A number of readers attended both the recent National Party Annual Conference and the Local Government annual conference. They were struck by the differences between the two. A key factor being that those who attend the National conference pay the cost themselves and those who attend the LG conference have ratepayers pay the cost.

Amazing the difference it makes, depending on who has to pay!

A good petition by Louise Duffy:

What are directives and how are they different to assisted dying?

Advance Care Plans | Directives | Living Wills tell medical teams what you do or don’t want if you can’t say yourself.

Research shows 80% of Kiwis value quality of life and want their voice and choices followed in a medical event.

Assisted dying is for those with a terminal condition who choose to have medical intervention so they can pass. Directives withholding care are for those with other conditions who choose not to have treatment so they can pass.

Both should enable people to die safely, peacefully and with dignity.

So, why are the two systems that lawfully enable people to pass in NZ treated so differently?

Assisted dying has one Act that ensures patients are treated by trained doctors who do not conscientiously object to their right to die and sets up an effective system with safeguards, reporting and independent monitoring.

Directive rights are spread over three Acts. There’s no training, nothing to ensure patients are treated by someone who doesn’t object to enabled dying and an ineffective system with no safeguards, reporting or monitoring.

We can do better.

Petition Purpose

That the House of Representatives implement a national register for standardised medical advance directives and mandate that those directives are followed

Petition Reason

I believe not following advance directives can lead to untold emotional and physical suffering.

My mum had a directive refusing care should she suffer a serious loss of mental or physical capacity. However, after a stroke her directive was not followed and instead of a medicated death within 10 days, mum was kept alive requiring 24/7 care.

This led her to refuse food and, finally, fluids and she died 58 days later, unmedicated until the last days. I believe her advance care plan should have been followed.

You can sign the petition here.

The NZ Initiative has published a thorough report on academic freedom. I’ll quote some data, and then their recommendations:

• In the US deplatforming attempts have increased 600% from 20 to 140
• In the US sanctioning attempts against professors has increased over 100% from 10 to 200
• Internal surveys at Auckland University found only 15% of law staff and 36% of science staff agreed they could respectfully voice their views without fear of any negative impact
• In the US the ratio of left academics to right academics has gone from 2:1 to 6:1
• In the UK the ratio of left academics to right academics has gone from 3:2 to 7:1
• Confidence in higher education in the US has dropped by 37% amongst Republicans and 16% amongst Independents

Their recommendations include:

1. An annual audit of New Zealand universities’ performance in upholding their obligations to academic freedom performed by a Director of Free Speech and Academic Freedom or (DFSAF), the Tertiary Education Commission (TEC) or the Minister for Tertiary Education.
2. An academic freedom survey of both students and academics at New Zealand universities.
3. Step back from engagements with well-documented links to the CCP and the People’s Liberation Army while continuing to engage with China in other areas of higher education and advanced research
4. Ceasing partnerships with military- linked universities
5. Anyone entering into a position of significant administrative power in our universities should be required to attend training in the basics of free speech theory and in universities’ legal obligations to academic freedom.
6. Strengthen the elements of internal democracy that still exist in our universities

I hope the Government and the universities take these up.

This chart is from Stats NZ data. Despite what some alarmists would claim, the level of alcohol being consumed in NZ is plummeting, not increasing. There are problems with a minority who abuse alcohol and cause harm, but that doesn’t mean that there is an overall problem.

• Since 1986, alcohol available for consumption per capita has dropped by a massive 29%
• Since 2008, it has dropped 18%
• In the last year it has dropped 12%

Will media cover this massive drop?

Radio NZ reported:

Nearly three months passed from when a former political figure’s party was told he was a “sexual predator” until the man stopped working for them.

The man, who has ongoing name suppression but is not a sitting MP, has been on trial in the Auckland District Court for the last week.

After three hours of deliberations, the jury found him guilty on all eight charges of indecent assault.

It can now be reported that the leader of the party the man was affiliated with was told about the abuse nearly three months before he resigned.

The interesting thing with this story is that the first few paragraphs make it look like the party leadership did nothing, but in fact the later paragraphs show that the response from the leadership was in fact first class. Here’s my summary:

• Day 1 – wife of complainant messages Facebook page of party leader saying Person A is a sexual predator
• Day 2 – staffer asks for details, is told the victim/complainant is her husband
• Day 4 – leader personally messages wife saying they are taking matter very seriously and will propose a course of action
• Day 5 – wife thanks leader and leader responds asking them to detail the allegations to a lawyer, who will then advise the party how to proceed. Details provided of a lawyer. Wife thanks leader and says her husband will contact the lawyer
• Day 15 – leader tells wife that the lawyer has been trying to contact them with no success and they are keen to have them make contact
• Day 16 – wife says they have decided to go to the Police, and won’t be contacting the lawyer

This seems an excellent response. A staffer asked for details, and then it was quickly elevated to the leader. The leader provided a way forward within 24 hours involving a lawyer (at their expense) and even followed up after the lawyer couldn’t contact the complainant.

Now you can make a case that the person complained about should have been asked to take a leave of absence on the basis of knowing there is a police complaint. But considering the party had no actual details of the complaint, and didn’t know if the Police would find there was a case to answer, there would have been issues of natural justice for demanding a stand down on the information they did have.

In the absence of any details, it is hard to see what more the party could have done at that stage. If the complainant had provided details to the lawyer, it is quite possible he would have been stood down or resigned much earlier.

I am in no way critical of the complainant. I think they did the right thing going to the Police, and making it a judicial matter rather than a political matter. The guilty verdict means there will be (hopefully) very serious consequences for the offending. While they could have proceeded both with the Police complaint and with an inquiry by a lawyer for the party, I think focusing only on the Police complaint was commendable as there was a risk one investigation could interfere with the other. The guilty verdict is a testament to his bravery in coming forward.

Chris Bishop and Shane Jones announced:

Cabinet has agreed to recommend a suite of sensible changes to the Fast-track Approvals Bill, say RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop and Regional Development Minister Shane Jones.

The changes are:

• Projects will be referred to an expert panel by the Minister for Infrastructure alone, who will be required to consult the Minister for the Environment and other relevant portfolio Ministers as part of that referral process.
• Final decisions on projects will not sit with Ministers but with the expert panel. This is the same as the previous Labour government’s fast-track process.
• Expert panels will include expertise in environmental matters; will include an iwi authority representative only when required by Treaty settlements; and will include Māori development expertise in place of mātauranga Māori.
• Applicants will be required to include information on previous decisions by approving authorities, including previous court decisions, in their applications for the referring Minister to consider. 
• Timeframes for comment at the referral and panel stages will be extended in order to give parties, including those impacted by a proposed project, more time to provide comments.

Having the expert panel, rather than Ministers, make the final decision is a welcome change. It also will significantly reduce the likelihood of judicial reviews for projects that are approved as a decision by a panel will always be much more thorough than one by Ministers.

They also released the type of projects that have applied:

• Housing and urban development projects: 40 per cent
• Infrastructure projects: 24 per cent
• Renewable energy projects:18 per cent
• Primary industries projects: 8 per cent
• Quarrying projects: 5 per cent
• Mining projects: 5 per cent

So that is around 70 renewable energy projects that want to use the fast-track process. If you are a fan of renewable energy, you should be delighted that they may be able to be consented within 12 months instead of eight years.

I think the fast-track one stop shop consenting law is arguably the most important reform the Government can do, that increases economic growth. If we want more tax revenue to fund health and education, we need a faster growing economy. Consenting costs have a huge impact on the economy – both the direct fiscal cost, but also the activity that never happens because it is too hard, Imagine what it will do to the economy if by the end of 2025, we have say 40 – 50 major housing and renewable energy projects consented.

The Taxpayers’ Union has compiled a local government “rich list” showing the salaries of council CEOs. They range from $648,900 to $219,382. But this doesn’t tell us too much as different councils are different sizes, and also regional councils tend to have less areas of responsibility and funding (and staff) than territorial or unitary authorities. So I’ve divided them into categories. Let’s start with Regional Councils.

Regional Councils

So the salaries range from $310k to almost $600k. The two on over $500,000 look out of line. They are in fact two of the smaller regional councils. Northland looks high when you compared to Canterbury, which has three times the population. On the flip side the Waikato Regional CEO looks to be a bit underpaid compared to their peers.

Large Councils

You would expect the Auckland Council CEO to be paid the most, likewise Christchurch second. The Tauranga CEO is earning $100,000 more than similar size Councils. You could also argue the Hamilton CEO is underpaid or Hutt is overpaid.

Medium Councils

The Far North CEO salary seems massively out of line. They get paid more than the CEOs of four large councils and around $100,000 more than CEOs of similar size councils. I’d argue that all the $400,000+ salaries are too much for a medium sized council.

Small Councils

Again the top six councils looks high – over $350,000 for a CE of a council with under 50,000 residents is a lot.

Very small councils

Now we are down to the very small councils. I would have thought you could get very suitable CEOs for under $300,000, as most Councils have done.

The brand salary ranges that would seem appropriate, based on the released data, in my opinion is:

• Regional Councils: $300k to $450k
• Large Councils: $400k to $650k
• Medium Councils: $300k to $400k
• Small Councils: $300k to $350k
• Very small Councils: $200k to $300k

From Radio NZ:

“More than a quarter of teachers in schools in poor neighbourhoods said most of their pupils had oral language below the level expected of them, compared to just 3 percent of new entrant teachers in schools in rich neighbourhoods.

School teachers said some children could not talk in sentences of more than four or five words, spent a lot of time on devices and had little interaction with books.”

As I discuss with Michael Laws below; ECEs and Schools are trying to cycle up Queen St towing an ocean liner to turn this situation around. I believe that we need a crown entity for Parenting and explain why in the clip.

If you want to see where our current patterns lead to, I have just done my annual data process to look at the achievements of every high school in NZ. There are approx. 430 schools in the process. The top 40 schools see 87% of their LEAVERS off with UE under their belt. For the bottom 40 schools it is 2.5%. Parenting is a huge part of this all the way through. Do we have the will to solve it?

(for the full data set including rankings for every high school please email me on alwyn.poole@gmail.com)

Alwyn Poole
alwyn.poole@gmail.com
Innovative Education Consultants Ltd
Education 710+ Ltd
(both sites currently being re-done)
alwynpoole.substack.com
www.linkedin.com/in/alwyn-poole-16b02151/

Politico has looked at the cross-tabs of Biden vs Trump polls and Harris vs Trump polls to see where has Harris gained relative to Biden. This is how much the gap between Harris and Trump has moved in her favour, compared to Biden and Trump.

• Young +17%
• Blacks +12%
• Independents +9%
• Democrats +7%
• WOMEN +7%
• Hispanics +6%
• Overall +5%
• Non-college educated +5%
• College-educated +3%

This indicates she has both motivated traditional Democratic voters (young, black) but also has increased appeals with non-base voters such as independents and non-college educateds. It’s a solid start.

Of course these are national polls. What will matter most is how the swing states move.

1 News reports:

Lennox Goodhue-Wikitera, 17, has been keeping students cool over the summer with his Juicie treats since 2022. But the school’s board of trustees now says he can only sell the frozen juice if he hands over all profits to the school and doesn’t take a wage. That’s despite donating around $3000 to the college of money made by the enterprise. 

“In late 2021, the canteen at our school closed down, and I had this lightbulb moment, walking around thinking I could really do with a Juicie right now because it was so hot and there was no canteen then the light bulb moment came – why don’t I just sell them?” he said.

“The next day, I turned up with a chilly bin in tow. I started selling them for about $1.50, sold a few at first, every day I kept selling more and more.”

Great to see Lennox seeing a need, and filling it.

In addition to the ice block sales, Lennox set up a business buying and selling imported products online and in his store, Bali Boutique, on the main street of Kaitāia.

He’d also attended a free IRD workshop in Kaitāia to learn more about his tax responsibilities. IRD staff later visited him at school during lunchtime to help him file his tax returns. He now has an accountant who does that for him. 

Amazing. We need more students like Lennox. And good on IRD for being helpful.

However, this year Lennox ran into problems once again with his ice block sales when the board asked to see a breakdown of his business expenses and saw Lennox had been paying himself a wage. 

“So profit is revenue minus expenses right, so there are lots of expenses involved in running this enterprise, for example I have to purchase chilly bins, I have to use my petrol to drive to Pak’nSave, there’s power in the freezer at home, also my time is expensive so I charge a very fair remuneration for myself,” said Lennox.

The board stopped him from selling at school again.

So the board banned him, because he had the temerity to pay himself a wage for his time. What an awful message this sends young people.

The Herald reports:

Welcome to Wellington, where council leaders from around the country have met in a convention centre that the Prime Minister thinks is an example of wasteful spending and is just down the road from a burst water main that has turned a street into a paddling pool.

The Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) conference started today in the capital. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon could not have asked for a better backdrop to deliver a sharply worded speech about council spending that did not go down well with some of Wellington’s leaders.

Luxon hit back at councils demanding more funding and support from central government while avoiding tightening their own belts.

The convention centre is a prime example of a non core activity, which is part of the reason rates are increasing 20%.

He also took advantage of the LGNZ conference location – Wellington’s $180 million Tākina convention centre. The audience of mayors from around the country was audibly disgruntled.

“It looks very nice, and it’s very nice that politicians like us have a wonderful space to make some great speeches in,” Luxon said.

“But can anyone seriously say it was the right financial decision or the highest priority for Wellington, given all of its challenges?”

Tākina has been criticised as a white elephant.

Councils can do some things very well. Wellington City has some brilliant playgrounds. The new library and cafe in Johnsonville has been a massive boon to the area. Playgrounds, libraries, parks, roads, water infrastructure etc is what we value and should be top priority.

Green Party regional councillor Thomas Nash said Luxon’s speech was “one of the most mana diminishing, paternalistic and visionless speeches to a group of people I have ever heard”.

Must have been a great speech then.

The Herald also summarises some changes announced by the Government:

• Refocusing the purpose provisions in the Local Government Act by removing four wellbeings from the Local Government Act.
• Investigating performance benchmarks for local councils.
• Investigating options to limit council expenditure on nice-to-haves through a regulator that would cap rate increases for non-core spending.
• Reviewing transparency and accountability rules to make it easier for councillors to request information from council staff, possibly by a written question system.
• Reforming the code of conduct process to balance councillors’ freedom of speech rights with spurious and politicised code of conduct investigations.

I’m not sure about having a regulator for local government spending. What I’d rather have is more decision making by ratepayers. Why not have any major project that would lead to a significant rates increase beyond inflation go to ratepayer/resident referendum?

We need more electricity, especially renewable energy. But once again actually getting consent is the problem. We currently have high wholesale rates due to shortages, and

Stuff reports:

Labour leader Chris Hipkins is distancing himself from his MP’s position that benefit sanctions are a “good idea” for those under the age of 20.

Labour has been vocal about the ramping up of the use of sanctions by the Government, calling it “callous”, that the government was “picking on” beneficiaries, and had a “willingness to kick people while they were down”.

But Greg O’Connor, Labour’s Ōhāriu MP, has said twice over the past week that he thinks applying sanctions to young jobseekers is warranted.

“Particularly for young ones, I’ll put my neck out, I think they’re actually not necessarily a bad thing, particularly maybe for those under 21,” he told The Working Group podcast.

Nice to have common sense from a Labour MP.

The Herald reports:

The carbon price is expected to rise on news the Government is slashing the number of tonnes of planet-heating emissions for sale by more than half.

Climate Change Minister Simon Watts said advice he has received suggests the impact on household bills should be “minimal”, adding only 3-4c a litre to petrol by 2029.

“We need the carbon price to encourage businesses and individuals to reduce their emissions to meet our climate targets,” he said.

The coalition is hoping that by selling fewer permits-to-pollute, it will flush out stockpiles of carbon credits companies are holding onto. Tuesday’s announcement means it will offer radically fewer units or permits than previously announced from 2025-2029.

This is a good thing. The whole idea of the ETS is that the number of units for sale reduces over time. This sends a market signal around investment, and allows individuals businesses to respond to demand, rather than have age Government trying to dictate what should happen.

But Watts said advice he had received suggested the impact would be small.

“The impact on inflation, our estimate is it could increase CPI inflation by 0.03 of a percentage point by 2029 so that pretty insignificant,” he said.

“Petrol you’re potentially looking at 1% by 2029 or around 3-4 cents a litre.”

That seems a small impact.

There has been a lot of scrutiny of Vice-Presidental candidate Tim Walz’s military service. Many Republicans say he has blatantly lied and claimed stolen valor. Many Democrats have said there is nothing to it at all.

The most balanced take I have seen comes from The Free Press. Their conclusion:

Over the years, there have been plenty of politicians who have exaggerated their military service—or falsely claimed to serve when they never did. On the one hand, it seems as though we can now add Tim Walz to that list. On the other hand, his transgressions appear to be more sloppy than venal. Whether his comments qualify as “stolen valor” is in the eye of the beholder. 

I am a huge fan of The Free Press, as it genuinely scrutinises both sides.

Law News reports:

I attended a LEANZ webinar recently where Karen Feint KC and Gary Judd KC debated the issue of compulsory teaching of tikanga Māori in law schools.

In keeping with their rank, both articulated their positions clearly and civilly.

They showed how we should engage with each other over controversial issues and how members of the legal profession can make valuable contributions to civil society.

We should not cower in our legal caves for fear of cancellation or disapproval.

Once upon a time, it was the norm to politely debate controversial issues. Now we have Law School Deans who throw insults and abuse at people whose views they disagree with. Glad to see LEANZ (Law and Economics Assn of NZ) is a Forum that still welcomes debate. Does the Law Society?

The Herald reports:

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has told Parliament he believes Māori ceded sovereignty to the Crown.

During Question Time, Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick pushed him on the issue multiple times, asking, “does the Prime Minister believe that Māori ceded sovereignty?”

Luxon responded, saying “our position is the Crown is sovereign”.

Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters interjected, citing prominent former Māori MP Sir Apirana Ngata from 1922.

“Is it a fact that, 102 years ago in a major thesis, Sir Āpirana Ngata set out the very circumstances of the Treaty, and he said that Māori ceded sovereignty.”

“As I said, our position is the Crown is sovereign,” repeated Luxon, “and also, importantly, the Treaty of Waitangi has protections in there for both Crown and Māori interests.”

It is a somewhat pointless debate. You can argue all you like about what was the intention of 200 chiefs 180 years ago, but it doesn’t change the reality that the elected Government of New Zealand has sovereignty over the Realm of New Zealand, and has exercised it for many scores of years.

Sovereignty is not based on ancestry or race, but territory.

The WP reports:

In a statement released late Wednesday night, the Harris campaign said that if elected, she would push for the “first-ever federal ban” on food price hikes

Rob Muldoon would like his policy from the 1980s back please.

It is depressing how bad the Harris policy positions are.