Professor Wayne Hall and others write:

Over the past ten years, a substantial minority of cigarette smokers in many countries have turned to electronic (e-) cigarettes in an attempt to quit smoking or as an alternative to smoking some or all of the time. In 2013 around 600,000 Australian smokers had tried e-cigarettes, while there are currently around 2.6 million e-cigarette users in Great Britain.

These devices avoid burning tobacco and don’t produce smoke, tar and particulate matter. Instead they use an electronic system to produce a mist containing nicotine and propylene glycol and/or vegetable glycerine that can be inhaled much like tobacco smoke to deliver nicotine to the lungs.

E-cigarettes deliver much lower levels of toxins and carcinogens than cigarettes, and are 95% less harmful than cigarettes according to some proponents.

But Australia has banned the sale of e-cigarettes containing nicotine. Nicotine can only be imported for use in vaporisers on a medical prescription, but a spokesperson for the Royal Australasian College of Physicians would like to ban this too.

The sale is banned in NZ also.

As we argue in the recent edition of the journal Addiction, the ban on e-cigarettes is ethically questionable. It’s a paternalistic policy that denies adult smokers the right to use a less harmful form of nicotine.

Banning a less harmful product (e-cigarettes) while allowing the most harmful (tobacco cigarettes) to be freely sold is an incoherent form of risk regulation. It also disadvantages smokers who may have difficulty quitting but want to reduce the risks of smoking.

To be blunt it is fucking stupid.

We oppose laissez faire policies towards e-cigarettes because they may increase the risks that have motivated the ban – dual use by smokers, uptake by minors, and re-normalising smoking. But there is another more ethically acceptable policy option: allowing e-cigarettes to be sold to smokers, while using tight regulation to minimise adverse outcomes.

We propose allowing adult smokers to buy approved e-cigarette products from a restricted number of licensed sales outlets. Any promotional material for these products could be restricted to information supplied to smokers purchasing these products.

A sensible compromise – regulated sales rather than a ban.

ResearchNZ has done a poll of trust in occupations, reporting the proportion who gave them a 7 or higher out of 10.

Second bottom are MPs at 25%. But this is a 7% increase over 2013.

Now at the bottom constant on 23% are journalists.

Wonder where bloggers would come! 🙂

Estonia shows what you can do reports The Register:

In the Autumn of 2014 my wife was posted to Tallinn, Estonia’s capital, for six months. One of the delights of being a technology analyst is you can you work anywhere there is good internet access. Estonia has excellent internet coverage plus 4G available throughout the country (even in rural areas – a matter or government policy). In addition, ‘being ‘local’ means you can explore the digital business scene.

So, armed with my identification documents, I went to a designated e-Resident office, having previously made an appointment online (of course). Although I brought passport-sized photos I was directed to a standard-seeming photo-booth which took my picture. Then I met a courteous Estonian officer who swiftly took my details and bio-identifiers while also linking to my electronic pictures from the photo-booth. I was told I would receive an email in two weeks if my application was not refused.

Thirteen days later the promised email arrived. I returned to the same office to sign for a package that included my e-Resident card and a neat, and super-small USB e-Resident card reader. Nothing in the process could have been simpler or more easily delivered (and from 1 April 2015 it has been possible to achieve the same at selected Estonian embassies.)

With an e-Resident card you can set up a business remotely operating from Estonia. As an e-Resident you can do everything legally required for a business by electronic means from afar, including setting up a company, signing contracts, opening bank accounts, making and receiving payments and paying all taxes.

I like the concept of e-residents.

Today’s Estonian citizen can (though he or she does not have to):

• Identify themselves, via e-ID, an electronic identity system

• Vote (iVote, available since 2007)

• Complete tax returns (and make payments or receive refunds)

• Obtain and fulfil prescriptions (eHealth)

• Participate in census completion

• Review accumulated pension contributions and values

• Perform banking, including making and receiving payments

• Pay and interact with utilities (like water, gas and electricity)

• Interact with the education system (e-Education)

• Set up businesses

• Sign contracts

• And more.

We’re not too far off. We can do most tax stuff online, and the census is online. Banks and utilities are all online. Education is getting there.

For example, digitising the police now enables a police officer in a patrol car to verify a car’s legality and insurance by querying the car registration system. If this shows the owner is a driver who has been convicted of a drink-driving offence within the past two years the police officer can stop and breathalyse that driver. Convicted drunk-drivers know this; unsurprisingly repeat drink-driving re-offences have fallen.

A good way to target.

News.com.au reports:

Nick Jensen, who posed with his wife Sarah on the cover of the latest issue ofCanberra CityNews, writes of the Christian couple’s decision to end their marriage under the headline, “Gay law change may force us to divorce”.

“My wife and I just celebrated our 10-year anniversary. But later this year, we may be getting a divorce,” he writes.

“The decision to divorce is not one we’ve taken lightly. And certainly, it’s not one that many will readily understand. And that’s because it’s not a traditional divorce.”

Mr Jensen goes on to explain the divorce plan, where the pair will continue to live together, have more kids, and refer to each other as husband and wife, but will legally end their marriage because they believe “marriage is not a human invention”.

“Our view is that marriage is a fundamental order of creation. Part of God’s human history. Marriage is the union of a man and a woman before a community in the sight of God. And marriage of any couple is important to God regardless of whether that couple recognises God’s involvement or authority in it,” he writes.

It’s fine to view marriage as purely a religious ceremony, but if that is your view then shouldn’t he have got divorced when atheists were allowed to marry?

Go to 3 News for a hilarious video of Colin Craig being interviewed in a sauna by David Farrier.

Craig is hardly sweating at all, while Farrier is turning into a waterfall. Farrier starts stripping off while interviewing. Colin Craig is a great sport going along, and even shares a post sauna shower with Farrier.

I wonder who will be the next sauna interview?

The Herald reports:

The Government and Business New Zealand have joined in tributes to former Council of Trade Unions secretary Peter Conway who died suddenly yesterday.

Workplace Relations and Safety Michael Woodhouse said Mr Conway was an engaging, intelligent and passionate advocate for workers who had committed his whole working life to improving the lives of working people. …

Business New Zealand chief executive Phil O’Reilly said Mr Conway was unfailingly constructive as an advocate in employment relations and highly respected by all who worked with him.

“Peter was an industrial leader of the highest integrity and his passing is a sad loss to New Zealand.”

John Bishop of the Taxpayers’ Unions described him as “an unfailingly honourable and dedicated New Zealander who strove to serve the people he represented”.

I think it says a lot about someone who was in the political sphere when they are praised not just by those people on the same side of the spectrum as them, but also sincerely respected and praised by those on the other side.

His family issued a statement yesterday saying he had battled a depressive illness for a year.

“Peter fought hard in a daily struggle to stay with the family he loved. He carried this terrible illness with the same dignity and kindness that he lived his life, but ultimately it took him.”

Mr Conway is survived by his wife, Liz Riddiford, and three children, Maddy, Sean and Rosa.

My condolences to his family and friends.

A lot of NZ Labour’s problems come from its ideological hatred of the private sector, and their kneejerk opposition to anything involving the private sector – regardless of the impact a programme may have in helping the most disadvantaged.

They’re against privately managed prisons, even if they do a better job of rehabilitating prisoners.

They’re against charter schools even if they do a better job of helping the most disadvantaged students gain qualifications

And we’re seen it again with their kneejerk opposition to social impact bonds. Labour seem to have no fresh ideas of their own, just a long list of things they oppose.

Now take social impact bonds. Are they some sort of right wing master plot to privateer and make money out of social services? No doubt they were pioneered by Market Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.

Well here are the parties that have been implemented social impact bonds overseas:

• UK Labour in 2010
• NSW Labour in 2011
• US Democrats in 2012
• Massachusetts in 2012
• NY State Democrats in 2013

You can have a valid view on the benefits and risks of social impact bonds. But the reality is that these are initiatives pioneered by centre-left Governments that rightly are focused on what works, rather than whether or not it involves the private sector. But NZ Labour seem unable to get past its ideological opposition to the private sector, so they remain stranded as a party that stands for little, but opposes a lot.

Stuff reports:

A second police crackdown on drinking in public has resulted in 40 young people being fined $250 each in just three hours.

Wellington police carried out the blitz in the central city, targeting people breaching the liquor ban on Saturday night. 

After an earlier operation two weeks ago, which netted 60 people breaking the bylaw, police publicly warned  they would carry out another on Saturday. Senior Sergeant Steve Dearns, who led both operations, said he was “concerned” so many people were still being caught.

But Victoria University’s students’ association is calling the fines punitive, and says hitting young people in the pocket won’t address the causes of “pre-loading”.

There is no “cause” of pre-loading. It’s simply a decision to but alcohol from off-licenses and drink it before going to an on-license.

If they were not being violent or committing vandalis, a warning and tipping out the booze would be fairer, association president Rick Zwaan said. “This $250 fine seems to be a bit punitive.”

I think the idea is that the fine will deter them from doing it in future.

Zwaan said it was no wonder students drank in the streets when alcohol was so expensive in bars, and university hostels set curfews on drinking indoors.  “It’s pretty unaffordable to drink out in the city.” 

Oh cry me a river. First of all it is no hard to drink past the curfew in a hostel, so long as you are not too rowdy. Secondly most students have lots of friends who live in flats. To claim there is no alternative but to drink in the street is crap.

Edge, at Circa, is a one person show by broadway star Angelica Page, and she is a star.

We have many good actors in NZ, but Page is in the global league. Her performance was riveting and stunning. You can see why she won the Helen Hayes Award for Best Actress. She has a mastery of the stage which is compelling. A slight narrowing of the eyes can convey so much. A slight change in pitch speaks volumes.

The play is about the life of Sylvia Plath, set on the day of her suicide aged 30. It’s a very sombre and gripping play. Page narrates the life of Plath ranging from her childhood to her death.

Plath, a Pulitizer Prize winner, was married to UK Poet Laureate Ted Hughes. A lot of the play focused on their relationship. He is the charming urbane womaniser, she is the neurotic masochistic victim. She is mentally unstable – her first suicide attempt was at age nine. Later in life she has electroconvulsive therapy.

An enduring controversy has been how much Hughes is to blame for her death. He left her for his mistress (who later also committed suicide, in the same manner as Plath). There were accusations he abused her, and for 20 years her gravestone was constantly vandalised to remove his name from it.

Page makes Plath real. She is funny, brittle, sad, mad, and strong at varying times. You get a picture of her loves and fears. It made me want to go buy the biography of Plath that the play is based on.

By coincidence there was a Q+A with Page after the play, moderated by Ran Henwood. A fascinating 45 minute discussion on Plath and the play. Questions ranged from whether Plath really intended to kill herself (she had many previous unsuccessful attempts which might have been cries for help) to what did people who knew Sylvia think of the play.

This isn’t a play that will appeal t everyone, but if you like dramatic solo performances, then this is as good as it gets.

It is on every second night at Circa, alternating with Turning Page (the story of Page’s famous mother), so is on Fri 12, Sun 14, Wed 17 and Sat 20 June.

Stars: ****1/2

Stuff reports:

Police have dropped charges against 16 Uber drivers who were fined while  carrying passengers using the popular ridesharing app.

Uber is a free smartphone app, which connects passengers to freelance drivers in private cars.

Uber now has more than 1000 drivers in Auckland and Wellington and aims to expand throughout New Zealand.

But in Auckland, police began stopping some Uber drivers over the New Year period charging them or issued them infringement notices for using their smartphone app as a meter – a breach that would make them subject to tough taxi regulations.

Good to see common sense win out. It is not the role of the Police to work on behalf of the Taxi Federation.

Politik reports:

Controversy within the Labour Party over moves by some right wing members and MPs to set up a think tank aligned with the party.

Some sources say that things got heated at last week’s Labour caucus over the proposal and  expulsion of some of those involved was threatened.

As I have said many times, Labour is all for diversity – except diversity of opinion.

But a spokesperson for Labour Leader Andrew Little says that while he does not discuss what happens at caucus, those reports are “inaccurate”.

Indeed the spokesperson said Mr Little said he welcomed the idea.

“Labour is a broad church and we welcome all sorts of ideas,” she said.

“If people want to have things like think tanks with ideas that’s good.”

I don’t even know why it was discussed at their caucus. Members should be free to set up whatever they want.

I co-founded the Taxpayers Union. I didn’t seek permission from anyone in National about it. In fact I didn’t even tell any MP about it until just before it launched. NZTU often disagrees with the Government, and/or criticises National. It’s called having a diversity of views on the centre-right. Labour though seems to again have problems with any diversity of views.

I would have thought the Labour caucus would have more pressing things to discuss than whether they like a proposed think-tank.

Stuff reports:

Consumers are getting a reasonable deal from phone and internet providers but are still paying over the odds for mobile broadband, according to the Commerce Commission.

The competition watchdog said telecommunications companies invested $1.69 billion in the year to June 2014, equalling the record set six years ago, despite a 1 per cent drop in industry revenues to $5.17b. Much of the investment was driven by the roll-out of ultrafast broadband (UFB).

Most of the figures in the annual report are based on a survey that is already one year old.

But they suggest Kiwis are paying broadly the same for phone and broadband plans, when compared to people in other developed countries.

Prices ranged from 22 per cent below average to 23 per cent above average, depending on technology and data caps, the commission found.

Consumers were also paying between a third and two thirds less for mobile phone calls and mobile broadband if they took up one of the $9 to $29 monthly deals offered by Spark, Vodafone and 2degrees.

But the price of larger mobile broadband plans was still high, with a six gigabyte monthly plan costing $90 a month, more than double the average among Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development states (OECD) .

That seems right to be. Home broadband plans are pretty well priced now. I have an unlimited data plan for a reasonable cost.

But the cost of a big data mobile plan is still over $100 (including phone plan also).

Broadband users chomped through an average of 32 gigabytes of fixed-line broadband data each month, up from 26Gb the previous year. Average speeds rose from 5.3 megabits per second to 7.3Mbps, achieving parity with Australia but still behind the 11Mbps average in the United States and Britain.

The Commissions reports are online here.

Some interesting stats comparing 2014 to 2008:

• Total telco investment up from $1.2 billion to $1.7 billion a year
• Fixed broadband connections up from 850,000 to 1,390,000
• Average speed up from 2.7 Mb/s to 7.3 Mb/s
• Unbundled phone lines from 3,000 to 131,000
• Fixed call minutes down from 12 billion to 8.25 billion
• Mobile minutes up from 3.7 billion to 5.3 billion

The Herald reports:

The Prime Minister says he would probably support a euthanasia law change of the type Lecretia Seales wanted. …

John Key said this morning MPs would have to treat any proposed euthanasia law as “a conscience issue” but it was inevitable the topic would re-emerge in Parliament.

“I personally would probably support legislation aimed in the way Lecretia wanted it,” Mr Key said on TV One’s Breakfast this morning.

He said everyone had a “slightly different view” on the possible wording or interpretation of euthanasia laws but he expected several MPs to propose bills and he did not believe the Government needed to put the topic on its agenda.

“It will eventually get debated again.”

It would be nice to have a Government bill, as that can get a law change considered quicker in most cases. However the advantage of a members’ bill is that they don’t have to jostle for position with other bills on the Government’s order paper. The disadvantage of a members’ bill is you have to wait for it to win in the ballot.

The last bill failed by just two votes at its first reading. And that is possibly because the MP in charge was not a great parliamentary tactician. I’ve yet to start counting votes in this Parliament, but I have looked at how MPs still here voted in 2003.

For – Cunliffe, Dyson, Goff, Key, McCully, Paraone, Peters, Turei, Williamson (9)

Against – Brownlee, Carter, Collins, Cosgrove, Dunne, King, Mahuta, Mallard, Mark, O’Connor, Parker, Smith, Tisch, English (14)

Based on public statements, Collins is in favour (subject to wording) and I suspect King and Mallard may be persuadable also.

But the key will be 98 MPs since 2003.

Stuff reports:

More than 30,000 signatures was not enough to persuade the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee to listen to Sean and Cody Roberts’ petition calling for compulsory drivers test for foreign drivers.

The Geraldine youngsters, 10 and 9 respectively, collated the petition after their father, Grant Roberts was killed  in 2012 by a Chinese tourist who had been in New Zealand for less than 48 hours. Grant was travelling on a motorcycle through the Lindis Pass when he was killed.

The petition was started because the pair believed their father would still be alive had the driver completed a competency test. The brothers asked for Parliament to consider a change to legislation, so that every foreign driver was to be competency tested before being able to get behind the wheel of a rental vehicle.

The roads would be safer if every foreign driver was required to sit a competence test. Likewise they would safer if every NZ driver had to annually sit a competence test. And they would be safer if no one under the age of 25 was allowed to drive.

The test is how much impact any change would make on road safety, and what would be the impact in other areas.

If people knew that NZ was the only country in the world where tourists are not allowed to drive, unless they sit a competency test, then we’d have a lot fewer tourists.

The Select Committee heard and received evidence from the New Zealand Automobile Association, the Tourist Industry Association New Zealand, Tourism New Zealand and petitioners Sean and Cody Roberts.

However it rejected compulsory testing, noting New Zealand was a signatory to the United Nations Convention on Road Traffic 1949 which prevented administration of a competency based test to foreign drivers.

Which makes the whole issue rather moot.

The Herald reports:

Respected lawyer Sir Peter Williams died last night.

The 80-year-old Queen’s Counsel, who has battled prostate cancer for almost a decade, died at his Ponsonby, Auckland home about 6.30pm.

Sir Peter was one of New Zealand’s most respected legal minds and a prison reform campaigner.

He was never battle-shy, having fought for his clients in the courtroom for 60 years, and campaigned for prisoner rights.

There were times I wished Sir Peter was not such a fine lawyer, as he achieved many a “not guilty” verdict. But a fair justice system needs strong and skilled advocates, and he was definitely one of those.

The latest OECD report on NZ is here.

The New Zealand economy has performed well in recent years, but bottlenecks in housing and urban infrastructure, inequalities in living standards and rising environmental pressures all pose challenges for sustaining robust growth and high levels of well-being over the long term, according to the OECD’s latest Economic Survey of New Zealand.

The Survey says that New Zealand can expect its strong, broad-based expansion to continue in the near term, with economic growth projected at 3.4% in 2015 and 3% in 2016. The budget deficit has been almost eliminated, general government debt is falling as a share of GDP, and monetary policy remains accommodative, pushing inflation back up to the midpoint of the official 1-3% target range.

However, the OECD points out a number of barriers to sustaining strong growth. House prices in Auckland, New Zealand’s economic hub, are high, reducing its attractiveness as a business location and posing financial stability risks. Strong population growth and constrained housing supply have resulted in rapid house price increases, eroding affordability. To address this, New Zealand should reduce the economic costs of environmental and planning regulations and the scope for vested interests to limit development that would otherwise be in the wider public interest.

The burden of housing costs has risen substantially for low-income households. Moves to bring the social housing stock more in line with demographic and geographic demand, as well as to reallocate it to those most in need, will help the hardest hit households. The government’s commitment to expanding the social housing stock is welcome, although the Survey recommends providing additional resources, to achieve a more significant increase.  

They also look at local government:

One of the most problematic factors cited for doing business in New Zealand remains an inadequate supply of infrastructure. The Survey recommends that New Zealand facilitate greater urban infrastructure provision by diversifying revenue streams available to local governments. Better management of the demand for and use of urban infrastructure, including congestion charging to reduce urban traffic, should be considered.

I’m in favour of congestion charging.

Stuff reports:

The Budget track is continuing to hold out the prospect of a surplus this year despite the Government officially postponing the prospect until at least 2015/16.

The Crown accounts for the 10 months to the end of April showed a $1 billion turnaround on Budget night predictions, with a surplus before gains and losses (Obegal) of $448 million against an expected deficit of $555m. …

Finance Minister Bill English said he would not know if the accounts would be in surplus this year until the final figures were published in October.

“But it’s clear it will be a close run thing.”

The $1b swing around highlighted the volatility  of monthly fiscal results, 

I think the year will end in a deficit, but it would be hilarious if it did end up in surplus after all, after Andrew Little hysterically proclaimed that a failure to obtain surplus would be the biggest political deception of his lifetime!

The Local Government Commission has said:

The Local Government Commission has made decisions on the next steps for three local government reorganisation proposals.

The Commission has decided not to proceed with its draft proposals for single councils in Northland and Wellington. Instead the Commission will return to those communities to work with them and seek to develop other options to address the challenges those regions face.  The Commission has issued a final proposal for reorganising Hawke’s Bay’s local government.

I think amalgamation and reform would have been good in all those regions. However it was apparent that opposition in Northland and Wellington was so intense (mainly whipped up by local body politicians worried they would lose their job) that any amalgamation was bound to fail in a referendum.

The out of control spending by the Auckland Council has also I think scared people off amalgamation.

The decision for Hawke’s Bay is:

That proposal is to establish a single new council for Hawke’s Bay, called Hawke’s Bay Council, with five local boards sharing decision making and representing the interests of the region’s varied communities.  If implemented, it will replace the Napier City, Wairoa District, Hastings District and Central Hawke’s Bay District, and Hawke’s Bay Regional Councils.  This final proposal has been issued following an extensive process.

This will proceed unless 10% of a current Council’s population call for a referendum. This is inevitable, so I expect a referendum between September and December this year.

Rodney Hide writes:

I’ve fallen out of love with Green co-leader Jamie Shaw. It didn’t take long. Our political honeymoon lasted less than a day.

He declared “free market capitalism dead”. I get that he doesn’t like free markets. He’s a Green. He’s a politician. He wants to boss us around. People being free to choose is anathema to him.

But to declare the free market dead? What is he saying? That no one now supports free markets? That’s not true. There’s me.

Or is he saying that there are no free markets? Has he never been on TradeMe, shopped in a supermarket or been to a food hall?

Free market capitalism is rampant and everything that we need is produced by it: food, shelter, internet and smartphones.

Countries previously starving have grown rich in a generation through free market capitalism.

We have more free trade than ever. There’s more private property. Profit and loss rules and consumers are king. Politicians and bureaucrats are increasingly marginalised. They don’t have the power and control they once had.

They don’t like it but that doesn’t make the free market dead. It’s alive and well and feeding the world.

It’s a line that may go down a treat with Green Party faithful but it shows they have another leader too shallow and too lazy to think and debate.

Rodney is correct that the free market is far from dead. Every day we buy, sell and trade.

Then I learned he doesn’t have a driver’s licence. Being driven around by others doesn’t reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Imagine the conversation.

“I don’t drive. I’m saving the planet. But could you pick me up around eight?”

Heh.

Stuff reports:

Traditional taxi companies will be hoping the Government comes down harshly on controversial app company Uber when it sets new rules for the industry later this year.

But the Government is already signalling that won’t be the case. Ride-sharing innovations, such as Uber, are being touted as the next big revolution on our roads, paving the way for a future in which many of us will no longer need to bother owning a car at all.

Transport Minister Simon Bridges has heard the talk and knows New Zealand needs to keep pace with the technology.

In January, the Government announced it would review the rules governing the taxi industry to make sure they were fit for purpose in the wake of Uber’s arrival.

The results of that review are due later this year. But Bridges signalled that the Government would be taking the “lightest touch” possible to regulation so ridesharing technology can flourish.

“I’ve always thought that in politics you’re on the side of the angels if what you’re doing is good for consumers, and ultimately this will be,” he said.

“What I want to see is a regime that allows for new technological innovations, but is safe. Some change is required, but we’re open to where that goes.”

That is very promising. Not only does Uber provide a much better service than traditional taxis, it makes it much easier to ride share – which can help reduce congestion.

Ran into a friend on a flight to Auckland and we decided to share a car in – both of us are Uber users. Normally this means one person pays, and shouts the other as who has cash to reimburse. But Uber has a button on the app called Split Fare and if you agree, you both get billed half.

So good to see the Government is looking to allow innovative new challengers, which benefit the consumer – rather than protect current players.

Stuff reports:

Emma-Lita Bourne’s family had been given a heater but could not afford to put it on. 

But Labour leader Andrew Little said requiring rental homes to be insulated was not enough.

“The problem is, you can have insulation, but if you’re not heating the house in the middle of winter, then all the insulation is doing is keeping the cold air in it,” Little said on TVNZ’s Breakfast show. 

“So there does need to be a means of heating – whether it’s a heat pump, whether it’s an energy efficient source of heating, a fireplace or whatever, there has to be a means of heating the home.”

That would be a compulsory requirement for rental accommodation under Labour, Little said.  

Umm, a heater is a means of heating. I doubt there is any property in NZ that does not have a source of heating.

The issue is that electricity is not free, but that is a different issue to requiring a source of heating. Heat pumps cost money also.

Having Government dictate what the form of heating must be for every property is nuts. Sometimes a wall heater is the cheapest form of heating because you don’t want the whole house heated.

Also not every rental property is for low income families. Some top end rentals go to US executives. Is Labour saying that it will be illegal to rent a penthouse apartment out to a person earning $500,000 a year, if it has wall heaters instead of a heat pump?

Stuff reports:

“We haven’t renewed Ken’s contract,” said Shaw, who replaced Russel Norman at co-leader at the end of May. “We offered the contract to Andrew, who’s accepted it”.

So let’s be clear. They had an employee who wanted to carry on. He was not incompetent at his job. He had been there eight years. They didn’t sack him for incompetence or misconduct – they just decided to choose someone else who they thought would be better.

Now think if any other employer did that? Greens (and Labour) insist that employees not even be given a 90 day trial. They say that once an employee is hired, they must be kept in a job indefinitely, unless the position is made redundant, or they are sacked for incompetence or misconduct. They would kick up a stink if some other employer kicked someone to the kerb, simply because they had found someone better to take their place.

Legally they can do so, because Parliament has special contracts that give employees almost no rights. Their contracts expire when  ever there is a change of leader, MP or an election. And even worse they can dump you at any time if they merely decide you are no longer compatible. They oppose any other employer in NZ having those rights, but happily will use them for themselves.

Many staff in Parliament and the Beehive have “events based” contracts, which come with little job security, but a likely three month redundancy payout on termination.

However, this does not cover staff employed in the various leaders’ offices, meaning Spagnolo faced leaving with no redundancy.

Shaw said that the Green Party’s MPs saw the situation as unfair and so would put their hands in their pockets to cover the cost.

“There are some staff that get a redundancy payment and some don’t depending on what budget they’re on,” Shaw said.

“We…choose to match that so that our staff are treated fairly no matter which category they are under”.

The move means MPs “take the hit on that ourselves”, he said.

Now that is a decent thing to do, and good on them. But it doesn’t mean they escape the underlying hypocrisy of dumping a long serving staffer who wanted to stay on, just because they felt someone else could do a better job.

I’m not against that. My point is why are they opposed to all other employers being able to do the same?