Rural round-up

27/06/2017

Colostrum vital part of successful calf rearing system – Sally Rae:

When it comes to rearing calves, Nicola Neal knows the challenges involved.

Mrs Neal and her husband Grant are sharemilking on the lower Waitaki Plains in North Otago and she also works part-time as a vet.

Her particular interest in rearing young stock has led the mother of two to launch a new venture this year.

The Aspiring Calf Company offers an advisory service to farming clients for setting up and managing robust, fail-safe systems for rearing great calves.

It was while she was studying veterinary science at Massey University that Mrs Neal met her husband, who was working for an animal health company. . . 

Rural folk with MS sort for study – Alexia Johnston:

Medical researchers are turning their attention to the rural sector to benefit people who have multiple sclerosis.

People living in rural South Canterbury, Otago and Southland who have the auto-immune condition multiple sclerosis (MS) are needed for the University of Otago School of Physiotherapy study.

The 24-week study combines two interventions for people with MS living in rural areas – web-based physio and Blue Prescription. . . 

Jan Wright an emblem of our nation’s maturity – Jon Morgan:

Jan Wright will be a hard act to follow. The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment’s term is up shortly and we will miss her.

She and her staff have produced a series of landmark reports on important issues over the past 10 years, rigorous reports firmly centred on science that have cleared up misunderstandings and set out clearly what is at stake.

Farmers have a lot to thank her for. In her reports she has exposed a lot of the lies and half-truths around arguments on clean rivers and how to manage water quality, the use of 1080, agriculture’s contribution to climate change and the Emissions Trading Scheme and high country tenure. . . 

Sale of Angus bull raises $4500 for rescue helicopter – Sally Brooker:

A North Otago Angus stud has raised $4500 for the Otago Regional Rescue Helicopter Trust.

Fossil Creek, run by Neil and Rose Sanderson and Blair and Jane Smith, held its annual on-farm bull sale at Ngapara last week. One lot in its catalogue was sold to help the rescue chopper that has been a life-saver in the district several times in the past four years.

Thanks to strong bidding and awareness of the charitable cause, the bull sold for $4500 to the Cameron family of Wainui Station, on the northern side of the Waitaki River. . . 

Annual tackles food sustainability – Hugh Stringleman:

Massey University’s second Land and Food Annual asks Can New Zealand Feed the World Sustainably?

Its editor Professor Claire Massey and some contributors say we can’t, for a variety of reasons based on perceived lack of sustainability in farming practices, especially water quality.

However, by the end of the book there are enough wise words to re-address the proposition and answer yes instead of no. . . 

What Next? Futurists can take their cricket meat – I’m milking cows until I’m 130 – Lyn Webster:

I watched the ‘What Next’ TV programme with Nigel Latta, John Campbell and a team of ‘futurists’. They were making calls on how life in New Zealand will look in 2037.

I have never felt so happy that I will be dead or close to it by then.

They foresaw a world where jobs as we know them will be taken over by robots. We will all be whizzing around skyping each other from driverless cars and off to a ‘cricket’ (insect) restaurant to eat our daily protein.

Currently, I am driving around in a 1993 Honda Ascot which failed its warrant because of the horn. Now I can’t register it because it’s so old that getting the horn fixed has turned into a big drama. . . 

Planning, returns and looming stresses make feeding 9 billion people a challenge – Ryan O’Sullivan:

 I was fortunate to be part of a relatively small group of eight Nuffield scholars, of diverse farming backgrounds, who visited countries on the Brazil Global Focus Program (GFP).

Countries visited were well developed or mostly developed in terms of their economies and agricultural industries and included Brazil, Mexico, United States, Ireland, France and New Zealand.

One of the key benefits I believe the GFP offers is the context it gives of the global agri-food business and therefore the perspective around New Zealand as a producer and marketer.  As one large scale US milk producer put it “New Zealand is small and cute” – which is pretty hard to argue with.  . . 

It’s time to rethink debate around water quality and weed out the emotion – Alan Wills:

Anyone with an opinion or agenda about water quality has received plenty of media play of late.

We regularly hear about “dirty dairying”, “industrial dairy farming” and just the other day I heard someone on breakfast television talking about “rivers of milk.”

There are no rivers of milk.

Some of the debate is constructive but much of it is narrowly focused, emotional and politically driven. There seems to be no appreciation of the bigger picture. . . 


Abuse should be reported immediately

26/10/2016

Farmwatch has released footage from hidden cameras which shows abuse of bobby calves:

It has been almost a year since the group went public with its last major exposé, which showed similar treatment as well as calves being killed through blunt force, and kicked and beaten, resulting in a public outcry and new industry guidelines.

Back then, many in the industry blamed the mistreatment on a few bad apples.

However, Farmwatch says its latest investigation shows this is untrue – and that the abuse of calves is a common practice in one of New Zealand’s biggest industries. . . 

Animal abuse is not common practice. Farmwatch’s statement is a slur on the thousands of farmers and farm workers who treat stock humanely.

Farmwatch has completed another investigation, this time involving about 10 farms in Taranaki and Waikato from August this year. The latest video, released to Checkpoint with John Campbell, showed calves being thrown forcefully onto trucks and dropped onto the ground.

“What you can see here is the workers just throwing them, hurling them, into the back of the truck,” Farmwatch spokesman John Darroch said. “He just chucks it by the neck backwards.”. . 

The dairy industry had, in the past, pinned the abuse on a few bad workers, he said.

“This is representative of the handling of calves, and when we place hidden cameras we get this kind of footage … If it were only a few people doing this, it would be impossible for us to get this footage.” . . 

That’s a nonsensical statement. It takes only one person to do this to obtain footage. Ten is 10 too many but it is not representative of the industry.

Apart from the obvious and overriding importance of animal welfare, bruising of calves reduces the value of their meat.

Almost everyone in dairying will be as angry and upset by this maltreatment as the animal rights people.

Furthermore, almost everyone else, with animal welfare at heart rather than a political agenda,  would have reported the abuse to MPI or the SPCA immediately to ensure the abuse stopped immediately and not waited two months as Farmwatch did.


Log in left eyes

19/08/2015

Winston Peters started the criticism of Mike Hosking as a National Party stooge.

Labour leader Andrew Little and Green co-leader James Shaw joined in, followed by several left wing bloggers lamenting bias in the media, especially on state-owned TVNZ.

Hosking has an unlikely defender in Brian Edwards who says rather than being right-wing he’s a social conservative.

. . . While I’d be surprised to discover that Hosking is a closet member of the Parnell, Remuera or Epsom branches of the Labour Party  – total membership five! – I’d also risk my bottom dollar that he isn’t a member of any political party. This is, or should be the default position for any broadcaster working in the field of news or current affairs.

What Hosking betrays on Seven Sharp, on commercial radio and in his writing is not political bias but social conservatism. The two may overlap from time to time, but are inherently different. It’s entirely possible and even commonplace to be left wing and socially conservative. . . 

Whatever his views, isn’t it strange that many of the people who are so upset by Hosking thought it was absolutely marvelous that John Campbell who wears his left wing heart on his sleeve was appointed to state-owned RadioNZ  National.

Perhaps the log in their own eyes blinds them to their hypocrisy and to Hosking’s professionalism.

Both he and Campbell are very good interviewers who are more than capable of putting their own views aside to ask tough questions of people across the political spectrum.

 

 


Current affairs sails on

25/06/2015

In the beginning was the good ship Campbell Live and the captain was John.

And John steered his ship through troubled waters and calm and braved many storms and was admired by many for his skill although sometimes his ship listed somewhat dangerously to port.

But his crew was not troubled nor were the people of  the left who praised him mightily for sailing into the right whence he created tempests.

But  every night Captain John was called to sail his ship in a race for the coveted trophy Ratings for the winner of this race was graced with advertising dollars.

But night after night Captain John failed to win the trophy though he navigated through diverse waters, from the shallows of celebrity to the depths of despond.

And so the admirals of the TV3 fleet spoke for they were unimpressed and they beseeched Captain John to change course.

And John said no for verily he stood on the poop deck of his own importance and did not want to chart another course.

So the admirals and Captain John parted ways and the good ship Campbell Live sank amidst the tears of its crew and passengers.

There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth among the people of the left who were sore afraid that all the socialist treasure was lost with the ship and that current affairs would not sail again.

But lo, two experienced captains,  Heather du Plessis-Allan And Duncan Garner were enticed from other craft to command a new ship and the admirals said its name would be Story.

And the admirals said that Story would be a smart, fun and thought-provoking ship that would lead the way in daily current affairs.

And the people went about their business, eating their dinners, playing with their smart phones, accessing the internet and watching television or not as it wasn’t in the beginning but is now and may or may not evermore be.

 

 

 

 


Governing for all NZ

23/09/2014

Prime Minister-elect John Key said in his victory speech he wants to govern for all New Zealand:

“I will lead a Government that will govern for all New Zealanders” was a quote from Mr Key’s acceptance speech that stood out for many.

“I wrote the speech that was delivered on Saturday night because I wanted them to be my words and it was how I felt,” says Mr Key.

That is what every government should do.

The criticism that National only cares about the wealthy is nothing more than left-wing rhetoric.

One of its strengths is economic management but that isn’t the end, it’s the means to affording the services and infrastructure which benefit all of us.

The people who are hurt the most by poor management and sluggish or negative growth are the most vulnerable.

“There will be some New Zealanders who say, ‘Well, he may have made a difference, but not positively to my life.”

To them Mr Key says “[We in National] have certainly tried our best to do that”.

But he knows he must now carve his legacy.

“Helen Clarke will be remembered for the Cullen Fund or the Working For Families,” he says. “If it all ends on Saturday night, I would like to be remembered for leadership around the Christchurch earthquakes and [getting through] the global financial crisis.”

Robert Muldoon’s ambition, “to leave the country in no worse shape than I found it”, Mr Key describes as having an incredibly low ambition.

“I want to leave the country in better shape than I found it,” he says. . .

We were already in recession and facing a decade of deficits when National won the 2008 election.

National has us back on track to surplus just six years later in spite of the GFC and the earthquakes.

These quotes were taken from an interview by John Campbell which you can watch at the link above.

It was a very good interview which allowed the PM to answer questions without interruptions and viewers to form their opinions on what was said.

Why on earth didn’t we have that sort of interview during the election campaign?

 

 


Information beats confrontation

20/08/2013

John Campbell’s confrontation with John Key on Campbell Live last Wednesday was a wonderful example of how not to do an interview.

Campbell was crusading, confrontational and angry. He made his views on the GCSB Bill blatantly obvious.

This morning Rachel Smalley’s interview (not yet online) with the Prime Minister was a complete contrast.

She was calm, measured, and gave no indication of her views on the issue.

She was after information, not confrontation, and she got it.

That included a repeat of the explanation of what access to metadata will mean under the new law:

Mr Key says the cyber-security function is to “protect” information, rather than accessing content.

He says the GCSB will be able to look at some email metadata, but that will not include addresses, the times emails were sent or received, or their content.

“Essentially it flows through a filter, and as it flows through that filter, it doesn’t record for anything other than a hundredth of a second,” he told media.

“It’s looking for the viruses which are coming into the system – it’s not looking at content, it’s not looking at who sent the email, it’s simply looking for the viruses and we don’t record … where the emails came from, who got them, any of that sort of stuff.” . . .
Mr Key is categorically ruling out “wholesale surveillance” of emails.
In cases where the GCSB wants to access the content of New Zealanders’ emails, Mr Key expects the agency to apply for very specific warrants, and seek the New Zealander’s consent, unless there are very good reasons not to.
Parliament’s intelligence and security committee will be able to see what type of warrants are being signed off and ask questions about those.The bill’s most controversial provision makes it legal for the GCSB to spy on New Zealanders on behalf of the SIS, Defence Force and police, if they have a warrant.

Whether or not viewers were reassured by what the PM said will almost certainly depend on their bias.

A lot, though not all, of the opposition to the Bill is politically motivated and Labour has made the mistake of opting for short-term point scoring rather than taking the opportunity to look like a government in waiting.

The wee parties can do what they like knowing they’ll never lead a government but sooner or later Labour will.

It could have looked like it was fit to do so by working with the government to address legitimate concerns about the legislation.

Instead of which it’s just playing me-too to the Green and Mana Parties and New Zealand First with David Shearer just another opposition party leader like Russel Norman, Winston Peters and Hone Harawira.


GSCB Bill explained

15/08/2013

In between interruptions and attempted justifications from John Campbell, Prime Minister John Key explained the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) Amendment Bill.

Do people care?

“We got 124 submissions on the GCSB bill, and 30,000 on snapper,” he says.

Mr Key says he spends a lot of time touring the country, but the GCSB bill is not a topic that comes up in his discussions.

“People do not raise GCSB. I have public meetings, I have question sessions at everything I do. I probably have half a dozen meetings a day with public engaging with people…People don’t raise this issue,” he tells Campbell Live. . .

Whether or not people care, doesn’t change the facts:

*  The GCSB will need to obtain a warrant from the Commissioner of High Security Warrants – a retired court judge appointed by Mr Key.

* The surveillance of] Kim Dotcom was illegal under the old law and it’s illegal under the new law.

* Mr Key says some discussion around the bill has been misrepresented, and the organisation will not be able to spy on New Zealanders.

* the original problems with the GCSB stem from a section passed by the Labour Government in 2003.

Another couple of points from the video (at about 18:15)
* The only legal things they [GCSB] can do is provide assistance, and they do that about nine times a year.
* Anything else they might do in cyber searches would require a warrant, they wouldn’t have access to content and it would be a bit like virus protection.
Some other points not covered in the interview:

The Bill clarifies the law that the GCSB operates under.

* The GCSB had been assisting other agencies like the NZSIS, Defence and Police for years, under the previous Labour Government as well as under the National-led Government. The Labour administration knew about this activity and signed off on it.

* The GCSB believed that it was operating within the law at all times, but it is now clear that there are difficulties in interpretation in the law.

* The Prime Minister is responsible for for national security and takes it seriously. That’s why the Government is moving to clarify the law so that it is legally clear the GCSB can assist other agencies, as it has done for years.

This Bill won’t change what can be done, the SIS can do anything the Bill would permit the GCSB to do.

This isn’t a debate about whether a particular New Zealander will have intelligence gathered about them and about their activities.

It will happen with appropriate oversight and safeguards.

The question is whether the Security Intelligence Service (SIS) does it, or if GCSB does it under a warrant gained by the SIS.

The GCSB has the capability to do it now, the SIS doesn’t. If the Bill isn’t enacted what would have been done by the GCSB will be done by the SIS, more expensively.

I thought the Prime Minister won the debate, so did Gravedodger who reviews the interview here.

But it’s not only those of us in the blue corner who weren’t impressed with the interviewing.

Whaleoil found this on Twitter:

@JohnJCampbell Raving is not interviewing, John. A graceless and embarrassing performance. This from your greatest fan. Brian

 

 

 

 


On pinning down Peters

13/06/2013

Trans Tasman observes John Campbell’s attempt to pin down Winston Peters:

For those who have been around for a bit, Peters’ mix of belligerence and incoherence is getting more and more like 1970s-80s trade unionist Jim Knox. Certainly Campbell, whose mien is usually bubbly and engaging even with the most difficult subjects, gave an impression of a man in a wrestle with a particularly large and truculent molasses-coated rhinoceros. . .

My memories of Knox are mercifully dim, but I can recall enough to suspect Peters won’t be flattered by the comparison.

Over at Opposable Thumb, Denis Welsh also paints a word picture:

 . . . But the days are long gone when he seized on something really meaningful, and it’s a sign of how impregnable the National government has been to his usual tricks that all the old shark can do now is sink his increasingly blunt teeth into a fellow minor party. Shark bites minnow: this is news? The more Peters attacks Dunne, the more he shows how weakened he has become. And as it also grows clearer with every day that he has no more of substance to throw at his victim (admitting he hasn’t got all the dirt he needs would have been unthinkable once), so we witness the sad spectacle of a veteran showbiz star no longer able to wow the crowds in the same dazzling way. The old soft-shoe shuffle, so slick before, looks worn and creaky now. One is reminded irresistibly of John Osborne’s play/film The Entertainer, in which a faded music-hall performer past his prime keeps wheeling out the same tired old jokes and routines, to increasingly thin applause. Peters has so lost the plot this time, in fact, that he’s in serious danger of rousing public sympathy for Dunne. . .

A truculant molassess-coated rhinoceros; an old shark with increasingly blunt teeth; the old soft shoe-shuffle . . .  looks worn and creaky now.

These aren’t descriptions of a man on the way up and in politics if you’re not going up you’re going down.


Points for trying

12/06/2013

At last the media is calling Winston Peters’ bluff.

John Campbell did an admirable job of attempting to get him to show some proof and give a straight answer.

Campbell wasn’t successful but at least he showed Peters obfuscating.

And tonight Rebecca Wright did her best to get him to prove his comments on Auckland as sin-city.

Three weeks ago, Winston Peters made a speech to Grey Power in Takapuna, entitled “Auckland, super city or sin city?”

In it, he used the word “China” 21 times and he asked the question “who’s running things here, us or them?”

Is there any other immigrant group that gets singled out like that?

It was all in a speech that refers to corruption, crime, money laundering, shady dealing, pokey machines, sex workers, cheating Asian students, a slave trade, drug importation and the seven deadly sins.

So Campbell Live asked Winston Peters for proof. . .

The video is here.

Unfortunately the deluded who think he can do no wrong will probably think he’s in the right and that the media is treating him unfairly.

 


Election post mortems

09/11/2008

John Key’s first extended interview as Prime Minister elect with John Campbell: part 1, part 2, part 3.

Sunday part 1, part 2, part 3,  part 4,  part 5.

Morning Report’s election special.

RadioNZ Sunday  – Sunday Group on the election and Media Watch on election coverage.


Morning after

09/11/2008

Four hours of sleep is not conducive to intelligent thought so I’ll keep this brief.

Some highlights:

* We have a National led government.

* National won 9 new seats (I know it’s the party vote that counts in forming a government, but good electorate MPs not only serve their constituents well, they also provide a positive face for the party which helps the vote next time round).

(The election night results for seats are here).

* John’s speech, in particular his desire for inclusiveness and hope:

New Zealand has spoken. Hundreds of thousands across the country, they have voted for change.

“Thank you for your support, and thank you for your trust. I talked about when I was a boy in a state house, riding my bike past the houses of people more fortunate than me.

“What inspired me then, and still inspires me today, is the belief within ourselves that we have the ability to make our lives better.

“And as it is for individuals, so it is for our country. Because New Zealand has so much more potential. This is not as good as it gets.”

He also said that whether or not people had voted for him, he’d be leading a government that works for all New Zealanders.

He was gracious to Helen Clark, acknowledged what she’d done for New Zealand and thanked her for it.

(The speech is here, post speech interview with John Campbell here,).

* Locally – Jacqui Dean’s hard work across the huge Waitaki electorate (34,888 square kms) was rewarded with a majority of 10,176.


The TV3 debate

03/11/2008

The first segment of the TV3 debate ended in a shouting match, the second opened with a request for better behaviour from John Campbell and he  got it.

It means that each of the leaders can talk uninterrupted – except by the chair.

I’m too biased to give a fair assessment of John Key’s and Helen Clark’s performances – of course John’s better 🙂

 But if the outcome of the election is influenced to any great degree by this then democracy is in trouble.

 Update: John Campbell asked what’s the difference between Bill English and Michael Cullen.

Point to Key for answering: “Bill’s got charm.”

Point off Clark for saying he didn’t in 2002.

Update # 2: Point to Key for: “If nine years isn’t enough to do that no amount of time is.”

Update # 3: Linda Clark, Jenni McManus and Jon Johansson have all agreed that Key will be our next PM; and Linda said she thinks it will be decisive enough that the Maori Party won’t hold the balance of power.


Why wait until December?

03/11/2008

John Campbell just asked Helen Clark why we have to wait until December for a mini-budget.

She hasn’t given a reason.

Why should we trust them with a blank cheque?


%d bloggers like this: