A guest post by a reader:

Most of us have by now no doubt seen the start of an interview with David Seymour on TV One Breakfast where he took the host to task for the manner in which the discussion was introduced.  Essentially (partly my words and partly his) he suggested the introduction  made at least one mistake of fact and was unreasonably “framing” the matter as divisive.  

I want briefly to suggest two ways in which the Bill has been viewed simplistically if not unfairly, then suggest a counter-argument, and then swing back to media framing.

A significant criticism of the Bill proposed by TV One, is its supposed divisiveness.  On one level that is transparently true.  The Bill has divided us and thus ipso facto it is divisive.

However, let’s examine that by analogy.

Imagine you and your significant other are having relationship difficulties.  Imagine that you sit your partner down one evening after dinner and suggest quietly and reasonably that it’s clear there are things you both need to discuss, and that after some early discussion between you it might be worth exploring these matters with a counsellor to see if resolution can be reached.

Imagine at that point your partner starts yelling and screaming, throws a few things, gets right up into your face and abuses you, and commences a tirade about the integrity of your marriage or other commitment.  Imagine that their position is that the sanctity of your past vows allowed for no further discussion irrespective of how things had moved in the interim.

Now note this analogy is offered around perceptions of behaviour not around what precisely the Treaty says or does not say.

My point is this.  Which is the more accurate way to frame those events, as an expression of divisiveness on the part of one party or as an overreaction on the part of the other?

Second point.  I assert as many many others have done that meddling (my word) with the Treaty has not started with ACT.  My working life has aligned with the growth of novel Treaty jurisprudence.  I have watched it from the sidelines while becoming increasingly concerned at the confusion and paralysis it is causing the public sector.

Again setting aside the substantive merits of this change, it is not a logical or tenable position to pour vitriol on ACT for wanting to do what others have done.  It is after all simply seeking a re-examination of the Treaty to ensure it meets current understandings and expectations.  That is no more than what has occurred over the last forty years.  The critics cannot have it both ways by treating the Treaty as dynamic when they want change and static when they don’t like the direction discussions of change are going in.

Now I am a Socratic man whose worldview is rooted in logic and rationality that underpin western culture.  So too I would suggest is David Seymour.

And that is the rub.  Maori reaction to the Bill is, it seems to me, rooted much more in the “vibe”.  That is, the symbolism of possible change is outrageous and an affront to mana irrespective of how we got to where we are today.  Now I “get” that may be a cultural response.  Personally it’s not one I favour and I have limited optimism for this country’s future if major issues are resolved in terms of subjective emotional responses to things.  But I do allow that others may have contrary views and/or want with the very best of intentions to leave room for them so far as this is possible.

But the two perspectives are ships passing in the night.  There is no ready way to reconcile them.  And that is precisely ACTs point.  If divergent views of the Treaty continue, and separatist understandings of what the Treaty mandates prevail, the society which evolves under its banner is unlikely to be much different.  And it is not hard to predict what will follow.  Fiji anyone?  

In my view then there are very clear grounds for regarding much criticism of the Treaty Bill as one-dimensional and unbalanced.  And so back to TV One.  Was its framing of the Bill unbalanced, if not biased?  Of course it was.    

A more balanced view could have taken any number of forms.  It could have used phrases such as “perceived divisiveness”.  It could have referred to the dynamic nature of understanding of the Treaty of which the ACT view is but another form.  It could have spoken of the Bill evoking “extreme reactions” which in my view would have been the most accurate way of describing what has occurred.  

None of this appears commonly in the media narrative.  Instead we have a stunning piece of illogic by which those seeking to reconcile diverging understandings are assumed to be sowing division by even raising the topic; a suggestion more farcical when it is noted that it is the other party (not formally but in terms of intellectual leadership) to the debate which has moved its views so as to create the divergence. 

All the best to us all as we grapple with these thorny issues while keeping the ship on course….. 

Matt Nippert reports:

Charity regulators have moved to deregister high-profile social services provider Waipareira, concluding a long-running investigation into its funding of chief executive John Tamihere’s political campaigns.

The decision follows a four-year investigation by Charities Services into Waipareira that has seen settlements reached and breached, accusations of racism, and Charities Services staff complain about bullying behaviour from Waipareira’s lawyers.

News of looming deregistration and the loss of its tax-free status broke in Waipareira’s own financial statements filed this week to the Charities Register, which end with a note stating: “On 23 September 2024, the trust received a formal notification from the Charities Registration Board (CRB) of its intention to make a decision to deregister the charitable entity Te Whanau O Waipareira Trust.”

No other decision was realistically possible.

Waipareira effectively made hundreds of thousands of dollars of donations to TPM’s 2020 election campaign and Tamihere’s own tilt for the Auckland mayoralty in 2019. 

You can’d do this, and be a charity. They knew this, but did it anyway.

The DIA statement said deregistration would see Waipareira revert to its previous status as a charitable trust, which faced no restrictions on political activity but came with tax consequences.

“The trust would also be able to continue its association with or support for political parties and candidates free from restrictions and obligations arising under the act. It may have tax implications for the trust, however this is a matter for Inland Revenue,” the statement said.

Charitable trusts face an income tax of 28%.

Charities law stipulates that deregistered charities need to distribute their assets to organisations that are registered or face a tax levied across accumulated assets. Based on Waipareira’s reported financial position, this one-off tax could amount to $30m.

It is a shame as historically Waipareira has done many good things for the communities they serve. But to use money given to them by taxpayers for charitable purposes, and channel it to political campaigns was just wrong.

The CBC reports:

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre says the House of Commons should be recalled now that NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh is vowing to bring forward a motion of non-confidence to take down the Liberal government.

“The Liberals don’t deserve another chance,” Singh wrote in an open letter on Friday. “That’s why the NDP will vote to bring this government down.”

This is a survival tactic for the NDP who don’t want to be associated with the Liberals anymore.

The timing of the next confidence vote is unclear, but likely to be in the first quarter of 2025 which will lead to an election in the first half of 2025. The only real uncertainty is whether Trudeau remains Liberal Leader to fight the election.

The Herald reports:

Labour’s finance spokeswoman Barbara Edmonds has replaced a graph that incorrectly stated the Ardern-Hipkins Government reduced New Zealand’s debt levels by about $31 billion in its second term. …

In fact, depending on what measure you use, Labour’s second term saw a rapid increase in borrowing thanks to the pandemic, reducing the tax take and increasing expenses. Debt increased by $72b or $36b by two of the most common recent metrics.

It is a concern that Labour’s Finance Spokesperson doesn’t even realise debt increased massively under the former Labour Government.

In June 2017 net core crown debt was $59.5b. In June 2023 it was $155.3b.

That’s an average increase of:

• $15,970,000,000 a year
• $1,330,000,000 a month
• $306,000,000 a week
• $43,7000,000 a day
• $1,820,000 an hour
• $30,376 a minute
• $506 a second

And Labour are claiming they reduced debt!

Stuff reports:

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon will not attend the national Waitangi Day events at Waitangi next year, he has confirmed.

His confirmation followed a letter from Hīkoi mō Te Tiriti organisers on Thursday morning, telling Government ministers they were not welcome at any Waitangi Day events.

Great. Easy call.

Stuff reports:

A District Court Judge accused of “verbally attacking” Winston Petersand other New Zealand First members at a Christmas party has been referred to the Judicial Conduct Commission.

The Post earlier reported that Judge Ema Aitken was attending an end-of-year bash for district court judges at Auckland’s exclusive Northern Club last month, when she gate-crashed a private function for Peters’ party in a neighbouring room.

Peters was reportedly making a speech when it is alleged Judge Aitken tried to enter the room and shouted: “He’s lying! How can you let him say that?”

Following questions from Stuff, the Judicial Conduct Commissioner office said the commissioner had powers to investigate incidents “on his own initiative”.

“That is the step he took yesterday morning when he read the various media references to this Judge.”

Whether our not this is a resignation offence is fairly easy to answer – just swap roles.

Imagine that at the same Northern Club evening with a gathering of judges and a NZ First gathering, it was a NZ First MP who gatecrashed the gathering of judges, yelled abuse at them, told them they were disgraces and accused the Chief Judge in attendance of lying. That MP would already be goneburger. MPs have had to resign for far less egregious conduct breaches.

And I don’t think I am alone in saying that we have higher expectations of judges than MPs. A District Court Judge has remuneration of $541,000 a year. They literally sit in judgement on people with the power to send people to prison. They are expected to have exemplary conduct, and they are required to be politically neutral.

Judge Aitken was either sober or drunk when she gatecrashed the NZ First function. And either option is bad for her. If she did it sober, then it shows a total lack of judgment and restraint. But if she was drunk – well she is the Judge that set up the Alcohol and Other Drug Treatment Court pilot. How can she credibly judge others who have misbehaved under the influence? And being drunk is no excuse.

The Herald reported:

If elected, Labour will build the new Dunedin Hospital to the level that was promised at the 2023 election before the coalition Government said it would downsize the build, blaming cost.

They really hope voters have short memories. In 2017 they promised to have construction start before 2021. They of course didn’t. In fact after six years they still hadn’t signed off a final business case for the entire hospital (only the smaller inpatients facility).

If they had kept their word in 2017, the hospital would be almost complete by now. But their inability to even decide on a final business case after six years speaks volumes.

Periodically I do something stupid in some way to do with activity. A few bike crashes, stopping myself with my face when running down a forest track, ripping my knee open in an off-road duathon, a bee sting to find I had an allergy …

You get to test out the A&E Departments around the country.

After a concussion and a bit of blood flowing on Saturday I eventually ended up in the North Shore Hospital A&E about 3pm. There was about twenty people waiting in a range of states and ways.

The short story is the one that many people tell from NZ A&E experiences; i.e. I finally made it home about 3am.

The other experiences were much more remarkabe.

Every nurse, nurse assistant, administration person was remarkable. No one apperared stressed, every question was answered positively, they were entirely professional and explained why they were doing each task – including asking me repititive questions to ensure I was on the right planet.

The doctor did not become available for me until 9pm. He also took time, explained things clearly – including why they were taking next steps (CT of head and neck). For the next while I was in the emergency ward where the atmosphere was equally positive and it was also very clear that the staff treated each other well – not just the patients.

At about 1am the doctor appeared again – with good news. I had avoided skull and neck fractures but that it was now his job so sew up the cuts in my scalp. He took an hour, apologised every time I just about leapt off the bed, explained what he was doing and talked sport throughout.

I had to ask – nicely; “why does the whole A&E process take so long?”

His response was that it is something all of the front line staff desperately want to change and that they have worked hard to get their systems and approach right but that so much resourcing is soaked up by policy and administration. His previous experience overseas had seen a minismisation of the number of non-medical middle managers and external, Ministry, resourcing. He also noted that here any decisions seem to take 20 people to make just because so many have an oar to stick in that has little to do with patient care.

I tell the story because this week the nurses are on strike for pay and conditions. Hospitals are for providing care for paitients when they need it. Like education – clearly a massive amount of resource is diverted away to people and places that really do not achieve very much at all re the true purpose.

I also have no doubt that a lot of the non-medical people – and the Ministry people – are paid a lot better that the vast majority of those doing a brilliant job in the ward.

To the North Shore Hospital A&E people. I appreciated your care!

To the Nurses – all the best with your fight.

Alwyn Poole

Radio NZ reported:

The government wants to divide New Zealand along ethnic and economic lines, Chris Hipkins says, and he wants to be the leader who brings it together.

Is he serious? He led a Government that tried to see everything in ethnic terms, and caused the huge division we still have today.

And for the party of the wealthy urban elite professionals to talk about economic division is equally hilarious. They look upon many working class voters as a foreign species.

Grant Duncan writes:

If a vote for Labour means, in effect, a vote for Green and TPM leaders in cabinet, then many centrist voters will reluctantly stick with National, thanks all the same. Chippy can’t control those other parties or explain them away over the next two years.

Labour is polling in the high 20s or low 30s. They will only be able to become Government if Greens and Te Pati Maori deliver a further 15%+ to them. That means they will be able to demand a full three way coalition, with seats in Cabinet. Neither party has ever had to grapple with the responsibility of being part of Cabinet.

It is hard to describe how left wing and woke such a government would be. It would make the Ardern Government look like a moderate deliberative government.

Some very good humour from Chris Luxon in the adjournment debate, which I enjoyed.

And to all of my haters over there, to all of my haters over there who say I use too much management speak, well, I don’t know how I can be any clearer. What I would say to you is that we have some big goals to chunk down so that we can grip up the deliverables and benchmark our KPI targets.

Heh nice self parody.

Now, to my friends in the Green Party—Julie Anne, no need to get up. I saw recently that there’s a new Green MP that has a member’s bill to liberalise the use of parody, and I just think it’s just great—it’s just great—to see the Greens live those values by being a parody of themselves each and every single day. I have to say, if you folks weren’t so opposed to it, we would have happily—happily—added Darlene Tana’s resignation to our fast-track list.

Not sure which jibe was better the JAG one or the Darlene Tana one.

To my friends in the media: can I just say thank you for always holding me to account and for always being so fair and balanced! I wish you a very happy and safe holiday—please do take as long as you need.

Heh.

I saw a lovely headline—it was an absolutely lovely headline about David Seymour finding love. And while I know David and Winston’s working relationship has been stronger than so many predicted, to be honest, I did think it was still quite a bold description of their relationship.

That one had me LOL.

Secret Santa with ACT this year was a disaster, though. They wouldn’t stop taking credit for every present.

Heh.

Radio NZ reports:

Labour’s Willie Jackson has taken aim at the coalition government for what he called “taking Aotearoa down a path of division and hate.”

It is a trick in politics to accuse your opponent of what you yourself do.

Which side of the debate on TPB uses violent rhetoric and demonises those who oppose? It’s pretty obvious, isn’t it.

The Herald reports:

Staff at a charitable trust working with Northland’s most vulnerable kids held crying families as they told them their services were under threat.

Stand Tū Māia plans to take Oranga Tamariki to court over its decision to terminate a three-year funding contract worth $21 million a year.

The organisation is seeking a court injunction and the existing contract enforced, to stop the government department from acting as if it has been cancelled.

I know nothing about this, but when I read a story like this I wonder why. So I do research. I look for their annual accounts. They are not on their website, but the charities register have them.

A wise accounting professor once told me to ignore income and expenditure and balance sheets as they can be easily adjusted through decisions such as whether you classify something as expenditure or capitalising an asset etc. He said always look at the cashflow. So I looked at their cashflow surplus in recent years. It is:

• 2020: Cash surplus of $3.1m on cash in of $24.7m
• 2021: Cash surplus of $0.8m on cash in of $23.7m
• 2022: Cash surplus of $2.9m on cash in of $25.4m
• 2023: Cash surplus of $9.2m on cash in of $36.6m

That is just from operating activities. Their total cash on hand has grown from $5.2m in 2018 to $28.0m in 2023. Now I don’t know if this is related to the OT decisions, but it certainly seems interesting that in five years their cash on hand has increased by around $23 million.

The Post reports:

A district court judge and her reality TV star partner have apologised for “verbally attacking” Winston Peters, Casey Costello and other New Zealand First members at a Christmas party.

Chief Judge Heemi Taumaunu has also apologised on behalf of the court.

Judge Ema Aitken and intensive care specialist David Galler were attending an end-of-year bash for district judges at Auckland’s exclusive Northern Club last month, when they gate-crashed a private function for Peters’ party in a neighbouring room.

The rumpus started as Peters was making a speech. It’s alleged Aitken tried to enter the room and shouted: “He’s lying! How can you let him say that?”

So Judge Aitken was presumably drunk (it is worse off she was sober), gatecrashed a NZ First party and abused the Deputy PM – calling him a liar.

This would be terrible behaviour for any person, but for a judge it is fatally inappropriate.

A video clip from the party also shows prominent barrister, Michael Reed KC, refusing to stop taking photographs of NZ First guests, including Shane Jones’ wife Dot, despite strict club rules.

That is creepy.

Attorney-General Judith Collins, who is the Crown’s senior law officer, said she was aware of the incident and “appalled by it”.

“I have told the Chief Justice that such behaviour is completely unacceptable and I expect it to be addressed,” she said.

The appropriate way to address this is by resignation.

According to an incident report, compiled by an independent lawyer acting on behalf of Northern Club and NZ First, based on witness statements, Aitken left the dinner to use the bathroom and heard Peters’ speech as she passed.

The report says she accused Peters of lying, in a comment to Holly Howard, who asked her to leave.

“However, Judge Aitken continued to shout and make a scene … Judge Aitken then told Ms Howard that there was a room full of judges next door, and they would be very interested to hear about this,” the incident report said.

Threatening and bullying behaviour.

In the second video, the report reveals, Reed tells the staff member: “Don’t touch me because you will be sued for a lot of money.” He also tells him “Can you be quiet, can you be quiet?”

The sense of entitlement is high.

Nicola Willis announced:

The Government set the public service a target of eliminating $400 million in operating expenditure on contractors and consultants by 2024/25.

In 2023/24 savings of $274 million were achieved. This year the public service is on track, after the first quarter, to achieve savings of about $500 million. These savings are forecast to continue over the next three quarters, which means savings over the two-year period could total more than $800 million, according to the update.

It shows operational expenditure by departments on contractors and consultants fell a further 46 per cent in the September quarter on an annualised basis, after a 31 per cent drop in the previous financial year to June.

Great news, except for consultants.

The Public Service Commission’s September Quarterly Workforce Data Update also shows the size of the public service has decreased 2.2 per cent from September 2023 to September 2024, and 1.1 per cent for the quarter.

In real terms, this is an annual drop of 1,402 full-time equivalents (FTEs).

“I feel for anyone who loses a job, but no government can live beyond its means indefinitely,” Nicola Willis says.

“The growth in the public service under the previous government was not sustainable if we also want to fund the health, education, welfare and other services New Zealanders depend on.

So for all the wailing and gnashing, the actual drop over 12 months has only been 1,402 FTE staff. This is partially because in a fit of of irresponsibility there was a huge increase in the last quarter of 2023, despite the election.

Here’s the change by quarter:

• Jul – Sep 23: +1,106
• Oct – Dec 23: +1,476
• Jan 24 – Mar 24: -416
• Apr 24 – Jun 24: -1,745
• Jul 24 – Sep 24: -717 (my calculation)

So the EFT staff total in the public service at September 2024 is only 296 less than in June 2023.

The House has just passed the first reading of the Gene Technology Bill. Judith Collins said:

Our current regulations for genetically modified organisms are some of the most backward looking in the world. New Zealand has lagged behind other countries, such as Australia, Canada, and England, which have safely embraced these technologies for the benefit of their people and their economies.

Despite gene technologies having been in use in New Zealand since the 1970s, the restrictive rules and time-consuming processes we have imposed on researchers have made testing and embracing innovation outside the lab all but impossible. But no more. This Government has listened to our research, primary industry, and medical communities and the frustrations that they have felt over many years. Today, New Zealand moves into the present with a safe enabling regulatory regime. The legislation will enable the sorts of innovation that will benefit New Zealand while effectively managing risks to the health and safety of people and the environment.

After 25 years of dithering, we finally have a Government that is not letting hysteria trump science. Amazing that this legislation has been introduced in the first year of office – rather than just another working group.

I knew Greens and Te Pati Maori would vote against, but very sad that Labour did also. They really are stuck in the 20th century.

The ABC reports:

Victoria’s Opposition Leader John Pesutto has lost a defamation case against former Liberal partyroom colleague Moira Deeming.

Ms Deeming brought the lawsuit against Mr Pesutto, alleging the Victorian Liberal leader had defamed her as a Nazi sympathiser in the wake of an anti-trans-rights rally.

She won $300,000 damages plus costs.

I can’t recall a party leader being sued for defamation before by someone who was in their caucus.

His mistake was repeating smears that attending a gender-critical rally was somehow aligning with Nazis. He threw his own MP under the bus to try and appease the wine mob, and has ended up fatally wounded.

Canadian PM Justin Trudeau is finished – either this week, or at the election.

Any tiny chance of victory has disappeared with the dramatic resignation of not just any Cabinet Minister, but his Deputy PM and Finance Minister. And she did it a few hours before the release of a major economic statement.

Trudeau’s GST holiday has backfired, with her implicitly calling it a costly political gimmick.

Trudeau will go one one of four ways:

1. He resigns, as some have reported he is considering
2. The Liberal Party caucus roll him
3. The NDP, who have called for him to resign, vote no confidence in the Government
4. He limps on to the election in October, with current projections being they would retain only 47 of their 160 seats

The Herald reports:

The public won’t learn the findings of an investigation relating to allegations of the misuse of personal data at Manurewa Marae until at least the end of January.

But it is expected the findings will “impact all of the public service” and some matters relating to the investigation will “require referral to other authorities for further consideration”.

It doesn’t sound like they found nothing, does it?

I also note that Te Pati Maori are now five months overdue with their audited financial accounts – a legislative requirement under the Electoral Act. They have been referred to the Police, yet there has been no decision two months on.