Better to know bias

Shane Taurima, general manager of TVNZ’s Maori and Pacific Programmes and Q + A interviewer, is seeking to be Labour’s candidate in the Ikaroa-Rawhiti by-election.

He  said he wasn’t a member of the party last week which, as Keeping Stock, points out, means he will have to get a special waiver from the party’s ruling council.

The party’s rules allow that, and I would be surprised if other parties don’t have a similar rule.

If they are sensible, it’s not one they’d employ often.

Taurima blames his non-membership on his job:

He said Horomia, who died last month after battling a number of health issues, had spoken to him in the past about entering politics. . .

. . . “Given my career choice and the absolute need to be impartial, apolitical and professional I would politely decline his approaches and he respected me for that. It wasn’t my time back then. I wasn’t ready. But I am ready now.” . . .

The need to be impartial, apolitical and professional in his work is unquestioned. But is that achieved by hiding strong support for a party?

Wouldn’t it be better for someone in his position to be upfront about his political leanings?

Isn’t it better for viewers to know about a bias and be the judge of whether that affects his work than to hide it and have them wondering?

If they can’t get the numbers . . .

Keeping Stock is running a caption competition for a photo of David Shearer and Russel Norman looking bemused.

My contribution: “If we can’t get the numbers to run a referendum, how are we going to get the numbers to run the country?”

We’lll pay for it

Keeping  Stock asks how much we’ll really save on power under a LabourGreen government?

Ministers Bill English and Steven Joyce gave the answer at yesterday’s National party Mainland conference: nothing, we’ll be paying more.

They’re promising households a $300 saving on power bills. Even if they can deliver on that which is most unlikely, they’re also going to impose a $500 cost through their ETS.

The best we can hope for under LabourGreen is a net $200 increase in our power bills, not any decrease.

There’s already been a referendum

The petition seeking a referendum on the government’s policy to sell minority shares in a few energy companies was presented to parliament yesterday.

Parliamentary Services staff will now have to waste their time and our money ensuring the validity of the signatories.

They shouldn’t have to do it because Keeping Stock shows us there’s already been a referendum.

Labour’s then leader, Phil Goff said so.

Mr Goff said Prime Minister John Key had made this year’s election a referendum on whether New Zealanders wanted to see their most important assets being sold.

Perhaps the current leader, David Shearer, could explain why he’s wasting public money on another referendum when the 2011 was decisive.

And apropos of waste – does anyone know who paid for all those boxes in which the petition pages were delivered and the delivery?

What a waste

There is never a good time to waste public money but if ever there was a worse time, it’s now.

Our economy is growing, but  slowly, and many or our trading partners are still struggling with the impact of the Global Financial Crisis.

We’ve got the added cost of the Christchurch rebuild,  the need to cut back because of the extravagances and mismanagement of the previous Labour-led government and almost all of the country is facing drought.

There is no fat in the system.

National has been focussed on getting more for less from public services which requires very careful management and fiscal rigour.

The opposition has shown it hasn’t got the seriousness of the problem by opposing every move the government has made to reduce costs and improve efficiency.

Now the petition calling for a referendum on the policy to sell minority stake in a few state owned energy companies is to be presented to parliament.

It’s supposed to be a Citizen’s Initiated Referendum but this is a politician’s initiated one.

It was never anything more than a political stunt and carrying on with it now that the sales process for the sale of up to 49% of shares in Mighty River Power has begun reinforces that.

If there are enough valid signatures to force a referendum it will be too late. MRP will be under mixed ownership and at least one of the other companies could be too before it’s held.

Regardless of the timing of the referendum and the partial sales this is an expensive exercise in futility.

National campaigned on its Mixed Ownership Model and won.  The Labour and Green Parties and their potential coalition partners New Zealand First and Mana campaigned against it and lost.

The partial sales are a fundamental part of National’s financial plan and the referendum will do nothing but provide an opportunity for grandstanding by the opposition.

It’s time for them to realise they’ve lost and accept the importance of not wasting public money.

UPDATE:

Keeping Stock shows it’s not just money being wasted.

How appropriate

Labour’s Dunedin North MP tweets:

Is there any more appropriate place for a prospective member of a Labour/Green government than Thieves Alley?

Hat Tip: Keeping Stock

2012 in review

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

About 55,000 tourists visit Liechtenstein every year. This blog was viewed about 300,000 times in 2012. If it were Liechtenstein, it would take about 5 years for that many people to see it. Your blog had more visits than a small country in Europe!

The top referring sites were:

1. nominister.blogspot.co.nz
2. kiwiblog.co.nz
3. nzconservative.blogspot.co.nz
4. keepingstock.blogspot.co.nz
5. asianinvasion2006.blogspot.co.nz (Cactus Kate)

The post which got the most comments (51) was water quality concern for all.

The people who made the most comments were:

• 1 robertguyton 375 comments (who blogs eponymously)
• 2 Andrei 343 comments (who blogs at NZ Conservaitve)
• 3 Gravedodger 172 comments (who blogs at No Minister)
• 4 adam2314 161 comments (who blogs at Inquiring Mind)
• 5 robertguyton 160 comments

Robert Guyton # 1 and # 5 is the same person, I think he gets two spots because some comments are linked to his blog and others aren’t.

Thank you all for visiting, those who link and hat tip from their blogs and those who join the conversation.

I appreciate your comments, whether or not I agree with them. A conversation among several is far more interesting than a one-woman diatribe.

I especially appreciate that almost everyone debates the topic and critiques arguments rather than resorting to personal criticism.

I think I had to delete only one comment last year and only rarely had to take a deep breath.

And thanks to WordPress for the blogging platform and excellent service on the very rare occasions I’ve needed help.

Click here to see the complete report.

Precious only when it suits

Was it the influence of The Hobbit’s my precious that prompted Trevor Mallard to pretend preciousness over a perceived slight to Jacinda Ardern during Question Time yesterday?

Hon PAULA BENNETT: Actually, Limited Service Volunteer is making a difference, and we have seen the numbers—[Interruption] Well, if you want to listen to the answer, then just zip it, sweetie, I am getting there. So what it is is that actually what you have got is you have got a number of people who do fall out in the first few—

Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think you heard what the Minister said.

Mr SPEAKER: I certainly did not hear what the Minister said, because the noise level was too high.

Hon Trevor Mallard: Well, we could hear it on this side, and I suggest that if you had listened you could have heard it. It was exceptionally offensive. [Interruption] . . .

It wasn’t the zip it but the sweetie to which he objected:

. . . Hon Trevor Mallard: No, no, no—she said “zip it, sweetie”. That’s what she said. [Interruption] . . .

. . . Mr Speaker, if that term was used to a member who was not a younger woman member—in that sort of approach—I think you would find it offensive. We certainly found it offensive here, and I ask you whether that term is something that is appropriate. “Zip it” might have been all right but—

Whatever it was Speaker Lockwood Smith took a far more sensible view:

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Look, there is a myth that there are certain terms that are ruled out in this House. It is a myth—there are none. Members should treat this place, this House, with respect and members should treat each other with courtesy. If members interject in a rude manner, they may get a less than perfect reaction from the Minister. The level of interjection was so high that I did not hear what the Minister had said. I accept my hearing is less than ideal. I fully accept that, and I apologise for it. But I believe that if we allow ourselves to get worked up over that, we are just being unnecessarily petty. The solution is simple: do not interject so much. It was not necessary. The member had asked a question and should be interested in the answer. It was difficult to hear the answer, so the Minister felt provoked and said something that was less than ideal, but under the circumstances I am not going to ask the Minister to withdraw and apologise for it.

Quite why sweetie is offensive escapes me but Mallard’s preciousness over this perceived slight contrasts sharply with what could be regarded as far more offensive behaviour at Labour’s conference which appears not to have raised any concern at all from him or his colleagues.

Equal Opportunities Commissioner, Judy McGregor, said:

“We produced sexy, big print bumper stickers which said A king for Miramar and Miramar needs a King. Annette was far too nice to let us use Miramar needs a King not a queen . . .

Keeping Stock asks, is it appropriate from someone whose work requires her to protect and promote equal opportunity?

. . . We accept that Dr McGregor’s comment was intended to be a joke. But so was John Key’s banter about Farming Show hot Jamie Mackay’s “gay red shirt”, and look at the furore over that. . .

If sweetie ranks as offensive on Labour’s preciousness meter and gay red shirt also provoked outrage then McGregor’s homophobic reference would be off the scale – if it came from the right.

But it came from the left and somehow slights, in jest or not, from the proponents of identity politics, don’t register at all.

Perhaps that’s because they’re precious only when it suits.

Tyson visa cancelled

The visa which would have allowed convicted rapist Mike Tyson to visit New Zealand has been cancelled by Associate Immigration Minister Kate Wilkinson:

Ms Wilkinson says the original decision to grant a Special Direction to Mr Tyson was a finely balanced call and a letter of support from the Life Education Trust, that would have been a benefactor from the visit, was a significant factor in approving the application.

“Yesterday evening the Life Education Trust contacted my office and asked for that letter to be withdrawn, making it clear that the Trust no longer wants to have any involvement with Mr Tyson’s visit.

“Given that the Trust is no longer supporting the event, on balance, I have made the decision to cancel his visa to enter New Zealand for the Day of the Champions event.”

Life Education Trust does a lot of good work in the community and it seemed odd that they’d supported this visa application.

Keeping Stock has a tweet from Sean Plunket which says they didn’t - the letter of support was an unauthorised one from a volunteer.

The world is full of inspirational speakers without criminal convictions who would be much better role models.

In the beginning

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth . . .

That’s what Genesis says and when John Banks said recently he believed the Biblical account of creation he was  ridiculed for it.

This week we’re reminded that David Shearer believes that taniwha must be respected.

Who will dare laugh at him for that?

It is a puzzling sign of the times that Christian beliefs are ripe for ridicule but indigenous gods and pantheism are treated as gospel or at least respect.

Hat tip:Keeping Stock

Campaigning for whom at whose expense? -Updated

UPDATE: A tobacco company is behind this petition.

I unreservedly apologise for making what I now know are unfounded assertions it was the Green Party.

Keeping Stock has had a tip about an advertisement seeking people who can spend four weeks working on a campaign from August 31 to October 2:

Engage needs a team of intelligent, confident, professional staff for this exciting and lucrative campaign.

The team will fly around NZ’s main centres together for around 5 weeks. You will be engaging with people at bars & cafes, on street, and at events, collecting information with an i-Pad and discussing a current affairs issue with a select target audience. All travel and accommodation, plus a food allowance when away from home, is organised for you and provided in addition to your pay.

You must be available for the entire fixed term contract from 31st August – 2nd October.
Working 27 days in total (5-6 days per week), with variable hours (6-10 hours per day). The total fee for completing the campaign is $4,000 + food allowance and bonus.

Due to confidentiality issues we cannot disclose any more information at this time, but of course more information will be provided when we contact you to discuss your application in person. . .

So who’s employing these people and who’s paying:

Keeping Stock has the answer:

If the information provided to us tonight is correct (and we have no reason to suspect that it isn’t), Engage NZ might not be too far removed from a certain political party. Because the purpose of this team flying around New Zealand engaging with people is a very political one. The “current affairs issue” being discussed is asset sales, and the “select target audience” with whom people are engaging is those who have not yet signed the petition for a Citizen Initiated Referendum.

 

Yes dear readers; the Green Party is at it again. The contract term began on Friday 31 August; the very day that the Greens and Labour launched their spring push to get to the required number of signatures. Our informant tells us that a friend applied and got the job, and in our informant’s words “it is the Greens running it.”.

 

The obvious question raised is this; who is funding this? Are the Greens using public money again in an attempt to re-litigate the 2011 General Election?

If they don’t have enough volunteers it’s very likely they also don’t have the money to pay them which means you and I are paying – again.

I have no doubt it is in the rules but this shows the rules are wrong if they enable parliamentary funding to be used for party political work.

In-work payments for those in work

The Green Party don’t appear to understand the reason that in-work tax credits go only to people in work for a very good reason although Finance Minister Bill English gave a good explanation yesterday:

. . . But the first part of the question, I think, demonstrates the difference in views about how to deal with poverty. The Government is focusing on mobility—that, in fact, a lot of families who at some times and in some periods experience low incomes actually get out of that situation. The in-work tax credit is designed to encourage people from benefits into work, and reward them for making the choice of going into work, because that is the best decision they can make to improve the incomes of their household and their children.

Holly Walker: What if a parent cannot find work? Do their children still have the same basic needs for food, shelter, warmth, and clothing that they would have if their parents were working?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: Yes, their children do have basic needs that ought to be met, and that is why the Government has throughout the last 4 years, since the beginning of the recession in 2008, protected the real value of the incomes of all our low-income households. But I would repeat for the member that those levels of income are part of the story. The other part of the story is to maintain the ability of families and individuals to move on to higher incomes. The analysis of New Zealanders’ time on low incomes shows that a relatively small number stay on low incomes for a long time, and even of those who are on low incomes only a proportion of those suffer the symptoms of persistent deprivation, which is the worst aspect of poverty. . .

. . . Holly Walker: Since children have the same basic needs regardless of the income status of their parents, will he support the Green Party bill to replace the in-work tax credit with a payment for all children who need it, and eliminate a blatant discrimination against some of our poorest children?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: No, we will not. In fact, on the issue of discrimination, this case has been to every tribunal it can go to and no one has found that the difference in payment is discriminatory. We will stick by the policy that has been in place for some time, put in place by the previous Labour Government—that is, maintaining the in-work tax credit.

What is it the left do not understand about the danger of snaring people in the welfare trap?

Some people will need a permanent benefit. But most will be in temporary need of assistance and the sooner they are helped to move from a benefit to work the better for them, their family  and society.

Keeping people on benefits when they could be working isn’t good for them and it isn’t fair on those who pay the taxes to support them.

This view isn’t the preserve of the right wing. Labour MP Trevor Mallard made this point on Facebook yesterday.

The post has now disappeared but Keeping Stock took the precaution of taking a screen shot.

In-work tax credits provide an incentive to work by ensuring people who earn a living are better off than those on benefits.

If people can get a similar income on a benefit than they can from working too many wouldn’t bother to work.

The solution to poverty is not to make life on a benefit more comfortable but to help those who could work to work.

Stand Tall

The 2012 Olympics have begun.

This is the culmination of years of training for the competitors all of whom will say they wouldn’t have been there without the teams of trainers and supporters.

For all that taking part counts, everyone aims to win, but everyone who is there can stand tall:

While we’re looking forward to two weeks of sporting highlights, Keeping Stock reminds us we should also remember the 11 Israeli athletes who were killed at the Berlin Olympics.

 

Do we need a race relations commissioner?

Like Inventory 2 at Keeping Stock, I’m not sorry that Race Relations Comissioner Joris de Bres is coming to the end of his term.

Sometimes his pronouncements, or lack of them suggested he thought some races were more equal than others.

The Justice Ministry is inviting applications for a replacement..

It comes as an amendment to the Human Rights Act has been introduced to Parliament that could see the position abolished. Mr de Bres, 65, had “some concerns” about the possibility, but the amendment had not yet passed its first reading.

I have just read Alison Wong’s book As The Earth Turns Silver.

The plot is fiction but based on facts about discrimination against Chinese immigrants.  The book also depicts discrimination against women. It was less violent but still harmful.

Recent reaction to the sale of farms to Shanghai Pengxin,  shows that race relations haven’t progressed nearly as far as they need to.

But discrimination isn’t confined to race and I’m not convinced singling it out for special treatment is necessary when similar ignorance is directed at people for other reasons including, but not confined to, gender and disability.

All such discrimination is wrong and I think the Human Rights Commission ought to be able to counter it without the need for individual commissioners.

AG to investigate Jones’ immigration decision

Auditor General Lyn Provost is to carry out an inquiry into the decision by the former Associate Minister of Immigration, Shane Jones, to grant citizenship to Yong Ming Yan (also known as Yang (Bill) Liu).

It will be led by Francis Cooke QC.

The link above will take you to an explanation of the background of the case and the scope of the inquiry which will examine:

• the policies and practices of the Department of Internal Affairs when advising the Minister on applications for citizenship, in particular where the applicant’s ‘good character’ is in question;
• how and why the Minister decided to grant citizenship to Mr Yan; and
• any other matters the Auditor-General considers it desirable to report on.

Looking at not just how the decision was made but why is important.

When Labour leader David Shearer requested the AG look at the case he referred to the process but that is far too narrow for an issue of this seriousness.

New Zealand has a very good reputation for lack of corruption in high places. The AG has a very  important role in safeguarding that reputation and any inquiry she undertakes must range as widely as it needs to be in order to get to the bottom of what happened, how and why.

That is not in any way pre-judging the outcome. A full and comprehensive inquiry is just as important if it clears the then-Associate Minister’s name as if it doesn’t.

Hat tip: Keeping Stock

How strong is a party with too few activists?

The Green Party likes to paint itself as the party of principle but how principled is it to use taxpayer funds to do the work normally carried out by volunteers?

Keeping Stock blogged yesterday on the party  advertising for students in Christchurch to solicit signatures for its petition against the partial float of a few state-owned energy companies.

He followed up that post today with more on rent a petition showing advertisements for six out-of-parliament staff whose primary role is to collect signatures for the petition.

That looks a lot more like party political activism than legitimate out-of-parliament support for MPs.

Such work is normally carried out by members, i.e. volunteers not paid staff.

What this suggests is the party doesn’t have many members.

Another clue to the parlous state of the Green Party’s membership is its campaign donations’ return which shows most of its large donations came from its MPs.

Their money is their own to do with it what they will. But they might not need to be this generous to the party if it had a lot more members paying subs.

Lots of people paying a little maes a stronger and more representative party than a few MPs paying a lot.

That is the way parties ought to get their base funding and it is why I believe that organisations must have at least 2,000 members before they can register as a party.

Democracy requires active participation of the people. Publicly funded employees can and should not replace that.

 

 

 

Labour in headlines for all wrong reasons

In Budget week when eyes and ears tend to be on the government, Labour is in the headlines but for all the wrong reasons.

Shane Jones has been referred to the Auditor General over his decision to grant Chinese immigrant Bill Liu citizenship, at last.

He’s also been stood down from his portfolios – for the second time. As Lady Bracknell may be regarded as a misfortune, twice looks like carelessness.

David Shearer said:

“Based on my discussions with Shane Jones, I believe that he followed a proper process. But given the differing statements made in and outside of court and the questions that have been raised publicly, I believe that an independent agency should review the case.

“I’ve asked for the Auditor-General to look into all the departmental as well as ministerial processes involved in this case.

But the problem is about much more than the process. It is possible to make a mistake with the process and arrive and the right decision and to follow the correct process and still reach the wrong decision.

Keeping Stock has a round-up of news stories giving some background.

Kiwiblog asks several valid questions which need to be answered not least of which are the links between Jones’ decision and Liu’s donations to the labour Party.

All of that points to a lot more than a problem with the process.

It also points to Labour’s ongoing challenge to look like a government in waiting. Unless and until it sorts itself out, it will struggle to convince enough voters to give it the support it needs to lead a stable coalition.

If it can’t manage itself, it can’t be trusted to manage a multi-headed coalition.

UPDATE: Keeping Stock has spotted an immigration case where Jones disregarded submissions on humanitarian grounds on the advice of officials. That contrasts with the Liu case where he ignored official advice.

Crossing the line

It is the Opposition’s job to hold the government to account.

The best way to do that is by intelligent criticism of policy and the promotion of viable alternatives.

The easiest way to do it is through personal attacks . But dirty politics is dangerous politics because mud slung usually spatters the slinger too.

Pete George raises this in a post entitled Labour’s Mallardy, Parliament’s Malady:

. . . Political mudslinging is also a major turnoff for a lot of the population outside the political bubbles, and I believe is a significant factor in increasing levels of public apathy towards politics and parliament. Politicians as a group are generally not respected – for good reason.

Most MPs go into parliament with the aim of doing good for the country. Most give it their best shot. Some MPs give the whole group a gutter level reputation through the use of gutter tactics. . .

Most MPs do not deserve the low opinion many hold of them. Unfortunately their business as usual isn’t usually news and we rarely see them doing the bread and butter work of helping constituents and running the country.

In a comment on my previous post, Johnsonmike wrote:

. . . I believe that the massive dumbing down of the media and its obsession with tawdry minor scandals, beat-up crime scares and celebrity mindlessness has brought us to the state of turn-off with politics we are now at. . .

Just as it’s easy politics to attack the person, it’s easy copy for journalists to dwell on the side shows.

There is a line between justifiable criticism and personal attacks. Those who cross it not only find themselves covered in muck, they can find that the public’s sense of fair play is aroused and that interest in the attack changes to sympathy for the attacked.

Hat tip:  Keeping Stock:

 

Jock Hobbs

One of the most moving moments of the Rugby World Cup was Jock Hobbs presenting Richie McCaw with his 100th test cap.

It was obvious then that Hobbs was very ill and it is testament to his strong will that he not only watched the All Blacks win their second World Cup but was on the stage for the presentation.

Today, far too soon, the final whistle blew for him.

His death is a loss for New Zealand and for rugby and even more so for his family and friends to whom my sympathy goes.

Keeping Stock writes an eloquent tribute here.

Is that all there is?

The so called teapot tape has been released on YouTube..

It’s not easy to hear what is being said by John Key and John Banks in their pre-election conversation because of the background noise.

But from what I could hear and understand there is absolutely nothing to cause embarrassment or upset to anyone.

If that is all there is, the Herald on Sunday and TV3 who had the tape and made such a fuss about it really need to look at themselves, their standards and motivation.

They inferred  implied the contents were politically sensitive and potentially embarrassing.

They told us it was in the national interest to release them. If that’s all there is it wasn’t. They are simply boring.

The HOS and even more so TV3 turned a non-event into a potential scandal and then someone from one of those media outlets or Bradley Ambrose, the reporter who, inadvertently or not, recorded the conversation, gave something to Winston Peters which enabled him to do what he does best – manufacture outrage to generate attention.

The only embarrassment is to the media who created an issue out of nothing.

I am not linking to the recording because I am unsure of the legal position but if you can’t find it you’ll save yourself 10 minutes and 46 seconds of boredom.

Whaleoil, Kiwiblog and Keeping Stock also have posts on the recording.