should look at other complementary methods.

One problem with having local government funded by rates, is that local councils do not benefit from local economic growth, and hence are often not incentivised to support economic growth. Central Government does benefit from economic growth – an increase in the economy leads to more income tax and GST revenue.

Their 10 points are:

1. An agreed priority and action plan to advance “special zones” for growth to test new ideas and drive economic prosperity
2. When new centrally imposed costs are considered (and particularly where national benefit applies) a cost benefit analysis and agreed cost sharing with central government should be mandatory
3. Mandatory rating exemptions should be removed
4. The application and administration process of the rates rebate scheme should be simplified to increase uptake
5. Better guidance is needed to assist councils make decisions on trade-offs about whether to fund services from prices (user charges) or taxes
6. Road user charges, targeted levies and fuel taxes should be allowed where it is economically efficient
7. Councils should be able to retain a share of any value uplift arising from additional economic activity related to local intervention and investment
8. Local authorities should receive a proportion of any mineral royalties attributed to local activities
9. Allow councils to levy specific charges and taxes on visitors where economically efficient
10. Reconsider the decision to limit the range of community amenities funded through development contributions

I especially like the first proposal – the ability to trial new ideas in special zones. We should have the flexibility to trial out different ways of funding new areas. To some degree, a lot of the economic growth in China has come from areas with special zones.

I also support the ending of most mandatory exemptions from rates. Everyone should pay their fair share whether they be the Government or churches.

Also been a long term advocate of road user charges and congestion charging so that transport is funded on a user pays basis, not on the basis of the value of your house.

And there is much merit in allowing local authorities to get a proportion of mineral royalties from their regions, as that would incentivise them to support economic activity in these areas.

Well done to LGNZ and their review group for a useful document. However again I would caution that these should be seen as alternate way to fund activities, not additional ways on top of rates – ie any new income sources should be compensated for by reductions in rates.

Brittany Raleigh (standing for President)

“I’m blue through and through. At intermediate we held mock elections where a buddy and I convinced our entire class to vote National (and this was in 2002). As a fan of the free market, low taxes and high personal freedoms, joining the Young Nats and the National Party was always going to be inevitable for me.When I turned up to my first event, I expected the organisation to be a place of debating the nuances of policy and waving signs on the side of the road from dusk til dawn (which it is). What I didn’t expect was that it would be a place where I would meet some of my closest friends, where my ideas would be listened to, and where I could have a lasting impact. The Young Nats have a special place in the National Party – we challenge, we support, and most importantly we are its future. 

The Young Nats need strong, experienced leadership that represents the voice of members. This weekend at the Young Nats’ AGM we have an important opportunity to build on the success we’ve had so far, and take the organisation to a new level. We can only do this if we have a team with a vision and a proven track record leading the charge from the front. 

It is crucial that we have an organisation with a culture of inclusion, that we broaden our base to include high schools, uni students, young professionals and tradespeople, and  expand our regions beyond just the metro areas. We need to run the best events with an equal focus on all regions, promote and win on the policies members feel passionately about, and ensure we have the financial resourcing to achieve our goals. We need to be preparing now to win a fourth term in 2017. We’ve had our platform available here on our website for the last three months. 

It’s important to be upfront about what you’re promising. Here’s our 100 day plan, our immediate priorities if elected: 

1. Unify. Reunite the organisation as one – where everyone works together for our common purpose
   2. Set the date for a 2016 Ball & start planning an election year 2017 Ball in Christchurch
   3. Plan a national event hosted by each region
   4. Bring back Young Nats Merchandise
   5. Call a national policy forum so you can tell us what you support
   6. Grassroots expansion. Grow our uni presence to new campuses, establish ourselves in high schools, forge relationships with YoPro groups & assist branch expansion in rural areas & smaller cities
   7. Fill the coffers. Kickoff fundraising initiatives & work with regions to raise operational money & 2017 campaign funds
   8. Prepare for 2017 now. Start campaign planning, training & work shops now to win 2017
   9. Review & clarify rules & standing orders to ensure ongoing transparency & compliance
   10. Review digital strategy. Utilise our tools for grassroots engagement & policy input, restore direct membership access & email authority to regions

I believe I have the experience and the results to take us forward. Since 2011 I have been involved in all facets of the Party and the Young Nats – volunteering in positions ranging from policy chair, secretary, treasurer, campaign manager, youth rep, list ranking committee member, women’s advisory group member, to ball committee member. As Northern Region Chair from 2013-2015 we saw our membership double, we fund-raised over $15,000, we passed multiple remits at a national level, we ran a campaign team of over 100 volunteers, and our social events regularly drew in over 100 people. Born and bred in Tauranga, I now live and work in Auckland as a Key Account Manager at a national freight company, which has given me invaluable commercial and professional experience. 

It is a privilege to seek election with such a talented and diverse team of Young Nats from around the country. Clive Antony is seeking election as Vice President, Ben Wooding as Treasurer, Michael Little as Secretary, Jason Howarth as Policy Chair, Jared Jamison as Grassroots Coordinator, and Sarah Fenwick as Projects Coordinator. Each region in the country is represented on our team and we all bring something unique to the table. Our full bios and backgrounds are available here on our website. 

The Young Nats have an exciting future – one which I hope to be at the helm of. “

I’ve observed (or been involved in) the Young Nats for almost 30 years, and I’ve never seen the organisation stronger. Their membership is well into the thousands, with active branches on every campus. I suspect they almost have more individual paid up members than the entire Labour Party.

In the last few years they’ve had a big impact on policies. Their lobbying helped get voluntary membership of student associations through Parliament, kept the alcohol purchase age at 18, and convinced a number of National MPs to vote to allow same sex marriages. They’ve also played a huge role in digital campaigning, and helping marginal electorates at election time.

Many people have been part of their success, but a lot is due to Sean Topham and Shaun Wallis who are retiring after four years as President and Vice-President respectively. They have done a great job in making Young Nats a vibrant fun group that people want to join and is relevant.

This weekend, delegates will elect their replacements, and it is great to see that there is healthy competition for every position on their national executive. It’s great when so many people want to be involved at the top level. There’s even tickets and campaign websites.

As a lot of Young Nats read this blog, I’ve agreed to run guest posts by Joel Rowan and Brittany Raleigh, who are both standing for the presidency. Joel’s post is below and Brittany’s will follow later today.

Joel Rowan (standing for President) and Katy Hendrikse (standing for VP)

I’m running to be the new Young Nats president.

You may have known that already. But you might not know why.

I decided to do this because I believe I’m the best person to lead our organisation through an important time. We’re supporting a third-term government and we have to work harder to keep winning support, and to win enough votes for a fourth term.

I led the Young Nats Digital Team, and our social media campaign throughout 2014. In that time we grew from under 6,000 fans to over 19,000 on Facebook. I led a team from around the country, and we delivered unprecedented results. Thanks to our campaign, thousands of young voters who probably would not otherwise have heard from National, saw at least one of our campaign posts. National won the campus booths at Otago University – renowned as a Labour stronghold. Our efforts online (and on the ground) made a difference.

I’m driven by a desire to make the Young Nats even better than we are today. I joined in 2011 and I’ve seen the very best of the Young Nats – great parties, policy victories, and a co-ordinated, successful ground campaign for the 2014 election. I’m really proud of our organisation.

But we can’t rest on those laurels. We can’t continue in the same way and expect to sustain the success of the last three years. That’s why I’ve assembled a team around me that is talented, smart, and made up of students in touch with the University campuses where we have the greatest potential for growth. They have the campaign experience needed to lead another winning effort in 2017.

We’ve built our plan based on things we want to do differently to positively change our organisation. We’re going to change the events that the Young Nats hold, and make it easier and more attractive to sign up, so we expand our membership. We’re going to change the way we form policy so that our supporters are engaged and have ownership of it. We’re going to better prepare for campaigns and equip our activists with the skills and resources they need to ensure National wins again in 2017.

My vision is to lead a friendlier organisation where new members feel welcome and everyday students can join, make great friends and strong networks while they learn valuable skills along the way. I believe when we do that we will grow in size, and gain influence, and be ready to win in 2017.

We’re the Team To Win not because we want to win on July 26. We’re the team to win because our plan will ensure we win new members, win new influence, and win the general election in 2017. That’s why I’m here.

If you want to know more about my team, visit teamtowin.nz

This video is going viral. The host is aged just 22 but has struck a real chord with many.

Go to TV3 and watch Andrew Little melt down and lash out at Patrick Gower as he is questioned over Labour’s targeting of Chinese sounding surnames.

Jesus. Could Andrew Little have handled this any worse? http://t.co/5RVWwBXjbu

— Russell Brown (@publicaddress) July 21, 2015

I’m sure he could if he tried.

The order paper is here.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

1. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements?
2. CHRIS BISHOP to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the international economy, and its effect on the New Zealand economy?
3. ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement in relation to affordability of homes in Auckland that “there’s a general view that housing prices are not overvalued”, given that the homeownership rate has fallen to its lowest level in 64 years?
4. JAMES SHAW to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that “I’d bet my bottom dollar that there would be considerable debate and discussion in New Zealand about whether the flag should change”?
5. SIMON O’CONNOR to the Minister of Health: What recent reports has he received on the number of B4 School free health and development checks completed in the last financial year, and what do they show?
6. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with the Prime Minister that bad news about the New Zealand economy is overblown, and that while dairy prices are down, “95 percent of our economy is not involved in that”?
7. JOANNE HAYES to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: How is the Government delivering more of the skilled ICT graduates that New Zealand needs?
8. KELVIN DAVIS to the Minister of Corrections: Does he stand by his statement that Mount Eden Corrections Facility is “the highest performing prison” for measures of core security, rehabilitation, and reintegration?
9. ALFRED NGARO to the Minister for Social Development: What reports has she received on how the Kickstart Breakfast initiative is supporting vulnerable children?
10. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Trade: Does the current draft of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement purport to restrict a future New Zealand Government from banning the sale of existing New Zealand homes to foreign buyers from Trans-Pacific Partnership countries?
11. RON MARK to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in all his Ministers; if so, why?
12. JAN LOGIE to the Minister for Social Development: Will she be raising benefit levels given official advice that shows that a family of four living on a benefit has $72 less per week than what they need to provide the “core essential items”; if not, why not?

National: Four questions on the economy, school health checks, ICT graduates and Kickstart Breakfasts

Labour: Four questions on Auckland housing, the economy, Mt Eden Prison and the TPP

Greens: Two questions on the flag referendum and benefit levels

NZ First: Two question on PM standing bu his statements and confidence in Ministers

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

Appropriation (2015/16 Estimates) Bill – committee stage

This Bill authorises the individual appropriations contained in The Estimates of Appropriations for the Government of New Zealand for the year ending 30 June 2016.

• Introduced May 2015
• 1st reading: May 2015, passed without dissent
• 2nd reading: June 2015, passed 63-58 with Labour, Greens, NZ First against

The debate is an 11 hour debate divided into ten sector debates. The sectors are:

• Economic Development and Infrastructure Sector
• Education Sector
• Environment Sector
• External Sector
• Finance and Government Administration Sector
• Health Sector
• Justice Sector
• Māori, Other Populations and Cultural Sector
• Primary Sector
• Social Development and Housing Sector

Each debate is a minimum of eight speeches of up to five minutes each, led off by the relevant select committee chairperson.

For the third month in a row, more people have come to NZ from Australia than vice-versa. Monthly figures can change though so I always look at the 12 month rolling data which is above.

In the 12 months to 30 June 2015, net migration to Australia was only 1,100 – so around three people a day.

In the 12 months to 30 June 2008, net migration to Australia was 31,730 or around 87 people a day.

Stuff reports:

Up to three additional Christchurch City councillors could be elected at next year’s local body elections as part of a post-quake representation shake-up.

After studying population shifts since the 2010 and 2011 quakes, council staff are putting forward two options for re-jigging the city’s representation arrangements. …

Under the first option, Christchurch and Banks Peninsula will be carved into 14 wards. Under the second option, they will be divided into 16 wards.

Each ward will be represented by one councillor to deliver either a council of 14 or 16, plus the mayor.

The current Council has 13 Councillors (plus the Mayor). So both options are to increase the number of Councillors. That’s a claytons decision. How about an option for the status quo or reducing the number?

A governance body larger than 12 members tends to struggle to do its job well, and you inevitably get an inner circle of key decison makers the bigger you get. The current total size of 14 is large enough – no need to go to 15 or 17.

I do support though the proposal to have one councillor per ward. I think you get far better informed voting in smaller wards with just one councillor to be selected, than a larger ward where you have to pick multiple councillors.

Anne Tolley announced:

Social Development Minister Anne Tolley says the latest benefit figures show the number of people receiving welfare is the lowest for any June quarter since before the Global Financial Crisis.

There were 285,349 people on a benefit at the end of June 2015, a drop of 8,237, or 2.8 per cent, compared to a year ago. This is the lowest June quarter since June 2008.

“I’m pleased to see the strong downward trend is continuing as Work and Income supports more people into work,” Mrs Tolley says.

“Sole parents continue to lead the way with a 6.5 per cent reduction nationally, including a 10.7 per cent drop in the number of Sole Parents who only have obligations to prepare for work.

“This puts more money in the pockets of these parents, and it improves the future prospects of both parents and children.

“Getting off a benefit and into employment or study reduces long term welfare dependency and allows individuals and families to thrive,” Mrs Tolley says.

Good to see the trend continuing.

Over the last five years we’ve seen:

• 47,500 fewer people on main benefits
• 25,000 fewer people on a benefit for more than a year
• 14,500 fewer under 25s on welfare
• Reduction by ethnicity is 21% for Pasifika, 18% European and 7% Maori
• 28,300 less on jobseeker benefits
• 19,000 fewer on sole parent benefits (21% down)

The NZ Initiative prints some feedback on their report about the cost of the MBIE campaign to reduce falls from heights of under three metres:

• I’m a qualified licenced builder and it adds 20 k to the build costs of a average house build. It may have reduced some claims but I don’t believe it is 30% reduction in what I read in the building magazines . But the cost to train and police the scaffolding is huge . So I’d wonder if the savings in acc claims would justify the costs in all the policing of it. In most tradies opinions its way over the top and to pc. If your good at what you do your experienced enough it should be up to the tradies if they need or want scaffolding on there jobs.
   
• I applaud the initiative of NZ Initiative. I just wish our compliance bureaucracy could adopt a balanced approach rather than inflexible adherence to the book at all costs. Ultimately, it is the public who pay.

• Talking to a tradesman about an Chch earthquake repair, a handful of nails on some roofing needed hammering back in; a 10 minute job – not allowed to do it without several thousand dollars worth of scaffolding.
   
• Just finished a renovation of our house and the scaffolding costs added a significant cost to the build. I ended up installing some windows myself as the scaffolding requirement doubled the cost of the windows and the height from the ground was laughable. I built my own low scaffold out of wood and did the job myself and saved a heap of money!

• The cost of compliance is a joke in this country. We had a quote for $2500 for scaffolding to do a $250 roof repair that would take an hour. If you don’t play the dumb game and Work-shaft catch you, the fine’s huge.

• Whats laughable Helen [Kelly] I have worked in the building / housing industry for 50 years we always built our own scaffold on housing projects this did not include safety netting never a bad accident Currently building a small house 150m3 the cost of scaffolding has increased the build cost by $15000.Keep laughing Helen you are out of touch.
• Totally agree… Had a quote to do the roof on my house… Additional cost of $10000.. Just for scaffolding to comply with the new rules…. For a new house build of course this adds to the total overall cost…

One day you’ll need scaffolding for tree huts!

The Herald reports:

Labour leader Andrew Little says banning smoking outside bars, cafes and restaurants would be a step too far, describing a smoke after a drink as one of “life’s little pleasures” for some people.

About 70 per cent of councils at the Local Government NZ conference yesterday voted to ask the Government to ban smoking outside cafes, bars and restaurants.

The former Labour Government banned smoking inside bars and other workplaces in 2003 but Mr Little did not believe that should be extended to outside areas.

“I agree people shouldn’t be allowed to smoke inside buildings which the public have access to. But in the end, people are able to lawfully buy tobacco products, they must be able to lawfully use them somewhere. We can go a bit too far sometimes in banning their use outside in public places.”

Bar owners had told him restrictions did impact on them and smoking was already restricted to outside areas. “There are some people, they go to a bar, they have a drink and they have a smoke and it’s a part of life’s little pleasures.”

Pleasing to see a Labour leader take a balanced approach and reject a ban. I suspect Andrew is remembering his days a EPMU leader, knowing that a fair proportion of his members would like to have a smoke down at the pub – and Labour won’t win them back by demanding that they lose the ability to do that.