The Herald reports:

A review of legislation that gives the Crown the power to take private land for public infrastructure projects like roads, schools and police stations has been completed.

The review could potentially lead to faster and simplified land acquisition processes.

Some caution is needed here. The RMA reforms are about allowing people who already own property to easier develop their own property.

The Public Works Act is about the ability of the Crown to take your property off you, without your consent.

It is what you call a necessary evil. Without it, no new roads could probably ever happen. But it is ripe for misuse, if it is made too easy.

“For example, all infrastructure projects that use the act must meet a high threshold of being of national and regional significance. While a high threshold is important for protecting private property rights, there are many worthy and necessary projects that are vital for a particular region or community but may not be nationally significant.

This sounds good in theory, but can you trust local government not to abuse it? The Wellington City Council is talking about using the Public Works Act to confiscate Johnsonville Mall off Stride Properties, purely because Stride won’t redevelop the mall. Using the PWA to try and blackmail a property owner into spending money that isn’t commercially sensible is reprehensible.

In New Zealand we have only one election on election day, and the Electoral Commission releases results in real time. The media do provide commentary on how the parties are doing, but most people can work out who has won for themselves.

In the US it is very different. There is no central count for the US election. Each state does its own count. And sometimes they are delegated down to county level also. Also you have almost 500 races for Congress plus thousands of other races.

The Associated Press is the main media outlet that monitors all the vote counts, and projects winners. They don’t determine the winner, but their projections are widely reported.

There is an interesting article on Stuff about how they do this. Some key facts:

• Have been calling races for 175 years
• 6,823 races this year to be called
• 5,000 staff will work on the election results
• 99.9% accuracy rate
• They call a race when they determine/believe the trailing candidate can’t overtake the lead of the leading candidate
• 4,000 staff at vote counts. 800 vote entry clerks who check data
• 60 staff on decision team, experienced in election law
• For a call on which presidential candidate wins a state, a race caller and a statewide analyst have to agree the trailing candidate can’t win, and they take it to a decision editor. All there must agree for the call to proceed
• If a state will put a candidate over 270, or close to it, the decision also has to be endorsed by the executive editor, the VP and head of news, and the Washington bureau chief

Fascinating to see what their process is. I suspect the key states will not be called for a couple of days, as they will be so close.

1 News reports:

The Government has pulled funding from the country’s flagship research centre into white supremacy and violent extremism. …

He Whenua Taurikura research centre in Wellington received a letter from the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) on Friday, saying funding would end in December. It has been run under a trust since 2022.

“Members of the trust are disappointed with the sudden change in direction by government, done in the name of cost savings,” a trust spokesperson told RNZ.

“The $2m the government saves by cutting this research will almost certainly increase the risk of significant loss of innocent life in vulnerable communities at the hands of extremists.”

The only people impacted will be the consultants and contractors. The reality is this taxpayer-funded so called anti-extremism centre was run by extremists.

The co-director called the Government a death cult recently. That is about as extreme as you can get.

They funded hard left activists such as Emma Rakete, Byron Clark, Kate Hannah and Kyle Matthews.

Now I’m all for all of the above people saying what they want, and researching what they want. But I’m not for their activism being funded by the taxpayer under the guise of fighting extremism, especially when their own politics are to the extreme left.

The Herald reports:

Te Pāti Māori claims a police operation targeting Mongrel Mob members and associates alleged to be involved in a drug distribution network was “terrorism” and motivated by a “racist agenda”.

It is amazing that a political party defends drug dealing gangs, and hates the Police so much they call them terrorists. TPM say they are for ta ao Maori and against colonisation, so why are they so pro-gang? There were no gangs pre-colonisation. They are a recent invention. Gangs are in no way part of the traditional Maori worldview of Manaakitanga – they are the opposite.

On all polls, Labour could only form a Government in coalition with Greens and Te Pati Maori. Could you imagine having Ministers who regard the Police as terrorists? What will it take for Labour to rule out coalition with TPM?

CNN reports:

Three economists were awarded the Nobel Prize Monday for their research into how the nature of institutions helps explain why some countries become rich and others remain poor.

Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson and James Robinson will share the prize, which carries a cash award of 11 million Swedish kronor ($1 million).

The Nobel Committee praised the trio for explaining why “societies with a poor rule of law and institutions that exploit the population do not generate growth or change for the better.”

“When Europeans colonized large parts of the globe, the institutions in those societies changed,” the committee said, citing the economists’ work. While in many places this was aimed at exploiting the indigenous population, in other places it laid the foundations for inclusive political and economic systems.

“The laureates have shown that one explanation for differences in countries’ prosperity is the societal institutions that were introduced during colonization,” the committee added.

Countries that developed “inclusive institutions” – which uphold the rule of law and property rights – have over time become prosperous, while those that developed “extractive institutions” – which, in the laureates’ words, “squeeze” resources from the wider population to benefit the elites – have experienced persistently low economic growth.

So colonisation that led to the rule of law and property rights led to prosperous countries, while colonisation that focused on extractive industries stayed poor.

The number of electorate seats will drop from 72 to 71 – the first ever drop under MMP. This is because the north island population did not grow as fast as the south island population. There are 16 SI seats, so the NI ones vary. The number of electorates has been:

• 1996: 65
• 1997: 67
• 2002: 69
• 2007: 70
• 2014: 71
• 2019: 72
• 2024: 71

The Boundaries Commission will set boundaries and work out which seat disappears. The largest drops in electoral population since 2020 are:

1. Mt Albert -3184
2. Mt Roskill -3160
3. Wellington Central -1697
4. Rongotai -1614
5. Auckland Central -618
6. Epsom -298
7. Pakuranga -87

So I’d say the most likely change is one fewer electorate in central Auckland.

These are the electorates that are over or under quota. Over 5% means they need to shrink and under 5% means they need to expand.

• Selwyn +14.0%
• Mt Albert -12.8%
• Epsom -12.4%
• Rongotai -12.3%
• Maungakiekie -12.2%
• Auckland Central -10.8%
• Pakuranga -10.7%
• Tamaki -10.4%
• Wellington Central -10.4%
• Palmerston North -10.3%
• Kelston -8.0%
• Ohariu -7.6%
• Rotorua -7.6%
• Mt Roskill -7.5%
• North Shore -6.5%
• Northcote -6.5%
• Napier -6.0%
• Ikaroa-Rawhiti -5.5%
• Invercargill -5.3%
• Mangere -5.2%
• Papakura +6.2%
• Whangaparāoa +6.4%
• Northland +7.0%
• Upper Harbour +7.8%
• Bay of Plenty +8.2%
• Kaipara ki Mahurangi +14.7%
• Takanini +17.7%

So what are the likely areas of change. We’ll start from the bottom:

• Southland: Invercargill to grow and and take area from Southland
• Selwyn to lose area to Ilam, Wigram, Banks Peninsula and Rangitata. Some flow on possible.
• Rest of South Island could stay the same
• Wellington: Rongotai to take territory from Wellington Central – possibly Brooklyn and/or Oriental Bay. Wgtn Central will then need to take a lot from Ohariu – Wadestown, Crofton Downs and maybe even Ngaio/Khandallah. Ohariu in turn will have to take in Linden and either move into Porirua, or some of the Western Hills from Hutt South.
• Palmerston North will grow in size and Bay of Plenty shrink in size.
• In Auckland looks very likely you lose an electorate around central to eastern Auckland. Takanini needs to shrink, as does Papakura so boundaries there may move south a bit.
• Up north Northland needs to shrink so boundaries may move north a bit including Northcote and North Shore which need to grow.

Sara Templeton has announced she will challenge Phil Mauger for the Christchurch Mayoralty. This is no surprise. The left are very unhappy they lost control of Auckland, Christchurch and Dunedin mayoralties.

Chris Lynch has a roundup of section from her colleagues:

• Halswell Councillor Andrei Moore: Not endorsing anyone
• Harewood Councillor Aaron Keown: Not endorsing Sara’s bid as she has not made good decisions for the people of my ward Harewood.
• Waimairi Ward Councillor Sam MacDonald: A mayor needs to have the leadership traits that allow for people to work together. I’ve worked around the same table as Sara for five years now, and that isn’t the case. We do not need deeply cynical, chip-on-shoulder, political/ideological leadership
• Riccarton Ward Councillor Tyler Harrison-Hunt: not endorsing anyone
• Papanui Ward Councillor Victoria Henstock: I question her ability to process opinions other than her own
• Fendalton Councillor James Gough said he respected Templeton’s decision to run but reaffirmed his support for Mayor Phil Mauger
• Cashmere Ward Councillor Tim Scandrett: Neutral
• Central Ward Councillor Jake McLellan said Sara’s announcement “was great for democracy to have candidates.
• Deputy Mayor Pauline Cotter did not say whether she would endorse Sara

Newsroom reports:

While the review came out of a NZ First policy, the work is being led by Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith, who told Newsroom there was “a habit of forming, of just throwing in a Treaty reference – a very broad one – in every piece of legislation that was coming along without much thought as to what the actual consequences of that would be or wouldn’t be”.

During the past three decades, Parliament had not always been clear about what specific Treaty provisions meant or were trying to achieve, Goldsmith said.

“That’s left the courts, and the agencies themselves, and businesses and local councils all to free-range as to what it does mean and doesn’t mean.

“And that’s created uncertainty, and frankly some outcomes that need some revision,” he said.

“We’re trying to honour Treaty commitments, while at the same time, never losing sight of the basic expectations of people living in a modern, democratic society, primarily to be treated equally and to have equality before the law.”

Goldsmith said reconciling those two things was where the challenge lay.

He talked about making Treaty provisions more consistent, clearer and more specific. But this review was likely to lead to some of these clauses being removed from legislation – both retrospectively and when new bills came before Parliament.

Good to see the Government focused on removing ambiguity. This is an area that needs clarity.

Simeon Brown announced:

Local Government Minister Simeon Brown has today announced his intention to appoint a Crown Observer to Wellington City Council, following news that the Council will now be required to rewrite its 2024-34 Long Term Plan.

“I have been concerned about the Council’s ability to manage their Long Term Plan amendment and adoption process, following their recent decision to rewrite its 2024-34 Long Term Plan,” Mr Brown says.

No surprise.

The Department has found that the Council has demonstrated an inability to understand the mechanisms it has available to manage financial pressures it is facing.

This includes the Council choosing in its Long Term Plan to use rates revenue to pay for its water infrastructure up-front, rather than appropriately using debt financing. Local Water Done Well financing mechanisms enables further debt headroom for Wellington City Council to meet its under-insurance issues.

“The advice from the Department highlights that the 2024-34 Long-Term Plan shows the Council’s net borrowings for water services increase by just $66 million to fund this investment (6 per cent of the total), with the remaining $1.10 billion of capital investment proposed to be funded by rates (94 per cent of the total).

“This is an inefficient and expensive way to fund infrastructure investment. The Council is front-loading costs on current ratepayers rather than utilising debt financing to spread the cost over current and future users of the assets,” Mr Brown says.

“The Department estimates that the Council’s financing approach to water services as set out in the 2024-34 Long Term Plan would overcharge Wellington City residents by more than $700 million over ten years.

Debt to fund critical infrastructure is fine. Having 94% funded through rates is bizarre.

“The Government is clear that by proposing a Crown Observer, the Government is not taking responsibility for any of the decisions made by the Council. The Council and Mayor are democratically elected and are responsible for the decisions made by the Council, and will remain accountable to their constituents.

Wellingtonians voted for a Labour/Green Council and WCC proved a great example of how that works in practice.

Of the Council of 16, six are current or former Greens, and four are Labour. One is also former Te Pati Maori, so they are a living example of how well those three parties can do at governing.

David Harvey writes:

What concerned me, and why it is that I do not mourn the departure of the Disinformation Project from the landscape, was the lack of rigour and the approach that was taken. Critical theory and neo-Marxist analysis – the conflict between the “empowered” and the “disempowered” – dominated the discussion along with the use of imprecise and opaque language. A further matter of concern was the reluctance to publish the data which supported the conclusions that the Project had reached.

Yet Mainstream Media uncritically drank the Disinformation Project Kool Aid, citing their sound bites as authoritative when clearly they were not. In this respect the Disinformation Project was promulgating its own form of if not disinformation, then misinformation. If it is the latter then they were entitled to express their opinion. But it should have been something MSM should have critically analysed and they did not.

Fact checking done well, can be a good thing. For example the US based Factcheck is usually highly reliable and neutral. However other fact checkers have been appalling, such as AAP.

A rigorous neutral Disinformation Project could have been a valuable thing. But it wasn’t rigorous or neutral.

In the NZ Gazette today:

Under section 134(1) of the Electoral Act 1993, I, Gerard Anthony Brownlee, Speaker of the House of Representatives, give notice that the seat of Darleen Tana has become vacant by reason of her ceasing to be a parliamentary member of the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand, the parliamentary leaders of that party having delivered to me in accordance with section 55A(3)(b) of the Act a written notice that complies with section 55C of the Act.

She will not be missed.

A reader observes:

The ship lies in 30m of water just off the reef and not far from where the sea floor plunges 300m+ one nautical mile offshore from Upolo’s north coast near the cross-island highway and opposite the five star Sinalei Reef Resort. The coastline there is incredibly beautiful and pristine.

IMHO the ship is not salvageable. Instead the focus has to be on removing the 950 tonnes of diesel on board and mitigating any environmental impact. That in itself will be a hazardous undertaking working so close to the reef.

There has been a lot of commentary from armchair admirals with much to say based on very little knowledge with a fair bit of misoginism thrown in for good measure. Particular (disparaging) comment has been made about the Captain’s sexuality. By all accounts she is an extremely capable ex RN officer who managed to evacuate the ship in dark, in a heightened sea state, without loss of life. Both the Minister and the Chief of Navy have commended her for that. Having said that it is fair to point out that under the previous Chief of Navy there was a push to give female officers seagoing command experience … last year four out of our seven operational ships were commanded by females. Early this year one of those (Captain HMNZS Canterbury) was relieved of command after her superiors reportedly lost confidence in her. Perhaps its time to pause and reflect.

Manawanui was a state of the art ship albeit in a 20 YO hull. It had been extensively refurbished and had just come out of a period of maintenance. The reports (if correct) that it suffered a catastrophic loss of power are concerning. The Navy are in the processing of establishing a high level Court of Inquiry into the sinking. I, for one, have confidence in the process. I have no doubt they will leave no stone unturned in establishing what actually happened and what (and who) was responsible with any repercussions to follow.

For now the government has a duty of care to throw everything at mitigating the effect of the disaster no matter the cost. Our ‘special relationship’ (so called) with Samoa is at risk. Samoans recall the tragedy of the SS Tahuna when, in 1918, the NZL Military Administration allowed the ship to dock in Apia with passengers sick with the Spanish Flu (the ‘black death’) …. the resulting epidemic saw 22% of the population wiped out; nor ‘Black Saturday’ (28 December 1928) where NZL Military policemen machine-gunned a peaceful demonstration by the Mau seeking self government causing 11 deaths; nor Muldoon’s dawn raids of 1976-79; nor the measles epidemic of 2019 imported from NZL. Our special relationship is fragile indeed … we cannot allow this tragedy to de-rail it.

Updated … I’m told from a reliable source that the ship left Devonport with the back up generator non operational. Manawanui had two main engines run off one switch board. When the switch board failed (caught fire) both main engines were knocked out and with the back up generator u/s it was all over rover. If that is correct then heads will surely roll.

The Herald reports:

A second bid by former Green Party MP Golriz Ghahraman to avoid a conviction for last year’s nearly $9000 shoplifting spree has failed. …

In a judgment released this morning, High Court Justice Geoffrey Venning said “the consequences of conviction cannot be said to be ‘out of all proportion’ to the gravity of offending in this case” — meaning there was no error in the district court decision.

The judgement is below, for those interested. The Judge goes through a process where he assesses the severity of the offending, then the severity of the consequence of conviction, and then whether the consequence isn’t just greater than the offending, but out of all proportion to it.

He said that offending can be categorised as low, moderate or serious and that on the bare facts, Ghahraman’s offending was in the serious category, albeit on the lower end of serious. Then taking into account her circumstances, the offending ends up in the moderate category, again at the lower end.

Then the Judge found that the consequences of a conviction, as opposed to consequences of the offending would fall in the low band, but at the higher end of low.

So you have the offending at the lower end of moderate and the consequences of a conviction at the higher end of low. Hence the consequences of a conviction do not outweigh the offending, let alone be out of all proportion to it. Basically the Judge is saying it isn’t even close.

Personally I think the convictions shouldn’t bar Ghahraman from practising law again at some stage in the future. It’s a matter of how long a break there should be between conviction and being able to practice again.

Trump is now favoured to win by four of the six prediction sites. It remains a remarkably close race with none of the seven swing states having a lead of more than 2%. As the average polling error in US presidential elections is 4%, it will come down to who does better than their polls. As Trump has done so in both 2016 and 2020, the smart money would be on him at this stage.

All six sites have Trump ahead in Arizona, Georgia and North Carolina giving him 262 election votes. He needs 270 to win. In Pennsylvania he leads in three, his behind in two and tied with one. Again the decision of Harris not to pick Josh Shapiro may be critical. A win there gives him 281.

If he wins Nevada (ahead in two, tied in one, behind in three) that gives him 268 EVs and Harris 270.

Three days ago the average had Harris 276 and Trump 262. Now it is Trump 281 and Harris 257.

News.com.au reports:

Senator Thorpe screamed out “f**k the colony” and “you are not my King” just moments after the monarch had delivered his address praising Australia.

She also yelled out a demand for “treaty” and said “you stole our land” and “you are not our King”.

“Give us our land back that you f**king stole from us,” she screamed. 

“Our bones, our skulls, our babies, our people.

You expect this sort of stuff from a moronic 13 year old protester, not an elected Senator. Its disgraceful behaviour.

Later, in the Great Hall, Senator Thorpe also turned her back as the Australian anthem was played.

In a statement released on Monday, Senator Thorpe said the British Crown and King Charles should be prosecuted for “genocide”.

It’s an interesting concept that you should hold people criminally liable for what their ancestors did 200 years ago. By this logic, any descendants of Te Rauparaha should be charged with genocide, theft, murder, rape and torture?

Senator Thorpe was elected as a Green Party Senator, and their deputy leader. She turned out to be even too insane for them, and is now an independent. She celebrated a fire in Old Parliament House and goes up to men outside strip clubs and informs them they stole her land, Yes, seriously.

The Herald reported:

Minister Andrew Bayly has apologised after a complaint he allegedly swore at, mocked and ridiculed a man during a ministerial visit to a business.

The complainant says it left him feeling “degraded, embarrassed and deeply disrespected”. …

Bayly said: “I obviously got this completely wrong, and I have unreservedly apologised to the person concerned.

“It was unintentional, I meant the comments in a light-hearted manner, but I accept that they caused offence. I take responsibility for the situation, and I am sorry.

The complainant said:

When Andrew Bayly was introduced to me, one of the first things he asked was why I was still at work. His tone was dismissive, and he proceeded to say, “Take a bottle of wine and go home, go on, go home…take some wine and f*** off.”

His behaviour and the way he spoke to me suggested that he had been drinking prior to arriving, which made the situation even more uncomfortable. Certainly not the demeanour one would expect from a representative of the New Zealand Government.

As he stepped closer, invading my personal space until we were shoulder to shoulder, Andrew again questioned why I was still working, noting that no one else was on the warehouse floor. What followed next was both shocking and humiliating. He called me a “loser” repeatedly, saying the reason I was still at work was because I am a “loser.”

He turned to the group of people with him at the time, including my boss, the Minister’s assistant, marketing staff, and employees, and formed an ‘L’ with his fingers on his forehead.

It seems clear to me reading this, that Bayly was trying to be funny, and was ribbing the staff member for being the only one still at work. I’ve heard from a number of people that they have seen Bayly try similar humour on other occasions. You often see this misjudged humour with people who have low EQ or are even slightly on the spectrum.

Now this doesn’t make what he did, acceptable. That sort of joshing humour should only be done with people you know, who are friends. In my weekly board gaming group, we often chant “loser” and hold up Ls to each other when someone loses. But that is between good friends, who know it is done with no ill intent. Trying to do that with a stranger is a very bad idea, as they could well interpret it in the way this complainant did.

And doing so a Minister of the Crown, is even more ill-advised. The fault does lie with Bayly, not with the complainant.

However Bayly did twice apologise to the complainant, once he was aware he had offended him. And despite receiving two apologies, the complainant decided to send a complaint letter to the leaders of Labour, TPM and the Greens, as well as the PM. Now he is entitled to do what he wants, but it does raise the question of exactly what he wants to achieve, having already had two apologies.

This has been viewed 10 million times. Konstantin Kisin did not use to have a view on the conflict, as he had never focused on it. But now he has come off the fence.

Lloyd Burr reports:

As a public service broadcaster, it has the funds and resources to cover stories that commercially-driven media can’t always do. Investigations. Council meetings. Court proceedings. Ultra-local stories. Niche stories. Stories that are in the public interest but don’t necessarily need to be justified based on revenue.

Some of its work here is a public good – especially local democracy reporting and local court reporting.

Recently though, a number of media commentators have noticed RNZ expanding into the news mediascape that’s already well-served by commercial news sites. Former NZ Herald boss Tim Murphy and former 3 News boss Mark Jennings have talked about it. So has former NZ Herald editor Gavin Ellis. The Spinoff’s Duncan Greive has spoken about it too.

The crux of it is that RNZ’s news website, which has seen an injection of funding, is chasing audience with stories that aren’t very RNZ-y and it’s coming at the expense of Stuffand NZ Herald.

A good point.

It begs the question: What is the rationale of a taxpayer-funded, non-commercial product eating into the traditional space of commercial news media? Why isn’t it spending its money on core ‘public-interest’ journalism?

The Government should focus Radio NZ more on non-commercial public good journalism. It could, for example, commission a monthly poll (no not from Curia) recognising that no private media outlet can afford to regularly poll anymore. This is actually against my personal financial interest, but would be a public good.

The Herald reported:

A tourist trying to have “a nice holiday in Nelson” was pulled off her bike, kicked and beaten by a naked man running through a campground.

The impact split her helmet and left her with lingering anxieties from the trauma of what started as a nice summer day by the beach.

The aggressor was Ricky James Mullen, a man described as having a nihilistic outlook, and now so used to prison, he functioned better inside it than out.

So why was he let out?

Ten years ago it was reported:

A Timaru man whose children saw him try to kill their mother’s new partner has been jailed for more than seven years.

Ricky James Mullen, 30, was sentenced in the High Court in Timaru today by Justice Graeme Pankhurst on charges of attempted murder, male assaults female and breaching a protection order.

He was jailed for seven years and four months.

This would have got him a strike as it occurred in 2013. Sadly Labour and Greens abolished the three strikes law, so his latest offending means he will get out in a few years, and offend again.

Sir Apirana Ngata is on our $50 note. He was a lawyer and then was the MP for Eastern Maori for almost 40 years. He was Minister of Native Affairs for six years.He made huge contributions to Maori land reform, language and culture.

He also wrote a booklet in 1922 on the Treaty of Waitangi, which NZPCR has usefully published online. Well worth a read to compare to what some today claim the Treaty means.

Some extracts:

There was without doubt Maori chieftainship, but it was limited in its scope to its sub-tribe, and even to only a family group. The Maori did not have authority or a government which could make
laws to govern the whole of the Maori Race.

So he says there was no Government in New Zealand prior to the Treaty.

The main purport was the transferring of the authority of the Maori chiefs for making laws for their respective tribes and sub tribes under the Treaty of Waitangi to the Queen of England
for ever.

He says Article 1 clearly transfers law making authority from the chiefs to the Crown.

What is this authority, this sovereignty that is referred to in the second article? It is quite clear, the right of a Maori to his land, to his property, to his individual right to such possessions whereby he could declare, “This is my land, there are the boundaries, descended from my ancestor so and so, or conquered by him, or as the first occupier, or so and so gave it to him, or it had been
occupied by his descendents down to me. These properties are mine, this canoe, that taiaha
(combination spear and club), that greenstone patu (club), that kumera (sweet potato) pit, that cultivation. These things are mine and do not belong to anyone else”.

He says the second article is about property rights.

This article states that the Maori and Pakeha are equal before the Law, that is, they are to share the rights and privileges of British subjects.

And the third article is about equality.