Stuff reminds us:

It was the day Richie Benaud stood up for principle over patriotism.

As evening descended on the Melbourne Cricket Ground on February 1, 1981, Australasia was gripped by furious debate after an incident many were already describing as having changed cricket forever. 

With just one ball left to play, and New Zealand needing a six to tie the one-day international match, captain Greg Chappell ordered his brother, Trevor, to bowl the final delivery underarm.

In his post-match wrap up for Channel Nine, Benaud defiantly stared down the barrel of the camera and excoriated the Australian team, calling it “one of the worst things I have ever seen done on a cricket field”.

“Let me just tell you what I think about it. I think it was a disgraceful performance from a captain that got his sums wrong today, and I think it should never be permitted to happen again.”

Pre-empting the excuses that would inevitably follow, Benaud continued: 

“We keep reading and hearing that the players are under a lot of pressure, and that they’re tired and jaded and perhaps their judgment and their skill is blunted. Perhaps they might advance that as an excuse for what happened out there today.

“Not with me they don’t,” he summed-up brusquely.

A great man, who never would have done what Chappell did.

The Herald reports:

A Ngaruawahia couple with a three-month-old baby face losing their house because the dad has been hit with an increase in child support payments of $44 a week.

Daniel Moulden, 30, and his wife Paige, 20, bought their house for $280,000 four months ago, just before their baby son Eli was born in January.

They calculated that they could just meet the house payments of $420 a week out of their combined net income of $1068 a week after deducting $82.50 a week which Mr Moulden was paying in child support for his three other children aged 11, 9 and 4.

Then the child support formula changed. From April 1, Mr Moulden must now pay $126.30 a week.

“At the moment, we are pushing other bills away so that we can keep the house,” he said.

“But if you push a bill away, it just doubles the next week, so we are pretty much looking at we might have to give it up.”

I have sympathy for any family who has an unexpected increase in costs. An extra $44 a week can be a real challenge.

But I would make the point that if he is only paying $82.50 a week or even $126.30 a week as a contribution towards three of his children, that is not a huge proportion of what they would be costing their custodial parent.

Mr Moulden is one of 33,000 liable parents whose child support payments have gone up under the new formula. A further 46,000 will pay less and 58,000 are unaffected.

Any change always produces winners and losers.

The Herald reports:

Prime Minister John Key today said he won’t be apologising for New Zealand’s role in the invasion Gallipoli a century ago.

On the eve of the bloody First World War conflict’s centenary, a prominent Turkish-New Zealander has called on the Government to say sorry for the offensive that claimed 86,000 Ottoman lives – almost twice the number of Allied soldiers killed.

But today when Mr Key was asked if he should apologise on behalf of New Zealand for the bloodshed of 100 years ago, he replied: “No.”

Why only apologise to Turkey? Should we also apologise to Kaiser Wilhelm II?

Hamish Rutherford writes in Stuff:

Taxpayers’ Union executive director Jordan Williams said the downgrading of flights by MPs may have inadvertently undermined the reason they claimed to need to fly business class.

“MPs travel business class so they can arrive refreshed and get straight into work,” he said.

“The fact that they are trading that for an economy-class seat so they can take their wife suggests that they’re not in Europe purely for work and even makes the argument for business-class tickets questionable.”

Meanwhile, a split may be forming in that organisation on the issue.

On Thursday David Farrar, a Taxpayers’ Union co-founder and board member, wrote on Kiwiblog that it was “pretty standard practice that if someone is entitled to travel business class, to allow them to choose two lower cost airfares instead”.

This was “often cheaper” than a single business class fare, he said.

Sir Keith Holyoake once said he only agreed with 80% of what his own Government did. Likewise I don’t agree with everything National does, and I don’t personally agree with every single media release put out by the Taxpayers Union. This is no surprise – I will always blog my personal views here.

I helped set up the Taxpayers Union because there was basically 2,000 or so lobby groups calling for more spending, and almost none calling for lower taxes and a restraint on spending. I’ve been delighted with how successful the Taxpayers Union has been in its first 18 months.

But that doesn’t mean I personally agree with every media release, and never will. The Board set priorities, and gets involved in determining policy on major issues. We don’t vet every press release, and even among the Board we sometimes have a diversity of views on what is “justified” spending and what is waste.

The Taxpayers Union is not a Cabinet or Caucus where you have to publicly agree on every issue. It is an organisation that exists to fight against wasteful spending, and support lower taxes.

Stuff reports:

John Campbell has reportedly hired a lawyer to take on Mediaworks in the battle to keep Campbell Live on air.

 

On Friday night’s show Campbell thanked viewers for the support he had received since Mediaworks confirmed it was looking to review the current affairs show, after its ratings appeared to have fallen far below rival Seven Sharp.

 

Campbell has enlisted the help of lawyer and former journalist Linda Clark, nzherald.co.nz reported.

Not sure this is a smart move. A smart move would be sitting down with Mediaworks and discussing ways to regain viewers. Bringing in the lawyers is unlikely to end well.

If I was Mediaworks and Campbell, I’d be looking at why they have lost so many viewers. I’d do a couple of focus groups of current and former viewers, and some quantitative research also.

What they need to work out, is whether people are no longer watching Campbell Live because they are switching off TV all together, or are they preferring Seven Sharp or Shortland Street? Is the problem that they don’t get enough viewers watching 3 News also?

Bringing in lawyers won’t help fund answers to those questions.

Stuff reports:

The airline industry is criticising plans to extend Wellington Airport’s runway, saying there are better ways to spend $300 million.

In a submission that went to the Wellington City Council last night, the Board of Airline Representatives New Zealand (Barnz) raises serious concerns about the claimed economic benefits, and fears airlines will be left to pick up the bill.

The board represents 20 airlines that fly into and around New Zealand, including Air New Zealand.

Airlines will of course pass on extra costs to travelers.

I’d love to be able to fly to countries outside Australia and the Pacific from Wellington. But not at any cost.

But Barnz says the methodology used to work out the supposed economic benefits is flawed. It commissioned a peer review which states that the economic impact assessment “overstates the benefits while overlooking costs”.

Many of the assumptions used are unsound, the report says. That includes the idea that people would wait 48 hours to catch a direct flight rather than adding a stopover in Auckland, and that tourists would want to land in Wellington, requiring a “figure of eight” to explore the country, rather than starting at one end and going down.

A fair point. However we may get some people wanting to do a shorter trip primarily in one island only.

Given the requirement for long-haul carriers to fill 80 per cent of their seats, it was unlikely one would be willing to come to Wellington, he said.

“We’re not aware of any airline expressing an interest in flying long-haul into Wellington . . . Our concern is that there’s a potentially huge cost either to the ratepayers or to the traveller.”

This is the key. Funding should only be considered if an airline is willing to pledge it would then fly to Wellington from the US or Asia. Spending $300 million on the basis of “Build it and hope they come” is not sensible.

Stuff reports:

Workers at KFC, Starbucks, and Pizza Hut will be guaranteed hours of work as their zero hours contracts are to be abandoned by the company which owns the fast food chains.

Restaurant Brands has committed to end zero hour contracts by July, in a collective agreement struck with Unite Union.

Under the controversial contracts, workers had to be available for work but had no guaranteed hours per week. 

Unite Union said its bargaining team unanimously supported the proposal, which guaranteed a worker at least 80 per cent of the average hours they had worked over the three-month period. 

This is a good thing.

Where an employer has regular guaranteed work and hours, they should try and provide some certainty to staff – especially when the staff have to be available for work.

But this doesn’t mean that zero hour contracts should be outlawed – far from it. Not all industries and employers are the same.

Negotiation is the way you deal with these issues, not one size fits all laws.

Vernon Small writes:

Sound like a good idea? Tick.

It’s fair. Tick.

It’s a tax cut. Where do we sign?

It’s a politician’s dream policy? Ah, maybe not so much.

ACT and leader David Seymour have in recent weeks hung their political hats on promoting the thoroughly commendable policy of indexing tax thresholds to inflation. 

True, it’s not exactly a Roger Douglas-esque call to arms. “Trash that wussy progressively tax and bring in a flat rate across the board!”

But for a party that must choose carefully when to kick the Government in the slats – and for one that believes in less tax and a smaller state – it is a canny option.  

I agree. It benefits basically everyone who is in employment.

ACT is right on a couple of scores, though.

If it is to be done it’s better it is done now when inflation is low and the impact on the Government’s books is small, though not cost free. English has recently lamented how the low inflation rate, and therefore the lack of extra inflation-driven tax revenue, has made it harder to reach his surplus target  

And the nice thing about a law indexing the tax rates to inflation, is that a left Government can’t use high inflation as a back door way to boost tax revenue.

• Winston Peters NZF 16,089 54.5%
• Mark Osborne NAT 11,648 39.4%
• Willow-Jean Prime LAB 1,380 4.7%

Those polls were pretty accurate.

Stuff reports:

Legendary cricket commentator Richie Benaud has died in a Sydney hospice. 

You could not over-state his influence on the game. He has been a commentator for over 40 years. The wonderful Twelfth Man take offs could not have happened without him.  Truly one of the greats.

The Herald reports:

A convicted wife killer released on parole was sent back to jail after he was caught approaching prostitutes.

Dean Raymond Purdy, 50, strangled his 23-year-old sex worker wife Debbie in Auckland with her own underwear after they quarrelled over whether she would continue to ply her trade on the streets.

In 1991, in High Court at Auckland, he was sentenced to life imprisonment for her murder.

Life can be for life. Early release on parole is a privilege, not a right.

A convicted wife killer released on parole was sent back to jail after he was caught approaching prostitutes.

Dean Raymond Purdy, 50, strangled his 23-year-old sex worker wife Debbie in Auckland with her own underwear after they quarrelled over whether she would continue to ply her trade on the streets.

In 1991, in High Court at Auckland, he was sentenced to life imprisonment for her murder.

Strike 1

And after a failed parole stint in 2011, when he was recalled for hanging out with a criminal and drug addict

Strike 2

Purdy was granted parole again in February last year.

But his newfound freedom lasted just over a week.

Almost immediately, Purdy started breaching his parole rules by leaving his given address at night and using a cellphone.

Strike 3

As well as the prostitutes breach, he also escaped custody on March 28 last year during a Christchurch Hospital appointment – only to be caught 250m away.

Strike 4

In its decision to decline Purdy another shot at parole, released to NZME. News Service, the board commented: “It is fair to say that Mr Purdy has not previously responded well when granted the privilege of parole.”

Indeed. I don’t think he needs to be given an annual review.

Stuff reports:

Just a fortnight after its tenth anniversary, Campbell Live is facing the axe.

Why?

In the last week of March, when Campbell Live celebrated a decade on air, it also saw some of the worst ratings in its history. According to analysis by throng.co.nz, it averaged an audience of 154,576 per night for that week – a week in which Seven Sharp exceeded 500,000 viewers for the first time.

Campbell Live has shed around 100,000 daily viewers in the last year. There will be a reason for that. Part of it is the ratings success of Seven Sharp, but that is not the whole story. They need to ask why have they lost 100,000 viewers?

If you go back two years, then they peaked at 400,000 daily viewers. Today it is 150,000. Again, something has gone wrong.

The Herald reported:

The document asked: “Is the 7pm slot still the right time for hard-hitting current affairs in the changing landscape of media consumption?”

It listed as one of the options bringing back Campbell’s show in its present format, or an amended one. Other options were for a Jono and Ben-style entertainment show or a tabloid-style factual show akin to Hard Copy.

I like Jono and Ben, but would not like to see them replace Campbell Live.

I think 7 pm is the right time for hard-hitting current affairs, but it is obvious that Campbell Live is alienating viewers.

The question is why?

Former Labour leader David Cunliffe asked if Mediaworks was axing the show because it was “too progressive”. 

If the show gets axed, it is because so many people have stopped watching it. Is that because it is too “progressive” (code for left)? I don’t know. But I do hear a lot from people who are politically neutral or left leaning that it is just simply too preachy, and tells you what you should be thinking.

Sometimes Campbell Live produces excellent shows. On other occasions it jumps the shark – for instance the conspiracy theory episode on Kim Dotcom which was ludicrous.

There are lots of people saying they want to save Campbell Live. Signing a petition won’t save it. Ranting about Mediaworks won’t save it. What will save it is working out why they now only get 150,000 daily viewers instead of 400,000, and having more people watch it.

The Herald reports:

A white police officer who gunned down a fleeing, unarmed black man appeared to plant his service-issue Taser gun at the side of the victim’s lifeless body, according to shocking videotape which emerged in the wake of the senseless killing.

Patrolman Michael Slager, 33, opened fire on father-of-four Walter Scott, 50, in North Charleston, South Carolina, on Saturday morning after reportedly stopping him over a broken tail light.

Slager was charged with murder on Tuesday and could face the death penalty after the incendiary footage emerged. The officer had previously defended his actions, saying he feared for his life after Scott wrestled his Taser gun from him during a scuffle.

However, cellphone footage from the scene showed Scott getting around 15-20 feet away before Slager opened fire with seven shots in quick succession followed by an eighth. The 50-year-old U.S. Coast Guard veteran was hit five times.

Thankfully there was cellphone footage of what happened.

You don’t shoot an unarmed person eight times in the back, for fleeing from Police.

And you don’t try and plant manufactured evidence on him that he was armed.

It does make you wonder how often this happens, without video footage to contradict the official version?

Stuff reports:

However this morning the Office of the Clerk provided a details on the trip which suggested that the MPs who took their partners have downgraded to economy to pay for an additional passenger.

A fact sheet on the delegation said MPs were each allowed one return business class ticket.

“Members may use the amount of one business class return airfare to enable their spouses to accompany them, eg, they may downgrade their airfares to premium economy or economy class,” the Office of the Clerk wrote.

“In this respect, there is no additional cost associated with members spouses or partners accompanying them than if the member had travelled alone.”

The original story on this made it look like both MPs and spouses were getting business class travel. It was very misleading.

It is pretty standard practice that if someone is entitled to travel business class, to allow them to choose two lower cost airfares instead. In fact this often is cheaper than one business class fare.

Mark Lister writes in the Herald:

Since listing at $1, Meridian shares have more than doubled, providing investors with a return of more than 100 per cent in less than 18 months. If dividends are included, this return jumps to 125 per cent over the period.

Utility companies such as Meridian are supposed to be predictable companies that offer steady (yet modest) returns. They aren’t supposed to double in price within barely a year the way a high-growth technology share might.

Part of this can be explained by a fall in interest rates over the period, which has made high-yielding shares more attractive and seen investor demand push up share prices.

But with the benefit of hindsight, another key reason for such a strong performance is that they were probably sold a little too cheaply in the first place.

In my opinion, the blame for that rests firmly with the Opposition political parties of the time, Labour and the Greens.

The “NZ Power” reform policy they championed through 2013 and early last year was heavy on emotive rhetoric, and short on detail. Whenever the proponents were quizzed about how it would work or be implemented, there didn’t appear to be many clear answers.

Labour and the Greens seemed to give up on this policy after the last electricity IPO was completed, and it didn’t get nearly as much airtime after that. That adds weight to the view that it was dreamed up only to derail the IPO process.

It was an act of commercial sabotage. They announced it just days before the first sale. It successfully reduced the price people were willing to pay for shares, which meant that the taxpayer lost perhaps a billion dollars due to this policy of sabotage from Labour and Greens.

In that respect, it failed. All it succeeded in doing was creating political and regulatory uncertainty among investors, and reducing the price the New Zealand taxpayer was paid for the 49 per cent of the assets now owned by private investors and managed funds.

The Crown received $1.8 billion (including the 50c a share due shortly) for the 49 per cent of Meridian sold, and that stake is today worth over $3.2 billion. The 49 per cent of Genesis sold down a few months later for $760 million is now worth almost $1.2 billion.

Had it not been for the uncertainty that was created at the time by the Opposition, the IPO sale prices could have been quite a bit higher.

In hindsight, it seems Labour and the Greens might have almost single-handedly contributed to a significant transfer of wealth from the average New Zealander (as the seller) to a much smaller group of people – those who could afford to buy shares in the IPOs.

As someone who invested in all three floats, their policy has made me a five figure capital gain. Thanks Labour and Greens.

While those who bought these shares will be celebrating some excellent returns from investments that should have been relatively boring, maybe the rest of the country is due a belated apology from Labour and the Greens for doing them this disservice.

If Labour and Greens can cost taxpayers one to two billion dollars in opposition, think what they might cost in Government!

Liam Hehir predicts some future press clippings. They include:

• Willow-Jean Prime ranked 12th on Labour’s List in 2017, with Andrew Little encouraging more tactical voting in Northland
• NZ First gains 4.6% of the vote but remains in Parliament as it holds Northland in 2017 election
• NZ First announces coalition deal with National
• July 2020 – PM Paula Bennett announces ACT and NZ First as preferred coalition partners for 2020 election and encourages tactical voting in Epson and Northland, with Opposition Leader Grant Robertson condemning the deal with NZ First

Labour may regret making NZ First’s only electorate seat, a very blue one.

The Daily Beast interviews Ayaan Hirsi Ali:

Do you think there is such a thing as Islamophobia? The term is often used to mean not just criticism of Islam, but bigotry toward Muslims as a group and as individuals. Do you think this is a problem?

You know what? Bigotry exists. People are racist. I grew up in a racist household. My mom used to look down on Kenyan people and call them slaves. It’s almost human nature to be racist. When it comes to “Islamophobia,” I think the individual who has given the most comprehensive answer and analysis is Asra Nomani in a January 16 article for The Washington Post. She [talks about the] “honor brigade” [a loosely knit network of bloggers and activists who criticize slights against Islam]. She tells you the genesis of how this “Islamophobia” term was invented, how it was kept afloat, but most disastrously, how it’s used to keep people silent. Right now, the country of Sweden has stood up for human rights, and Saudi Arabia is accusing Sweden of Islamophobia. Saudi Arabia is actually beheading people for sorcery, flogging women. And they dare call Sweden Islamophobic. It’s a country that has no churches, no synagogues, that persecutes fellow Muslims on grounds of being Shiites. It’s just amazing. That’s how “Islamophobia” is used.

Good point.

Are there people in the Muslim community who have been willing to engage with you, more than before?

Yes, it’s very interesting. Ten years ago, I was a pariah. And now, I have Muslims who are saying, “I don’t necessarily agree with every word you say”—which they don’t have to—“but you’re one of us, you’re brave, a reformation is needed.” I’m giving you an example: Maajid Nawaz, because he’s very prominent. The last time I debated him three years ago, here in New York, we were debating on Intelligence Squared, “Islam is a religion of peace” and he was saying, Islam is a religion of peace, and I was saying, No, Islam unreformed is not a religion of peace. Today he is saying, like me, Islam needs a reformation; but unlike me, he is still a Muslim. And along with him is a cleric, Usama Hassan, who has endorsed this book. He doesn’t agree with me, but he says, “This discussion is absolutely necessary. It’s important, it’s urgent, let’s have it.” So there is a shift, and beyond individuals who are just talking. Look at the president of Egypt [Abdel Fattah el-Sisi]. I think ISIS is forcing a lot of people who are Muslims into opposition. [El-Sisi] says we need a revolution in religion. That goes much farther than I’m going. I’m saying reform; he’s saying revolution. But it’s ultimately going to be a revolution in religion, he’s right.

A reformation of Islam, as happened to Christianity some centuries ago, would be a very good thing. But also very difficult.

So you’re very hopeful about what’s happening right now.

I just want to remind the free world that there was a time when they were not free—Europeans and Americans were not free. There was a time when Christian theology and Jewish theology was used to commit atrocious acts. Remember the witch hunts, remember the Protestants. I think Americans associate religion with something positive. In Europe, Protestants were killing other Protestants, Catholics were killing Protestants, Protestants were killing Catholics, just as the Sunni and the Shia are doing now. That is now in the history books. I look forward to a time when atrocities committed in the name of Islam will be in history books and museums and movies, but not happening to real people in real time.

The key is changing the focus of a religion from justified death, to honouring life.

You’ve had some reactions from Western feminists to your statements about Islam that you’ve found a bit disconcerting.

We are seeing that Western feminists are shy about pointing out the misogyny that’s committed in the name of the religion of Islam, because they feel we can’t impose our ethnocentric or Eurocentric or American-centric ways. If you read the [faculty] letter at Brandeis, that’s the core of it. Which is—don’t be ridiculous. It doesn’t matter where you are as an individual human being; freedom is freedom. Nobody likes to be oppressed. Human rights are universal. Individual rights are universal. This is the message to American feminists and other Western feminists: the best thing to share is the outcome of the emancipation.

There’s an argument, which I’m sure you’ve heard, that Western women face their own forms of oppression, which are different but may be just as bad, or almost as bad—

Like what? Who does the dishes at home? That’s what it boils down to: How can we balance work-life. Of course that’s challenging. But can you imagine how far we’ve come from the points when women weren’t allowed to get out of the house, couldn’t be in public, couldn’t take public office, weren’t allowed to vote, couldn’t own their own bank accounts. Even the money they inherited wasn’t theirs, it was for the male guardians to look after. And now, [it’s], “Who loads the dishes in the dishwasher, who does the unloading?” And I think it’s still very important; I have massive fights with my husband about who does what at home. But that is more on the micro level, and it’s a luxury. And I don’t think that the government can do anything about that. What kind of law are you going to pass that says who does the dishes, who does the diapers, who looks after the children, who’s going to work and whose career is going to go up or down?

I always find it amusing when NZ’s progress of women’s rights is judged by a UN committee that includes countries that don’t even given women the vote.

Spending a few days in Tasmania visiting some of my GF’s family, who have moved here. We had a couple of days in Hobart so decided to drive south to the Tasman Peninsula and Port Arthur.

This beach is where the dogline was at Eaglehawk Neck – the only connection to the mainland and 30 metres wide. They had 13 vicious dogs here who would catch escaped prisoners.

A blowhole at the Tasman Peninsula.

Some great formations made over the centuries by the elements.

And great views of the peninsula.

Then we got to Port Arthur, where you go out by boat, giving you this view of the old prison.

Many will remember the mass shooting by Martin Bryant in 1996. He killed 35 and wounded 25 more. He may be insane but he picked his area well, in that there would be very few places in Australia with so many people in one place, yet scores of miles from the Police.

It is a beautiful and now tranquil area, despite its history.

Thousands of prisoners were kept here, ranging from actual criminals, to political prisoners to paupers to the insane.

Today there are no prisoners, but lots of birds.

A lovely view from up at the Commandant’s House.

It takes around three to four hours to get around all the buildings, grounds and houses.

The prison areas are just part of what is there. They have many old houses from the convict and post-convict eras where the doctor or priest etc would live.

Remains of an old church.

The Gardens.

And the fountain at the centre of the gardens.

Tryout out the shackles for size.

And driving home, I loved these road signs of the Tasmanian Devils. And you do actually see a few at night.

The Washington Post reports:

Rolling Stone magazine just plain got it wrong.

That’s the conclusion of the massive (and massively long) piece penned by three officials at Columbia University journalism school, a report that details the fact that the story of a gang rape of a woman named “Jackie” at the University of Virginia was, in fact, simply not right.

So, that’s bad enough. What’s worse is that the errors made by Sabrina Rubin Erdely, the article’s author, and the rest of the Rolling Stone editorial chain were entirely avoidable and encompassed the sort of basic reporting that every student in journalism school should know.

Not only were none of the claims by “Jackie” checked out, the journalist who wrote the article actually lied about having tried to contact certain people.

And yet, Rolling Stone has apparently decided that this whole episode was just a blip on the radar and not at all the sort of thing that Erdely, her editor or anyone else should lose their job(s) for. “Sabrina’s done great work for us over the years and we expect that to continue,” Rolling Stone Managing Editor Will Dana told The Washington Post via e-mail.

Um, WHAT?

I am not one to call for other reporters’ heads when mistakes are made, as I have made mistakes before and had my head called for. But there are mistakes and then there are MISTAKES. A poorly chosen tweet or, in my case, a poorly conceived and unfunny parody, is one thing. Totally misreporting allegations of a gang rape in a hugely high-profile magazine story is another. One is poor judgement, often in the world of Twitter expressed (and regretted) in a millisecond. What Erdely did is journalistic malpractice, failing to do the basic blocking and tackling of reporting because, frankly, the story she had was just too good to check.

Erdely also lied, as well as being negligent in not checking.

The Post also reports:

The University of Virginia chapter of Phi Kappa Psi said Monday that the fraternity house will file a lawsuit against Rolling Stone, calling the magazine’s discredited reporting of an alleged gang rape by some of its members “reckless.”

The fake story had real world impact. The chapter was closed down. Its members were smeared and called rapists.

“Irresponsible journalism unjustly damaged the reputations of many innocent individuals and the University of Virginia,” Sullivan said. “Rolling Stone falsely accused some University of Virginia students of heinous, criminal acts, and falsely depicted others as indifferent to the suffering of their classmate. The story portrayed University staff members as manipulative and callous toward victims of sexual assault. Such false depictions reinforce the reluctance sexual assault victims already feel about reporting their experience, lest they be doubted or ignored.”

Actual victims of rape, may be those most harmed by this awful fake story.

Ngapuhi have pointed out that all three electorate MPs in Northland are members of Ngapuhi – Winston Peters, Dr Shane Reti and Kelvin Davis.

There would not be many countries where all the MPs in a region are members of the local indigenous tribe!

Hopefully having three electorate MPs in Parliament (plus one List MP) will help them reach a settlement with the Crown. They are basically the last major historical settlement to go.