Open mike 14/01/2025

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, January 14th, 2025 - 54 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

54 comments on “Open mike 14/01/2025 ”

  1. thinker 1
    14 January 2025 at 7:13 am

    I put my submission to the Regulatory Standards Bill just in time yesterday.

    What an effort!! 36 questions, many of which would have required technical knowledge of the status quo, more than ought to be required of ordinary citizens debating the higher level principles, imho.

    Some of them even led you down the garden path, as in giving your preferences to options where the status quo wasn't one of them.

    I filled in many of the boxes by simply saying I preferred the status quo than a wholesale rewrite of something that the world already looks to New Zealand as being one of the best at.

    As I sat there, turning webpage after webpage, though, it made me pretty angry at the approach being taken – the technical nature of the questions, the timing of the submission period, and the likelihood that my voice won't be heard.

    Reply
    • Tony Veitch 1.1
      14 January 2025 at 8:03 am

      I too waded through all the pages to make a submission.

      But remember, this is only on the 'proposed' bill. Once it has had its first reading in the House it will go to a select committee for public comment.

      By then, hopefully, Labour, the Greens and TPM will have fully woken up to how destructive this legislation will be to the collective good of all of us.

      I've saved some of my ammunition for a submission to the select committee.

      Reply
    • Ad 1.2
      14 January 2025 at 8:10 am

      Administrative public law – of which regulatory law is essentially a subset – is where some of the most dedicated legal minds are focused, and those people are like very small, very sharp moving parts that are completely necessary to the functioning of a very large and complex machine.

      Regulatory law specialists who can deal with this kind of legislation mostly sit within the public service itself. It's not a popular sport in private practise and those that exist are usually within large public utility companies.

      Even worse, the judges who have to apply this kind of law to cases are rarely public administrative law specialists, even if they have done a few specialist regulatory cases.

      So don't be too frustrated if you found the submission process tough. It's not a law for the broad citizenry to understand well or to even emote coherently about like the Treaty Principles Bill. Very few can do this field well.

      The lawyers and judges I know of are pretty aghast at the coarseness of the approach. It's this framework together with essentially chucking out the entire RMA that makes this government just look like a loose unit.

      I would prefer that instead there were just two goes at regulatory impact statements before and after the Select Committee processes of new law and new regulations.

      Reply
    • Karolyn_IS 1.3
      14 January 2025 at 9:16 am

      I flicked through that online form, and decided against using it. I'd already drafted my submission on a Word doc anyway, and submitted it via email. The email option was by far the better one.

      Reply
    • Incognito 1.4
      14 January 2025 at 5:50 pm

      Congratulations on your effort.

      Even though this Bill is highly technical and complex and quite possibly its implications can only be fully understood by specialists – much if not most of the substantive criticism I’ve seen came from emeritus professors and current academics – the onus is on lawmakers/political representatives to explain it to the people they represent and in such ways that are clear and understandable to a lay audience and with utmost integrity (unlike David Seymour and other more prominent defenders of the RSB).

      Many but not all of us are faced with similarly complex major decisions such as buying a house, consenting to a major medical treatment, or, ironically, consenting to medically-assisted euthanasia, for example. One cannot make such big life-changing decisions without being fully informed and expert advice is highly recommended, necessary, or even mandated.

      Unfortunately, many aspects of life are slipping away from our control and understanding and politics is no exception, which is one reason why it’s been ‘taken over’ by the so-called PMC – from time to time this is raised here and the lack of working-class representation among our politicians and in Parliament.

      I leave you with this from today’s Newsroom Pro e-mail newsletter [so no link] by Sam Sachdeva:

      Victoria University of Wellington senior law lecturer Dr Eddie Clark has noted that the bill would cut across existing mechanisms for overseeing the regulatory system, such as the Public Service Commission and the Ombudsman – which may be a feature rather than a bug.

      “In short, it’s an attack on the functioning of the normal and previously non-partisan mode in which the public service operates,” Clark says.

      A debate about regulatory stewardship seems unlikely to attract the same level of opprobrium as an effort to redefine the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. But unlike the Treaty Principles Bill, the National-Act coalition agreement compels the Government to pass the Regulatory Standards Bill into law, setting up a longer scrap between the coalition and its critics.

      Reply
  2. Tony Veitch 2
    14 January 2025 at 7:59 am

    Richard Murphy gives the lie to that tired old neoliberal mantra of 'trickle down.'

    Simply put, 'we' (society as a collective) cannot afford immoderately wealthy people!

    6 minutes long.

    Reply
  3. PsyclingLeft.Always 3
    14 January 2025 at 8:42 am

    Waimea dam. Cost overrun..more than doubles.

    Waimea Water Limited (WWL) announced on Monday that the final cost of the controversial dam is $211 million, double the $104.5 million projected cost when the Tasman District Council voted to go ahead with the project in 2018, and nearly three times the $75.9 million price it consulted on in 2017

    And a classic case of who wanted,and who actually ends up paying !

    Ropere Consulting economist Peter Fraser.

    Fraser said the dam was never going to be good value for money and said much of the costs would land on Richmond ratepayers – but had been a great deal for a small group of farmers.

    "This is the biggest subsidy to a small group of farmers probably in New Zealand's history, because they have been completely insulated from all the price increases," he said.

    "We have the classic situation where we privatise the profits and socialise the costs – and the way those costs have been socialised is on the ratepayers of Richmond."

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/538863/controversial-waimea-dam-more-than-double-projected-cost

    And of course that other Farmer required dam…….

    Failed Ruataniwha dam still causing contention as council agrees to relieve financial stress of backers

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/422981/failed-ruataniwha-dam-still-causing-contention-as-council-agrees-to-relieve-financial-stress-of-backers

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/129713803/ruataniwha-dam-proponents-owe-council-more-than-250000

    And the NAct1 fasttrackers have resuscitated this dam idea again. I hope the local ratepayers are ready to protest ! Costs..can at least, double. Proven. And who pays…. .

    Scrapped Hawke's Bay dam project may be revived under fast-track bill

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/530087/scrapped-hawke-s-bay-dam-project-may-be-revived-under-fast-track-bill

    More..Dairy farms?!

    https://www.greenpeace.org/aotearoa/story/the-ruataniwha-dam-what-is-it-and-why-has-it-been-renamed-to-the-tukituki-water-storage-scheme/

    Reply
    • Belladonna 3.1
      14 January 2025 at 1:36 pm

      Doesn't it also supply backup water for residential use?
      In the current climate situation – of increasingly unpredictable droughts and heavy rainfall – surely a dam to smooth out the water supply is a sensible investment?

      Reply
    • alwyn 3.2
      14 January 2025 at 2:13 pm

      Only double?

      Be grateful it isn't like the overruns on cycleway follies in the Wellington region.

      The 3 km cycleway between Petone and just south of Melling was approved in 2017 with a cost of $17 million. It was finally completed at a cost of $70 million.

      https://wellington.scoop.co.nz/?p=155198#:~:text=Its%20original%20budget%20was%20%2417,an%20agency%20email%20to%20RNZ.

      [Since you have so much to say about this cycleway and the cost overrun, give a few reasons for the budget blowout and then argue what should be done about it now. In other words, make yourself useful and contribute something constructive for a change – Incognito]

      Reply
    • Drowsy M. Kram 3.3
      14 January 2025 at 3:34 pm

      If there are concerns about the Ruataniwha dam / Tukiyuki water storage scheme's "cost overrun", and whether it represents "value for money", then perhaps CoC finance minister Willis could advise on delivery of a “good, reliable Toyota Corolla” dam wink

      A quick reminder of incompetence

      "It might smell like excrement in a few months time, but for the next few weeks the sunshine pump will be working overtime to sell it like its the bee's knees.”

      Reply
      • PsyclingLeft.Always 3.3.1
        14 January 2025 at 9:28 pm

        Ah yea DMK…a “good, reliable Toyota Corolla” dam. : )

        However, those proponents (lurking?) behind the Waimea dam were all very keen on the gold plated, profit making, benefits ..whilst socialising its costs on the hapless Ratepayer.

        As its sadly a done deal…I hope the Ruataniwha one gets some action Pushback…

        Reply
        • Drowsy M. Kram 3.3.1.1
          14 January 2025 at 11:15 pm

          Thanks PsyclingLeft.Always – I got my dams a bit mixed up – Damn the Dam!

          Project spokesperson Mike Petersen said the proposal is completely different in focus and intent from the original Ruataniwha project, despite sharing the original project’s site on the Makaroro river.
          …
          Petersen rejected claims made on Radio NZ by opponents of the project that the dam could cost $1 billion. He pointed to original dam proposals that were closer to $280 million, but said the group would be assessing full costs in the coming months.

          He said the group had looked hard at lessons learnt from Marlborough’s Waimea dam project, where costs had ballooned out from an original $75 million price tag to over $200 million.

          https://www.farmersweekly.co.nz/news/tukituki-project-is-no-ruataniwha-2-0/

          “No Ruataniwha 2.0“? Really? For a few dollars more sad

          STEVE ABEL (Green) [17 Dec 2024]: "Coming to my area soon is a rushed and fast-tracked project"—without the licence, without the consent of the local people; in fact, explicitly overriding the will and the wishes of the local people. That's what this fast-track bill does.

          From Trans-Tasman Resources in Taranaki, where the extraordinarily destructive seabed mining is scheduled to occur—the people have resisted for over a decade. The local community, the local iwi, and the fishing industry themselves have resisted, and non-Government organisations. It has been kicked back by the Supreme Court. It has been kicked back by every consideration body in the country. The Tukituki water project, the Ruataniwha Dam—back from the dead—the zombie project that the people of the Hawke's Bay stood up and resisted and opposed and that had no credibility; Bathurst coal extension on the West Coast of the South Island. The Waitaha hydro project, in the magnificent river of the West Coast of the South Island, was found to be so destructive and harmful for the environment that it was turned down and turned back. The significant impacts on the natural character of the area made it not worth it.

          Reply
  4. Anne 4
    14 January 2025 at 10:15 am

    Happened upon this old video [1988] by chance:

    https://www.bbc.com/videos/cd184xejm20o

    An interview with Dame Edna Everage and Donald Trump. Quite insightful…. extols the virtues of one, Mohamed Al – Fayed of Harrods fame.

    Reply
  5. Incognito 5
    14 January 2025 at 12:04 pm

    Thank you, Frank Macskasy, for a beautiful piece on the Regulatory Standards Bill.

    It also binds future parliaments, irrespective of voter intentions, to a particular ideological direction. Part 1, Paragraph 5 of the Bill states clearly and simply:

    This Act binds the Crown.

    […]

    It is simply undemocratic to expect a government of the day to attempt to bind future parliaments with law limiting their powers.

    It would be akin to a socialist government passing an Enabling Standards Bill mandating current and future parliaments to promote legislation that fit only with Marxist-Leninist doctrine. (Many might see no problem with this.)

    https://frankmacskasy.substack.com/p/submission-on-regulatory-standards [from Feeds section on RH side]

    Reply
    • SPC 5.1
      14 January 2025 at 1:06 pm

      That is the commonality in various legislation – Treaty Principles, RSB, then onto that of enabling a foreign investor to claim compensation from government from the consequences of its policies.

      After the principle of the sovereignty of government has been broken – change to OIO rules to allow foreign investment in housing for rent, ownership of coastal land/river land/high country land (would they be able to seek compensation for any CGT, any stamp duty impacting on a sale …).

      Reply
      • Incognito 5.1.1
        14 January 2025 at 1:10 pm

        Yes, they’re changing the whole of the NZ legal framework, step by step, piece by piece. The RSB though is a big ‘hit’, the bomb that does most of the destructive work.

        Reply
    • Obtrectator 5.2
      14 January 2025 at 1:30 pm

      I'm trying – so far without success – to figure out how any Act of Parliament can "bind the Crown" in perpetuity. The Crown is sovereign, end of story. Short of actually abolishing it (which is undoubtedly the ultimate aim) I don't see how it would be unable act on the advice of a later set of ministers and undo whatever piece of legislation it chooses.

      Individual members of the royal family are of course bound by the law (and have been convicted under it) but that's not the same thing. They still have the absolute power to make and unmake any laws with the consent of Parliament.

      Reply
      • SPC 5.2.1
        14 January 2025 at 1:36 pm

        It is the neo-liberal right bringing NZF to its order of rule, via its accomplice Shane Jones.

        But it demonstrates what National gave ACT in the coalition agreement.

        All legislation of this sort would be removed by the next (Labour led) government.

        Reply
      • Psycho Milt 5.2.2
        14 January 2025 at 1:38 pm

        I think Frank's misunderstood what that phrase means. The Act will bind the Crown while it's in force, but any future government can just repeal or amend the Act if it doesn't want to be bound by it any more.

        Reply
      • Belladonna 5.2.3
        14 January 2025 at 1:39 pm

        AFAICS, there is no way that any Act can operate in perpetuity. The best that can be achieved is entrenchment (requiring a super-majority of Parliament to overturn). And this requires an initial super-majority to be enacted.

        Reply
        • Craig H 5.2.3.1
          14 January 2025 at 2:15 pm

          Even that's questionable – nobody has tested whether a simple majority is required to just repeal legislation (rather than amend it).

          Reply
      • Incognito 5.2.4
        14 January 2025 at 2:08 pm

        Good point.

        I’m no legal expert at all but found this:

        https://www.dpmc.govt.nz/publications/co-02-4-acts-binding-crown-procedures-cabinet-decision

        So, there’s obviously a lot techo-legal stuff related to this.

        Whether Frank knows about this and/or meant it, I don’t know. However, other expert commenters have mentioned this Bill to provide a ‘legal straightjacket’ or 'constitutional straitjacket’ or raised the prospect of ‘entrenchment’ outside of Parliament and even if/when the ACT is repealed by a next government (in 2026, 2029, or ??).

        So, yes, this Bill is no ordinary Bill and Frank has a point even though his reasoning might be ‘flawed’.

        Reply
      • Mike the Lefty 5.2.5
        14 January 2025 at 5:23 pm

        I'm wondering that too.

        Could some kind of "enabling" bill do it?

        That kind of tactics is entirely possible with ACT in control.

        National and NZ First characteristically respond with a bored yawn.

        Reply
    • adam 5.3
      14 January 2025 at 5:16 pm

      Incognito you should ask Frank if you can cut it and post it here? Or Frank if you looking 🙂

      Reply
    • Psycho Milt 7.1
      14 January 2025 at 1:51 pm

      I guess it's more obvious than I thought – first thing that came to mind when I read the accusations against Gaiman was his story about the writer who enslaves and rapes Calliope for inspiration. There's a line something like "The first thing he did when he got her home was rape her."

      Reply
    • gsays 7.2
      14 January 2025 at 5:58 pm

      Lends weight to the observation 'A bully is the first victim'

      Reply
  8. tWig 8
    14 January 2025 at 12:49 pm

    In the Guardian: Spain proposes 100% tax on houses bought by non-EU citizens.

    '[Spain's prime minister ] Sánchez sought to underline the global nature of the challenge, citing housing prices that had swelled 48% in the past decade across Europe, far outpacing household incomes.

    “The west faces a decisive challenge: to not become a society divided into two classes, the rich landlords and poor tenants,” he told an economic forum in Madrid.'

    Yup, he's called it. Neo-feudalism.

    Also: ‘[Other] proposed measures include expanding the supply of social housing, offering incentives to those who renovate and rent out empty properties at affordable prices and cracking down on seasonal rentals. ‘

    Sanchez has set the tone, now we need all LW parties to do the same, picking up housing rights as the centre-piece of their electoral strategies, educating the public well before elections on the real issue.

    Reply
  9. Incognito 9
    14 January 2025 at 1:04 pm

    The Ministry of Regulation received almost 23,000 submissions, around 80 percent of them in the final four days of the consultation period.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/538931/the-regulatory-standards-bill-what-you-need-to-know

    Reply
    • adam 9.1
      14 January 2025 at 5:46 pm

      Glad I got mine early.

      I worry now that – putting in that act are the new Marxist-Leninists in the realm of ideological purity – may get it removed from the committees eyes.

      Reply
  10. joe90 10
    14 January 2025 at 1:17 pm

    The back-pedaling begins.

    Newt Gingrich, the former US House speaker and presidential hopeful, said a section of his own Republican party was “rabid” over immigration and predicted Donald Trump’s suggestion that he could deport documented people as well as millions of undocumented people will not come to pass.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-deportation-vows-only-rabid-120003312.html

    Critics are putting President-elect Donald Trump on blast after a key adviser appeared to back away from a major campaign promise.

    Trump has repeatedly claimed he would end the war between Russia and Ukraine within 24 hours of taking office or even sooner.

    But retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg, who Trump tapped to serve as special envoy to the two nations, told Fox News last week it would take longer ― echoing comments made earlier by Trump himself.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/massive-reversal-trump-ripped-already-071918215.html

    Reply
  11. tWig 11
    14 January 2025 at 1:33 pm

    Emz and Magenta in Big Hairy News (from 48 min) discuss One news coverage on the Regulatory Bill. The last line in the news story says that National will support the Bill.

    This means that a pressure campaign targetting MPs is the next appropriate step in this process. If there is enough kick-back in electorates, then that may be enough to sway the Nat caucus. It means the national discussion around this is not finished, by a long way.

    Reply
    • Incognito 11.1
      14 January 2025 at 3:08 pm

      Thanks for the heads-up.

      Also good to find out that it was at least discussed by some on TikTok.

      The two BHN presenters didn’t know about National supporting the RSB. However, it’s in the Coalition Agreement of National with ACT:

      • Legislate to improve the quality of regulation, ensuring that regulatory decisions are based on principles of good law-making and economic efficiency, by passing the Regulatory Standards Act as soon as practicable.

      There’s less clarity in the Agreement between National and NZFirst but that document also refers to removing regulations (“Cut red tape”) and overall sounds like it would support this Bill to become Act ASAP.

      Reply
  12. SPC 12
    14 January 2025 at 1:40 pm

    For those in Wellington.

    An easterly disposition bringing up the southerly.

    Is it summertime somewhere else, is this where the people go?

    Reply
  13. SPC 13
    14 January 2025 at 5:15 pm

    X, with the ambition to be like we chat (payment system), takes over USA Tik Tok and incorporates DJT ….

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360547994/tiktok-calls-report-potential-sale-elon-musk-pure-fiction

    Reply
    • SPC 13.1
      14 January 2025 at 6:38 pm

      Those oligarchs that did not get in Putin's way remained wealthy, others went to prison.

      Now they are a veritable boyar's brigade, nothing like the political brigades the communists supported in Spain.

      Note how quickly Meta and Amazon adapted to the new universal order, they gave up greenwash so easily, it would appear they were just neo-liberals the whole time. Thus as was said, it would be easier for a camel to fly over Cleopatra's needle than to convince the rich not to seek a cloud to sit on (place of privilege) to lord it over those down below.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleopatra%27s_Needles

      Reply
  14. SPC 14
    14 January 2025 at 5:35 pm

    Alex Jones back on X to lie again, does so and again the response from Musk is “true”. Does this make Musk liar in chief on social media?

    https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/disinformation-reigns-as-bushfires-devastate-california-20250113-p5l3se.html

    Jon Stewart eats Chicago pizza and goes to work.

    Reply
    • adam 14.1
      14 January 2025 at 5:41 pm

      Any one else been hearing people say we need a luigi for the carbon burning industrial complex?

      Reply
      • SPC 14.1.1
        14 January 2025 at 6:13 pm

        From the SMH link.

        “I have certainly seen an uptick in anti-science disinformation in recent months and I attribute that to Elon Musk and his close relationship with Russia and Saudi Arabia, who helped finance his purchase of Twitter precisely so they can neuter it as a medium for proactive communication action on climate,” he said.

        The scale of the information wars engulfing the United States is beyond anything seen in Australia, but experts say it could also happen here, particularly after Mark Zuckerberg announced Facebook and Instagram’s fact-checking service would be dumped.

        “This has had a tremendously pernicious impact on our public discourse, since social media is being used to promote disinformation rather than fact and science-based discussion.”

        Earlier this year, academics from the Australian National University proved that repeated exposure to climate scepticism and denial increased the perceived truth of those claims.

        Here opposition to carbon offsetting.

        https://www.somo.nl/the-carbon-offset-industry-needs-to-be-abolished/

        Reply
  15. adam 15
    14 January 2025 at 5:38 pm

    2018 Homelessness video – gets point across

    Is Christopher Bishop as minister of housing, making the other Tory reprobates who have held the post look decent?

    More on the streets of late up north, being moved on when we have a terrorist tourist wave.

    Reply

Leave a Comment