Did the Mt Vic loop walk this morning. At first overcast and looked like rain, but by the end of the walk, the sun had burnt all the cloud away and was sweltering. 85 minutes in total and you do 5 kms but a fair amount of uphill. It is basically a figure of eight loop.

You start at Charles Plimmer Park at the top of Majoribanks Street and head up on the Hataitai to City walk track. This is the one that had Lord of the Rings filmed just off it.

A view of central to southern suburbs as you head along the western side of Mt Vic.

That looks like some sort of observatory near Government House. Anyone know what it is exactly?

Nice shadowy bush track on the eastern side.

This tree is on a definite lean!

The Hataitai Velodrome, which you circle around.

Charles Plimmer Park where you start and finish.

There are literally scores of walking and cycling tracks on Mt Vic. If I loved lived next to it, I’d spend all my time exploring them.

The loop track isn’t signposted as such. It is a combination of four other tracks. But once you work out where to go, it is a great view of both the CBD and the eastern suburbs.

Last time I did this track, they found a dead person there the next day – hopefully no repeat this time!

John Weekes at HoS reports:

Sky’s cricket commentators have been told they must be nice to the Black Caps and are not to regurgitate their off-field dramas.

The controversy surrounding the sacking of captain Ross Taylor has fired up debate for the summer game but fans expecting Sky commentators to weigh in will be waiting a long time, the company says.

“We don’t put down sporting codes because we’re in the business of promoting sport,” Sky spokeswoman Kirsty Way said.

Sky and New Zealand Cricket had a business partnership, she said. “It’s natural for our commentators to promote our product.”

Cricket is just a product?

Former New Zealand cricketer and commentator John “Mystery” Morrison said Sky’s policy was “pathetic”. “The day that people don’t debate and argue these issues will be a sad day for the game,” he said.

He said commentators should be allowed to voice their passion and interest and scrutinise the game.

I tend to agree with John.

Sure you don’t want the commentators sledging NZ Cricket between ever over, declaring how much better the team would be playing if it were not for the wallies who did xyz.

But the recent happenings shouldn’t be taboo, and if relevant to the game, commentators should be able to mention them.

Also I hope that the fact NZ Cricket are a business partner doesn’t mean the news and sports shows are instructed to not talk about their problems. I can understand the actual game commentary being a bit sensitive, but the daily news and sports shows should have no restrictions.

Chloe Johnson at HoS reports:

A district court judge is waging a crusade from the bench to stop serious offenders being released back into the community.

At one sitting earlier this month, Judge Russell Callander sent four defendants back into the cells while making strong statements about the need to keep the public safe.

During the hearings at the Auckland District Court, Callander said bail was granted too readily and judges could not take any more chances.

“We are almost weekly now presented with ugly situations in court where violent offenders seek and obtain bail, only to return home to inflict either death or further grievous injury on the original complainant,” Callander said.

“That strikes fear into the heart of any rational community, and indeed into the heart of any rational judge assessing risk issues on bail.”

The level of offending on bail is massive. Great to see a Judge focusing on preventing further violence.

One allegedly king-hit his partner, causing her to go blind in one eye.

Another allegedly robbed a jeweller’s shop while high on meth, placing a shotgun to the owner’s face.

The third was a recidivist burglar with 106 previous convictions facing a fresh charge of burglary.

The last was a man kicked out of a rehabilitation programme, resulting in breach of e-bail.

What lovely men those first two are especially.

Sent to me by e-mail:

Subject: Update on Mr Claus – fyi

 Background

 The Treasury Secretary had an appointment last week marked Santa Claus. As is normal, Treasury staff provide a briefing note for all of his external meetings.

Briefing Note for Meeting

We see the Treasury Secretary plans to see Mr Claus next week. This note sets out some issues the Secretary should be aware of;

1) Economics. Mr Claus is very keen on distributing the effects of strong growth, but much less convincing on how we should meet the conditions for growth. For example, his freight proposals require extraordinary logistical management, right at the leading edge of the discipline. He would well advised to go down the drone route, as the US military has, than to continue with a manned aircraft. Multiple drones would go a long way to ensure success in his annual endeavour. The CAA advise us that the risks of airborne pollution from his existing craft are high, and could be dangerous to citizens.

 2) Social cohesion. Mr Claus has an unusual trait of using loud laughter to make a serious point as in “Merry Christmas Ho Ho Ho”. Some may misunderstand his penchant for having little children sit on his knee, but he’s passed all police checks with flying colours (and flying reindeer, which concerns Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) and animal cruelty advocates).

 3) You might want to ask him why a one-horse open sleigh provides such enjoyment. MSD’s view is that it is a pretty dangerous activity, and MPI note that a horse pulling an open sleigh through snow would need considerable pastoral care. It is possible that it should be licensed under MoT’s planned regime for quad-bikes.

 4) Other jurisdictions have reliably informed us (pse protect) that Mr Claus has been discovered stuck in compromising positions in chimneys in foreign capitals.

 5) Given the possible disappearance of his current home, Mr Claus may be looking for your support on climate change initiatives. So far, of course, there is no compelling evidence that climate change has occurred, or if it has, that it is the fault of people like us. It’s just as likely that the enormous expansion of his manufacturing operation, required to deal with the growth in children numbers around the world, has led to the somewhat reduced ice coverage. So it’s all his fault, really. And what is he going to do about it?

 Mr Claus may want to provide a briefing on his proposed JV with the NZ Govt. Our understanding of what he might propose at present is as follows;

The GFC has had a serious impact on his Trust funds. The interest on these funds is what underpins his business model. The initial source of these Trust funds is murky ( to say the least).

He has had to re-engineer his business, to get greater efficiencies. So he has a jv with Apple, which can deliver music, books and games world-wide electronically.

As you know, the intelligence on whether children have been good or not has been a drain on all our intelligence activities, with Waihopai spending up to eighteen hours a day on this at peak times. Mr Claus proposes now to use social media, which will allow for major budget cuts in our Vote: Spooks.

Many toys are now supplied by China, and are much cheaper than those from traditional dwarves and elves. We have a relative over abundance of this race and with the finish of the filming of the Hobbit,we are concerned at the potential unemployment increase amongst this vulnerable section of society

The proposal he wants to put to the NZ govt is that NZ should be the base for Southern Hemisphere Claus Inc. This would lead to marked efficiencies in his operations, and would allow NZ to brand itself as Santa’s summer home with all the spinoffs that would provide. He evidently has a business case supplied by Warner Bros which shows a significant benefit to cost ratio.

 Views across Treasury are as follows :-

Economic Policy note that NZ already relies on hirsuite gentlemen and hobbits for its brand identity, and aren’t sure how Santa would fit into that. (Maybe a cross between Gandalf and Frodo?)

Tax policy think Claus’s business model is a classic in tax evasion (trust holding shares in a company which employs one of those providing the endowment) and could be the subject of international dispute.

Regulatory Quality note that there is no competition for Mr Claus, and NZ would in effect be supporting a multinational monopoly.

Commercial Monitoring has baggsed the first ride in the sleigh, given their new more active monitoring role.

Macro could see a small one-off positive impact on GDP, but note that this will be offset by changes in monetary conditions, so it should be ok, sort of, you know.

 The Chief Economist thinks that this idea is BEAUTIFUL (and we think he is beautiful too).

 Immigration note that we receive few migrants from the North Pole, and considerably fewer now that the Arctic is ice-free for some of the year. It would be helpful if Mr Claus could find support from local entrepreneurs. Toymakers are not at present on Immigration’s skilled shortage list.

 International think this could see NZ as a competitor for Singapore, with very large but seasonal trade flows.

 The accounting people think the JV would probably need to be a Crown Entity, and in any event, will require close monitoring.

 The Vote team think we’d probably need an appropriation, and a Minister for Claus.

 The Treaty team think we should celebrate Matariki, not Christmas, and bright red clothes are culturally inappropriate. Ministers strongly agree with this point. Better colours might be, oh, teal blue, or, say, Pacific blue.

 MPI aren’t keen on reindeer – HASNO issues – but could see sense in a team of sheep, with a fetching ewe in front of a team of stout Romneys. A couple of collies could help with navigation.

 TPK think a waka is more appropriate than a sleigh. It would certainly float better, in the event of a sheep-out.

 Our Corporate Centre partners are keen. SSC think the public service has a lot to learn from Mr Claus’s strong ethical foundations. DPMC can see clear and visible opportunities for a Minister for Claus, who would need to be a very senior Minister.

Talking points – express interest, note the proposal’s close fit with our living standards framework, and get a team together to look at a PPP.

 Have a great Christmas.

It uses all the correct jargon, so I suspect must be the work of a bored Treasury staffer!

ZB reports first the bad:

Fiji’s ruling military has warned it will closely monitor parliament when the coup-plagued nation finally elects a new government, as officials wrapped up work on a draft constitution. …

However, the role of the military, a key political player in the Pacific nation that has endured four coups since 1987, remains contentious, with the author of the draft constitution calling for it to stay out of politics after 2014.

But in a submission to the commission tasked with working on the new constitution, the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF) indicated it had no intention of restricting its role after the elections.

The military exists “to deal with both internal security situation and external threats,” said the submission, which was seen by AFP.

“The forces cannot and will not be complacent in dealing with situations that undermine national interest.”

The military said it would not allow any government that won office in 2014 to undermine its reforms.

This has always been my concern. Fiji will be a pseudo-democracy. The people will be able to elect a Government, but only if the Government does things the military approves of.

Kenyan academic Yash Ghai, the head of the five-person Constitutional Commission that handed the draft document to the government on Friday, said the military should be subject to parliamentary oversight and focus on national defence.

“We think the professional military, their conscience should be to defend Fiji against external aggression and we would rather the police handle internal disorder issues,” he told Radio New Zealand.

“We feel that the military must be responsible to the government and to parliament and they have to act within the confines of the constitution.”

But sadly this will not happen. Fiji’s future appears to be a series of military rulers. They won’t interfere most of the time, but will grant themselves the right to intervene purely because they have the guns.

The new constitution is intended to guarantee, through a People’s Charter, principles such as one-person-one-vote, an independent judiciary and transparent governance, as well as establishing a secular, corruption-free state.

And that is the good. But the military must be accountable to the elected Parliament, and not above the Constitution.

Joe Mullin at Arstechnica writes:

Save the children! UK Prime Minister David Cameron wants porn filters to come on, by default, in any British houses that have children in them.

“A silent attack on innocence is underway in our country today, and I am determined that we fight it with all we’ve got,” wrote Cameron in today’s Daily Mail.

The system Cameron promises will be in the works by February, when British ISPs will have to present plans for how they will present the filter options. Every owner of a new computer will be asked when they log in through their Internet service provider if they have children in the house. If they answer yes, it will immediately prompt them to set up filters blocking content, individual sites, or restricting access at particular times of day, according to the Mail.

If those options just get clicked through rapidly, filters that keep out porn and “self-harm” sites will be “on” by default.

The kids will probably be the ones setting up the Internet accounts!

I’m all for parents protecting kids from nasty stuff on the Internet – but it should be parents – not the Government.

It could be worse though:

Cameron’s promise to filter Internet traffic by default replaces an earlier suggestion in which, rather than prompt parents to set up filters, the filters were simply already turned on. “All the evidence suggests that wouldn’t work very well in practice,” said Cameron. He gave the example of one parent who tried to access things like TV stations on demand, but found they were blocked as well. These “blanket filters” will just get turned off, he said.

That automatic block was rejected by Cameron’s ministers earlier this week. Opposition politicians accused the government of “bow[ing] to pressure from the Internet industry, which is opposed to restrictions on the lucrative porn sector,” as reported in the Daily Mail. “The fight MUST go on: Furious charities hit out after ministers refuse to order an automatic block on Internet filth,” read the headline.

But it sounds like it will be a bureaucratic montrosity:

Conservative Member of Parliament Claire Perry will take charge of making sure the system gets implemented. She said the age checks would probably involve using credit card numbers and electoral rolls to make sure kids can’t get around the new system.

It’s so silly. The kids will probably also all have prepaid mobiles probably that will have full Internet access on them.

Buzzfeed has 27 science fictions that became facts in 2012. As Stats Chat points out, some of them are debatable, but still very interesting. Some of them are:

• Quadriplegic Uses Her Mind to Control Her Robotic Arm
• Self-Driving Cars Are Legal in Nevada, Florida, and California
• Voyager I Leaves the Solar System
• Flexible, Inexpensive Solar Panels Challenge Fossil Fuel

I always recall how much of the Sci Fi of the 1970s is in common use today.

Eli Dourado is a co-founder of WCIT Leaks and was part of the US delegation to WCIT where various repressive countries tried to grab control of the Internet from the private sector.

He blogs on what actually happened at WCIT. It’s a fascinating read for those interested. He makes a key point:

Though the world had been assured that WCIT would not attempt to mount a “UN takeover of the Internet,” that was in many ways what happened.

The months of weasel words were exposed as lies. We knew that it was always about control of the Internet.

After last night’s performance, the ITU could never again deny that it had designs on the Internet, it could never again imply that those who were concerned about the possibility of a takeover of some aspects of Internet governance by nation-states were misinformed conspiracy theorists. The battle lines were now drawn, and this clarity comforted me. But would we stand alone?

This was always the worry. Not would the US resist, but would the EU surrender monkeys agree to a bad compromise?

The United States took the floor. Ambassador Kramer announced that the US would not be signing the new treaty. He was followed by the United Kingdom. Sweden said that it would need to consult with its capital (code in UN-speak for “not signing”). Canada, Poland, the Netherlands, Denmark, Kenya, New Zealand, Costa Rica, and the Czech Republic all made similar statements before the Chairman cut the meeting short.

At a later meeting that night, additional countries expressed their reservations. The EU issued a directive that the new human rights language was unacceptable, and therefore no EU country would be allowed to sign. An intensive overnight lobbying effort was launched. Once senior-level ministers got an earful from private sector representatives back in their own countries, they sent instructions to their delegations in Dubai not to sign the new treaty.

All told, 89 countries signed while 55 did not.

Very pleased that NZ was one of those consistently opposed.

Reuters reports:

The Iowa Supreme Court has ruled employers in the state can legally fire workers they find too attractive.

In a unanimous decision, the court held that a dentist did not violate the state’s civil rights act when he terminated a female dental assistant whom his wife considered a threat to their marriage.

The seven justices, all men, said the basic question presented by the case was “whether an employee who has not engaged in flirtatious conduct may be lawfully terminated simply because the boss views the employee as an irresistible attraction”.

The high court ruled that bosses can fire workers they find too attractive and that such actions do not amount to unlawful discrimination.

The actual court judgement is here.

I await the PSA standing up for the rights of hot workers not to be discriminated against.

The Herald reports:

Two unemployed men arrested after trying to put their meals onto Prime Minister John Key’s bar-tab this week claim Key had offered to shout their meals and then reneged – a claim the Prime Minister’s office has rejected.

Also:

Mr Jellema said his bail conditions prohibited any alcohol, but had only had one beer and had the incident with Key not happened, it would not have been an issue. Mr Boyd said his bail conditions prevented him being drunk in a public place – but he also had only had one beer and subsequent testing had shown minimal alcohol in his system.

If he is already on bail, and has an alcohol prohibition as part of his bail terms, I think we can make some conclusions about their reliability.

It does remind me though of a National Party conference in the 1990s. One of my mates asked for my room number. I deduced he probably wanted to charge his drinks to it, so I gave him the number of the room next door to me.

Later in the night caught up with him, and he boasted how he had charged half a dozen drinks to my room. I then responded that it wasn’t in fact my room, but the one next door to me.

He was still very unconcerned at this point, and casually asked whose room it was. I replied that it was (then Finance Minister) Bill Birch’s. He turned several shades of pale and rushed downstairs to the bar to try and pay for his drinks, and get the charges removed. He correctly concluded that Mr Birch would have been very unimpressed to find my friend’s signature on bar drinks charged to his room!

Fran O’Sullivan writes in NZ Herald:

Should Chief Justice Sian Elias recuse herself from the upcoming Supreme Court hearing on the Maori water rights claim?

The Chief Justice will no doubt be aware of the mutterings around Wellington on this score since the Maori Council, whose co-chairman is Maanu Paul, issued its claim to water rights and geothermal energy.

It would be a big call to challenge the Chief Justice, who has (in fact) presided over at least three Supreme Court hearings in which the Maori Council has been a plaintiff without facing any challenge from the Executive. But Cabinet ministers are understood to have asked Crown Law to look at whether grounds do in fact exist for a challenge, or a request to be made to her to stand aside.

That’s news to me, and I wouldn’t take it as gospel.

Elias’ prior connections with the Maori Council were so deep that it is surprising that issue has not come up in a considered way before.

She successfully acted for the council on several high-profile Treaty of Waitangi claims against the Crown in the late 1980s through to the mid-1990s.

Some Cabinet ministers take the view that because of this strong and lengthy relationship as one of the council’s prime legal advocates, she should recuse herself from the upcoming appeal by the Maori Council against High Court judge Ron Young’s judgment effectively clearing the way for the Government to sell down its shareholding in Mighty River Power.

I don’t think there is a need for Elias to recuse herself. You should recuse yourself due to personal conflicts, but not on the basis of whom your former clients were. Lawyers are advocates for hire. If Judges had to recuse themselves because someone appearing before them is a former client, then you’d have no end of recusals.

Elias is known to be very sympathetic to Maori claims, but that also is not a ground for recusal. She was appointed a Judge and later Chief Justice with her leanings being well known.

Kurt Bayer at NZ Herald reports:

The parents of a man who threatened to exhume a 90-year old man’s body believe he has been affected by a new church in which the pastor believes in faith-based healing.

“He’s not been long with the church, but long enough for them to get their hooks into him,” said the man’s father yesterday, after their son contacted Harold Ritchie’s relatives again, asking to meet them at the grave so he could “raise the body”.

Police took the 25-year old into custody when he arrived at the Ruru Lawn Cemetery in Bromley, Christchurch, and referred him for a psychiatric assessment.

On Wednesday, the man turned up uninvited at Mr Ritchie’s funeral service. He banged on the coffin and told the deceased man to “wake up”.

If he had woken up, there would be a lot more people worried about the Mayans!

Mr Sansom said he, too, had joined Fellowship Church last month and the move had been “life-changing”.

The church is led by “Pastor Peter”. Neither he nor anyone in his congregation would reveal his full name.

My rule of thumb is if someone refuses to reveal their surname, they are a dodgy as fuck con artist.

Lois Cairns at The Press writes:

Former National MP Aaron Gilmore will head back to Parliament in the new year.

Gilmore’s ranking on the National Party’s list means he has been called up to fill the spot left by the departure of long-serving National MP and Speaker of the House Lockwood Smith, who will take up his new role as high commissioner to Britain early next year.

Gilmore scraped into Parliament as a list MP in 2008 but lost his seat in the 2011 general election when special votes gave the Greens an extra seat at National’s expense. …

Gilmore said he hoped as an MP to be Christchurch-based because he wanted to help influence the city’s rebuild.

It will be good to have another Christchurch MP for National.

It has been reported that Paul Quinn, the next on the list after Gilmore, does not plan to return so if Groser does gain the WTO job, then Paul Foster-Bell would become an MP.

Kathryn King at Stuff reports:

Burger King’s latest store has been opened by Labour’s associate health spokesman Iain Lees-Galloway, but he turned down the opportunity to sample its fare for himself.

Lees-Galloway opened Burger King’s Rangitikei St store yesterday morning, the company’s third in Palmerston North, but the city MP was quick to distance himself from advocating fast food by acknowledging his spokesman position and telling the small crowd he was “pleased to see another business opening in the Manawatu”. …

When asked about the recent spate of fast-food outlets opening in the city, he said it meant they had confidence our economy had enough demand for them. But he said he hoped they would be competing for market share rather than increasing the amount of fast food sold in the city. Palmerston North also serviced a bigger area than just the city.

He opens them, but hopes they don’t do well and gain customers!

Lees-Galloway said he would open any business that asked him and that it was a fairly standard thing for a local MP to do.

Any business? Really? I do hope a new Palmie brothel asks Iain to open them up for business!

Stuff reports:

Prime Minister John Key has confirmed the Government’s nomination of Trade Minister Tim Groser for the job of World Trade Organisation director general.

Key said Groser’s name had been put forward to replace Pascal Lamy, whose successor must be agreed by the end of May.

The WTO decides the rules for world trade.

“Given Tim Groser’s experience in trade, and the blend of both technical and political skills he brings to the table, I believe he is well-placed to advance the complex and challenging issues facing the WTO,” Key said.

“The organisation has a vital part to play in the global economy recovery.”

Former Labour Prime Minister Mike Moore is the only New Zealander to have held the position previously.

I think the vote is in April actually.

There is no doubt Groser is the best individual for the job, in my opinion. His appointment would be great for the WTO and great for liberalising trade.

However many countries do not vote for an individual, but vote for a country. The fact that Mike Moore was the Director-General in the 1990s means some may think NZ have had their turn.

If Groser does get the job, it means another mini-reshuffle for Cabinet on top of the one in January to replace David Carter becoming Speaker.

Carla Penman at Stuff reports:

The most expensive cab company in Wellington can charge as much as a quarter more for a ride than the cheapest operators.

Yes, that is called competition.

And fares in the capital are twice as much as those in the regulated market of Melbourne, Australia.

Is it?

Prices for a simple 10-minute, 3.9-kilometre trip from Cuba St to Hobson St in Thorndon, at the same time of night, on the same route, in light traffic, ranged from $15.40 in a Kiwi Cab, to $18.40 in a Green Cab, to $20.20 in Combined Taxis – a massive 24 per cent difference. This included callout and eftpos charges.

It’s certainly easy to get a cab in Wellington. The city seems to be awash with taxis. On any given day, especially along Courtenay Place, dozens of cabs are lined up waiting for customers.

There are 11 companies chasing different kinds of customers.

Yet strangely, despite all this competition, prices are still around double what you’d pay in Melbourne – where taxi fares are regulated.

Okay, let us look at this Melbourne fare website. A 4 km, 10 min journey would be:

• Booking Fee $2.00
• Flagfall $3.00
• Kms 4 x $1.62 = $6.48
• Wait 6 x $33.96/60 = $3.40

That is a total of Au$14.88 or NZ$18.80, and that presumably the EFTPOS fee which was included in NZ and not known in Australia.

Each cab has to display its company’s charges both inside and outside the vehicle. Companies tell their drivers to have their meter set to charge a certain amount, depending on the time and distance travelled – this is called the tariff.

The meters are checked by New Zealand Land Transport, to ensure they are charging at the advertised rate.

That should mean the customer can quickly calculate the cheapest cab on the rank, right?

In theory, yes.

But it’s not easy for the average customer to figure out the total fare from the baffling array of charges listed.

For example, there’s the call-out fee, the flagfall (starting rate), the tariff (the price per kilometre travelled), a fee for using eftpos and waiting time per minute.

If you manage to add all those up, you then need to try to calculate the total fare by estimating the distance to be travelled and multiplying it by the tariff – and that’s just too much for most customers. Either they don’t bother and just grab the most available cab, or even if they do calculate it according to the rates, it’s not a reliable guess – because it depends on the route the driver takes, and the amount of congestion.

First of all many customers do not want the cheapest cab on the ramp. We have a market where you can choose cheap and nasty or more expensive and reliable. I will always choose a Combined cab over any other cab, for several reasons:

• Their drivers speak English
• Their drivers know where most roads are
• Their cabs don’t tend to stink of food
• They always have eftpos and take taxicard

But I do agree prices are hard to calculate. What I think would make a difference is having the NZ Transport Agency listing the tariff schedules for all taxi firms in each city on a website. I’d love to be able to compare the prices of Combined and Green Cabs (who aren’t too bad) so I know in advance the approx cost of each.

With most customers simply unable to figure out the likely fare, Combined Taxis has been able to quietly increase its fees, relying on its market dominance to keep customers rolling in.

This sounds like the normal competitors whining. Combined do well, because they provide the best service in my opinion. I also know a lot of women who will only use Combined because they feel safest with them.

Green Cabs Wellington manager Toni Shuker says people choose Combined Taxis because they have more vehicles available.

No, I choose them because of the good service I get from them.

James Ihaka at NZ Herald reports:

Many Maori Television staff will start the Christmas break with an extra $500 in their pockets at a cost of $78,000 to the taxpayer-funded station.

The station’s chief executive, Jim Mather, said the decision to award 156 staff the extra payment was “a statement of appreciation” and made smart business sense despite figures released to the Herald showing viewership ratings are poor.

I’m sorry but I think this is a non story. A $500 Xmas bonus is hardly over the top, and Maori TV is not designed to be a commercial channel. The viewership ratings are abysmal, but they actually produce some great shows such as Native Affairs.

The station reported a surplus of $775,000 for the last financial year to June 30.

So they are living within their means.

Maori Television receives $16.6 million in direct state funding and $16.1 million from Te Mangai Paho.

It also receives about $20 million via the Te Mangai Paho contestable fund, which is paid directly to independent producers.

So the $78,000 of bonuses is around 0.15% of their revenue.

This is a very significant story. Claire Trevett reports:

Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia has called on her fellow co-leader, Pita Sharples, to step down and hand over the reins to MP Te Ururoa Flavell, despite Dr Sharples’ plans to stand again in 2014.

And Mr Flavell is considering not standing again in 2014 if Dr Sharples does not give up the leadership, saying he is not sure whether he wants to wait around until 2017.

I think the writing is on the wall. Of course Sharples will be 73 at the next election.

Mrs Turia will stay on as a minister but is open to handing over the co-leadership earlier. This week she told Waatea News Dr Sharples should follow suit to make way for Mr Flavell – the natural successor for the leadership, who had been expected to take over by 2014 until Dr Sharples decided to stay on.

“The leadership role is not about being a minister,” Mrs Turia said. “Being the leader of a political movement is something quite different. There is absolutely nothing stopping Pita from continuing to be the minister.”

Here’s what I would do if I was the Maori Party.

1. Have Flavell take over as co-leader from Sharples at some stage before the election
2. Have Sharples continue as a Minister
3. Line up the desired new co-leader to replace Turia to stand in Te Tai Hauauru.
4. After the 2014 election, if Maori Party in position to be Ministers have Sharples and Flavell as Ministers.
5. Have new female co-leader focus on party leadership, rather than being a Minister
6. Line someone up to succeed Sharples in Tamaki Makauru in 2017.
7. Have Sharples stand down as a Minister in 2016, allowing female co-leader to step up as a Minister

I regard Flavell as a smart parliamentary operator, and think he would be a very competent Minister.

Russell Baillie at NZ Herald reports:

As he sat on a wharf bollard to have his photo taken, Ang Lee eyed the Waitemata below with a slight grin.

Maybe it was because the Oscar-winning director, who was in Auckland yesterday, has spent a good deal of the past few years at sea – or in a giant wave tank replicating it – as he filmed Life of Pi.

The movie is a spectacular 3D adaptation of the supposedly unfilmable Yann Martell bestseller which tells of the adventures of a teenage Indian castaway sharing a lifeboat with a tiger named Richard Parker.

The film is great. I saw it a couple of weeks ago at a fundraiser for the Wellington branch of the Sensible Sentencing Trust along with around 150 others.

The reservation many had over the film, was that you will know from the beginning that Richard Parker is a tiger.  But that does not detract from the film.

The animal shots are incredible in 3D. Richard Parker looks magnificent, but everything does. The storm is amazing, the lost island beautiful and the other animals almost human like. The only issue was that the 3D was not done correctly in the first two minutes, and most of the audience were taking their glasses off and on trying to work out what was happening. May have been an issue on that copy only, but anyway was all okay after a couple of minutes.

Definitely a great film to see. Despite the fact you know how it ends if you have read the book, there are some nerve racking scenes on the life boat.

Katie Chapman at Dom Post reports:

Wellington’s big transport projects are in limbo as the NZ Transport Agency and Wellington City Council face off over plans for the Basin Reserve.

The agency is committed to a flyover north of the historic cricket ground as a key part of its transport plans for the city, which include the possibility of a light rail system.

It warned the council on Wednesday not to reconsider its backing for the flyover. But the council ignored the warning at a meeting that night, agreeing instead to spend $50,000 exploring fresh alternatives.

There’s nothing wrong with having a different view on a transport project. But what is highly unprofessional is changing your mind on a project, after previously agreeing to it. It just makes you look wonky, and like grass in the wind.

FOR

Mayor Celia Wade-Brown: “What we’re saying here is that we don’t want to leave any stone unturned in the search for a win-win solution that will reduce some of the congestion.”

Stephanie Cook: “Do we want Wellington to end up like Los Angeles with its spaghetti junctions, flyovers and intersections all over the place?”

Paul Eagle: “There has been a chorus from the community saying, ‘We do not want a flyover’.”

Andy Foster: “In some ways we’re doing NZTA a favour. We’ve learnt through bitter experience that when you think you’re right and you’ve got a winner, sometimes you don’t.”

Justin Lester: “We think [the flyover] is butt ugly and want something better for the city.”

Iona Pannett: “I’m appalled at the behaviour of NZTA. They’ve threatened us as elected representatives and acted in a political manner, when they should have been providing advice as public servants.”

Bryan Pepperell: “It is absolutely necessary that we do not accept last century’s solution to our transport problems.”

Helene Ritchie: “These roading projects are seriously [on] impacting the town belt.”

AGAINST:

Ray Ahipene-Mercer: “This was a deliberate act of political sabotage by the mayor and seven councillors.”

Ngaire Best: “What I see before me is actually a proposition to delay, delay, delay.”

Jo Coughlan: “Wellington needs to future-proof itself for growth, and investment in roading infrastructure is critical.”

Leonie Gill: “I just don’t know what this decision is going to achieve when alternative options can be taken through the RMA process.”

Ian McKinnon: “Presumably the solution is to do nothing. One can’t but help wondering if that’s what some councillors want.”

Simon Marsh: “By continually frustrating NZTA and the Government, the Government might say, ‘Wellington, you are too difficult to work with.’ “

John Morrison: “It appears this council has finally become a Green Party protest rally.”

I like an article that includes not just how each person voted, but a quote from them. Helps me with my voting decisions next year.

Katie Chapman at Dom Post reports:

An Englishman with a reputation for cost-cutting has been picked as chief executive of Wellington City Council, ousting long-term incumbent Garry Poole.

In a closed-door meeting on Wednesday night, councillors spent three hours debating the appointment of Kevin Lavery, who will receive a salary of $420,000. Councillors interviewed four people for the position on Monday, after deciding in August to advertise the position.

Mr Poole applied for the job but The Dominion Post understand he lost out in a 9-6 vote to Dr Lavery, chief executive of Cornwall Council in southwest England.

In that role, which he has held for four years, Dr Lavery has been responsible for a £1 billion (NZ$1.94b) budget, and has driven a controversial proposal to outsource shared council services, including information technology, call centres and procurement in an effort to cut costs. In 2010, his pay package was worth £245,342 (NZ$476,732), and a newspaper investigation found that Cornwall Council had the highest staff credit card bill in Britain.

A reputation for cost cutting sounds good to me as a ratepayer.

Mr Poole announced the decision in a statement to staff yesterday: “As you can appreciate, it is a decision that for me is a significant disappointment. I am enormously proud of Wellington and what we have done to help it build an international reputation as a remarkable place to live, work, visit and play.”

I thought Poole had been an effective CEO. It seems one of those situations where Council would have been happy to keep him on, but thought someone else was a stronger candidate. This is one of the benefits of fixed term contracts.

As an centre-right person it is no surprise I have supported most of what the Government has done. But that doesn’t mean there have not been issues where I disagree with them, or support something from other parties, or give an opinion that isn’t helpful to the Government. I’ve had a quick look through the archives, and below are a surprising large number of links:

• I say National is the under-dog for 2014
• I call for Cabinet to be reduced from 20 to 12
• I call for significant caucus rejuvenation for 2014
• I labelled the National MPs blog “the greatest cure for insomnia ever invented” and a typical post as “so mind numbingly boring, that I only subject my eyeballs to them around twice a year, as they start bleeding as I read about some organic carrot farm they have opened“
• I blog in favour of Labour MP David Clark’s Mondayisation bill
• I praise Winston for his scrutiny of Whanua Ora
• I call for more funding of the Ombudsmen
• I blog in favour of removing the one seat threshold for MMP
• I say we should be ashamed of the slavery on our seas, and blog on this several times calling for the Govt to take action
• I support Trevor Mallard’s call for significant SOPs to be provided in advance to the opposition
• I supported the call for a full independent inquiry into the ACC Pullar issue
• I expose Vic Uni’s attempts to scam the PBRF system
• I said that taxpayer funding should not be used for Judith Collins lawsuit (it wasn’t)
• I label the first three months of 2012 as National’s Quartus Horribillis
• I mock the claim Murray McCully is not a micro-manager, saying “If Murray isn’t a micro-manager, then Grace Quek is a virgin“
• I submit to the MMP review for lowering the 5% threshold to 4%. My submission disagrees with National’s submission on almost every issue.
• I give Green MP Julie-Anne Genter a guest post on Roads of National Significance
• I support Charles Chauvel and Law Commission on a three warning approach to cannabis
• I pronounce the ACT Party dead
• I criticise John Banks for his lobbying on behalf of Kim Dotcom, knowing he was a likely donor.
• I blog in support of the Meatworkers Union over a proposed employment contract from Talleys
• I support Labour MP Su’a William Sio over comments he made
• I support David Shearer’s call for cross-party talks on superannuation and lifting the age to 67.
• I actively campaign against the Government’s proposal to raise the alcohol purchase age for off licenses.
• I call National’s stance on superannuation as fiscally not credible, and could damage them in 2014
• I criticise the handling of the Budget announcement on class sizes
• I support Labour’s criticism of the Housing NZ call centre
• I profile the 7th Labour Government and predict Jacinda Ardern will be the Prime Minister of it
• I call on the Govt to set up a royal commission on retirement savings
• I support some of Labour MP Iain Lees-Galloway’s alcohol law amendments on advertising
• I blog support for Labour MP Maryan Street’s euthansia bill
• I say the proposed constitutional reforms for Labour should result in a stronger party for them.
• I praise the appointment of Tim Barnett as Labour Party General Secretary
• I say it is not good that John Banks signed a donation return saying he did not know who his donors were, when he was involved in personally receiving two of the donations.
• I blog on how opposition MPs have made a positive difference with their private members bills
• I support the partial opening of Parliament up to the OIA
• I again say National should support David Clark’s Mondayisation bill
• I called on the Govt to delay the partial asset sales, to wait for the Waitangi Tribunal Report
• I criticise National for not getting more members bills into the ballot
• I blog several times in favour of Labour MP Louisa Wall’s marriage bill
• I slam the decision to delay the Ecan elections as “wrong”
• I praise Winston for his motion recognising Nancy Wake’s 100th birthday
• I praise Labour’s policy on reading recovery
• I say there is “no excuse for a mistake of this magnitude” on the incorrect info re a possible merger of Shirley and Chch Boys High Schools
• I criticise the Government for not supporting greater protection of the Ross Sea
• I support introducing a PMs question time to Parliament, to allow greater questioning of the PM
• I say there should be an inquiry into how NZ authorities deal with extradition requests
• In relation to the Chch schools announcement I say “I’m staggered by that degree of insensitivity and stupidity” and that “almost everything about the announcement was flawed”
• I publish staff numbers for ministerial offices
• I say the Govt should repeal Section 6A, not amend it
• I again label the Ecan decision inexplicable and ” wrong in principle and it’s wrong politically”
• I blog in support of Clare Curran’s amendment to the Patents Act, and against the Govt SOP, saying I hope ACT and United Future vote against National on this issue
• I say there must be a full inquiry into the MSD data breach and encourage donations to Keith Ng for his work
• I support Kevin Hague’s adoption reform bill
• I agree with Phil Goff on the pay rise for the MFAT CEO
• I support Gareth Hughes’ copyright bill to allow parody and satire as fair use
• I call for the Govt to hold an inquiry into the GCSB, modify the Chch schools proposal and change their stance on ECan elections
• I support Sue Moroney’s amendment to have calorie information on alcohol
• I say heads must roll over the MSD data breach
• I criticise National for the bill which would ban drug sniffer dogs from schools
• I blog Audrey Young’s ratings of National Ministers and comment they “have been a bit generous to a couple of Ministers”
• I blog against a National MPs members bill
• I criticise the Govt’s cellphone in car ban
• I credit Winston for his handling of the Horan allegations
• I say the Govt should not subsidise fibre with copper
• I praise aspects of the Greens ICT discussion paper
• I later say “I’m quite dismayed [with] the Government’s response to the Commerce Commission’s draft copper pricing determination” and “To be blunt the Government should shut the hell up on the Commerce Commission’s draft determination.”

I will use this post as a reference point for the next idiot who states that I always agree with National and never criticize them.