Daily Review 01/05/2017

35 comments on “Daily Review 01/05/2017 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. mickysavage 1

   1 May 2017 at 5:27 pm

   The photo is of Willow Jean Prime who sounds like she will be highly placed on the list and should be a very welcome addition to Parliament.
   • Ad 1.1

     1 May 2017 at 5:43 pm

     Shane Reti on 20,000 and Kelly Ellis on 7,000; anyone thinking they can overcome a 13,000 deficit in one term has got moxie.
     • michelle 1.1.1

       3 May 2017 at 8:42 am

       Willow Jean Prime will take out that egg Reti
2. Tiger Mountain 2

   1 May 2017 at 5:49 pm

   Willow Jean is standing in Northland, not Whangarei Ad, but no easier task really

   she is a great candidate and of the North, hopefully when Winston retires she will take the seat on merit, the Nats have run the Far North into the ground and people there need to lose the bad habit of voting blue
3. WILD KATIPO 3

   1 May 2017 at 7:41 pm

   I reckon Maanu Pauls got the right idea about this:

   A massive claim for customary rights of New Zealand’s foreshore and sea beds has been lodged in the High Court at Rotorua by a local iwi leader.

   The application by New Zealand Maori Council co-chairman Maanu Paul – made on behalf of all Maori – wants recognition of customary marine title and protected customary rights over the New Zealand coast and the entire foreshore and territorial waters of New Zealand.

   “Our position is quite simple, the government has been in charge since 1840. They’ve made a mess of the water, they’ve made a mess of the environment, our clean green image is about to be destroyed and we’re saying we’ve had a guts full of this poor management,”

   Paul said complaints Maori were after money were false.

   “There are better ways to ensure our economic sustainability,” he said.

   “Some people may think I’ve gone off the green train, but the facts are the facts, we are destroying our livelihood, we are destroying our environment, we are destroying the lifeblood, because that is water.

   “I have black-haired brown-eyed mokopuna and I have blonde-haired green-eyed grandchildren, and I want them both to share in the legacy I create for this country.

   …………………………………………………………………..

   That’ll put the boot into all these greedy multi nationals just wanting pilfer all our goodies.

   And I can hear the screams from a lot of the National party self interests from here.

   Good bloody job.
   • Draco T Bastard 3.1

     1 May 2017 at 8:19 pm

     That’ll put the boot into all these greedy multi nationals just wanting pilfer all our goodies.

     No, they’ll just keep calling such people green terrorists as they have been for years now.
   • keepcalmcarryon 3.2

     1 May 2017 at 8:33 pm

     Looks like the Nat/Maori party rollback of Aunty Helens take on the Seabed and Foreshore -to sort it , has got it well sorted. (sarc)
     Working as intended?
4. Ovid 4

   1 May 2017 at 8:40 pm

   I’m not sure what Poto Williams is trying to accomplish in calling to shift the burden of proof in rape cases. She would no doubt be aware of the Law Commission’s report (PDF) and recommendations around the justice system’s response to victims of sexual violence – which offers a suite of changes without something as fundamental as reversing the burden of proof. Especially when she recognises that she is unsure how such a change would be implemented.

   It really seems like the old political logic of “Something must be done. This is something. Therefore this must be done”. It may also be unwise to raise this in a week where David Dougherty has just died. But back to the fundamental issue of the burden of proof, I view this as a human rights issue. The State in all its power must prove its case before imprisoning any person no matter how horrific the crime. Not just imprison someone because they can’t prove a negative and have been denounced. If this goes into the Labour platform, I will likely become a floating voter.
   • BM 4.1

     1 May 2017 at 8:57 pm

     Yeah, this is a shocker, pretty much alienates 50% of the population.
   • mickysavage 4.2

     1 May 2017 at 9:03 pm

     I think Poto is a wonderful human being and a great representative. One of the best. But I disagree with her on this. Too many years practising law makes you appreciate the golden thread that is the presumption of innocence.
     • BM 4.2.1

       1 May 2017 at 9:17 pm

       Do you reckon she would have run this past Andrew Little?

       If not, this would have to be strike 2.

       Just saw this on Kiwblog, according to Farrar this was or still is official Labour party policy

       http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2017/05/labours_policy_remains_guilty_unless_you_can_prove_you_are_innocent.html

       That’s rather concerning.
       • Ovid 4.2.1.1

         1 May 2017 at 9:23 pm

         She’s the Associate Justice Spokesperson on sexual and domestic violence, so thinking about this kind of stuff is in her bailiwick. But statements like this are unwise if people will assume it’s official Labour policy. Which it isn’t, so far as I can tell.
         • BM 4.2.1.1.1

           1 May 2017 at 9:29 pm

           It may actually be official Labour party policy

           http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2017/05/labours_policy_remains_guilty_unless_you_can_prove_y
           • Ovid 4.2.1.1.1.1

             1 May 2017 at 9:33 pm

             I don’t see it in Labour’s list of announced policies. They cleared the table after 2014. I’ll keep an eye out for it as Election Day approaches.
           • mickysavage 4.2.1.1.1.2

             1 May 2017 at 10:14 pm

             Nope but it is something that should be discussed. If the system is failing then all possible solutions should be investigated.
     • Rosemary McDonald 4.2.2

       1 May 2017 at 10:58 pm

       Don’t go getting your jocks in a knot guys….settle down….don’t panic!

       Poto states…”Now, I know that runs up against ‘innocent until proven guilty’, and that would be one of the issues that we’d really have to consider long and hard, but I’m of the view that we have to make some changes.”

       Poto Williams said she didn’t yet know how the policy would be implemented.

       “I don’t pretend to have the legal nous in which to do this, but I’m comfortable that there is a way that we can work our way through this.”

       So…?

       “Too many years practising law makes you appreciate the golden thread that is the presumption of innocence.”

       “Golden thread that is the presumption of innocence.”

       With all due respect MS….what twaddle.

       Have you ever had to defend yourself against a criminal charge?
       • PMC 4.2.2.1

         1 May 2017 at 11:10 pm

         Just because it might seem that the notion’s been lost, or is unreal or fanciful, unattainable or what ever, that doesn’t mean we should give up on the concept. In fact, it means should strive even more to embrace it.
         • McFlock 4.2.2.1.1

           1 May 2017 at 11:14 pm

           …but it is a reason to take a long hard look around and see if there’s a better tool for some circumstances.
           • PMC 4.2.2.1.1.1

             1 May 2017 at 11:37 pm

             Are you saying that, in some circumstances, a better tool could include abandoning the concept of innocent until proven guilty?
             • McFlock …

               2 May 2017 at 12:09 am

               Well, that’s already the case if, for example, a company director fails to declare a conflict of interest: the evidence is the absence of a declaration in the register. The defence is to prove that the declaration was made.

               There are probably one or two other circumstances where the “golden threads” that we like to think are immutable are, in fact, heavily compromised in law.

               But in general, it depends where you put the burden of proof: I don’t think anyone has suggested that it be abandoned entirely (e.g. complainant makes accusation, if accused can’t prove beyond reasonable doubt that they were the other side of town then they’re screwed). I think the main proposal last time this came up was that if the defence is simply that sex took place but the complainant consented, then rather than it being “he said/she said”, it’s “she said and he’d better have a bloody good reason for us to not believe her”.

               Another idea that was floated a while back was a lesser charge that involves culpable recklessness as to consent, which I think could also do with some consideration.

               The question that needs answering is “what is the greater injustice – increasing the sexual assault conviction rate at the cost of maybe increasing successful false accusations, or leaving it at the pathetic prosecution and conviction rate we have today and the harm that causes”? Because the system that we have at the moment is practically negligent when it comes to sexual assault.
       • Richard McGrath 4.2.2.2

         2 May 2017 at 7:24 am

         What you call twaddle’ is in fact a cornerstone of British (and NZ) law, and is there for our protection
         • Rosemary McDonald 4.2.2.2.1

           2 May 2017 at 7:34 am

           “…..is in fact a cornerstone of British (and NZ) law, and is there for our protection.”

           Christ on a bloody raft…what pretentious rubbish. OK, you’ve flown the flag, now y’all can hang up those silly robes and put your powdered hairpieces back in their boxes.

           There for whose protection?

           ‘Cos at the present point in time, in the context of sexual violence, then it is protecting the accused….and revictimising the accuser. To the point where victims of sexual violence….if the stats are correct some 90% of them…are simply not prepared to go on trial.

           So…this is a win for justice?
     • Richard McGrath 4.2.3

       2 May 2017 at 7:20 am

       Well put, MS
   • McFlock 4.3

     1 May 2017 at 9:34 pm

     Is the current situation working to report, provide justice for, and reduce sexual assaults?

     No, it’s not. Not by a long haul.

     And she doesn’t say this must be done. She says something like it needs to be considered in the way evidence is weighed, beyond just tweaking the criminal procedures (which your law commission link looks at).
     • Rosemary McDonald 4.3.1

       1 May 2017 at 11:25 pm

       And it is Rape Awareness Week….http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11845532

       “Sexual violence in New Zealand, by the numbers
       • From July 2014 to the end of January this year 13,758 people reported a sexual assault to police.

       648 in Canterbury
       642 in Counties Manukau
       576 in Central
       566 in Auckland City
       553 in Wellington
       532 in Waikato
       529 in Bay of Plenty
       486 in Waitemata
       458 in Southern
       332 in Eastern
       275 in Tasman
       268 in Northland

       • Between January 2016 and January 2017 5865 people were the victim of a rape or other sexual assault in New Zealand.

       • Of the victims, 4567, or 77.9 per cent, were female, 10.9 percent or 639 were male. The remaining 11.2 per cent did not specify a gender.

       •The majority of victims were aged 15 to 19.

       • Of the ethnicities specified, European victims made up 36.3 per cent, Maori 21.2 per cent, Pacific Island 4.5 per cent, Asian 2.5 per cent, Indian 1.7 per cent.

       • In New Zealand, up to one in three girls will be subject to an unwanted sexual experience by the age of 16. The majority of those incidences would be considered serious, with over 70 per cent involving genital contact.

       • Up to one in five women will experience sexual assault as an adult.

       • It is estimated that 90 per cent of sexual violence is committed by someone known to the victim.

       • Reporting of sexual violence in New Zealand is very low, with an estimated 9 per cent of incidents ever reported to police.

       (Source: NZ Police, Rape Prevention Education)”
   • tangled_up 4.4

     1 May 2017 at 9:53 pm

     It really seems like the old political logic of “Something must be done. This is something. Therefore this must be done”.

     It’s astonishing how an unscrutinised idea that is so unworkable and detrimental to Labour’s​ popularity can just be put out out there like that. Very disappointing.
     • PMC 4.4.1

       1 May 2017 at 10:08 pm

       Alarmingly, there’s a lot of so-called “progressive”or “liberal” thinkers who’d think this was a good idea. And ironically there’d be a lot of unthinking boorish gits who’d oppose it, and not because it’s an affront to basic constitutional principle.
5. JC 5

   1 May 2017 at 9:14 pm

   “Speaking of people who will be unwelcome on any list!

   According to one ex Phillip Morris.. aka Todd Barclay, aka The new Transport Minister”…

   ”The changes about to be completed were always intended to be a bit of a short-term solution to help alleviate some of the pressure,” Mr Barclay said.

   https://www.odt.co.nz/regions/queenstown/mp-foresees-second-upgrade-roundabout

   How’s that for sucking up to the poor Queenstowner’s…and a party mantra for sweet FA!
   • McFlock 5.1

     1 May 2017 at 9:40 pm

     lol that’s also his excuse for “upgrading” his electorate office staff /sarc
6. Muttonbird 6

   1 May 2017 at 9:49 pm

   There are approximately 92,700 Kiwis aged between 15 and 24 who aren’t working, in education or training. That’s up 19 percent during National’s time in power, and Prime Minister Bill English admits he’s not sure why.

   That a damning statistic and lo, Bill English is puzzled again. He seems to be puzzled a lot around the labour market and why wages for the most vulnerable are not growing.

   http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/04/prime-minister-bill-english-puzzled-by-high-numbers-out-of-work-and-education.html

   Here’s a clue, Bill. High numbers of New Zealand youth are not in work because you are giving their jobs to low skilled foreigners instead of encouraging pathways for them to succeed.
   • AB 6.1

     1 May 2017 at 10:03 pm

     Bah – “a bit of a puzzle” is code for: “they’re pretty useless”
     • aerobubble 6.1.1

       2 May 2017 at 4:13 pm

       Stupid city was supposed to solve Aucklands growth woes.

       Aging pop. needs younger migrants to pay tax revenue, and making it harder to get ahead means more kiwis stay in or move to OZ, thus making the tightarses count the ‘extras’ healt, welfare, now education. Hopelessly blinkered since paying taxpayers is good for the economy. But hey stupid conservstive parties on both sides of the ditch.

       As pop. rises globally, its imperative NZ keeps up less it becomes a lagger and so prize by bigger nations. We need 10 million, yet our glorious leaders foolishly pander to immgration cuts.
7. PMC 7

   1 May 2017 at 10:10 pm

   Say goodbye to Air NZ.

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/92102345/former-prime-minister-john-key-to-become-an-air-nz-director
   • ropata 7.1

     2 May 2017 at 12:41 am

     Watch for the asset stripping and rundown of the national carrier, in preparation for sale to private interests (i.e. FJK and his bankster mates)
8. aerobubble 8

   2 May 2017 at 3:58 pm

   Once upon a time trees grew right up to the shore line, monsters five stories high, prinstine natural. So imagine my shock. Hearing an estate agent using the word natural vista to remove the last large tree between them and habour. My shock did not abate, when a property owner sudden declare they jad no ther choice but to remove said tree for fear of damages to another property owners view. Shocked in a number over ways, one that someone other than council who can stop you removing trees… …or the abuse tsunami of neighbors up and down country sudden nickpicking… …but worse, that this opportunty was missed, to get a mate with a chainsaw ready, spend no time or effort waiting for the court case, rocking up to said court, and when the case wasn’t thrown out for standing, phone up said mate to chop tree down thus ending said case, no fees, no damages, and neighbors happy with the legal bill. The only upside to the saga would have been the large number of lawyer dwarf signing their way to court houses up and down country should such a thing had come to pass.

   Nobody has a right of a Habour vista if trees five stories high would have blocked it.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS