This clearly crosses the line from reporting news to manufacturing news. No one can argue that complaints about school lunches should generate over 25 stories a week for an entire month.

This is quite simply the media at war with the Government.

Climate scientist Michael Mann won $1 million in a defamation lawsuit against writer Mark Steyn. However the damages have been reduced to $5,000 due to false claims by Mann about lost grants.

Some extracts from the recent court ruling:

• They each knowingly made a false statement of fact to the Courtand Dr. Mann knowingly participated in the falsehood, endeavoring to make the strongest case possible even if it required using erroneous and misleading information
• Both attorneys deliberately engaged in outright misrepresentations, with the intent of presenting false evidence in support of a crucial aspectof Dr. Mann’s claims,that fall squarely within Rule 8.4(c)’s prohibition against “conduct involving dishonesty
• Therefore, as Mr. Williams and Mr. Fontaine knowingly violated the rules of professional conduct, the Court finds that their conduct,in service of Dr. Mann, involvesthe requisite bad faith warranting sanctions pursuant to the Court’s inherent authority
• Dr. Mann’s assertion that there was no falsehood or misrepresentation in his testimony orhis counsel’s conductborders on frivolity
• The Court arrives at such a sanction because the misconduct of Dr. Mann and his counsel (1) was extraordinary in its scope, extent, and intent;

It seems Dr Mann has done more damage to his own reputation through this lawsuit, than Mr Steyn did!

The Parliamentary Counsel Office (who draft the laws) have published a useful tool for government agencies and MPs who are involved in law making.

Basically you enter details around a proposed law around its size and complexity, and it provides timing details such as:

• 20 weeks for drafting
• 3 weeks for consultation
• 4 weeks for ministerial consultation
• 2 weeks for Cabinet process
• 7 months for parliamentary readings
• 1 week for royal assent

This should allow agencies to better assess timeframes for new laws or amendments.

A guest post by Wendy Geus:

Could Matt Doocey’s transgender stance be contributing to anxiety in our young?

Like Ardern’s mythical ‘climate emergency’?

I sent an email to Winston Peters after I read New Zealand First has introduced a Member’s Bill to remove Diversity, Equity and Inclusiveness regulations from our public service, congratulating him on his decision. No doubt mine was not the only one. I felt jubilant at the thought of a politician finally addressing this issue.

When I checked the Herald for details shortly after, the article was gone. (This is why a major shareholder of NZME is keen to sack the board and return some balance to this pious, humourless left wing publication.) They report, grudgingly, anything they don’t agree with then remove it quickly to avoid too much coverage of ‘unsafe’ ideas. Hopefully that will be rectified soon.

Seeing Trump’s swift action on removing the DEI peremeating public services in the United States, New Zealand First senses that people here feel the same about the take over of identity politics in our public service in all its absurdity. Appointments of roles using rigid DEI guidelines could in a worse case scenario affect people’s safety and lives.

The recent account of a Delta Airlines plane flipping on a Canadian airport tarmac, piloted by a woman with 3 female co pilots and engineers whose catchphrase was ‘Unmanned’, illustrates DEI at its most awkward and concerning. Political correctness defies anyone  questioning if they were up to the job. But when the safety of hundreds of passengers is at stake, accountability is crucial. Doubtful in Canada where DEI runs deep.

I mentioned in a previous article a Washington Examiner report on the Goldwater Institute’s investigation indicated: “DEI ‘s ‘obscene price tag’ of $1.8 billion dollars with United States University students forced to waste 40 million hours fulfilling mandatory DEI initiatives.”  Also Government departments’ DEI fixation, such as the FBI in particular, affecting performance outcomes; and serious questions, in this regard, asked of the Los Angeles Fire Department following the LA fires.

Victorious Trump’s courage to attack the tyranny of the left won the day in the United States but is an ongoing challenge. Washington Times asserts  ‘Trump must stand strong against the Left’s rage’ signalling his ongoing fight, one in which our passive Prime Minister does not engage.

He seems to condone the ongoing transgender activists’ indoctrination of our children; men playing in women’s sport; and maintaining the secrecy around the details and culpability for our embarrassing maritime disaster last year which has made New Zealand a global laughing stock…. to name just a few.

Not to forget the outcome of the announced Court Martial of the ship’s Captain which seems to have vanished into thin air, aided by the media’s disinterest as their witch hunt of David Seymour’s lunch programme has taken priority over this mere triviality.

Jacinda Ardern at the height of her global virtue signalling appointed Yvonne Gray with great fanfare, to the prestigious role of Captain of the newly minted $147 million Manawanui. All things being equal that in itself should not have been a problem if her credentials were sound; except she had just returned from a three year break from the Navy. Was she apppointed purely on merit? Was there noone else who could have done this job, including the three quarters of staff who are men, many more qualified with longer and more recent experience?

This appears to be one of the myriad Labour government’s ideological appointments negatively affecting culture, performance, productivity and in this case, safety, throughout the New Zealand public service which Luxon is loath to change but Peter’s is intent on addressing.

Associate Defence Minister Chris Penk who served in both the New Zealand Navy and Australian Navy seemed an obvious replacement for Defence Minister Judith Collins after she went on the attack following the maritime disaster, shutting down discussion, labelling critics misogynists and demonstrating she was completely out of her depth. (excuse the pun)

Will we ever find out the details around this disaster and who ultimately was culpable; or will we get a white washed redacted report to protect the ‘mental health’ of those involved and the reputations of officials.

Like Canada, DEI still reigns supreme under our weak PM. Girls, apparently, can do anything. 

From subjecting 2 year olds to (taxpayer funded) transvestites reading stories to them in libraries and labelling it ‘normal’. (Personally as a toddler I would be more terrified of the weird creature reading the story than the Destiny’s church haka which children see everywhere these days)…

To Health New Zealand’s ongoing stated discriminatory preference for Maori, Pacifika, the Rainbow community and the disabled in their job advertisements, which was not addressed by former CEO Margie Apa (who probably introduced it) or Dr Shane Reti…

To lessons indoctrinating our children as young as three or four who are still learning to hold a crayon or pencil, that they can change sex. Imagine how this must seem to these little minds still learning to navigate their world as a boy or a girl; confusion and anxiety must result.

The sexualisation and indoctrination of our young by predatory trans gender activists is not what parents expect. I know many parents are at their wits end over this and are not being listened to. (Like in the USA under Biden)  

I understand at the end of 2024 New Zealand First got an undertaking for this programme to be withdrawn but not till the end of term one 2025. No doubt the likes of Doocey, Luxon and Stanford had a say in prolonging it. Who knows what damage it continues to do to all our students subjected to this radical programme.

With an agreement to remove ridiculous ‘treaty obligations’ references from the public service in the Coalition  Agreement this shouldn’t be difficult, with a simple reversal of the public service amendment made by Chris Hipkins. Why has this not been done already? We are nearly half way through their first term. Much animated cabinet discussion must have taken place, or not…  Luxon’s preferred way of dealing with sensitive issues.

In April 2024 in the UK the release of the Cass report, after a ground breaking four year investigation into the use of puberty blockers for young children, resulted in their immediate banning for under 16s with Gender Dysphoria. This from a radical Labour government. Northern Ireland followed close on their heels.

The Tavistock Clinic at the centre of this, where Minister for Mental Health Matt Doocey had worked prior to coming to New Zealand, was closed down. A key finding of the investigation was to include an holistic approach to treat young people with this condition.

My further concern stems from a comment Doocey made on Q @ A in March 2024, words to the effect that he was looking forward to the moment his children reveal to him what their genders are.

And he is the Mental Health Minister? How disturbing.

His beliefs are not rational and do not withstand public scrutiny when put under the common sense, logic and reason lens. This is why the radical left invented ‘hate speech’ to prevent criticism of their irrational beliefs using the excuse it could be ‘unsafe’. Further lunacy of the left on a par with Alice in Wonderland; fine for a fairy tale, but not real life.

The media buys into all this and bullies anyone who criticises. So is it not about time someone came along and shook up the radical left journos at the Herald?

The New Zealand Ministry of Health took little notice of the findings in the Cass Report and the use of puberty blockers for under 16s in New Zealand continues. Stephen Frank’s recent letter questioning treatment has been met with outrage by our media and dissent from apparent experts in the field.

When will this tyranny end?

Radio NZ reports:

A District Court judge accused of interrupting a New Zealand First function at an exclusive Auckland club says she mouthed an inaudible comment after hearing a snippet of a speech about the teaching of tikanga at law school.

But Judge Ema Aitken says that when she did so, she didn’t recognise NZ First leader and Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters’ voice as he was addressing party faithful. And she didn’t know it was a political function, despite a banner at the door.

This deserves a Tui billboard!

The thought that someone would hear Winston speaking, and not recognise who it was (and miss the large banner) is hilarious.

In a letter to the Judicial Commissioner, which has been provided to NZME, the judge gave her account of what happened that night, saying while she was returning from the toilet, she took a wrong turn and inadvertently walked past the NZ First function.

While passing the room, she heard a snippet of a speech from a male speaker saying something along the lines of, “They’re now teaching in law school that tikanga Māori law overrides the Westminster system”.

She said she was surprised and taken aback as she wasn’t expecting to hear the word tikanga at what she assumed was a social function.

“The statement was incorrect to me and mischaracterised the important role of tikanga for lawyers and judges in the District Court processes,” she said in her statement.

As she walked past, she said, she mouthed to a woman seated at a table near the door, who looked familiar, “that’s not true”. She said that would have been inaudible. She later recognised the woman as NZ First MP Casey Costello.

She said she made a comment disagreeing with speaker, reportedly, “He’s lying, how can you let him say that?”

The judge said no one at the table with Costello, which she estimated included at least six others, turned and responded to her comment. She denied shouting and said she was speaking in a normal voice.

The judge said she was quickly approached by a man and a woman, who walked her back down to her function, which was in the room next door.

If all she did was make a comment in a non raised voice to one person, why would she have been escorted back to her function by two people?

I read this Newsroom article to try and work out what Labour’s position on public-private partnerships is. It seems to be:

1. Labour is open to supporting PPPs where they make commercial sense and where they align with our values of fairness, co-operation, and some form of public ownership/control of critical infrastructure. (Sep 24)
2. “We support PPPs when they maintain some form of public ownership/control of critical infrastructure and align with Labour values of fairness and cooperation. A robust analysis that demonstrates long-term cost effectiveness and better value for public money must guide consideration of PPPs.” (Nov 24)
3. Newsroom asked Labour leader Chris Hipkins about the party’s position on public-private partnerships.  “I think the Government should be really upfront with New Zealand about what they’re considering hocking off,” he replied. (March 11 2025, am)
4. Citing the potential cost of changing lightbulbs, or negotiating extra hours in the school hall, she said Labour would want to be “careful” about PPPs for these assets. “So those are the key boundary areas for Labour, that we are very, very careful when it comes to where the state has a duty of care.” In those areas where there is a duty of care, she said, then the Government should be paying “some” of the upfront capital – which rather implies that the private sector would pay the balance. (March 11 2025, pm)
5. Newsroom was told that private ownership and operation of schools and hospitals were completely off the table for Labour. But where the financing and building of school, hospital and prison infrastructure by private companies had been agreed, Labour would consider it – so long as the deals met the criteria of not costing the taxpayer more in the long-term because the Crown had to be tenants in a public hospital. (March 13 2025, am)
6. Labour did not support PPPs for prisons, she said. Nor did it support the private ownership of core infrastructure – for example schools, hospitals and prisons – which would only mean worse outcomes for Kiwis. (March 13 2025, 7 pm)
7. The next Labour government will not support any step towards the private ownership or operation of our public hospitals, schools, prison or critical infrastructure. These are essential public services, and people expect their government to safeguard them for the benefit of all New Zealanders long into the future.” Note that, like McLellan, she did not rule out private involvement in the design, build, financing or maintenance of schools and hospitals. Just in any private ownership and operation. (March 14 2025, 11.10 am)
8. Newstalk followed up: Do you mean you’re ruling out, in a public-private partnership, the building of it? “Both,” Edmonds said. “Both the capex and the opex.” (March 14 2025, 1.30 pm)

And it carries on. Not only does their position keep changing as unions lobby them, but they keep trying to conflate privatisation (sale of an asset) with a PPP (private sector funds and manages the asset for a limited time, ownership remains with government) and with just plain old private sector constructions (which we have had since the Ministry of Works was abolished).

Luke Malpass writes:

The day began with a meeting with Modi, hugs and general admiration, and ended with Luxon delivering the best speech he has made in many months, followed by an informal mixer with the business and community delegations at the New Zealand High Commission.

Luxon’s speech to the Raisina Dialogue was a long affair, but was lofty and global in tone and was well delivered, weaving between the bilateral relationship. It was about the changing world where security is likely to trump economics and in which protectionism and the rise of AI will affect everything. …

All the reports indicate a very successful trip, with the bonus of an agreement to start negotiating a free trade agreement.

Some facts about India:

• Largest population on Earth – over 1.4 billion
• 5th largest economy – US4 trillion
• Average GDP growth of 5.8% over last 20 years
• Annual exports and imports between NZ and India are only $1.5 billion each way, most being travel related

As someone whose life work is in education I hear adults complain so often about the “next generation”.

This quote has always anchored me:

‘The children now love luxury; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are tyrants, not servants of the households. They no longer rise when their elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize over their teachers.’

(Commonly attributed to SOCRATES by Plato

A couple of weeks back I included some information on the athletic performances of 15 year old Sam Ruthe. Last night I had the privilege of being at Mt Smart to watch him run. Equally impressive was the support and pacing of double olympian Sam Tanner.Even aftere the race Sam Ruthe was composed with press and all supporters.

Brilliant.

Alwyn Poole
alwyn.poole@gmail.com
Innovative Education Consultants Ltd
Education 710+ Ltd
alwynpoole.substack.com
www.linkedin.com/in/alwyn-poole-16b02151/

TUANZ said:

The Technology Users Association (TUANZ) is raising concerns about the potential risks of deregulating the long-standing copper network outside urban areas as proposed by the Commerce Commission in its announcement this morning.  

While we acknowledge the need to transition users away from legacy and outdated networks, we remain concerned about the possible impact on rural communities – especially as they already face the shutdown of the 3G mobile network this year. Deregulation could lead to affordability issues, potentially leaving vulnerable communities without reliable and affordable internet or phone services.

“The Commission believes most rural users have up to three alternative providers, but we would like to analyse the data behind this claim to identify any gaps in coverage and capability,” says Craig Young, CEO of TUANZ. 

I’m with the Commerce Commission on this. The availability of Starlink, especially, has made copper a very poor choice for rural users. When I lived on a rural lifestyle block we could only get ADSL and then when Starlink came around, we could get speeds 20 times faster than ADSL.

Copper is a technology of the 1990s and 2000s – not the 2010s let alone the 2020s.

Stats NZ reports:

New Zealand’s gross domestic product (GDP) rose 0.7 percent in the December 2024 quarter

This is well above market expectations, so is welcome good news.

The history of recent recessions is:

1. Jan 2008 – June 2009: -2.5%
2. Jul 2010 – Dec 2010: -0.8%
3. Jan 2020 – June 2020: -11.5%
4. Apr 2024 – Sep 2024: -2.1%

Average annual economic growth from 2018 to 2024 was just 1.8% a year. From 2012 to 2018 it averaged 3.0% a year.

Newsroom reports:

A US obstetrician-gynaecologist has cast serious doubt on a high-profile child abuse conviction, asserting the main injuries sustained by the baby were the result of trauma suffered during labour and delivery, not parental abuse. …

Dr Barry Schifrin, a specialist in maternal fetal medicine based in California, criticised the Starship child protection team, Te Puaruruhau, for its lack of an obstetrical review of the case before it diagnosed non-accidental injury, and describes the official version of the baby’s birth presented in court by Starship Hospital doctors as a “fiction”. …

Schifrin is an expert at reading fetal trace monitoring and was part of the team that invented the foetal heart rate monitor in the 1960s, which was developed to help reduce foetal death and brain damage during labour and delivery.

I have no expertise in this matter. But I always get interested when a media organisation finds an international expert, and promotes them as the sole source of truth, without any nuance.

A quick google finds the following on Dr Schifrin (who is 87 years old):

• A court recently ruled his expert testimony as inadmissible as his conclusion “that there was a lack of standard of care by the nurse and the physician is not based on sufficient data or facts and not the product of reliable principles.”
• In 2007 he was censured for testimony in a case, and resigned from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
• A court noted “Dr. Schifrin’s causation theory, which has been excluded as unreliable by other courts”

Now again I am not saying who is right or wrong, or if Schifrin is right or wrong. My objection is that Newsroom presents him an authoritative expert, without any qualification.

Nicola Willis announced:

The Government is proposing changes to procurement rules to make it easier for New Zealand businesses to win government contracts that are collectively worth more than $50 billion a year, Economic Growth Minister Nicola Willis says.

“The changes include introducing a new economic benefit test and scrapping 24 rules that put unnecessary obstacles in the path of Kiwi businesses. …

“Currently there are 71 rules that agencies must follow when tendering contracts. We are proposing to reduce that number to 47 by scrapping rules that are redundant or unnecessary, duplicate content, repeat statutory and regulatory requirements or have never been applied in practice.

71 rules is insane. 47 is less so.

In an ideal world, there would be just four things a tender is judged on:

• Experience
• Capability
• Quality
• Price

Lord Ashcroft writes:

My disappointment at learning about the planned closure of the Lord Ashcroft Gallery at the Imperial War Museum has been tempered by the touching reaction to the imminent loss of my medal collection from public viewing.

I remain hugely disappointed at the decision of the IWM to shut the gallery, which displays the world’s largest collection of Victoria Crosses (VCs), and that trustees did not have the courtesy of seeking a meeting with me to discuss it.

It was particularly galling learning about this through a third party.

However, not only have friends and strangers alike been incredibly supportive towards me but I have received two offers from Commonwealth nations to display my VC and George Cross (GC) collection abroad.

Although this would present some logistical challenges, I am touched that the collection is in such demand even if the IWM has decided that it will close the gallery on June 1 this year.

This is such a bizarre decision by the Imperial War Museum. Lord Ashcroft not only provided all the medals at no cost, but also covered the costs of the gallery. So they are closing down a free, hugely popular, exhibit. I can only assume they have been hit by the woke virus, and have decided that awe should now be ashamed of war heroes.

Wouldn’t it be amazing if the medal collection could be hosted in New Zealand. It would become our most visited museum. You could spend hours there looking at the medals, and reading the citations of the 200+ VCs and GCs.

Roger Partridge writes:

Central to Sachs’s worldview is the claim that NATO’s eastward expansion forced Russia’s hand. According to this narrative, the West broke solemn promises made in 1990 not to expand “one inch eastward” after German reunification. The West’s subsequent enlargement encircled Russia with hostile forces and left Putin no choice but to invade.

That narrative collapses under scrutiny.

First, Putin himself has contradicted this rationale. In a June 2022 speechmarking Peter the Great’s 350th birthday, Putin explicitly compared his actions in Ukraine to the Tsar “reclaiming” Russian lands, suggesting territorial ambitions rather than defensive concerns. This was not about NATO – it was about empire.

Second, there is no historical basis for the claim that NATO broke a promise not to expand eastward. No formal treaty or written agreement containing such a sweeping commitment exists. Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet leader at the time, explicitly refuted this narrative. In an October 2014 interview with Russia Beyond, he stated plainly: “The topic of NATO expansion was not discussed at all.”

According to diplomatic historian Mary Sarotte, declassified records show that discussions concerned NATO forces in former East Germany specifically – not a permanent ban on sovereign nations joining the alliance. Sachs’s claim rests entirely on selective interpretations of informal discussions during German reunification. This is hardly the basis for a binding international commitment that would permanently deny sovereign nations their right to choose alliances.

The 1997 NATO-Russia Founding Act further undermines this “broken promise” narrative. In this formal agreement, Russia acknowledged NATO’s plans for expansion while receiving assurances about military deployments. If a binding “no expansion” pledge had existed in 1990, this later document would have been unnecessary.

Third, NATO’s actual approach toward Ukraine disproves claims of aggressive expansion. Despite growing security concerns, NATO repeatedly delayed Ukraine’s membership prospects. Even after Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, the alliance still declined to offer Ukraine a Membership Action Plan. When Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine remained years away from possible NATO membership. This directly contradicts Putin’s claim that NATO posed an imminent threat.

Very useful dispelling of this myth.

Ironically the greatest asset NATO has is Putin. His relentless attacks on neighbouring countries is what pushed Sweden and Finland to join NATO.

In 1994, Ukraine possessed the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal – a Soviet inheritance that included approximately 1,900 strategic nuclear warheads. Ukraine voluntarily surrendered this entire arsenal under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, receiving security assurances from Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom in exchange. All signatories pledged to respect Ukraine’s borders and to “refrain from the threat or use of force” against Ukraine.

This agreement represented a remarkable act of good faith by Ukraine. It eliminated a massive nuclear arsenal that could have served as the ultimate security guarantee against future aggression. Ukraine fulfilled its obligations completely, transferring all nuclear weapons to Russia for dismantling by 1996.

Russia’s invasion in 2014 and again in 2022 represents a clear violation of these commitments. 

Ukraine was betrayed by Russia.

Andrea Vance writes:

Wellington’s council has spent $22 million on outsourced advice on its town hall upgrade – $2m more than the original budget for the cursed project.

Isn’t this astonishing. The WCC has spent more money just on advice (not construction) on their gold plated town hall upgrade than the original overall budget for it.

And they wonder why we are unhappy with 20% rates increases!

1 News reports:

Substack blogger Emily Writes spoke to a source with a family member at a school who claimed the child opened their school lunch yesterday, “and a couple of flies came out“.

The media are so desperate to report bad news on the Government they are resorting to a unverified fourth hand source.

According to this the child, told a family member who told a source who told a blogger – and this makes national news!

Sean Teddy, hautū operations and integration at the Ministry of Education said: “We are aware of a complaint. 

“The Ministry is working with NZ Food Safety, who are looking into the matter to establish the facts. 

“However, given that the meal was heated for 25 minutes in a commercial oven and then transported to schools in specially insulated delivery boxes to keep them hot, we do think it is unlikely that a fly flew out of a packaged meal.”

In other words, it is near impossible – but hey lets run a story based on a fourth hand allegation.

The Public Works Act is a necessary evil. In theory no one should ever be forced to sell their land against their will, but then we would never be able to construct essential infrastructure.

So any changes to the PWA should be critically examined. I’m horrified that one local Labour City Councillor is campaigning to use the PWA to take over a shopping mall.

The changes announced by the Government are:

• Incentive payments: To encourage early agreements, landowners who voluntarily sell their land before a Notice of Intention is issued will receive an additional premium payment equal to 15 percent of their land’s value, with a maximum payment of $150,000.
• Recognition payments: All landowners whose land is acquired under the accelerated process will receive a five percent recognition payment, acknowledging the critical role their land plays in delivering essential infrastructure, with a maximum payment of $92,000.
• Replacement objections process: Landowners who object to land acquisition for critical infrastructure projects will no longer go through the Environment Court. They will instead submit their objections directly to the relevant decision-maker, either the Minister for Land Information or the local authority, for faster resolution.

The first two looks very sound. Additional compensation is good.

I am uneasy about the third one. The fact we have a City Councillor campaigning to use the PWA against a shopping mall owner makes me nervous about making them the decision maker.

The Herald reported:

The Greens’ Tamatha Paul has expressed “regret” about a claim she made on social media that the “vast majority” of people in prison are there for non-violent offences that they’ve “had to do as a response to poverty”. 

Police and Corrections Minister Mark Mitchell has described comments in her video as “total nonsense” and an “insult” to New Zealanders who have been victimised by those in prison.

The Greens would have you think people go to prison for shoplifting etc.

She went on to say most people are in prison because of disabilities, conditions like fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, and undiagnosed autism or ADHD. 

“They’re being punished for being disabled, they’re being punished for being poor, they’re being punished for being Māori, they’re being punished for our system that we have in our country.”

Again they think the criminals are the victims.

They’re not being punished for being poor or disabled etc etc. They are being punished because they bashed someone or raped someone or robbed someone etc etc.