Matthew Backhouse at NZ Herald reports:

Hotels are charging exorbitant rates for Wi-Fi and guests are much better off paying for mobile internet, a consumer advocate says.

A survey of New Zealand’s top central-city hotels, as rated by Five Star Alliance, has found only two offer free wireless internet in rooms – despite some exclusive suites costing more than $2000 a night.

It’s like charging for water. I can understand 10 years ago charging extra for wifi, but the vast majority of hotel guests today will want wifi – either because they are travelling from overseas or to reduce their mobile data usage.

What I want to do one day is set up a website (or get an accom website to do it) which lists the wifi charges for every hotel and motel in NZ, so people can pick ones with cheap or free wifi. I think that would provide an incentive for more accom providers to stop charging for it. Whne you have have paid over $200 for a room, it is aggravating to be told 24 hours of wifi will cost more than a month’s data for a residence.

The other top hotels either make guests buy packets of data or charge up to $45 a day.

The rates compare poorly with mobile data plans, which give 1GB of data for an average of $20 a month.

I used to have a vodem, just to avoid hotel wifi charges. Now I tether my iPhone.

Tourism Industry Association chief executive Martin Snedden disagreed that free Wi-Fi was the norm overseas, saying he had been charged as much as $30 a day during a recent trip to Europe and America.

Now sure where Martin stayed, but in the US it is free most places I have stayed at.

Cao Dai is a funny little religion. It is basically endemic to Vietnam and has two to three million adherents. A sort of mixture of Buddhism and Catholicism!

This is the main temple of the Cao Dai. Pretty impressive. As you may surmise, one has to leave your shoes outside to enter it.

One of their regular prayer services.

A close up of the roof decoration. It is a beautiful structure. We visited it on the way back from the tunnels.

Stuff reports:

Labour leader David Shearer said anything which stopped the sale of state-owned assets was a “good thing”.

So, for example, another massive earthquake which destroyed half the country’s hydro-dams and hence stopped the partial floats, would be a good thing?

I think it shows how unbalanced Labour have got on this issue.

Oral Questions 2.00 pm – 3.00 pm

Questions to Ministers

1. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: At his meeting with the boss of American oil giant Anadarko in November 2011, was the issue of making deep sea oil drilling a permitted activity under the EEZ legislation raised?
2. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement “we’re trying to change the economic picture to encourage more New Zealanders to stay”; if so, how many people have migrated to Australia since he took office?
3. SCOTT SIMPSON to the Minister of Finance: What steps are being taken to improve housing affordability, as part of the Government’s wider economic programme?
4. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement regarding Australia that “It has been a bit of a safety valve for jobs for people who can’t find jobs here”; if so, what advice, if any, has he received on the effects of emigration on the level of unemployment in New Zealand?
5. MELISSA LEE to the Minister for Social Development: What announcements has she made on ensuring those working with children recognise and report suspected child abuse, as part of the Government’s White Paper for Vulnerable Children?
6. Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister of Education: Will she extend the consultation timeframe for Christchurch schools which are proposed to be merged or closed, to enable them to fully engage with their communities; if not, why not?
7. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister of Education: What steps is the Government taking to ensure meaningful consultation with school communities in Greater Christchurch?
8. CHARLES CHAUVEL to the Prime Minister: Since he assumed ministerial responsibility for it, has the Government Communications Security Bureau undertaken surveillance of any person who is a citizen or resident of New Zealand, other than Mr Kim Dotcom?
9. Dr CAM CALDER to the Associate Minister of Health: What progress has been made on the introduction of a comprehensive clinical assessment tool for older people in rest homes?
10. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: Does he stand by his comment of 17 October 2012 that, “We need to make sure that New Zealand continues to do its fair share, alongside other countries, to combat the effects of climate change…”?
11. MIKE SABIN to the Minister of Customs: What is the Government doing to combat the smuggling of precursors used to manufacture methamphetamine?
12. ANDREW WILLIAMS to the Minister of Finance: Is reducing the current account deficit a priority for the Government?

Questions to Members

1. DENISE ROCHE to the Member in charge of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill: Why did the member draft the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill?
2. DENISE ROCHE to the Member in charge of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill: What is the purpose of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (Application to Casinos) Amendment Bill?

Today there are five questions to Ministers from National, four from Labour, two from the Greens and one from NZ First. Denise Roche of the Greens is asking two questions to Metiria Turei on her casino bill.

Labour are asking on the economy and Australia twice, Christchurch schools, and Dotcom. The Greens are asking on deep sea drilling and climate change, and NZ First are asking on the current account deficit.

Patsy of the day goes to Scott Simpson for Q3: What steps are being taken to improve housing affordability, as part of the Government’s wider economic programme?

Government Bills 3.00 pm – 6.00 pm and 7.30 pm – 10.00 pm

1. Alcohol Reform Bill – committee stage (cont)
2. Taxation (Annual Rates, Returns Filing, and Remedial Matters) Bill– third reading
3. Legislation Bill – committee stage

The Alcohol Reform Bill seeks to implement the Government’s decisions on the reform of alcohol legislation; decisions made in response to the Law Commission’s 2010 report on alcohol. Specifically, it seeks to limit the sale of alcohol from grocery stores and creates an offence of being on licensed premises outside of licensed hours.

The Taxation (Annual Rates, Returns Filing, and Remedial Matters) Bill sets the annual income tax rates for the 2012/13 year, introduces amendments to the requirements for filing and storing of tax returns and amends other acts and regulations such as the KiwiSaver Act 2006.

The Legislation Bill was introduced by Chris Finlayson in 2010 to modernise and improve the law relating to the publication, availability, reprinting, revision, and official versions of legislation and to bring this law together in a single piece of legislation. It passed its second reading with unanimous support.

John Hartevelt at Stuff reports:

MPs are set to embark on a long and laboured debate to pass what critics have labelled the ”alcohol non-reform” bill.

An overhaul of liquor laws is expected back in Parliament today for its committee stage – the most detailed debate of any bill.

Some have tipped the bill could carry on being debated at the committee stage for some weeks, with about 20 amendments to be thrashed out by MPs.

The length of the debate is more about how many parts the bill has, not how many amendments have been put forward. However amendments can take a wee while to vote on and there are not 20 amendments but 20 SOPs, and each SOP can have multiple amendments.

There are 10 parts to the Alcohol Reform Bill, which means 11 debates of probably two hours each. Each vote on an amendment takes around a minute of whips case the votes but will take much longer if they do a personal vote on each amendment. MPs can give their proxies to the whips to vote on each amendment but with Labour allowing a free vote on every amendment, someone may ask the Speaker for a personal vote on each amendment.

Among the amendments proposed by Labour MPs is a ban on liquor sales from off-licences after 8pm and a minimum pricing regime.

Jesus Christ – 8 pm? Let’s bring back 6 o’clock closing also. So if you go to the supermarket at 8.30 pm to do your weekly groceries, you wouldn’t be able to buy a bottle of wine. I’ll look forward to seeing who votes for that stupidity.

The NZ Herald editorial yesterday:

Labour’s xenophobic employment restrictions will not resonate with most.

Appeals to patriotism seek to tap the most accommodating of instincts. They can also be the most dangerous of tools. Too often, politicians talk of it when they want to beat the populist drum without much regard for the potentially dire consequences. So it was with a speech by Labour leader David Shearer last week, during which he set out policies that promised to give New Zealanders the first crack at jobs by making it harder for businesses to bring in migrant labour. Helpfully, Mr Shearer underlined the dismal nature of this approach by using the word “patriotic” as many as five times.

It must have tested well with a focus group!

The Labour leader said the current requirements for employers to try to find New Zealand workers before migrants were lax, often requiring a boss to show only that a job had been advertised. Labour would require companies to work with agencies, industry groups and Work and Income before approval was given to employ a migrant.

What this means is more hoops and bureaucracy for a business just wanting to get the best person for a job.

Mr Shearer placed his policy in the context of the rebuilding of Christchurch. This was an opportunity to employ and train New Zealand workers but there was a risk it would be squandered because of cheaper migrant labour, he said. Such talk may impress those still harbouring xenophobic tendencies, but Mr Shearer is mistaken if he thinks it will strike a chord with most New Zealanders. Least impressed of all will be the business community. It will be appalled by Labour’s intrusiveness and red tape that will serve only to stifle initiative. It will also point out, quite rightly, that government has no business interfering directly in staffing, as would be the case under a policy requiring companies with government contracts to train one apprentice for every $1 million investment.

Appeals to patriotism are usually a port of call for politicians desperate to win popularity. But the changed face of New Zealand and an appreciation of the important economic role of immigration has deprived this approach of much of its impact. Making it harder for migrant workers to enter the country will only hinder development. Most New Zealanders understand that. So should Mr Shearer.

Here’s a pop quiz for you all. What percentage of 16 and 17 year olds who are in employment, are currently earning more than the minimum wage?

Guess to the nearest 10%.

UPDATE: The answer is 79% or roughly 80%. So only 20% of 16 and 17 year olds are in minimum wage jobs.

Eva Moskowitz at the WSJ reports:

New York City recently released official progress reports for the city’s 1,230 schools, including measures of how each school compares with other schools that have similar students. The reports provide yet more proof that charter schools–which outperformed traditional public schools by a wide margin–are working. Eight of the top 11 elementary and middle schools by student performance are charters, and four of those charters are in Harlem.

What might be most notable about the city’s findings, however, is that Harlem’s experiment with school choice has improved educational outcomes not just for the select few (some 10,500 currently) who win lotteries to attend charter schools. Although critics claim that charter schools succeed at the expense of district-run schools–because, the argument goes, charters “cherry pick” students, leaving behind those who are hardest to educate–Harlem’s results prove otherwise.

Of New York City’s 32 school districts, three serve students in Harlem. Suppose we treat all of Harlem’s charter and district schools as a single district (while separating out the Upper West Side, which shares a district with Harlem). In 2006, the third-graders in this Harlem district were near the bottom of the citywide heap–28th in math and 26th in English. Today, this overall group of Harlem students ranks 16th in math and 18th in English.

This is what the so called caring left are fighting tooth and nail. Their hatred of private sector involvement blinds them to the gains for disadvantaged students that have been achieved with some charter schools.

If it can work in Harlem, it can work in deprived areas of New Zealand.

Shane Jones appeared on Q+A at the weekend to defend the Government’s position on fishing in the Ross Sea, from the Greens. This was notable for several reasons.

• Jones is currently suspended as a spokesperson for Labour, so shouldn’t be agreeing to go on TV shows unless he no longer regards himself as bound by caucus discipline
• He was (again) attacking the Greens
• He was implicitly defending the Government’s position

Shane said:

I actually think the Kiwis are in a fantastic position of leadership, etc. They used a science-based approach. The science around that particular fishery is considerable, not only based on published papers from our own scientific community, but acknowledged by the Aussies and a host of others. Now, if it comes to pass that we completely lock it up, etc, well, that will be a decision that’s made on the basis of values. The fishing industry are there at the moment. I don’t think that their impact is anywhere near as destructive as Gareth would have it. I mean, if you take that money out of the industry, and it’s vastly more than $20 million, I mean, what is the industry to do? It can retire back home and find fresh activities. They’re not going to find activities with Gareth’s approach where they’re banning aquaculture and they’re banning fish farming.

And on the Greens and Greenpeace:

Um, I think Gareth ended up doing the bidding of the green priests, otherwise known as Greenpeace. They are an international franchise organisation, and they raise a great deal of money from our country, and they should expect to be criticised, as we are. Did the workers deserve to be dissed by the Green Party? No, they didn’t. I mean, I think it’s hypocritical at one level. Russel, someone I considerably respect as their leader, is up in a manufacturing inquiry, and Gareth is out there acquiescing with the deprecation and humiliation of New Zealand workers. You can’t have it both ways.

So what does this mean. It certainly fist my theory of Shane being happier in NZ First. NZ First love the fishing industry (especially their cheques).

Claire Robinson noted on the panel:

Interestingly, you know, Shane Jones – that could have been a government representative sitting up there talking to you. He was so much along the lines of what the government might say.

Imagine what the rest of the Labour caucus feels, having a Labour MP on the coveted Q+A show defending the Government.

Scott Yorke blogs:

 Despite not being Labour’s spokesperson on conservation or fisheries (he’s not the party’s spokesperson on any issue, after being stood down pending the Auditor General’s investigation of the William Yan matter), Jones appeared to endorse the government’s approach to the marine reserve issue. He made no attempt to distance his own views from the official Labour position.

Labour hasn’t actually determined its position on the issue. So why did Jones appear at all? Did he get clearance from David Shearer before appearing?

Labour having no position at all, is confirmed in this story:

Labour says it has not taken a position on whether to back the United States proposal for a large reserve in the Antarctic’s Ross Sea or the Government’s proposal for a smaller reserve that are about to be debated in Hobart.

Conservation spokeswoman Ruth Dyson confirmed yesterday that the party had not taken a formal position, after colleague Shane Jones appeared on TVNZ’s Q&A supporting the Government’s reserve.

“Our consistent policy has been to make sure we always use the best science,” Ruth Dyson said, as it had done to support the net bans to protect Maui dolphins.

Saying our policy is to use the best science is a slogan not a policy. The question is quite simple – does Labour back the US proposal or the NZ proposal?

Scott continues:

Labour needs a leader who will bring wayward MPs into line, because the voting public will not enthuse over a party that does not have a clear and consistent message. If some MPs won’t accept that then they need to be encouraged to consider their futures.

Or maybe he already has. Either way, the ball is in Shearer’s court.

Imagine a complex of tunnels that could house up to 11,000 people. Well that is what the Viet Cong built during the Vietnam War. You get to understand how very different tactics are needed in a classic war, and a guerilla war.

Making the tunnels would have been gruelling work, and living in them not much better. They were often just 1.2 metres high if that, and infested with critters.

This is how they got air to the tunnels below. They would use termite mounds as cover for air holes. Bear in mind in some areas there were three layers of tunnels, and the third layer could be 10 metres below the ground.

There are 121 kms of tunnels in total. regardless of your views on the Viet Cong, that is an incredible achievement – and one that many say was reasonably influential in their ability to remain potent.

A solider showing one of the entrances into the tunnels. Pretty damn narrow hole, and under the leaves could easily be undetected.

You can see how narrow it is. Imagine walking through the bush and having armed soldiers spring out of the ground.

This is half of a pit trip. The grass covers swings when you step on it, and the bamboo spikes below would be lethal. Nasty.

One of the tunnels wen went through. You don’t spend much time underground, which is a relief as you are crouched over the whole time.

The VC made rubber sandals out of the discarded tyres left  by the US forces.

The tour through the area takes around 90 minutes and is absolutely fascinating. Regardless of your political opinions on the war, it is a fascinating example of how to fight a guerrilla war.

Philip Greatrex writes in the NZ Herald:

One of the biggest problems with age-based laws is that they assume the existence of an invisible line that, when crossed, makes that individual smarter, more mature, more capable and more respectable as a person.

Yep hey are a problem. But it is not an assumption that (for example) at 17 years 364 days you can not be trusted to purchase alcohol, and the next day you can. It is just the simple reality that an age restriction is a poor proxy for competence – but is simple to understand and administer.

If you don’t want age based laws, then let us have competency testing. You could argue that anyone should be able to apply for a driver’s license if they can pass the theory and practical tests.

If you don’t want an age restriction for voting, then bring in a competency test.

Teenagers, upon turning 18, do not suddenly gain more political knowledge or understanding; chances are they have about the same amount they had when they were 16, given most 18-year-olds haven’t yet left school.

But with a voting age of 18, hundreds of thousands of people are being deprived of having their say in the way their country is run.

And same for a voting age of 16 or 15 or 14. All ages can be arbitrary. The argument Philip needs to make is why 16 is a more justifiable arbitrary age than 18.

For my 2c I think 18 has more arguments in favour of it, even putting aside the consistency issue. I think 18 is the age at which most people finish up full-time secondary study.  I don’t think that many people under 18 follow or care about politics. The fact that 18 to 25 year olds have an appallingly low voting turnout doesn’t suggest that those even younger are wanting to vote. Sure of course some want to – I would have liked to have voted at eight. But 16 is just as arbitrary as 18. Why at 16 are you mature enough but not 15?

In the end I believe in consistency with our age laws. If you want the age of voting to be 16 – fine. But then that should be the age of adulthood for all your rights – to marry without consent, to join the Army, to sign contracts, to be tried as an adult.

What I’d like to happen in New Zealand is for all our age laws to be aligned. For 16 to be the age at which people get partials rights (to drive, to leave school, to marry with consent) and 18 they get their full rights (voting etc). At the moment our ages are all over the place:

• 10 – can be charged with a murder or manslaughter
• 12 – can be charged with crime with a maximum penalty of 10 years or more
• 14 – can be charged with all crimes
• 16 – can get a drivers licence, leave home, refuse medical treatment, get a tattoo, leave school, get a gun licence, consent to sex,
• 17 – treated as an adult for crimes, can join armed forces
• 18 – now an adult without guardians, get married, make a will, buy alcohol, tobacco, get a bank account, gamble,
• 20 – can find out your birth parents
• 25 – can adopt

Most rights are 16 or 18. I can’t support a law that says at 16 you can vote but not get a credit card.  If you want a voting age of 16, then make the case for all the adults rights to occur at 16.

Sir Wilson Whineray has died aged 77. A huge loss. He was the longest serving All Black captain, and many (including T.P. McLean) say he was the greatest.

He turned down Governor-General in 2006 and would have made an excellent head of state for New Zealand.

He was captain at age 23 in 1958 and remained so until 1965. After rugby he got an MBA from Harvard and eventually was Chair of Carter Holt Harvey.

His family, friends and former teammates will miss him the most, but their loss is also New Zealand’s loss. He was one of our greatest.

The Herald reports:

Mr King said he supported parts of Christie’s Law, the proposed amendments to the bail Act campaigned for by Christie’s parents after her death in November last year. …

Mr King said parts of Christie’s Law were “sophisticated” and “thought-through” but he said a suggested risk assessment tool to judge judges was “costly gobbledegook”.

He backed changes to the law that currently give a strong presumption of bail for those who are under 20, saying it would have made a difference in Christie’s case.

Rare for a defence lawyer to support a law change which will make it harder for defendants (under 20) to get bail, so good to see this. I think the key point is that the current law made it very hard for a Judge to refuse bail, and removing the presumption of bail may have meant Chand would not have got bail, and hence killed Christie Marceau.

Sue Kedgley writes:

The worst-kept secret in Parliament is that the present Speaker, Dr Lockwood Smith, is retiring at the end of the year and heading to London to become our high commissioner there.

The assumption is that the new Speaker will be a National Party MP, because for some odd reason it has been an accepted convention that the Speaker should come from the ranks of the party that is in government.

It isn’t an odd reason. It is the norm in almost every country.

Why shouldn’t long-serving MPs with vast political experience who are not members of the Government, such as Annette King, Winston Peters and Phil Goff, be selected as the next Speaker?

I’m not against an opposition MP being Speaker. in fact in 2008 I suggested Michael Cullen would be an excellent Speaker. But Peters would be the worst Speaker ever, and you’d have to be demented to suggest him. Goff is far far too partisan to ever be accepted. I’d have no problem with Annette King as Speaker – she’d be pretty good.

But I expect the Government will vote for a National MP, because at the end of the day, why wouldn’t they?

In 1992, former Clerk of the House, Sir David McGee, recommended that, once selected, New Zealand Speakers should remain in office, regardless of any change in government, until they retired from Parliament.

That’s not a terrible idea, unless they are a terrible Speaker.

In 1999, three former Speakers recommended that Speakers should sever their connections with any political party, and remain in office, (usually unopposed in their electorate) as long as the House was satisfied with their performance. The Speakers also questioned the idea that the Speaker’s appointment should be seen to be at the disposal of the prime minister, and as serving the purposes of the government.

This is a more silly idea, as it means only electorate MPs could become Speaker.

Surely it’s time, in 2012, to take up these ideas, and stipulate that a Speaker, once appointed, should sever links with their political party and become an independent MP. Perhaps future Speakers should also be selected by secret ballot, and be required to give up their right to vote, other than to exercise a casting or a conscience vote.

I quite like the idea of a secret ballot, so that the vote is truly an independent one.  The suggestion though that they give up their right to vote undermines MMP and proportional representation as it means the party they came from gets one less vote.

Marika Hill at Stuff reports:

University of Auckland associate professor Cliona Ni Mhurchu said consumers were often left baffled by food labelling and struggled to make informed health choices.

Relying on people to exercise self control was not working, she added.

“We’ve failed because our focus is on the individual to make healthy choices.”

Yeah if people make bad choices, we must do something about it. Or not.

She called for a large-scale trial of either traffic lights or a star-rating food system, which would rate food based on health factors.

Star-rating labels in parts of the United State saw a significant increase in people buying healthy food, she said.

As a general rule transparency is a good thing. When I purchase food now, I religiously read the nutritional information box.

However things are not always simple. For example alcohol does not have these boxes. The reason, as I understand it, is because on most of the measures listed such as fats it comes up really well, so people may think alcohol is healthier than it really is.

There may be a halfway measure where the calorie count only is included on alcohol. I noticed in Australia that shops serving  fresh food tend to include the calorie count with the food. Not sure if this is required or voluntary, but I for one found it useful being able to compare the calorie counts of say different pastas as the airport.

The controversial fat-tax was also debated at the obesity conference.

Professor Wayne Cutfield, director of the Liggins Institute in Auckland, said the world’s first fat and sugar tax failed to make its mark in Denmark.

In January, the Danish Government introduced higher taxes on beer, wine, chocolate, candy, sodas and cream.

However, the Government was now reviewing the fat-tax following an outcry over manufacturing job losses and shoppers buying bad food across the country’s borders.

I’m not surprised. Just as banning school tuckshops from selling certain foods just drove kids across the street. Them the health police want to ban certain foods from 500 metres of a school. Eventually they’ll propose a Government set menu for the entire country.

Food and Grocery Council chief executive Katherine Rich said the obesity epidemic was a complex issue that could not be solved by over-simplified food labels or slapping a tax on unhealthy food.

“There has to be common sense about these issues.

“You can’t pass laws to make people eat healthy.”

And unhealthy food often costs more than healthy food. It is about education and responsible parenting and self-control.

Stuff reports:

Australia has lost another soldier in Afghanistan.

This is the 39th Australian soldier to have been killed in the war in Afghanistan since 2002.

The soldier’s next of kin have been notified.

Australia currently has about 1550 troops deployed to Afghanistan.

In August, the ADF suffered its darkest day since the Vietnam War when it lost five soldiers in two separate incidents.

This included two soldiers in a helicopter accident in Helmand Province and three soldiers in a  “green on blue” attack north of Tarin Kowt.

Defence Minister Stephen Smith will speak from Sydney later this morning.

By coincidence I read yesterday the book “Exit Wounds” by Major General John Cantwell. The synopsis sums it up:

As a country boy from Queensland, John Cantwell signed up to the army as a private and rose to the rank of major general. He was on the front line in 1991 as Coalition forces fitted bulldozer blades to tanks and buried alive Iraqi troops in their trenches. He fought in Baghdad in 2006 and saw what a car bomb does to a marketplace crowded with women and children. In 2010 he commanded the Australian forces in Afghanistan when ten of his soldiers were killed. He returned to Australia in 2011 to be considered for the job of chief of the Australian Army. Instead, he ended up in a psychiatric hospital.

Exit Wounds is the compassionate and deeply human account of one man’s tour of the War on Terror, the moving story of life on a modern battlefield: from the nightmare of cheating death in a minefield, to the poignancy of calling home while under rocket fire in Baghdad, to the utter despair of looking into the face of a dead soldier before sending him home to his mother. He has hidden his post traumatic stress disorder for decades, fearing it will affect his career.

Australia has been at war for the past twenty years and yet there has been no stand-out account from these conflicts—Exit Wounds is it. Raw, candid and eye-opening, no one who reads this book will beunmoved, nor forget its imagery or words.

I highly recommend this book.

The section on the Gulf War was fascinating. He was a Major and meant to be a liaison officer between the US and British forces, which meant travelling all over the place to liaison points, to find no one there. Several times they almost got killed by friendly fire – and once found themselves 20 kms in advance of the coalition forces, meaning that had to drive towards the coalition forces from the Iraqi side.

Also he describes the scenes of bodies buried in the ground as tanks with blades had crushed all in their sights. That was the start of the nightmares.

In Iraq in 2006 he was a Brigadier or one star general. He dealt regularly with senior Iraqi leaders and his stories of their duplicity and betrayal are eye openers. He also has several near misses with death and see first hand the results of a massive bomb. You get a feeling of what it is like having 100 or so people a day die, mainly civilians.

Then in 2010 he was a Major General and the commander of Australian forces in Afghanistan. He disobeyed orders to go out on patrol with some of his men, and again there were many close calls with death. However it was the 10 Australian men who died that hit him hardest, and the scenes of him fare-welling them after he has formally identified them are incredibly moving.

Generals are not meant to admit that they can suffer from post traumatic stress disorder and Cantwell’s book has probably done his fellow soldiers a great service in allowing them to recognise and get treatment also if they need it. It is hard to imagine anyone being totally untouched by the scenes of carnage Cantwell describes. One can only imagine how much worse great slaughters such as WWI were.

Tech Liberty blogs:

The RIANZ has withdrawn one of the first three cases to go to the Copyright Tribunal. The withdrawal happened after all submissions had been made but before the formal hearing at the Tribunal.

Tech Liberty helped the defendant with her submission along with pro bono assistance from lawyers and Susan Chalmers at InternetNZ.

The case

The defendant was a student in a flatting situation and was the account holder for the flat’s shared internet account. She has never used file sharing software and we had to explain to her what it was and how it worked. It seems likely that one of her flatmates had it installed.

The flat never received the first detection notice and they didn’t really understand the second warning notice. She did show it to her flatmates and asked them to stop doing anything they were doing. They denied doing anything, so she checked to make sure that their wireless network was properly protected by a password in case they had been hacked. The third notice was a mess – addressed to the wrong person, Telecom eventually withdrew it and replaced it with another one.

Then came the notice from the Ministry of Justice that action was being taken against the account holder. The defendant was very upset and worried, and contacted her local Citizen’s Advice Bureau for help, who put her on to us.

This sounds like a great example of an innocent person being caught up in the law – which I suspect is why RIANZ dropped the case – it would have made for a very bad poster child.

I don’t advocate that saying “My flatmate did it” should be an absolute get out of jail card, as the law would be pretty ineffective if you could just dodge liability that way. But I do think it should be a factor the Tribunal can take into account.

RIANZ claimed a total of $2669.25 in penalties. This was made up as follows:

1. $1075.50 as the cost of the music.
2. $373.75 to repay the cost of the notices and tribunal fee.
3. $1250 as a deterrent.

The cost of the music was calculated as being five tracks (total number of notices) multiplied by the $2.39 cost of each track on the iTunes store. The observant may notice that this works out to $11.95 rather than $1075.50. RIANZ decided, based on some self-serving research, that each track had probably been downloaded 90 times and therefore the cost should be multipled by 90. There is no basis in the Copyright Act or Tribunal regulations for this claim.

A lot of us will be very interested in what fines are levied. For my 2c I think it should be something along the lines of twice the cost of the music plus the cost of the notices and tribunal fee for routine cases.

When we met the defendant she was very worried about the case and what it would mean for her. It caused her significant distress and preparing a defence interrupted both her studies and her part time job. The thought of a $2669 penalty weighed heavily on her and her plans for the future.

She immediately cancelled the flat’s internet account and her and her flatmates were from that point without an internet connection at home. Obviously this was not good for their studies, social lives or personal business (e.g. online banking).

The flatmates refused to acknowledge any responsibility or offer to pay any money towards the penalty. Relationships in the flat broke down and the defendant left the flat soon after.

There’s a lesson here. Don’t be the account holder for your flat unless you trust your flatmates not to do stuff which could make you liable.

The notices from Telecom had a number of technical faults, of which the main ones were:

• Telecom sent out an incorrect notice then withdrew it and sent out another. Even the corrected notice had some errors and used different infringement numbers and the whole situation was very confusing.
• The second and third notices did not specify which first and second notices they were following on from, as required by the regulations. This made working out the timelines very difficult.
• The corrected third and final enforcement notice was sent for an infringement that happened within the 28 day stand down period after the warning notice, which means it was not a valid enforcement notice.

The defendant did ask the Copyright Tribunal for a formal hearing which she intended to attend.

It is disturbing that a third strike was issued based on an invalid notice. You would think for the initial cases, RIANZ would be triple-checking the notices.

The Saigon Zoo is actually in their botanical gardens, which makes a nice setting for the visistors to walk around in.

Since seeing so many animals in the wild in Africa, I haven’t really been able to enjoy zoos – even those as spacious as possible for the animals. And Saigon Zoo is far from that. I felt so sorry for the poor giraffes especially, but also for many of the animals there. I guess there is little alternative as most of the animals in zoos would not survive in the wild, but it did make me want to join the Animal Liberation Front briefly!

The imposing creature is a Burmese Rock Python. They are the largest subspecies of the Indian Python. On average they are 3.7 metres long but can reach 5.7 metres.

A beautiful Iguana.

I can’t recall what species this was – possibly a Gibbon?

The poor elephants.

Luckily there is some glass between us.

Showing off.

A beautiful white Bengal tiger.

One big Orangutan.

Enjoying the water.

Some lazy bears.

That bird is almost taller than me!

A squirrel monkey. Cute,

A beautiful bird.

Also liked the hedge sculpture.

Far from the best zoo around, but if you have a spare couple of hours, you do get to see a few animals you won’t normally see.

Ahi Karunaharan writes and stars in his one man play, The Mourning After.

The play is the story of Shekar, a Sri Lankan born in New Zealand. His father has just died, and he wants to travel back to Sri Lanka to spread his ashes. He also has the mystery of a photo of a beautiful woman, who is not his mother.

Karunaharan plays a multitude of characters, and uses his acting skills artfully to argue backwards and forwards with himself. Changes in posture and accent inform you as to who he now is. Karunaharan has a presence and charisma which dominates the small stage.

It took me a while to work out the plot, but it is worth persevering for. After battling his relatives in New Zealand, Shekar arrives in Sri Lanka. His family house is the only one left standing after the Boxing Day tsunami.

It is a house of mystery. Uncle Somu, the adult in the house, relives his days of glory as an extra in an Indiana Jones film. The young Raju provides comic relief and does a wonderful crow call. Malicious Aunty Saroja is the village gossip and then there is the women shut in the room.

The set is minimal, but effective, and director Miria George uses sound and light well in telling the story of Shekar.

I have to be honest and say that this sort of play isn’t one that grabs me. It was artistically done very well, and Ahi Karunaharan is a superb and charismatic actor. The plot revelation was just a bit too obvious I found, and I never found myself fully engaged on the emotional level.

That isn’t to say we didn’t enjoy the play. It was entertaining and many of the characters were entertaining and appealing. A one actor show is a challenging task, and Karunaharan rose to it.

There are also reviews on the play at Theatreview.

An interesting story about a US tennis coach in Taupo, who didn’t work out. The highlight:

The landlady says he gambled on American sports, and she found discarded prescription painkiller packets in his room. He had a habit of putting his hand down his pants during conversations, and one day came home to say police had stopped him after receiving reports of someone masturbating in bushes near the tennis club.

“He was really scared, he thought the cops were going to storm the house at any moment.” Feinsod says he put his hands down his pants, like Al Bundy in Married With Children, because “that’s a thing we do in New York to stay warm“, that he was prescribed painkillers for a foot injury, and the “masturbation” incident was a misunderstanding.

Oh yeah, that’s definitely a New York thing. Everyone in New York stands around with their hands down their pants.

Matt McCarten writes:

We know abstractly that in our capitalist economic system it’s the natural order of things that big corporations eat smaller businesses to grow bigger still.

When we see the human cost it’s difficult to be so philosophical.

This is about the local store closing, as they couldn’t compete with a chain store.

And yes on a personal level it is very hard when any business owner has to stop trading as they can’t compete.

But pining King Cantue like for a return to the 1970s when the Government decided who was allowed to compete, is seriously misguided.

I recall in the 1970s and 1980s the concern that supermarkets would destroy the corner dairies, and many did close. But who wants to live in a country with no supermarkets?

But now it seems these corporates are moving to the next level of reducing costs and maximising profit.

Have you noticed how The Warehouse and supermarkets now expect us to check out and pack our own goods? If we insist on a checkout operator, do you notice the fewer stations and longer waits? Eventually, the only human we’ll see is a security guard making sure we don’t pinch anything.

Oh God, how awful. And Air NZ now have self-service kiosks and you can use e-passports to take yourself through customs. I enjoy doing it myself and happily accept the cheaper prices when I do. And sometimes when I am busy I get the supermarket to home deliver for me, which creates extra jobs the otherway. The moral of the story is not to pine for the 1970s, but look for new opportunities.

For good reason we should blame faceless corporations and the Stephen Tindalls of this world for destroying our way of life.

Yeah fuck the poor families who can afford cheap goods now. That evil Tindall who has actually provided goods at prices more people can afford.

Celeste Gorrell Anstiss at HoS reports:

Internal Affairs has mounted a crackdown on big spot prizes at expos and fishing competitions, warning organisers they constitute illegal gambling.

Officials have sent cease-and-desist letters to 15 organisations, informing them that events with an entry fee cannot have door giveaways, raffles or barrel draws with prizes worth more than $500.

Beach and Boat Fishing Competition organiser Tony Wheeler has put ticket sales to New Zealand’s biggest fishing tournament on hold, after receiving the letter this month. He is scrambling to figure out how to comply with the Department of Internal Affairs’ strict conditions.

Only certain licensed organisations, like the Lotteries Commission, charitable trusts and SkyCity casino, are allowed to run games of chance.

DIA are just doing their job, but it is a silly law. Our gambling laws like monopolies. Just one casino per city, if that. TAB have a monopoly on sports betting. The Lotteries Commission on large games of chance etc.

There should be some rules around transparency such as clearly stating the chance of winning and the percentage of receipts that will be paid back as prizes.

The crackdown comes after a complaint from a pokies trust, which argued that its business was being undermined by events like A&P shows and trade shows that give away spot prizes such as cars, boats and holidays.

Wheeler’s annual competition is the biggest fishing tournament in the country with 2100 competitors and more than $220,000 worth of spot prizes, including a boat and a car. The heavily-promoted $100,000 prize for catching a special snapper – tagged by the officials and thrown back in – is alleged to breach the Gambling Act.

Catching a tagged fish requires some knowledge or skill, but Internal Affairs believes winning relies on a large element of chance. Fishing competitions are still allowed to award prizes for catching the most fish, or the biggest fish, because this is regarded as skill.

We should just change the law so DIA doesn’t have to waste time deciding whether catching a particular fish is skill or chance. For my 2c it involves skill. Sure you need luck for that particular fish to come along, but you need skill to keep it on the line.