Two new polls out in the last 24 hours. A Roy Morgan last night and a Fairfax Ipsos poll this morning.

This shows the current size and time weighted average of all the public polls.

Labour have been in the 20s in the last seven polls. The last two polls had them at 23.5% and 24.9%. The average of all polls has them polling below what they got in 2011. By comparison in Sep 2011 they were polling at 32.5% so they are now polling 7% lower than at the same stage of 2011.

This is no reason to be complacent, as National always drops away when in Government during an election campaign. However it is hard to see how Labour can credibly form a Government if they get a result in the 20s, even if it becomes mathematically possible.

Just 65 days to go until the election.

The Herald reports:

Kim Dotcom has announced he plans to drop a political bombshell five days before the general election which he says will prove the Prime Minister has been lying about when he first knew about the German internet tycoon.

Dotcom made the announcement yesterday to 3News on the first day of the internet Mana party’s road trip campaign.

“On September 15, I’m doing a Town Hall event in Auckland and I invite everyone to come there because that is going to be the day when I’m going to reveal my evidence…..my evidence around the political interference and my evidence that John Key lied,” Dotcom said.

If the evidence stacked up as significant, he would not be releasing it five days before the election. He’s chosen that date in the hope media will breathlessly report it, and not have time to actually scrutinise or authenticate it. Otherwise he would release it well in advance of that. It’s basically a ploy to try and get publicity for his pet party in the last week, and damage National.

I can’t imagine it will be anything reliable. Probably some second hand report of someone saying they one mentioned his name to John Key at a social function.

If John Key had heard of Kim Dotcom prior to the raid, I can’t see why he wouldn’t have said “Yeah, I’d heard a couple of people mention him”. There is no significance in whether he had or had not heard of him earlier unless you believe the conspiracy theory that Joe Biden, Warners, Barack Obama and John Key are all part of a global conspiracy to persecute the honest businessman Kim Dotcom.

The fact that Dotcom has had to offer $5 million or so for proof of his pet conspiracy theory, suggests that he of course has no proof – otherwise why would you be offering money for it.

A reader e-mails:

I went there yesterday to try and find out what Phil Twyford had said about the roading package.  First thing I noticed on the front page: no search function.  So I went to news and clicked on press releases.  They’re in chronological order.  So I clicked on page 3, as I figured that might take me back as far as June 29, when we made the announcement.  It didn’t, so I clicked on the last available page – page 5.  That took me back as far as July 4, but there is an arrow to the right of the five numbered pages, so I clicked on that, figuring it would take me to pages 6 and beyond.  Nope, it took me back to the front page of press releases.

 Shit I thought, I’ll have to go to Phil Twyford’s MP page – that’s bound to have his press releases.  No, it doesn’t.  It doesn’t actually have any of his media statements – there’s no hyperlinks from his page to anything he’s said, press releases or speeches.  It did have a link to what looked to be his personal website (‘Website: twyord.org.nz’), so I thought it might be there, but astonishingly that link merely refreshed the very page I was looking at.

 So in a nutshell:

• Labour’s website has no search function
• It has no archive of its press releases older than the past two weeks, and older releases just seem to drop off the bottom of the list as new ones enter the system
• Its MP pages have none of their statements, and the links to what appear to be their external personal websites don’t work

 And, as someone else out to me, if you look at their team page, here: http://campaign.labour.org.nz/team the bios don’t follow any orchestrated formula; they’re a shambles – some are in the first person, such as Nanaia Mahuta … “since becoming an MP I have …”, some are in the third person, such as David Cunliffe … “David is in politics because he believes people matter …”, and some, like Chris Hipkins (ironically the Education Spokesperson) are a grammatical mess … “Chris passionate about education …”

The main purpose of Labour’s website seems to be to get people to give them their e-mail address.

The Guardian reports:

David Cameron has completed his biggest reshuffle in office, demoting the trouble-making Michael Gove to chief whip, installing the Eurosceptic Philip Hammond as foreign secretary and promoting two more women to the cabinet.

The prime minister has cleared out a dozen middle-aged and older men from his ministerial ranks in order to create a more female and less privileged top team. The strategy behind the shake-up is being attributed to Lynton Crosby, Cameron’s election adviser, as the party seeks to make itself look more representative of society before the election.

The size of the reshuffle is huge. Almost every major portfolio affected.

However, there are already signs of a backlash within the party about the scale of the sackings. Among the centrists, there is unhappiness about the departure of Dominic Grieve as attorney general, who has stood up for the European court of human rights

No wonder he went. The ECHR is massively unpopular in the UK.

Stuff reports:

Customers will be the winners if companies agree to sign up to Consumer NZ’s tough fair trading code of conduct.

To earn its “Consumer Trusted” accreditation a business must sign up to a strict code of conduct and a set of eight principles promoting fair trading. They will also pay a fee of up to $25,000 a year.

Consumer NZ chief executive Sue Chetwin said the programme aimed to deliver high standards of customer service and consumer confidence. …

“What we’ve developed through Consumer Trusted is a visible way of rewarding businesses with genuinely top-class customer service.”

“Our goal is to inspire all businesses to go beyond the minimum standards of consumer law,” Chetwin said.

The programme’s consumer principles include: excellent customer service, fair returns and refunds policies, clear pricing and accurate advertising.

Businesses must also sign up to a code of conduct which includes a range of fair trading clauses.

For example, if a product worth more than $100 goes on sale within a week of purchase the buyer is entitled to a refund of the difference.

Accredited businesses must also belong to an approved dispute-resolution scheme, or allow Consumer NZ to provide the service.

Large companies would pay $25,000 a year to be part of the programme, while the fee for smaller businesses would be in the “low thousands” of dollars per year, she said. Revenue from the programme would go back into research, testing and consumer dispute resolution service.

I like this initiative. It is a voluntary self-regulation initiative. A business will only join up if it thinks the fee and commitments it makes are worth the gain in reputation and trust. A good market initiative.

Chetwin said she hopes to get 25 businesses on board by the end of the year. Four have already been accredited, including telecommunications company 2degrees, online electricity retailer Powershop, internet service provider Inspire Net and shoe retailer Shoe Clinic.

That’s cool – two of those companies are ones I use.

THE 8 PRINCIPLES

Provide excellent customer service

Fair, clear returns and refunds policies

Informative and up-to-date website

All complaints and disputes dealt with fairly

Contracts must be fair and easily understood

Clear pricing

Customer details are not exploited

Advertising is accurate

They are good principles.

Liam Hehir writes in the Manawatu Standard:

Does this mean my views aren’t coloured by my own philosophies? Of course not! By virtue of being human, I suffer from cognitive biases which can never be fully eradicated. The same goes for every single person involved in journalism. You should never believe anyone who claims to be wholly dispassionate on matters of public affairs.

But one really curious thing about alleged media bias is that it can depend on the reader as much as it does on the writer.

In 1982, Stanford University undertook a landmark study on how people with strongly held views perceive media coverage. The test subjects were divided into two groups – those who sympathised with Israel and those who opposed it. When shown news reports of the Lebanese Civil War, the pro-Israel group complained that the coverage was biased against Israel. The same reports were then shown to the anti-Israel group – who complained that they were biased in favour of Israel.

Both groups felt that the coverage would unduly influence an undecided person towards the opposite position.

As a matter of objective reality, of course, they couldn’t both be right. These studies therefore give us an important insight into how we perceive the news. This is sometimes called the “hostile media effect”.

We see this here with some people convinced the NZ Herald hates the Government and some people convinced they try to help the Government.

Here’s the ironic thing: some studies show that perception of media bias will drop off when the writer is open about his or her personal views on the subject. This could be because if readers know what the writer’s biases are; they will be prepared for what’s coming. Their expectations aren’t injured when they find they disagree with the writer’s conclusions.

You can see why this creates problems for “straight news” reporters who try hard to cover contentious issues without favour. As one researcher in this field once put it: “If I think the world is black, and you think the world is white, and someone comes along and says it is grey, we will both think that person is biased.”

Opinion writers don’t suffer from that problem.

Not that this will placate everybody. There will always be those who fundamentally don’t accept that reasonable people can have differing views.

When confronted with opinions they don’t like, these people really have three choices. First, they can try to persuade their ideological opponents with constructive debate.

Second, they can simply avoid people and media that do not affirm their pre-conceptions. Third, they can try to hound people they disagree with out of the public square.

I believe that a good liberal sees only the first two options as respectable. Again, however, that’s just an opinion.

I think it is beneficial for journalists to be open about their worldview.

Duncan Garner writes:

Three Labour MPs have broken ranks in recent weeks – quite loudly and very publicly.

They are interested in one thing: self-preservation. They want to win their seats and they’ve given up relying on their party. They are clearly concerned Labour will poll poorly on election night, so they’ve decided to run their own campaigns – away from head office and away from the leader.

These MPs have either chosen not to be on the list or they have a low-list spot. They are vulnerable. It’s all or nothing for them.

They must win their seats to return to Parliament; this sort of pressure usually focuses an MP’s mind. They want to be back in Parliament and they want the $150k salary.

I’m talking about West Coast-Tasman MP, Damien O’Connor, Hutt South MP, Trevor Mallard and list MP and Te Tai Tokerau candidate, Kelvin Davis.

Take Davis: yesterday he engaged Labour in its biggest u-turn in years. He told me he supported the Puhoi-Wellsford road project that his party has openly mocked and criticised.

Labour MPs call it the holiday highway; David Cunliffe has campaigned against it. Labour, until yesterday, was going to can the project upon taking office. Who knows where they stand now!

Labour appear to have now done a u-turn on it, saying their policy now is only to delay it not cancel it. I guess it took the floods for them to realise that campaigning against better roads into Northland isn’t too popular there.

O’Connor and Davis certainly look in touch with middle New Zealand, their electorates and their issues. They have given the one-fingered salute to their struggling party and put self-preservation first.

Who can blame them?

We may see more of this.

Stuff reports:

Two Auckland secondary schools are acting quickly to lighten the load after a period of rapid roll growth.

The Ministry of Education has advised Selwyn College and One Tree Hill College to put enrolment schemes in place.

The board of trustees at each school is consulting with the community before submitting the proposed home zone for ministry approval.

Both aim to have the zones up and running for the 2015 school year, with out of zone enrolments closing on September 3.

Selwyn College has never had an enrolment zone.

The school has experienced such a big turn around in achievement and community interest and more control is needed to manage its population size, principal Sheryll Ofner says.

While I don’t personally support zoning, it is good to see Selwyn College doing so well, it now needs one.

Selwyn College was praised by Helen Clark in 2006 as a model of what we like to see in our schools. The NCEA Pass rate for Level 1 that years was 39%. Anne Tolley sacked the board in 2009 and under new leadership the pass rate is now 93%.

It shows the power and difference great school leadership can make.

Simon Bridges announced:

New power price data released today shows the Government’s 2010 electricity reforms are making a real difference for consumers, says Energy and Resources Minister Simon Bridges.

“The sales data released by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment for the year ending March 2014, shows the lowest annual price increase since 2001 at 2.3 per cent,” Mr Bridges says.

“Discounts and other benefits from retailers are becoming the new norm in an increasingly competitive electricity market and the new data captures what consumers have actually paid for their power, rather than the advertised price.”

In other words, competition helps keep prices from increasing greatly.

For the June quarter, there has been an increase of 2.3 per cent.  This was driven by a 6.7 per cent increase in lines charges — the component regulated by the Commerce Commission — as retailers passed on the significant investment costs associated with upgrading local networks. 

The energy component — the part subject to competition — decreased by 0.7 per cent. 

This is what makes Labour’s policy so bizarre. Rather than focus on better regulating the parts of the electricity sector which are monopolies, their policy seeks to destroy competition and the market among generators.

Latest figures released by the Electricity Authority show that consumers can save, on average, $155 per year by switching power retailers.

Yep. I’ve saved heaps by swapping.

Stuff reports:

The head of Immigration has rejected suggestions Kim Dotcom’s residency was approved as part of a United States move to make it easier to extradite him to face charges there.

Documents published today show that the Security and Intelligence Service (SIS) withdrew its objections to Dotcom’s residency as the Government negotiated a deal with Hollywood studio Warner Bros to ensure The Hobbit trilogy was filmed here.

Dotcom believes US authorities wanted to keep him here to make it easier to extradite him on internet piracy and copyright infringement charges. He has long claimed the Government was acting at the behest of the American film industry but has never offered proof.

I love this conspiracy theory. The Government let Dotcom into New Zealand just so it could extradite him years later. And it was all part of a deal with Warners to film The Hobbit here. This makes people who believe the moon landing was faked look sane.

But in an exclusive interview, Immigration chief executive Nigel Bickle said that from Immigration’s point of view he had seen no evidence of that and it was Dotcom’s advisers who had called for a fast decision in his case.

‘‘Mr Dotcom was represented by a very good immigration adviser, who was rightly asking questions … ‘why is it taking so long making a decision? Mr Dotcom’s like a lot of these individuals – many countries are courting them. Could you hurry up and make a decision’.’’

The beauty of this conspiracy theory is it casts something that was favourable to Dotcom as being sinister.

Bickle said then-immigration minister Jonathan Coleman had not been involved in the decision to grant Dotcom permanent residency, and the call was made by an official.

In 2010 the investor category Dotcom was applying under, requiring at least a $10m investment here, was a new policy. Ministers were interested in how it was going and were briefed weekly. 

But in terms of Dotcom as an individual, Coleman had no involvement in the decision.

Bickle had told Coleman, under the ‘‘no surprises’’ policy, on October 28, 2010 after he had been informed Dotcom would be granted residency.

But it was not a decision that needed to go to the minister.

A minor inconvenient fact.

Following up my post on promoting entrepreneurship to students, I got the following release:

An 18-year-old Christchurch entrepreneur has ditched his plans of studying at university, including a $40,000 scholarship, to launch a website designed to inspire young New Zealanders.

Jake Miller has today (Monday, 14 July) launched his new start-up business OOMPHER – a motivational website featuring video interviews with some of New Zealand and the world’s most successful individuals. The aim is to inspire school leavers and people to do extraordinary things through the wise words of leaders in their fields.

In just six months Jake has gained the support of dozens of New Zealand’s high-flyers as well as major corporates, including lead sponsor BNZ.

Fashion designer Karen Walker, Air New Zealand CEO Chris Luxon, All Blacks coach Steve Hansen, comedy legend Rhys Darby, businesswoman Suzanne Paul, renowned architect Ian Athfield, bungy pioneer AJ Hackett and political leaders are all standing up for the vision of OOMPHER and an 18-year-old in Christchurch. Rarely have so many of the country’s leaders united for a common cause.

Jake has also managed to secure video interviews with international talents such as New York Entrepreneur of the Year Shazi Visram. His sights are now firmly set on locking down Virgin Group founder Sir Richard Branson and film directors Peter Jackson and James Cameron as future interviewees.

By the end of the year his business plan shows he will have 54 interviews on OOMPHER representing nine key sectors: sports, politics, business, arts, entrepreneurship, innovation, media, professions and technology.

As the former head boy of Christchurch Boys High School, Jake was offered a $40,000 university scholarship last year to study law and commerce – but he turned it down.

Convinced that he didn’t need a piece of paper to follow his entrepreneurial dreams, and despite backlash from former teachers and family, he decided to take the risk and see what he could achieve.

In Jake’s own words: “For me, what was missing was the inspiration. I felt I didn’t need to go to university to follow my entrepreneurial dreams – despite a former teacher predicting because of that I’d ‘end up in prison.’ I think this was due to my generally unconventional approach to life.

“A university degree or tertiary qualification is obviously essential for many careers; however research shows that there is a poor correlation between entrepreneurial success and having a framed piece of paper on the wall.

“My dad’s death in the 2010 Fox Glacier plane crash also reminded me that life can be here one minute and gone the next. We’ve got to make the most of it and do what we love.”

OOMPHER will be live from Monday, 14 July at www.oompher.com.

It’s a great site, with lost of interesting and inspirational interviews, Good to see Jake get out there and take a risk, recruiting a team of other young people for the project – plus lots of corporate sponsors.

The Dom Post editorial:

It was years ago today that the Lange Labour Party won the election that would change all our lives. This proved to be one of the major reforming governments of our history, comparable with the Liberals of the 1890s and the Labour government of the 1930s. It made profound changes in our economy, our foreign policy, and in race relations. Some of these changes were for the better, and some were not. We are still wrestling with the legacy of David Lange and Roger Douglas.

National’s Robert Muldoon was a backward-looking leader who had in many ways painted his country into a corner. Douglas used the economic crisis – massive internal and external deficits, a frightening overseas debt – to push through a Right-wing, top-down revolution which never figured in Labour’s election manifesto. New Zealand was hauled into the era of Thatcher and Reagan by stealth. At the end of six years, the government had a deserved reputation for failing to tell the voters of its real intentions.

Some of the economic changes were clearly needed. A brutal assault on costs was inevitable. An excessively protected economy imposed unnecessarily high costs on ordinary New Zealanders. Exchange rates, wages, prices and interest rates could not continue to be set by prime ministerial fiat.

Has someone told Labour today this?

But Douglas and his friends went way beyond sensible reforms and deep into the swamps of ideology. His massive privatisation and flat-tax proposals of December 1987 were shrink-the-state Hayekian politics dressed up as economic orthodoxy. That forced the fatal showdown between Douglas and Lange killed the government. It was a civil war that Labour had to have.

Douglas said his revolution would put New Zealand on a new, high-growth path. It didn’t. His excuse was that the job was left unfinished. Only ACT and Tea Party Republicans still believe that. The last 30 years have seen huge changes in economic theory that have demolished central parts of the Reaganite-Rogernome credo.

That’s the assertion of the editorial, but I don’t accept that. I think it is a shame Lange destroyed his own Government by going against the wishes of his own Cabinet. It would have been great to see a flat tax implemented.

The Dom Post reports:

Higher rates rises over the next few years could be the price residents have to pay for Wellington City Council’s “eight big ideas”.

Councillors have been warned that projects such as the airport runway extension, the Hilton Hotel and conference centre, and a film museum would not be sustainable without increasing the number of ratepayers – and even then “slightly higher rates increases in the short term” might be needed.

A presentation from council staff working on budgets for the next 10 years looks at various funding possibilities, one of which could be a rates increase above 10 per cent in 2015-16.

Another scenario, spreading out costs across the decade, involves an increase of about 6 per cent for 2015-16.

In recent years, rates rises have been held to about 2.5 per cent.

Rates should not increase more than inflation. It is all too easy for Councillors to have a wishlist of ideas, but we’re the ones who to have to fund them.

Any contribution to the proposed airport runway extension should be minimal.

I was surprised to read:

The 1,500,000th registration of a domain name under one of the new gTLDs happened in the last few days, probably last Friday, although exactly when is hard to pinpoint on newTLDstats.com daily update.

Currently total new gTLD registrations are showing at 1,517,747 with around one in five (301,627 – 19.87%) of these being .xyz registrations. Just on registrations, the second most successful new gTLD has been .berlin, which now has 136,943 domains under management, or 9.02 percent of all new gTLDs.

Can this be true? .xyz is the most popular new TLD?

Both of these new gTLDs have had differing promotions that have been extremely successful at getting them initial registrations. Network Solutions has run a promotion for .xyz where their .com registrants received the equivalent .xyz domain for free, resulting in Network Solutions being responsible for 232,685 of the gTLD’s DUM, or over three-quarters (77.14%) of the total.

Oh, now that makes sense. When you give them away for free, that is not what I call success.

The .berlin gTLD ran a successful promotion itself with a limited number of registrars where the maximum fee charged per domains was €5.55, with some even giving away domains. After three days of the promotion, DUM had jumped almost 90,000.

Again, if you give them away, that doesn’t indicate how successful you will be long-term.

According to the latest nTLDstats.com statistics, the third most popular of the new gTLDs is .club with 83,003 DUM, followed by .guru (65,137) and then .photography (40,603).

I can see why .club could do well.

Stuff reports:

The hardline Sensible Sentencing Trust has come out in support of a judge’s decision not to jail a drink-driver who killed a New Plymouth woman.

Hogan Bolton, 31, of New Plymouth, was sentenced on July 4 to nine months’ home detention following the death of artist and mother Carmen Rogers after she was hit in Brougham St on May 6.

His breath alcohol was 1297mcg. The legal level is 400mcg.

As well as making a $50,000 emotional harm reparation to the family he has agreed to appear in an anti-drink driving documentary.

The sentence, worked out through the restorative justice process, has reignited debate on the futility of imprisoning offenders rather than focusing on more effective alternatives.

Yesterday, Sensible Sentencing Trust spokesman Garth McVicar said he was supportive of Judge Allan Roberts’ decision.

“Normally I’m not a big fan of restorative justice. Often victims haven’t been told the full picture, that attending a restorative justice conference reduces the sentence.

“But I’m a big fan of offenders being held to account. And if that involves public speaking and a documentary in this case, then that’s great.”

His stance might put him out on a limb with others in his group, McVicar said.

Obviously Bolton was incredibly remorseful and the judge should be given a pat on the back for thinking outside the square, McVicar said.

Before sentencing Carmen Rogers’ husband Che, his family and Bolton had met in a day-long restorative justice conference.

Che Rogers said he did not want Bolton jailed.

Rather it was agreed that Bolton be part of an anti-drink-driving documentary and also give a speech to senior Spotswood college students with Nouveau, 15, Che and Carmen Rogers’ older daughter.

Seems a good outcome. Restorative justice and non custodial sentences are great when the offenders are truly remorseful and not repeat offenders. I’m sceptical of their value when it does involve a serious repeat offender.

Newstalk ZB reports:

Environmental groups are taking the Electoral Commission to court over a ruling on a climate change campaign.

Greenpeace, Forest and Bird, WWF and others launched the Climate Voter initiative last month.

But the Electoral Commission says the campaign counts as an “election advertisement”, and is therefore subject to rules around wording of communications and spending restrictions.

Greenpeace says the ruling could gag grassroots advocacy groups – and the organisations are planning to take a freedom of speech test case to the High Court.

Greenpeace spokesman Steve Abel says it’s become a free speech issue.

“Organisations that are advocating for anything, whether it’s better cancer funding or milk in schools or lower taxes, the organisations should be able to do that without having to put a promoter statement on under electoral law.”

Organisations can advocate on issues without promoter statements. But if they are seen as encouraging a vote for or against a political party, then they need a promoter statement.  As this is a campaign headlined “Make your vote count” I am not surprised the Electoral Commission thinks they should have a promoter statement.

You might wonder why they don’t just stick a promoter statement on their website. The organisations backing it are already known. So why are they going to court, rather than sticking on a promoter statement?

Well Greenpeace has another lawsuit before the courts at the moment (a supporter might ask what proportion of their donations are going on lawsuits!) fighting the decision to deregister them as a charity due to their political advocacy. If they put a promoter statement on their website, then they weaken their own case that they are a charity, not a lobby group. So to try and keep up the pretence they are a charity, they are going to court again.

I hope the Electoral Commission seeks costs, if Greenpeace loses.

The Herald reports:

The SIS tried to block Kim Dotcom’s residency application but dropped their objection 90 minutes after being told there was “political pressure” to let the tycoon into New Zealand, secret documents from the spy agency reveal.

Last night the leader of the Dotcom-funded Internet Party, Laila Harre, said she “wouldn’t have been comfortable” granting the tycoon residency if she had been the Minister of Immigration.

But she’ll take $3 million from him to get into Parliament now he is here. Hilarious.

Documents declassified and released through the Official Information Act show the Security Intelligence Service describing Dotcom as a “bad but wealthy man” who was under criminal investigation by the FBI.

It also has agents passing on information about the FBI investigation for then Minister of Immigration Jonathan Coleman, described as an “interested party” wanting to get “high rollers” into New Zealand.

In hindsight a rather bad decision overlooking the criminal convictions because of his wealth.

One hour and 27 minutes later, another SIS agent said the agency’s block would be lifted, writing: “Since Dotcom is not of security concern, there is no reason for this application to be on hold with us. Please can you inform your INZ contacts of this, also noting Dotcom is the subject of a criminal investigation and that they need to discuss the case with NZ Police before they proceed with granting him PR [permanent residency].” …

An Immigration NZ spokesman said last night no contact had been made with police after the SIS urged Immigration to do so.

So the SIS were aware he was flagged by the FBI as a person of interest, but as it was not a security issue, said go talk to the Police. But Immigration NZ never did. Sigh.

The Herald reports:

All New Zealand schoolchildren would learn Maori under Labour’s long-term plan for te reo, but it appears the party is loath to give the policy a high profile.

So is it their policy or isn’t it?

Labour Maori affairs spokeswoman Nanaia Mahuta and education spokesman Chris Hipkins indicated Labour had an “aspirational” target for Maori to be taught in all schools after the Maori Party’s Te Tai Tokerau candidate, Te Hira Paenga, claimed Labour had endorsed his party’s policy for compulsory te reo in schools.

“We are glad to see Labour at last getting the message that our reo is something that we all, as New Zealanders, should embrace,” Mr Paenga said.

Ms Mahuta initially suggested Mr Paenga had the wrong end of the stick, saying Labour would only promote its own policy which was “the recognition that te reo should be a working language for all New Zealanders”.

However, Ms Mahuta was far more direct in a debate held in Gisborne earlier this month when she said: “We’ve made a clear commitment that te reo Maori will be compulsory in our schools.”

Isn’t this typical Labour. They say one thing to one audience, and another thing to another. That quote from Mahuta is crystal clear, but now watch them backtrack as the previously secret policy has been highlighted.

She later said the comment was made in the context of the recognition “that there are some real challenges in our school system to build the capacity of our teaching workforce who are able to teach te reo Maori”. She said te reo for all schoolchildren was “an aspirational goal within our policy platform around te reo Maori and we believe that we need to take some practical steps to be able to build up, for example, the teaching workforce to be able to teach te reo Maori in our schools as a way towards supporting that aspiration”.

Education spokesman Mr Hipkins said Labour “certainly wouldn’t use the phrase compulsory” for its long-term te reo policy.

So Mahuta says to a Maori forum that te reo Maori will be compulsory, while Hipkins says, no it won’t be.

“I would certainly like to make sure all kids have the option and there is availability of te reo maori in all schools. Whether in fact that was compulsory, that’s a discussion for another day.

Translation – that is our policy, but we don’t want people to realise it.

I have no problem with having a debate on the pros and cons of compulsory te reo Maori in schools.  What I do have a problem with is a two-faced party that won’t even be honest about its policies.

Labour MP Kelvin Davis said:

The Government needs to step up and help local councils fix infrastructure problems highlighted by the recent Northland storms, Labour MP Kelvin Davis says.

The Government needs to step up and help local councils fix infrastructure problems highlighted by the recent Northland storms, Labour MP Kelvin Davis says.

“The bad weather has amplified how susceptible the North really is at times like this.

“Our roading infrastructure is a major source of concern. This weather event has shown that when the main road in and out of the north fails, the side roads are just not able to cope as detour routes.

Kelvin then went on Radio Live and said three things of interest.

• That both Labour and National had not invested enough on infrastructure in Northland
• That he was unaware of the announcement by the Government two weeks ago to invest in improvements for two local roads in Northland
• That he supports the Puhoi to Wellsford Highway, which Labour have vowed to scrap. He calls it a lifeline, and says everyone up here supports it

Gerry Brownlee points out:

Transport Minister Gerry Brownlee says Labour list MP Kelvin Davis’s call today for the Government to “step up” and invest in Northland roading following this week’s damaging storms shows what a conflict-ridden shambles Labour is just 68 days out from the general election.

“Up to $1.66 billion worth of Government funding is currently committed to Northland roading projects, and the vast majority of it would be cut by a Labour-led government,” Mr Brownlee says.

“Only two weeks ago the Government announced up to $33.5 million worth of extra investment in upgrading two roading projects Northland councils told us were urgent – one of them on the very stretch of State Highway 1 south of Kawakawa which has been washed out by this week’s storm.

“National identified years ago that Northland’s roading infrastructure was vulnerable through underinvestment and has committed over $1.38 billion as part of the Roads of National Significance programme, and $255 million in the most recent National Land Transport Plan.

“We know that if Labour is in a position to form a Government later this year it would axe the Puhoi to Wellsford Road of National Significance and re-direct the funding to an immediate start on Auckland’s City Rail Loop, a project the Government has already committed to co-funding the construction of from 2020.

“You don’t have to convince the Government that Northland needs better roading, Mr Davis, convincing your caucus colleagues and the Green Party will be a much tougher task,” Mr Brownlee says.

There is a pattern emerging here of local provincial Labour MPs disagreeing with Labour on regional development. O’Connor and Tirikatene both voted against Labour on West Coast logging, and now Davis is saying his party is wrong on the Puhoi to Wellsford Highway. He even calls it a lifeline that everyone in Northland supports.

What this points to is a party totally out of touch with regional New Zealand. Urban liberals in Auckland who hate logging and roading, set the policy for the regions.

Incidentally who is the Regional Development Spokesperson for Labour? I’ll leave it to you to look it up.

From Backbenches:

THIS WEEK ON PRIME TV’s “BACK BENCHES”: Watch Wallace Chapman, Damian Christie, the Back Benches Panel and special guests discuss the week’s hottest topics!

RIVERS-CLEAN ENOUGH TO SWIM IN: The Green Party has launched their Clean Rivers Policy-promising to make rivers clean enough to swim in. Their plan would include giving some of the rivers the same protection as National Parks, strengthening regulations, a pollution cap and restricting dams and irrigation schemes. But National has called the policy “costly and impractical.” There are some 425,000kms of rivers and streams. Can we afford to put them all to swimming standards? Is it unfair to our agriculture industry? Can our farmers afford it? Are the Greens anti-growth? And if not the Greens policy, how would Labour and National clean our rivers and streams?

RAPE CULTURE: What is a rape culture? Does NZ have one? Many say yes. Is it in the language we use? The actions we condone? If we do have a rape culture, how do we stop it? How do we clean up our act? Would naming and shaming of sex offenders do any good? And is it time for a public sex offender registry?

There are two ways to get in on the political pub action:

First, you can join the live audience in Wellington’s iconic Backbencher Pub on Wednesday, 16th of July at 6pm. Filming begins around 6:15pm.

Or watch us that night on PRIME TV at 10:30pm!

http://www.primetv.co.nz/

Plus, Follow us on Facebook (BackBenchesTV) or on Twitter @BackBenchesTV.

Our Panel: Labour MP Phil Goff, National MP Claudette Hauiti, and Green Party MP Gareth Hughes. 

The Road That Wasn’t There is a smart, short delightful production at Circa.

The play starts with Gabriel furiously stamping papers in an office job in Australia. He rushes through them to try and grab the phone, but always missed it and it goes to voice mail. The fact the phone is a 1950s type phone just makes the incongruity fun.

The set is a collection of cardboard boxes that get turned over or removed to announce each new chapter. One of the boxes also double as a projection screen, where a series of shadow figures are creatively displayed.

The plot is simple, yet convoluted. Gabriel returns home as his mother seems to be going nuts, including stealing maps and hanging them all over her house. The mother eventually tells Gabriel the story of his father – which is a fairy tale involving paper roads, Blanket Man, monsters and and a theatrical company.

Everything works well in this play. The three actors entertain wonderfully. The shadows and the puppets are delightful, and the story captures you. You want to know how it ends.

A great play that appeals to all ages. On until Sat 19 July.

Article 11(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says:

Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

Labour’s policy to make people accused of sexual assault prove their innocence is in stark contrast to this. Labour are saying that the presumption of innocence will be reversed if you are accused of sexual assault or rape, if the only issue is consent, not that sex occurred.

The Green Party has policy saying:

Encourage commitment to international human rights as contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international conventions, and support the work of the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court.

So my question to the Greens is, do they support Labour’s policy to reverse the burden of proof for consent in rape cases?

How can you claim to support the UDHR and even entertain for a second Labour’s policy?

While David Cunliffe has backed away from the policy, saying they are just considering it, Andrew Little explicitly said on Twitter changing the burden of proof is policy, and Little is still advocating for the change. Until such a time as Labour unambiguously says there is no chance of a change to burden of proof under Labour, the only safe thing to do is assume it is likely to occur if they get into Government.